THE LIBRARY 
 
 OF 
 
 THE UNIVERSITY 
 
 OF CALIFORNIA 
 
 LOS ANGELES 
 
 GIFT OF 
 FREDERIC THOMAS BLANCHARD
 
 THE 
 
 CYCLOPEDIA 
 
 OF 
 
 BIBLICAL LITERATURE. 
 
 EDITED BY 
 
 JOHI^ KITTO, D.D., F.S.A., 
 
 ASSISTED BY 
 
 NOTED BIBLICAI, WRITEKS, BEPEESENTING ALL THE GREAT EVANGELICAL CHUECHEB. 
 
 ILLUSTRATED BY NUMEROUS ENGRAVINGa 
 
 IN TWO VOLUMES. 
 VOL. I. 
 
 NEW YORK: 
 AMERICAN BOOK EXCHANGE, 
 
 764 Broadway 
 
 1881 •
 
 LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS. ,j 
 
 INITIALS NAMES. 
 
 W L A Rev. W. L. Alkxandkr, M.A., Author of 'The Connexion and Harmony of 
 
 the Old and New Testaments,' &c. 
 
 G B Rev. G. Baur, Ph. D. of the University of Giessen. 
 
 J. R. B Rev. J. R. Beard, D.D., Member of the Historico-1 heological Society o. 
 
 Leipzig. 
 
 G. M. B G. M. Bell, Author of ' Universal Mechanism,' &c. 
 
 C- H. F B. . . . Rev. C. II. F. BiALix)nLOTZKY, Ph. D., Gottingen, Author of ' De Abropatione 
 Legis.' 
 
 J B Rev. John Brown, D.D., Professor of Exegetical Theology to the United 
 
 Secession Church. 
 
 G. B. . . i . . . . Rev. George Bush, Professor of Hebrew and Oriental Literature in the 
 
 University of New York. 
 
 J. D. B Rev. James D. Bhti-ek, Abbot Resident, Theological Seminary, Andorer 
 
 United States. 
 
 K. A. C. ..... K. A. Credner, Doctor and Professor of Theology in the University of 
 
 Giessen. 
 
 S. D Rev. S. Davidson, LL.D., Professor of Bihlical Literature and Oriental 
 
 Languages in the Lancashire Independent College. 
 
 B. D Rev. Benjamin Davies, D.D. 
 
 J. F. D Rev. J. F. Denham, M.A., St. John's College, Cambridge, F.R.S, 
 
 J. W. D Rev. J. W. Doran, LL.D., Association Secretary of'^the Church Missionary 
 
 Society. 
 
 J. E. Rev. John Eadie, LL.D., Professor of Biblical Literature to the United 
 
 Secession Church. 
 
 G. H. A. V. E. . G. H. A. von Ewald, Doctor and Professor of Theology in the University 
 of Tubingen. 
 
 F. W. G Rev. F. W. Gotch, M.A., Trinity Colle^, Dublin. 
 
 H. A. C. H. . . . H. A. C. Havernick, Doctor and Professor of Theology in the University 
 
 of Konigsberg. 
 
 » 
 
 E, W U E. W. IIengstenrero, Doctor and Professor of Theology in the University 
 
 of Berlin. 
 
 J. J Rev. J. Jacoci, of the University of Berlin. 
 
 R. J Rev. R. Jamieson, M.A., Editor of ' Paxton's Illustrations of Scriptar*.' 
 
 E. A. L . ... Rbv. E. A. Lawrence, Haverhill, United State*. 
 
 A
 
 LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS. 
 
 INITIALS. 
 
 R. L 
 
 F. R. L. . . . 
 
 E. M 
 
 P. M 
 
 N. M 
 
 F W. N. 
 J N. . . 
 
 W. A. N. 
 J. P. P. . 
 B. P 
 
 J. F. R. . . 
 
 J. 
 
 E. R 
 
 c. 
 
 H. S 
 
 J. 
 
 P. S 
 
 H 
 
 S 
 
 A 
 
 T 
 
 D 
 
 W 
 
 w 
 
 W 
 
 WW 
 
 NAMES. 
 Re-v. Robert Lee, D.D., Edinburgh. 
 FuEDERicK R. Lees, Ph. D., F.S.S.A.; Editor of 'The Truth-Seeket ' ftc 
 
 E. MiCHELSON, Ph. D. of the University of Heidelberg. 
 Peter Mearns, Author of Tirosh,' &c. 
 
 Rev. N. Morren, M.A., Author of ' Biblical Theology,' and Translator of 
 
 ' Rosenmiiller's Biblical Geography.' 
 
 F. W. Newman, late Fellow of Balliol College, Oxford. 
 
 John Nicholson, B.A., Oxford, Ph. D., Tubingen, Author of ' An Account 
 of the Establishment of the Fatemite Dynasty,' Translator of ' Ewald'i 
 Hebrew Grammar.' 
 
 W. A. Nicholson, M.D. 
 
 . Rev. John Phillips Potter, M.A., Oriel College, Oxford. 
 
 . Rev. Baden Powell, M.A., F.R.S., F.G.S., Savilian Professor of Geometry 
 in the University of Oxford. 
 
 , J. F. RoYLE, M.D., F.R.S., F.L.S., F.G.S., Member of the Royal Asiatic 
 Societies of Calcutta and London ; Professor of Materia Medica and 
 Therapeutics in King's College, London. 
 
 J. E. Ryland, Translator of ♦ Neander's Church History,' and of ' Semisch's 
 Justin Martyr.' 
 
 Lieut.-Colonel C. Hamilton Smith, K.H. and K.W., F.R. and L.S., 
 President of the Devon and Cornwall Natural History Society, &c. &c. 
 
 Rev. J. Pye Smith, D.D., F.R.S., F.G.S. 
 
 Rev. H. Stebbing, D.D. of St. John's College, Cambridge, Author of ' A 
 History of the Church,' &c. 
 
 Rev. a. Tholuck, Doctor and Professor of Theology in the University of 
 Halle. 
 
 Rev. David Welsh, D.D., Professor of Divinity and Church History, Nev 
 College, Edinburgh. 
 
 Rev. Leonard Woods, D.D., Professor of Theology in the Andover Theo- 
 logical Seminary, United States. 
 
 Rev. William Wright, M.A. and LL.D. of Trinity College, Dubiio, 
 Translator of ' Seller's Biblical Hermeneutics.' 
 
 7%e initials of tlie Contrihntors of the following arttcleg have been inadvertently omitted :^ 
 J. R. B Roman Empire; Tabeunaci.es, Feast of. — H. A. C. H., Genesis. — J. F. H., 
 Spices; Storax, Ta.mau, 1: Tkii. Turk; Tiiiz*.h, 1. — W. W., Jvdk • Nbuucbl!>* 
 
 MKUAK. *
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 Toe present work was undertaken with the design of providing the public with 
 a more complete view of the existing state of Biblical literature, both at home 
 and abroad, than it previously possessed. It was felt that former works of the 
 kind, numerous as they are, and useful as some of them may be considere<l, 
 were built too exclusively upon the 'old learning' of Calmet and others ; and 
 that some recent attempts to give a more modern character to such under- 
 takings had been made too entirely from home materials, and had loo ex- 
 clusive reference to sucli external facts and circumstances as travellers and 
 antiquarians offer, to meet the demands of the present time. The work, there- 
 fore, owes its origin to the Editor's conviction of the existence of a great body 
 of untouched materials, applicable to such a purpose, wh'ilr *\ii ^( tivfij o/ 
 modern research and the labours of modern criticism ha I accumulated, and 
 which lay invitingly ready for the use of those who migkt know how to avail 
 themselves of such resources. 
 
 It was no task for one man to gather in this great harvest. And as the 
 ground seemed, for the most part, conuiion to all Christian men, it appeared 
 desirable that assistance should be sought from a sutficient number of competent 
 Biblical scholars and others, witiiout distinction of country or religious party, 
 that the field might be tlie more thoroughly swept, and the greater wealfli of 
 illustration obtained, from men of different lines of reading and various habits of 
 thought. The prompt manner in which the call of the Editor for co-operation 
 has been met bj"^ the numerous eminent Biblical scholars and naturalists, whose 
 names appear iti tlte List of Contributors, has been amung the highest gratifica 
 tions arising to him out of this undertaking; wliile tlie ability, the laborious 
 research, tite care and the pujictuality, with which they have discharged the 
 vai'ious tasks confided to them, demand his warmest acknowledgments. 
 
 The only drawback likely to arise from co-operation so various and exten 
 «ive, lay i« the probability that considerably different views might be manifested 
 in the several articles ; and that, too, on subjects on which every reader is 
 iik«ily to liave formed some opinion of his own, and will be disposed to regard M 
 
 a2
 
 Till PREFACE. 
 
 erroneous or s'ispicious ever}- opinion which may not entirely coincide witli ttiat 
 wliich he lias been accustomed to entertain. In tliis lay the sole danger and 
 the greatest diffic ilty of such an undertaking. Here was to hf a book which 
 no one man, and not even a very few men, could pr»Kluce ; and wliich 
 the public woidd yet probably expect to exhibit as much unity, not only of 
 plan and execution, but of opinion and sentiment, as if it were the produce 
 of a single mind. The Editor, however, felt tliat he could n«.t nndertake 
 to find forty independent thinkers among whom there should be no visible 
 diversitioB of sentiment. But he thought that much might be done in pro- 
 ducing so near an approach to uniformity on matters of real importance as 
 would satisfy every reasonable reader ; especially when he should come to con- 
 sider that the clioice lay between taking the work with such diversities as 
 necessarily arose from the extent of the co operation employed in its produc- 
 tion, or of altogether dispensing with the immense amount of Biblical informa- 
 tion which it embodies. Entire luiiformity, if attainable at all, could only 
 have been attained at the cost of providing a very different and greatly in 
 ferior work ; and a work thus different and inferior could not have established 
 a distinction sufBciently marked from all previous undertakings of the kind to 
 justify its production. 
 
 It jias not consisted with the Editor's idea of the functions he had under 
 taken, to dictate to the Contributors the views they were to take of the subjects 
 intrusted to them, or to set up his own views as the standard of correct opinion. 
 This he must have done, had he made it his rule to insert only such statements 
 as exactly coincided with his own sentinients, or to exclude altogether whatever 
 views of particular subjects might differ from those with which his own mind 
 is satisfied. The Contributors were expected to abstain from introducing the 
 opinions peculiar to their nation or to their religious communion ; but they 
 Iiave been under slight restraint with respect to the conclusions which they 
 might form as independent thinkers and reasoners, competent by their attain- 
 ments and studies to form a judgment worthy of attention on the various matters 
 coming under their consideration. In conformity with no other principle could 
 this work have been produced ; and such being the nature of its execution, it 
 became necessary that the initials of the several writers should be aihxed to 
 their contributions, that the reader might know to whom to ascribe the respon- 
 sibility of the particular articles, and that no one contributor might be deemed 
 responsible for any other articles than those to which his signature is annexed. 
 The Editor also, who has provided all those articles which bear no signature 
 (except those adverted to at the end of the. List of Contributors), does not hold 
 himself responsible for any statements or opinions advanced in any other articles 
 than tliesc. Some of them exhibit opinions in which ne is not able to concur, 
 but which have nevertheless been furnished by persons whom he could nol 
 regard as less competent than himself to arrive at just conclusions. 
 
 Yet although some explanation is due to tliose who may possibly find in thil
 
 PREFACE. bl 
 
 work, in a few articles, opinions in wliicli tiiey cannot agree, and views from 
 which theii own differ ; it is riglit tljat tlie persons engaged in producing it slionld 
 claim for it a judgment founded not upon particular articles, but upon its generai 
 character, which was intended to be, and is, in accordance witii the known standard*) 
 of orthodox opinion in this country, as may be ascertained by reference to those 
 leading articles wliicii may be regarded as stamping the character of any woric 
 in which they are found. In fact, a Cyc]oi)aedia of Biblical Liieruture, a^s 
 distinct from Theology properly so called, offers less occasion tiian miglit at 
 first sight appear for the obtrusion of those matters of doctrine and dit.ci[)Iine 
 which Christian men regard with differences of opinion which the Editor would 
 fain believe to be less wide and less important tiian is too generally suppot-ed. 
 In the dispensations of Divine Providence, he has been by piiysical privations 
 shut out from many of those external influences and associations whicli tend to 
 magnify such differences, and to deepen into impassable gulfs the ^pace which lies 
 between them. He has not found this condition a disadvantage in conducting 
 the work which he has now tiie happiness of having brought to a conclusion ; 
 Mor will he venture to regard that condition as an unmitigated evil, if, through 
 the complete isolation in which he has thereby been placed, he has been enabled, 
 without any compromise of the views he conscientiously entertains anti which 
 his own writings will sufficiently indicate, to realize more extensive co-operation 
 in this undertaking than under pastoral or official connection with any religious" 
 denomination he could expect to have attained. It is believed that tlie English 
 language has no other book wiiich eminent foreign scholars have co-operated 
 with our own in producing ; and it is certain that it possesses no other work 
 which embodies the combined labours of writers who, indeed, are of different 
 communions here, and are known by different names among men, but who have 
 the same hope in this world, and but one name in heaven. 
 
 The nature of the present work, and the place which its conductors desire it 
 should occupy in the Biblical Literature of this country, will be best under- 
 stood by a sketch of the whole field in which that place is marked out. This 
 will show not only what is here attempted, but how much of this wide and 
 fruitful field remains open to the same process of cultivation. Eor this 
 sketch we are indebted to the able pen of Dr. Credner, who has enriciied tliis 
 work by several, valuable contributions, and by whom it has been prepared 
 expressly for the place which it here occupies. It will be understood by most 
 readers that tiie term Theological EncyclopcEdia is technically^eniployed on the 
 Continent, and is beginning to be employed in this country, to describe the 
 whole field of Sacred Literature, of which Biblical Literature, strictly so called, 
 is but a part. 
 
 " A comprehensive arrangement of all that belongs to the region of hamai: 
 knowledge has— not quite properly — been intlicated by the term Encyclupicdia^ 
 1 e., iv kvkKi^ naihia or eyKvicXioe naihia. Another term, Wisse7ischaJ't%
 
 X PREFACE. 
 
 Ktcnde (knowledge of scieiice), has also been applied to tliat arrangement in 
 Germany, when it includes likewise an internal and scientific development of 
 the systems and subjects under discussion. In our title, Cijclopcedia of J^ihlicai 
 Literature, it is obvious that, the word ' Cyclopaedia ' cannot be taken in the more 
 extended acceptation of the term, but merely so far as the Bible and Theology 
 are concerned. As the peculiar proxiucG of l^iblicul Encyclopo'dia can only be 
 clearly understood and defined in its cc^nnection with TJieological Encyclojyasdiay 
 it may be requisite to describe at length tlie meaning of the latter and more 
 comprehensive term. 
 
 But even the notion of Theological P^ucyclopsedia in general, is yet of too 
 extended range for our purpose, as it miglit be supposes! to comprehend a sys- 
 tematic development of all that refers to the knowledge of God generally ; M'hile 
 here cognizance can be only taken of some particular branch of that knowledge, 
 namely, of that belonging to Christianity alone. Our notice must tlierefore be 
 limited to the Encyclopsedia of Christian theology. But Christian theology 
 forms only a special and limited part of general theology. The former, in 
 endeavouring to comprehend scientifically the Christian religion, deals altogetiier 
 with a subject of experience. For the Christian religion, or tlie Christian know- 
 ledge of God, is not innate and constitutional in man, or something existing in 
 'lis mind a priori, but is a religion connected with Jesus Christ as its revealer. 
 christian theology is thus a positive or historical science, which can be traced 
 from its origin at a known point of time. 
 
 Now, nothing more intimately concerns the spirit of Christian theology than the 
 solution of the question, By what standard are we to determine the tenets of the 
 Cliristian religion, or from what source must tliey be deduced ? It is in the solu- 
 tion of this important question that the adherents of the Christian religion divide 
 themselves into two large bodies ; the one considers the Scriptures, emanating 
 from the Holy Ghost, as the first and last source of knowledge for Christian 
 truth, — a source, however, not bounded by time and s])ace, but continuing to flow, 
 and pour forth new religious truths within the range of the Cluircli formed under 
 the guidance of tlie Holy Spirit. Tliis doctrine is r.sually expressed in the follow- 
 ing terms : the Catliolic Church assumes a double outVard source of the know- 
 ledge of religious truth, namely, the Apostolic, botli Scriptural and traditional. 
 The other great religious party makes a very marked distinction between the 
 revealed doctrines laid down in the Scriptures and tlie later views and develop- 
 ment of the same by the Church ; in other words, they distinguish between Scrip- 
 tural and traditional revelation. Their leading principle is that the Christian 
 religion can be derived pure and unalloyed from the Bible alone ; and they 
 therefore reject, as unnecessary and unauthorised, all professed sources of reli- 
 gious knowledge which are foreign to the Holy Scriptures. As Christians of 
 the latter category we here take the Scriptures as the oili/ external source of 
 revelation for religious truth ; and in this point of view we also trace tiai 
 outlines of th iological science.
 
 PREFACE. xi 
 
 Thus considered, a little examination of the subject leads ustodlacove. in it 
 • threefold principle : — 1. An eternal, ever-prevailing, and therefore ininiutable. 
 Christian principle ; 2. Another, established upon this positive foundation ; 
 ind 3. One that is developing itself out of tin's. Our business is, therefore, not 
 with a revealed doctrine which has long- since been completed, whicli had lived, 
 lost its spirit, and died ; but witli one which, like the human mind itself, is conti- 
 nually expanding in youthful vigour — one which, when correctly comprehended, 
 exhibits a mutual relationslnp and equal degree of development with whatever 
 stage of culture and civilization its adherents, the Cliristians, may have readied. 
 Thus it has happened that in process of time many trutiis which must ever l)e 
 most essential to the Christian, have been variously and diffierently understood 
 and interpreted. Every thinking Christian must strive to bring iiis religious 
 opinions and actions into a possible, perfect, and continued harmony witii a cor- 
 rect view of the doctrines contained in the Bible. Christian Protestantism is 
 the spiritual advancement of humanity at the side of tlie Bible ; and the task of 
 Christian theology must thus be to show, not only how far that end has been 
 aimed at in past times and until now, but also in what manner man is to strive 
 after it in time to come, and to indicate the means by which the teachings of 
 the Scriptures are to be exiiibited in their true unison with every advancement 
 which mankind can make in knowledge and civilization. 
 
 It is thus evident that Christian theology stands in the closest relation to 
 all the departments of human knowledge, and more especially to philosoi)hy, to 
 which, when duly applied, Christianity has ever been much indebted, — while it 
 has caused her great damage and injury whenever its natural and necessary 
 boundaries have been overpassed ; and it is not less clear that the efforts of the 
 theologian must, above all, be directed towards a due comprehension and a pro- 
 gressively seasonable development and advancement of the always living Christian 
 Bpirit contained in the Scriptural doctrines. This task pre-supposes a proper un- 
 derstanding of the Scriptures Christian theology must, therefore, in the first 
 instance, try to solve scientifically the questions — What is meant by Holy Writ? 
 How have its doctrines been understood until now ? And by wliat laws are we 
 to proceed so as to arrive at a right vmderstanding of their scope and spirit ? 
 The results of these inquiries, systematically obtained, form a complete science 
 in themselves. As Cliristianity, however, is not limited to abstract speculations, 
 but has for its chief aim the enkindling and diffusion of true piety, in thought 
 and in practice. Christian theology has further to display the means by wiiich 
 this Christian conviction may be on the one hand called forth in the soul of man 
 and diffused abroad, and on the other quickened and defended. Christian theo- 
 »ogy 18, finally, required to set forth the course which Christianity has pursued 
 40 former ages, and to describe its past vicissitudes and present condition. 
 
 The foundation of Christian theology must thus be sought in the Scrip- 
 tures : and, divesting ourselves of all prepossessions and hypotheses, it will, in 
 the first instance, be necessary for us to obtain a clear insight as to tbc
 
 xil PREFACE. 
 
 circuiKstances and the times in which the series of books which constitute the 
 Scriptures came into existence. This leads us to the first branch of theological 
 flcience, namely, to Biblical AitcHiEOLOGY, or Biblical Antiquities. 
 Biblical Archaeology, usually confined within too narrow limits, is that part ol 
 theological science wiiich tries to unravel the various circumstances and con- 
 ditions which have exercised uiore or less influence upon the composition of the 
 Scriptural books. Its object is, therefore, to treat of: — 
 
 1. The nature of the country in which those books have originated ; to this 
 branch of inquiry belong Physical Geography and Natural History. By 
 the latter we understand not only (a common mistake) a systematic survey 
 of the natural productions, but also and chiefly an enumeraiion of the 
 peculiar features of their origin, growth, continuance, cultivation, use, etc. 
 It is, for instance, quite immaterial what place the date-pahns or balsam- 
 shrubs occupy in the system — such investigations being of no importance 
 for the understanding of the Bible, the writers of which have disre- 
 garded those points ; while, on the other hand, the peculiarities of tin 
 locality where the palm-tree stands, its external appearance at the dif- 
 ferent seasons of the year, its growth, fertility, use, etc. — in short, all thai 
 particularly strikes the sense of the beholder, have frequently exercised 
 considerable influence on the inspired v/riters ,- and these sources oi 
 external impressions on the senses and mind of man, are to be par- 
 ticularly considered and noticed by Biblical Archaeology. 
 
 2. The inhabitants of those countries ; their peculiar character, manners, 
 customs, way of living, and their intercourse with other nations. 
 
 3. The vicissitudes of their people, — consequently, the history of the 
 Hebrews and Jews, down to that time when the last books of the Scrip- 
 tures were written. 
 
 4. The politico-religious institutions, the civil and geographical order ana 
 division of the land and the people ; and 
 
 5. The mental development of the Hebrews and Jews, the regulations 
 founded on it, and the degree of progress which the arts and sciences had 
 attained among them. 
 
 Biblical Archaeology may be further divided into two classes— that of the 
 Old Testament and that of the New Testament : the former may again be sub- 
 divided into the Hebrew and the Jeioish archaeology. 
 
 As soon as the foundation for Biblical researches is laid by the help /)f 
 Biblical Archaeology, the theologian then turns to the solution of the second maiw 
 question in theology : — What is meant by the Scriptures ? How ancj when 
 have they arisen ? In what form do they lie before us ? The answer to all 
 these questions is the object of Biblical Introduction, or, more correctly, of 
 the History of Holy Writ. It is divided into Introduction to the Old Testament 
 and Introduction to the 2>ew Testament. It must render an account—
 
 '■ PREFACE. »ltl 
 
 1. Of the origin of the indivichial books received into the sacred canon ; 
 not omitting to notice at the same time the varions views that have been 
 entertained on that point by critics of all ages, as well as those particular 
 opinions which are seemingly the more correct. 
 
 2. Of the origin of the collection of the books of Scripture as the repo- 
 sitory of Christian knowledge, or of religion ; constituting the History 
 of the Cation. 
 
 8. Of the spread of the Scriptures by transcriptions, translations, and 
 printing. 
 
 4. Of the vicissitudes and fate of the original text ; forming the History 
 of the Text; and — 
 
 5. Of the various motives which have led to various modes of under- 
 standing the Bible ; being the History of Interpretation-. 
 
 We next come to that* important part of Theological Encyclopaedia con- 
 nected with the question — What precepts have been regarded as Christiau 
 doctrines from the introduction of Christianity to the present day ? 
 
 The answer to this important question is given by Doctkine-History,* 
 which, in a less limited sense than that in which the term is usually taken, points 
 out the peculiar doctrines which have from time to time been received as articles 
 of Christian belief. But as a variety of opinions with regard to the essentials 
 of the Christian religion has arisen, not only among the various and different 
 suets as separate bodies, but likewise at sundry times among the members of 
 even one and the same sect or party, Doctrine-History must necessarilv include 
 all the peculiar features of schismatic views, their origin and history, the causes 
 of their rise and gradual development, as well as their connection with the 
 Scriptures, from which they all claim to be derived, and by which they must 
 be tried. 
 
 A principle that is given out by a Christian sect jvs an essentially Christian 
 doctrine, becomes an article of creed, a dogma {c6yfjia = 6 tihoKTui). 
 
 A Dogma is understood to be the doctrine of a particular party or sect, 
 although that party may agree with the other sects in respect of other doctrines 
 of Christianity, and must necessarily agree with them in regard to the spirit 
 and central point of the Christian religion. Such dogmas, or articles of creed, 
 are the fruit of a certain way of thinking peculiar to the age in which they arise, 
 and obtain clerical importance when received either into the system of Si/mbols 
 or into the public liturgy. All symbols must therefore only be considered as 
 belonging to both a certain party and a certain time, and are thus not to be ranked 
 among the eternal and universal articles of faith. The exhibition of a finished 
 system of doctrines lies beyond the range of Sytnbolik ; it sets forth merely the 
 
 * Dogmen-geschichte, ' history of doctrines.' We have no corresponding term in the Fna^iffli 
 language, and therefore propose that of Doctrine-History,
 
 xlv PEEFACE. 
 
 most e«ential truths, the fundamental elements, leaving the farther scientific oi 
 systematic details to the sphere of Dogmatik. Dogmatik is therefore imme- 
 diately linked to tlie doctrines established by a certain party of Christians. An 
 universal Christian Dogmatik is not to be hoped for, so long as these are dif- 
 ferent parties among Christians. We should therefore have to range Symbol, 
 Dogma, and Dogmatik together, under the comprehensive head of Doctrine- 
 History, Such history ought, however, not to be limited to actual dogmas 
 aL)ne, but ought likewise to embrace many of the more loose and unembodied 
 doctrinal views and speculations ; partly on account of the influence wiiich 
 they may have had upon the rise and reception of some embodied dogmas, 
 and partly because history shows that some doctrinal views advanced but 
 rejected in earlier times, have, perhaps after the lapse of some centuries, been 
 reproduced, received, and sanctioned. A comparative survey of the various 
 dogmas of the different sects or church parties is the object of Comparative 
 Dogmatik ; though it has hitherto limited its views chiefly to the dogmas of the 
 principal sects alone. 
 
 It is greatly to be desired that the scope of Comparative Dogmatik should 
 be so extended as to embrace the collection of those dogmas which have, from 
 time to time, prevailed within the church of one and the same parly — as, e. g., 
 of the Roman Catholics, with special regard to the variety of opinions enter- 
 tained by this church on some doctrinal points, from her foundation in the 
 second century, in comparison with those held in the fourth, fifth, and sixth 
 centuries. This function of Doctrine-History has been too much confined to the 
 established doctrines within one church-party alone ; and this limitation is almost 
 unavoidable with those sects which, like the Roman Catholics, look at all otlier 
 sects as infidels, — a judgment surely as erroneous as it is partial and uncourteous. 
 
 Christian Morals is, properly speaking, only the practical part of 
 Dogmatik, and was, indeed, formerly always exhibited only in its connection 
 therewith. Its province is to show the influence which the Christian dogmas 
 exercise upon the dispositions of the heart, or in what degree those dogmas 
 may be brought into action upon the will of man. What, in our recent times, 
 has often been called — especially on the part of some German Protestant theo- 
 lo(>-ians — dogmatics or doctrines of faith, without attacliing to them any parti- 
 cular meaning of a sect or church-party, partakes mostly of a middle view 
 between church dogmatik. Biblical theology, and religious philosophy, wavering 
 between all, and belonging to none. 
 
 Patristics* and Patrology f seem to lie beyond the circle by which wr 
 have defined the limits of theological science. For the notion attached to the 
 term 'Fathers of the Church' is not universally acknowledged by all Christian 
 Beci.3, and least so among Protestants, who consider it a contradiction to th« 
 
 • Patristics, the literary character and history of the Fathers. 
 f Patboloct, the doctrinal and ethical systems founded on their writu.gk
 
 PREFACE. Hr 
 
 principle by which the Scriptures are recognised as tlie only source of the 
 knowledge of religious truth. 
 
 The immense mass of manifold and various tenets which have prevailed 
 as Christian doctrines at different times and in diH'erent countries, ever since the 
 introduction of Christianity, makes it evidently impossible to ascer'ain what is 
 real Christian doctrine, and what is not, if we do not talie the ScuirxuKEs as the 
 only guide in this labyrinth. The science, therefore, wliich discloses \.i us 
 the tenets of Holy Writ we call Biblical Exegesis, or I.ntekfretation. It 
 involves the difficult task of discovering the true meaning attaciied to the w ords 
 by the writer. To be able to do this, a thorough knowledge of the language in 
 which the author has written down liis thoughts is indispensable ; consequently, 
 a profound knowledge of Hebrew for tlie Old Testamerit, and of Greek for tlif 
 New Testament, is of tlie utmost necessity, and is one of the first requisites, in an 
 expounder of the Bible. But as the Sacred Writings jjave greatly suffered from, 
 and have been disfigured by the liberties of transcribers and eniendators, it is 
 needful to try to discover or restore the real words of the original text ; and tlie 
 science employed in this task is known by the name of Bibucal Criticism. By 
 means of criticism and philological research the sense of the Biblical writings 
 may be ascertained, grammatically or philologically. To this mode of exegesis 
 or interpretation is given the name of Gramtnatical Exposition. But although 
 it is most essential to correct interpretation of the Scriptures tiiat the text should 
 be grammatically considered, yet it is equally undeniable that philological 
 exegesis is by itself insufficient to develope completely the meaning of the 
 sacred writers in the words which they employ. To be able to do this completely 
 and satisfactorily, it is necessary that the interpreter should possess the means of 
 transporting himself into the times and into the spirit of the ages in whicii those 
 writers lived ; or, in other words, that he should be well acquainted with the 
 historical conditions of those ages, and with the modes of thought which then 
 prevailed ; as well as with the circumstances affecting the particular position 
 of the individual writer of every sacred book, and of the people whom he 
 addressed. Biblical Archaeology and Biblical Introduction are the pro{>ei in- 
 struments for the accomplishment of that object, which we call the Historical 
 Interpretation of the Scriptures ; the true and perfect Biblical Interpretation is 
 thus comprised in the category of Guammatico-Historical Exegesis, — a 
 term implying conditions which are hardly ever found in an equal degi-oe of 
 profundity in one and the same interpreter., 
 
 A more easy, partial, and objectionable species of interpretation is that 
 called Dogmatical Exegesis, which does not limit it,self to an independent 
 inquiry into the meaning of the sacred writings, but attempts rather to 
 determine the sense of the text by arbitrary dogmas. Equally objectionable, 
 and still more arbitrary, is the process of the Allegorical mode of expo- 
 jition^ which tortures the Biblical sense into figurative meanings ; and whicfa 
 rvely fails to evince the essential difference that exists between tlte mode of
 
 »▼! PREFACE. 
 
 thinking in the author and the interpreter, or between the ancient and 
 modern times. 
 
 Hermeneutics establishes the laws by which the interpreter is to prcceed 
 in his labours. Its relation to Interpretation is that of theory to practice. The 
 uuggestions which have led to the formation of Biblical Hermeneutics were 
 given chiefly by Dogmatical Exegesis. 
 
 The requisites of theology are, however, not confined to the mere endea- 
 vour to discover by means of correct exegesis the true meaning of Holy Writ, 
 OT of particular passages in the New Testament ; but the object of theology aa 
 a science is also and chiefly to collect the various religious views and doc- 
 trines dispersed in the Scriptures, and to compare and unite them into an entire 
 system ; and this science, aided by exegesis, is called Biblical Theology, 
 which is the true corner-stone of Biblical Exegesis. The inquiries involved 
 in it are rendered difficult and intricate by the fact that the Scriptures were 
 composed by various authors, and at different, and often at very long intervals 
 Biblical Theology must in the first instance be divided into two parts, that of 
 the Old Testament and that of the New Testament. But at the time of the 
 rise of Cliristianity and the writing of the New Testament, the Jews had 
 already formed a theology of their own, founded upon what may be called 
 exegetical explanations of the religious views set forth in the Old Testament, 
 and which, although not essentially wrong in its principles, was considerably at 
 variance with historical truth. This system of Jewish theology represents the 
 religious opinions which prevailed in the time of Christ, in consequence of the 
 peculiar views which the Jews entertained of the Old Testament writings and 
 of the revelations contained in them ; and it therefore supplies an intermediate 
 link which is often of more direct use to us for understanding the theology of the 
 New Testament, than the theology of the Old Testament viewed in its purer 
 and more simple results. Neither the Biblical theology of the Old Testament, 
 nor the Jewish theology in general, can be of binding force upon Christians, 
 except in so far as either may be borne out by the Biblical theology of the New 
 Testament. The former bear about the same relation to the latter as Biblical 
 archaeology does to the exegesis of the New Testament. 
 
 If the essence of Christianity be made a foundation for farther philosophical 
 specuiations, we arrive then at Christian RELiGious-PHiLOSoriiY, which em- 
 bodies into its system some but by no means all the doctrines of Scripture. 
 
 There have always been individuals, ever since Christianity has existed, who 
 Iiave particularly employed themselves in diffusing, enlivening, animating, 
 and defending the Christian faith ; and in most instances the Church, as an 
 independent community, has made the conservation of the Christian interests 
 the particular obligation of some of her members. Thus has arisen a science 
 for itself, directed towards the care and preservation of Christianity, and 
 usually called practical theology. The province of this science is of a 
 threrfoid character :—
 
 FKEFACE. XV 4 
 
 I. A guidance to flit riglit metliod of calling forth Chri^iutn ennrictio* 
 either in those who had hitherto been attached to another religion, — 
 PnosELYTisM, Missionary-studies; or in those who, altiiough 
 Christians, are still in want of Christian insti-iiction, — Catechetics. 
 
 S. The preservation and religions aiiimatiofi of the Cliiircli community by 
 means either of public worshij) itself, — LiTuncics ; or of edifying dis- 
 courses during the same, — IIomiletics ; or of that peculiar agency which 
 has its sphere in domestic and private life,— Pastoral Theoloct. 
 
 3. Defence of the Christiaii Church, by diverting the attacks made eitlier 
 tgainst her rights, — Church rights ; or against her sublime truths, — 
 Apologetics. 
 
 Finally, Christianity having already existed for very many centuries as a re- 
 ligious institution, it must be for every man, as a 7nan, and more particularly 
 for the thinking Christian, of the highest importance to learn the origin of 
 Christianity, its propagation and vicissitudes until our present times, and the ex- 
 tent and nature of the influence which it has exercised upon its votaries. The 
 science which gives information on all these points is called Church History, 
 describing all the known facts belonging to the total process of development of 
 Christianity. This science is of such an enormous extent as to compel its division 
 into several departments, which have also been variously treated. Such are the 
 History of the Spread of Christianity ; History of Church Doctrine ; History of 
 the Moral Injiuence of Christianity ; History of Reliyious Confusions and Fa- 
 naticisms arising out of Christianity ; History of Christian Civil Constitutions ; 
 History of the delations of the Church to the State; Ecclesiastical Antiquities or 
 ArchcEology ; History of some Christian Sects, such as. History of the Jeivish 
 Christians; History of the Catholics ; History of the Protestant Church, of 
 Che Presbyterians, Methodists, etc. ; Church History of some Countries and 
 Nations; History of Christian Literature. In that part of Church History 
 which describes the vicissitudes of tlie Church in times long gone by, the question 
 at last suggests itself, What is the present state of Christianity in the world ? 
 The science which — far from being as yet sufficiently cultivated — .solves this 
 in'.portant question, goes by the name of Church St.\tistics, and with it we 
 may regard the sphere of Theological ENCYCLOPiEDiA as completed. 
 
 It cannot lie within the province of the present work as a Cyclopcedia of 
 Hihlical Literature to embrace in the form of a dictionary all the subjects thus 
 described as appertaining to Christian theology. Passing by systematic theology 
 (v/hich is the object of dogmatic history), practical theology, and church-history, 
 the work comprises those branches of positive knowledge which are indispensable 
 for the understanding of the Bible, and its historical interpretation, including, 
 cherefore, Bihlical Archceology ^nd Hihlicnl Introduction, but leaving the appli- 
 cation itself, together with grammatical criticism, to the department o{ Biblical 
 Interpretation. Tlie treatment of these matters in the form here adopted hav
 
 xvili PEEFACE. 
 
 MTtaiuly :he disadvantag^e of somewhat obscuring the survey and impeding th« 
 systematic development of the whole ; but this disadvantage is greatly counter- 
 balanced by the benefits arising from the easy and convenient use which in 
 this form can be made of the abundant and various materials belonging to the 
 subjects discussed : a dictionary of such a character has, moreover, this important 
 advanta"^, that tlie subjects embraced in its plan can be handled with such 
 fulness of criticism as the present age requires. 
 
 Attempts were early made to exhibit information pertaining to the Bible 
 under the alphabetical arrangement of a dictionary. Of the many works of 
 that kind, deserving notice, are : Hierolexicon reale collectum, moderante. Ad 
 Rechenbergio, Lipsige et Francf., 1714, 2 vols. ; Aug. Calmet, Dictionnaire 
 Historique, Critique, Chronologique, Geographique, et Litterale de la Bible ^ 
 Paris, 1722, 2 vols., and (most complete) 1730, 4 vols. fol. ; Dictionnaire 
 Universelle, Dogmatique, Canonique, Histor}que, et Chronologique des 
 Sciences Ecclesiastiqiies, et avec des Sermons abreges des plus celebres Orateurs 
 Chretiens, par le P. U. Richard et autres Religieux Dominicains, etc., Paris, 
 1760-64, 5 vols. ; W. F. Hezel, Biblisciies Real-Lexicon, iiber Biblische, und 
 die Bibel erlaiiternde alte Geschichte, Erdbeschreibung, Zeitrechnung , etc.y 
 Leipz., 1783-85, 3 vols., 4to. ; F. G. Leun, Bibl. Encyclopcedie, oder exege- 
 tischcs Real-ivorterbuch iiber die Sdmmtlichen Hiilfsivissenschaften des Aus- 
 legers, nach den Bcdilrfnissen jetziger Zeit. Dutch ei?ie Gesellschaft von 
 GelehrtcH. Gotha, 1793-98, 4 vols., 4to. 
 
 Although the work of Calmet was the most learned and practically useful 
 of all, the partial standing point of the author rendered it unsuited to the 
 enlarged demands of the present age ; which, with the superficiality anii 
 want of plan in later works, had brought performances of this kind into some 
 disrepute ; and it was reserved for George Benedict Winer, a theologian of 
 Leipsic, to restore them to their former credit by his Biblisches Real-ivorter' 
 buck, Leip., 1820, 2 vols., 8vo., of which a second and improved edition was 
 publislied in 1833-38. The sphere of that work is, however, too narrowly 
 drawn, the critical treatment in it is of a very unequal character, and many of 
 the subjects examined in its pages, especially in the department of natural his- 
 tory, have iu reality no relation whatever to the Bible. Similar publications 
 by various other writers have been produced on the Continent, but they cannot 
 be regarded as exhibiting any claims to scientific criticism, or well-considered 
 arrangement." 
 
 To particularise the works of the kind produced in our own country might 
 appear invidious. It may suffice to say that they have all in their day served 
 purposes of more or less usefulness, for which they are no longer available. All 
 that has been done till now has been in various degrees based upon Calmet's great 
 worK ; and tfie present is the only production which ca;i be regarded as even 
 im>fee8iag to draw its materials from original sources of informatio/i. Oaimet'^
 
 PREFACE. «i» 
 
 own work was composed in a great degree out of the materials already used by 
 him in the notes, dissertations, and prefaces of his great work, the Commcntaire 
 LitUrale. The first translation of it appeared in 1732, in three large and costly 
 folio volumes, executed by two clergymen, Samuel ('/Oyley, M.A., and John 
 Colson, M.A., F.R.S., the former of whom translated to the letter M, and the 
 otlier to the end of the book. This translation formed th^ great treasury 
 from which were drawn the materials of the large number of lesser Dictionaries 
 of the Bible which subsequently appeared. These exhibited little more diversity 
 from each other than such as naturally arises where persons of difterent habits of 
 mind form different abridgments of the same work, the original or new matter 
 being chiefly exhibited by the interspersion of doctrinal articles in support of 
 the particular views which the compiler entertained. At length a new edition of 
 Caimet was undertaken by Mr. Charles Taylor, and appeared in 1795 in four, and 
 in later editions in five, quarto volumes. This was a very eccentric performance, 
 composed thus : — two volumes consisted of an abridcjment of Caimet ; one volume 
 of engravings ; and two volumes of ' Fragments.' These fragments contained a 
 sprinkling of useful matter drawn from histories and travels ; but three-fourtha 
 of the whole consist of singularly wild and fanciful speculations respecting 
 mythology, ethnology, natural history, antiquities, and sundry other matters, 
 and are replete with unsound learning, outrageous etymologies, and the vagaries 
 of an vmdisciplined intellect. Caliuet, thus transformed, and containing as 
 much of the editor as of the original author, has in its turn formed ilie basis 
 of the Biblical Dictionaries which have since appeared, including a very pains- 
 taking digest of the more useful parts of Taylor's matter incorporated with 
 the Dictionary under one alphabet, the whole abridged into one volume 
 royal 8vo., which appeared in 1832. This work was in the same year re- 
 produced in America under the supervision of Dr. Robinson, M'ho made some 
 /ew but valuable additions to particular articles. For the sake of tliese addi- 
 tions, reference has in the present work been occasionally made to tliat edition, 
 but more in the early than in the latter part, where the sources of such additions 
 were rather sought in the German authorities from v hich they were found 
 to be derived. This is the sole assistance which has been obtained from 
 any edition of Caimet ; and it is so trifling that no notice would have 
 been taken of it here, were it not that Calmet's name has been in this 
 country so much used in connection with such undertaking's, that many readers 
 would, without this explanation, be disposed to confound the present work with 
 the numerous compilations based upon or made up out of his folios. Of 
 Winer's JBihlisclies Real-tcbrterhuch more frequent use has, in some classes of 
 subjects, been made ; but rather as an index than as a direct source of niatenals ; 
 and not to any extent which can impair the claim of tiiis work to be ierived 
 from original sources of information, rather than from other productions of the 
 wm<^ description. 
 
 The Editor cannot but regard with peculiar satisfaction the ample lefer*
 
 XX PREFACE. 
 
 ences to books which occur in almost every article, and which indicate to tht 
 reader the means of more extensive inquiry into the various subjects whicii 
 have been noticed with indispensable brevity in this work. Tlie numeroiw 
 references to Scripture will greatly assist its chief use and design — the illus- 
 tration of the sacred volume. It is believed that the articles in the depart- 
 ments of Biblical Introduction and Criticism embrace a body of informa* 
 tion, respecting the books of Scripture and sacred criticism, such as no Mork 
 sf the kiud in any language has hitherto contained. The Natural History 
 of Scripture has now for the first time been examined, and as far as possible 
 eettled, not by "mere scholars ignorant of natural history, but by naturalist? 
 of acknowledged eminence. The Scripture Geography has, by the help 
 of Dr. Robinson's invaluable Biblical Researches in Palestine, and of other 
 publications less known in this country, assumed in the present work a 
 greatly altered and much more distinct aspect. The Archaeological arti- 
 cles exiiibit an extent of illustration and research which will tend greatly to 
 elucidate the obscurities which tlie subjects necessarily involve. The History 
 has been discussed under tlie influence of those broad principles which con- 
 stitute its philosophy ; and in this, as well as in the Biography, it has not 
 been forgotten that while actions are always to be judged by the immutable 
 standard of right and wrong which the word of God has established, the judg- 
 ments which we pass upon men must be qualified by considerations of age, 
 country, situation, and other incidental circumstances. 
 
 It is hoped that with such claims to attention, and embodying, as it does, 
 the results of great labour and much anxious thought, the work now offered to 
 the public will receive indulgent consideration for the minute errors, defects, 
 and perhaps discrepancies, from wliich the Editor dares not hope that it is wholly 
 exempt, and which are perhaps inevitable in a work executed by so many 
 different hands, and involving so large a body of references, titles, and propel 
 Dames. 
 
 JOHI? EITIXX 
 
 Woking, Oct. Utk^ ISifi.
 
 CYCLOPAEDIA 
 
 BIBLICAL LITERATURE. 
 
 AARON. 
 
 AARON (pn^. etymology and signification 
 ■nkiiown ; Sept. 'Aapwy), the eldest son of Am- 
 ram and Jocliebad, of the tril)e of Levi, and 
 brother of Moses. He was born n c. 1574 
 (Hales, B.C. 1730), three years before Moses, and 
 one year before Pharaoh's edict to destroy tlie 
 male children of the Israelites (Exod. v. 20 ; 
 vii. 7). His name first occurs in the mysterious 
 interview wiiicli Moses had with the Lord, wiio 
 appeared tt) him in tlie burning bush, while he 
 kept Jethro's tlock in Horeb. Among other ex- 
 cuses by whicli Moses souglit to evade the great 
 commission of delivering Israel, one was that he 
 lacked that persuasive readiness of speech (lite- 
 lally was ' not a man of worils ') which appeared 
 *o him essential to such an undertaking. But he 
 was reminded that his brother Aaron pt)ssessed in 
 A higli degree the endowment which he deemed so 
 neeuTul, and could therefore sjieak in liis name 
 and on his behalf. During tiie forty years' ab- 
 sence of Moses in tiie land of Midian. Aaron 
 had manied a woman of the Irilie of Judah. 
 named Elisheba (or Elizabeth), wlio had born 
 to him four sons, Nadab, Abihu, Eleazer, and 
 Ithamar ; and Eleazer had, before tlie return of 
 Moses, Ijecome the father of Phinelias (Exod. 
 ?i 23-2.5). 
 
 Pursuant to an intimation from God, Aaron 
 went mto the wilderness to meet his long-exiled 
 brother, and conduct him back to Egypt. After 
 forty years of separation tliey met ami embraced 
 each other at the mount of Horeb. When tliey 
 arrived in Goshen, Aaron, who appears to liave been 
 well known to the chiefs of Israel, introduced his 
 brotliA to tliem, and assisted him in opening and 
 enforcing the great commission which had been 
 confided to, him. In tlie sul)sequent transactions, 
 from the first interview with Pharaoli till after 
 the delivered nation had passed the Red Sea, 
 Aaron appears to have been almost always pre- 
 sent with his more illustrious brotlier, assisting and 
 supporting him ; and no separate act of his own 
 is recorded. Tills co-operation was ever after- 
 wards mainfained. Aaron and Hur were present 
 on the hill from which Moses surveyed llie Ijattle 
 whicli Josliua fought with the Amalekites ; and 
 *iese two long sustained the weary hands upon 
 wliose uplifting the fate of the battle was fiAind 
 to depend (Exod. xvii. 10-12). Afterwards, when 
 Moses ascended Mount Sinai to receive the 
 tables of the law, Aaron, with liis sons ami 
 •Bventy of the elders, accompanied him j)art of 
 dw way up, and, aii a token of tiie Divine favour, 
 
 AARON. 
 
 were permitted to behoM afar off the outskir1» a< 
 that radiant symbol of the Sacred Presence, wh;cb 
 Moses was allowed to view more nearly (Exod. 
 xxiv. 1, 2, 9-11). 
 
 The absence of Moses in the mountain was 
 prolonged for forty days, during which the people 
 seem to have looked upon Aaron as their liead, 
 and an occasion arose wliich first brings the 
 respective characters of the brothers into real 
 comparison, and the result fully vindicates the 
 Divine preference of Moses by sliowing that, 
 notwithstanding the seniority and greater elo- 
 quence of Aaron, he wanred the iiigli qualities 
 wliiak ^vere essential in the leader of the Israel- 
 ites, and which were possessed by Moses in a 
 very eminent degree. The peo])le grew iinjia- 
 tient at tlie protracted stay of their great leader 
 in the mountain, and at length concluded that he 
 nad perished in the devouring fire that gleamed 
 upon its top. The result of tliis hasty conclu- 
 sion gives us the first intimation of the extent to 
 which their minds were fainted with the rank 
 idolatries of Egy])t. Recognising the aiithority of 
 their k)st chief's brother, they gathered around 
 iiim, and clamorously demandeil that he .should 
 proviile them with a visible symliolic image of 
 their God, that they might worshij) him as other 
 gods were worshipped. Either afraid to risk the 
 consequences of a refusal, or imperfectly im- 
 pressed with tlie full meaning of the recent and 
 authoritative prohibition ot all such attempts to 
 represent or symbolize the Divine Being, Aaron 
 comj)lied with their demand; and with the 
 ornaments of gold which they freely ofi'ered, cast 
 the figure of a calf [Cai.f, Golden], being, pri.>- 
 bably, no other tlian that of the Egy]itian god 
 Mnevis, whose worship prevailed in Lower 
 Egypt. However, to fix tiie meaning of this 
 image as a symbol of the true God, Aaron was 
 careful to proclaim a feast to Jehovah for the en- 
 ,suing day. On that day the people met to cele- 
 brate the feast, after the fashion of the Egyptian 
 festivals of the calf-idol, with dancing, with 
 shouting, and with sports. 
 
 Meanwhile Moses had been dismissed from the 
 mountain, provided with the decalogue, written 
 ' by the finger of God,' on two tablets of stone. 
 Tlieii.';, as s(K)n as lie came sulliciently near to 
 obs(Tve the proceedings in the camp, he cast from 
 him with such I'orce that they bra'ne in piece*. 
 His re-apjjearance confounded the mul'itncfe, wiio 
 quaileu under his stern relink', ami quietly bu1>- 
 mitted to see tlieir new-made lUol ilestroye<l. Fas
 
 i AARON 
 
 tais sin tlie jjopulation was decimated by sword 
 an;', plague. Aaron, when taxed by his 'jrofher 
 for his conduct in this matter, attempted to ex- 
 cuse himself l)y casting the whole blame upon 
 the people, and pleading the necessity of circuq^- 
 stances (Exod. xxxii.). 
 
 During his long absence in the mountain, ' 
 Moses had received instructions regarding the 
 ecclesiastical est<il)lishment, the tabernacle [Ta- 
 bbrnaci.e]. and the priesthood [Priests], wtiich 
 he soon al'tprwards proceeded (o execute. Under 
 the new institution Aaron was to be high-priest, 
 and l.:9 aons and descendants priests ; and the 
 whole frilje to which he belonged, that of Levi, 
 was set a]jart as the sacerdotal or learned caste 
 rLEViTEs]. Accordingly, after the tabernacle had 
 fieen comjjleted, and every jueparation made for 
 the commencement of actual service, Aaron and 
 his sons were consecrated by Moses, who anointed 
 them with the holy oil and invested them with 
 the sacreil garments. The higli-priest applied him- 
 Belf assiduously to the duties of his exalted office, 
 and during tlie period of nearly forty years 
 that it was filleil liy him, his name seldom 
 comes inider our notice. But his elevation was 
 soon ibllowed by a most afflictive event. His 
 two eldest sons, Nadab and Abihu, were struck 
 dead for daring, seemingly when in a state of 
 partial inebriety, to concluct the service of God 
 in an irregular manner, by olVering incense with 
 unlawful tire. On this occasion it was enjoined 
 Hia.L tlie priests should manifest none of the orili- 
 cary signs of mourning ibr the loss of those who 
 A-eie so dear to them. To this heavy stroke Aaron 
 Sawed in silence (Lev. x. 1-11). 
 
 Aaron would seem to have been liable to some 
 tils of jealousy at the superior influence and au- 
 rliority of his brother ; tor he joined in, or at 
 least sanctioned the invidious con<luct of his 
 sister Miriam [Miriam], wlio, after the wife of 
 Moses had been brouglit to the camp by Jethro, 
 liecame apprehensive for her own position, and 
 cast reflections upon Moses, much calculated to 
 damage his influence, on account of his marriage 
 with a foreigner— always an odious thing among 
 the Hebrews. For this, Miriam was struck with 
 temporary lejjrosy, which brought the high-priest 
 to a sense of liis sinful conduct, and he sought 
 and obtained forgiveness (Num. xii.). 
 
 Some twenty years after (b.c. 1471), when 
 the camp was in the wilderness of Paran, a for- 
 midable conspiracy was organized against the 
 sacerdotal authority exercised by Aaron and his 
 sons, and the civil authority exercised by Moses. 
 This conspiracy was headed by chiefs of influence 
 and station — Korah, of the tribe of Levi, and 
 D.ithan and Abiram, of the tribe of Reuben [Ko- 
 uah]. But the divine appoindnent was attested 
 and confirmed by the signal destruction of the 
 conspirators : and '.he next day, when the people 
 a5seml)le 1 tumulcuously and murmured loudly at 
 tlie ".estrucfion which iiad overtaken their leaders 
 and fri -•ids, a tierce pestilence broke out among 
 them, and tliey fell by tliousandson the spot. When 
 this was seen, Aaron, at the command of Moses, 
 filled a censer with Are from the altar, and^ rush- 
 ing forward to tlie point where life had ended and 
 deatii had not begun, he stood there, a^d the plague 
 was stayed where he stood. This was in fact 
 Another attestation of the Divine appointment; 
 
 ' for ils further confirms ^'-Ji, as regarded 
 
 AB 
 
 Aaron and his family, the chiefs of the MveiflJ 
 tribes were required to deposit their staves, ano 
 with them was placed that f)f Aaron for the rrib* 
 of Levi. They were all laid up together ovei 
 night in the tabernacle, and in the morning it 
 was round that, while the other rods remained as 
 they were, that of Aaron had biukled, blossomed, 
 and yielded the fruit of almonds. The rod wai 
 preserved in the tabernacle, as an authentic evi- 
 dence of the divuie appointment of the Aaronie 
 family to the priesthood — which, iniiecd, does not 
 a.T)pear to have been ever afterwards disputed 
 (Num. xvii. 1). 
 
 Aaron was not allowed to enter the Promised 
 Land, on account of the distrust which he, as 
 well as his bnitlier, manifested when the rock 
 was stricken at Meribah (Num. xx. R-13). His 
 death indeed occurred very soon after that event. 
 For when the host arrived at Mount Hor, in 
 going down the Wady Arabah [Arabah], in 
 order to double the mountainous territory of Edom, 
 the Divine mandate came that Aaron, accom- 
 panied by his brother Moses and by his son 
 Eleazer, should ascend to the top of tliat mountain 
 in the view of all the people ; and that he should 
 there transfer his pontifical robes to Eleazer, and 
 then die. He was 123 years old wiien his ca- 
 reer thus strikingly terminated ; and his son arid 
 his lirother buried him in a cavern of the moun- 
 tain [HoR, Mount]. The Israelites mourned 
 for him tiirty days ; and on the first day of th« 
 montii .'Vb, the Jews still hold a fast in comme- 
 moration of his death. 
 
 AAIIONITES, the descendants of Aaron, who 
 served as priests at the sanctuary (Num. iv. 3, 
 aeq. ; 1 Chion. xii. 27; xxvii. 17). 
 
 AB (3N, father) is found as the first member 
 of several compound Hebrew proper names, the 
 etymology and meaning of which may be ex- 
 plained by a few remarks on the laws of their 
 construction. This is the more necessary, as 
 Leusden, Hiller, and Simonis, the authors of the 
 three most celebrated Ononiastica Sacra, <as well 
 as the many who blindly follow them, indif- 
 ferently take the former or latter member of such 
 compounds to be in the relation of genitive to 
 the otlier, i, e. consider it equally legitimate to 
 say, Ahncr means fat/ier of light, or light of the 
 father. Nevertheless, it may be laid down as an 
 incontestalile canon — being founded not merely 
 on an accessory law, but on one of the charac- 
 teristic peculiarities of the Syro-Arabian lan« 
 guages (that is, on the state construct) — that, in 
 all cases in which a compound name consists of 
 two nouns, one of which is to he considered in the 
 relation of genitive to the other, that one must 
 invariably be the latter. Abner, theiefore, can 
 only mean father of light. 
 
 This error appears to have arisen (besides the 
 want of sure principles of construction) from the 
 inability to appreciate the metaphorical sense in 
 which tlie Ilelirews use the \cnr\% father, son, &c. 
 The name Abigail, fatht-r of joy, appeared in- 
 explicable as the name of a woman ; and there- 
 fore those scholars thiught it allowalile to s?cr • 
 fice tlie construction to the necessities of the 
 sense. And yet it is not difficult to conceiv* 
 the process by which the idea of a natural fathei 
 became modified into that of atithor, cau^e. source 
 'as when it is said, ' ha* the rain a father f Job
 
 AB. 
 
 ABADDC N. 
 
 SJrtviii. 2^); nor that, when once the langiiage 
 had sanctioned tlie use of father as equivalent 
 to source, the word niiijiit he sometimes treatixl 
 as an austract, in idea, and he applied without 
 gross incongrnity to a woman. 
 
 As tlte Kthiopio, and especially the Arahic 
 languages \ery frequently use faihcf in ;he sense 
 c( poiitfsior (iis fathf.r of ivhite^ u name for milk), 
 •ome have beeu (Jisjiosed to vindicate the same 
 |<rivilege to IIehr»»v also. Thus Goseuius seems 
 to have entertained this view, when !ie rendered 
 Abigail by ' pater exuUiitionis, i.e. liilaiis, ni lire 
 TAeSdurus. In the German edition of his Ma- 
 nual, however, he i.as explained it by ' whose 
 father is joy.' Into the question as to the prin- 
 ciple involved in the latter of his modes of inter- 
 pretation, there is no need to enter ; the imme- 
 diate object of this article being solely to define 
 the relation of the two nouns in a compound 
 proper name, when one of ttiem is conskiered 
 dependent as a genitive on the otber. 
 
 Very much light yet remains to be thrown on 
 Compound Hebrew proper names, by a study of 
 those of the same class in Arabic. The innume- 
 rable compound prcenomitia and cognomiiia 
 which the Arabs bestow not only on men, but 
 on beasts and inanimate objects, furnish parallels 
 to almost every peculiarity observable in Hel)rew ; 
 and altiioughno example may be found in which 
 a woman Is called father of joy, yet tlie prin- 
 cijjje of the metaphorical use of terms of rela- 
 tionship, as the iirst element in a name, will re- 
 ceive ample illustration, and be brought within 
 the reach of our occidental conceptions. (See 
 an instructive paper on the Preenomina of the 
 Arabs, liy Kosegarten, in Ewald's Zeitschrift fur 
 die Kunde des Mortjenktndes, i. 297-317.) — J. N. 
 
 AB (^UK ; 'A/SjSa, Josepli. Andq. iv. 4 ; the 
 Macedonian Aa;o$) is tlie Chaldee name of that 
 mr.nth whicti is the tifth of the ecclesiastical and 
 eleventh of the civil year of the Jews. The 
 /lame was first introduced after the Baiiyloni.in 
 captivity, and does not occur in the Old Testa- 
 ment, in which this month is only mentioned by 
 its numeral designation as the fifth. It com- 
 menced with the new moon of our Atigxtst (the 
 reasons for this statement will he given in tlie 
 article MontusI, and always had 30 -lays. This 
 niontli is pre-eminent in the Jewish calendar as 
 the period of the most signal national calami- 
 ties. The 1st is memorable for the death of 
 Aaron (Num. xxxiii. 3S). Tlie 9th is the date 
 Assigned by Moses Cotzensis (cited in Wagen- 
 seiVs Sota, p. 736) to the following events : the 
 declaration that no one then adult, except 
 Joshua and Caleli, should enter into the Pro- 
 mised Land (Num. xiv. 30); the destruction 
 of the first Temple by Nebuchadnezzar (to 
 these first two 'the fast of the fil>h month," in 
 Zech. vii.5; viii. 19, is supposed to refer; yet the 
 tract Pcsachim, cited in Reland's Antifj. Sacr., 
 IV. 10, asserts that the latter was the only 
 fast observed during the Captivity) : the de- 
 struction of the second Temple by Titus ; the 
 devastation of the city Bettar ("IH^h); and the 
 ^laugh»CT of Ben Cozilwh (Bar C(X-.ab). and of 
 several thousand Jews there ; and tlie j)lougiiing 
 up of tlie foundations of the Temple by Turnus 
 RiTfus — the two last of wliich happened in the 
 <roe of Ila Irian. 
 
 With regard to the destruction of tie tlrrt 
 Temp.e, although there is no tioulrt that tit* 
 Jews conunemorate that event by a fast on the 9th 
 of .A.b, yet tiie sercrifh is the date given for it in 
 2 Kings XXV. S 'wliere, however, the Syriac and 
 Araliic versions read the ninth). a..d tlie (tulh. 
 that assigned in Jer. lii. 12. ./osepliiis, iioweier, 
 in mentioning that the Herodian Temple \\m 
 burnt on the truth of Lous, expressly a^iserts dial 
 it was on the .mnie day of the month on wliicli 
 the first Temple was ilestroyed('/J(7/ .hid. vi. -I, hj. 
 Buxtorf, in his Si/nap. Jiid. cli. xxx., :e'_-tincile» 
 the discrepancy between the 9th as the day of 
 commemoration and the 10th as the date of the 
 event, by saying that the confiagration Im/tin on 
 the former day. Compare alsoW'airenseils Solti. 
 p. 942. 
 
 Jn a calendar ascribed to the celebrated hm- 
 tronouier Rab Ada, who lived in the third cen- 
 tury, which Bodenschatz has given in his Kinh- 
 llche Verfassung dor ./itden. v.. 136, the 15lh is 
 the day a^^pointed for the festival of the fuAo- 
 (popla, in which the wood 'or the burnt-ollering 
 was stored u]) in the court of the 'JVinple, to 
 which Nehemiali alludes in x. 3-1, and xin. 31. 
 Some place tiiis festival on another day, or even 
 month ; or assume, on the authority of the trea- 
 tise Taanith, \\ia.\ nine particular families brouglu 
 wood on nine sejiarate (Uiys, four of whic... 
 however, occur in Ali (Otiio, Lexicon Pa/iltin. 
 p. 3Sn). Tlie election of parricul.-:r fi-.milies 
 accords with the statement in \ehemiah. Aever- 
 theless, Jose].ihi;8, sjioaking of this festival, says, 
 ev f/ Traffiv efios Z\f\v ■Kpoa'pfpe:'- ( Bell. .Jitd. ii . I V^; 
 and the date of the day succeeding it, which he 
 mentions in the next section, fixes its re'el. ra- 
 tion, in his time, on the 1-lfh of the moiiiti. It 
 is, however, extiemely di(!icuit to distinguisti the 
 original from the later forms in any rite of a 
 people so prone to multiply its ceremonial ob- 
 gervar;ces as the Jews were. 
 
 Lastly, the Megillat Tnnnifh states that the 
 18th is a fast in memory of the western lamp 
 going out in the Temple in the time of Aliaz. 
 I*^ n-iay be conjectured that this refere to the ex- 
 tinction of 'the lamps' which is rnentione<l in 
 2 Chron. xxix. 7, as a iiart of Aha/'s attempts to 
 suppress the Temple service. For an inquiry 
 into what is meant by the icestern or evening 
 lam;;, see the article Candlestick. — J. N. 
 
 ABADDON, or Apoij.von (JH???, dcstruc 
 fion ; 'A^aS8ci>v in Rev. ix. 11, where it is ren- 
 dered by tlie Greek 'AiroWvaif, di'stroger). The 
 former is the Hebrew name, and tlie latter the 
 Greek, for the angel of death, described (Rev. 
 ix. 11) as toe king and c'tiief of tlie ApiK-alyptic 
 locusts under the fifth trumpet, and as the .ingei 
 of the abyss or ' bottomless pit.' This personifi- 
 cation is peculiar to the [irej>ent text. In the Biiile, 
 and i?i every Rabbinie»il instance that occurs to w.t. 
 the word pT3X (abaddon) means destruciioD 
 (Job xxxi. 12), or the place of destruction, i.e. 
 the subterranean worhl, Hades, the region of the 
 dead (Job xxvi. 6 ; xxviii.'22 ; Prov. xv. 11). It 
 is in tact the second of fVie seven names v.'hicK 
 the Rabbins ap])ly to that region: and they av- 
 diice it particularly from Ps. Ixxxviii. 11, 'Shall 
 thy loving kindness lie dedan'd in tlie grave, 
 or thy I'aithtrilness in (abaddoif] ilestrnction *
 
 ABANA. 
 
 ABATTACflTlUL 
 
 ABaNA, or Amana (HjaS* or HilOS ; the 
 former beiriT; the ketkih or Hebrew lext, and 
 the hitter the Iceri oc niarginal reading; Sept. 
 A$ayd,), the nasie of one of the rivers which are 
 mentioned by Nd^nisn (2 Kings v. 12), ' Abana 
 and Fiiar^^ar,' as ' r;T«9 of Damascus.' Amana 
 8ignii'>3s ' perennial,' and is probably the true 
 nam?, the |)ermuta*lcri of b and m being very 
 common in itie Oriental dialects. It is easy to 
 Snd ' rivers of" Damascus;' but there is a diili- 
 culty in appropriating the distinctive naines 
 wliich are here applied to them. Tlie main stream 
 by which Damascus is now irrigated is called 
 Barrada. This river, the Chrysorrhoas, or ' golden 
 stream,' of the ancient geographers, as soon as it 
 issues from a cleft of the Anii-Ijcbanon moun- 
 tains, is immediately divided into three smaller 
 courses. The central or princip;il stream runs 
 straight towanls the city, and there sujjplies the 
 differ^t public cisterns, baths, and fountains ; 
 *'^° other brandies diverge to the riglit and left 
 al(jn^ the rising ground on either hand, and having 
 furnished the means of extensive irrigation, (all 
 again into the main channel, after diffusing their 
 fertilizing influences, without which ti)e whole 
 would be an arid desert, like the vast surrounding 
 plaiiis. In those plains the soil is in some parts 
 even finer than here, but barren from tlie want 
 of water. The main stream and its subsidiaries 
 unite in greatly weakened force beyond the town 
 on the south-east ; and the collected waters, after 
 flowing for two or three hours thiough tlie eastern 
 nills, are at length lost in a marsh or lake, 
 whicli is known as the Bahr el Merdj, or Lake 
 of tlie Meado'vV. Dr. Richardson {^Travels, ii. 499) 
 states that the ' water of the Barrada, like the 
 water of the Jordan, is of a white sulphuieous hue, 
 aiid an unpleasant taste.' At the present day it 
 eems scarcely possible to appropriate with cer- 
 tainty the Scriptural names to these streams. There 
 is indeed a resemblance of name which would 
 suggest the Barrada to be the Pharpar. and tlien 
 the question would be. which of tlie other streams 
 is tlie Abana. But some contend that theBariada 
 is the Abana, and are only at a less for the Pliarpar. 
 Others lind both in the two subsidiary streams, 
 and neglect the Banada. The most recent con- 
 jecture seeks tlie Abana in the small river Fldgi 
 or Fijik, which Dr. Richardson describes as rising 
 near a village of the same name in a pleasant 
 valley fifteen or twenty miles to the north-west of 
 Damascus. It issues from the limestone rock, in 
 a deep, rapid stream, about thirty feet wide. It 
 is pure and cold as iced water; and, after coursing 
 down a stony and rugged channel for above a hun- 
 dred yards, falls into tlie BaiTada, which comes 
 from anotlier valley, and at tlie point of junction 
 is only lialf as wide as the Fijih. Dr. Mansford 
 'Script. Gnz. in Abana), who adopts tlie notion 
 that ttie Aliana »»"3sone of the subsidiary streams, 
 well remarks thai • Naaman may be excused his 
 national jjrejudice in favour of his own rivers, 
 which, by their constant and beautiful suj^iy, 
 render the vicinity of Damascus, although on the 
 edge of a desert, one oi the most beautiful spots 
 in the worl 1 ; wliile the streams of Judsea, with 
 thr exception of tl e Jordan, are nearly dry (he 
 greatrr part of the V^ar, and, running in de^) 
 and rocky channels, convey but partial fertility 
 to tlie lands dirough which they flow.' 
 
 ABARIM (Dnn^, Sept. 'Aj8ap.», a mo>ai 
 tain (D''"13yn"'T-n), or rather chai 1 of inaan< 
 tains (D'lSyrrnn) which form or belong ta 
 the mountainous district east of the Dead Sea and 
 the lower Jordan. It pres*^ts many distinc' 
 masses and elevations, commanding extensive 
 views of the country west of tlie river (Irby anr} 
 Mangles, p. 459). From one of the highest of these, 
 called Mount Nel)0, Moses surveyed the Promised 
 Land before lie died. From the mannti m vrliich 
 tlienamesAbarim,Nebo,a.idPisgah are connected 
 (Deut. xxxii. 49, ' Get thee up into this mountain 
 Abarim, untAj Mount Nebo;' iuid xxxiv. 1, 'Unto 
 the mounta.n of Nebo, to ;he t«p of Pisgah'), it 
 would seem that Nebo was a mountain of tlie 
 Abarim chain, and that Pisgah was ilie highest 
 and most commanding peak of that mountain. 
 The loftiest mountain of the neighbourhood ii 
 Mount Attarous, about ten miles north of the 
 Anion ; and travellers have been disposed to iden- 
 tify it with Mount Nebo. It is represented al 
 barren, its summit lieing marked by a wild pis- 
 taoliio-lree overshadowing a heap of stones. Tb« 
 precise appropriation of the tliree names, however, 
 remains to be determined, as this locality has rjol 
 yet (lS43j had the advantage of sucli search^"^ 
 exploration as Professor Robinson has applieij^ lj 
 Western Palestine. 
 
 [Ciiciiibita citrullus.] 
 
 ABATTACHIM (D-niSais; ; Sept. cUvosy 
 This word occurs only in Numbers xi. 5, wher9 
 the murmuring Israelites say, ' We remember (he 
 fish which we did eat freely in Egypt, the cucum- 
 bers and tlie ahattachim,^ &c. Tlie last word 
 lias always been rendered ' Melons.' The pro- 
 bable correctness of this translation may be 
 inferred i'roin melons having been known to thb 
 nations of antiquity ; and it may be proved to 
 be so, by comparing the original term with tlie 
 name of the melon in a cognate language such 
 as the Arabic. 
 
 The cucurbitacese, or gourd tribe, are remark- 
 able for their power of adapting themselves 
 to the dift'erent situations where they can be 
 grown. Tlius Mr Elphinstone describes some 
 of them as yielding largo and juicy fruit in the 
 midst of tlie Indian desert, where water is 300 
 feet from tlie surface. Extreme of moisture, how- 
 ever, s far from injurious to them, as the great 
 maji rity are successfully cultivated in the rainy 
 season in India Mr. Moorcrolt degcribes aq ez
 
 ABATTACHIM. 
 
 •entlve cultivation of' melons and cucvimhers on 
 tiie hods of weeiU w.iich Hoat on ihe lakes of 
 Cashmere. Thev are similarly cultivated in 
 Persia and in China. In India, ' some of the 
 species may be seen in tlie most arid places, 
 others in tiie densest jjingles. Planted at tJje 
 foot of a tree, they emiT.ate the vine in ascend- 
 ing its brandies ; and near a hut, they soon cover 
 its tliatch with a coating of green. They form a 
 p/incipal portion of the culture of Indian gai^ 
 dens : tlie farmer even rears them in the neigh- 
 bourhood of his wells' (Roy\e,Hi>nalai/aii Botany, 
 p. 218). 
 
 These plants, though known to the Greeks, are 
 not natives of Kuro;je, but of Eastern countries, 
 whence tliey must have been introduced into 
 Greece. They probably maj be traced to Syria 
 or Egypt, whence other cultivated plants, as well 
 HS civilization, have travelled westwards. In 
 Egypt they formed a portion of the food of the 
 people at the very early period when tJie Israel- 
 ites were led by Moses from its rich cultivation 
 into the midst of the desert. The melon, the 
 water-melon, and several others of the Cucurbi- 
 taceiB, are mentioned by Wilkinson {Thebes, 
 p. 212; Ancient Egyptians, iv. 62), as still cul- 
 tivated there, and are described as being sown in 
 the middle of December, and cut, the melons in 
 ninety and the cucumbers in sixty days. 
 
 If we consider that tlie occurrences so grapiii- 
 cally detailed in the Bible took place in the 
 East, we should expect, among the natural pro- 
 ducts noticed, that those which appear from the 
 earliest times to have been esteemed in these 
 countries would be those mentioned. But as 
 all are apt to undervalue the good wliicli they 
 possess, and think of it only when beyond tlieir 
 reach, so the Israelites in the desert longed for 
 the delicious coolness of the melons of Egypt 
 Among these we may suppose both the melon 
 and water-melon to have been included, and 
 therefore both will be treated of in this article. 
 
 By the term Ahattachim there is little doubt 
 that melons are intended, as, when we remove 
 the plural form ?wi, we have a word very similar 
 
 to tlie Arabic y.U> BuGkk, which is the name 
 
 of the melon in that language. This appears, 
 however, to b^ a generic term, inasmuch as tliey 
 emjiloy it simply to indicate the common or 
 musk melon, while the water-melon is called 
 Butikh-hindee, or Indian melon. The former is 
 called in Persian khurpoozeh, and in Hindee 
 khurbooja. It is probably a native of tiie 
 Persian region, whence it lias been carried 
 south into India, and -north into Eurof,e, the 
 Indian being a slight conniption of the Persian 
 name. As the AraJiian authors append y'i^/fwA as 
 the Greek name of butikh, which is considered 
 to be the melon, it is evident that fufash 
 must, in theit estimation, be the same. From 
 there being no p in Aiabic, and as the diacritical 
 point noon might, by transcribers, liave easily 
 been mistaken for that of shen, it is more than 
 probalile that tliis is intended for Ttirwv. esjie- 
 ciallyif we compare the description in Avicenna 
 with tiiat in Dioscorides. By Galen it was called 
 Melo})spo, from nielo and pi''iio, the former from 
 being roundish in form like the apple. Tiie 
 melon is suppi sed to have been tJie ctIkvos of 
 Tbeopbrastus, and the a'lKvos Tztirwv ol' Ilipjio- 
 
 ABATTACHIM. 
 
 crates. It wiis known to the Romans, and ciiiti- 
 vated by Columella, with the assistance of some 
 precaution at cold tiqies of the year. It is sai-J 
 ivj nave been introduced into this country aiuuit 
 the year \f>W, and w.as called musk-melon to 
 distinguish it from the pumpkin, wliich wia 
 usually called melon. 
 
 The melon, being thus a native of warm cli- 
 mates, is necessarily tender in thoseof Europe, but, 
 being an annual, il is successfully cultivated liy 
 ^aiileners with the aid of glass and arlilicfal 
 iieat of about 75'' to 80°. The fruit of the iri.'l.,n 
 may be seen in great variety, whether with ies[i('ct 
 to the colour of its rind or of its llesh, its taste or 
 its odour, and also its external form and size. 
 The (lesli is soft and succulent, of a white, yel- 
 lowisii, or reddisli hue, of a sweet and pleai-int 
 taste, of an agreeable, sometimes musk-like odour, 
 and forms one of the most delicious of (iuifs, 
 wliich, when taken in moderation, is wholesome, 
 but, like all other fruits of a similar kind, is 
 liable to cause indigestion and diaiiiiu^a when 
 eaten in excess, especially by tliose unaccustomed 
 to its use. 
 
 All travellers in Eastern countries have borne 
 testimony to tlie refreshment and delight they 
 have experienced from the fruit of the niek>n. 
 But we shall content ourselves with lel'eiriug .'o 
 Alpinus, who, having jiaid ]jaiticular attention t.i 
 such subjects, says of the Egyptians, 'Fructibus, 
 &c. se replent, ut ex iis solis sa-pe cuenani, vej 
 prandiuni perficiant, cujusmodi sunt precocia, 
 cucurbitae, pepones, mclopeppnes ; quorum quidmn 
 noirien genericum est Batech'' {Rerum .Irlyypl. 
 Hist. 1. 17). He also describes in the same 
 chapter the kindof iiielon called Abdellavi,whicii, 
 according to De Sacy, receive* its name from 
 having Ijecn introduced by Abdullaii, a governor 
 of Egypt under theKhalif Al Manioon. It may 
 be a distinct species, as ihe fruit is oljloirg, 
 tapering at botti ends, but thick in tlie midiil-e, 
 a tiguve (tab. xli.) is given in his work />« 
 Plantis Aiyypti i but Forskal ajijilies tliis name 
 also to the Cliate, which is se)iaiately desciiijed 
 by Alpinus, and a figure given by him at 
 tab. xl. 
 
 The C-;ic'cimis Ckate is a villous plant wiih 
 trailing stems, leaves roundisii, liluiitiy aiigleil, 
 and toothed; the fruit pilose, elliptic, and taj>triiig 
 to both ends. ' Horum usum corporibus in cibo 
 ipsis tum crudis, tuni coctis vescentibus, salubiein 
 esse apud omnes eorum locoruni incola.s ciedi- 
 tur' (Alpiii. /. c. p. 5i). Hasselquist calls this the 
 'Egy))tian melon' and 'queen of cuciimlieis,' and 
 says that it grows only in the fe<-tile soil louni 
 Cairo; that the fniit is a little watery, and ilie 
 flesh almost of the same substance as tiial of rlie 
 melon, sweet and cool. 'This the grandees anU 
 Eurojieans in Egypt eat as the most plea><i:it 
 fruit they find, and that from which they lune 
 the least to apprehend. It is the most excel leiii 
 fruit of tJiis tribe of any yet known' (Hassel- 
 quist, Travels, p. 258). EorskiH, uniting the 
 Abdellavi and Chate iiito one sjM-cies, jays it i< 
 the commonest of all fruits in Egyjit, and i« 
 cultivated in all their fields, and tliat maiij 
 prepare from it a \ery gratefui drink {t'lor* 
 yEf/yptiaco-Arabica, p. 168). 
 
 VVith tlie melon it is necessary to notice tli« 
 Waier-ilelon, which is generally siqiposed to (jc 
 specially indicali;d by the teim Battich. IJat
 
 • ABATTACHIM. 
 
 (his it udiild 1)0 diflicult (o determine in the 
 aflivniative in a fa.niilv like tlie cucuibitacese, 
 wlieiv there are so many phmts like each other, 
 hotli in tlieir herl)age and fruit. In the first 
 place, the temi Battich is ratlier generic than 
 S];ecific, anil, therefore, if Abattnchim were simi- 
 larly employed, it might include tlie water- 
 melon, but not to the exclusion of the others. 
 In tlie second place, it is doubtful wliether the 
 warer-melon was introduced into Egypt at a very 
 early period, as we find no distinct mention of 
 it in Greek writers. It is now common in all 
 par's of Asia. It seems to have been first dis- 
 tinctly mentioned by Sera])ion under the name 
 of DulLiha, which in the Latin translation is 
 interpreted, 'id est melo magnus viridis ;' and 
 St^titi.) is quoted as tlie earliest author wlio ap 
 plies tlie term 'Ayyovpiov to the water-melon, as 
 lias subsequently been frequently the case, though 
 it is often distinguished as Anguria indica. Sera- 
 pion, however, quotes Rhases, Meseha, and Ish- 
 malielita. In the Persian books referred to in a 
 Note, the author finils Battieh himlee given as 
 (he Arabic of turbooz, which is the name as- 
 signed in India to the water-melon. So Alpinus, 
 speaking of the anguria in Egypt, says, 'vulgo 
 Batech el Maovi (water), et in Scriptoribus 
 Medicis Batoch-Indi vei Anguria indka tlicitur.' 
 One of the Persian names is stated to be hin- 
 dnaneh. It may be indigenous to India, hut it is 
 difficult, in the case of this as of other long-culti- 
 vated plants, to ascertain its native country with 
 certainty. 'For, even when we find such a plant 
 apparently wild, we are not sure that the seed 
 has not escaped from cultivation ; and at pre- 
 sent we know tliat the water-melon is cultivated 
 in all parts of Asia, in the north of Africa, and 
 in the soutli of Europe. 
 
 Tlie water-melon is clearly distinguislied by 
 Ipinus as cultivated in Egypt, and called by 
 the above names, ' quae intus seniina tantnm, et 
 aquani linlcissimam continent.' It is mentioned 
 by Forskal, and its properties described by 
 Hasselquist. Thougii resembling the other kinds 
 very considerably in its properties, it is very 
 difi'erent from tliem in its deeply-cut leaves, 
 fioni which it is compared to a very diU'erent 
 jilaiit of this tribe — tliat is, the colocynth. 
 ' Citrulhis folio colocynthidis secto semine nigrc' 
 .\ fe.v others have cut leaves, but the water- 
 melon is so distinguislied among the edible 
 siiecies. The plant is hairy, with trailing cirrhi- 
 ferous stems. The pulp aliounds so mucli in 
 watery juice, that it will run out by a hole made 
 through the rind; and it is from tliis peculiarity 
 that it has obtained the names of water-melon, 
 melon d'eau, was-ier-melon. Hasselquist says 
 that it is cultivated on the lianks of the Nile, in 
 trtp ricli chivey earth which subside; during the 
 inundation, and serves ' the Egyptians for meat, 
 drink, and physic. It is eaten in abundance, 
 during tiie season, even by the richer sort of 
 people ; but the common people, on whom Pro- 
 vidence liath tiestowed nothing but poverty and 
 oatience, scarcely eat anything but these, and 
 account this the best time of the year, as they 
 *re obliged to put iqi witli worse at other seasons 
 <f the year' (Tr'ivels, p. 2.)(;). — J. F. R. 
 
 %'* in concluding the first article in this work 
 on the botany ol" the Bible, the author thinks 
 it desirable t<i state the mode in which he has 
 
 ABATTACHIM. 
 
 studied the subject, and the grounds upon wriicl 
 he has formed his opinions, whetlier they agrea 
 with or differ frr;ni those of previous writers. He 
 has already related, in his ' Essay on the Anti- 
 quity of Hindoo Medicine' that his attention 
 was first directed to the identification of the 
 natural products mentioned in ancient authors, 
 in consequence ol" being requested by the Me- 
 dical Board of Bengal to investigate the medi- 
 cinal jilants and drags of India, for the purpose 
 of ascertaining how far the public service might 
 be supplied with medicuies grown in India, in- 
 stead of importing thein nearly all from foreign 
 countries. In effecting this inijiortant object, 
 his first endeavour was to make himself ac- 
 quainted witii the difr'erent drugs which tlie na- 
 tives of India are themselves in the habit of 
 employing as medicines. For this purpose he 
 had to examine the things themselves, as well 
 as to ascertain the names by which they were 
 known. He tlierefore directed specimens of every 
 article in the bazars to be brought to liini, whether 
 found wild in tlie country or the produce o.* 
 culture — whether the result of home manufac- 
 ture or of foreign commerce — wfietlier of die a.i.i- 
 mal, vegetable, or mineral kingdom — whether 
 useful as food or as medicine, or employed 
 in any of the numerous arts which minister to 
 the wants or comforts of man. In order to 
 acquire a knowledge of their names, he caused the 
 native works on Materia Medica to be collated 
 by competent hakeems and moonshees, and the 
 several articles arranged under the three heads 
 of the animal, vegetable, and mineral kingdoms. 
 Tlie works collated were chiefly the ' Mukhzun- 
 al-Udwieh,' ' Tohfat-al-Moomeneen,' ' liitiarut 
 Buddie,' and ' Taleef Shereef,' all of them in 
 Persian, but consisting principally of translations 
 from Arabic authors. These were themselves 
 indebted for much of their inhinnation respect- 
 ing drags to Dioscorides ; but to his d-escrijh 
 tions tlie Persians have fortunately appended the 
 Asiatic synonymes, and references to some hidian 
 products not mentioned in the works t)t" the Arabs. 
 The author himself made a catalogue of the 
 whole, in which, after the most usually received, 
 that is, the Arabic name, the seveial synonymes 
 in Persian, Hindee, &c., as well as in metamor- 
 phosed Greek, were inserted. Jle traced tlie 
 articles as much as possible to the ijlants, 
 animals, and counti-ies whence they were derived ; 
 and attached to them their natural history names, 
 whenever he was successful in ascertaining fliem. 
 Being witliout any suitable library for such 
 investigations, and being only able to obtain a 
 small copy of Dioscorides, he was in most cases 
 obliged to depend upon himself for the identi- 
 fication of the several substances. The results 
 of several of these investigations are brielly re- 
 corded in his observations on the history and 
 uses of the different natural families of plants, in 
 his ' Illustrations of the Botany of the Hima- 
 layan Mountains.' The author also made use ol 
 these materials in his ' Essay on thti Antiquity 
 of Hindoo Medicine,' in tracing different liiilian 
 products from the works of tlie Arabs into thos4 
 of the Greeks, even up to the time of Hippocrates. 
 He inferred that tropical products could only 
 travel from south to north, and that the Hindoos 
 must have ascertained their projieities, and used 
 ther» as medicines, belbre they became siii)i-
 
 ABBA. 
 
 efently famous to be obsevved and recorded by 
 die Greeks. Having tiius traced many of these 
 Kastem products to tlie works of almost ct^ii- 
 tiimporary authors, he was led to conclude that 
 many of thein must be the same as those men- 
 tioned in the Bible, especially as there is often 
 considerable resemblance between their Arabic 
 and Hebrew names '^Essaij, p. 13S\ 
 
 Althougli, like Hasselquist, Alpinus, Forskal, 
 and othere, the author studied these subjects in 
 Eastern countries, yet he difiers from them all in 
 tlie circumstances under which he pursued his in- 
 quiries. His investigations were carried on vviiile 
 he was resident in the remotest of the Eastern 
 nations known in early times, wiio were probably 
 among the first civilized, and who are still not 
 only acquainted with the various drugs and flieir 
 names, but possess an ancient literature, in which 
 many of tliese very substances are named and 
 arranged. Having obtained Uie drugs, heard 
 their names applied by the natives, read their 
 descriptions, and traced them to their plants, he 
 formed many of his opinions from indepenuent 
 sources. It may therefore be consiiiered a strong 
 confirmation of the correctness of his results when 
 they agree with those of previous inquirers; when 
 they dift'er, it must be ascribed to the peculiar ])ro- 
 oeaa by which tliey have been obtained. — J. F. R. 
 
 [Cocamis melo.] 
 
 ABBA CA/3/3a, NSN') is the Hebrew word 
 i^, fatfier, under a form peculiar to the Chaldee 
 idiom. The Aramaic dialects do not possess the 
 definite article in the foiin in which it is found 
 in Hebrew. They compensate for it by adding 
 a syllable to the end .of the sim])le noun, and 
 thereby ])roduce a distinct form, called by gram- 
 marians tJie etnphatic, or definitive, which is 
 equivalent (but with much less strictness in its 
 use, especially in Syriac) to a noun with the 
 article in Hebrew. This emphatic form is also 
 commonly used to express the vocative case of 
 cur language — the context alone determining 
 when it is to be taken in that sense fjust as the 
 Doun with the article is sometimes similarly us.xl 
 in Hebrew). Hence this form is appropriately 
 employed in all the passages in -vhich it occurs 
 in tJie New Testament (Mark xiv. 36; Rom. viii. 
 15; Gal. iv. 6) : in all of which it is an invoca- 
 tion. Why Ahha is, in all these jiassa'j-es, im- 
 mediafely rendered by b Trar-fip, instead of irdrtp. 
 
 ABBREVL\TIONS. 7 
 
 may perha])s be in f)art accoTiuted for on th« 
 supposition liiat, although the Hellenic (as veil 
 as the classical) Greek allows the use of the 
 nominative with the article for the voiiative 
 (Winer, Gram. d<:s Ncutvat. Sprach. ^ 29), the 
 writers of the New Testament preferred llie 
 former, because the article more adequately re- 
 presented the force of (he emphatic form. 
 
 It is also to be observed tliaf, in tiie usage of 
 the Targums, K3N. even wlien it is the sul>- 
 ject of an ordinary projwsition, may mean my 
 fatlver ; and that the al)solute form of tJie word m 
 not used with the sulhx of the Jirst person sin- 
 gular. Lrgiitfoot has endeavoured i liorop liehr. 
 ad Marc. xiv. 3(5) to show that tiiere is an 
 im]jortant difierence Ijetween llie Hebrew nj< 
 and the Chaldee KSN : that whereas the foinur 
 is used for all senses o\' faiJier, botli strict and nii> 
 taphorical, the latter is confined to the sense of a 
 natural or adoptive fatlier. This statement, which 
 is perhaps not entirely free from a doctiinal liias 
 is not strictly coiTect. At least the Targuins liav 
 rendered the Hebrew father by K3K, in Gen. 
 xiv. 8, and Job xxxviii. 2S, where the use of 
 die term is clearly metaphorical; and, in later 
 times, the Tahnudical writers (according (o 
 Buxtorf, Le.v. Talm.) certainly employ X3N to 
 express rahbi, master — a u.sage lo which he thinks 
 reference is made in Mart, xxiii. 9. — J. N. 
 
 ABBREVIATIONS. As there are satisfactory 
 
 f rounds for believing that the word Se/a/t, in the 
 'salms, is not an anagram, the earliest positive 
 evidence of the use of abbreviations by the Jews 
 occurs in some of the inscriptions on the coiiu 
 of Simon the. Maccabee. Some of these, namely, 
 have l^'' for 7N"1^, and ^^ for mtn ; anti sonie 
 of tJiose of the first and second years haic t? 
 and ^L"; the former of which is considered tu 
 be a numeral letter, arid tlie latter an abbre- 
 viation for 2 ri3D'. antio II. (Bayei, Dc Kumis 
 Hebreeo-Satnaritaiiis, p. 171). It is to Iw o;.- 
 served, however, that both these latter alibrevia- 
 tiiiiis alternate on other ecpially genuine coins, 
 witii the full legends nHN nyC and Cni^ DX*; 
 and that tiie coins of the tliird and fourth y«ais 
 invariably express both the year and the numeral 
 in words at length. 
 
 The earliest incontestable evidence of the u«e 
 of abbreviations in tlie cojiies of the Ohl Testa- 
 ment is founr in some few extant MS.S., in 
 which commiin words, not liable lo be mistaken, 
 are curtailed of one or more letters at the 
 
 end. Thus SB'* is written for ?X"1C^; and the 
 
 phrase IIDH D?iy? O, so frequently recurring 
 
 ... ' ii ' 
 
 in Ps. cxxxvi., is m some MSS. written H 7 -. 
 
 Yet even this licence, which is rarely used, Is 
 always denoted by the sign of abbre\ iation, an 
 oblique stroke on the last letter, and is g-Tie- 
 rally confined to the end of a line; and as all 
 the MSS. extant (with hanily ttpo exceptions') 
 are later than the tenth century, wlien the lialt- 
 binica! mode of abbreviation had been so long 
 established and was caiTied to such an e>tent, 
 the in.frequency and limitation of the licence, 
 under such circumstances, might be considered 
 to favour the belief tliat it was not more freely 
 employed in earlier times. 
 
 Nevertiieless, some learned men have endea- 
 voured to prove that abbreviations must hav«
 
 ABBRKVIArioNS. 
 
 ABBREVIATIONS. 
 
 Iiecn useil '.n tlie MHS. of the sacr(?<l text which 
 weie written l)Hli>rf the Alexandiian version was 
 mailt' ; iiuii they liiul the f^nniiuls of this opinion 
 in the exisfeiice of st>vi'ral M.ksoretic various lec- 
 tions m tlie liehrew te);t itstll^ as whII as in the 
 •everal (liscrejKincit'S l)«twecn it and the ancient 
 version^ wl>ich may l>f plausibly accounted I'or ■ 
 on that assuinption. 'Diis thfory supposes that 
 both the copyists wl>o resolved the abbreviations 
 (which it is assumed exisfeil in the ancient He- 
 brew MSS. prior to the LXX.) into the entire 
 full text whicl) we now possess, and the early 
 translators who used such abbre\ iated copies, 
 wei<> severally lial>le to error in their solutions. 
 To illustrate the ajjplication ir>i' this tlu'ory to the 
 Masoretic veading^s, Kithhovn {^Einleit. i»» A. T, 
 i. .i'.H) cites, among other passages, Jos. viii. 16, 
 in which the Kefhib is TV, and the Keii ''}}; 
 ar.d2S.im. xxiii. 2it, in wliich Tl is the Kethib. 
 and /Ti the Keri. With regard to tlie ver- 
 sions, Drtisiius suggests that the reason why the 
 LXX. rendered the words (Jon. i. 1>) b3N 
 '13y, by SovKos Kvp'tov el/^'t, was Ijecause they 
 mistook the Eesh i'or Daleth, and l>elie\ed the 
 Jod to be an abbreviation of Jehovah, as if it had 
 l)een originally written ^~Q,]J (Qncest. Ebraic. 
 iii. 6). An example of the converse is citetl 
 from Jer. vi..ll, where our text has tTSn"' nOH, 
 which the LXX. has rendered dvfx.6v fxov, as if 
 the original form liad been ^nOH, and they had 
 considered the Jod to be a suffix, whereas the 
 later Hebrew copyists took it for an abbreviation 
 ".f the sacretl name. Kennicotl's three Disserta- 
 ^/rns contain many similar conjectures ; and 
 Stark's Davidis almrumque Carminnm Libri V. 
 hiis a collection of exam])les out of the ancient 
 versions, in which he thinks he traces false solu- 
 tions of abbreviations. 
 
 In like manner some have endeavoured to ac- 
 count for tlie discrei)ancies in statements of 
 numbers in j)arallel passages and in the ancient 
 versions, by assuming that numbers were not ex- 
 presseil in the early MSS. by entire words (as 
 they invariably are in our present text), but by 
 some kind o'i abbreviation. Ludolf, in his Com- 
 tnentar. ad Hist. Alihiop. p. 85, has suggested 
 that numeral letters may ha\'e been mistaken for 
 the initial letter, and, consequently, for the ab- 
 breviation of a numeral word, giving as a perti- 
 nent example the case of the Roman V being 
 mis*aken for }'i<jmti. He also thinks the con- 
 verse to have V>een possible. Most later scholars, 
 however, are di\ ided l>etween the alternative of 
 letters or of arithmetical cyphers analogous to 
 aur figures. The last was the idea Cappellus 
 entertained (Critlca Sanri, i. 10), although De 
 Vignol<« appears to Viave first worked out the 
 theory in detail in his Chrcmolorjie de I'Histoire 
 Semite: whereas Scaliger (cited in Walton's Pro- 
 lec/omena, vii. \l) and almost all modem critics 
 are in favour of letters. Keimicott has treated 
 the subject at some length ; but the l)est work 
 an it is that of J. M. Falier, entitled Literas 
 olim pro vocibiis in numernndo n scriptoribiis 
 V. T. esse adhihitas, Onoldi, 1775, 4to. 
 
 It is undeniable that if is much easier to ex- 
 plain f_ie discordant statt-ments which are found, 
 for ins(ance, in the jjarallel numbers of the 2nd 
 chapter of Ezra and the 7th of Neiiemiali, l)y 
 having recourse to either of these suppositions. 
 
 than it is to conceive how such very digsimilai 
 signs and sounds, as the entire names of tla 
 Hebrew numerals are, could be so re}>eattdly 
 confounded as they appear to have been. Tliia 
 ade<2uacy of the theory to account for the jihe- 
 nonjena constitutes the internal argument for iu 
 adiTiission. Gesenius has also, in his Geschichtt 
 der Ilebriiischen Spraclie, p. 1T3, ailduced the 
 following external groimds for its adoption : 
 the 6ict that both letters and numeral notes are 
 tl-und in other languages of the Syro-Arabian 
 family, so that neither is altogether alien to theii 
 genius ; letters, namely, in Syriac, Arabic, and 
 later Hebrew ; numeral figures on the Phoenician 
 coins and I'almyrene inscrijjtions (those em- 
 pJoyetl by the Arabs and transmitted through 
 them to us are, it is well known, of Indian 
 origin). And although {particular instances ar*? 
 more easily explained on tlie one supposition 
 than on the other, yet he considers that ana' \,'y, 
 Hs well ivs the majority of examples, favoui- the 
 belief that the numerals were expressevl, ii. tlie 
 ancient copies, by letters ; that they were then 
 liable to frequent confusion ; and that they were 
 finally written out at length in words, as in our 
 present text. 
 
 There is an easy transition from these abbre- 
 viations to those of the latex Hebrew, or Rabbi- 
 nical writers, which are nothing more than a 
 very extended use and development of the same 
 principles of stenography. Rabbinical abbre- 
 viations, as defined by Danz, in his valuable 
 linbbinismtis Enudeaius, 6 65, are t'wher 2}erject, 
 when the initial letters only of several words are 
 written together, and a double mark is jilaced 
 between such a group of letters, as in D'O'lH, 
 the common abbreviation of the Hebrew names 
 of the books of Job, Proverbs, and Psalms (the 
 last letters only of words are also written in 
 Cabbalistical abbre\'iations) ; or imperfect, where 
 more than one letter of a single w(-rd is written, 
 and a single mark is ])laced at. the end to denote 
 the mutilation, as HK'' for 7N14J*'. Tlie per 
 feet abbreviations are called by the Rabbinical 
 writers niHTl ''tJ'Xl, i. e. eapitais of words. 
 When ])roper names, as frequently lia|)pens, ar« 
 abbreviated in this manner, it is usual to form 
 the mass of consonants into projjer syllables by 
 means of the vowel Patach, and to consider Jod 
 and Vau as representatives of / and U. Tiius 
 D3"D1, Rnmbain, the abbreviation of ' Rabbi 
 Mosiieh ben Maimon,' and ''t^T, Rashi, that ol 
 ' Ral>bi Siielomoh Jarchi," are a])posite illustra- 
 tions of this metho<l of contraction. Some ac- 
 qtiaintance with the Rabbinical ablweviations is 
 necessary to understand the Masoretic notes in 
 the margin of the ordinary editions of the He- 
 brew text; and a considevalde familiarity with 
 them is essential to those who wish, with ease 
 and profit, to consult the Talmud and Jewish 
 commentators. The elder Buxtorf wrote a valu- 
 able treatise on these abbreviations, under the 
 title De Abbrei}iaturis Hebraicis, which has 
 ol'ten l)een reprinted ; hut, fr^m the inexhaustible 
 nature of the suliject, O. G. TycLsen added twu 
 valuable supplements, in 176S. and Selig incor- 
 porated them with his own researches in his 
 Compendia vocum Hebraico-Rabbinicarum, Lips. 
 1780, which is the completest work of the kind 
 extant. 
 
 With regard to the abbreviation* in the MSSk
 
 ABDON. 
 
 »f he New Testament, u may be observed that 
 they have t'urnislied little matter for criticHl in- 
 qui:y. Tljose that exist are almost exclusively 
 conaned to common and easily supplied words, 
 e. i^. God, Lord, father, son, &c. ; or to the ter- 
 minations of tbrniation and inflexion, in which 
 case they fall more properly under the province 
 of general Greek Paueograjihy. They very 
 rarely furnish any hint of the mode in which a 
 various reading has arisen, as has been suggested, 
 for instance, in the case of Kaipw and Kvplcv in 
 Romans xii. II. Tiie use of letters for nume- 
 rals, however, according to Kichhorn"s Kinlcit. 
 ins N. T., iv. 199, is not only found in some 
 MSS. now extant, but, in the instance of the 
 number 6CG, in Rev. xiii. 18, can be traced up 
 to the time of the apostles; ])artly on the testi- 
 mony of Irenscus, and partly because those MSS. 
 whi ih wrote the number out in words dilVer in 
 tlie gender of tlie first word, some writing e^aicS- 
 oiot, some e^aK6iTiai, some f^aKSaia. The early 
 fathers have also unhesitatingly availed them- 
 ielves of the tlieory that numbers were originally 
 denoted by letters, whenever they wished to es- 
 plain a difficulty in numbers. Thus Severus of 
 Antioch (cited by Theophylact) accounts for the 
 diflerence of the hour of our Lord's crucifixion, 
 as stated in Mark xv. 25, and Joim xix. 14, by 
 the mistake of y (3) for s '6^ Kioiihorn has 
 given a lithographed table of t.'ie Uiost usual ab- 
 breviations in the MSS. of the New Testament. 
 
 Lastly, the abbreviations by which Origen, in 
 nis ' Hexapla,' cites tlie Septuagint and otlier 
 Greek versions, deserve some notice. The nature 
 of this work rendered a. compendious mode of 
 reference necessary ; and, accortlingly, numeral 
 letters and initials are the chief expedients em- 
 
 Sloyed. A large list of them may lie seen in 
 lontfaucon's edition of the 'Hexapla;' and 
 Eichhorn (Ehdeit. mis A. T. i. 518-50) has given 
 those w.hich are most important. — J. N. 
 
 L ABDON (|n?y, a servant; Sept. 'A$5c!>v), 
 die son of Hillel, of the tribe of Ephraim, and 
 tenth judge of Israel. He succeeded Elon, and 
 judged Israel eiglit years. His administration 
 appears to ha\'e been peaceful ; for nothing is 
 recorded of him but that he had forty sons and 
 thirty nephews, who rode on young asses — a mark 
 of their consequence (Judg. xii. 13-15). Abdon 
 died B.C. 1112. 
 
 There were three other persons of this name, 
 w.iiJi appears to have been rather common. They 
 are mentioned in 1 Chron. viii. 29 ; ix. 36 ; 
 xxxiv. 20. 
 
 2. ABDON, a city of the tribe of Asher. which 
 was given k) tlie Levites of Gershoni's family (Job 
 rxi. 30 ; 1 Chron. vi. 74). 
 
 ABEDNEGO (ijrnaj;, servant ofNego, i. e. 
 Nebo ; Sept. 'A^Sfvayci), the Chaldee name im- 
 posed by the king of Bai)ylon's ofhcar u]K)n 
 Azariah, one of the three comjianions of Daniel. 
 With his two friends, Siiadrach and Mesiiach, 
 he was miraculously delivered from tlie burning 
 furnace, into which Vj»y were cast for refusing 
 to worsliip the g(»ldes: statue which Nebuchad- 
 cezzar had caused to be set up in tlie plain of 
 Z>ura (Dan. iii.). 
 
 i-BEL (?5n ; Sept. "A^StA), properly Hebel, 
 %B iecond son of Adam who was slain by Cain, 
 
 ABEL. t 
 
 bis elder brother (Gen. iv. 1-16). The circum- 
 stances of that mysterious transaction are cor., 
 sidereil elsewhere [Cain]. To the name Abel 
 a twofold int<>r))retalion has been given. lt« 
 jiriniary signification is weakness or tnnittj, as 
 the word 72n. from which if is derived, indi- 
 cates. By unotlicr reiiilering it signiHes grxj 
 or lamentation, both meanings i)eing justified l)y 
 tlie Scripture narrative. Cain (a possession) 
 was so named to indicate both the joy of his 
 mother and his right to trie inheriiance of the 
 first-born : Abel received a name indicative of 
 his weakness and poverty when compared with 
 the snj)posed glory of his brother's destiny, and 
 propfieticalli/ of the jialn and sorrow wliich were 
 to be indicted on him and his parenis. 
 
 Ancient writers abound in observations on the 
 mystical character of Abel ; and he is spoken of 
 as the representative of the pastoral tribes, wiiiie 
 Cain is regarded as the autlior of the iromudic 
 life and character. St. Chrysostom calls liini the 
 Lamb of Christ, since he sufl'ered the most griev- 
 ous injuries solely on account of his iimocency 
 (,'lrf Staijir. ii. 5); and he directs particular 
 attention to the mode in whicii Scripture speaks 
 of his offerings, consisting of the best of his 
 flock, ' and of the fat thereof,' while it seems fa 
 intimate that Cain presented the fruit wliich miglit 
 be most easily procured {Horn, in Gen. xdii. 5), 
 St. Augustin, speaking of regeneration, alludes 
 to Abel as representing the new or spiritual man 
 in contradistinction to the natural or corrupt man, 
 and says, ' Cain founded a city on earth, but 
 Abel as a stranger and pilgrim looked forward 
 to the city of the saints which is in heaven ' 
 (Dff Civitate Dei, xv. i.). Abel, he says in 
 another place, was tlie first-fruits of tiie Cliurch, 
 and was sacrificed in testimony of tlie future 
 Mediator. And on Ps. cxviii. (Serm. xxx. sec. 9) 
 he says : ' this city' (tiiat is, ' the city of God") 
 ' has its beginning from Abel, as the wicked city 
 from Cain.' Iienajus says that God, in the case 
 of Abel, subjected the just to the unjust, diat the 
 righteousness of the former might lie manifested 
 by what he suffered (Contra Hares, iii. 2.5). 
 
 Heretics existed in ancient times who repre- 
 sented Cain and Abel as embodying two spiritual 
 powers, of which the miglitier was that of Cain, 
 and to which they accordingly rendered divine 
 homage. 
 
 In the early Church Abel was considered the 
 first of the martyrs, and many persons were ac- 
 customed to pronounce his name with a particular 
 reverence. An obscure sect arose under the titl 
 of Abelites, the professed object of which waa 
 to inculcate certain fanatical notions resjieci- 
 ing marriage; but it was speedily lost amid a 
 host of more popular parties. — H. S. 
 
 ABEL (7?i< ; Sej)t. 'A/StA), a name of se- 
 veral villages in Israel, with additions in the case 
 of the more important, to distinguish tliem from 
 one another. From a comjiarison of tlie Arabic 
 and Syriac, it appears to me&n fresh grass ; and 
 tl;e places so named may be conceived to have 
 been in jieculiarly ■\'erdant situations. In. 1 Sam. 
 vi. IS, it is used as an appellative, and })robably 
 signifies a grassy plain. 
 
 ABELjABEI.-BBTH-MAACHAH.OrAuEI.-MAlM, 
 
 a city in the north of Palestine, which seems to 
 have been of considerable strength from ita h»
 
 10 
 
 ABEL BETH MAACAH. 
 
 tory, arid of importance from its being called ' a 
 motlier in Israel ' (2 Sam. xx. 1 9). Tlie identity (;f 
 tlie city under these dill'ereut names will be seen by 
 a comparison of 2 Sam. xx. 14, 15, IS; 1 Kings xv. 
 20 ; 2 Chron. xvi. 4. The addition of ' Maacah' 
 marks it as belonging to, or being neai to, the region 
 Maacah, which lay eastward of tlie Jordan under 
 Mount Lebanon. This is the town in which 
 Sheba posted himself when he rebelled against 
 David. Eighty years afterwards it was taken and 
 sacked by Benladad, king of Syria ; and 200 
 years subsequently by Tiglath-pileser, who sent 
 away the inhabitants captives into Assyria (2 
 Kings XX. 29). 
 
 ABEL-BETH-MAACK[AH, that is, Abel near 
 tlie house or city of Maacali ; the same as Abel. 
 
 ABEL-CARMAIM (D*p-}3 "jSN, place of 
 ihe vineyards ; Sept. "E.^^Kx^PI^'^l^)i a village of 
 the Ammonites, about six miles from Pliiladel- 
 phia, or Rabbath Ammon, according to Eusebius, 
 in whose time the place was still rich in vine- 
 yards (Judg. xi. 33). 
 
 ABEL-MAIM. The same as Abel. 
 
 ABEL-MEHOLAH, or Abel-Mea (TIK 
 njinp , place of the dance ; Sept. 'AjSeA^ieouAa), 
 a town supposed to have stood near the Jordan, 
 and some miles (Eusebius says ten) to the south 
 of Bethshan or Scythopolis (1 Kings iv. 12). It 
 is remarkable in connection with Gideon's victory 
 over the Midianites (Judg. vii. 22), and as the 
 birtli-place of Elisha (1 Kings xix. 16). 
 
 ABEL-MIZRAIM (D^VP ^5^, the mourn- 
 ing of the Egyptians ; Sept. XiivQos KlyvTrrov), 
 the name of a tlireshing-floor, so called on account 
 of the ' great mourning' made tliere for Jacob 
 by the funeral party from Egypt (Gen. l. 11). 
 Jerome places it between Jericho and the Jordan, 
 where Bethagla afterwards stood. 
 
 ABEL-SHITTIM (D^lStJ'n ^3N, place of 
 acacias ; Sept. Be\<ta), a town in the plains of 
 Moab, on the east of the Jordan, between which 
 artd Beth-Jesimoth was the last encampment of the 
 Israelites on that side the river (Num. xxxiii. 49). 
 It is more frequently called Shittim merely (Num. 
 XXV. 1; Josh. ii. 1; Mic. vi. 5). Eusebius says it 
 was in the neighbourhood of Mount Peor ; and in 
 the time of Joseplius it was known as Abila, and 
 stood sixty stadia from the Jordan (Atitiq. iv. 
 8, 1 ; V. 1, 1). The place is noteil for tlie severe 
 punishment which was there inflicted upon the 
 Israelites when they were seduced into the worship 
 of Baal-Peor, through their evil intercourse with 
 the Moabites aiicl Midianites. 
 
 ABELA. [Abii.a.] 
 
 ABI, the mother of King Hezekiab ^"2 Kings 
 xviii. 2), called also Abijah (2 Chron. xxix. 1). 
 Her father's name was Zachariah, perhaps the 
 same who was taken by Isaiah (viii. 2) for a 
 witness. 
 
 ABI A. [Abijah, 3.] 
 
 ABIAH or Abijah (iT'IIlN, ^ pater Jehova, 
 i. e. vir divirms, ut videtur, i. q. DTIPK ti*'N,' 
 Geseniuj in Tlwsaur. ; Sept.* 'A^id), one of the 
 sons of Samuel, wlio were intnisted with the ad- 
 ministration of justice, and whose misconduct 
 atlorded the ostensible ground on wliich the Is- 
 raelites demanded that tlieir government should be 
 ehanged into a monaichy (I Sam. viii. 1-5). 
 
 ABLiTHAR. 
 
 ABI-ALBON. [Abikl 2.] 
 
 ABI ATI! AR {-\T\\:i^, father of abundance. 
 Sept. 'A^iddap], the tentli high-])riest of the Jew*, 
 and fourth in descent from Eli. Wliea his fa- 
 tlier, the high-priest Abimelechj WaS slain witi 
 the priests at Nob, for suspected partiality to the 
 fugitive David, Abiathar escaped the massacre; 
 and bearing with him the most essential part of 
 the priestly raiment [Ephod], repaired to the 
 son of Jesse, wlio was tlien in the cave of Atlul- 
 lam (1 Sam. xxii. 20-23 ; xxiii. 6). He was 
 well received liy David, and became the priest of 
 tiie party during its exile and wanderings. As 
 such lie sought and received for David responses 
 from God. When David became king of Judah 
 he appointed Abiathar high-priest. Meanwhile 
 Zadok had been appointed high-priest by Saul, 
 and continued to act as such while Abiathar was 
 high-priest in Judah. The appointment of Zadok 
 was not only unexceptionable in itselfj but was 
 in accordance with the divine sentence of depo- 
 sition wliich had been passed, through Samuel, 
 upon the house of Eli (1 Sam. ii. 30-36). When, 
 therefore, David acquired the kingdom of Israel, 
 he had no j^ist ground on which Zadok could be 
 removed, and Abiathar set in his place ; and the 
 attempt to do so would probabl^y have beai 
 offensive to his new subjects, who had been ac- 
 customed to tl>e ministration of Zadok, and whose 
 good feeling he was anxious to cultivate. Tha 
 king got over tliis difficulty by allowing both 
 appointments to stand ; and until the end of 
 David's reign Zadok and Abiathar were joint 
 liigh-priests. How tlie details of duty were set» 
 tied, under tliis somewhat anomalous arrange- 
 ment, we are not informed. As a high-priest 
 Abiathar must have been perfectly aware of tlie 
 divine intention that Solomon should be tlie suc- 
 cessor of David : he was therefore the least ex- 
 cusable, in some respects, of all those who were 
 parties in the attempt to frustrate that intention 
 by raising Adonijah to the t]ir«ne. So his con- 
 duct seems to have been viewed by Solomon, 
 who, in deposing him from the high-priestliood, 
 and directing him to withdraw info private life, 
 plainly told him that only liis sacerdotal cha- 
 racter, and his foiTner services to David, pre- 
 served him from capital punishment. This 
 deposition of Abiathar completed the doom 
 long before denounced upon the house of Eli, 
 who was of the line of Ithamar, the younger son 
 of Aaron. Zadok, who remained the high-priest, 
 was of tlie elder line of Eleazer. Solomon w.is 
 probably not sorry to have occasion to remove 
 tlie anomaly of two high-priests of different lines, 
 and to see tlie undivided pontificate in tlie senior 
 house of Eleazer (1 Kings i. 7, 19; ii. 26, 271 
 
 In Mark ii. 26, a circumstance is describeJ a/ 
 occurring ' in the days of Abiathar, the higl 
 priest,' wliich appears, from 1 Sam. xxi. 1, to liave 
 really occurred when his fatlier Abimelech was tlie 
 high-priest. Numerous solutions of this dithculty 
 have been olVered. Tlie most probable in itself 
 is iliat wliich interprets the reference thus ' in tlie 
 days of Abiathar, who was afterwards the 
 high-priest' (Bishop Middleron, Greek Articlie, 
 pp. 188-190). But this leaves open another dirii- 
 culty which arises from the jirecisely opposite 
 reference (in 2 Sam. viii. 17; 1 Chron. xviii. 16; 
 xxiv. 3, 6, 31) to ' Abimelech, the son of Aiu»r
 
 ABIB. 
 
 ttiar/ ds the person who was high-j)riest along 
 with ZadoK, and wiio was deposed by Solomon ; 
 whereas tlie history describes that personage as 
 Abiathar, tiie son of Abinielech. The only ex- 
 planation which seems to remove all these dilli- 
 cultiea — althoug'i we cannot allege it to be alto- 
 gether satislactory — is, that both lather and son 
 hfiii the two names of Abimelech and Abiathar, 
 and might be, and were called by, either. But 
 although it was not unusual for tlie Jews to have 
 two names, it was not usual for botli fatlier and 
 son to have the same two names. We theielbre 
 incline to leave the passage in Mark ii. 2G, as 
 explained above ; and to conclude that the other 
 discrepancies arose from an easy and obvious 
 transposition of words by tlie copyists, which was 
 afterwards perpetuated. In these places, the 
 Syriac and Arabic versions have ' Abiatliai, the 
 son of Abimelech.' 
 ABIB. [NisAN.] 
 
 1. ABIEL (7N''3X, father of strength, i.e. 
 strong ; Sept. 'A$iri\), the fatlier of Kisli, whose 
 son Saul was the lirst king of Israel, and of Ner, 
 whose son Aimer was captain of the host to his 
 cousin Saul (I Sara. ix. 1 ; xiv. 5). 
 
 2. ABIEL, one of the thii ty most distinguished 
 men of David's army (1 Chron. xi. 32). He is 
 called Abi-albou (papy ^2X) in 2 Sam. xxiii. 
 31 ; a name which has precisely the same signi- 
 fication (father of strength) as the other. 
 
 ABIEZER O.tV.^aX, father of help; Sept. 
 'ASie'^eo, Josh. xvii. 2), a son of Gilcad, the 
 ^andson of Manasseh (Num. xxvi. 30), and 
 founder of the family to which Gideon belonged, 
 and which bore his name as a patronymic — 
 Abiezrites (Judg. vi. 34 ; viii. 2). Gideon him- 
 •elf has a very beautiful and delicate allusion to 
 this patronymic in his answer to the fierce and 
 proud Ephraimifes, who, alter he had defeated 
 the Midianites with 300 men, chiefly of the 
 family of Abiezer, came to the pursuit, and can- 
 lured the two Midianitish princes Zeba and Zal- 
 munna. They sharply rebuked him for having 
 engrossed all the glory of tiie transaction by not 
 calling them into action at tlje first. But he 
 soothed tlieir pride by a remark which insinuated 
 tljat tljeir exploit, in capturing the princes, 
 although late, surpassed his own in defeating 
 tlieir army : — ' What have I done now in com- 
 parison with youV Is not the (grape) gleaning of 
 Ephraim better than the vintage of Abiezer ? ' 
 (Judg. viii. 1-3). 
 
 ABIGAIL (S^rnS? or W'lVi, father of joy ; 
 Sept. 'A^i-yaia), the wife of a prosperous siieep- 
 master, called Nabal, who dwelt in the district 
 of Carmel, west of the Dead Sea. She is known 
 chiefly for the promptitude and discretion of her 
 conduct in taking measures to avert the wrath of 
 David, which, as slie justly apjirehended, had 
 been violently excited by tlie insulting treatment 
 which his Tnessengers had received from lier iius- 
 band [Nabai.]. She hastily prepared a liberal 
 lupply of provisions, of which David's troop stood 
 in mucli need — and went fortli to meet him, 
 attended by only one servant. Wlien they 
 iiet, he was marching to exterminate Nabal and 
 all tliat belonged to him ; and not only was his 
 cage mollified by her j rudent remonstrances and 
 (kiicate management hut he became sensible 
 
 ABIJAH. 
 
 11 
 
 that tlie vengeance which he had puqKwed mu 
 not warranteil by the circumstances, and was 
 thankful tliat he had been jjrevented from shed- 
 ding innocent l)liH)d. The beauty and ))rudence 
 of Aliigail made such an impression upon DaviU 
 on this occiision, that when, not long after, he 
 heard of Nal)ars death, he seni for her, and she 
 became his wife (1 Sam. xxv. 14-42). By iier 
 it is usually stated that he had two sons, i)\a- 
 leab and Daniel ; but it is more likely tiiat the 
 Chileab of 2 Sam. iii. 3, is the same as tlic 
 Daniel of 1 Chi-on. iii. 1 ; the son of Abigail 
 being known by both tliese names. 
 
 1. ABILAIL (^!n"'3N, father of light or 
 splendour; Sept. 'AjSiai'a), the wife of Hehoboam, 
 king of Judah. She is called thedau;,'hter ofKliab, 
 David's elder brothei- (2 CI iron. xi. IS): but, as 
 David began to re'gn more tiiun eighty years before 
 her marriage, and was 30 years old wlien he became 
 king, we are doubtless to understand that she wiis 
 only a descendant of Kliab. This nar«e, as borne 
 by a female, illustrates the remarks under Au. 
 
 2. ABIHAIL (^:n"''aN*, father of might, 
 i.e. might g ; Sept. 'h^ixaiK). This name, al- 
 though the same as the preceding in the autho- 
 rized version, is, in the original, different both in 
 orthography and signification. It should be 
 written Abichaii,. The name was borne by 
 several persons: 1. Abichaii., the son of Huri, 
 one of the family-chiefs of the tribe of Gad, who 
 settled in Bashan (1 (Jhron. v. 14); 2. AuicnAiL, 
 the father of Zuriel, who was the father ol' tlie Le- 
 vitical tribes of Merari (Num. iii. 35); 3. Aui- 
 CHAiL, the father of queen Esther, ard lirother of 
 Mordecai (Estli. ii. If)). 
 
 ABIHU (K-in^3X, father of him; Sept. 
 'A/SiowS), the second of the sons of Aaron, wiio, 
 V.'itli his brothers Nadab, Eleazer, and Ithamar, 
 was set apart and coiiseciateil for the priesthood 
 (Exod. xxviii. 1). When, at the liist establisli- 
 ment of the ceremonial worshiji, the victims 
 ofieied on the great brazen altar were consumed 
 by fire from heaven, it was directed that this "fin 
 should always be kept uji ; and that the daily 
 incense should be burnt in censors tilled v/itli 
 it from the great altar. B"t one day, Nadab 
 and Abihu presumed to neglect this regulation, 
 and oll'ered incefse in censers filled witli ' ftiange' 
 or common lire. For this tiiey were instantly 
 struck dead by lightning, and were taken away 
 and buried in their clothes without tiie camp 
 [Aaron]. There can lie no doubt that tliis severe 
 example liad the intended elVect of eufoicmg be- 
 coming attention to the most minute observances 
 of the ritual service. As immediately after the 
 record of this transaction, and in apparent reler- 
 ence to it, comes a prohibition of wine or stnmg 
 drink to the jiriests, whose turn it might be to 
 enter tiie tabernacle, it is not uiifaiily surmised 
 that Nadab and Abihu were intoxicated when 
 they committed this serious error in tlieir minis- 
 trations (Lev. X. 1-11). 
 
 1. ABIJAH (nns;, -injaN;, see signif. in 
 Abiah ; Sept. 'A/Bid, 2 Chnm. xiii. 1). He is also 
 called Abijam (D*DX; Sept. 'A)3iou, 1 Kings iv. 
 1). Lighttbot (//<;/■«». (). T. in loc.) thinks tlial the 
 writer in Chronicles, not describing his reign ai 
 wicked, admits the sacred Jau in liis nanie; oui 
 which the book of Kings, ciiarging hiui witli fol-
 
 13 
 
 ABIJAH. 
 
 lowing tlie evil ways of his father, changes into 
 Jam. This may be fanciful ; but such changes 
 of name were not unusual. Abijah was tlie second 
 king of tJie separate kingdom of Judah, being the 
 «on of Rehoboam, and grandson of Solomon. He 
 be^an to reign B.C. 05S (Hales, b.c. 973J, in the 
 eighteenth year of Je;-oboam, king of Israel ; and 
 be reigned three years. At the commencement 
 of his reign, looking on the well-founded sepa- 
 ration of the ten tribes from the house of David 
 as rebellion, Aljijah made a vigorous attempt 
 to bring their i.ac^ to their allegiance. 'In this 
 he failed; although a signal victory over Jero- 
 boam, who liad double his force and much greater 
 experience, enabled him to take several cities 
 which had been held by Israel. The speech 
 which Abijah addressed to the opposing army 
 before the battle has been much admired. It was 
 well suited to it^ object, and exhibits correct 
 notions of tlie theocratical institutions. His view 
 of the political positi(jn of tlie ten tribes with 
 resjject to the house of David is, however, obvi- 
 ously erroneous, although such as a king of Judah 
 w^as likely to take. The numbers reputed to have 
 been present in this action are 800,000 on the side 
 if Jeroboam, 400,000 on the side of Abijah, and 
 500,000 left dead on the field. Hales and others 
 regard these extraordinary numbers as corrup- 
 tions, and propose to reduce them to 80,000, 
 40,000, and 50,000 respectively, as in the Latin 
 Vulgate of Sixtus Quintus, and many earlier 
 editions, and in the old Latin translation of Jo- 
 sephus ; and probably also in his original Greek 
 text, as is collected by De Vignoles from Abar- 
 banel's charge against the historian ofliaving made 
 Jeroboam's loss no more than 50,000 men, contrary 
 to the Hebrew text (Kennicott's Dissertations, 
 i. 533; ii. 201, &c. 5«4). The book of Ciironicles 
 mentions nothing concerning Aljijah adverse to the 
 impressions which we receive from his conduct on 
 tills occasion ; but in Kings we are told tliat ' he 
 walked in all the sins of his father' (1 Kings 
 XV. 3). He had fourteen wives, by whom he left 
 twenty-two sons and sixteen daughters. Asa suc- 
 ceeded him. 
 
 There is a difficulty connected with the ma- 
 ternity of Abijah. In 1 Kings xv. 2, we read, 
 ' His mother's name was Maachah, the daughter 
 of Abishalom ;" but in 2 Chron. xiii. 2, ' His 
 mother's name was Michaiah, the daugliter of 
 Uriel of Gibeah.' Maachah and Michaiah are 
 \«ariatl()ns of tiie. same name ; and Abishalom is 
 in all likelihood Absalom, the son of David. The 
 word (03) rendered 'daughter' is applied in 
 the Bible not only to a man's child, but to his 
 niece, giand-daugliter, or great-grand-daughter. It 
 is therefore probable that Uriel of Gibeah mar- 
 ried Tamar, the beautiful daughter of Absa- 
 lom (2 Sam. xiv. 27), and by her had Maachah, 
 wiio was tlms the daughter of Uiiel and grand- 
 daughter of Absalom. 
 
 2. ABIJAH, son of Jeroboam I., king of Israel. 
 His severe and threatening illness induced Jero- 
 boam to send his wife with a present [Prbsent], 
 guited to the disguise in whicii she went, to con- 
 «Nlt the prophet Ahijah respecting his recovery. 
 This prophet was the same who had, in the days 
 of Solomon, foretold to Jeroboam his elevation to 
 the throne of Israel. Though blind with age, he 
 knew the disguised wife of Jeroboam, and was 
 authorized, by the prophetic impulse tliat came 
 
 ABILA. 
 
 upon him, to reveal to her that, btccause tnen 
 was found in Abijah only, of all the house of 
 Jeroboam, ' some good thing towards the Lord,' 
 he only, of all t.iat house, should come to hi» 
 grave in peace, and be mourned in Israel. Ac- 
 cordingly, wlien the mother returned home, the 
 youth died as she crossed the threshokl of the 
 door. ' And they buried him, and all Israel 
 mourned for him' (1 Kings xiv. 1-lS). 
 
 3. ABIJAH, one of the descendants of Eleazer, 
 the son of Aaron, and chief of one of the twenty- 
 four courses or orders into which the whole body 
 of the priesthood was divided by David (1 Chron. 
 xxiv. 10). Of these the course of Abijah was the 
 eighth. Only four of the courses returned from 
 the captivity, of which that of Abijah was not 
 one (Ezra i"i. 36-39; Neh. vii. 39-42; xii. 1). 
 But the four were divided into the original num- 
 ber of twenty-four, with the original names ; and 
 it hence nappens that Zecharias, the father of 
 John the Baptist, is described as belonging to tht 
 course of Abijah or ' Abia' (Luke i. 5}. 
 ABIJAM [Abijah, 1.] 
 
 ABILA, capital of the Abilene of Lysanias 
 (Luke rii. 1) ; and distinguished from other 
 places of the same name as the Abila of Lysa- 
 nias ('A^iAtj tov Avcravtov), and (by Josephus) as 
 ' the Abila of Lebanon.' It is unnecessary to rea- 
 son upon the meaning of this Greek name ; for it 
 is obviously a form of the Hebrew Abel, which 
 was applied to several places, and means a 
 grassy spot. This has been supposed to be the 
 same as Abel-beth-Maacah, but without founda- 
 tion, for that was a city of Naphtali, which Abila 
 was not. An old tradition fixes this as the 
 place where Abel was slain by Cain, which is in 
 unison with the belief that the region of Da- 
 mascus was the land of Eden. But the same 
 has been said of otlier places bearing the name 
 uf Abel or Abila, and appears to have originated 
 in the belief (created by tlie Septuagint and the 
 versions ^vliicli Ibllowed it) that the words are 
 identical; but, in fact, the. name of the son of 
 Adam is in Hebrew Hebol (?3n), and therefore 
 difi'erent from the repeated local name of Abel 
 (73K). However, under the belief that the 
 place and district derived their name from Abel, 
 a monument upon the top of a high hill, near tlie 
 source of tlie river Barrada, which rises among tlie 
 eastern roots of Anti-Li banus, and waters Damas- 
 cus, has long been pointed out as the tomb of 
 Abel, and its length (thirty yards) has been 
 alleged to correspond with his stature ! (Quares- 
 mius, Eliwicl. Terrce Sancto', \ii. 7, 1 ; Maun- 
 drell, under May 4th). This spot is on ths 
 road from Heliopolis (Baalbec) to Damascus, 
 between which towns — thirty-two Roman miles 
 from the former and eighteen from the latter — 
 Abila is indeed placed in the Itinerary of An 
 toninus. About the same distance north-west 
 of Damascus is Souk Wady Baixada, wiiere 
 an inscription was found by Mr. Banks, which, 
 beyond doubt, identifies that place with the Abila 
 of Lysanias (Quart. Rev. xxvi. 38S ; Hogg's 
 Damascus, i. 301). Souk means market, and is 
 an appellation often added to villages where 
 {periodical markets are held. The name of Souk 
 (Wady) Barrada first occurs in Burckliardt {Syria^ 
 p. 2) ; and he states that there are here two vil- 
 lages, bnilt on the opposite sides of the Barrada 
 The lively and refreshing green of this aeijfb
 
 ABILENE. 
 
 Wurhood is noticeil by liim und otber travellers, 
 «nd umlcsii^.edly suggests Mie ])r()])riety of the 
 came of Abel, in its Ilebi^w acceptation of a 
 gi'ossy spot. 
 
 AlilLENE CA$i\i}trfi, Luke iii. 1), the small 
 district or territory which took its name from the 
 chief town, Ahila. Its situation is in some 
 degree determined by that of the town ; but 
 its precise limits and extent remaiji unknown. 
 Northward it must have reached beyond the 
 Upper Barrada^ in order to include Al)ita ; and 
 it is probable that its southern border may have 
 extended to Mount Hermon (Jebel es-Sheikhl It 
 seems to have inchided tlie eastern declivities of 
 Anti-Libanns, and the fine valleys between its 
 ba.se and the hills whicli front tlie eastern ])iains. 
 This is a very ijeautiful and fertile region, well 
 wooded, and watered by numerous springs from 
 Anti-Libanus. It al»'j alTords fine jiastures ; and 
 in most respects contrasts witli the stern and 
 barren western slopes of Anti-Libanus. 
 
 This territory had been governed as a tetrarchate 
 bt Lysanias,son of Ptolemy and grandson of Men- 
 n<BU3 (Joseph. Antiq. xiv. 13, 3), l)Ut he was put 
 to death, b.c. 33, flisough the intrigues of Cleo- 
 patra, who then took possession of tlie province 
 (^Antiq. xiv. 4, 1). After her death it fell to Au- 
 gustus, who rented it out to one Zenodonis ; but 
 as he did not keep jt clear of rolibers, it was 
 taken from him, and given to Herod tlie Great 
 {Antiq. xv. 10, 1 ; Bell. Jud. i. 20, 4). At his 
 death, a part (the southern, doubtless) of the terri- 
 tory was added to Trachonitis and Ituraea to form 
 a tetrarchy for his son Philip ; but by fa« tlie 
 larger portion, including the city of Abila, was 
 then, or shortly afterwards, bestowed on anu her 
 Lysanias, mentioned by Luke (iii. 1), wlu is 
 supposed to have been a descendant of the former 
 Lysanias, but who is nowhere mentioned by Jo- 
 sephus. Indeed, notliing is said by him or any 
 ■other profane writer, of this part of Abilene until 
 about ten years after the time referred to by 
 Luke, wlien the emperor Caligula gave it to 
 Agrippa I. as ' the tetrarchy of Lysanias' (Jo- 
 seph. Atitiq. xviii. 6, 10), to whom it was after- 
 wards confirmed by (Claudius. At his death, it 
 was included in that part of his possessions which 
 •vent to his son Agrippa II. This exjilanation 
 ''which we owe to the acuteness and research of 
 VViner), as to the division of Abilene between 
 Lysanias and Philip, removes the apparent dis- 
 crepancy between Luke, who calls Lysanias 
 tetrarch of Abilene at the very time that, accord- 
 ing to Josejihus, (a part of) Abilene was in tlie 
 pos-session of Philip. 
 
 1. ABIMELECH ('^^'P^as;, father of the 
 king, or perhaps royal father ; Sejjt. 'A^Lfj.(\fx)f 
 die name of the Philistine king of Geiar in the 
 time of Abraham (Gen. xx. 1, sqq. : u.c. 1898; 
 Hales, B.C. 2l)54) ; but, from its recurrence, it 
 was ]:robably less a proper name than a titular 
 distinction, like Phaijaoh for the kings of 
 Egypt, or Augustus for the emperors of Rome. 
 A.tiraliam removed into iiis territory after the 
 destruction of Sodom ; and fearing that th<' 
 extreme beauty of Sarah might bring him into 
 iitiirulties, lie declared her to be liis sister. The 
 conduct of Abimelecb ••! taking Sarah into his 
 ■lareiD, ahows tliat even in thos" early times 
 <iiigs claimed t).e right of latino to tnemsehes 
 «fae unman ied fenial«>f not only o.' their natural 
 
 ABIMELECH. 
 
 IS 
 
 subjects, but of tJiose who sojourned in their A» 
 minions. Another contemporary instance of this 
 custom occurs in Gen. xii. lb; and one of later 
 date in Estli. ii. 3. But .\bimelefh, oh( Jient to 
 a divine warning coiiimunicaled to 1 i.i: in a 
 dream, accompanied by the information t 'at Abra- 
 ham was a sacred person who had interctiirse with 
 God, restored her to her iiusband. As a mark of 
 his respect he added valuable gifts, and oll'ered 
 tlie jiatriarch a seltlrment in any part of tlje 
 CouTitry ; but he nevertheless did not forbear to 
 rei)uke, with mingled delicacy and sarcasm, the 
 deception wliich had been jmictised tijion him 
 (Gen. XX.). The most curious point in this trans- 
 action seems to lie, that it apjiears to ha\ e been 
 aiimitted, on all hands, that he had an iindoul'tetl 
 right to ajiproprlale to his harem whatevi'r mi- 
 married woman he pleased — all the evil in liiis 
 case lieing that Sarah was aln-ady married : »o 
 early iiad some of the most odious jirinciples of 
 despotism taken root in tlie East. The interposi- 
 tion of Providence to deliver Sarali twice fro'n 
 royal harems will not seem superlluous whVn it is 
 considered how carefully women are there se- 
 cluded, and hov/ impossible it is to obtaiii access 
 to them, or get them back again ;^^Estli. iv. !)). It 
 is scarcely necessary to add that these practices 
 still prevail in some Eastern countries, esjiecially 
 in Persia. The uresent writer, when at Tabreez, 
 in the days of Abbas Meerza, was acqi;:iinted 
 with a Persian kJiaii who lived in continual 
 anxiety and alann lest his only daughter should 
 be required for the harem of the prince, who, 
 he was aware, had heard of her extreii;e 
 beauty. Nothing further is recorded of King 
 Abimelech, excejit that a few years alYer, he 
 repaired to the camp of Abraham, who iiad re- 
 moved southward beyond his borders, accom- 
 panied by Phichol, ' the chief captain of his host.' 
 to invite the patriarch to contract with him a 
 league of peace and friendship. Abraham con- 
 sented ; and this first league on record [.Alli- 
 ance] was confirmed by a mutual oath, made at 
 a well which hail been dug by -Abraham, but which 
 the herdsmen of .Abimelech had Ibrcibly seized 
 without his knowleilge. It was rtstoied to tlie 
 rightful owner, on which Abraham named it 
 Beehsheba (^he. Well of the Oath), and conse- 
 crated the spot to the woishijj of Jehovah (Gen. 
 xxi. 22-34). 
 
 2. ABIMELECH, another king of Gerar, in 
 the time of Isaac (about B.C. 1804 ; Hales, 1960), 
 who is supposed to have been the son of Flie pre- 
 ceding. Isaac sought refuge in his territory 
 during a famine; and having the same fear re- 
 S])ecting his fair Meso]>otaniian wife, Rebekah, as 
 his father had entertained respecting Saraii, he 
 reported her to be his sister. This brought upon 
 him the rebuke of Abimelech, when he acci- 
 dentally discovered tlie truth. The country aj)- 
 pears to have become more cultivated and 
 populous than at the time of .Abraham's visit, 
 nearly a century before; and the inhabitants, 
 were more jealous of the jiresence of sucb 
 powerful jiasi ral chieftains. In those times, as 
 now, wells of water were of so much importance 
 for agricultural as well as pastoral i)uri>08««, that 
 tliey gave a proprietary right to the soil, not cirt> 
 vioiisly aji|)ropriat«d, in which they were dug. 
 Abraham had dug wells during his sojourn in 
 •^ » f ...♦■y; and, to lui the claiir whidi rr
 
 14 
 
 ABIMELECH. 
 
 Bnlted fiom tliem, (he Philistines had afteiwards 
 filled ihem up ; but they were now cleaved out 
 by Isaac, who proceeded to cultivate the ground 
 to which they gave him a right. The virgin soil 
 yielded him a hundred-tbld ; and his other pos- 
 sessions, his flocks and herds, also received such 
 firodigious increase tliat the jealousy of the Phi- 
 istines could not be suppressed; and Abimelech 
 desired him to seek more distant quarters, in lan- 
 guage which gives a high notion of the wealth of 
 the patriarchal chiefs, and the extent of their 
 estublishment.s : — ' Depart from us : for thou art 
 more and mightier than we.'' Isaac complied, 
 an-d went out into the open country, and dug 
 wells for his cattle. But tlie shepherds of the 
 Philistines, out with their flocks, were not in- 
 clined to allow the claim to exclusive pasturage 
 n these districts to be thus established; and their 
 opposition induced the quiet patriarch to make 
 successive removals, until he reached such a dis- 
 tance that iiis operations were no longer disputed. 
 Afterwards, when he was at Beersheba, he re- 
 reived a visit from Abimelech, who was attended 
 by Ahuzzath, his friend, and Phichol, the chief 
 captain of liis army. Tliey were received with 
 some reserve by Isaac ; but when Abimelech ex- 
 plained that it was his wish to renew, with one 
 so manifestly blessed of God, the covenant of 
 peace and goodwill which had been contracted 
 l^tween their fatliers, they were more cheerfully 
 entertained, and tlie desired covenant was, with 
 due ceremony, contracted accordingly. (Gen. 
 xxvi.) From the facts recorded respecting the 
 connection of the two Abimelechs with Abraham 
 and Isaac, it is manifest that the Philistines, 
 even at this early time, had a government more 
 org-anized, and more in unison with that type 
 which we now regard as Oriental, than appeared 
 among the native Canaanites, one of whose na- 
 tions had been expelled by these foreign settlers 
 from the territory which they occu]jied [Phi- 
 listines]. 
 
 3. ABIMELECH, a son of Gideon, by a con- 
 cubine-wife, a nativeof Shechem, where lier family 
 aad considerable influence. Through that influ- 
 ence Abimelech vras proclaimed king after the 
 death of his fatlier, who had himself refused 
 that honour, wiicn tendered to him, both for 
 nimself and his cliildren (Judg. viii. 22-21). In 
 a short time, a considerable part of Israel seems to 
 have recognised his rule. One of the first acts of 
 his reign was to destroy his brothers, seventy in 
 number, being the first example of a system of 
 barbarous state policy of which there have been 
 frequent instances in the East, and which indeed 
 has only within a recent period been discon- 
 tinued. They were slain 'on one stone' at 
 Ophrah, the native city of the family. Only one, 
 the youngest, named Jotham, escaped ; and he 
 had tlie boldness to make his appearance on 
 Mount Gerizim, wliere the Shechemites were as- 
 sembled for some public purpose (perhaps to in- 
 augurate Aliinielech), and rebuke them in his 
 famous parable of the trees choosing a king 
 [JoTiiAM ; Parable]. In the course of tiiree years 
 tlie Shechemites found ample cause to repent of 
 what they had done ; they eventually revolted in 
 bimelech's absence, and causetl an ambuscade 
 o be laid in the mountains, wiih the design of 
 estroying liim on his return. But Zebul, his 
 overnor i i Shechem, contj-ive<i to apprise him of 
 
 ABINADAB. 
 
 these circumstances, so tliat he was enabled ti 
 avoid ttie snare laid for him ; and, having hastily 
 assembled some troops, appeared unexpectedly 
 before Shechem. The people of tliat place had 
 meanwhile secured the assistance of one Gaal 
 and liis followers [Gaal], who marched out to 
 give Abimelech battle. He was defealecL, and 
 returned into the town ; and his inefticiency and 
 misconduct in the action had been so manifest 
 that the people were induced by Zebul to expel 
 him and his followers. Although without his pro- 
 tection, the people still went out to the labours of 
 the field. This being told Abimelech, who was 
 at Arumah, he laid an ambuscade in four bodies 
 in the neighbourhood ; and when the men came 
 forth in the morning, two of the ambushed jiarties 
 rose against them, while the other two seized the 
 city gates to prevent their return. Afterwards 
 the whole force united against the city, which, 
 being now deprived of its most efliciei.t inhabit- 
 ants, was easily taken. It was completely dfr 
 stroyed by the exasperated victor, and tlie gr6und 
 strewn with sal^, symbolical of the desolation to 
 wnicn .t was doomed. The fortress, however, stili 
 remained ; Imt the occupants, deeming it un- 
 tenatile, wi'Jidrew to the temple of Baal-Beritl^ 
 which stood in a more commanding situation. 
 Aliimelech emjdoyed his men in collecting and 
 piling wooel against this building, which waa 
 then set on fire and destroyed, ^vitli the thousand 
 men who were 'n .t. Afterwards Aliimelech went 
 to reduce Thebez, which had also revolted. The 
 town was taken with little difticulty, and the 
 people withdrew into the citadel. Here Abime- 
 lech resorted to his favourite operation, and while 
 heading a party to burn down the gate, he was 
 struck on the head by a large stone cast down by 
 a woman from tlie wall abo^■e. Perceiving that 
 he liad received a deatli-blow, he directed his 
 armour-bearer to thrust him through with his 
 sword, lest it should be said that he fell by a 
 w oinan"s hand. Thus ended tlie first attempt to 
 establish a monarchy in Israc' The chapter in 
 which these events are recorded (Judg. ix.) gives 
 a more detailed and lively view of the military 
 ojierations of that age than elsewhere occurs, and 
 claims the close attention of those who study that 
 branch of antiquities. Abimelech himself ap- 
 pears to have been a bold and able commander, 
 but utterly uncontrolled by religion, principle, 
 or humanity in liis ambitious enterprises. His 
 fate resembled that of Pyrrhus II., king of 
 Epirus (Justin, xxv. 5; Pausan. i. 13; Thucyd. 
 iii. 74); and the dread of the ignominy of its 
 being said of a wanior that he died by a woman's 
 hand was very general (Sopliocl. Trach. 1064; 
 Senec. Here. 6et. 1176). Vainly did Abimelech 
 seek to avoid this disgrace ; for the fact of his 
 death by the hand of a woman was long aftei 
 associated with his memory (2 Sam. xi. 21). 
 
 ABINADAB (inj^awS*, father of voluntari- 
 ness; Sept. 'A/ii>/aSa/8). There are se\eral persons 
 of this name, all of wliom are also called Amina- 
 DAB — the letters h and rn being very frequently 
 interchanged in Hebrew. 
 
 1. ABINADAB, oie of the eight sons of Jesse, 
 and one of the thiet wlio followed Saul to the 
 war witli the Pliilistines (1 Sam. xvi. 8). 
 
 2. ABINADAB, one of Saul's sons, who was 
 slain at the battle of Gilboa (I Sam. xxxi. 2). 
 
 3. ABINADAB, the Levite of Kirjath-jearim.
 
 ABIR.\M. 
 
 ID wlitise honsp, wliicli was on a hill, the Ark of 
 the Covenant was dejiosited, after being l>rouL?ht 
 back from the land of the Philis ines. it was 
 committed to the special charge of his son Elea- 
 ler; and remained there seventy years, until it 
 was removed by David (1 Sam. vii. 1, 2; 1 Chron. 
 xiii. 7). [Ark.] 
 
 1. ABIRAIvI {Uy^V^, father of altitucle/\.e. 
 high; Sept. ' X^fipdiv), one of the family-chiefs of 
 the trilie of Reuben, who, with Dafhan and On 
 of the same tribe, joined Korah, of the tribe of 
 Levi, in a conspiracy against Aaron and Moses 
 [Aaron]. (Num. xvi.) 
 
 •2. ABIRAM, eldest son of Hiel the Bethelite 
 (1 Kings xvi. 34). [Hiel; Jericho.] 
 
 ABISHAG (3?i''a^?, father of error; Sept. 
 'A^iady), a beautiful young woman of Shunam, 
 in the tribe of Issachar, who was chosen by the 
 servants of David to be introduced into the royal 
 harem, for the special purpose ctf ministering to 
 him, and cherishing liim in his old age. She be- 
 came his wife ; but tlie marriage was never con- 
 summated. Some time after the death of David, 
 Adonijah, his eldest son, persuaded Bathsheba, 
 the mother of Solomon, to entreat the king tliat 
 Abishag might be given to him in marriage. 
 But as rights and privileges peculiarly regal 
 were associated with the control and possession 
 of the harem of the deceased kings [Harem], 
 Solomon detected in this application a fresh aspi- 
 ration to the throne, which he visited with death 
 ^1 Kings i. 1-4; ii. 13-25) [Adonijah]. 
 
 ABISHAI C^'IV^, father of gifts ; Sept. 
 A/Secca aiid 'Afficrai), a nephew of David by his 
 sister Zeruiah, and brother of Joab and Asahel. 
 The three brothers devoted themselves zealously 
 U< the interests of their uncle during his wander- 
 ings. Though David had more reliance upon the 
 talents of Joab, he appears to have given more 
 of his private confidence to Abishai, who seems 
 to have attached himself in a peculiar manner 
 to his person, as we ever find him near, and 
 rPa^'y for council or action, on critical occasions. 
 A'>i»hai, indeed, was rather a man of action than 
 ol council ; and although David must haTe been 
 gratified by his devoted and uncompromising 
 attachment, he had more generally occasion to 
 check the impulses of his ardent temperament 
 than to follow his advice. Abishai was one of 
 the two persons whom David asked to accom- 
 panj' him to the camp of Saul ; and he alone 
 accepted the perilous distinction (I Sam. xxvi. 
 5-9). The desire he then expressed to smite the 
 sleejiing king, identifies him as the man who 
 afterwards burned to rush upon Shimei and slay 
 him for his abuse of David (2 Sam. xvi. 9). 
 For when the king fled beyond the Jordan from 
 Absalom, Abishai was again by his side : and he 
 was eiitnistt'd with the command of one of the 
 tJiree divisions of the army which crushed that 
 rebellion (2 Sam. xviii. 2). Afterwards, in a 
 war with the Philistines, David was in imminent 
 
 f-eril of liis life from a giant named Ishbi-bcjiob ; 
 Alt was rescued by Abishai, who slew the giant 
 (2 Sam. XX. l.')-17). He was also the chief of 
 t.i»e three ' mighties,' who, prol)ably in the same 
 war. pprfomied the chivalrous exploit of break- 
 mg (hniugli the host of tlie Philistines to procure 
 Da id a drauijht of wafer from the well of iiis 
 
 ABIYONAH. 
 
 it 
 
 native Bethlehem (2 Sam. xxiii. 14-17). Among 
 the exploits of this iiero it is mentioned that b» 
 withstood 300 men and slew them with hit 
 spear : but tlie occasion of this adventure, and 
 the time and manner of his death, are e(inully 
 unknown. In 2 Sam. viii. 13, the victory over 
 the Edornites in the Valley of Salt is as'-ribed to 
 David, but in 1 Chron. xviii. 12, to Abishai It 
 is hence jirobable that the victory was actually 
 gained liy Abishai, Init is ascribed to David at 
 king and commander-in-chief. 
 
 ABISHUA (VJ\l^''^, father of sa/etg; Sept. 
 *A/8i(roi5), tiie son of Pliinehas, and fourth higli- 
 priest of the Jews (1 Chron. vi. 50). The com- 
 mencement and duration of his yK)nti(icate are 
 uncertain, but tlie latter is inl'eiied from cir- 
 cumstances, confirmed by tlie Ciironicon of Alex- 
 andria, to have included the period in which 
 Ehud was judge, and probably the preceding 
 period of servitude to Eglon of' Moab. Blair 
 places him from B.C. 1352 to 1302 — equivalent 
 to Hales, b.c. 1513 to 14G3. This high-priest is 
 called Abiezer by Josephus {Antiq. v. 12, 5). 
 
 ABIYONAH (n3Vai<;Sept./c<{,r7rap,s). Thi. 
 word occurs only once in the Bible, Eccles. 
 xii. 5 : ' When the almond-tree shall flourish, 
 and the grasshopper shall be a burden, and desire 
 shall fail ; because man goeth to his long home.' 
 The word translated desire is AnnoNAn, which 
 by others has been considered to signify the 
 CAPER-PLANT. The rcasons assigned for the 
 latter opinion are •. (hat the Rabbins apply tlie 
 term ahionoth to the small fruit of trees "and 
 berries, as well as to that of the caper-bush ; 
 that the caper-hush is common in Syria and 
 Arabia; that its fruit was in early times eaten as a 
 condiment, being stimulating in its nature, and 
 
 [Capparis spinosa.] 
 
 tn-'refore calculated to excite desiie; that as tk* 
 caper-bush grows on tombs, it wi-'l lie IjiUt^T
 
 16 
 
 ABIYONAH. 
 
 be destroyed when tnese are opened ; and, finally, 
 that as Solomon speaks here in symbols and 
 allegories, we must suppose him to deviate from 
 the course he had apparently prescribed to him- 
 gelf, it he were to express in plain words tiiat 
 •desire shall fail,' instead of intimating the same 
 thing, by the failure of that which is supposed 
 to have been used to excite desire. 
 
 Celsius (Ilierobotanicon, i. 210) argues, on 
 the contrai y, that Solomon in other places, when 
 treating of the pleasures of youth, never speaks of 
 capers, but of wine and perfumes ; that, had lie 
 wished to adduce anything of the kind, he wouhl 
 have selected something more remarkable ; that 
 capf'rs, moreover, instead of being pleasantly sti- 
 niulam, are rather acrid and hurtful, and though 
 occasionally employed by the ancients as condi- 
 ments, were little esteemed by them ; and, finally, 
 that the word abionoth of the Rabbins is distinct 
 from the abiyonah of tliis passage, as is ad- 
 mitted even by Ursinus : ' Nam quod voeabu- 
 lum m3V35< Abionoth, quod Rabbinis usitatum, 
 alia quaedam puncta habeat, non puto tanti 
 esse momenti' {Arboret. Biblicum, xxviii. I). To 
 tJiis Celsius replies : ' Immo, nisi vocales et 
 puncta genuina in Ebraicis observentur, Babelica 
 *et confusio, et coelo terra miscebitur. Incer- 
 tum pariter pro certo assumunt, qui cappares vo- 
 lunt proprie abionoth dici Rabbinis' (I.e. p. 213). 
 
 But as the Septuagint, the Vulgate, and some 
 other translations, have understood the caper- 
 it)ush to be meant, it is desirable to give some 
 account of it, especially as, from its ornamental 
 natvne, it could not but attract attention. There 
 are, moreover, some points in it^ natural his- 
 tory which have been overlooked, but which may 
 serve to show that in the passage under review it 
 might without impropriety have been employed 
 in carrying out the figurative language with 
 which the verse commences. 
 
 The caper-plant belongs to a tribe of plants, 
 the CapparideiE, of which the species are found 
 in considerable numbers in tropical countries, 
 Buch as India, whence they extend northwards 
 into Arabia, the north of Africa, Syria, and 
 die soutli of Europe. The common caper-bush — 
 Capparis spinosa, Linn, (the C. sativa of Persoon) 
 — is common in the countries immediately sur- 
 rounding the Mediterranean. Dioscorides de- 
 scribes it as spreading in a circular manner on 
 the gi-ound, in poor soils and rugged situations ; 
 ,and Pliny, ' as being set and sown in stx.tny 
 places especially.' Theophrastus states that it 
 refuses to grow in cultivated ground. Dioscorides 
 describes it as having thorns like a bramble, 
 leaves like the quince, and fruit like the olive; 
 characters almost sufWcient to identify it. The 
 caper is well known to tlie Arabs, being their 
 
 14 kibbur ; and designated also by the name 
 ^ eU ^ athufor azuf. The bark of the root, which 
 
 is still used in the East, as it formerly was in 
 Europe, no doubt ])ossesses some irritant property, 
 as it was one of the five aperient roots. The 
 unexpanded Hower-buds, preserved in vinegar, are 
 well known at our tables as a condiment by the 
 name of capers. Parts of the plant seem to have 
 ((Cen similarly used by the ancients. 
 
 The caper-plant is showy and ornamental, 
 fiDwing in barren places in the midst of die 
 
 ABLUTION. 
 
 rubbish of nihis, or on the walls of buildingti 
 It was observed l)y Ray on tiie Temple of Peace 
 at Rome, and in other similar situations. It forms 
 a much-branched, diffuse shrub, which annually 
 loses its leaves. The bran :hes are long and 
 trailing; smootli, but armed with double curved 
 stlpulary spines. The leaves at» alternate, round- 
 ish or oblong-oval, a little ileshy, smooth, of a 
 green colour, but sometimes a littl'- reddish.- The 
 flowers are large and showy, produced singly 
 in the axils of the leaves, on stalks which ar« 
 larger than the leaves. The calyx is fcur-leaved, 
 coriaceous : the petals are also four in numljer, 
 white, and of an oval roundish form. The sfamena 
 are very numerous and long ; and their filaments 
 being tinged with puq>le, and terminated by the 
 yellow anthers, give the (lowers a very agreeable 
 ajjpearance. The ovary is borne upon a straight 
 stalk, which is a little longer than the stamens, 
 and which, as it ripens, droops and forms an oval 
 or pear-shaped berry, enclosing within its pulj 
 numerous small seeds. 
 
 Many of the caper tribe, being remarkable ft) 
 
 the long stalks by which their fruit is supported, 
 conspicuously display, what also takes place in 
 other plants, namely, the drooping and hang- 
 ing down of tiie fruit as it ripens. As, then, the 
 flowering of the almond-tree, in the first part of 
 the verse, has been supposed to refer to the whiten- 
 ing of the hair, so the drooping of the ripe fruit 
 of a plant like the caper, which is conspicuous 
 on the walls of buildings, and on tombs, may be 
 supposed to typify the hanging down of tlie head 
 before ' man goeth to his long home." — J. F. R. 
 
 ABLUTION, the ceremonial washing, 
 whereby, as a symbol of purificatit)n from un- 
 cleanness, a person was considered — 1, to b« 
 cleansed trom the taint of an infeiior and ^.ess 
 pure condition, and initiated into a higher and 
 purer state ; 2. to be cleansed from the soil of 
 common life, and fitted for special acts of reli- 
 gious service ; 3. to be cleansed from defilements 
 contracted by particular acts or circumstances, 
 and restored to the privileges of ordinary life ; 
 4. as absolving or purifying himself, or declaring 
 himself absolved and purified, from the guilt oi 
 a particular act. We do not meet with any 
 such ablutions in patriarchal times : but untlar 
 the Mosaical dispensation they all occur. 
 
 A marked example of the first kind of ablution 
 occurs when Aaron and his sons, on their being 
 set a])art for the priesthood, were washed with 
 water before tliey were invested with the priestly 
 robes and anointed with the holy oil (Lev. viii. 6). 
 To this head we are inclined to refer the ablution 
 of persons and raiment which was commanded ti 
 the whole of the Israelites, as a preparation to 
 their receiving the law from Sinai (Exod. xix. 10- 
 15). We also find examples of this kind of pnri& 
 cation in connection with initiation into a higha 
 state. Thus those ailmitted into the lesser or itt 
 troductory mysteries of Eleu«i8 were previovuj;
 
 ABLUTION. 
 
 tKirifieil on the banks of ili€ Ilissus, by wafer 
 being poured upon them by theUtlianos. 
 
 Tiie seco/id kind of abhition was that wiiich 
 required the pricjls, on ]ain of death, to wash 
 tlieir hands and their (eet before tliey approaclieil 
 tl>e altiir of God (Kxod. xxx. 17-21). For this 
 purpose a lar^e basin of water was provided both 
 at the tabernacle and at the temple. To this the 
 Psalmist alludes when he says — ' I will wash my 
 nands in iruiocency, and so will I coinp;iss thine 
 altar' (Ps. xxvi. fi). Hence it became the custom 
 in the early Christian church for the ministers, in 
 the view of the cungregation, to wash their hands in 
 a basin of water brouglit by the deacon, at the com- 
 mencement of the communion (Jamieson, p. 126); 
 and this practice, or somctiiing- like it, is still 
 retained in the Eastern churches, as well as in 
 the clmrch of Rome, when mass is celebrated. 
 Similar ablutions by the priests before proceeiling 
 to perform (lie more sacred ceremonies were usual 
 among the heathen. Tiie Egyptian priests in- 
 deed carried the jnactice to a burdensome extent, 
 from which the Jewisli priests weif, perhaps de- 
 signedly, exonerated ; and in tlicir less torrid 
 climate it was, for puqioses of real cleanliness, 
 less needful. Reservoirs of water were attached 
 to the Egyptian temples ; and Herodotus (ii. o7) 
 informs us that the priests shaved the whole of 
 tl-eir bodies every third day, that no insect or 
 other tilth might, be upon them when they served 
 the gods, and that tliey washeil tliemselves in cold 
 water twice every day and twice every night : 
 Porphyry says thrice a day, witti a nocturnal 
 ablution occasionally. This kind of ablution, 
 as preparatory to a religions act, answers to the 
 simple Witc^i of the Moslems, which they are 
 required to go through five times daily before 
 tlieir stated jnayers. This makes the ceremonies 
 of ablution much more conspicuous to a traveller 
 in the Moslem East at the present day than tiiey 
 would appear among the ancient Jews, seeing 
 that the law im{K)sed this obligation on the jiriests 
 only, not on the people. Connected as these 
 Moslem ablutions are vi\x\\ various forms and 
 imitative ceremonies, and recmiing so frequently 
 as they do, the avowedly heavy yoke of even the 
 Mosaic law seems liglit in the comjiarison. 
 
 In tlie t/iird class of ablutions washing Is re- 
 garded as a puritication from positive defile- 
 ments. The Mosaical law recognises eleven 
 «])ecie3 of uncleanness of this nature (Lev. xii.- 
 XV.), tlie purification, for which ceased at the 
 end of a ceitain period, provided the imclean 
 person then washed his body and his clothes ; 
 but in a few cases, such as leprosy and the detile- 
 ment contracted b}' touching a deafl body, he 
 remained unclean seven da)'S after the physical 
 cause of pollution had ceased. This was all that 
 the law required : but in later times, when the 
 Jews began to letine ujion it, these cases were 
 Considered generic instead of specific — as repri"- 
 nenting classes instea<l of individual cases of 
 dif'tilpment — and the causes of jioUution retpiiring 
 puriMcation by water thus came to be greatly in- 
 cre<*sed. This kind of ablation for sulistantial 
 
 uncleanness answers to the Moslem iStJ' (/hash. 
 In which the causes of dp'ilement greatly exceed 
 tliose of the Pvlosaical lav while they are jierhaps 
 equalled in number and minuteness by those 
 wiuch the late Jp\» 5 devioed. The uncleanness 
 
 ABLUT.ON. 
 
 11 
 
 in tliis class arises chiefly 1^om ihe natu.-al sec»>)- 
 tions of tinman beings a».d of beasts used fo. 
 food ; and from the oniure of animals not used 
 for food : and, as among tUv Jews, the defih-ment 
 may be comnmnicated no only (o persons, but 
 to Cioihes, utensiis, nnd rlwellin^s— in all wliich 
 cases the ]iuriiication must lie made by water, o~ 
 by some representative act where wafer cannot lie 
 ai)))lied. 
 
 Of the Inst class of ablutions, by which |)erson« 
 declared themselves iVee from the guilt of a part- 
 cular actioji, the most remaikable instance is that 
 which occurs in the expiation lor an unknown 
 murder, when flie elders of the nearest village 
 waslied their hands over the ex])iatory heifer, be- 
 headed in Ihe valley, saying, ' (Jur hands have 
 not shed this blood, neither have our eyes seen it ' 
 (Deut. xxi. 1-9). It has been th(oight by some 
 that the signal act of Pilate, when lie wasilsed ins 
 liands in water and declared himself innocent of 
 the blood of Jesus (Matt, xxvii. '?A), was a de- 
 signed ado])l!on of the Jt-wish cuLJfoni : but this 
 supposition does not a])[)ear necessary, as the 
 custom was also common among the Greeks and 
 Romans. 
 
 We have confined this notice to the usages of 
 ablution as a sign of jmrilication sanctioned or 
 demanded by the law itself. Other jnactices not 
 there indicated appear to iiave existeil at a very 
 eiu-ly period, or to have grown up in the course 
 of time. From 1 Sara. xvi. 5, comjiared with 
 Exod. xix. 10-14, we leain that it was usual for 
 those who presented or jirovided a sacrifice to 
 pii-ify themselves by ablution : and as this was 
 everywliere a general, jiractice, it mav be sup- 
 posed to have existed in pafriaiehal times, and, 
 being an established and ap]:id\ ed custom, not 
 to have required to be mentioned in the law. 
 There is a passage in tJie apocryj'hal book of 
 Judith (xii. 7-9) which has been thought to intimate 
 that the Jews perl'ormed ablutions before ])raver. 
 Uut we cannot fairly deduce that meaning from 
 it. It would indeed ])rove too m.ich if so under- 
 stood, as Judith bathed in tlie water, which is 
 more than even the Moslems do before theii 
 prayers; Moreover, the authority, if clear, would 
 not be conclusive. 
 
 But after the rise of the sect of the Pharisees, 
 the practice of ablution was carried to such ex- 
 cess, t'rom the afl'ectation of excessive ])urity, that 
 it is repeatedly brought under our notice ir. 
 the New Testament through the severe animad- 
 versions of our Saviour on the consummate hy- 
 pocrisy invohed in this la.stidious attention to 
 the external types of moral purity, while the 
 heart was left unclean. All the practices there 
 exjKised come under the head of ])nrificution from 
 imclcamiess ; — the acts involving wliich were 
 made so numerous that jiersons of the stricter sect 
 could scarcely move without contracting some 
 inv(ilunt;iry ]iollution. Fortlii^ reason they never 
 entered their houses withont ublulion, from the 
 strong probability that they hail unknowingly 
 contracted some defilement in the streets ; and 
 they were especially careful never to eat without 
 washing the hands (Mark vii. I-.')). I)ecaiist 
 they were peculiarly liable to be defiled ; and as 
 unclean hands were held to communicate un- 
 cleanness to all IikkI (excepting fruit) which they 
 touched, it was deemed that there was no secu- 
 rity against eating unclean food but by iilwayi
 
 IS 
 
 ABNAIM. 
 
 wag'iiiig ine lianJ? cerenionially l>efore toiicliing 
 any meat. We say ' ceremonially,' because 
 ',liis article refers only to ceremonial wasliing'. 
 Tlie Israelites, who, like other Orientals, fed with 
 their fingers, washed tlieir hands before meals, 
 for tlie sake of cleanliness [Washing]. But these 
 customary washings were distinct from the cere- 
 monial alilntions, as they are now among the Mos- 
 lems. There were, indeed, distinct names for 
 fhem. The formei- was called simply n?''t33, or 
 Kashniq, in wliich water was poured upon the 
 hands; tiie latter was called T\7'''2,'0,phtnging,he- 
 «ause the hands were p/unr/ed in water (Light- 
 foot, on Mark vii. 4). It was tliis last, namely, the 
 ceremonial ablution, which the Pharisees judged 
 to be so necessary. When therefore some of that 
 sect remarked that our Lord's disci])les ate ' with 
 unwaslien hands ' (MariC vii. 2), it is not to be 
 uiiderst(K)d literally that they did not at all wash 
 t eir h mds, but that tiiey did not jylunrje them 
 ceremonially according to their own practice. 
 And thi-; was expected from them only as the 
 disciples of a religion? teacher ; for ttiese refme- 
 nients were not practised by the class of j)eople 
 from wtiich tiie disciples were chiefly drawn. 
 T le •• wonder was, that Jesus had not inculcated 
 this observance on his followers, and not, as some 
 have fancied, tiiat he had enjoined them to neg- 
 lect what hatl l)een their j)revious jiractice. 
 
 In at least an ecpial degree the Pharisees mul- 
 tiplied tiie ceremonial pollutions which required 
 the ablution of inanimate objects — ' cups and 
 pots. In-azen vessels and tables ;' the rules given 
 in the law (Lev. vi. 28; xi. 32-36; xv. 23) 
 l)eing extended to these multiplied contamina- 
 tions. Articles of earthenware which were of 
 little value were to be l)roken ; and those of 
 inetal and wood were to be scoured and rinsed 
 with water. All these matters are fully described 
 jy Buxtorf, I/ightfoot, Gill, and other writers 
 oi' the same class, who present many striking 
 illustrations of the passages of Scripture which 
 refer to them. The Mohammedan usages of 
 ttl)lution, which of!er many striking analogies, are 
 fully detailed in the third book of the Mischat 
 ul Masabih, and also in ])"Ohsson"s Tableau, 
 liv. i. chap. i. 
 
 ABNAIM (n*33X). This word Is the .dual 
 of pX, a stone, and in tliis form only occurs twice, 
 Exod. 1. IG, and Jer. xviii. 3. In the latter passage 
 it undeniably means a 2yotter' s icheel ; but what 
 it denotes in the former, or how to reconcile with 
 the use of the word in the latter text any interpre- 
 tation which can be assigned to it in the former, 
 is a question whicii (see Rosenmiiller in loc.) has 
 mightily exercised tiie ingenuity and patience 
 of critics and philologers. The meaning ap])ears 
 to have been douittful even of old, and the ancient 
 versions are much at variance. The LXX. evades 
 the diflSculty l)y the general exjiression orav Sxri 
 vohs Tw TiKTiLV, ' wlieu tliey are about to lie de- 
 livered, ' and is followed by tlie Vulgate, ' et partus 
 tcmpxii rdveiierit ;' but our version is more de- 
 fniite, and lias 'and see tliem'ujjon the stools.' 
 This goes upon the notion tliat tlie word denotes 
 a particular kind of open stool or chair con- 
 stnictfil for the puqiose of delivering ])regnant 
 womei . The usages of *lie Kast do not, however, 
 acquaint us with any sucli utensil, the emjiloy- 
 Tient of wliich. indeed, is not in accorda^ice with 
 
 ABNER. 
 
 the simple manners of ancent times. Othem, 
 therefore, sujipose the word to denote stone oi 
 other bathing trouglis, in which it was usual to 
 lave new-boiTi infants. Tliis conjecture is so 
 far probable, that the midwife, if inclined ta 
 obey tlie royal mandate, could then destroy the 
 child witliout check or observation. Accordingly, 
 this inteqnetation is preferred by Geseni\is (The- 
 aaitr. a. v. pX), quoting in illustration The- 
 venot (Itin. ii. 9S), who states ' that tlie kings of 
 Persia are so afraid of being dejirived of that 
 ])ower which they af)use, and are so apprehensive 
 of being dethroned, that they cause the male 
 children of their female relations to be de- 
 stroyed in the stone bathing-troughs in which 
 newly-horn children are laved.' The question, 
 however, is not as to the existence of the 
 custom, but its application to the case in view. 
 Professor Lee treats the jjreceding opinions with 
 little ceremony, and decides nearly in accordance 
 with the LXX. and other ancient versions, none 
 of which, as he remarks, say anything about 
 wash-pots, stools, or the like. He thcTi gives 
 reasons for luiderstanding the command of Pha- 
 raoh thus: ' Observe, look carefully on the two 
 occasions (i. e. in which either a male or female 
 chilli is boni). If it be a son, then,' &c. We 
 may add that this is a suljject on which some 
 light may possibly be thrown at a future day 
 by the monuments of Egy]it, in which the an- 
 cient manners of that country are so minutely 
 portrayed. 
 
 ABNER CIJ^N or ^y3^?, father of light; 
 Sept. 'Alievfrip), the cousin of Saul (being the son 
 of his uncle Ner), and the commander-in-chief ol 
 his army. He does not come much before us until 
 after the death of Saul, B.C. lOSfi. Then, the expe- 
 rience which he had acquired, and the character 
 for aliility snd decision which he had estal)lished 
 in Israel, enabled him to uphold the falling 
 house of Saul for seven years ; and he might pro- 
 bably have done so longer if it had suited his 
 views. It was generally known that David liad 
 been divinely nominated to succeed Saul on the 
 throne : when, therefore, that monarch was slain in 
 the liattle of Gilboa, David was made king over 
 his own tribe of Judah, and reigned in Hebron. 
 In the other tribes an influence adverse to Judah 
 existed, and was controlle<i chiefly by the tribe 
 of Ephraim. Abner, with great decision, availed 
 himself of this state of feeling, and turned it to 
 the ailvantage of the house to which he belonged, ■ 
 of which he was now the most important surviv- 
 ing member. He did not, however, venture tc 
 ])ro])ose himself as king ; but took Ishboshelh, 
 a surviving son of Saul, whose known imbecility 
 had excused his absence from the fatal light in 
 which his father and brothers j)eris!ied, and made 
 him king over the tribes, and ruled in his name. 
 Ishboshetli reigned in Mahanaim, beyond Jordan, 
 and David in Hebron. A sort of desultory 
 warfare arose between them, in which the ad- 
 vantage a])]iears to have been always on tttt 
 side of David. The only one of the engagements 
 of which we have a particular account is that 
 which ensued when Joab, Davi(i's general, and 
 Aliner, met and fought at (xibeon. Aliner wai 
 liea'en and fled for his life; l)ut was pursued 
 by Asaliel, the brother of Joab and AbishaL. 
 who was ' swit't of fn"<^ as a wild roe.' Alioer.
 
 ABNER. 
 
 dreading a biood-feud with Joab, for whom he 
 teems to have entertained a sincere resjiect, en- 
 treate<l A-saliel to desist from the pursuit : but 
 6nding that he was still followed, and that his life 
 was in danger, he at length ran his pursuer thniugh 
 the body by a back thrust with tlie jK)inted heel of 
 his apear (2 Sam. ii. 8-32). Tliis put a strife of 
 blood between the two foremost men in all Israel 
 (after Da^id); for the law of honour wiiich had 
 from times before the law prevailed among the 
 Hebrews, anil which still prevails in Arabia, ren- 
 dered it the conventional iluty of Joab to a\ enge 
 tlie blood of his brotlier upon tlie perst>n by whom 
 he had been slain [Bi.ocd-Revenge]. 
 
 As time went on, Abner had occasion to feel 
 more strongly that he was himself not only tlie 
 chief, but the only remaining prop of the house of 
 Saul : and this conviction, acting upon a proud 
 and arrogant spirit, led him to more presiuiiptuous 
 conduct than even the mildness of the feeble 
 Ishbosheth could suffer to pass without question. 
 He took to his own harem a woman who had 
 heen a concubine-wife of Saul. This act, from 
 the ideas connected with the harem of a deceased 
 king [Harem], M'as not only a great impro- 
 priety, but was open to the suspicion of a political 
 design, which Abner may very jwssibly have en- 
 tertained. A mild rebuke from the nominal king, 
 however, enraged him greatly ; and he plainly 
 declared that he would henceforth abandon his 
 cause and devote himself to the interests of 
 David. To excuse this desertion to his own 
 mind, he then and on other occasions avowed his 
 knowledge that tlie son of Jesse iiad been appointed 
 by ttie Lord to reign over all Israel : but he 
 appears to have been unconscious that tiiis avowal 
 exjiosed his previous conduct to more censure than 
 it offered excuse for his present. He, however, 
 kept iiis word with Ishliosheth. After a tour, 
 during wViich he explained his present views to 
 the elders of the tribes which still adhered to tiie 
 house of Saul, he repaired to Hebron with autho- 
 rity to make certain overtures to David on their 
 t)ehalf. He was received with great attention 
 iind respect ; and David even thougiit it prudent 
 bo promise that he should still have the chief com- 
 mand of the armies, wlien the desired union of 
 the two kingdoms took place. Tlie political ex- 
 pediency of this engagement is very clear, and to 
 that expediency the interests and claims of Jotib 
 were sacrificed. That distinguished personage 
 fcap|(ened to be absent from Hebron on service at 
 the time, but he returned just as Abner had left 
 the city. He s{>eedily understoo<l what had 
 passed ; and his dread of the sujierior influence 
 which such a man as Abner might establish with 
 Oavid, quickened his remembrance of the ven- 
 geance which his brother's blood required. His 
 Eurpose was promptly fonned. Unknown to the 
 ing, but apparently in Itis name, he sent a 
 message after Abner to call iiim l)ack ; and as he 
 returned, Joab met him at the gate, and, leading 
 him aside, as if to confer j)eaceably and privately 
 with him, suddenly thrust his sword into his body 
 (b.c. 1018), The lamentations of David, the 
 public mourning which he ordered, and the fu- 
 neral honours which were pai<l to the remains of 
 Abner, the king himself following tlie bier as chief 
 mourner, exonerated him in public 0])inion from 
 aavirg bei-n privy to this assassination. As for 
 foal big pflvilege as a blood-avenger must to a 
 
 ABNET. 
 
 19 
 
 great extent have justified liis treacherous act in 
 tlie opinion of the jieople ; and that, together with 
 his iiidiu'rice with tlie anuy, screened him from 
 punisiiment (2 Sam. iii. G-31IJ. 
 
 For the following interesting elucidation of 
 David's lament over Abner, we are indebted to a 
 learned and higiily valued contributor. 
 
 [David's short but empliatic lament o\er Al> 
 ner (2 Sam. iii. 33) may be rendered, witii stricfei 
 adherence to the /(fim of the original, as fol- 
 lows : — 
 
 'Should Abner die as a villain dies? — 
 Th)' hands — not bound, 
 Thy feet — not brouglit into fetters : 
 As one falls Ijefore the sons of wickedness, 
 fellest thou ! ' 
 As to the syntactical structure of tliese lines, it 
 is important to obseive that the second and third 
 lines are two propositions of state belonging to 
 the last, which describe the condition ,'n tchlch 
 he was when he was slain. Tliis kinil of propo- 
 sition is marked l)y the stibjcct being jilaced //r«^ 
 and by the verb generally tieconiiiig a participle. 
 On the right knowledge of tliis structure the 
 beauty and sense of many passages altogether 
 depend ; and the common ignorance of it is to 
 be ascribed to the circumstance, that the study 
 of Hebrew so very seldom readies bpyon<i the 
 vocabulary into the deejier-seated peculiarities c' 
 its coiistrnctlon. (See Ewalds Ilebr. Grant 
 §556.) As to the sense of the worils, J. D. Michaelis 
 (in his Uebersetzimg des Alten Test, init AKincr- 
 kunge7i fiir Ungelehrte) saw that tiie point of 
 this indignant, more than sorrowful, lament, 
 lies in the inode in which Abner was slain. 
 Joab professed to kill him ' for the blood of 
 Asahel iiis brother,' 2 Sam. iii. 27. But i!' a 
 man claimed bis brother's blood at fJie liatid <A 
 his murderer, the latter (even if he fled to the altar 
 for refuge, Exod. xxi. 14) would have lieen deli- 
 vered up (bound, hand an<l fivit, it is assumed) 
 to tlie avenger of blood, who would tlien possess 
 a legal right to slay him. Now Joab not only 
 liad no title to claim the right of the Goel, ai 
 Asahel was killed under justifying circumstance* 
 (2 Sam. ii. 19); but, while jiretending to exer- 
 cise tJie avenger's right, he took a lawless and 
 private mode of satisfaction, and committed a 
 murder. Hence David charged him, in allusion 
 to this conduct, with 'shedding the blood of war 
 in peace' (1 Kings ii. 5); and hence he expressej 
 himself in this lament, as if indignant that 
 llie noble Aimer, instead of being surrendered 
 with the formalities of the law to meet an 
 authorized jienalty, was treacherous! \' stabbed 
 like a wortliless fellow by the bands of an 
 assassin. — J. N.] 
 
 ABNET (l33aK). As this word can lie haced 
 to no nxjt in fiie Hebrew language, and as U 
 occurs in the narrative immediately after the 
 departure from Egyjjt, it is reasonably supjKxed 
 by Professor Lee to be Egyjitian, in op]K)sifion 
 however to Hottinger, who refers it to the Persic, 
 and to Gesenius, who finds it in liie Sanscrit. It 
 means a band, a. bandage ; and from the placet 
 in which it occurs, it api)ears to have Uvn made 
 of fine linen variously wrought, an<i used to ((ind 
 as a girdle about the Ixnly of {lersons in authority 
 especially the Jewish jiriest'f (Exod. xxix. ft, 
 xxviii. 39 ; xxxix. 29 ; Lev viii. 13 ■ Isa. xxn
 
 w 
 
 ABOMINATION. 
 
 21). Tliese girdles may be considered as fairly 
 ce'jresented 1 y those which we observe on such 
 persons in the Egyptian i)ainting3. 
 
 ABOMINATION (H^P^R and Y'ip^ ; Sept. 
 and New Test. — e.g. Matt. xxiv. 15 — ^SeXvyfm, 
 for both). Tliese words describe generally any 
 object of detestation or dis^ist (Lev. xviii. 22 ; 
 Beut. vii. 25) ; and are applied to an impure or 
 detestable action (Ezek. xxii. 11; xxx. 26; Mai. 
 ii. 11, &c.); to any thing causing a ceremonial 
 poliution (Gen. xliii. 32; xlvi. 31 ; Deut. xiv. 3) ; 
 but more especially to idols (Lev. xviii. 22 ; xx. 
 13 ; Deut. vii. 26 ; 1 Kings xi. 5, 7 ; 2 Kings 
 xxiii. 13) ; and also to food offered to idols (Zech. 
 ix. 7) ; and to filth of every kind (Nahum iii. 6). 
 Tliere are two or tliree of the texts in whicli tlie 
 word occurs, to which, on account of their peculiar 
 interest or difficulty, especial attention has been 
 drawn. The f.rst is Gen. xliii. 32 : ' The Egyp- 
 tians miglit not eat bread with the Hebrews ; 
 for that is an abomination (n^VIH) unto tlie 
 Egyptians.' This is best explained l)y the fact 
 that the Egyyitians considered tliemselves cere- 
 jnonially defiled if they ate with rt?«y strangers. 
 Tlie jjrimary reason appears to have been that the 
 cow was the most sacred animal among the Egyp- 
 tians, and tlie eating of it was abliorrent to tliem^ ; 
 whereas it was lioth eaten and sacrificed by the 
 Jews and roost !?ther nations, who on that account 
 were aljoniinable in their eyes. It was for this, as 
 we leain from Herodotus (ii. 41), tJiat no Egyptian 
 wan or woman would kiss a Greek on the mouth, 
 or would use the cleaver of a Greek, or his spit, or 
 his dish, or v.ould taste the flesh of evtm clean beef 
 (that is, of oxen) that liad Ijeen cut with a Grecian 
 carving-knife. It is true tliat Sir J. G. Wilkinson 
 (^Anc. Egyptians, iii. 35S) ascribes this to the re- 
 ougnance of the fastidiously clean Egyptians to 
 the comjiaratlvely foid liabits of their Asiatic and 
 «>dier neighljours : but it set :ns scarcely fair to 
 take th(> ^ae.lf of the father of h. story, and ascrifie 
 
 ^BOMINATIO^:. 
 
 to them any other than the very satlsfac'ory rca$on 
 which lie assigns. We collect tlien that it wa* 
 a.s foi'eii/ners, not pointedly as Hebrews, tiiat ii 
 was an abomination for fiie Egyptians to eat with 
 the brethren of Joseph. The Jews themselvc* 
 subsequently exemplified the same practice; for 
 in later times they held it unlawful to eat or 
 drink with foreigners in their houses, or even to 
 enter their houses (John xviii. 28 ; Acts x. 28 ; 
 xi. 3) ; for not only were the houses of Gentiles 
 unclean {Mishn. Oholoth. IS, § 7), but they them- 
 selves rendered unclean those in whose houses 
 they lodged (Maimon. Miahcab a. Morheb, c. 
 12, § 12); which was carrying the matter a step 
 further than the Egyptians (see also Mitzvoth 
 Torn, pr. 14S). We do not however trace these 
 examples before the Captivity. 
 
 Tlie second passage is Gen. xlvi. 34. Joseph 
 is telling his brethren how to conduct theroc 
 selves when introduced to the king of Egypt; 
 and he instructs them that when asked concern- 
 ing their occupation they should answer : ' Thy 
 servants" trade hath been about cattle from our 
 youth even until now, both we and also our 
 fathers.' This last clause has emjihasis, as show- 
 ing that they were hereditary nomade pastors ; 
 and the reason is added : 'Tliat ye may dwell in 
 the land of Goshen, — Jor everij shepherd is an 
 abomination unto the Egyptians.' In the former 
 instance they were 'an abomination ' as strangera, 
 with whom t!ie P2gyptians cou.d not eat ; liere they 
 are a further abomination as nomade a^iepherds, 
 whom it was certain that the Egyptians, for that 
 reason, would locate in the border land of Goshen, 
 and not in the heart of the country. That it wag 
 nomade sliejiherds, or Bedouins, anti not simply 
 shepherds, who were abominable to the Egyptians, 
 is evinced by the fact that the Egyptians them- 
 selves paid great attention to the rearing of cattle. 
 This is shown by their sculptures and paintings, 
 as well as bv ■'he offer of this very king of Egyjit 
 to make sucn of Jacob's sons as were men o( 
 activity' overseers of his cattle' (xlvii. 6). Eoi 
 this aversion to nomade pastors two reasons are 
 given ; and it is not necessary that we shovild clioose 
 between them, for both of them were, it is most 
 likely, concurrently true. One is, that the inhabit- 
 ants of Lower and Middle Egypt had pieviously 
 been invaded by, and had remained for many years 
 subject to, a tribe of nomade shepherds [Egipt], 
 who had only of late been expelled, and a native 
 dynasty restoied^the grievous oppression of the 
 Egyptians by these pastoral invaders, and the in- 
 sult with which their religion had been treated. Tlie 
 other reason, not necessarily superseding the former, 
 but rather strengthening it. is, that tlie Egyptians, 
 as a settled and civilized people, detested the law- 
 less and predatory habits of the wandering shep- 
 herd tribes, which then, as now, lioundfd the val- 
 ley of tlie Nile, and occujjied the Arabias. Tlioir 
 constantly aggressive'operations upon the frontier*, 
 and ujTon all the great lines of communication, 
 must, with respect to them, have given intensity to 
 the odium v/itli which all strangers were regarded. 
 If any proof of this were v/aiitmg, it is found in 
 the fact (attested by tl>e Rev. R. M. Macliriar 
 and others) that, sunk as Modern Egypt .s, there 
 is still such a marked and irreconcilable differ- 
 ence of ideas and liahits betweeri the inhabitant* 
 and the Bedouins, whose camps are often in thi 
 near neighbburho'id of tlieir towtis amf village^
 
 ABUMINATlOiN 
 
 ABRAHAM. 
 
 iiiat tlie latter are regiiriled witli dislike and fear, 
 And no tVicndly iiitercow'se exists bctwi-i'ii tlicni. 
 We know that tlie same statu of feelinjf prevails 
 between the settled! inha itanta and the Bedouins 
 Along tlie Tigris and Euphratis. 
 
 The third marked use of this word again occui-s 
 (n Egj'pt. Tiie king tells the Israelites to oiler to 
 their god the sacrifices which they desired, with' 
 out going to the desert tor that pur]K)se. To which 
 Moses objects, tiiat they shoulil liave to --acrilice to 
 tl>e Lord ' the abomination of the lif/i/ptian.i,' 
 who would thereby be highly exas|)erated against 
 thtm (Exod. viii. 2-5, 2()). A reference back to 
 tlie hrst explanation shows that this ' abomination' 
 was the cow, the only animal which all the Egyp- 
 tians agreed in holding sacred ; whereas, in the 
 great saeriKce which the Hebrews projwsed to 
 bold, not only would hcifeis be oflered, but tlie 
 people woiilil feast upon their (lesh. 
 
 The Abomination ok Dksoi.ation. In 
 Dan. ix. 27, DOt^'D |'1pt^•; literally, ' t/te abomi- 
 natiun of the desolatcr, which, without doubt, 
 means the idol or idolatrous, apparatus which the 
 desolater of Jerusalem sliould establish in the holy 
 place. This appeal's to have been a prediction of 
 tlie pollution of the temple by Antiochus E])i]jhanes, 
 who caused an idolatrous altar to be built on tlie 
 altar of bunit olferiiigs, whereon unclean things 
 were offered to Jupiter Olympius, to whom the 
 temple itself was dedicated. Josephus distinctly 
 refers to this as the accomplishment of Daniel's 
 prophecy ; as does the author of the first bixik of 
 Maccabees, in declaring that ' they set up the abo- 
 mination of desolation upon tliealtar' — iLKoh/nt.y\(jav 
 rb PSeXvyfia rrjs (prjfiiocTfu^s c'ttI rb 0uaLacrTi)pLov 
 (1 Mace. i. 59 ; vi. 7 ; 2 Mace. vi. 2-.') ; Joseph. 
 Antiq. xii. 5, 4 ; xii. 7, 6). The jilirase is quoted by 
 Jesns, in the fomi of tS» ^SiKvyfia rvjs (pi)ixw<riws 
 t. xxiv. 15), and is applied by him to 
 it was to take place at tlie advance of the 
 Romans against Jerusalem. They who saw ' the 
 abomination of desolation standing in the holy 
 place" were enjoined to ' (lee to tlie mountains.' 
 And this may with probaliility be leftiied to the 
 aUvance of the Roman army against the city with 
 their image-crowned standards, to which idolatrous 
 honours were jiaid, and which the Jews regarded 
 as idols. The unexjiected retreat and discom- 
 fiture of the Roman Ibrces aflbriled such as were 
 mindful of our Saviour's prophecy an opportunity 
 of obeying the injunction which it contained. 
 Tliat the Jews themselves regarded the Roman 
 standards as abominations is shown by the (act 
 that, in deference to their known axersion, the Ro- 
 man soldiers quartered in Jerusalem forbore to 
 introduce their standards into the city : and on 
 one occasion, when Pilate gave orders that they 
 should be carried in by niglif, so much stir was 
 made in the matter by tiie principal inhabitants, 
 that for the sake of peace tiie governor was event- 
 ually induced to give up the jxiint (Joseph. An- 
 tiq. xviii. 3. 1). Tliose however wlio suppose 
 tliat ' the holy place' of the text must lie the 
 temple itself, may fhid the accompli.ihnieut of llie 
 prediction in the fact that, when t!ie city had been 
 i&ken by the Romans, and the holy house destroyed, 
 the soldiers brought their standards in due form to 
 the temjile, set them up o\er the eastern gate, and 
 offered sacrifice to them (Joseph. Bell. Jxul. vi. 
 6, I) ; for (as Havercamji judiciously notes from 
 Tertulliari, Apol. c. xvi. 1G2) ' almost the entiie 
 
 religion of the Roman eanip consisted in woiship- 
 
 plng the ensigns, swearing by the ensigns, aiuj 
 In [irereiriiig the ensigns betbreall the other g'Mla,' 
 
 Nor was this the last appearance of ' (he abomi- 
 nation of desolation, in the holy pla(H' :" for, not 
 only did Hadrian, with studied insult to the Jews, 
 set up the figure of a boar over the Bethlehem nate 
 of the city (^■Elia Capltollna) wiiich rose ujiori 
 the site and ruins of Jerusalem (Euscb. Chri-ii. 
 1. i. p. 45, ed. 1G5S), l.)ut he erected a temjile Ic 
 Jupiter upon the site of the Jewish temple (Dion 
 Cass. Ixix. 12), and caused an image ot him- 
 self to l)e set up in the part which answered to 
 the most holy place (Niceplionis Callist., Hi. 21;. 
 This was a consummation of all the al;<iinination8 
 which the iniquities oi tlie Jews brought ujwn 
 their holy place. 
 
 ABRAHAM (Dn"!2N, father of a tuult^ 
 tude; Sejit. 'A^paa/J.). flie founder of the Hebrew 
 nation. Uji to Gen. xvil. 4, 5, he is uniformly 
 called Abuam (C^^N. father of ek-^-ation, or 
 hie/ h father ; Sejit. "A/Spc.u), and fhis was 'lis ori- 
 ginal ijanie; but the extende<l form, wtiict; it 
 always afterwards bears, was gi\en to it to niake ': 
 significant of the promise of a numerous posterity 
 which was at the same time made to liini. 
 
 Abraham was a nati\e of Ciuildea, and de- 
 scended, through H<'ber, in the iiiiifii generation, 
 from Sliem the son of Noah. His (afher wasTeiuh, 
 who had two oilier sons, Nahor and Haran. Haian 
 died prematurely 'before his lather.' leaving a son 
 Lot, and two daughters, Mileali atiil Isc.ili. Lot 
 attached himself to his un<-le Aljraham ; Mibah 
 became the wife of iier uncle Nahor; and l-cali. 
 who was also called Saral, became the wile ol 
 Abraham (Gen. xi. 2()-21>: comp. Joseph. Autiq. 
 i. 6, 5) [Iscah]. 
 
 Abraham was bom a.m. 2(10S, b.c. liOfi 
 (Hales, A.M. 325S, B.C. 2153). In 'Ur vX the Chul- 
 dees' (Gen, xi. 2S). The concise history in 
 Genesis states nothing concerning the poition at
 
 3i 
 
 ABRAHAM. 
 
 ABRAHAM. 
 
 nis life jvior to the a<^e of 60; and resj)ecting 
 a person livini^ in times 30 remote do authentic 
 information can lie deriveil from any other source. 
 Tiicre are indeed traditions, l)i'.t they are too 
 manifestly huili up on the foundation of a few 
 obscure int.imations in Scri])tine to l)e entitled to 
 any credit. Thu, it is intimated in Josh. xxiv. 
 2, that Terah iiiid his family 'served other tfoils' 
 beyond tlie Euphrates: and on this has l)een 
 founded tlie i^miance that Terah was not only a 
 worshipper, but a 7naker of idols; that the youthful 
 Abraham, discovering the futility of such gods, 
 destroyed all those his father had made, and jus- 
 tified file act in various conversations and arjju- 
 nieuts with Ti/ah, which we find repeated at 
 len,'th. A^ain, ' Ur of the Chaldees' was the 
 name of the place where Abraham was born, and 
 fiDtn wiiich he went forth to s^o, he knew not whi- 
 Jier, at tlie call of God. Now Ur (T-1X) means 
 /ire; and we may therefore read tliat he came 
 forth from the Jire of the Chaldees; on which has 
 bet'n built the st< ry that Alj'ahum was, for his 
 disbelief in the established idols, cast by king 
 Nimrod into a burning furnace, from v/hich he 
 was by special miracl^> delivered. And to this 
 the premature death of Haran has suggested the 
 addition that he, by way of jjunishment for his 
 disbelief of the truths for which Abraham suffered, 
 was marvellously destroyed by the same fire from 
 wliicii liis brother was still more marvellously 
 preserved. Again, tbe fact that Chaldea was the 
 region in which astronomy was reputed to have 
 been first cultivated, suggested that Abraham 
 brought astronomy westward, and that he even 
 taught tliat science to the Egyptians (Joseph. 
 Antiq. i. 8). These are goodly specimens of tradi- 
 aon-building; and more of them may be found 
 in the alleged history of Abraham by those wlio 
 think them worth the trouble of the search. It is 
 just to Josephus to state that most of these stories 
 are rejected Ijy him, although the tone of some of 
 his remarks is in agreement with them. 
 
 Alri«ough Abraham is, by way of eminence, 
 named ftst, it ajjpears probable that he v»as the 
 youngesr of TeralTs sons, and l)orn by a second wife, 
 when his father was l.'iO years old. Terah was 
 severity years old w'~-;n the eldest son was born 
 (Gen. xi. 32; xii. 4; xx. 12: comj). Hales, i'. 
 107); and that eldest son appears to have l>('i»n 
 Haran, from the fact that his lirothers married lus 
 daughters, and fiiat his daughter Sarai was only 
 ten years younger than his brotlier Aliraham (Gen. 
 xvii'. 17). It is .siiown by Hales (ii. 107), tliat 
 Aliiahani was (50 years old when the family 
 quitted their nafive city of Ur, and went and 
 abode in Charran. The reason for tiiis movement 
 does not appear in the Old Testament. Josephus 
 alleges that Terah could not bear to remain in 
 the place where Haran had died (Antiq. i. 6. .5); 
 wiiile the apocryphal book of Juditii, in con- 
 formity witli the traditions still current among the 
 Jews and Moslems, aflirnis that they were cast 
 forfli fiecause they would no longer woi^ship the 
 gods of the land (Judith v. 6-S). The real cause 
 iranspires in Acts vii. 2-4: 'The God of glory 
 ayipeared to our father Aliraham while he was (at 
 Ur of the Ciialdees) in Mesopotamia, before he 
 dwelt in Charran, and saiil unto liim, Dejiart from 
 thy Uaid, and from thy kindred, and come hitiier 
 to a l^nd (yrjv) whicii / loill shew thee. Then 
 departing from the land of the Chaldees, lie «W«»lt 
 
 in Charran.' This Jirst call is not rec, ded, but 
 only implied in Gen. xii.: and if is distinguished 
 by several pointtnl circumstances from the second, 
 which alo'-e is there mentioned. According!} 
 Abraham do])arted, and his family, including liii 
 aged father, removed with hini. They jirooeeded 
 not at once to the land of Canaan, which in- 
 deed had not been yet indicated to Alnahain 
 as bis destination; but they came to Cliarrari, 
 and tarried at fhat convenient station for fif- 
 teen current years, until Terah died, at the age cA 
 20,'} years. Being free from his filial duties, 
 Abraham, now 75 years of age, received a second 
 and more ]iointeil call to pursue his destination : 
 'Depart from thy land, and from thy kindred, and 
 from thy father s house, unto the land (^"iXrt, 
 rrjv yriu\ which I will shew tliee' (Gen. xii. 1). 
 The difference of the two calls is obvious: in the 
 former tiie land is indefinite, being designed only 
 for a temporary residence ; in the latter it is definite^ 
 intimating a permanent abode. A third condition 
 was also annexed to the latter call, that he should 
 separate from his father's house, an(i leave his 
 brother Nahor's family behind him in Charran. 
 This must have intimated to him that the Divine 
 call was personal to himself, and required that he 
 should be isolated not only from his nation, but 
 from his family. He however took with him h!g 
 nephew Lot, whom, having no .children of his 
 own, he appears to have regarded as his heir, and 
 then went fortii 'not knowing whither lie went' 
 (Heb. xi. 8), but trusting implicitly to the Divine 
 guidance. And it seems to have been the inten- 
 tion of Him by whom he had been called, to op,°n 
 gradually to him the high destinies which awaited 
 him and his race, as we perceive that every suc- 
 cessive communication with which he was fa- 
 voured rendered more sure and definite to him 
 tlie objects for which he liad been called from the 
 land of his birth. 
 
 No jiarticiilars of the journey are given. Abr» 
 ham arrived in the land of Canaan, which he 
 found occujiied by the Canaanites in a large 
 number of small independent communities, wliich 
 cultivated the districts around their several towns. 
 The country was however but thinly ])eo)iled ; 
 and, as in the more recent tim^s of its depopula- 
 tion, it atVorded ample j)asture-grounds for the 
 wandering jiastors. One of that class Alirahani 
 n>ust ha\<; a]ii>eared in their eyes. In Mesopi>- 
 tamia the familv had been jiastoral, l.uf dwelling 
 in towtis and houses, and sending out toe flocks 
 and lierils under the care of shepherds. But thw 
 migratory life to whicli Abraham lad now been 
 called, com])elled him to take to the tent-dwelling 
 as well as the jiastoral life : and the usages which 
 his sul)sequent history indicates are therefore found 
 to present a condition of manners and habits 
 analogous to that which still exists amotig th» 
 nomade [lasforal, or Bedouin tribes of south-west- 
 ern Asia. 
 
 The rich pastures in that part of the country 
 tempted Abraham to form his first encanqiment 
 in the vale t)f Moreh, which lies between the 
 mountains of Ebal and Gerizim. Here the strong 
 faith which had brought the childless man thus 
 far from his home was rewarded by the grand 
 promise: — 'I will make of thee a great nation, 
 and 1 will bless thee and make thy name great 
 and thou shalt be a blessing; and I will blea* 
 them that bless thee, anil ciir»e them that cunc
 
 ABRAHAM. 
 
 tiiee: and in t.»ee sliall all the families of tlie 
 Mrth Ije blessed ' (Gen. xii. 2, 3). It was fnitlier 
 promised that to his jwsterity should be given the 
 rich heritage of that beautirul country into which 
 he had come (v. 7). It will he seen that this 
 important ])romise consisteil of two parts, the 
 one temporal, the other spiritual. The U'm/>oral 
 was the promise of posteritj-, tliat he should 
 be blessed himself, and be the founder of a 
 gr€ut nation ; the spiritual, that lie should be 
 the chosen ancestor of the Redeemer, wlio ha<l 
 been of old obscurely jiredicted (Gen. iii. 1')), 
 and tliereby become the means of blessing all 
 the families of the earlii. Tlie implied con- 
 dition on his part was, that he should jjublicly 
 profess the worship of the tnie God in this more 
 tolerant land; and accordingly 'he built there 
 an altar unto the Lord, who ap|ieared unto iiim.' 
 He soon after removed to the district between 
 Bethel and .\i^ where he aUo built an altar to that 
 'Jehovah' whom the w(irld was then hastening 
 to forget. His farther removals tended southward, 
 VJitil at length a famine in Palestine compelled 
 him to withdraw into Egypt, wliere corn abounded. 
 Here his aj)[jrehension that the beauty of his wife 
 Sarai might bring him into danger with the dusky 
 Egyptians, overcame his faith and rectitude, and 
 he gave out that she was his sister. As he had 
 feared, the ! €auty of tlie fair stranger excited the 
 admiration of tlie Egyjitians, and at length 
 reached the ears of the king, who forth witli ex- 
 ercised his regal right of calling her to his harem, 
 and to tliis Abraham, appearing as only her brother, 
 was obliged to submit. As, however, tlie king liad 
 no intention to act harslily in the exercise of his 
 privilege, he loaded Abraham with valuable gifts, 
 Buited to his condition, being chiefly in slaves 
 and cattle. Tliese presents could not have been 
 refused by him without an insult wiiich, under 
 all the circumstances, llie king did not deserve. A 
 grievous disease inllicted on Pharaoh and ids liouse- 
 hold relieved Sarai from her danger, by revealing 
 to the king that she was a married woman ; on 
 which he sent for Abraham, and, after rebuking 
 him for his conduct, restored his wife to liim, and 
 recommended him to withdraw from the country. 
 He accordingly returned to the land of Canaan, 
 much richer than when he left it ' in cattle, in 
 lilver, and in gold* (Gen. xii. 8; xiii. 2). 
 
 Lot also iiad much increased his possessions : 
 and soon after tlieir return to their previous sta- 
 tion near Bethel, the disputes between their re- 
 spective siiepherds about water and pasturage 
 soon taught them that they had better separate. 
 The recent jiromise of j)osterity to Aitraham liim- 
 •elf, althougii his wife had been accounted barien, 
 probably tended also in some degree to weaken tlie 
 tie by wliich the vmcle and nej)hew liad hitherto 
 been united. The subject was iiroaciied by Abra- 
 ham, wdio generously conceded to Lot tlie choice 
 of pasture-grounds. Lot chose the well-watered 
 plain in wliich Sodom and other towns were situ- 
 ated, and removed thither [Lot]. Thus was ac- 
 complished the dissolution of a connection which 
 had been Ibrmed before the promise of cliildren 
 wag given, and the disruption of wliich ajipears to 
 have been necessary for that comjilete isolation of 
 the coming race which the Divine puqxise re- 
 quired. Immediately a*'*erwards the patriarch 
 was cheered and encouraged by a more distinct 
 and formal reiteration of tlie promises which had 
 
 ABRAHAM. 
 
 ti 
 
 been jireviously made to him, of the o^cu])atioo 
 of the land in which he lived by a p.isterity nu- 
 merous as the dust. Not long alter, hi" removed 
 to the pleasant valley of Waiiire, in the :;eigii- 
 bourhood of Hebron (then called Aiba), and 
 pitched his tent undera terebinlh iv< c ((it'll, xiii.j. 
 
 It a})])ears that fourteen years belDie this time 
 the south and east of Palestine had been invaded 
 by a king called ('hetlorlaomer, fioui bt yuiid the 
 Euphrates, who brought several of the Muall di»- 
 united slates of those tjuaiti'is under tribute. 
 Among them weie the live ('ities of thi Plain of 
 Sodom, to ivliieh Lot had witlidrawi This bunleii 
 was bonie impatiently by tliese stares, and they 
 at lengtii withlield their tribute. This brougiit 
 ujion them a ravaging visitation from C'ied<ala- 
 onier and four other (perhaps triljutarvy kings, who 
 scoured the wliole country east of the Jonlan. and 
 endetl by defeating the king^i of tlic plain, plun- 
 dering their towns, and carrying the jieoplc aviay 
 as slaves. Lot was among the sull'eiers. When 
 tiiis came to tlie ears of Abraham, he immediately 
 armed such of his slaves as were (it for war, in 
 number .318, and being joined by the friendly 
 Amoritish cliicfs, Aner, Eshcol, and Mamie, pur- 
 sued tiie retiring invaders. They were overtaken 
 near the springs of the Joi-dan ; and their camp 
 being attacketl on opjwsite sides by night, they 
 were thrown into disorder, and fled. Abraham 
 and ids men pursued them as far as tiic neigh- 
 bouriiood of Damascus, and then retunjed with a*! 
 the men and goods wliich had been taken away. 
 Although Abraham had no doubt been chiefly 
 induced to undertake this exploit by liis regard 
 for Lot, it involved so large a benefit, that, as the 
 act of a sojourner, it must have tended greatly to 
 enhance the character and iiower of the [wtriarch 
 in the view of the inhabitants at large. In (act, we 
 afterwards lind him treated by them with high 
 resjiect and ccnsideratior.. Whsn they had ar- 
 rived as far as Salem oti their return, the king o( 
 that jilace, Melciii/e<!ek, wiio was one of the few 
 native princes, if not tiie oidy one, who retained 
 the knowledge and worship of ' the Most Iligli 
 God,' whom Abraham served, came forth to meet 
 them with refreshments, in acknowledgment for 
 wiiicii, and in recognition of his character, Abra- 
 ham presented him witli a tenth of the spoils. B\ 
 strict right, founded on the war usages which still 
 subsist in Arabia (Burckhardt's A'cfei-, p. 07_;, 
 the i-ecovered goods became the ])ro|)eity of Aliia- 
 ham, and not of those to whom tiiey oiiginally 
 belonged. This was acknowledge<l by the king 
 of Sodom, who met the victors in the valley near 
 Salem. He said, 'Give me the jieisoiLs, and 
 keep the goods to thyself.' But v.itii becdmiinr 
 jiiide, and with a ilisinieresfedness which in that 
 country wouUl now be most unusual in similar 
 circumstances, he answered, ' I have lif'ttd up 
 mine hand [i.e. I have swoni] unto J»h(ivah, the 
 most high God, that I will not take I'n.m a liucad 
 even to a sandal-thong, and that I will not t.die 
 any thing that is thine, lest thou skuddcst my, 
 I have made Abram rich ' ((ieii. xiv.). 
 
 Soon alter his return to Maiiire the faith oi 
 Abraham was rewarded aiul encouraged, not on?y 
 by a more distinct and detailed repetition (<f thw 
 jnomises foimerly made to him, but by llie cot- 
 finnation of a solemn covenant contracted, at 
 nearly as might be, 'after the manner nf men' 
 [Covknant] between him and God. It »vas now
 
 li 
 
 ABIIAHAM. 
 
 ABRAHAM, 
 
 d)a! lif* first imilcvstoiMl tluit hi« nnnnixcd jiDsteiify 
 were fo irro.v iij) iiihi a nation i fxlf-r l..>roi|4i) lM)nd- 
 agp ; am! j!i,ir, in -lOl) years afu-r (or, sfiictly, 
 4l>5 ypiiH, counting IVoni tlie liiilli of Isaac to 
 the Kxalf), thoy should come forth Irom that 
 bandage as a nation, to take jKis-y'^sian of tlie 
 la:)d ill which he soj mrned (Gpn. x\v.\ 
 
 Alter ten years' residence in Canivin (b.c.1913), 
 Sarai, l)ein<» then 75 year* ohl, and having- long 
 been a(*o!iiited barren, chose (o ])Uf her own in- 
 t?n)retatioD iii',(?n the promised f)lessing of a pro- 
 geny K) Abraham, slid persuaded him to take 
 her \vom:ui -slave Ha-rar, an Egyptian, as a se- 
 conilary or conciil)ine-\vife, with the view that 
 whatever cliild irii'^Ut jiroceed from this imion 
 should be acconiifed lier own [Kauau]. The 
 son who was born to Abraham by Hagar, and who 
 received the name of Ishmael [Ishmaei.], was ac- 
 cordingly brought lip as the heir of his i'atlier and 
 of the iir.iniises (Gen. xvi.}. Thirteen years after 
 (B.C. liKXl), when Abraham was 99 years old, he 
 ■'vas favoiued with .still more explicit declarations 
 of the Divine purposes. He was reminded that 
 the promi.-ie to liim was that he should be the 
 father of many nations ; and to indicate this in- 
 tention his name was new changed (as before de- 
 scriljed) from Abram to Abraham. The Divine 
 Being then solemnly renewed the covenant to be a 
 God to him and to the race that should s]iring from 
 him ; and in token of that covenant directed that he 
 and his should receive in Jheir flesh the sign of cir- 
 cumcision [Circumcision]. Abundant blessings 
 were jiromised to Ishmael ; but it was then first an- 
 nounced, in distinct terms, that the heir of the spe- 
 cial promises was not yet bom, and that the barren 
 Sarai, then 90 years old, should twelve months 
 thence be his mother. Then also her name was 
 changed from Sarai to Sarah (the princess) ; and to 
 commemorate the laughter with which the prostrate 
 "patiiarch received such strange tidings, it was di- 
 rected that the name of Isaac (he laughed) .should 
 be given to tlie future child. The very same 
 day, in obedience to the Divine ordiiiance, Abra- 
 ham himself, his son Ishmael, anil his house- 
 bom and purchased slaves were all circumcised 
 (Gen. xvii.). 
 
 Three months after this, as Abraham sat in his 
 tent door during the heat of the day, lie saw three 
 travellers apjiroaching, and hastened to meet them, 
 and hospitably pressed ujwn tliem refresliment 
 and rest. They assented, and under the sliade of 
 a terebinth tree partook of the abundant fare 
 which the patrianh and his wife provided, while 
 Abraham himself stood l)y in respectful attend- 
 ance. - From the manner in wliich one of tlie 
 Biiangers sjioke, Abraham soon gathered that his 
 visitants were no other than the Lord himself and 
 two attendant angels in human form. The pro- 
 mise of a s.in by Sarah was renewed ; and when 
 Sarah her.self, who overheard this within the tent, 
 laugled inwardly at the tidings, wliich, on account 
 of her great age, she at first tlisbelieved, she in- 
 curred the striking rebuke, ' Is any thing too hard 
 for Jehovah'.*' The strangers then addressed them- 
 selves to their jounvv, and Abraham wiilked some 
 way with them. The tv/o angels went forward 
 in the direction of S.idom, while the Lord made 
 known to him that, for tlieir enormous iniquities, 
 Sodom and the otlier ' cities of tlie plain' were 
 about to be made signal monuments ol' his wrath 
 and of his moral tjovernment. Moved by com- 
 
 jKission and by remembrance of Lot, the patriarcll 
 ventured, reverently but ))er.seve'ingly, lo intflrc«d« 
 for the doomed Sodom ; and at lengtii obtained a 
 promise that, if but ten righteous men were found 
 therein, the whole city .should be saved for their sake. 
 Early the next morning Abraham arose to ascertain 
 the result of this concession : and when lie looked 
 towards Sodom, the smoke of its destruction, rising 
 'like the smoke of a furnace,' made known lo him 
 its terrible overthrow [Suuom). II<; probably 
 soon heard of Lot's ctcape : but the consternaiion 
 which this event inspired in the neighbourhood 
 induced him. almost immediately after, to remove 
 farther oil' into the territories of Abimeloch, king 
 of Gerar. By a most extraortlinary infatuation 
 and lajTse of faith, Abraham allowed himself to 
 stoop to the same mean and foolish prevarication 
 in denying his wife, which, twenty-three years b^ 
 fore, had occasioned him so much 'rouble in Egypt, 
 The result was also similar [Abiiui.ech], except 
 that Abraham answered to the rebuke of the Phi- 
 listine liy stating the fears by which he had been 
 .actuated — atlding, 'And yet indeed she is my 
 sister ; she is the daughter of my father, but not 
 the daughter of my mother; and she liecame my 
 Vt'ife.' This mends the matter very little, since in 
 calling her his sister he designed to be understood 
 as saying she was 7iot his wife. As he elsewhere 
 calls Lot his ' brother,' this statement that Sarah 
 was his ' sister' does not interfere with the proba- 
 bility that she was his niece. 
 
 Tlie .same year* Sarah gave birth to the long- 
 promised son, and, according to pre\ious direc- 
 tion, the name of Isaac was given to him [Is.\ACJ. 
 This greatly altered the position of Ishmael, wha 
 had hitherto ajipeared as the heir both of the tem- 
 poral and the spiritual heritage; wheieas lie had 
 now to share the former, and could not but know 
 that the latter was limited to Isaac. This a)}- 
 pears to have created much ill-feeling botii on his 
 part and tliat of his mother towards the child; 
 which was in some way manifested so pointedly, 
 on occasion of the festivities which attended the 
 weaning, that the wrath of Sarah was awakenetl, 
 and she insisted that both Hagar and her son 
 should he sent away. This was a very hard mat- 
 ter to a loving father: and Abraham was .so much 
 pained that he would jirobably have refused com- 
 ])liance with Sarah's wi.-ili, had he not been ap- 
 prised in a dream that it was in accordance with 
 the Divine intentions respecting both Ishmael and 
 Is;uic. With his habitual uncompromising obe- 
 dience, he then hastened them away early in the 
 moining, with provision for the journey. Tlieir 
 adventures belong to tlie article Hagar. 
 
 When Isaac was about 20 years ohl (u.c. 1R72) 
 it p'eased God to subject the faith of Abraham 
 to a severer trial than it had yet sustained, or that 
 lias ever fallen to the lot of any other mortal man. 
 He was commaniled to go into the mountainous 
 country of Moriali (probably u here the ti niple after- 
 waids stood), and there offer up in sacrifice tlie ton 
 of I: is affection, and the heir of so many hopes and 
 
 * It is, however, supposed by some biblical 
 critics that the ]ireceding adventure with Abime- 
 lech is related out of its order, and took place at 
 an earlier date. Their chief reason is that Sarah 
 was now 90 years of age. But the very few years 
 by which such a sup])osition might reduce this 
 age, seem scarcely worth the discussion [SaramI,
 
 AliHAIlAM. 
 
 promises, wliicli his tlcjitli must nullify. It is pro- 
 Inxhle that human sacnlices already existed; ami 
 as, wlien they did exist, the olleriii^ of an only 
 tr beloved child was considiied the most merito- 
 tious, it may have seemed reasonahle to Ahratiam 
 J lat lie should nut withhold from his own Gi)d the 
 \osfly sacrilice wliicli the heathen olVered to their 
 i liils. The trial anil peculiar dilliculfy lay in the 
 t (n;^ular jwsition of Isaac, and in tlte unlikoliluwd 
 Mat his loss could he sn])])lied. ]5ut Aliraham's 
 'faith shrunk not, assured tliat what (iod had pi>j- 
 mised he would certainly perform, and that he was 
 ahle to restore Isaac to him even from the dead' 
 (Ileh. xii. 17-19), and he rendereda ready, however 
 painful, obedience. Assisted by two of his ser- 
 vants, he prejiarcd wood suitable for the purjiosc, 
 and without delay set out upon his melancholy 
 jomney. On the thinl day lie descried the ap- 
 jwinted place ; and informing his attendants that 
 he and his son would go some distance farther to 
 worship, and then return, he jiroceeded to the spot. 
 To the touching question of his son respecting the 
 victim to be ollered, the patriarch rejilied by express- 
 ing his faith that God himself would provide tlie 
 sacrifice ; and probably he availed himself of this 
 opportunity of acquainting liim with the Divine 
 command. At least, that the communication was 
 made either then or just after is unquestionable ; 
 for no one can suppose that a young man of twenty- 
 five could, against his will, have been bound with 
 cords and laid oui as a victim on the wood of tlie 
 altar. Isaac would most certainly have been slain 
 by his father's uplifted hand, had not the angel of 
 Jehovah inteqjosed at the critical moment to arrest 
 tlie fatal stroke. A ram which had become en- 
 tangled in a thicket was seized and offered ; and 
 a name was given to the ])lace (nj^")^ nilT', 
 Jehovah-Jireh — 'the Lord will provide') allusive 
 to the believing answer which Abraham had given 
 to iiis son's inquiry respecting the victim. The 
 promises Ijefore made to Abraham — of numerous 
 descendants, superior in power to their enemies, 
 and of the Ijlessings which his spiritual progeny, 
 and especially tlie Messiah, were to extend to all 
 mankind — were again contirmed in the most so- 
 lemn manner; lor Jehovah swore by himself 
 (comp. Heb. vi. 13, 17), that such should be the 
 rewards of his uncompromising obedience. Tlie 
 father and son then rejoined their servants, and re- 
 turned rejoicing to Beersheba (Gen. xxi. 19). 
 
 Eight years after (b.c. 1860) Sarah died at 
 the age of 120 years, being then at or near 
 Hebron. This loss first taught Aljiaham the ne- 
 cessity of acquiring possession of a family sepul- 
 chre in the land of his sojourning. His choice 
 fell on the cave of Mach])elah [Machpelaii], and 
 after a striking negotiation with the owner in the 
 gate of Hebron, he ]jurchased it, and had it legally 
 secured to him, with the field in which it stood 
 and the trees tiiat grew thereon. This was the 
 jnly possession he ever had in the Land of Pro- 
 mise (Gen. xxiii.). The next care of Abraham 
 was to provide a suitable wife for his son Isaac. 
 It lias always been the practice among j)astoral 
 tribes to keeji iqi tlio family ties by intermarriages 
 of blood-rela ions (IJurckhardt, Notes, p. 104) : and 
 now Abraham had a further inducement in the 
 desire to ma-ntain the jiurity of the separated race 
 from foreign and idolatrous connections. Pie there- 
 fore sent his aged and confidential steward Elie- 
 ler, imder the bond of a solemn o.'tli to dischirge 
 
 ABRECH. 
 
 U 
 
 his mission faithfully, to renew the intercourse be- 
 tween his faniily and that of his brother Nahor, 
 whom he had left iiehind in C'liairan. He ])roe- 
 pered in his imi<orlant mission [1.->aa(1. ami in 
 due time returned, bringing with him kebckah, 
 the daughter of Nahor's son Bethin'l, ulio hecania 
 the wife of Isaac, and was installed as chief lady 
 of the camp, in the separate tent which Sarati had 
 occujiied (Gen. xxiv.). Some time after Abr.ihaHi 
 himself took a wife named Kefurah, by win in he 
 had several children. These, togetl er with I.sh- 
 niael, seem to have been jiortioned ofl' liv tln-i' 
 father in his lifetime, and sent into the east ana 
 south-east, that tliere might be no danger of their 
 interference with Isaac, tlie divinely a])|!oiiii«'il heir. 
 There was time for this : for Abraham li\ed to 
 the age of 175 years, 100 of which he had spent 
 in the land of Canaan. He illed in b.c. IS'22 
 (Hales, 197^), and was buiied by his two eldes: 
 sons in the family sepulchre which he had pur- 
 chased of the Ilittites (Gen. xxv. 1-10). 
 
 ABRAHAMS BOSOM. There was no name 
 which conveyed to tlie Jews the same associations 
 as that of Abraham. As undoubtedly he was in 
 the highest state of felicity of w'hicli departed 
 spirit.s are capable, ' to be with Abraham ' im- 
 plied the enjoyment of the same felicity ; and ' to 
 be in Abraliam's bosom ' meant to be in repos« 
 and hajijiiness with him. Tlie latter phrase is 
 obviously derived from the custom of sitting or 
 reclining at table which prevailed among the Jews 
 in and before tlie time of Christ [Accubation}. 
 By this arrangement, the head of one person was 
 necessarily brought almost into the bosom of the one 
 who sat above him, or at the top of the triclinium ; 
 and the guests were so arranged that the most 
 favoured were placed so as to bring them into 
 that situation with lesjiect to the host (comp. John 
 xiii. 23; xxi. 20). These Jewish images and 
 modes of thought are amply illustrated by Light- 
 foot, Schoettgen, and AVetstein, who illustrate 
 Scripture from Rabbinical sources. It was quite 
 usual to describe a just person as heing with 
 Abraham, or lying on Abraham's bosom ; and as 
 such images were unobjectionable, Jesus accom- 
 modateil his sjieech to them, to render himself 
 the more intelligible by familiar notions, when, iu 
 the beautiful parable of the rich man and Lazarus, 
 he describes the condition of ihe latter alter death 
 miuer these coiuliiions (Luke xvi. 22, 23). 
 
 ABRECH (■^I'l^N). This word occurs only 
 in Gen. xli. 43, vvheii,' it is used in- proclaiming 
 the authority of Joseph. Something simitar 
 liajipened in the citse of Mordecai ; but then 
 several words were employed (Esth. vi. 11). If 
 the word he Hebrew, it is probably an imjiera- 
 tive of "r|"13 in Hi])hil, and would then mean, as 
 in our \ ersion, ' liow the knee !' We are indeed 
 assured by Wilkinson (/l«c. Egyptimts, ii. 24) 
 that the word ahrek is useil to the jpiesent day 
 by the Aralis, when requiring a camel to kneel 
 and receive its load. But Luther and others rujv 
 pose the word to be a compound of "?]"1'2K, * the 
 father (if the state,' and to be of Chahlee origin. 
 It is however jiri/bably Egyiitiau, anil Dr. Lee 
 is inclined with De Rossi {Ett/m. Ef/i/pt. p. 1) 
 to repair to the Cojitic, in which Aberek or Abrefr 
 means ' bow the head.' It is right to add, that 
 Origen, a native of Egypt, and Jerome, both of 
 whom knew the Semitic languages, concur in tlie
 
 M 
 
 ABSALOM. 
 
 ABSAL )M. 
 
 opinion tlia ". Ahrech means ' a native Egyptian ;' 
 and wlien we consider how important it was tliat 
 Joseph should cease to be regarded as a foreigner 
 [Abomination], it has in this sense an import- 
 ance and signiticance which no other interpreta- 
 tion conveys. It amounts to a proclamation of 
 naturalization, wluch, among such a people as 
 the Egyptians, was essential to enable Joseph 
 to work out the great plan he had undertaken. 
 We believe however that it is not now possible 
 to detennine tlie signiticatiou of the word witli 
 certainty. 
 
 ABSALOxM (ph^"!^, father of peace; Sept. 
 ^A$e(r(Ta\d>fj. ; Vulg. Absalon), the third son of 
 David, and his only son by Maachah, daughter of 
 Talmai, king of Geshur (2 Sam. iii. 3). He was 
 deemed the handsomest man in the kingdom ; and 
 was particularly noted for the profusi(jn of his 
 beautiful hair, which appears to have been re- 
 garded with great admiration ; but of which we 
 can know nothing with certainty, except that it 
 was very fine and very ample. We are told 
 tliat when its inconvenient weight compelled him 
 at times (D''Ov D^D' |*pD does not necessarily 
 mean ' every year,' as in the A.V.) to cut it off", 
 it was found to weigh ' 200 shekels after the 
 king's weight ;' but as this has been interpreted 
 as high as 112 ounces (Geddes) and as low as 7^ 
 ounces (A. Clarke), we may be content to under- 
 stand that it means a quantity unusually large. 
 David's other child by Maachah was a daughter 
 named Tamar, who was also very beautiful. She 
 became tlie object of lustful regard to her half- 
 brother Amnon, David's eldest son ; and Was vio- 
 lated by him. In all cases where polygamy is 
 allowed, we find that the honour of a sister is in the 
 guardianship of her full brather, more even than in 
 that of her father, whose interest in her is consi- 
 dered less peculiar and intimate. We trace this 
 notion even in the time of Jacob (Gen. xxxiv. 6, 
 13, 2), sqq.). So in this case the wrong of Tamar 
 was taken up by Absalom, who kept her secluded 
 in his own house, and said nothing for the present, 
 but brooded silently over the wrong he had sus- 
 tained and the vengeance which devolved upon 
 him. It was not until two years had passed, and 
 wlien this wound seemed to have been healed, that 
 Aljsalum found opportunity for the bloody revenge 
 he had meditated. He then held a great sheep- 
 shearing feast at Baal-hazor near Ephraim, to 
 which lie invited all the king's sons ; and, to lull 
 suspicion, he also solicited the presence of his fa- 
 ther. As lie expected, David declined for him- 
 self, but allowed Amnon and the other princes to 
 attend. They feasted together ; and, when they 
 were warm with wine, Amnon was set upon and 
 slain by the servants of Absalom, according to 
 tlie previous directions of their master. Hon-or- 
 struck at the deed, and not knowing but that 
 they were included in the doom, the other princes 
 took to their mules and Hed to Jerusalem, rilling 
 the king with grief and honor by the tidings which 
 they lirouglit. As for Absalom, he hastened to 
 Geshur and remained there three years with his 
 father-ill-law, king Talmai. 
 
 Now it hajipened that Absalom, with all his 
 faults, was eminently dear to the heart of his father. 
 His beauty, liis spirit, his royal birth, may be sup- 
 posed to have drawn to him tiiose fond paternal 
 ieelings wliich he knew not how to appreciate. At 
 
 all events, David mourned every day af!«f fti« 
 
 banished fratricide, whom a regard for public 
 opinion and a just horror of his crime forbade 
 him to recall. His secret wishes to iiave home 
 his beloved though guilty son were however dis- 
 cerned by Joab, who employed a clever woman of 
 Tekoah to lay a supposed case before him for judg- 
 ment ; and she applied the anticipated decision 
 so adroitly to the case of Absalom, that the king 
 discovered the object and detected tlie interposi- 
 tion of Joab. Regarding this as in some degree 
 expressing the sanction of public opinion, David 
 gladly commissioned Joab to ' call home his ba- 
 nished.' Absalom returned ; but David, still 
 mindful of his duties as a king and father, con- 
 trolled the impulse of his feelings, and declined 
 to admit him to his presence. After two years, 
 however, Absalom, impatient of his disgrace, 
 found means to compel tlie attention of Joab to 
 iiis case ; and through his means a complete re- 
 conciliation was etfected, and the father once 
 more indulged himself with the presence of hia 
 son (2 Sam. xiii. xiv.). 
 
 The position at this time occupied by Absalom 
 was very peculiar, and the view of it enables us 
 to discover how far the general Oriental laws of 
 primogeniture were aflected by tiie peculiar con- 
 ditions of the Hebrew constitution. At the out- 
 set he was the tliird son of David, Amnon and 
 Chileab being his elder brothers. But it was pos- 
 sible that he might even then, while they lived, 
 consider himself entitled to the succession ; and 
 Oriental usage would not have discountenanced 
 the pretension. He alone was of royal de- 
 scent by the side of his mother ; and royal or 
 noble descent by the mother is even now (as we 
 see by the recent instance of Abbas Meerza in 
 Persia) of itself a sufficient ground of preference 
 over an elder brother whose maternal descent ii 
 less distinguished. Tliis circumstance, illus- 
 trated by Absalom's subsequent conduct, may 
 suggest that he early entertained a design upon 
 the succession to the throne, and that the reinovftl 
 of Amnon was quite as much an act of policy ai 
 of revenge. The other elder brother, Chileab, ap- 
 pears to have died : and if tlie claims of Absalom, 
 or rather his grounds of pretension, were so im- 
 portant while Amnon and Cliileab lived, his 
 position must have been greatly strengthened when, 
 on his return from exile, he found liimsclf the eldest 
 surviving son, and, according to tlie ordinary laws 
 of primogeniture, the heir apparent of the crown. 
 Such being his position, and his father being old, 
 it would seem difficult at the first view to assign 
 a motive for the conspiracy against the crown 
 and life of his indulgent fattier, in which we soon 
 after find him engaged. It is then to be consi- 
 dered that the king had a dispensing power, and 
 was at liberty, according to all Oriental usage, 
 to pass by the eldest son and to nominate a 
 younger to the succession. This could not have 
 afiected Absalom, as there is every reason to 
 think that David, if left to himself, would have 
 been glad to have seen the rule of succession take 
 its ordinary course in favour of his best loved 
 son. But then, again, under the jieculiar theo- 
 cratical institutions of the Hebrews, tlie Divine 
 king reserved and exercised a power of dispensa- 
 tion, over which the human king, or viceroy, had 
 no control. The house of David was established 
 as a reigning dynasty; and altJiough the liw oi
 
 ABSALOM. 
 
 primogwiiture was allowed eventiiallj to take in 
 general its due course, the Divine king reserved 
 the power of appointing any member of tliat house 
 whom he miglit jnefer. That power had been 
 exercised in the family of David by the j-reference 
 of Solomon, who was at tiiis time a child, as tlie 
 successor of his father. David had known many 
 years before that liis dynasty was to be established 
 in a son not yet born (2 Sam. vii. 12); and when 
 Solomon was Iwm, he could not be ignorant, 
 even if not specially instructed, that he was the 
 destined heir. Tliis fact must liave l)een known 
 to many others as the child grew up, and jjrobably 
 the mass of the nation was cognizant of it. In 
 this we find a clear motive for tiie rebellion of 
 Absalom — to secure the throne which he deemed 
 to be his right by the laws of primogeniture, dur- 
 ing the liletime of liis father; lest delay, while 
 *~aiting tlie natural term of his days, shoulil so 
 strengthen the cause of Solomon with his years, 
 as to place his succession beyond all contest. 
 
 Tiie line person of Absalom, his su))crior birth, 
 and his natural claim, pre-disposed tlie people to 
 regard his pretensions with favour : and tliis pre- 
 disposition was strengthened by the measures 
 which he took to win tiieir regard. In the first 
 place he insinuated that he was the heir apparent, 
 by the state and attendance with which he ap- 
 peared in public; while that very state the more 
 enhanced the show of condescending sympatliy 
 with whicli he accosted tlie suitors who repaired 
 for justice or favour to the royal audience, in- 
 quired into tlieir various cases, and hinted at tlie 
 fine things which miglit be expected if he were on 
 tl»e tlirone, and had the power of accomplishing 
 his own large and generous purposes. By these 
 influences ' he stole the hearts of the men of Israel ;' 
 and when at length, four years at"ter his return 
 from Geshur, he repaired to Hebron and there 
 proclaimed himself king, the great body of the 
 people declared for him. So strong ran the tide 
 of opinion in his favour, that David found it ex- 
 pedient to quit Jerusalem and retire to Mahanaim, 
 beyond the .fordan. 
 
 When Absalom heard of this, he proceeded to 
 Jerusalem and took ]X)ssession of the throne with- 
 out opposition. Among those who had joined 
 him was Ahithophel, who had been David's coun- 
 sellor, and whose profound sagacity caused his 
 counsels to be regarded like oracles in Israel. 
 This defection alarmed David more than any 
 other single circumstance in the afTair, and he 
 persuaded his friend Hushai to go and join Ab- 
 salom, in the hope that he might be made instru- 
 mental in turning the sagacious counsels of 
 Ahithophel to foolishness. The first piece of 
 advice which Ahitho))hel gave Absalom was that 
 he should puljlicly take possession of that portion 
 of his father's harem which had been left lieliind 
 in Jerusalem. This was not only a mode by which 
 ♦lie succession to the throne might tie confirmed 
 [Abishag : comp. Herodotus, iii. 6S], but in the 
 present case, as suggested by the wily counsellor, 
 this villanous measure would disfx)se the peo])le 
 to throw themselves the more unreservedly into 
 bis cause, from the assurance that no jiossibility 
 of reconcilement between him and his father re- 
 mained. Hushai had not then arrived. Soon after 
 he came, when a council of war was held, to con- 
 ikder the course of (operations to be taken against 
 David, Ahithophel counselled that the king 
 
 ABSALOM S TOMB. 
 
 37 
 
 8/ioiild be inusued that very Jiight, and smittwi, 
 while lie was ' weary and weak handed, and before 
 he Liid time to recover stiengtii.' Husiiai, how- 
 ever, whose object was to gain time for David, 
 sjieciously urged, from the known valour of die 
 king, the possibility and fatal coiiseipipjic*^ of a 
 defeat, and advised that all Israel should be 
 assembled against him in such lince as it would 
 be impossible for him to willisfand. Fatally for 
 Absalom, the counsel of Hushai was jnefenod to 
 that of Ahithophel ; and time was thus given 
 to enable the king, by the help of his inllucntial 
 followers, to coiled his resources, as well as to 
 give the |)eoj-le time to reflect ujion the under- 
 taking in which so many of them had embarked. 
 The king soon raised a large force, which he 
 properly organized and separated into three divi- 
 sions, commanded severally by Joai), Abisha', 
 and Ittai of Gatli. The king iiiiiisclf intended 
 to take (he chief command ; but ll.e peo|)le re- 
 fused to allow liim to risk his valued life, and the 
 command then devolved upon Joab. The battle 
 took place in the liorders of the forest of Kphiaim ; 
 arnl the tactics of Joab, in drawiiij the enemy 
 into the w(X)d, and there liemming tliem in, so 
 that they were destroyed with ease, eveiiiually, 
 under the jirovidence of God, decided tlie action 
 against Absalom. Twenty thousand of his Troops 
 were slain, and the rest fled to their homes. Ab- 
 .salom himself fled on a swift mule; but as he 
 went, the boughs of a terebinth tree caught (he 
 long hair in wiiich he gloried, and he was left 
 suspended tiieie. The charge which David had 
 given to the troops to resjiect the life of Ab- 
 salom prevented any one from slaying liim : but 
 when Joab heard of it, he hastened to the spot, 
 and pierced him through with three darts. His 
 body was then taken down and cast into a pit 
 there in the forest, and a liea]i of stones was 
 raised upon it. 
 
 David's fondness for Absalom was unextin- 
 guished by all that had passe<l ; and as he sat, 
 awaiting tidings of the liattle, at (he gate of 
 Mahanaim, he was ])robably more anxious to 
 learn tiiat Absalom lived, than that the battle 
 was gained ; and no sooner did he hear tijat Ab- 
 salom was dead, than he retired to tlie chanibei 
 above the ga'e, to give vent to his jiateriial 
 anguish. The victors, as they returned, slunk 
 into the town like criminals, when they heard 
 the bitter wailings of the king : — ' O my son 
 Absalom ! my son, my son Absalom ! would 
 God I liad died for thee, O Absalom, my son, 
 my son !' The conseipiences of this weakness — 
 not in his feeling, but in the inability to control 
 it — might have been most dangenais, bad not Joab 
 gone up to him, anil, after sharply rebuking him 
 for thus iliscouraging those who had risked their 
 lives in his cause, induced him to go down and 
 cheer the returning warriors by his jnesence (2 
 Sam. xiii.-xix. S). 
 
 ABSALOM'S TOMB. A remarkable menu- 
 merit licaring this name makes a conspicuous fi»ure 
 in the Valley of Jehoshaphat, outside Jerusalem ; 
 and it has been noticed aii<l described iiy almost 
 all travellers. It is close by the lower bridge over 
 the Kedron. and is a svpiare isolate<l block hewn 
 out from the rocky ledge so as to leave an area 
 or niche around it. The fiody of this moiiumeni 
 IS about 24 feet square, and is ornamented on 
 each side with two columns and two lialf oo
 
 absalums tomb. 
 
 lumns of the Ionic order, with piiasiers at tne 
 corners. The architravi! exhibits triglyplis and 
 Doiic ornaments. The elevation is about 18 or 
 20 feet to the top of the architrave, and thus far 
 it is wholly cut from the rock. But the adjacent 
 rock is here not so high as in the adjoining tomb 
 of Zecharias (so called), and therefore the upper 
 part of the t(,mb has been carried uj) with mason- 
 work of lar^e stones. This consists, first, of two 
 square layers, of which the upper one is smaller 
 than the lower ; and tlien a small dome or cupola 
 runs up into a low spire, which appears to have 
 spread out a little at the top, like an opening 
 flame. Tliis mason-work is perhajis 20 feet high, 
 giving to the whole an elevation of about 40 feet. 
 There is a small tscavated chamber in the body 
 of the tomb, into which a hole had been broken 
 tlirough one of tlie sides several centuries aso. 
 
 Tlie old travellers who refer to tliis tomb, as 
 well as Calmet after them, are satisfied that 
 they find the history of it in 2 Sam. xviii. IS, 
 which states tliat Absalom, having no son, built 
 a monument to keep his name in remembrance, 
 and that this monument was called ' Absalom's 
 Hand ' — that is, index, memorial, or niomcment 
 [Hand]. With our later knowledge, a glance at 
 this and the other monolithic tomb bearing the 
 name of Zecharias, is quite enough to show that 
 they had no connection with the times of the per- 
 sons whose names have been given ix> tliem. ' Tlie 
 style of architecture and embellishment,' ^vrites 
 Dr. Robinson, ' sliows that they are of a later 
 period than most of the otlier countless sepul- 
 chres round about the city, which, with few ex- 
 ceptions, are destitute of architectural ornament. 
 Yet, the foreign ecclesiastics, who crowded to 
 Jerusalem in the fourth century, found tliese 
 
 monuments here ; and of course it became an 
 object to refer tiiem to persons mentioned in tlie 
 Scriptures. Yet, from that day to this, tradition 
 seems r^ever to liave become fully settled as to 
 ihe individuals whose names they should bear. 
 Tlie Itin. Hieros. in a.d. 3133, speaks of tlie two 
 Bonolitliic monuments us the tombs of Isaiali and 
 
 ABSINTHIUM. 
 
 Hezekiah. Adamnus, aliout a.d 697, mention* 
 only one of these, and calls it the toml) of JehO" 
 
 shapnat The historians cf the Crusadet 
 
 appear not to have noticed tliese tombs. The 
 first mention of a tomb of Absalom is by Ben- 
 jamin of Tudela, who gives to the other the name 
 of King Uzziah ; and from that time to the pro- 
 sent day the accounts of travellers have been 
 varying and inconsistent' (^Biblical Researches^ 
 i. 519, 520). The remarks of professed architect* 
 on things requiring a real knowledge of tiie 
 Scriptures ami of the ancient Hebrews, are gene- 
 rally so unsound and trivial tliat little can lie ex- 
 pected from tliem in such matters. Yet witli the 
 clear information on some points wliich we now 
 possess, it is surprising to hear so learned Ln 
 architect as Professor Cockerell speak of thi* 
 alleged tomb of Alisalom as a most precious 
 monument of antiquity, and insist on its un- 
 doubted identity, and its ' perfect correspoiulence 
 with holy writ' (^Athenccum, Jan. 2S, 1843); 
 which holy writ says no more than that Absalom 
 did erect some monument. 
 
 ABSINTHIUM Qh^ivBiov in New Test., l)y 
 which also the Sept. renders the Heb. TVXIJ/ ', 
 A. V. wormwood). This proverbially bitter plant 
 is used in the Hebrew, as in most other languages, 
 metajihorically, to denote the moral bitterness of 
 distress and trouble (Deut. xxix. 17 ; Prov. v 4 ; 
 Jer. ix. 14 ; xxiii. 15 ; Lam. iii. 15, 19 ; Amos v. 
 7 ; vi. 12). Thence also the name given to the 
 fatal star in Rev. viii. 10, 11. Artemisia is the 
 botanical name of the genus of plants in which 
 tlie different species of wormwoods are found. Tlie 
 plants of this genus are easily recognised by the 
 multitude of fine divisions into which the leaves 
 are usually separated, anil the numerous clusters 
 of small, round, drooping, greenish-yellow, or 
 brownish flower-heads with wliicli the branches are 
 laden. It must be understood that our common 
 wormwood (^Artemisia absinthiuni) does not ap- 
 pear to exist in Palestine, and cannot therefore 
 be that specially denoted by the Scriptural term. 
 Indeed it is more than probable that the word ie, 
 intended to apply to all the plants of this class 
 tliat grew in Palestine, rather than to any one of 
 them in particular. The examples of this genus 
 that have been found in that country are : — 1. Ar- 
 temisia Jvdalca, which, if a particular speciea 
 be intended, is probably the Absinthium of Scrip- 
 ture. Rauwoll'l' found it about Betlilelieni, and 
 Shaw in Arabia and tlie deserts of Numidia plen- 
 tifully. This plant is erect and slirubby, with 
 stem about eighteen inches high. Its taste is 
 very bitter ; and both the leaves and seeds are 
 much used in Eastern medicine, and are reputed 
 to be tonic, stomachic, and anthelmintic. 2. Arte" 
 misia Romana, which was found by Hasselquist 
 on Mount Tabor (p. 2S1). This species is lierba- 
 ceous, erect, with stem one or two feet liigh 
 (higher when cultivated in gardens), and nearly 
 upright branches. The plant has a pleasantly 
 aromatic scent ; and the bitterness of its taste if 
 so tempered by the aromatic flavour as scarcely to 
 be disagreeable. 3. Artemisia abrutanum, found in 
 the south of Europe, as well as in Syria and Pales- 
 tine, and eastward even to China. This is ft 
 hoary plant, becoming a shrub in warm countries; 
 and its branches bear loose panicles of nodding 
 yellow flower-heads. It is bitter and aiomab'c^ 
 with a very strong scent. It is not much used m
 
 AliSTlNENCE. 
 
 mediciiip; i)'.i( the biunches are employed in im- 
 r>arting a vtllow dye to wool. 
 
 ABYSS. 
 
 2S 
 
 I Artemisia Judaica.] 
 
 ABSTINENCE is a refraining from the use 
 of certain articles of food usually eaten ; or 
 fi'om all food during a certain time for some 
 particular object. It is distinguished from 
 Temperance, which is moderation in ordinary 
 food ; and from Fasting, which is abstinence 
 from a religious motive. The first example of 
 abstinence which occurs in Scripture is that 
 in which tlie use of blood is forbidden to Noah 
 (Gen. ix. 20) [Blood]. The next is that men- 
 tioned in Gen. xxxii. 32 : ' The children of Is- 
 rael eat not of the sinew which shrank, whicli 
 is upon the liollow of the thigh, unto this daf/, be- 
 cause he (the angel) touched the liollow of Jacob's 
 thigh in the sinew that shrank.' This practice of 
 particular and commemorative abstinence is here 
 mentioned b\' anticipation long after the date of 
 the fact referred to, as the phrase ' imto this day' in- 
 timates No actual instance of tlie practice occurs 
 in the Scripture itself, but the usage has always 
 been kept up ; and to the present day the Jews 
 generally abstain from the whole hind-quarter on 
 account of tlie trouble and expense of extracting 
 the particular sinew (Allen's Modei'n Judaism, 
 p. 421). By tlie law, abstinence from l)lood was 
 confirmed, and the use of the flesh of e\en lawful 
 animals was forbidden, if tlie manner of their death 
 rendered it impossible that they should be, or tin- 
 certain that they were, duly exsanguinated (Exod. 
 xxii. 31 ; Deut. xiv. 21). A broad rule was also 
 laid down by the law, defining wliole classes of 
 animals that might not be ea^en (Lev. xi.) 
 [Animat, ; Food]. Certain parts of lawful ani- 
 mals, as being sacr^ed to the altar, were also inter- 
 dicted. These werfe the large lobe of the liver, the 
 kidneys and the fat upon tiieni, as well as the tail 
 of the 'fat-tailed' sheep (Lev. iii. 9-11). Every- 
 thing consecrated to idols was also forbi(hlen 
 (Exod. xxxiv. 15). In conformity with these rules 
 tlie Israelites abstained generally from food whicli 
 was more or less in use among other people. In- 
 stances of abstinence from allowed food are not 
 ft"eq;ient, excejit in commemorative or afllictive 
 fasts. The forty days' abstineiice of Moses, 
 Elijah, and Jesus are peculiar cases requiring to 
 be sejiarately considered [Fasting]. The j)riesls 
 were commaiuleil to abstain fnim wine previous 
 to their actual ministrations (Lev. x. t)), and tlie 
 same abstinence was enjoined to tiie Nazarites 
 tj:iring tiie wliole jieriod of their separation (Num. 
 vi. 5). A constant abstinence of this kijid was, at a 
 later pel iod, voluntarily undertaken by tlieRechab- 
 ite3(Jer. XXXV. 16,1S). Among tlie early Christian 
 converts there were some who deemed themselves 
 Jiound to adiiere to tiie Mosaical limitations regunl- 
 Ilig food, and tliey accordingly alystained I'roiii 
 
 flesn sacrificed to idols, as well as from animali 
 which the law accounted unclean ; wliile others 
 C(!nteinned tiiis as a weakness, and exulted in the 
 liberty wherewith Christ had made his followers free. 
 This question was repeatedly refeired to St. Paul, 
 who laid down some admirable rules on the 
 subject, the purport of wtiich was, that every one 
 was at liberty to act in this matter accoiding to 
 the dictates of his own conscience; but that the 
 strong-minded had better alistain from the exer- 
 cise of the freedom Ihey jiossessed, whenever it 
 might jirove an occasion of stumbling to a weak 
 brother (Rom. xiv. 1-3 ; 1 Cor. viii.). In another 
 place the same ajiostle reproves certain sectarie.g 
 who should arise, foibi(Uling marriage and en- 
 joining aljstinence from meats wiiich God had 
 created to be received with thanksgiving (1 Tim. 
 iv. 3, 4). The council of tlie apostles at Jeru- 
 salem (tecitied tiiat no other abstinence rcgaidiiig 
 f(Kxl should be imposed upon tiie convcits than 
 ' from meats ofl'ered to idols, liom bko-'d, and fioni 
 things strangled ' (Acts xv. /.2). 
 
 The Essenes, a sect among the Jews which is 
 not mentioned by name in tlie Scri])tuies, led a 
 more abstinent life tlian any lecorded in the sacred 
 books. As there is an account of them els-ewheie 
 [EssENE.s], it is only necessaiy to nmition here 
 tliat they refused all pleasant tixxl, eating iiothintf 
 but coarse bread and drinking only water ; and 
 that some of tiiem abstained from food altogetlier 
 until after tlie sun had set (Pliilo, De ]'ilu C'wt- 
 templativu, p. 65)2, 69(5). 
 
 That abstinence from ordinary food was jiiac- 
 tised by the Jews medicinally is not shiiwn in 
 Scripture, but is more than probabli, not only as 
 a dictate of nature, but as a common jiiactice of 
 their Egyptian ncighliours, who. we are ii<H,rmed 
 by Diodorus (i. S2), ' being persuaded that tin' ma- 
 jority of diseases proceed from indigestion and ex- 
 cess of eating, haa frequent recourse to abstinence, 
 emetics, sliglit doses of medicine, and otlier simple 
 means of relieving the systtni, whicli some jiei>- 
 sons were in the habit of repeating eveiy two or 
 three days.' 
 
 ABYS8 ("APvffffus). The Greek word means 
 literally ^iriihout bottotn,' but actually deep, pro- 
 fottnd. It is usetl in the Sept. iiir tiie Ilelirew 
 Cinn, which we find applied eitlier to the ocean 
 (Gen. i. 2; vii. 11), or to the under world (Ps. 
 Ixxi. 21 ; cvii. 26). In the New Testameul it 
 is used as a noun to describe Hade~, or tlie place 
 of the ilead generally (Rom. x. 7) ; but mor* 
 esjiecially that ])art of Hades in which the .souis 
 of the wicked were supjiosetl to be confined (Luke 
 viii. 31; Rev. ix. 1, 2, 11; xx. 1, ''. ^ comji. 
 2Pct. ii. 4). In the Revelation the authorized 
 version invariably remiers it ' bottomless j»it,' 
 elsewhere ' deep.' 
 
 Most of these uses of the word are explained ly 
 reference to some of tiie cosniological notions 
 which the Hebrews entertained in common with 
 other Eastern nations. It was iielieved that the 
 abyss, or sea of fathomless waters, encompassed 
 the whole earth. The earth floated on the atiyss, 
 of which it covered only a small part. Accord- 
 ing to the same notion, the earth was founded 
 upon the waters, or, at least, had its foundations 
 in the abyss beneath (Ps. xxiv. 2 ; cxxxvi. 6). 
 L'nder these waters, and at the bottom of the 
 abyss, the wicked were leprcsented as groaning_ 
 anil under);oing the |)unishment of tlieir sins.
 
 80 
 
 ABYSSINIA. 
 
 Tiiere were confined the Rephaim — those old 
 giants wlio while living caused surrounding na- 
 tions to tremble (Prov. ix. 18 ; xxix. 16). In 
 those dark regions the sovereigns of Tyre, Baby- 
 lon, and Egypt are described bj' the prophets as 
 undergoing the punishment of their cruelty and 
 pride (Jer. xxvi. 14 ; Ezek. xxviii. 10, &c.). This 
 was ' the deep' into which the evil spirits in Luke, 
 riii. 31, besought that they might not be cast, and 
 which was evidently dreaded by them [Cosiio- 
 DONY ; Haues]. 
 
 The notion of such an abyss was by no means 
 conKned to the East. It was equally entertained 
 by the Celtic Druids, who held that Anntcn (the 
 deep, the low port), the abyss from which the 
 earth arose, was tlie abode of the evil principle 
 (Gwarthawn), and the place of departed spirits, 
 comprehending botli the Elysium and the Tarta- 
 i-us of antiquity. With them also wandering spirits 
 were called Plant annicn, ' the children of the 
 deep' (Davis's Celtic: Researches, p. 175 ; Myth. 
 and Rites of the B. Druids, p. 49). 
 
 ABYSSINIA. 'Tliere is no part of Africa, 
 Egypt being excepted, the history of which is 
 connected with so many objects of interest as 
 Abyssinia. A region of Aljjine mountains, ever 
 difficult of access by its nature anrl peculiar situ- 
 ation, concealing in its bosom the long-sought 
 sources of the Nile, and the still more mysterious 
 origin of its singtdar j)eople, Abyssinia has alone 
 preserved, in the heart of Africa, its peculiar lite- 
 ratuie and its ancient Christian church. \V hat 
 is still more remarkable, it has preserved existing 
 remains of a j)reviously existing and wide-spread 
 Judaism, and witli a language approaching more 
 than any living tongue to the Hebrew, a state of 
 manners, and a peculiar cliaracter of its people, 
 which represent in these latter days the habits 
 and customs of the ancient Israelites in the times 
 of Gideon and of Joshua. So striking is the re- 
 
 g/^mblance between the modem At)yssinians and 
 the Hebrews of old, tliat we can hardly look upon 
 them but as l)ranche3 of one nation ; and if we 
 kiad not convincing evidence to the contrary, and 
 knew not for certain that tiie Abrahamidae ori- 
 ginated in Clraldea, and to the northward and 
 eastward of Palestine, we might frame a very 
 
 ABYSSINIA. 
 
 probable hy{X)thesis, which should bring then 
 down as a band of wandering shepherds from fh« 
 mountains of Habesh (Abyssinia), and identify 
 them with the pastor kings, who, according to 
 Manetho, multiplied their bands of the Pharaohs, 
 and being, after some centuries, expelled thence 
 by the will of the gods, sought refuge in Judea, 
 and built the walls of Jerus<alem. Such an hy- 
 pothesis would explain the existence of an almost 
 Israelitish people, and *he preservation of a lan- 
 guage so nearly ajiproaching to the Hebrew, in 
 intertropical Africa. It is certainlj' untiiie, and 
 we find no other easy explanation of the facts 
 which the history of Abyssinia presents, and 
 particularly the early extension of the Jewish 
 religion and customs through that country ' 
 Prichard's Physical History of Man, pp. 279, 
 280). 
 
 Tiie above paragraph will suggest the groun<l« 
 which appear to entitle Abyssinia to a place 
 in a Biblical Cyclopsdia. But as the country 
 has no physical connection with Palestine — which 
 is, geographically, our central object — a parti- 
 cular description of it is not necessary, and it 
 will suffice to notice the {wints of inquiry sug- 
 gested by the quotation. A brief outline is u. 
 that seems requisite. 
 
 ' Abyssinia ' is an European improvement 
 upon the native name of ' Habksh.' That this 
 country lies to the south of Nubia, which sepa- 
 rates it from Egypt, and to the east of the Gulf 
 of Bab-el-Mandah and the southern jmrt oi" the 
 Arabian sea, will sufficiently indicate its position. 
 Abyssinia is a high country, wliich has been 
 compared by Humboldt to the lofty Plain of 
 Quito. By one of those beautiful synthetical 
 operations of which his writings offer so many 
 examples, the greatest living geographer, Carl 
 Ritter of Berlin, has established, from the writings 
 of various travellers, that the high country of 
 Habesh consists of three terraces, or distinct 
 table-lands, rising one above another, and of 
 which the several grades of ascent offer themselves 
 in succession to the tra.veller as he advances from 
 the shores of the Red Sea (Erdkvnde, th. i. 
 8. 168). The ^rs^ of these levels is ttie plain of 
 Bahamegash : the second level is the plain and 
 kingdom of Tigre, which formerly contained tl)e 
 kingdom of Axum: the third level is High 
 Abyssinia, or tlie kingdom of Amhara. This 
 name of Amhara is now given to the whole kin^ 
 dom, of which Gondar is the capital, and where 
 the Amharic language is spoken, eastward of the 
 Takazze. Amhara Proper is, however, a moun- 
 tainous province to the south-east, in the centre 
 of which was Tegulat, the ancient capital of 
 the empire, and at one period the centre of the 
 civilization of Abyssinia. This province is no* 
 in the possession of the Gallas, a f)arbarous people 
 who have overcome all the southern parts of 
 Habesh. The present kingdom of Amhara is the 
 heart of Abyssinia, and the abode of the emperor, 
 or Kegush. It contains the upper covuse of the 
 Nile, tlie valley of Dembea, and the lake Tzana. 
 near which is the royal city of Gondar, and like. 
 wise the high region of Gojam, which Bruce 
 states to be at least two miles above the level of 
 the sea. 
 
 Abyssinia is inhabited by several distinct rac»T, 
 who are commonly included under the name ot 
 Habesh or Abyssins. They are clearly distin-
 
 ABYSSINIA. 
 
 fniulied fit)in eacli other by their languages, but 
 have more ov less res-mblance in manners and 
 physical cliaracter. These races are — 1. The Ti- 
 jfratii, or Abyssins of the kingdom of Tigre, which 
 nearly coincides in extent with the old kingdom 
 of Axum. They sjjeak a langnage called by 
 Tellez and Iiudolph lingitn Tigrania. It is a 
 corrnption or moilern dialect of the Gheez or 
 old Ethiojiic, whicli was tl.e ancient vernacular 
 tongue of the province ; but is now a dead 
 language consecrated to literature and religious 
 uses [Ethiopic Languaoe], and the modem 
 language of Tigre has been for more than five 
 centuri<;j merely an oral dialect. 2. 'Y\w.Amharas, 
 who have been for ages the dominant people in 
 Abj'ssinia ; the genuine Amhara being consi- 
 dered as a higher and nobler caste, ss the military 
 and royal tribe. Their language — the Amharic — 
 now extends over all the eastern parts of Abys- 
 sinia, including various provinc.es, some of which 
 appear at one time to have had vernacular lan- 
 guages of their own. 3. The Affows, whicii name 
 is borne by two tribes, wlio sjieak ditVerent lan- 
 guages and inhiibit dilferent parts of Abyssinia. 
 These are the Agoivs of Damot, one of the most 
 extensive of the southern provinces, where tJiey 
 are settled about the sources and on the banks of 
 tJie Nile; and the Agows of Lasta, who, ac- 
 cording to liruce, are Troglodytes, living in 
 caverns and paying the same adoration to the 
 river Takazze which those of Damot pay to 
 the Nile. These last are called by Salt the 
 Agows of Takazze ; and although they scarcely 
 dilVer from the other Abyssinians in pliysical cha- 
 racter, their language shows them to be a distinct 
 race from the Persian as well as from the Am- 
 liara. 4. The Falasha, a people whose present con- 
 dition suggests many curious inquiries, and the 
 investigation of whose history may hereafter 
 throw light upon that of the Abyssins, and of tlieir 
 literature and ecclesiastical antiquities. They 
 all profess the Jewish religion, and ])robably 
 did so before the era of the conversion of the 
 Abyssins to Christianity. They themselves pro- 
 fess to derive tiieir origin from Palestine; but tlieir 
 language, which is said to have no affinity with 
 the Hebrew, seems sufficiently to refute this pre- 
 tension (Vater, Mitlirklates, t. iii.) According to 
 Bruce, the Falasha were very powerful at the 
 time of tlie conversion of the Abyssins to 
 Christianity. They were formerly a caste of 
 potters and tile-makers in the low country of 
 Dembea, but, owing to religious Hnimosities. and 
 being weakened by long wars, they were driven 
 out thence, and took refuge among rugged and 
 almost inaccessible rocks, in the high ridge called 
 the mountains of Samen, where they live under 
 princes of their own, bearing Hebrew names, and 
 paying tribute to the Negush. It is conjectured 
 that the Faiasha and the Agows were at one time 
 the principal inhabitants of the sr-uth-eastem parts 
 of Abyssinia. 5. Tlie Gafats, a pagan tribe, 
 with a distinct language, living on tlie southern 
 banks of the Nile, near Damot., 6. The Go7if/as 
 and Enareniis. The former inhabit the province 
 of Gonga, and liave a language distinct IVotn all 
 the precetiiiig. but the same which is spoken by 
 he i/eople of Narea, or Enarea, to the southward 
 of Hari-'sh. 7. To these we should jierliajjs now 
 add tiie Ga/la.Sj a race of wandering herdsmen, 
 extensively spread in eastern intertrojiical Africa, 
 
 ABYSSINIA. 
 
 II 
 
 who have become, during the lust cenlAiiy, very 
 fonnidable by their numbers, and threaten to over- 
 whelm the Abyssinian enijiire. 
 
 The Al)y8sinians are to be regarded as belong- 
 ing to the bhick races of men, but this is to be 
 received with some explanation. AVithoul eiitering 
 into particulars, it may be observed, after Ruppell 
 '^Reisc in Abijssinien'), that there are two jjliysical 
 types prevalent among the Abyssinians. The 
 greater number are a iinely-fomiitl peojile of the 
 European type, having a countenance and fea- 
 tures precisely reseml)ling those of the Bedouins 
 of Arabia. To this class belong most of the inha- 
 bitants of the high mountains of Samen. and of 
 the jilains around LakeTzana, as well as (he Fa- 
 lasha, or Jews, the lieatlien Gafats, and the Agows, 
 notwithstanding the variety of their dialects. The 
 other and very large division of the Abyssinian 
 people is identified, as far as physical trails are 
 concerned, with the race which has lieen distin* 
 guished by the name of Ethiojiian. This race i* 
 indicated by a somewhat flattened nose, thick 
 lips, long and rather dull eyes, and IW very 
 strongly crisped and almost woolly hair, which 
 stands very thickly ujxm the head. Tliey are 
 therefore one of the connecting links between the 
 Arabian and the Negro races, being separated 
 from the former by a somewhat broader line than 
 from the latter. In their essential characteristic* 
 they agree with the Nubians, Berberines, and 
 native Egyptians (Prichard's Nat. Hist, of Man, 
 p. 285). 
 
 Abyssinia has for ages been united under one 
 governor, who during the earliest periods resided at 
 Axum, the ancient capital of Tigre ; but who for 
 some centuries past has resided at Goinhir, a 
 more central part of the kingdom. For ages also 
 the Abyssins have been Christians, but with a 
 strange mixture of the Judaism which ajijiears to 
 have been previously ])rofessed, and witli (lie ex- 
 ceptions which have been already indicated. 
 Tigre, in which was the ancient cajiital of the 
 empire, was the country in which Juilaism aj)- 
 pears to have been in former times the most pre- 
 valent. It was also the country which possessed, 
 in the Gheez or ancient Ethiopic, a Semitic lan- 
 guage. It was, moreover, the seat of civilization, 
 which, it is iniTiortant to observe, aj)])ears to have 
 been derived from the opposite coast of Arabia, 
 and to have had nothing Egyjjtian or Nubian 
 in its character. 
 
 These observations have brought us liack again 
 to the difficulty stated at the covriniencenient of 
 this article, in the words of Dr. Prichaid, which 
 has hilherto been considered iiisii])erable. There 
 is no doubt, liowevcr, that (his ilitlicult y has chiefly 
 arisen from atteiujiting to explain all the phe- 
 nomena on a single princijile; whereas two cause* 
 at least contriliuted to produce them, as the ibl- 
 lowiiig remaiks will clearly show : — 
 
 The IbrnifT ])rofession of Judaism in the coun- 
 try is sufficient to account for the class of ob- 
 servances and notions derivatile from the JVwish 
 ritual, whicli are very numerous, and appear 
 singular, mixed up as they are witii a jirolessedly 
 Christian faith. This, however, does nut account 
 for Jewish manners and customs, or for (lie ex- 
 istence of a langnage so much resembling the 
 Hebrew, and so truly a Semitic dialect as the 
 Gheez, or old Ethiopian. For nations nwy adopt 
 a foreign religion, and maintain tiie uaagcf
 
 93 
 
 ABYSSINIA. 
 
 arising iVom it, without any marked diange of 
 their customs or language. But all wliich tiiis 
 leaves unsolved may, to our apprehension, be very 
 salisiactovily accounted for by tlie now gene- 
 rally admitted fact, that at least the people of 
 Tigre, wlio possessed a Semitic language so 
 nearly resembling the Hebrew, are a Semitic co- 
 lony, who imported into Abyssinia not only a 
 Semitic language, but Semitic manners, usages, 
 and modes of thought. Whether this may or 
 may not be true of the Amiiara also, depends in 
 a great degree upon the conclusion that may be 
 reached resjjecting the Amharic language, whicii, 
 through the large admixture of Kthiopic and 
 Arabic words, has a Semitic appearance, but 
 may, notwithstanding, prove to be fundamentally 
 African. At all events, the extent to which 
 the Gheez language has operated upon it would 
 atford a jnoof of the influence of the Semitic 
 colony upon the native population : which is all 
 that can reasonably be desired to account for the 
 phenomena which have excited so much inquiry 
 and attention. 
 
 If it should be objected that it is not sufficient 
 to identify as Semitic the manners and usages 
 wliich have Ijeen described as Hebrew, we would 
 beg to call attention to that passage, in the com- 
 mencing extract, which, with an unintended 
 significance, intimates that these customs are 
 those of the early times of Gideon and Joshua, 
 when the Hebrews had not been long subject to the 
 peculiar jnodifying influences of the Masaical in- 
 stitutions. This is very much the same as to say 
 that the customs and usages in view are in ac- 
 cordance with the general type of Semitic man- 
 ners, rather tlian with the particular type which 
 . the Mosaical institutions produced ; or, in other 
 words, that they resemble the manners of the He- 
 biews most when those manners had least departed 
 from the general standard of usages which pre- 
 vailed among the Semitic family of nations. 
 Tiiey are, therefore, less Hebrew manners than 
 Semitic masiners, and, as such, are accounted 
 for by the presence of Semitic races in tlie coun- 
 try. In point of fact, travellers who derive their 
 first notions of the East from the Bible, when they 
 come among a strange people, are too ready to 
 set down as specificnlhj Hebrew some of the 
 more striking usages whicli attract their notice ; 
 ■srhereas, in fact, they are generically Orie7ital, 
 or at least Semitic, and are Hebrew also 
 merely because the Hebrews were an Oriental 
 people, and had Orient.'l features, habits, and 
 usages. Our conclusion, iJien, is, that the fonner 
 prevalence of the Jewish religion in Abyssinia 
 accounts for the existence of the Jewish ritual 
 usages ; and that the presence of one (perhaps, 
 more than one) paramount Semitic colony ac- 
 counts for the <;xisteuc-e, in this quarter, of a 
 Semitic language, and Semitic (and therefore 
 Hebrew) manners and usages. We entertain a 
 very strong conviction that this conclusion will 
 be corroborated by all tlie researcli into Abyssi- 
 nian history and antiquities which may here- 
 after be made. 
 
 Having thus considered the question which 
 alone authorized tlie introduction of this article, we 
 reserve for other articles [Canuace ; Ethiopia ; 
 Sheba. Qusen of] some questions connected with 
 otner points in tlie history of Abyssinia, espe- 
 cially the introduction of Judaism into that 
 
 ACCAD. 
 
 country. Of tne numerous books which hav* 
 been written resjiecting Abyssinia, the Ilistoriet 
 of Tellez and Ludolph, and the Travels of 
 Krani]), Bruce, Salt, and Rupjiell, are the most 
 imjiortant : and an achiiirable digest of existing 
 information may l>e found in Ritter's Erdkimde, 
 th. i., and (as fir as regards ethnography and 
 languages) in Pricliard's Besearches, vol. ii. 
 ch. vi., and his Natural History of Man, sect. 26. 
 
 ACCAD (n5N ; Sept. *Apxa5), one of the five 
 
 cities in * the land of Shinar,' or Babylonia, 
 which are said to have been built by N imrod, 
 or rather to have been * the beginning of his 
 kingdom' (Gen. x. 10). Their situation has been 
 much disputed, ^lian (^De Animal, xvi. 42) men- 
 tions that in the district of Sittacene was a river 
 called 'ApyaS))?, which is so near the name 'Ap^dS 
 which tlie LXX. give to tliis city, that Bociiart 
 was induced to fix Accad upon that river (^Pha^ 
 leg. iv. 17). It seems that several of the ancient 
 translators found in their Hebrew MSS. Achar 
 (*1DK) instead of Accad (nSN) (Ejihrem Syrus, 
 Pseutlo-Jonatban, Targian Hieros., Jerome. Al)ul- 
 faragi, 8;c.) ; and the ease with which the similar 
 letters 1 and 1 might be interclianged in cojiying, 
 leaves it doubtful which was the I'eal name. Achar 
 was the ancient name of Nisibis ; and hence the 
 Targumists give Nisibis or ' Nisibin (p2^^'3) 
 for Accad, and they continued to be identified 
 by the Jewish literati in the times of Jerome. But 
 the Jewish literati have always been deplorable 
 geographers, and their unsupported conclusions are 
 worth very little. Nisibis is unquestionably too 
 remote northwanl to be associated with Babel, 
 Erech, and Calneh, ' in the land of Shinar.'' These 
 towns could not have been very distant from each 
 other ; and when to the analogy of names we can 
 add that of situation and of tradition, a strong 
 claim to identity is established. These circum- 
 stances unite at a place in the ancient f>ittacene, 
 to which Bochart had been led by other analogies. 
 The yirobability that the original name was Achar 
 having been established, the attention is natur:illy 
 drawn to the remarkable pile of ancient buildings 
 called Akker-koof, in Sittacene, and which the 
 Turks know as Akker-i-Nimrood and Akker~i- 
 Bahil. Col. Taylor, the British resident at Bagh- 
 dad, who has given much attention to tlie subject, 
 was the first to make out this identification, and 
 to collect evidence in support of it ; and to his 
 unpublished communications the writer and other 
 recent travellers are indebted for their statements 
 on the subject. The Babylonian Talmud might 
 be expected to mention the site ; and it occurs 
 accordingly under the name of Arjgada. It occurs 
 also in Maimonides (Jud. Chaz. Tract. Mndce, 
 fol. 25, as quoted by Hyde), who says, ' Abralwin 
 xl.annos natus cognovit creatorem suum'; «pd im- 
 mediately adds, 'Extat Aggada ties annos natus.' 
 Akker-koof is about nine miles west of the Ti- 
 gris, at the spot where that river makes its nearest 
 approach to the Euphrates. The heap of ruins 
 to which the name of Nimrod's Hill — Tel-i-Kim- 
 rood, is more esj)«cially approjiriated, consists of 
 a mound surmounted by a mass of lirick-work, 
 which looks like either a tower or an irregular 
 pyramid, according to the point from which it is 
 viewed. It is about 400 feet in circumference 
 at the bottom, and rises to tlie height of 125 feet 
 >ibove the sloj'ing elevation on wliich it stanils
 
 A('CARON. 
 
 riie <iiounil, which seems Id form the founda- 
 tion of the pile, is a mass of riihbish accu- 
 mulated by the decay of the suixTslructuie. In 
 the ruin itself, the l.iyers ol' sun-dried l)iicks, of 
 which It is connK)sed, can he traced very ilis- 
 linctly. They are cemented together by lime or 
 bitumen, and are divich'd into courses varying 
 from 12 to '20 feet in lieijflit, and are separated 
 bv layers of reeds, as is usual in the more an- 
 cient remains of this priuiilive region. Travellers 
 
 ACCENT. 
 
 W 
 
 have been ^wrplexrd to make out the use of fliis 
 remarkable monument, and various strange con- 
 jectures have been hazarded. The embankments 
 of canals and reservoirs, and the remnjints of 
 I'lick-work and jioltery occujjying tlie place all 
 around, evince that the Tel stood in an important 
 city; and, as its construction aniiounces it to be 
 a Babylonian relic, the greater pvnbal)ility is tliat 
 it was one of tliose j)yramidal structures erected 
 upon iiigh ])1aces, whicli were consecrated to the 
 lieavenly bodies, and served at once as the temples 
 and the ol)servat()ries of tnose remote times. Such 
 l/uiulings were common to all Babylonian towns; 
 aii'l those vvliicli remain appiear to ha\e been con- 
 structed more or less on tlie model of that in the 
 nietro]iolitan city oi" Babvlon. 
 
 ACCARON. [Ekron.] 
 
 ACCENT. Tliis term is often used witli a 
 very wide meaning : as v.hen we say that a per- 
 son lias ' a Sc>tch accent,' in which case it de- 
 notes all that distinguishes the Scotch from the 
 English pronunciation. VVe here confine the 
 word, in the first jilace, to mean those peculia- 
 rities of sound for wliich grammarians have in- 
 vented the 7narks called accents ; and we natu- 
 rally must have ^ principal reference to the 
 Helirew and the ttreek languages. Secondly, 
 we exclude ike consiilera-tion of such a use of 
 accentual marks (so called) as prevails in the 
 French language ; in whidi they merely denote 
 a certain change in the quality of a sound 
 attributed to a vowel or diphthong. It is evident 
 ^Jiat. had a suthcient number of alphabetical 
 towels been invented, the accents (in such a 
 sense) would have lieen su])erseded. While tiie 
 Hebrew and Greek languages are here our chief 
 end, yet, in order to pass from the known to the 
 miKHOwn, we shall fhroiigliout refer to our own 
 tongue as the b(Bt source of illustration. In this 
 res-jjcct, we un<loubteily overstejj tlie projier limits 
 of a Biblical Cyclopii'dia ; but we are in a 
 manner constrained so to do, since the whole sub- 
 ject is misrepresented or very defect '\ely ex- 
 
 ])laiTied in most English grammars : and if wf 
 al)Stained from this full ex];osition, niaT\y r»-ade:« 
 would most j)robabl\', after all, ruisundei stand 
 our meaning. 
 
 Even after the word accent iias Ijeeii thiw 
 limited, there is an ambiguity in ttie teim; it !mg 
 still a double sense, acct)rding to which we name 
 it either oratorical or vocalnilar. By tlie 'atter, 
 we mean the accent which a wonl ifi isolation 
 receives ; for instance, if we read in a vocabulary . 
 while l)y oratorical accent we understaiul fh»t 
 wliich words actually have when read aloud or 
 spoken as jiarts of a sentence. 
 
 Tite Greek then of letters, who, after the Ma- 
 cedonian kingdoms li:;.l taken their tir.al Ibrm 
 invented accentual marks to assist foreigner.? 
 in learning their language, have (with a single 
 uniform c.xception) tieon satisfied to indicaie 
 the vocabular accent : but the Hebrew •rram 
 marians aimed, when the ])r()niinciation of tlie 
 old tongue was in danger of lieing forgotten, at 
 indicating by marks the traditional inflections of 
 the voice with wliich the Scriptures were to be 
 read aloud in the synagogues. In co!ise(juence 
 they have introduced a very complicated systenj 
 of accentuation to direct the reader. Some of 
 their accents (so called) are, in fact, stops, others 
 syntactical notes, whicli served also as guides to 
 the voice in chanting. 
 
 In intelligent reading or sjieaking, the vocal 
 organs execute numerous intonations which we 
 have no method of representing on pajier ; espe- 
 cially such as are called inflections or slides by 
 teachers of elocutuni : but on tlies<? a book miglit 
 be written ; and we can here only say, that the 
 Masoretic accentuation of the Hebrew a]))>ears to 
 have struggled to depict the rhythm of sen- 
 tences ; and the more progress has been made 
 towards a living perception of the language, the 
 higher is the testimony boine by the learned to 
 the success whii^h this rather cumbrous system 
 has attained. The rhythm, indeed, was pro- 
 bably a sort of chant; since to this day the 
 Scriptures are so recited by the Jews, as also the 
 Koran by the Arabs or Turks : nay, in Turkish, 
 (he same veib {pqumaq) signifies to sing and to 
 read. But this chant by no means attains the 
 sharp discontinuity of Euro])ean singing on the 
 contrary, the voice slides from note to note. Mo- 
 notonous as the whole sounds, a deeper study of 
 the expression intended might probably lead to a 
 fuller understanding of the Masoretic accents. 
 
 Wherein the Accent consists. — In ordinary 
 European words, one syllable is pronounced with 
 a peculiar stress of the voice ; and is then said to 
 be accented. In our own language, the mosr 
 olnious accompaniment of this stress on »'ie 
 syllable is a greater clearness of somid in the 
 vowel ; insomuch that a i-cry short vowel cannot 
 take the primary accent in English. Neverthe- 
 less, it is verj' far from the triitli, that accentetl 
 vowels and syllables are necessarily long, or 
 longer than the unaccented in the same word ; 
 of which we shall speak afterwards. In iWustra- 
 tion, however, of the loss of clearness in a vowel^ 
 occasioned by a loss of accent, we may comjKire 
 a contest with to contest ; equal with cqudliiy; in 
 which the syllables con. qtud, are soumW with a 
 very ofjscure vowel when unaccented. 
 
 Let us observe, in juissing, that when a rowifl 
 gound changes tlirougli ti;in8p>)sition of die ao
 
 u 
 
 ACCENT. 
 
 cent, tiic Hebrew grammarians — Instead of trust- 
 ing tliat tin; voice will of iUelf rnoilii'y the vowel 
 vrnen the accent is sliii'tctl — generally tliiiik it 
 nocessary to dejjict t!ie vowel difl'erently : whicii 
 is OJ\e ])rin(;ij>;il cause of the complicated changes 
 of the vowel points. 
 
 A second concomitant of the accent is less 
 marKed in English than in Italian or Greek ; 
 namely — a musical elevation of tlie voice. On 
 a ])iano or violin we of course separate en- 
 tirely tiie stress given to a note (which is called 
 forte and staccato) from its elevation (which may 
 be A, or c, or v) ; yet in sjjeech it is natural to 
 execute in a higher tone, or, as we improperly 
 term it, in a higlier key, a syllable on which we 
 desire to lay stress: possibly because shaip sounds 
 are more distinctly heard tlian Hat ones. Practi- 
 cally, therefore, accent embraces a slide of the 
 voice into a higher note, as well as an empliasis 
 on tlic vowel ; and in Greek and Latin it would 
 a]ipear that this slide upwards was the most 
 marked peculiarity of accent, and was that whicli 
 gained it the names irpoo-wSia, nceentus. Even 
 at the ])resent day, if we listen to the speech of a 
 Greek or Italian, we sliall observe a marked ele- 
 vation in the slides of the voice, giving the ap- 
 jiearance of great vivacity, even where no pecu- 
 liar -,entiment is intended. Thus, if a Greek be 
 requested to pronounce the words (rocpia (wisdom), 
 napa^oXT] (jiaraljle), his voice will rise on the 
 i ancl 7) in a manner never heard i'rom an Eng- 
 lishman. In ancient Greek, however, yet greater 
 nicety existed ; for tlie voice had three kinds of 
 accent, or slides, which the grammarians called 
 flat, sharp, and circumflex; as in tIs, ti's ; iroC. 
 It is at the same time to be remarked, that this 
 flat ascent was solely oratorical ; for when a 
 word was read in a vocabulary, or named in 
 isolation, or in leed at the end of a sentence, it 
 never took the ilat accent, even on the last syl- 
 lable ; except, it would seem, the word rls, a 
 certain one. In the middle of a sentence, however, 
 tlie simple accent (for we are not speaking of the 
 circumflex) on a penultima or antepenultima was 
 always sliarp, and on a last syllable was flat. Pos- 
 Btbly a stricter attention to tlie speech of the l)est 
 educated modem Greeks, or, on the contrary, to 
 tliat of their peasants in isolated districts, miglit 
 detect a similar peculiarity : but it is generally 
 believed that it has been lost, and some uncer- 
 tainty therefore naturally rests on the true j.ro- 
 nunciation. On the whole, it is most probable 
 that the flat accent was a stress of the voice ut- 
 tered in a lower note, much as the second accent 
 in grandfather ; that the shai]) accent was that 
 which prevails in modern Greek, and has been 
 above described ; and that the circumflex com- 
 bined an upwara and a downward slide on the 
 same vowel. The last was naturally incapable 
 of being executed, unless the vowel was loiifj •. 
 but the other two accents couM exist eijually 
 well on a short vowel. 
 
 In English elocution various slides are to be 
 heard, more complicated tlian the Greek cir- 
 cumflex ; but wit!i ';s they are wholly oratorical, 
 never vocabular. Moreover, they are jieculiar to 
 vehement or vivacious oratory ; being abundant 
 in familiar or comic speecli, and admissible 
 also in high pathetic or indignant declamation : 
 >>ut thev are almost entirely excluded %<m tran- 
 quil anil serious utterance. 
 
 ACCENT. 
 
 Secondary Accent. — On the same trord, when 
 it consists of many syllables, a doubie accent if 
 frequently heard, certainly in Engliali, and pro- 
 bably in most languages; but in our own tonjrue 
 one of the two is generally feebler than tl;e other, 
 and may be calleil secondary. If we agree tc 
 denote this by the flat accent (^) of tlie Greeks, 
 we may indicate as follows our tloui^le accent: 
 
 consideration, disobedience, iini)retending ; 
 
 Secondary, accessary, peremptorily. 
 We have puq;osely selected as tlie three last ex- 
 amples cases in which the secondary accent fall* 
 on a very short or obscure vowel, such as can 
 never sustain the primary accent. 
 
 In some cases, two syllables intervene between 
 the accents, and it may then be difficult to say 
 which accent is the princi])al. In drisfocrdt, 
 eqnalize, dntiddte, tlie first syllable has a stronger 
 accent than the last; but in riristocrcittc, equali- 
 zation, dntedir vian, they seem to be as equal as 
 possible, though the latter catches the ear more. 
 In aristocracy, the foiTner is beyond a doubt 
 secondary ; but here the two are separated by 
 only one syllable. Predeternmuition has three 
 accents, of which the middlemost is seconilary. 
 
 In the Greek language a double accent is some- 
 times found on one word ; but only when the 
 latter is superinduced by some short and subc.i- 
 dinate word which hangs upon the other. Such 
 short words are called enclitics, and form a class 
 by themselves in the language, as tliey cannot be 
 known by their meaning or fonn. By way of 
 example we may give, rvgaviis tis (a certain 
 usuqier), ol5d ae (I know thee). In these cases, 
 wo observe that the two accents, if Loth are sharp, 
 are (bund on alternate syllables, as in English; 
 but whether one of them was secondary we do 
 not know. If the former is a circumflex, the 
 latter is on the following syllable. Occasionally, 
 two or more enclitics follow each other in suc- 
 cession, and produce a curious combination ; as, 
 (Iirds nov ri /j-oi. These accents, however, are 
 not vocabular, but oratorical. 
 
 The Hebrews have, in many cases, secondary 
 accents, called a. foretmie, because with them it 
 always precedes the principal accent (or 'tone'), 
 as, ■ 3ri3, kutebii ; the intermediate and un- 
 accented vowel being in such cases exceedingly 
 short and obscure, so that some grammarians 
 refuse to count it at all. This foretone is de- 
 scribed as a stress of the voice uttered in a lower 
 note, and therefore may seem identical in sound 
 with the flat accent of the Greeks. It ditlers, 
 however, in being always accompanied with the 
 sh-dT]) accent on t!ie same word, and in being 
 vocabular, not merely oratorical. 
 
 On the Place of the Accent. — A great diftereE;ie 
 exists between different languages as to the place 
 of the accent. In Plebrew it is found solely on 
 the last syllable and last but one, and is assumed 
 systematically by many grammatical terminal ions, 
 as in Meh'k (for Mdlk\ a king, pi. MeVnlii'm. 
 Tiiis is so entindy opjK)sed to the analogies of 
 English, that it has been alleged (Latham On th4 
 English Language') that Princess is tiie on^.;* 
 word in vvhicii our accent falls on a final inflec- 
 tion. The radical contrast of all this to our 
 own idiom leads to a perverse pronunciation of 
 most Hebrew names : t'lius we say Isaiah, Ne- 
 '?eniiah. C'.in;ian. I'srael — aldinug^ witii their li.i»» 
 
 J
 
 ACCENT. 
 
 •rcent tliey are Isaiah, Nehemyali, Cana-an, 
 Isra-cl ; to say notliinp; of other peculiarities of 
 the native sound. In Greek, tlie accent is 
 founil on any of tlie tliree last syllal)les of a 
 word; the circumflex only on the two last. In 
 the Latin lanj^ua;;:e, it is very rem;ul<al)le th;it 
 (except in the case of nionosyllaliles) (lie accent 
 never fell on the last syllable, hut was strictly 
 confined to the pentdtima and antepenultima. 
 This peculiarity struck the Greek ear, it is said, 
 more than anything else in the sound of Latin, as 
 it gave to it a jxim])ous air. It is tiie more diih- 
 cult to believe that any thoughtful Greek seri- 
 ously imputed it to Roman jiri-tle, since we are 
 told that tiie MoV\f dialect of Greek itself agreed 
 in this respect with the Litin (See Foster On 
 Accent and Quantity, ch. iv.). The Latin ac- 
 centuation is remarka!)le for having the jilace of 
 the accent dictated solely by eupho!>y, u'itliout 
 reference to the formation or meaning of the 
 word; in which respect the Greek only partly 
 agrees v.ith it, chielly whrn the accent falls on 
 the penult ima or antepenultima. Tlie Latin 
 accent, however, is guided by the quantity of 
 the penultimate syllable; the Greek accent by 
 the nuantity of the ultimate voiccl Tlie rules 
 are these : — 
 
 I. Greek : ' When the last voioel is long, the 
 accent is on the penultima ; when the last vowel 
 is short, the accent is on the antejienultima.' 
 O^ytons are herein excepteil. 2. Latin : ' When 
 the }wnullimate syllable is long, the accent is 
 upon it; when short, the accent is on the ante- 
 penultima. Every dissyllable is accented on the 
 peimltima.' Accordingly, the Greek accent, even 
 wi the cases of the very same noun, shifted in the 
 following curious fashion : N. ayOpcviros, G. h.v- 
 6piiwou, D. avBpdinrct), Ac. ^vSpajTrov; and in Latin, 
 rather dill'eicntly, yet with' an equal change, 
 X. Sermo, G. Serm<'mh, &.c. It is beyond all 
 question that the above rule in Greek is genuine 
 and correct (tliough it does not apply to oxytons, 
 that is, to words accented on the last syllable, 
 and lias other exceptions which the Greek gram- 
 mars will toll) ; but there is a natural dilliculty 
 among Englishmen to believe it, since we have 
 been taught to pronounce Greek u-ith the accen- 
 tuatiati of Latin ; a curious and hurtful corrup- 
 tion, to which the inlluence of Erasmus is said to 
 (lave principally contributed. It deserves to be 
 noted that tlie modem Greeks, in pronouncing 
 tlieir ancient words, retain, with much accuracy 
 on the whole, the ancient vules of accent ; but in 
 words of recent- invention or introduction they 
 follow tiie rule, which seems natural to an English- 
 man, of keeping the accent on the same syllable 
 dirough all cases of a noun. Thus, althougli they 
 sound as of old, N. dudpcairos, G. auBpunov, yet 
 in the word K0K<jiV7),a ludy, wliicli is quite recent, 
 we find (plural"), N. oi KOKwees, G. ruy kokoovcov, 
 &c. Similarly, 6 KaTnrdyos, the captain, G. rov 
 Kciitirlpou, &c. This is only one out of many 
 marks that tlie modem Greek has lost the nice 
 appreciation of the quantity or time of vowel 
 fcuiids, wliicii characterize*! the ancient. 
 
 Ii- all Latin or Greek words which we imjxirt 
 »nto English, so long as we feel them to be fo- 
 reig:n, we adltere to the Latin rules of accentua- 
 rion as well as we know how : thus, in clemricrat, 
 democracy, democrritical ; philosnjjhy, philoso- 
 phical ; astron'-mij, dstivncmical ; clo/n/'Siic, do- 
 
 ACCKNl. at 
 
 mcst'icity, dnmesticution ; possible, possibility ; 
 biirbaroics, barbarity. But the moment we Ireiit 
 a>hy of these words as natives, we follow our own 
 rule of keeping the accent on the iadical syl- 
 lable; as in b rbarousness, where the Saxon 
 ending, ness, is attached to the foreign word. 
 ^Vifh tiie growth of tiie language, we become 
 more and more accustomed to hear a long train 
 of syllables following the accent. Tiius, we 
 have c<>mfort. comfortable, coinforftiblcness ; pur- 
 liamcnt, parliamentary, whicli used 'o be jx'irliv- 
 mintary. 
 
 In many provinces of England, and in par- 
 ticular families, tiie older and iv-iit-r pronun- 
 ciations, f.o/jj'rnVf/, iad'stry, kee]) their ])lac('. in- 
 stead of the modem contrary, industry. Tiie 
 new tendency has innovated in Latin words so 
 far, that many persons say inimical, contemplate, 
 inculcate, decorotis, sononrus, luid even concord- 
 ance, for inimical, contemplate, kc. ' Alc.vauder 
 has supplanted ^ Akxdttdcr. In the cases of con 
 cordancc, clamorous, and various others, it is 
 probable that the words have been maile to follow 
 the pronunciation o{ concord, clamor, as in native 
 English derivatives. Tiie jirincijile of clianiie. to 
 whicli we have been pointing, is pioliably deeir 
 seated in human speech; fur the later Attics are 
 stated to have made a similar innovation in va- 
 rious words; for example, /Eschylus and Tliucy- 
 dides said ofxoios, rpo-Kcuou, lait Plato and Aris- 
 totle, ofjLoios, rpoiraiov. 
 
 If the principal acv^ent is very dist;uit from <iTie 
 end of a long word, a great obscurity in the disi- 
 tant vowel-sounds results, \vhicii renders a word 
 iiighly unmusical, and quite unmanageable to 
 poetry. Titis will be seen in such pronunciations 
 as })drliamentary, iKrempforily. 
 
 In Helirew tiie same plienomenon is exhibited 
 in a contrary way, the early vowels of a word 
 being apt to become extremely short, in conse- 
 quence of the accent l^eing delayed to the end. 
 
 Tints, ?^i^?, 6he'l, a tent, pi. ^;'^vl^?, nhrdi'mi 
 
 'bw, qdteV; they killed ; •ini'pOi?, q,Ual hu, 
 
 tliey killed him. Oratorical reasons occasionally 
 induce a sacrifice of tlie legitimate vocabular 
 accent. In English this hapjiens chirfly in cases 
 of antithesis ; as when the verbs, which would 
 ordinarily be sounded increase and decrease, re- 
 verse their accent in order to l-.ing out m<<^e 
 clearly the contrasted syllables : * He must in- 
 crease, Ijut I must rfi'crease.' 
 
 Tliis change is intended, not for mere euphony, 
 l)ut to assist the meaning. Variety and energy 
 seem to Ije aimed at in the following Ilelaew 
 example, which Ewald has lioticed, and uliich 
 seems to indicate that more of tlie same sort must 
 remain to be discovered: Jiulyes v. 12, 'f->/, 
 '«;•/, Lkbord : 'iri,'' ri, dabbiri .s/iir ; whicli. after 
 Ewald, we may imitate by translating fhu.s, • Up 
 tlien, up flien, Deborali : up then, I'lj) then, uttor a 
 song.' The Greek anil Hebi-ew languages, more- 
 ever, in the pause of a sentence, niodilied tli* 
 accent without reference to the meaning of tiie 
 
 words. Tims the verb ordinarily sounde<l ^7''}i. 
 pade'lii, with a very short penultimate vowel, lit- 
 comes at the end of the sentence ^?T5, yadllti 
 with a long and acoenteil ]ienultima (See Ewald'* 
 IJebreio Gram. ^ 1.31, 133). TW Ctr>'ek lao-
 
 rri ACCENT. 
 
 gnajje also af (he crul of a sentence changes a 
 daf accent into a sharp one; for instance, the 
 wor'l ri/x); 'lionor) before a pause becomes rtjxi]; 
 but no elongation of vowels ever accompanies thia 
 phenomenon. 
 
 Accent in Compound Words. — It is principally 
 by the accent that the syllables of a word are 
 joined into a siniji;lc wliole ; and on tliig account 
 a language witli well-defined accentuation is 
 (c.eteris paribus) so mnch the easier to be under- 
 stcKxl when heard, as well as so much the more 
 mujical. This function of tl)e accent is dis- 
 tinctly perceived l)y us in such words of our lan- 
 guage as have no other organized union of tiieir 
 paits. To the eye of a foreigner reading an 
 Knglish book, steam-boat appears like two words; 
 e»]K>cially as oitv printers have an exti'eme dislike 
 of hyphens, and omit them whenever the cor- 
 rector of tlie j>ress will allow it. In Greek or 
 Pea-sian two such words would be united into one 
 by a vowel of union, which is certainly highly 
 conducive to euphony, and the compound would 
 appear in the form steamiboat or steamobi'itoa. 
 As we are quite destitute of such apparatus (in 
 spite of a lew such exceptions as handicraft, 
 momiiebnnk), the accent is eminently important; 
 by which it is heard at once that stecimboat is 
 a single word. In fact, we thus distinguish be- 
 tween a stonebox and a stme box ; the former 
 meaning a box for holding stones, the latter a box 
 made of stone. Mr. Liitham (Enr/l. Langiwoe, 
 §234) has ingeniously remarked that we may 
 read the following lines fro:.n Bun Jonson in two 
 ways : 
 
 ' An'd thy silvershining ciujver' — 
 or, ' A)!'d tliy silver shining quiver' — - 
 with a slight difl'erence of si-'nse. 
 
 The Hebrew language is genei-ally regarded as 
 quite destitute of comjwund words. It possesses, 
 rievcitheless, something at least closely akin to 
 them in (what are called) nouns in regimen. 
 Being without a genitive case, or any particle 
 devoted to tlic same purjx)se as the English pre- 
 })Ositio5i of, they make up for this by sounding 
 two words as if in combination. The former 
 word loses its accent, and tliereby often incurs a 
 shortening and obscuration of its vowels ; the 
 voice hurrying on to the latter. Tins may be 
 illustrated by the English pronunciation of s/«y? 
 of war, man of %edr, man at arms, phrases whicli, 
 by repetition, have in spirit become single words, 
 the first accent being lost. Many such exist in 
 our language, though unregistered by gi'ani- 
 marians — in fact, even in longer phrases the phe- 
 nomenon is observable. Thus, Secretary at Wdr, 
 Court of Queen's Bench, have very audibly bur 
 one predominating accent, on the last syllable. 
 
 So, in Hebrew, from )Vjn, ■)(izzayo'n, a vision, 
 
 conies n?V P''ID, x^-J''"*"^''^'^''? vision of the 
 riiglit (Job XX. S). Thpt every such case is fairly 
 to be regarded as a coin])ound noun was remarked 
 by Dr. Campbell of Aberdeen, who urged that 
 otherwise, in Isaiah ii. 20, we ought to render the 
 word? ' the idols of his silver;' wliereas, in fact, 
 the exact rejire^i ntation of the Hebrew in Greek 
 is not e1Saj\a apyvpov-avrov, but, so to say, 
 ap'yvpeiSaiXa avrov. In Greek compounds the 
 posvtion of the accent is sometimes a very cri- 
 tical Jiiatt<'r in distinguishing active and passive 
 
 ACCENT. 
 
 meanings of rj)if]iets. Thus, p.Tirp6Krovoi meani 
 mother-slain, or slain by one's mother; while 
 /uT^rpoKTuvos is motJier-slayinfj, or slaying one's 
 mother. Such distinctions, however, seem ta 
 have been confined to a very small class of 
 comjiounds. 
 
 Sense of a simple word modified by the Ac- 
 cent. — It is familiarly remarked in our English 
 grammars, that (in words of Latin origin, gene- 
 rally imported from French) we often distinguish 
 a verb from a noun by putting the accent on the 
 penultimate syll.able of the nomi and the ulti- 
 mate of the verb. Thus, we say, an insult, to 
 insi'lt i a contest, to contest ; &c., i<i.c. The dis- 
 tinction is so useful, that in doubtful cases it 
 appears desirable to abide by the rule, ;\nd to 
 say (as many persons do say) a perfume, to per- 
 finie; details, to detail; the contents of a book, 
 to conthit i &c. It is certainly curious that the 
 very same law of accent pervades the Hebrew 
 language, as discriminating the sim])lest triliteral 
 
 noun and verb. Thus, we have \yQ, melek, 
 king; "]TO, mdldk, he ruled. In the Greek lan- 
 guage the number of nouns is very considerable 
 in which the throwing of the accent on the last 
 syllable seriously alters the sense; as, TpSiros, a 
 manner ; rpo-irhs, tlie leather of ah oar : Ovuhs, 
 anger or mind: 6i5;itos, garlic : Kpiuav, judging ', 
 Kpiywv, a lily-bed ; Sij^os, a sho»ilder; aijxhs, cruel. 
 A very extensive vocabulary of such cases is ap- 
 pended to Scapula's Greek Lexicon. 
 
 Relation of Acce)it to Bkythm and Metre. — 
 Every sentence is necessarily both easier to the 
 voice and ])leasanter to tlie ear when the whole is 
 broken up into symmetrical parts, witii conve- 
 nient pauses between them. The measure of the 
 parts is marked out. by the number of princijial 
 beats of the voice (or oratorical accents) wliich 
 each clause contains ; an'l wlien these are so 
 regulated as to attain a certain mu-.ical uniformity 
 without betraying art, the sentence has the pleas- 
 ing rhytlun of good prose. Wl»en art is not 
 avowed, and yet is manifest, this is unpleasing, 
 as seeming to proceed from all'ectation and in- 
 sincerity. When, however, the art is avowed, wi? 
 call it no longer rhythm, but metre ; and with 
 the cultivation of poetry, more and laoie mHody 
 has been exacted ol versifiers. 
 
 To the English ear. three and four beats of the 
 voice give undoubtedly the most convenient lengtl 
 of clauses. Hence, in what is called }}o€ticai 
 j)rose, it will be found* that a*iy particularly me- 
 lodious passage, if broken up into lines or verses, 
 yields generall'' either three or four beats in every 
 verse. Fi - f e x amjil e : 
 ' Where is the maid of Ar'van ? 
 
 Gone, as a vision of the night. 
 
 Where shall her lover look for herl 
 
 The hall, which once she gladdened, is desolate.' 
 
 But no poetical prose, not even translations 0/ 
 poetry which aim at a hal .''-metrical air, will be 
 found to retain constantly the ^Areefold and four- 
 fold accent. To produce abruptness, half lines, 
 containing but two accents, are thrown ir ; and 
 in smoother feeling clauses of fi\e accents which 
 often tend to ix'come the true English blank 
 verse. All longer clauses are coni]>osite, and cat 
 be resolved into three and three, four and three, 
 four and four, <S;c. To illustrate this, let us tak«
 
 ACCENT 
 
 a passai^ of trie Old Tcsfam :nf m the common 
 English tninslafion. Hahakkuk iii. 2: 
 )'h, Li'.rtl ! 
 
 I have heard thy speech ; and was aiVaid. 
 O'li Lord ! 
 
 Revive tli y m ork in the midst of the years ! 
 
 In the initist of the years make known! 
 
 In wratli remc-niher mercy! 
 
 God came from Teinan, 
 
 And tlie Holy One from Mount Paran. 
 
 His gh'iry covered tlie heavens, 
 
 jVntl the earth was full of his praise. 
 
 His brightness was as the light, 
 
 He liad honis coming out of his hand, 
 
 And there was th<' hiding of his ptuver.' &c. &c. 
 
 Tlie accent wliicli we liave been here descril> 
 ing as the source of rhythm is strictly the ora- 
 fy^k'al accent. As this falls only on the more 
 emphatic words of the sentence, it is decidedly 
 etrong, and, in comparison with it, all the feebler 
 and secondary accents are unheard, or at least 
 luicounten. Nor is any care taken that the suc- 
 cessive accents should be at equable distances. 
 (Occasionally they occur on successive syllables ; 
 niucli oftener at the distance of two, three, or four 
 Bvllables. Nevertheless, this poetical rhythm, as 
 Koon as it becomes a\'owedly cultivated, is em- 
 bryo-metre ; and possibly this is the i-eal state of 
 ^he He'r;rew versification. Great pains have been 
 taken, from Gomarus in 1630 to Bellermaiin and 
 Saalscliutz in recent times, to define the laws of 
 Hebrew metre. A concise histtiry of tliese at- 
 tempts will be found in the Introduction to De 
 Wette's Commentary on tlie Psalms. But al- 
 though the occasional use of rhyme or assonance 
 in Heijrew seerns to be more than accidental, tlie 
 failure of so maiiv eflbrts to detect any real 
 metre in the old Henrew i? decisive enough to 
 warn future inquirers against losing tlieir labour. 
 (^See the article ParalleUsmus in Ersch and 
 Gruber's Bncyclopedie). Tlie modern Jews, in- 
 deed, have borrowed accentual metro from the 
 Arabs : but, although there is nothing in the 
 fjenius of the tongue to resist it, peri^aps the 
 i'ervid, practical genius of the Hebrew prophets 
 rejected any such trammel. Repetition and tinj- 
 jililication mark their style as too declamatory to 
 lie what we call poetry. Nevertheless, in the 
 Psalms and lyrical passages, increasing investi- 
 gation ap])ears to prove that considerable artifice 
 of comjMsition has often been used (See Ewald's 
 Poetical Boo/cs of the Old Test. vol. i.). 
 
 In our own language, it is obvious to every 
 considerate reader of poetry that the metres called 
 anapajstic depend far more on the oratorical 
 accent than on the vocabular (wliicli is, indeed, 
 tlieir essential defect) ; and on this account nu- 
 merous accents, which tlie voice really utters, are 
 passed by as counting for nothing in the metre. 
 We oiler, as a single example, the two following 
 lines of Camjjbell, in wliich we have denoted by 
 the flat ac«ent those syllables tlie stress upon 
 which is subordinata and extra mctrum : 
 
 ' Siy, ri'ish'd the bMd eagle exultingly forth 
 From his home, in the dark-rolling clouds of 
 the north." 
 Such considerations, drawn entirely out of ora-- 
 tory, appear to be the only ones on which it is 
 any longer useful to pursue i.a inquiry concern- 
 ing Hebrew neti'cs. 
 
 i.CCHO. 
 
 37 
 
 Confusion of Accent with Quantity.— It is a 
 striking fact that Foster, the author of a learne<l 
 and rather celebrated book intended to clear up 
 this confusion, succeeded in establishing tlie Irutli 
 concerning Greek and Latin, by he!]) of ancient 
 grammarians, but himself fell into the i>o^ular 
 errors whenever he fried to deal with the Knglish 
 language. Not only does he allege that ' lli« 
 voice dwells longer' on the first syllable of /(n- 
 nestly, character, &c., tiian on the two last (and 
 improperly writes them kfnicstli/ , c/ulracti-r), but 
 he makes a general statement that accent and 
 quantity, though separated in Greek and Latin, 
 are inseparable in Eiiglisii. The truth is so tat 
 otherwise, that probably in three words out of 
 four we separate them. As single instances, con- 
 sider the words hSiestly, clicb-acter, just adduced. 
 The accent is clearly on the first sylialile ; but 
 that syllable in each is very short. On the other 
 liand, the second syllable of both, thoiigii un- 
 accented, yet by reason of ftie consonants s 1 1, c t. 
 is long, though kss so tlian if its vowel likewise 
 had been long. The words are thus, like the 
 Greek KvXiySpos^ a cy'lindei; accented wi tlie 
 first syllable, yet as to quantity an amphibracn 
 (cj — '.J). Until an Englishman clearly feels 
 and knows these facts of liis own tongue, lie will 
 t>e unable to avoid the most perplexing errors on 
 this whole subject. 
 
 Invention cf Accents. — We have already said 
 that the accentual marks of the (ireeks were in- 
 vented not long after the Macedonian conquests. 
 To Aristophanes of Byzantium, master of the 
 celebrated Aristarchus, is ascribed the credit iA 
 fixing both the punctuation and the accentuation 
 of Greek. He was born near the truldle of tl* 
 second century B.C.; and there se":s to l)e no 
 iloubt that we actually have before our eyes a 
 pronunciation which cannot have gr''a(1y di;Vend 
 from tliat of Plato. As for tlie Hebrew accentu- 
 ation generally called Masoretic, the learned are 
 agreed that it was a system only gradually biiih 
 up by successive additions; the word Masoia 
 itself meaning tradition. The woik is ascribed 
 to the schools of Tiberias and Baln'lou, whicli 
 arose after tlie destniction of Jerusalem Ijy the 
 Romans; but it cannot be very accurately .stated 
 in how many centuries the system of vovrel-jioints 
 and accentuation attained the fnlly-deveIo{)e<t 
 state in which we have received it. There is, 
 however, no question among the ablest sciiolars 
 that tiiese marks rejiresent the utterance oi' a. 
 genuine Hebrew jx-riod ; the jmniunciation, it 
 may be said with little exaggeuition, oi E/.ia 
 and Neliemiah. — F. W. N. 
 
 ACCHABIS. [Si'iDEK.] 
 
 ACCHO (ISy ; Sept. "Akx^), a town an-1 
 haven within the nominal territory of the liibe 
 of Asher, which however never acquireil jms- 
 gession of it (Judg. i. 31). The Greek and Koman 
 writers call if'A/frj. Ace (Strab. x\ i. S77 ; Diod. 
 Sic. xix. 93 ; C. Nep. xiv. 5) ; but it was even- 
 tually better known as Ptoi.ejiais ''Plin. lUfit. 
 Naf. V. 19), which name it received from the first 
 Ptolemy, king oi Egypt, by whoni it was much 
 improved. By this name it is mentioned in the 
 Apocrypha (1 Mace x. 56 ; xi. 23, 2i ; xii. 45, 
 48; 2 Mace. xiii. 11), in the New Testament 
 (Acts xxi. 7), and by Josephus (Antiq. xiii. 12, 
 2, seq.'). It was also called Colonia Claudii
 
 S8 
 
 ACCHO. 
 
 Oiescris, in consequence of its receivinj,- iX.<r 
 ])rivi leges of a Roman city from the emj'oror 
 Claudius (Plin. v. 17 ; xxxvi. 65). But the 
 names thus imposed or altered by foreigners ne\'er 
 took with the natives, and tlie place is still known 
 
 in rhe country by the n-ime of \^^ Akka. 
 
 It continued to be called Ptolcniais by the 
 Gr*>eks of tlie lower empire, as well as by Latin 
 authors, while the Orientals adhered to the ori- 
 ginal designation. This lias occasioned some spe- 
 culation. Vitriacus, who was bisliop of tlie place, 
 produces the o[)inion (Hist. Orient, c. 25) that the 
 to.vn was founded by twin-brothers, Ptoleniaous 
 and Aeon. Vinisauf imagines that the old 
 town retained the name of Accho, wliile that of 
 Ptolemais was confined to the more modern addi- 
 tions northward, towards the hill of Turon (G. 
 \'inisaiif i. 2, p. 2tS), but the trutli undoubtedly 
 is that the natives never adopted the foreign 
 names of this or any otiier town. The \v'ord 
 Accho, or Akka, can be traced tu no Hebrew or 
 Syriac root, and is. Sir W. Drummond alleges 
 ( Oritjhies, b. v. c. 3), clearly of Arabian origin, and 
 
 derived from i ^ jCsi a^, which sigiiilies sultry. 
 
 The neighbourhood was famous for the sands 
 which the Sidonians employed in making glass 
 (Plin. Bist. Nat. v. 19 ; Stiabo, xvi. 877) ; and 
 the Arabians denote a sandy shore heated by the 
 
 sun by the word ^J^t okeh, or ^^^ aket, or 
 (with the nunnation) aketon. During the Cru- 
 sades the place was usually known to Europeans 
 l)y the name of Agon : ai'terwards, from the occu- 
 pation of the Knights of St. Jolm of Jerusalem, 
 as St. Jean d'Acue, or simply Ague. 
 
 This famous city and haven is situated in N. 
 lat. 32" 55', and E. long. 35^ 5', and occupies 
 the north-we;to:n j>oint of a commodious bay, 
 called riie Bay of Acre, the opposite or south- 
 wes*rrn point of whicli is foime;! l)y tlie promon- 
 tory of Mount Carincl. Tlie c>r.y W-iz .m the jdain 
 to which it gives its name. Ii5 vr:''*"-STi side is 
 washed by the •)Va."es of ilie Mediti.'i'-anfan, and 
 (>}» tlie .south lies the bay, beyond w;::cii may be 
 seen the town of Caipha, -on the siia of the ancient 
 Cakinws, and, rising high above bc'L,the shrubby 
 heights of Carmel. The mour.iains belonging to 
 the chain of Anti-Libanus are seeo at the dis- 
 tan<'e of about four leagues to the no«tli, while 
 to the east ihe view is bounded by the fruitful 
 hills of the Lower Galileo. The bay, from the 
 toivn of Acre lo t!ie promontory of Mount Carmel, 
 is three leagues wide and two in depth. The 
 port, on account of its shallowness, can only be 
 entered bv vessels of small liurden ; but there is 
 excellent anchorage on thr other side of the bay, 
 l)!;fi)re Caipha, which is, in fact, the roadstead of 
 Acre (Turner, ii. 1 11 ; G. Robinson, i. 19S). In the 
 t"me of Strabo Accho was a great city {XlroXeiidh 
 iixri ■fXfya.K'!) irnMS ^,l> ''Aktjv uiv6/j.uCov irpoTepov, 
 xvi. p. S77), and it h.as continued to be a place of 
 importance down to the jjres'^nt time. But after 
 the Turks gained possession of it. Acre so rapidly 
 declined, tiiat the travellevs of the sixteenth 
 and seventeenth centuries concur in descriliing 
 ii as mutii fallen from its tbrmer glory, of which, 
 however, traces still remained. The missionary 
 Eugene ko .;er (La Terre Saincte, 1 6 1.3, pp. 41-46), 
 remarks "^iiat tlie whole place had such a sacked 
 
 ACCHO. 
 
 and desolated appearance, that .ittle remained 
 worthy of note except t!ie palace ot the grand- 
 master of the Knights Hosjiitallers, and the 
 church of St. Andrew : all tlie rest was a sad and 
 deplorable ruin, pervaded by a pestiferous air 
 which soon threw strangers into dangerous mala- 
 dies. The Emir Fakr-ed-din had, however, lately 
 built a commodious khan for the use of the 
 merchants : Ibr there was still considerable frafiic, 
 and vessels were constantly arriving from France, 
 \ enice, England, and Holland, laden with oil, 
 cotton, skins, and other goods. The Emir had 
 also built a strong castle, notwithstanding re- 
 peated orders from the Porte to desist. Roger 
 also fails not to mention the immense stone balls, 
 above a hundredweight, which were ibund in the 
 ditches and among the ruins, and which were 
 tlirown into the town from machines before the 
 use of cannon. T'lis account is contirmed by 
 other travellers, wl o add little or nothing to it 
 (Doubdan, Cotovicus, Znallart, JVIorison, N.au, 
 DAiwieux, anil others). Moi ison, however, dwells 
 more on the ancient remains, which consisted of 
 portions of old walls of extraordinary heig-hf and 
 thickness, and of fragments ol' buiklings, sacred 
 and secular, which still aftimled manifest tokens 
 of the original magnificence of the place. He 
 (ii. 8) afKrms that the metropolitan church of St. 
 Andrew was equal to the finest of those he had seen 
 in France and Italy, and tliat the church of St. 
 John was of the same jierfect beauty, as might 
 be seen by the pillars and vaulted roof, lialf 
 of which still remained. An excellent and 
 satisfactory account of the place is given by 
 Nau (liv. V. ch. 19), who takes particular notice 
 of the old and strong vaults on which the houses 
 are built ; and the present writer, having observed 
 the same practice in Baghdad, has no doubt, 
 that Nau is right in the conjecture that they 
 were designed to afl'ord cool undersjroiuid re- 
 treats to the inhabitants during th.e heat of the 
 day in summer, when the climate of the j)lain is 
 intensely hot. This provision might not be neces- 
 sary in tlie interior and cooler parts of the country. 
 Our Maundrell gives no further inforrriation, save 
 that he mentions that the town appears to have 
 been encompassed on the land side by a double 
 wall,deferided witli towers at small distances; and 
 that without the walls were ditches, ramparts, and 
 a kind of bastions faced with hewn stone {Journey, 
 p. 72). Pococke speaks chielly of*!he ruins. After 
 the impulse given to the jirosjierity of the place 
 by tlie measures of Sheikh Daher, and afterwards 
 of Djezzar Pasha, the descriptions dilTer. Much 
 of the old ruins l;ad disapneared from the na- 
 tural progress of decay, and from their materials 
 having been taken I'or new works. It is, however, 
 mentioned by Buckingliiim, that, in sinking the 
 ditch in front of the then (1^16) new outtr wall, 
 the foundations of small buildings were ex]K)sed, 
 twenty feet below tlie present level of the soil, 
 whicli must have lielonged to the earliest ages, 
 and probably formed part of the original Accho. 
 He also thought that traces of I'tok-nicJs might 
 be detected in the shaft-s of grey and red granite 
 and marble pillars, which lie aixiut or liave been 
 converted into thresholds for large doorways, of 
 the Saracenic period; some partial remains might 
 be traced in the inner wall:.; and he is disposed 
 to refer to that time the now old Vhar wliich, at 
 stateij above, was really built b\ the Emir T.ikr
 
 ACCHO. 
 
 el-<lin. All tie Christian ruins mentioned by 
 tie travellers alreaily quoted iiad disaiii)oared 
 £n actual inijiortanci", however, tlie town hail 
 much increiised. The jwpiilation in I'ilit was com- 
 puted at 10,000, of whom 3000 were Turks, tlie rest 
 Christians of various denominations (Connor, in 
 Jowetf, i. 123). Approached from Tyre the city 
 presented a beautilul apfiearaiice, from the trees in 
 ttie inside, wliich rise ahove the wall, and from the 
 ground immediately around it on the outside 
 being planted witli orange, lemon, and ))alm 
 frees. Inside, the streets had tlie usual narrow- 
 ness and filth of Turkisli towns; the houses 
 solidly built witli stone, with flat roofs; tiie ba- 
 zaai-s mean, but tolerably well supplied (Turner, 
 ii. 113). Tiie ])rincii)al objects were the nK)s(iue, 
 the pasha's seraglio, the granary, and the arsenal 
 (Irby and Mangles, p. 195). Of the mosque, 
 which was built I)y Djezzar P;isl)a, tliere is a 
 description by Pliny Fisk {Life, p. 337; also 
 G. Robinson, i. 200). The trade was not consider- 
 able ; the exports consisted chiefly of grain and 
 cotton, tlie jiroduce of the neighbouring jilain ; 
 and the i^;i|A)rts chiedy of rice, cotlee, and sugar 
 from Damietta (Turner, ii. 112). As thus de- 
 scribed, the city was all but demolished in 1832 
 by the hands of Ibrahim Paslia ; and although 
 Considerable pains were taken to restore it, yet, 
 as lately as 1S37, it, still exhibited a most 
 ■wretched apjjearance, with ruined houses and 
 broken arches in every direction (Lord Lindsay, 
 Letters, ii. 81). 
 
 As the fame of Acne ia rather modern than iii- 
 blical, its historj- must in this place be liriefiy 
 told. It belonged to the Phoenicians, until tiiej-, 
 in common with the Jews, were subjugated by the 
 Babylonians. By the latter it was doubtless main- 
 tained as a military station against Egypt, as it 
 was afterwards liy the Persians (Strabo, xv i. p. 877). 
 In the distril)ution of Alexander's dominions Ac- 
 cho fell to the lot of Ptolemy Soter, who valued 
 tiie acquisition^and gave it his own name. After- 
 wards it fell into the hands of the kings of Syria ; 
 and is repeatedly mentioned in the wars of the 
 Maccabees. It was at one time the head-quartrrs 
 of their heathen enemies (I Mace. v. 15, 22, 55). 
 In the pndea\our of Demetrius Soter and Alex- 
 ander Balas to bid highest for the sujjport of Jon.i- 
 than, the latter gave Ptolemais and the lands 
 around to the temple at Jerusalem (x. I, 39). 
 Jonathan was afterwards invited to meet Alex- 
 ander and the king o^ Kgvpt at that place, and 
 was treated with great distinction by them (x. 5fi- 
 IG); but there he at length (b.c. 144) met his 
 deatli through tlie treachery of Tryphon (xii. 48- 
 50). Alexander Janna-ug took advantage of the 
 civil war between Antiochus Philometor and An- 
 tiochus Cyziceniis to bosiege Ptolemais. as the only 
 maritime city in those parts, except Gaza, which 
 he liad not subdued; but the siege was raised by 
 Ptolemy Lathyrus (then king of Cyprus), who 
 got ])ossession of the city (Joseph. Antiq. xiii. 
 12, 2-C), of which he was soon deprived by his 
 mother Cleopatra (xiii. 13, 2). She probably 
 gave It, along with her daughter Selene, to Anti- 
 ocnus Grypus, king of Syria. At lea.^t, after his 
 death, Selene held possession of that and some 
 Other PhttTiician towns, after Tigranes, king of 
 Armenia, liad acquired the rest of the kingdom 
 fxiii. If), 4). But an injudicious attempt to ex- 
 uaid lier dominions drew u]X)n her the ven^eaiiceof 
 
 ACCHO. 
 
 M 
 
 that conqueror, wlio, in ii.c. 70, reduci d Ptolemais^ 
 and, while thus enijdoyi'd, rcce'ved with favoui 
 the .lewish embassy wiiich was s<'iil by Queci. Alex- 
 andra, with valualile jiresents, lo.M'ik his fiii iMlshij; 
 (xiii. Ifi, 4). A (vw yeais aft< r, Ptolemais was ab- 
 sorbed, with all the country. into thi-]^)manem])iK' 
 and the rest of its ancient history is obscure ;uid (.• 
 litlle note. It is only mentioned in the New Testa 
 ment from St. Paul having spiiil a (hiy there on 
 his voyage to Cwsarea (Acts xxi. 7). The impoit- 
 ance acquired by tlie last-named city throngl 
 the m(de constructed liy Ileiod, and the saft 
 harbour thus formed, must have had some eii'ect 
 on the prosperity of Ptidemais ; but it continued 
 a place of imp(irta»ice, an<l was the seat of a 
 bishopric in the fii-st ages of the Christian Chuich. 
 The see was filled sometimes iiy oithodox and 
 sometimes by Arian bishops ; and it has tiie 
 equivocal distinction of iiaving been the Ijirth- 
 jilace of the Sabellian heresy (Niceph. vi. 7). 
 Accho, as we may now again call it, was an 
 imjierial ganison town wiien the Saracens invaded 
 Syria, and was one of those that held out until 
 Csesarea was taken by Annn, in x.n. 63'S {Mod. 
 Univ. Hist. i. 473). 
 
 The Friinks first became masters of it in a.u. 
 1 110, w hen it w as taken by Baldwin, king of Jeru- 
 salem. But in A.D. 1 1 87 it was recovered by Salah- 
 ed-ilin, who retained it till a.d. 1191, when it was 
 retaken by tlie Cliristians. This was the faniouH 
 siege in which Ricliard C<Eur-de-Lion made 8C 
 distinguished a figure. The Chiistlans kept it 
 exactly one hundred years, or till a.d. 1291 ; and 
 it was the very last place of which they were dis- 
 possessed. It had been assigne<l to llie Knights 
 Hospitallei-s of Jerasalem, who fortified it strongly, 
 and defended it valiantly, till it was at length 
 wrested fiom them by Khalil l)en Kelaoun, Sultan 
 of Egypt, who is called Melek Seruf l)y C'iiristian 
 writers (D'Herbelot, in ' Acca ;' Will, 'f yr. 1. xxiii. 
 c. 6, 7 ; Vitriacus, cap]). 25, 99, 100; (^uau'smiiw. 
 toni.ii. ]).P97). Under this dominion it leniained till 
 A.D. 1517, when the Mamluke dynasty was over- 
 thrown by Selim I., and all its teiritories p:issed 
 to the Turks {Chronica de Si/r/a, lil>. v. caji. 1 ; 
 Mod. Univ. Hist. b. xv. c. 10, i 2). After thi. Acre 
 remained in quiet ofiscurity till the mitldleof the 
 last century, when the Arab Sheikh Daher ti,t)k 
 it by suipiise. Under him the place n co\eied 
 some of its trade and inqioitance. He was sue- 
 ceeded by the barbarous but ab'e tyrant I)je/./.ar 
 Pash;i, who strengthened the fcvtilicatioiis and im- 
 proved tlic town. Under him it rose once moie 
 into fame, througli the gallarJ and successl'iil 
 resistance which, under the direction of Sir Sid- 
 ney Smith, it offered to the arms of Bnonapaite. 
 After that the fortifications were further stiength- 
 ened, till it became the strongest place in all 
 Syria. In 1S32 the town was boieged for neaily 
 six months by Ibraliini l^asha, duiing wliicli 
 35,000 shells were thrown into it, and the build- 
 ings were literally lieaten to jiieces (Hogg's l)a- 
 masctts, pp. I6()-lfi<)). It had by no mean* 
 recovered fiom this calamity, when it was suli- 
 jected tc the operations of the English fleet iindei 
 Admiral Sto])ford, in jiuisuance of the plan \'<m 
 restoring Syria to the Porte. On the 3icl of No- 
 vemlier, 1840, it was lionibanh-il for several lours, 
 when the exphision of the jxiwder-niaga/.ine de- 
 stroyed the garrison and laid the town in nairw 
 TNaoier's If'a;- in !>i/ria).
 
 40 
 
 ACCOM.M )I)ATI{).V. 
 
 .•iCCOMMDD.Vn JN.as n.0,1 l>y Ehev.Toj-icul 
 (iTifer>, li.i-i Ix'cn dcliiieii t,> l>e tiie iipjilicatiou of 
 f»ne t'lin,^ tu iirijliun' Uy analogy. Tiiij delinitioii, 
 however, rs l.ir ♦'i.)tn Ueiti^^ oinjjleti;, ai the term, 
 at least in nioilevii fiim-s, I'ii' Iv-eu nstnl in vaiions 
 wni ie>i. 
 
 It has l)een a])ptieil ti) the form 0!" instiuc- 
 ti.ni in which it lias ])!eiiseil the Alniiii^hty to 
 Cijinmuuicafe his will ti> niankiiul. Tlius the 
 St'iijiUle i?!na.res anil anthrDjximorphitic expiessions 
 which, were U3»l )',)v tiie conveyance o? divine 
 '.nth;, ei|«*cJally in tlie jni'aiicy of mankind, are 
 Jieijiieiuly di'noiniii;i'ft'<l accom^/tmlation. To 
 exjiress thij .sen* jhe teim dicene coitdescoiaioa 
 'i.n h'en also enijirldyed. \t i* meant thereby 
 'hat G.kI, in onler to lead iMiuikiml to a know- 
 ledge liC relij;ion and morality, hiiiMUed hirn elf 
 },) the vveafciies*, the prevailing'- ignnirauce, n>odes 
 ">!' tli()ir,Hit, and .s]jirit(uvl wants of irjen, and ctun- 
 rwiinicated frutlH nmlev various images [An- 
 Tiii{op(>jK>Rt»i2i>si}. When it is considered that 
 the first oracles of our holy religwn ave the earliest 
 monuments of Imimin thought extant, and pre- 
 serve the memorials of the infancy of s(x;iety, antl 
 that, ?n ortler to attain their end — that of coni- 
 muniaitiny instrnctton — they iTiust be accommo- 
 dated in their form to the prevalent mi)des of 
 thotight antl lan^age, we may readily jierceive 
 the reasons for the emplo\'ment of figurative ex- 
 pressions and typical symbols. (See Archbishop 
 Whately's Bampton Lectures ; also, Lectures on 
 TheolcKjy, by the Rev. W. D. Coiiybeave, Lond. 
 183t)). This is called divine condescension, 
 in order to disting^uisli it from human, which 
 consists in a teacher's adapting himseli' to the 
 modes of thonglit and imperfections of men, with 
 'he tlesign of leading them to iVeih knowledge 
 and better views. This is considered to be a neces- 
 sary condescensicm to the weakness of the ignorant 
 and uncivilized. Few, it is maintained, w(Hild 
 have received wVxilesome tmths if the teacher had 
 Jiot regulated himself according to this system, 
 at least, in matters of s)tbordi)iate irainort, so iar 
 as this could be done without jirejiidice to the 
 truth. Tlie yierson who emplovs this methofl is 
 saiil to s])eak tear o'lKoyo/Aai', or economically 
 (See Seller's Biblical Ilermcneutics, by the Rev. 
 W. Wright, LL.D., L.md. ISli-l, § 31, &c.). 
 Symlu>ls, types, parables, and allegories are in- 
 cluded under this i'o\m of instruction, of which, 
 in all its jiarts, the insjjired teachers both uniler 
 fhe former as well as the Christian disji^ensation, 
 are considered to have availed themselves in the 
 communication of. the divine will. They con- 
 formed themselves to the capacities of their 
 nearers, and did not think it necessary to refute 
 •lupli of their errors as had no connection with 
 relijrious truth? Bu* ir modern times and es- 
 pecially within tlie last half-century, tne principle 
 of accommodation in dogmatic theology has, in 
 tlie inteij>iet.,ition of the Scripture.^, far exceeded 
 these limits. While sober inteqjreters allowed 
 that it was tlie duty of a relig ous instructor to 
 reserve the inculcation of certain religious trutlis, 
 which the hearers were yet inailecjuate to compre- 
 liend, or admitted that the ins])ired teachers 
 adopted the prevailing opinions in natural science, 
 Or even in regard to genealogical records, or 
 jjoints of clironology and other topi<;s unconnected 
 with the salvation of mankind — -such as the re- 
 ceived jx>pular notions respecting demons— or, at 
 
 ACCOMMODATION. 
 
 least, would not disturb the minds of their lioaien 
 by correcting their notions on such subjects — tii»! 
 advocates of this theory, feeling the difficulty o( 
 fixing the exact limits of the system, or cods! 
 dering the only sulistaiitial truths to \>e those of 
 natural religion, jirocceded to the leng-tli of holding 
 that all beyond thes<', including every jieculiai 
 doctrine of Christianity, was a mere accommoda- 
 tion to the prejudices or expectations of their con- 
 temporaries. Tliey thus confounded what was 
 true, viz., accommodation in the form, with — 
 what was inconsistent with the character of a 
 ilivine revelation, or even with that of an u])righ{ 
 human legislator — accommodatioiii in the tnattei 
 of their instincfions ; every tiling Jnyst.eriotis and 
 difficult, the veiy notion that Ciiristianity was a 
 revelation from lieaven, was said to be merely a 
 wi.se condescension to the weakness of foymer ages ; 
 and this system long continued to be the prevalent 
 one in Germany. Others have maintained that the 
 sacred vvriters were themselves not tree from fhe 
 errors and prejudices of theiycoimtrymen,and that, 
 instead of accommodating thenjselves tothese,tliey 
 were only teaching what they believed to l>e true. 
 The question has assumed a new shape since the 
 rise and devtiopment of this latter view, according 
 to which fhe ajiostles ba^e lieen placed, in regard 
 to their interpretations, said to l>e derived from the 
 Rabbinical schools, on a level with the mass of their 
 countrymen. The general inclination and tend- 
 ency of the system is this — that in the New Testa- 
 ment we shall find only the opinions of Christ 
 and the apBfles, and not religious and eterr.al 
 tiuths. The principle of dogmatical accommo- 
 dation, to a certain extent, has, in various degrees, 
 exercised from an early age an inttuence on the 
 interpretation of the Scriptures ; but it diil not 
 assume its present form bel'ore the time of Semler, 
 in whose writings we fintl the g^rm, at least, of 
 that system which has been considered ;is the most 
 formidable weajion ever devised for tlie destruction 
 oi'Chiisfiani'v {KixxiPr'Acstantism in Germany, 
 p. 75, Lond. 1S29> 
 
 The dogmatical accommodation has been also 
 called, in latter times historical interpretation, in 
 contradistinction io grammatical, or doctrinal, 
 inasmuch as it refers to the alleged transient 
 opinions of a peculiar age, wliich the inspired 
 te<ichers are said to have employer! in their in- 
 structions. Those who support this theory are 
 strongl.y opposeil to verbal, or what they designate 
 literal criticism, which they contemn as being 
 barren, minute, and of little value, as if it had 
 reference only to words and syllables ; but ex- 
 perience has shown that where verbal criticism 
 has been neglected, literature has been unknown 
 or uncultivated (Preface to Tittman's Melcte- 
 tnutc ^acra. See also Storr, De fiensti Histo- 
 rico Scriptura Sacrce, and his Dissertation hn 
 the Object of the Death of Christ ; also his 
 Conjidcntial Letters on tlie sttbject of Religion; 
 Haupt's hemerkimgen iiher die Lehrart Jesu, 
 Heringa, Verhandeling, ten betooge, dat Jesus 
 end zgn Apostelen zich doorgaans tiiet gesohiki 
 hcbben naar de Verkeerde denkheeMen van 
 htmne tgdgeenooten ; Reason and Revelation, by 
 Crusius; Planck's Introduction to Theological 
 Sciences, in Biblical Cabinet, vol. vii.; Lesss Let- 
 ters on the Principle of Accommodation ; Lang, 
 in Flatt's Magazine ; Meyer's Attempt ; Tzschir> 
 ner's Memorabilir and Starck's Dialogues, pp.
 
 ACCOMMODATIUA 
 
 ? 13-1 16. Tlu; doctrine has been ili'.'eiuied, with 
 /aiions limitations, by Vogel, in his Aiifsiitze, 
 Mid in his Mint/al of Practical DMnitu ; anii 
 j)v Sdiott, in his Journal for Chrqijmen. See 
 liso Uaners Ucrmemutik, ^ 1 17-151', p. 12M2r); 
 und Wri-iit's .S<:'(7(7-, ^S :>(!1-2'/(j, p. n«-138 : these 
 paiagraplis are thus velened lo by .lahn, Enclii- 
 rldion IhrmcneuticcF, ]>. 19). — \V. \V. 
 
 .ACCOMMODATION (exegetical or sjiecial) 
 IS pnnci])ally ('mploycd in the application of ct>r- 
 tain jxissai^es of the Old Testament to events in 
 tiie New, to which i'ley had no actual historical 
 nr ty))ical reference. In this sense it is also called 
 illustration. Citations of this description are ap- 
 ])areiitly very frequent throuj^hout the whole New 
 Testament, but especially in the Ejiistle to the 
 Htbrewg. As the system of exegetical accom- 
 inodatioa has in modem times been tlie occasion 
 of much angry controversy, it will Ije necessary 
 to enter somewhat minutely into its character 
 and history. 
 
 It cannot be denied that many such passages, 
 altliough apparently introduced as referring t"o, or 
 ])redictive of, certain events recorded in the New 
 Testament, seem to have, in their original con- 
 nection, an exclusive reference to quite other ob- 
 jects. The difficult}- of reconciling such seeming 
 misajiplications, or detlections from their original 
 design, has been felt in all ages, although it has 
 been chiefly reserved to recent times to give a 
 solution of the difficulty bj' the theory ai accom- 
 inoclatioa. By this ;t is meant that the projihecy 
 w citation from the Old Testament was not de- 
 signed literally to apply to the event in question, 
 but that the New Testament writer merely adopted 
 it for tlie sake of ornament, or in order to jiroduce 
 a strong impression, by showing a remarkable 
 parallelism between two analogous events, which 
 had in themselves no mutual relation. 
 
 There is a catalogue of more than seventy of 
 these acconmiodated passages adduced by the 
 Rev. T, H. Home, in support of this theory, in his 
 Introduction to the Critical Study of the Holy 
 Scriptures (vol. ii. part i. ch. iv. sect. 11, p. 343, 
 "ith ed. IS34), but it will suffice for our piu- 
 pose to select the following specimens, which are 
 those given by Jahn, in his Enchiridion Iler- 
 meneuticce, ^ 31 : — 
 
 Matt. xiii. 35, cited from Psalm Ixxviii. 2. 
 „ viii. 17 „ Isaiah liii. 4.* 
 
 „ ii. 15 „ Hosea xi. 1. 
 
 „ ii. 17,18 „ Jeremiah xxxi. 15. 
 
 „ iii. 3 „ Isaiah xl. 3. 
 
 It will be necessiry, for the com])lete elucida- 
 tioii of the subject, to bear in mind the distinction 
 not only between accommodated passages and 
 such as must ije jiroperly explained (as those which 
 are absolutely ailduced as proofs), but also be- 
 tween such ])assages and those which are merely 
 l)orrowed, anil a])]jlied by the sacred writers, some- 
 times in a higher sense than they were used by the 
 
 ACCUMxMODATION. 
 
 4^ 
 
 * Jahn has observed that the quotation from 
 the Old Testament in this passage ' lie cast out 
 ■iie s))irits witli iiis word, and iiealed all that were 
 •«ck. that it luir/ht be fulfilled which teas spoken 
 'ty Esaias, saying. Himself took ottr infirmities, 
 *nd bare our sicknesses,' is constantly used in 
 Its pio])fr sense when cited in other parts of the 
 Kew Testament. 
 
 original authors. Passages which do not stri tly 
 and literally jiredict future events. l)ut which can 
 be applied to an event recorded in tiie New Testa- 
 ment by an accidental jiarity of circiimstancis, 
 can alone l)e tiuis designated. Such accommo- 
 dated ])a9sages toerefore, if tliey exist, can oidy be 
 considereil as descriptive, and not ]ireiiictive. 
 
 It will here be necessary to consider the variou* 
 modes in whicli the prophecies of the Old T<'>ia- 
 meiit are suj)]iosed to be fulfilled in the New. 
 For instance, the ()])inioii has lieen tiaintained 
 by several divines, and is adopted in Mi. 
 Ilome's Introduction, that there is sometimes a 
 literal, sometimes only a mediate, typical, or 
 S]jiritual fulfilment. Sometimes a projihecy is 
 cited merely by way of illustration (acconniioda- 
 tion), while at otiier times notiiijig more exists 
 than a mere allusion. Scmie projihecies aie suj,- 
 posed to have an immediate literal fullilment. and 
 to have been afterwards accomplisiieil in a large' 
 and more extensive sense; but as the full de- 
 velopment of this part of the subject appertains 
 more jiroperly to the much controverted question 
 of the single and double sense of pro])hecy, we 
 shall here dwell no further on it than to observe, 
 that not only are commentators who sujiport the 
 theory of a double sense divided on tiie very im- 
 jiortant question, what are literal pro])hecies and 
 what are only prophecies in a secondary sense, 
 but they who are agreed on this question are at 
 variance as to wh.it apjiellation shall be given to 
 those passages which are applied by tiie New Testa- 
 ment writers to the mirristry of ourSa\ jour, and yet 
 historically belong to an antecedent period. In 
 order to lessen the difficulty, a distinction has 
 been attempted to be drawn, by Dathe and others, 
 from the formula with which the quotation is 
 ushered in. Passages, for instance, introduced 
 by the formula 'iva irKripooOfj, ' that ir might be 
 fulfilled,' are considered, on this account, as di- 
 rect predictions by some, who are willing to con- 
 sider citations introduced with the expression 
 Tore fTr\r]pcv6'ri, ' then was fulfilled,' as nothing 
 more than accommodations. The use of the 
 former phrase, as apjilied to a mere accommoda- 
 tion, they maintain is not warranted liy Jewish wri- 
 ters : such passages, therefore, they hold to be pro- 
 phecies, atieast in a secondary sense (see Bishop 
 Marsh "s seventeenth Le<;tiire, in which, however, 
 he justly observes, that if all prophecies were to be 
 considered such only in a secondary or mystical 
 sense, they would lose much of their satisfactory 
 character). Bishop Kidder {Demonstration of 
 the Messias, part ii. p. 81, Lond 1726) ajiw- 
 sitely observes, in regard to this subje-t, that ' a 
 scripture may be said to be fulfilled seieval ways, 
 viz., ])roperly and in the letter, as when that wiiicii 
 was foretold comes to pass; or again, wlien what 
 was fulfilled in the ty]ie is fulfilled again in the 
 antitype ; or else a scripture may lie fulfilled more 
 improperly, viz., by way of accommodation, as 
 when an event happens to any jilace or people like 
 to that which fell out some time before.' He in- 
 stances the citation. Matt. ii. 17. ' In Ramah was 
 a voice heard," .ic. ' Tiiese words," he adds, ' are 
 made use of by way of allusion to exjires^s thia 
 sorrow by. The evangelist doth not say " that it 
 mij'ht be fulfilled,'" but " then was fulfilleil," q.d., 
 sucli another scene took jilace.' 
 
 It must at the same time be admitted that this 
 distinction in regard to tlie fomiula of (juotatioa
 
 43 
 
 ACCOMMODATION. 
 
 18 not acknowledged by the majority of commen- 
 tators, either of those who admit or of those who 
 deny tne theory of accommodation. Among tiie 
 former it will suffice to name Calmet, Doddridge, 
 Roseinniiller, and Jahn, who look ujjon passages 
 introduced by thie formula ' that it miglit be ful- 
 filled,' as equally accommodations with those 
 which are prefaced by the words ' then was ful- 
 filled;' while those who deny the accommodative 
 theory altogether, consider both as formulas of 
 direct prophecies, at least in a secondary or typi- 
 ciA sense. This, for instance, is the case espe- 
 cially in regard to tne two citations of this de- 
 scription whicli first present themselves in the 
 New Testament, viz. Matt. ii. 15, and Matt. ii. 
 17, the former of which is introduced by tlie 
 first, and the latter by the second of. these for- 
 mulas. But inasmuch as the commentators above 
 referretl to cannot perceive how the citation from 
 Hosea xi. 1, ' Out of Egypt have I called my 
 son,' although prefaced by the formula ' that it 
 might be fulfilled,' and which literally relates to 
 the calling f)f the children of Isi-ael out of Egypt, 
 can be prophetically diverted from its historical 
 meaning, tliey look upon it as a simple accommo- 
 dation, or applicable quotation, and consider the "va 
 ■K\-i)ji(j3Qfj as a Jewish formula of accommodation. 
 Mr. Hoine, after referring in support of this ex- 
 plication to some questionable examples from Su- 
 renhusius's B:/8Aos KaraWayris, and Rosenmiiller's 
 Commentary on the Neio Testament, observes, that 
 ' it was a familiar idiom of the Jews, when quoting 
 the writings of the Old Testament, to say, that it 
 might be fulfilled which was spoken by such and 
 such a prophet, not intending it to be understood 
 tliat such a particular passage in one of the sacred 
 books was ever designed to be a real prediction of 
 what they were then relating, but signifying only 
 that the words of the Old Testament might be 
 |iroperly adopted to express their meaning and 
 illustrate their ideas' (^Introduction, vol. ii. part i. 
 ch. 4). ' Tlie apostles,' he adds, ' who were Jews 
 by birth, and wrote and spoke in the Jewish 
 idiom, frequently thus cite the Old Testament, 
 intending no more by this mode of speaking, than 
 that the Avords of such an ancient writer might 
 with equal propriety be adopted to characterize 
 any similar occurrence which happened in tlieir 
 times. The fonnula " that it might be fulfilled," 
 <U)es not therefore difi'er in signification from the 
 phrase " then was fulfilled," applied in the fol- 
 lowhig citation in Matt. ii. 17, IS, from Jer. 
 xxxi. 15-17^ to the massacre of the infants at 
 Bethlehem. They are a beautiful quotation, 
 and not a pTf-diction of what then happened, 
 and are therefore applied to the massacre of 
 the infants according not to their original and 
 iiistorical meaning, but according to Jewish 
 phraseology.' Dr. Adam Clarke, also, in his 
 Commentary on Jeremiah (jtxxi. 15-17), takes the 
 same view : — ' St. Matthew, who is ever fond of 
 accommodation, applied these words to the mas- 
 sacre of tlie children of Bethlehem ; that is, they 
 were suitable to that occasion, and therefore he 
 applied them, but they are not a prediction of that 
 e\ent. So opposed, however, was the late Rev. 
 Hugh James Rose to tils principle of accommo- 
 dation, that he included the application of it to 
 tills very jjassage among those which ought to ex- 
 clude Kuinoel as a commentator from the library 
 fcf tlie tlii'ological studt'iit (Supplement to State 
 
 ACCOMMOD.\TION, 
 
 of Protestantis7)i, p. xlil.); and the Rev. Clia* 
 Forster, in his Critical Essays, p. 59, in wliich 
 he altogether opposes the theory, designates the 
 distinction attempted to be drawn by Dathe and 
 Bishop Marsh between the firmulas of citation 
 as " in all its bearings fanciful and licentious." 
 Mr. Forster's view is, that in tlie return of the 
 Messiah out of Egyjit, and in his return alone, 
 the promise of the Lord to Rachel (Jer. xxxi. '16}, 
 ' and tliey shall come again from the land ol 
 the enemy,' which was figuratively fulfilled in 
 the return of the Jews of the three generations 
 from tlie captivity in Babylon, was adetjuately and 
 literally fulfilled, and that Ills coming again out 
 of Egypt is an event distinctly predicted of the 
 Messiah, under the figure of Israel in Egyptian 
 bondage (Ho-, xi. 1). 
 
 In the same manner he infers tliat, so far from 
 the prophecy In Jer. xxxi. lieing an accommo- 
 dation of the e\angelist's, the pro))het himself had 
 diverted to his immediate puqiose (the Babylonish 
 captivity), in the way of accommodation only, the 
 prophetic type (Gen. xxxv. 16-19) from its proper 
 object, the birth of the Messiah at Bethlehem, in 
 which the historical type found its literal fulfil- 
 ment (Critical Essays, p. 34). 
 
 D. J. G. Rosenmiiller gives as examples, which 
 he conceives clearly show the use of these for- 
 mulas, the passages Matt. i. 22, 23 ; ii.' 15, 17, 23 ; 
 XV. 7 ; Luke iv. 21 ; James ii. 23 ; alleging that 
 they were designed only to denote that something 
 took place which resembled the literal and historical 
 sense. The sentiments of a distinguished English 
 divine are to the same ellect : — ' I doubt not that 
 this phrase, " that it might be fulfilled," and the 
 like were used first in quoting real jirophecies, but 
 tliat this, by long use, sunk in it5 value, and was 
 more vulgarly applied, so that at last it was given 
 to scripture only accommodated.' And again, 
 'If prophecy could at last come to signify sing- 
 ing (Titus i. 12; 1 Sam. x. 10 ; 1 Cor. xiv. 1), 
 why might not the -[hrnse fulfilliiiy of Scripture 
 and projjhecy signify only quotation' (Niclioll's 
 Conference with a Theist, 1698, part ill. p. 13). 
 
 The accommodation theory in exegetlcs ha» 
 been equally combated by two classes of oj)po- 
 iients. Those of the more ancient school con- 
 sider such mode of apjilicafion of the Old Testa- 
 ment passages not only as totally iireconcilable 
 with the plain grammatical construction and ob- 
 vious meaning of the controverted passages whl sh 
 are said to be so applied, but as an unjustifiable 
 artifice, altogether unworthy of a divine teacher; 
 while the other class of expositors, who are to be 
 found chiefly among the most modern of the 
 German (so called) Rationalists, maintain that the 
 sacred writers, having been themselves trained in 
 this erroneous mode of teaching, liad mistakenly, 
 but bona fide, interpreted the pa>.sages which they 
 had cited from the Old Testament in a sense 
 altogether dill'erent from their historical meaning, 
 and thus anplied them to the history of the Chris- 
 tian dispensation. Some of tliese have maintained 
 that the accommodation theory was a mere shift 
 (see Rosenmiiller's lUstoria Interpretationis^^ 
 resorted to by commentators who could not other- 
 wise explain the application of Old Testamem 
 prophecies in the New consistently wltli the inspi- 
 ration of the sacred writers : while the aUvocateg 
 of the system consider that the apostles, in adajit- 
 ing themsehes to the mode of interpretation whick
 
 ACCOMMODATION. 
 
 «as customary in tlieir days, and in further 
 adopting what may be considered an argument 
 e concessis, were emjiloying the most jiersuasive 
 mode of oratory, and the one most likely to jmne 
 elfectMal ; and that it was therefore lawiul to 
 adopt a method so calculated ro attract atten- 
 •,ion to their divine mission, which they were at 
 all times prepared to give evidence of by other 
 and irrefragable proofs. 
 
 We shall conclude with giving a brief sketch 
 of the history of this method of interpretation. 
 Mr. Stuart, of Andover, in the Excursus to his 
 Commentary on Hebrews, alleges that the fathers 
 of the church had no hesitation in applying this 
 system to the interpretation of the Scriptures. But 
 he has furnished us with no example of their cri- 
 tical ajiplication of it, and any such aiiplication 
 seems to us scarcely compatible with the allegori- 
 cal fancies to which they seem to have been ad- 
 dicted. The difference, indeed, had been at all 
 times felt, from Origeii downwards, between the 
 Historical sense of the citations, and tliat to which 
 they are apjilied in die New Testament ; and ex- 
 positors have been divided into two classes ; the 
 one making die New Testament interpretation 
 the rule for the explanation of Old Testament 
 passages, and tlie otiier attempting, in various 
 ■ways, to reconcile the discrepancy (see Tho- 
 luck's Commentary on Ilebretcs). But t!ie fiist 
 who appears to have led the way to the moile of 
 intei-jjretation in question, was Theoilore of Mop- 
 suestia, in the tifth century, who, so far as we can 
 jnd^•e from the few writings of his which liave 
 come down to us, was decidedly favourable to 
 literal and historical intei-pretation. He con- 
 sidered that tlie Old Testament contained very 
 few direct projjhecies of tlie Messiah, and in re- 
 ference to other quotations, such as that in John 
 xix. 24, and Rom. x. 6, observes that the .apostle 
 ' alters the phiase to suit it to ids argument ' (see 
 Tlioluck's Commentary on Hebrews). And 
 again, in reference to Psalm xxii. 19, Theodore 
 obser\es that die second verse, and consequently 
 Hie psalm itself, cannot possibly reler to Him 
 ' who did no sin, neitlier was guile found in His 
 mouth ;' but that as our Lord on the cross cited 
 tile woidsof tlie psalm, ' My God, my God, why 
 hast thoii forsaken me 'f the apostle, on tliis ac- 
 count, accommodated to Christ the words of tliis 
 verse also : ' They parted my gannents among 
 them,' and for my vesture did they cast lots.' 
 Hf seems at the same time to have acknowledged 
 thu existence of a higher and lower sense, for he 
 obser\ es tiiat some passages referring to the Mes- 
 siah had been ' liyperbolically applied to his- 
 toriral pereonages in the Olil Testament,' and 
 says of Psalm Ixix. 22, that the words may, in 
 another sense, he referred to our Lord, although the 
 Psalm did not historically refer to him (see 
 Rosenmulier's Historia Interpi'etationis, vol. iii. 
 2r>()). Rosenmiiller conceives, from an exjires- 
 sion of Nicholas Lyranus, that he (Nicholas) 
 had at leas' a glimpse of this system. But the 
 person who. * so far as modem theology is con- 
 cerned,' to use the words of the R'iv. J. J. Cony- 
 beare {Batnpton Lectures), ' was the first and most 
 erninent patron and ailvocate of the system ' was 
 Calvin, who ' adopted princijiles of exposition 
 which, since the condemnation of Theodore, in the 
 3ftii centiiry, had -carcely perliaps been heard of, 
 anl assuredly liever been entertained in iLe 
 
 ACCOMMOD.VTION. 
 
 44 
 
 Christian church.' Erasmus and Luther had, no 
 doubt, led the way by their advocacy of die 
 literal interjjretation ; but, even in jiassagt's wliich 
 have been supposed to bear a double n^lalioii to the 
 Jewisii and Chrislian church, Cuh in appears 
 rather to ground such ajiplication on the naliire 
 and similarity of the suiijects and tlieir condi- 
 tion, than ujion anything of a distinctly tyjiica? 
 and proplietical ciiaracter. He is, theicliire, di.s- 
 ])osed to look not so much for an iiitintion origin- 
 ally s[)iritual and iHedictive ol' higher things, us 
 for the autliorilative application of a new and 
 more extended sense liy the inspired writers th<-ni- 
 selves. On Heb. ii. fi, lie remaiks. ' tiiat it wits n. 5 
 the apostles intention to give the genuine eiqr./si- 
 tion of die words, and diat no inconvenience can 
 result from sii])pojing tiiat the apostie makes hIIu- 
 sions to the Oid Testameiit jiassage for tlie sake 
 of embellishment.' In regard to tlie passages in 
 Matt. ii. 15-17, already cited, he observes, ' be- 
 yond controversy, the passage Hos. xi. 1, must 
 not be restricted to Christ :" and in reference to the 
 second quotation (Jerem. xxxi. 1.5), he says ' it is 
 ceifain that the j)ro|)het ivl'ers to the slaughter of 
 the tribe of Benjamin, which took place in his 
 own time ; and Matthew, in citing the words of 
 the prophet, does not mean that this was a pieiiic- 
 tion of what Herod was about to do. but that 
 there was a renewal <if the lamentation of the Ben- 
 jamites." And again, ' Non tam inijjetiatur, (juani 
 jiiii dejfexione ad Chrisfi peisonaii accommodui' 
 (Calvin's Commentary on Jl(.b''eiiS, jiassim). 
 
 But while the credit of this invention has been 
 thus attributed to Calvin, ' a writer, whom on 
 the one hand no one w-ill accuse of any Neo- 
 logian tendency, while on the other the most 
 sober and judicious critic will find nothing in his 
 exposition revolting to the strictest lules of just 
 interpretation' (Lvetures, dtc, by W. J). Cony- 
 b'eare), the doctrine of accommodation, once em- 
 ployed for tlie jmr]Hise of discauling all sjjiritual 
 and allegorical methods of inteipietatiori, was at 
 a liter period exteiideil to all that had been 
 hitheito considered as tyjiical. In England, Dr. 
 Sykes, in his answer to Collins, and in tlie jiie- 
 face to his Commentary on (he Epistle to t/ifi 
 Hebreics, surrendered the whole scheme of typical 
 prefiguration and secondary jiroiihecy, as desti- 
 tute of ])roof, and accommodated to the mission of 
 our Loid in comlescension to the reigning preju- 
 dices of the jieojile. Le Cleic carried his notions 
 of accommociation to sUv excess, as nearly to in- 
 validate the prophetical clia. -cler of die Old Testa- 
 ment altogether, and consider.nbly to depieciate 
 the divine audiority of the Ne.v ; and Sender 
 ])ronounced all the references maiu in Scripture 
 by our blessed Lord and his discijiles, to lie the 
 mere result of a compliance with the false and 
 Rabbinical theories of_^their unenlightened coun- 
 trymen. 
 
 Among those who, in modc-n times, have most 
 ably vindicated the syste' ol' the ty]iiral iiiter- 
 jiietation of jirophecv,, :^s o])])osed to the accom- 
 modation dieory, is Professor Tholiick, of Jjcrlin, 
 in the Dissertniion atlixed to his Comni< ntary 
 en Hebrews. He docs not, indeed, deny all in- 
 stances of accommodation, but refers i great 
 number of passages viliich had been .so inlerjiif<',»i 
 fas Matt. ii. 1').' IS; xxvii. 9,3.'); J(-!.ii i;i. U- 
 xix. 21, 3(5 ; Acts i. 20 ; ii. 27-31) to iiic clbM 
 of typical prouhecies
 
 •4 ACCUBATION. 
 
 The only canon furnislied l)y Professor Tholucl 
 for ilistin;^nisliing between types and accommo- 
 dation is, tlie consideration of the importance of 
 the subject t'^ which they are applied — a rule 
 which must ever be vague and unsatisfactory. The 
 Rev. J. J. Conybeare is of opinion tliat we are 
 * not to look for any secondary sense but what is 
 inlierent in and consequential on the typical, the 
 typical being determined by the real and essential 
 points of analogy between the cormected objects.' 
 Professor Tholuck had been preceded by Bilroth 
 in his Commeiiianj on Corinthians, who had ob- 
 served in reference to the citation in 1 (]or. i. 19, 
 that we are ' not to look for a strict historical 
 identity between the meaning which St. Paul 
 attaches to the passages, and that entertained by 
 tlieir original authors, but merely a connection of 
 an analogical kind.' Bilroth then proceeds to vin- 
 dicate the sacred writers from the charge of igno- 
 rance, if not disingenuousness, by the consideration 
 Inat Ihe Old Testament, taken as a whole, is a 
 type C'f the New. This is the idea on which 
 Tholuck has enlarged, and wliic'n, he thinks, dis- 
 pels all misconception on the subject ; but Bil- 
 roth's translator observes tliat, if it be meant that 
 ' tlie declarations of the propliets, instead of being 
 actual descriptions of the coming Messiah, directly 
 communicated by divine impulse, were merely 
 poetical delineations of persons or events connected 
 with Jewish history, and intended by the divine 
 Spirit to be typical of what was to happen in after 
 times, then were tliey, correctly speaking, no pro- 
 phecies at all, and it was vain and foolish in our 
 Lord and his apostles to appeal (o the fulfilment 
 9f them in Him and His church, as a jivoof that 
 oe was the Messiah to whom they referred.' The 
 ivriter conceives it to be more philosophical to 
 consider the Old Testament passages as having 
 the meaning which the apostle ascril^es to them, 
 than suppose our own inteipretation of them to be 
 correct, or attempt to explain them in an accom- 
 modative or even typinal sense. To remark on 
 these views would amount to a re-openiiig of the 
 question : we shall, therefore, conclude these ob- 
 servations in the words of the temperate and 
 judicious writer w.iom we have already cited. 
 
 ' Although, even the most cautious and un- 
 questionably pious expositors of Scripture have 
 admitted that some few passages of the Old 
 Testament, quoted or referred to in the New, 
 rKust, in the jiresent state of our knowledge, be 
 regarded as so applied or accommo<lated to the 
 description and illustration of sulijects foreign to 
 their onginal scope and intention, yet it is surely 
 unreasonable and uncritical to argue from these 
 few to the whole, or even the larger portion of 
 those sayings, which we are assured that holy men 
 of old uttered, as the spirit directed and enabled 
 them ' (Ba/npton Lectures, by J. J. Convheare, 
 Oxford. 1^2fi).— W.W. 
 
 ACCUBATION. the posture of reclining on 
 ccnjches at table, which prevailed among the Jews 
 in and liefore the time of Clirist. We see no rea- 
 son to think that, as commonl.y alleged, they bor- 
 rowed this custom from the Romans after Judea 
 had been subjugated by Pompey. But it is best 
 known to us as a Roman custom, and as such 
 must be described. The dinner-bed, or triclinium, 
 stood in the middle of the dining-room, clear of 
 ■ lie walls, and formed tiiree sides of a square 
 which enclosed the table. The open end of the 
 
 ACCUBATION. 
 
 square, with the central hollow illowed tie servanti 
 to attend and serve the table. In aU the existing 
 representations of the dinnei-bcd it is shoan to 
 have been higher than the encUised table. Among 
 
 the Romans the usual number of guests (sn 
 each couch was three, making nine for the three 
 couches, equal to the nimiber of the Muses ; but 
 sometimes there were four to each couch. The 
 Greeks went beyond this number (Cic. In Pis. 
 27) ; the Jews appear to have had no parti- 
 cular fancy in the matter, and we know that at 
 our Lord's last supper thirteen jiersons were pre- 
 sent. As each guest leaned, during the greater 
 part of the entertainment, on his left elbow, so as 
 to leave the right arm at liberty, and as two or 
 more lay on the same couch, the head of' one 
 man was near the breast of the man wlio lay 
 behind him, and he was, therefore, said 'to 
 lie in the bosom ' of the other. This phrase ;va3 
 in use among the Jews (Luke xvi. 22, 23 ; John 
 i. 18 ; xiii. 23), and occurs in such a manner as 
 to show that to lie next below, or ' in the bosom ' 
 of the master of the feast, was considered the most 
 favoured place ; and is shown by the citations of 
 Kypke and Wetstein (on John xiii. 23) to have 
 been usually assigned to near and dear connec 
 tions. So it was ' the disciple whom Jesus loved ' 
 who ' reclined upon his breast ' at the last supper. 
 Lightfoot and others suppose that as, on that oc- 
 casion, John lay next below Christ, so Peter, who 
 was also highly favoured, lay next above him. 
 This conclusion is founded chiefly on tlie fact of 
 Peter beckoning to John that he should ask Jesus 
 who was the traitor. But this seems rathe\ .a 
 prove the contrary — that Peter was not near 
 enough to speak to Jesus himself. If he had been 
 there, Christ must have lain near his bosom, and 
 be would have been in riie best position for Wiiis- 
 pering to his master, ana in the worst for beckon- 
 ing to John. The circumstance that Christ was 
 al)le to reach the sop to Judas when he had 
 dipped it, seems to us ratlier to intimate that he 
 was tiie one who filled tliat place. Any y-erson 
 who tries the posture may see that it is not easy 
 to deliver anything but to the person next above 
 or next below. And this is not in contradiction 
 to, but in agreement with, the circumstances. 
 The morsel of favour was likely to be given to one 
 in a favoured place ; and Judas being so trusted 
 and honoured as to be the treasurer and almoner 
 of the wiiole party, might, as much as any othei 
 of the apostles, be expiected to fill that place. 
 This also gives more point to the narrative, a» 
 it aggravates liy contrast the tui-pitude and base- 
 ness of hi.s conduct. 
 
 The frame of the dinner-bed was laid with naAt- 
 tresses variously stuffed, and, latterly, was furnished 
 with rich coverings and liangings. Each nersoa
 
 ACCUBATIOIS'. 
 
 was 'WUiilly providwl witli a cushion or bolster 
 »n wiiicli ti)su])port tlic upper part ofliis pprson in 
 a smnewliat raised position; as the left arm alone 
 c(Tuld not \ong witliout weariness sustain the 
 weight. The lower part of tlie Ixidy heing ex- 
 tended diagonally on the bod, « ilh tlie feet out- 
 ward, i . is at once perceived liow easy it was for 
 ' the wunian that was a sinner " to come lieliind 
 between me dinner-bed and rlie wall, and anoint 
 the feet of Jesus (Matt. xxvi. 7; Mark xiv. 3). 
 
 Tlie dinner-beds were so various at dift'erent 
 times, in different places, and under dilferent cir- 
 cumstances, tliat no one dr8cii])tion can apply 
 to tiieni all. Kven among tlie Romans they were 
 at first (after tlie Punic war) of rude form 
 and materials, and covered with mattresses 
 stuffed with ruilies or ^traw ; mattresses of hair 
 and wool were introduced at a later period. At 
 first llie wooden frames were small, low, and 
 round; and it was not until the time of Au- 
 gustus that square and ornamented couches came 
 into fashion. In the time of Tiberius the most 
 splendid soit were veneered with costly woods or 
 tortoiseshell, and were covered with valuable em- 
 broideries, the richest of which came from Baby- 
 lon, and cost large sums (U. K. S. Pompeii, ii. 8S). 
 The Jews periiaps hail all these varieties, though 
 it is not likely that the usage was ever carried 
 to such a pitch of luxury as among the Romans ; 
 antl it is probable that the mass of tlie jieople fed 
 in the ancient manner — seated on stools or on the 
 ground. It appears that couches were often so 
 low, tliat the feet rented on the ground ; and that 
 cushions or bolsters were in general use. It would 
 also seem, from the mention of two and of three 
 couches, that the anangement was more usually 
 Btjuare than semicircular or round (Lightfuot, 
 Eor Heb. in John xiii. 23). 
 
 rf^^ ^<:-^'^f \\ rf 
 
 ACELDA.MA. 
 
 40 
 
 It is utterly improbable that the Jews derived 
 this custom from thf Romans, as is constantly 
 alleged. They certainly know it as existing amon.,' 
 Ihe Persians long before it had been adopted by the 
 Romans themselves (Esth. i. (5 , vii. S) ; and the 
 j)resin-n))tion is that they adopted il while subject 
 V that people. The Greeks also had the usage 
 (fioni the Persians) before the Romans; and with 
 Ihe Greeks of Syria the Jews had very much in- 
 tercourse. Besides, the Romans ado])ted the 
 custom from the larthaginians (Val. Max. xii. 
 1,2; Liv. xxviii. !J'5) ; "and, that thnj iiad it, 
 imjlies that it jneviously existed in Pi.opnicia, in 
 t!ie neighbourhood of the Jews. Th.is, tha' in 
 tiie time of Chris', the custom had been latelv 
 
 adopted from tlie R<nnan-:, is tlie la.st of varioiit 
 probabilities. It is also unlikely thai in so short 
 a time it should ha\e become usual ancf even (a» 
 the Talmud asserts) obligatory to eat the Piissover 
 in that iiosture of indulgent repose, and in no 
 other. All t!>e sacred and profane lileratiire of 
 this subject has bei^n most industriously brought 
 together by Sfuckiu< {Antiq. Cnnrivalium, ii.31); 
 and the works on Pom|>eii and Hercuhineum sup- 
 ply the more recent inliiimation. 
 
 ACCURSED. [Anathema.] 
 
 ACCUSER ( nn© and in l"'N ; Sept 
 and New Test. 'A»/ti5i«os). The original •.•.■'.>r]^ 
 which bears this leading signification, means. 
 1^,. One who has a cause or matter of coiit<'nlion ; 
 tlie accuser, opjioncnt, or jdaintill" in any suit 
 (Judg. xii. 2; Matt. V. 25; Luke xii. oR)." We 
 have little ini'ormafion respecring the manner in 
 which causes were cyr.diicted in the Hebrew 
 courts of justice, except from the Rabbinical au- 
 thorities, who, in matters of this ilescrijition, may 
 be supposed well informed as to ihe later custonisi 
 of the nation. Even from these we learn little 
 more than that great care was taken that, the 
 accused being deemed innocent until convicted, 
 he and the accuser should appear under equal 
 circumstances before the court, that no inejn- 
 dicial impression'might be created to the disail- 
 vantage of the defendant, whose iiiferests, we are 
 told, were so anxiously guarded, that any one was 
 allowed to speak whatever he knew or had to say 
 in his favour, which jirivilege was withiield from 
 the accuser (Lewis, Oiiyines Ilcbreece, \. 6S). 
 The word is, however, to be understood in regard 
 to the real jihiintifl', not to the advocates, who 
 only became known in the later period of the 
 Jewish history [.\dyocate]. 
 
 The word is also applied in Scripture, in tne 
 general sense, to any adversary or enemy (Luke 
 xviii. 3 ; 1 Pet. v. 8). In the latter jiassage there 
 is an allusion to the olil Jewish notion thatSalan 
 was the accuser or calumniator of men liefbre 
 God (Job i. 6, sq.; Rev. xii. 10, sq.; conip. 
 Zech. iii. 1). In this ajiplication the forensic 
 sense was still retained, Satan being represented 
 as laying to man's ciiarge a breach of the law, a."* 
 in a court of justice, &v.d demanding his punish- 
 ment [S\tan]. 
 
 ACELDAMA ('A«:eA.5o/^a, from the Syro- 
 Chaldaic, K0"=1 ?i2n. .field of hkmd), tlie field 
 purchased with the money for which Judas IjC- 
 trayed Christ, and which was appropriated as a 
 place of Inirial tor strangers (Matth. xxvii. S; Acts 
 i. 19). It was previously 'a jiotter's field.' The 
 field now shown as Aceldama lies on the slope of 
 the hills beyond the valley of Hinnom, soulli of 
 Mount Zion. This is obviously the sjiot which 
 Jerome points out ( Onomasf. s. v. ' Acheldamach"), 
 and wliich has since bein mentioned by almost 
 every one who has described Jerusalem. San- 
 dys thus writes of it : ' On the south siile of this 
 valley, neere where it meeteth with the valley of 
 Jehoshajihat, mounted a good lit ight on the side 
 of the mountain, is Acchlanta, or the field of 
 blood, ])urchase(I with the restoreil reward of trea- 
 son, f(>r a buriall place for strangers. In the 
 midst whereof a huge square roonie was m.ide by 
 the mother of Conslantine; the soulh side, walled 
 with the naturall rscke; flat at tlie top, and e<|uaH 
 with the v]i]); r level ; out of which aris<>th certaint
 
 4Q 
 
 ACHAIA. 
 
 little ci'.i>oloes, opm in the midst to let doune tlie 
 dead bodies. Tliorow tiiese we might see lUe bot- 
 tome, all couered witli bones, and certiiine corses 
 but newly let doune, it being now the sepulclire 
 of the Armenians. A greedy graue, and great 
 enough to deuoure the dead of a whole nation. 
 For they say (and I believe it), that the earth 
 tliereof within tlie space of eight and forty lioures 
 will consume the flesh that is laid thereon' (^Re- 
 lation of a Journey, p. 187). He tlien relates the 
 common storj^, that the empress referred to caused 
 270 sliip-loads of this (lesh-consuming mould to 
 be taken to Rome, to form tlie soil of the Campo 
 Sancto, to wiiich the same virtue is ascribed. Cas- 
 tela atlirms that great quantities of the wondrous 
 mould were removed by divers Christian princes 
 m tlie time of (he Crusades, and to this source 
 assigns the similar sarcopliagic properties claimed 
 not only by tlie Campo Santo at Rome, but by 
 tii9 cemetery of St. Innocents at Paris, by the 
 cemetery at Naples (Ze Sainct Voija^u de Hieru- 
 saletn, 1«693, p. 150, also Roger, p. 160); and, 
 we may add, that of the Campo Santo at Pisa. 
 
 Tlie plot of ground originally bought 'to bury 
 strangers in,' seems to liave been early set apart 
 by tlie Latins, as well as by the Crusaders, as a 
 place of burial for pilgrims (Jac. de Vitriaco, 
 p. 61). The charnel-house is, mentioned by Sir 
 John Mandeville, in the fourteenth century, as 
 bslonging to the Kniglits-hospitallers. Sandys 
 sho'.vs that, early in the seventeenth century, it was 
 in tlie possession of the Armenians. Eugene 
 Roger (La Terre Saiacte, p. 161) states that they 
 bought it for the burial of their own pilgrims, and 
 ascribes the erection of rue charnel-house to them. 
 They still possessed it in the lime of Maundrell, 
 or rather rented it, at a sequin a day, from the 
 Tmks. Corpses were still deposited tliere; and 
 the traveller observes that they were in various 
 stages of decay, from which he conjectures that 
 the grave did not make that ipiick dispatch with 
 the bodies committed to it which had been re- 
 ported. 'Vhe earth, hereabouts,' he observes, 'is 
 ■if a chalky subsbmce; the plot of ground was not 
 above thirty yards long by fifteen wide; and a 
 moiety of it was occupied by the chamel-honse, 
 which was twelve yards high" (Joiirnci/, p. 136). 
 Richardson (Travels, p. 567) affirms that iiodies 
 were thrown in as late as ISIR; but Dr. Rof)in- 
 soii alleges that it has the appearance of having 
 been for a much longer time abandoned: 'The 
 field or plat is not now marked by any Ijoundary 
 toilistinguish it from the rest of the hill-side; and 
 the farmer charnel-house, now a ruin, is all tliat 
 remains to point out the site. .. .An opening at 
 eacli end enabled us to look in; but the bottom 
 was empty and dry, ex'cepting a few bones much 
 decayed" (BiMicT,l Researches, i 521). 
 
 ACHAIA ('Axa'ia), a region of Greece, which 
 in the restricted si;nse occupied the north-westeni 
 portion of the Peloponnesus, including Corinth 
 and its isthmus (Strabo, viii. p. 43'', sq.). By 
 the poets it was often pat for the whole of 
 Greece, wnence 'Ayawi, the Greeks. Under 
 the Romans, Greece was divided into two pro- 
 vinces, Macedonia and Achaia, the foi-mer of 
 which included Macedonia pi-ojier, with Illyri- 
 cum, K[)irus, andTliessaly ; and the latter, all tliat 
 lay southward of the former (Cellar, i. p. 1170, 
 i022). It is in this latter acceptation that 
 MM name of Achaia is always e'pployed in the 
 
 ACHAN. 
 
 New Testament (Acts xviii. 12, 16; xix. 21; 
 Rom. XV. 26 ; xvi. 2.5 ; 1 Cor. xvi. 15 ; 2 Co7. 
 i. 1 ; ix. 2 ; xi. 10 ; 1 Thess. i. 7, H). Achaie 
 was at first a senatorial province, and, as such, was 
 governed by proconsuls (Dion Cass. liii. p. 704). 
 Tiberius change I the two into one imperial pro- 
 vince under procurators (T!c\.Q.\t. Annal.i.lQ); but 
 Claudius restored them to the senate and to tlie 
 proconsular form of government (Suet. Claud. 25), 
 Hence the exact and minute propriety with which 
 St. Luke expresses himself in giving the title of 
 jiroconsul to Gallio, who was appointed to the 
 province in the time of Claudius (Acts xviii. 12). 
 
 ACHAICUS ('Axai/C(is), a native of Achaia, 
 and a follower of the apostle Paul. He, with 
 Stephanas and F'ortunatus, was the bearer of the 
 1st Epistle to the CorirUliians, and was recom- 
 mended by the apostle to their special resjiec' 
 (1 Cor, xvi. 17). 
 
 ACHAN (pj?; Sept.-'Axa^, o? 'Axap, Josh. 
 vii. 1). In the parallel passage (1 Chron. ii. 7) the 
 name is spelt IDJ?, and as it has there the meaning 
 of troublintj, it is thought by som , that this is an 
 intentional change, after the fact, to give the name 
 a significant reference to the circumstance which 
 renders it notorious. The city of Jericho, before 
 it was taken, was put under that awful ban, of 
 which there are other instances in the early Scrip- 
 ture hlstorj', whereby all the inhabitants (except- 
 ing Rahab and her family) were devoted \o 
 destruction, all the combustible goods to be con- 
 sumed by fire, and all the metals to be conse- 
 crated to God. This vow of devotement was 
 rigidly observed by all the troops when Jericho 
 was taken, save by one man, Achan, a Judahite, 
 who could not resist the temptation of secreting 
 an ingot of gold, a quantity of silver, and a costlj 
 Babylonish garment, which he burled in his 
 tent, deeming that his sin was hid. But God 
 made known this infraction, which, the vow 
 liaving been made by tlie nation as one body, had 
 in^'olved the whole nation in his guilt. The 
 Israelites were defeated, with serious loss, in their 
 first attack upon Ai ; and as Joshua was well as- 
 sured that ^!-is humiliation was designed as the 
 jjunlshment of a crime whicli had inculpated the 
 whole people, he took immediate measures to dis- 
 cover the criminal. As in other cases, the matter 
 was referred to the Lortl by the lot, and the lot 
 ultimately indicated the actual criminal. The 
 conscience-stricken olVender tlien confessed liis 
 crime to Joshua; and his confession being verified 
 by the production of ills ill-gotten treasure, the 
 people, actuated by the strong impulse with which 
 men tear up, root and branch, a polluted thing, 
 hurried away not only Achan, but his tent, his 
 goods, his sjKiil, his cattle, his cliildrcn, to the 
 valley (afterwards called) of Achor, north of 
 Jericho, where they stoned lilni, and all that be- 
 longed to liim ; after wliicli tlie whole was con» 
 sumed with fire, and a cairn of stones raised 
 over the ashes. The severity of tliis act, as re- 
 gards the family of Achan, has pro^•oked some 
 remark. Instead of vlntlicatlng it, as is generally 
 done, by the allegation that tlie members of 
 Achan 's family were prolialily accessories to hi» 
 crime after the fact, we prefer the supposition tliat 
 they were included in the doom by one of tha.se 
 sudden impulses of indiscriminate popular ven- 
 geance to wliich the Jewish peojile were excewi-
 
 ACHAR. 
 
 iiigly prone, and wliicli, in this caao, it would not 
 have l)een in tlfc f/owcr of Josliua to control by 
 aiiy antliority which lie could iinilor such circum- 
 8t<inces exercise. It is admitted tliat tliis is no 
 more liian a conjoctiii-e : hut, as such, it is at 
 least worth as much, and assumes considerably 
 less, than tlic conjectures which have been oiVered 
 >-/ others (Josh. \ii.). 
 
 ACHAR. [AcuAN.] 
 
 ACHASHDARPENIM (B^3Sni^"ns; ; Sept. 
 ffarpaTrai and arpaT-qyoi; Vul;^. satrupec ; A. X. 
 ♦rulers of provinces.' It occurs in Esth. iii. 12; 
 viii. 9; ix. 3 ; and witli the Cliaidee termination 
 an, in Dan. iii. 2. 3, 27 ; vi. 2, 3). The wirrd is 
 vmdoubtedly merely another form of writing the 
 Persian word satrap, tlie origin of wliich has Ijeen 
 much disputed, and does not claim to be here 
 considered. These satraps are known in ancient 
 liistory as the governors or viceroys of the pro- 
 vinces into whicli the Persian empire was divich'd. 
 Strictly speaking, tliey had an extended civil 
 jurisdiction over several smaller {itovinces, each 
 of which had its own nPlD or governor. Thus 
 Zerulihabel an<l Nehemiah were ' governors ' of 
 Judea, under the Persian satraps of Syria (Ezra, 
 jv. 3, 6 ; Neh. ii. 9). The power and functions 
 of the Persian satraps were not materially dif- 
 ferent from those of tlie modem Persian goveniors 
 and Turkish pashas ; and, indeed, the idea of 
 provincial government by means of viceroys, en- 
 trusted with almost regal powers in their several 
 jurisdictions, and responsible only to tlie king, by 
 ivhoin they are appointed, lias always been pre- 
 valent in tlie East. The important peculiarity 
 and distinction in the ancient Persian govern- 
 ment, as admirably shown by Heeren (^Researches, 
 i. 4R9, sq.), was tlial the civil and military powers 
 were carefully separated : the satrap being a very 
 powerful civil and political chief, Ijut having no 
 immediate control over the troops and garrisons, 
 the commanders of which were resjjonsible only to 
 the king. The satra])s, in tlieir several provinces, 
 employed themselves in the maintenance of order 
 ?iici the regulation of afl'airs ; and they also col- 
 lected and remitted to the court the stipulated 
 tribute, clear of all charges for local govcinnunl 
 and for the maintenance of the troops (Xenoph. 
 Cyrop. viii. 6, § 1-3). In later times this prudent 
 wparation of powers became neglected, in favour 
 of royal iirinces and other great persons (Xenojjh. 
 Anab. i. 1, § 2), who were entrusted with the mi- 
 ilitary as well as civil power in their govern- 
 ments ; to which cause may be attributed the 
 ro\olt of the younger Cyrus, and the other rebel- 
 lions and civil wars, wliich, by weakening the 
 empire, facilitated its ultimate subjugation by 
 Alexander. 
 
 ACHBAR. [Mou.sE.] 
 
 ACHISH (tJ'"'3X, signification imcertain ; 
 Sej)t. 'hyxovs, also 'Apxi's, '^X'-^t called Abime- 
 lech in the title of Ps. xxxiv.), tlie Philistine 
 king of Gath, with wliom David twice sought re- 
 fuge when lie lletl from Saul (1 Sam. xxi. lO-l.'j; 
 xxvii. l-3j. Tiie first time David was in im- 
 minent danger: for he was recognised and spoken 
 ol by the officers of the court as one whose glory 
 had be<ri won at the cost of the Philistines. This 
 *alk tilled David with such alarm that he feigned 
 nimself mad when introduced to the notice of 
 \ch;s.i, vvh.), seeing liim ' scrabbling uoon the 
 
 ACHMETIIA. 
 
 47 
 
 doors of the gate, and letting his spittle fall down 
 ujion his beard,' reliuked his peoiile shar]ily for 
 bringing liim to his presence, a.sking, ' Have 1 
 need of madmen, that ye liave brought tliis ftllow 
 to |)lay the madman in my jirewnce? Shall tliis 
 fellow come into my house ;" After this David 
 lost no time in quilting fiie territories of Gatli. 
 Winer illustrates David's conduct by reference to 
 the similar proceeding of some other great men, 
 who feigned themselves mad in difficult circum 
 stances — as Ulysses (Cic. Off'.Vn. 26; Hygin. 
 f. 9.'), Schol. ad Li/rophr. SIS), the astronomer 
 Meton (^']lian, Hist. xiii. 12), L. Junius Brutus 
 (Liv. i. 56; Dion. Hal. iv. f)S), and tiie Arabian 
 king Bacha (Schultens, Atith. Vet. llamasa, p. 
 53.5). About four years after, when the character 
 and position of David became better known, and 
 when he was at the head of not less than fiOO reso- 
 lute adherents, he again repaired with his troop 
 to King Acliish, wlio received him in a truly 
 royal spirit, and treated him with a generous con- 
 fidence, of which David took rather more advan- 
 tage than was creditable to him [David], 
 
 ACHMETHA (J^npn^^, Ezra vi, 2; 'Ek- 
 Pdrava, 2 Mace. ix. 3 ; Judi<-)i xi. 1 ; Tob. v. 9 ; 
 Joseph. Antiq. x. 11,7; xi. 4, 6 ; also, in Greek 
 authors, ^'E.y^arava and 'A-y/Sctraro), a city in 
 Media. The derivation of the name is doubtful ; 
 but Major Rawlhisoii {Geogr. Journal, x. 1 34) has 
 left little question that the title was ajiplied exclu- 
 sively to cities having a fortress for the protection 
 of the royal treasures. In Ezra we learn tliat in 
 the reign of Darius Hystaspes the Jews petitioned 
 that search might be made in the king's treasure- 
 house at Babylon, for the decree which Cyrus had 
 made in favour of the .lews (Ezra v. 17). Search 
 was accordingly made in the record-office ('house 
 of the rolls"), wliere the treasures were kept at Ba- 
 liylon (vi. 1) : but it appears not to have been found 
 there, as it was eventually discoveied ' at Acli- 
 metha, in the palace of the province of the Medes' 
 (vi. 2). It is here worthy of remaik, tli.it the 
 LXX. regarded ' Aclimetha," in which they could 
 hardly avoid recognising the familiar title of 
 Ecbatana, as tlie generic name for a city, and, ac 
 cordingly, rendered it by -kSXis; and that Jo- 
 sephns, as well as all the Christian Greeks, while 
 retaining the jiroper name of Ecbatana, yet agree, 
 with the Greek Scrijitures. in em]i!oyiiig the word 
 ^dpis to exjiress the Hebrew Nri"l*3, liirtha 
 (' the palace '), which is used as the ilistinctive 
 epithet of the city. 
 
 In Judith i. 2-4, there is a brief account of 
 Ecbatana, in which we are told that it was built 
 by .A.rjjhaxad, king of the Medes, who made it 
 his cajiital. It was built of hewn stones, and 
 surrounded by a high and thick wall, furnished 
 with wide gates and strong and lofty towers. Hero- 
 dotus ascribes its foundation to Dejoces, in obe- 
 dience to whose commands the Medes erected 
 ' that great a?id strong city, now known under 
 the name of Agbatan.i, where the walls are built 
 circle within circle, and are so constructed that 
 each inner ciicle oveitojis its outer neighbour by 
 the height of the batllenients alone. Tiiis was 
 elVected partly by the nature of the ground, a 
 conical hill, and partly by the building itself. 
 Till! number of the circles was seven, and within 
 the iiiiieiniost was the jialace of the treasuiy. 
 The battlements of the first circle were white, of
 
 <8 
 
 ACHMETHA. 
 
 til" second black, of the third scarlet, of the fourtli 
 blue, of the lillh orantje ; all these were brilliantly 
 Coloured with dilVereiit pigments; but the battle- 
 ments of the sixth circle were overlaid with silver, 
 and of the seventh with gold. Such were the pa- 
 lace and the surrounding fortification that Dejoces 
 constructed for himself: but he ordered the mass of 
 tlie Median nation to construct their houses in a 
 circle around the outer wall (Herodot. 1. 98). It is 
 contended by Major Rawliiuon (Geoffr. Journal, 
 X. 127) that tliis story of the seven walls is a fable 
 o( Sabaean origin, the seven colours mentioned 
 being precisely those employed by the Orientals to 
 denote the seven great heavenly bodies, or the seven 
 climates in wliich they revolve. He adds (p. 128), 
 * I cannot believe ttiat at Aghatana the walls 
 were really painted of tliese colours : indeed, 
 battlements with gold and silver are manifestly 
 f-ibulous ; nor do I think that there ever could 
 have been ever, seven concentric circles : but in 
 tliat early age, where it is doubtful whether mith- 
 raicism, or fire-worship, had originatetl in this 
 part of Asia, it is not at all improbable that, ac- 
 cording to the Sabaean superstitions, the city 
 should liave been dedicated to the seven lieavenly 
 liodies, and perhajs a particular part assigned to 
 the protection of each, with some coloured device 
 emblematic of the tutelar divinity.' 
 
 Tiiis Ecbatana has been usually identified 
 witli tlie present Hamadan. Major Rawlinson, 
 however, wliile admitting that Hamadan occupies 
 the site of the Median Ecbatana, has a learned 
 and most elaborate paper in the Geographical 
 Journal (x. 65-158 ; On the Site of the Atrojm- 
 tenian Echata^io^, in which he endeavours to 
 sliow that the present Takht-i-Sideiman was the 
 site of another, the Atropateijian Ecbatana; 
 an<l tliat to it, rather than to the proper Median 
 Ecbatana, the statement in Herodotus and most 
 of the other ancient accounts are to be understood^ 
 to refer. Our only business is with the Achmetha 
 of Ezra ; and that does not require us to enter into 
 this question. The major, indeed, seems inclined 
 <o consider the Ecbatana of the ajjocryphal hoi)ks' 
 as his Atropatenian Ecbatana ; but is ratlier iri.-.'ve 
 doubtful in claiming it as tlie Achmetha of Ezra. 
 But without undertaking to determine what 
 amount of ancient history should be referred to 
 the one or to the other, we feel bouji;l to conclude 
 tliat Hamadan was the site of tLe Aclimetha of 
 Ezra, and tlie Ecljatanaof tlie Apocryjiha : 1. Be- 
 cause it is admitted that tlie Median Ecbatana 
 was a more ancient and more anciently great city 
 tlian the Atropatenian metropolis. 2. Because 
 the name ' Achmetha ' may easily, through the 
 Syrian Ahmethan, and the Annenian Ahmetan, 
 be traced in the Persian Hamadan. 3. Antl be- 
 caui-3 all the traditions of the Jews refer to Ha- 
 madan as the site of the Achmetha and Ecbatana 
 of tlieir Scriptures. 
 
 Hamadan is still an im|K)rtant town, and the 
 8er>t of one of the governments into wliich the Per- 
 sian kingdom is divided. It is situated in north 
 lat. tSi" 53', east long. 40°, at the extremity of a 
 rich and fertile plain, on a gradual ascent, at the 
 base of the Elwund Mountains, whose higher sum- 
 mits are covered with ])erpetual snow. Some rem- 
 nants of ruined walls of great thickness, and also 
 of towers of sun-tlried bricks, present the or.ly 
 positive evidence of a more ancient city than the 
 Ciresen! on the same spot. Heajw o" conipara- 
 
 ACHMETHA. 
 
 tiveV.' reccnl ruMis, an I a wall fallen to decay, 
 attest that Ha!maduii has declined from even iti 
 modern iiii]X)rtance. The ]iopulation is said by 
 Soulhgate to be about 30,t)()(), which, from wnat 
 the present writer has seen of the ])lace, lie should 
 judge to exceed llie truth very considerably. It 
 is little distinguished, inside, from other Persian 
 to\vns of the same rank, save by its excellent and 
 well-supplied bazaars, and tlie unusually .large 
 number of l.bans of rather a superior description. 
 This is the result of the exteiisive transit trade of 
 wliicli it is the seat, it being the great centre 
 where the routes of traffic between Persia, Meso- 
 potamia, and Persia converge and meet. Its own 
 manufactures are chiefly in leather. Many Jew* 
 resiile here, claiming to be descended from those of 
 the Cajitivity who remained in Media. Benjamin 
 of Tudela says that in his time the number v\a« 
 50,000. Modern travellers assign them 5(10 
 houses ; but the Rabbi David de Beth Hil'el 
 (Travels, pp. P5-87, Madras, 1832), who wui not 
 likely to understate tlie fact, and had the. best 
 means of infotmation, gives them but 200 families. 
 He says they arc mostly in good circumstances, 
 having fine houses and gardens, and are chiefly 
 traders and goldsmiths. They speak the broken 
 Turkish of the country, and ha\'e two synagogues. 
 Thejj derive die name of the town from ^Ha7nan^ 
 and '■Mode,' and say that it was given to that toe of 
 Mordecai by King Ahasuerus. In the midst of tlie 
 city is a tomb which is in their charge, and which 
 is said to be that of Mordecai and Esther. It ig 
 a Jjlain structure of brick, consisting of a small 
 cylindrical tower and a dome (the whole about 
 20 feet higli), with small projections or wings on 
 three sides. Within are two apartments — a small 
 jxirch ibiTned by one of the wings, and beyond 
 it tlie tomb-chamber, which is a plain room 
 paved with glazed tiles. In the midst, over the 
 s])ots where the dead are supposed to lie, are two 
 large wooden frames or chests, shaped like sarco- 
 phagi, with inscriptions in Hebrew and flowers 
 carved upon them. There is another inscription 
 on the wall, in bas-relief, whicl", as translated by 
 Sir Gore Ouseley, describes th'e present tomb a." 
 having been built over the graves of Mordecai 
 and Esther by two devout Jews of Kashan, 'n 
 A.M. 4174. The original structure is said to 
 have been destroyed when Hamadan was sackeil 
 by Timour. As Ecbatana was then the sum- 
 mer residence of the Persian court, it is pro- 
 bable enough that Mordecai and Esther (tied 
 and were buried there ; and tratlitional testi- 
 mony^, taken in connection with this fact, and 
 with such a monument in a place where Jews 
 have beeti permanently resident, is better evidence 
 than is usually obtained for the allocation of an- 
 cient sepulchres. The tomb is in charge of the' 
 Jews, and is one of their places of pilgrimage. 
 Kinneir, Ker Porter, IMorier, Frazer, anil South- 
 gate furnish the best accounts of modern Ha- 
 madan. 
 
 History mentions another Ecbatana, in Pales- 
 tine, at the foot of Mount Carmel, towards Ptole- 
 mais, where Cambyses died (Herod, i i. 64 ; 
 Plin. v. 19). It is not mentioned by this or any 
 similar name in the Hebrew writings : and we ■ 
 are at a loss to discover the grounds which Major 
 Rawlinson says exist for concluding that tlier* 
 was a treasury in this jiosition (Geoff r. Joum 
 X. 131-).
 
 ACHOR. 
 
 ACHU. 
 
 ACIK 
 *wee 
 
 Marcli till (lie t'lid of May. Varioties nl' .S. tiiuri- 
 tiimis, found in dillercnt wnintrics, and a lew of 
 tlie numerous kinds of Cyiici'accje common in 
 Indian jiustures, as Ci/pertis duhius and haa- 
 stMhyus, are also eaten by cattle. Tlierefore. if 
 any specific plant is intended, as seems implied iu 
 what goes hefore, it is peiliajis one of the edihle 
 sjjecies of sciq)us or cypenis, ])orha])s C.cscnlcntus, 
 which, however, has distinct Arabic names : or 
 it may lie a true grass ; some species of panicum, 
 for instance, which fonn excellent pasture in 
 warm countries, and several of which grow lux- 
 uriantly in the neighbourhood of water. 
 
 CIKHl (^^^y ; Se))t. 'Aywo), a valley be- in texture, and some jwssesscd of acrid and ^vpn 
 
 r ■ 1 \ \- .1 .-„>, »„.o;.....^ «),;- ii.<mo poisonous nroiierties. None, therefore, of the ^l/r/e* 
 •wci-n Jericho and Ai, which received this name ',..',', • <• i. > rni 
 r- L- ■ t ii\ t ^ i\^ f^....l 1u l>r«,,r,iit can be intended, nor any species ol /j«<fe«i(M. The 
 'signilying trouole) from the trouWe l)ro\ig.it , i • . V / 1*1 11 1 
 ^ :< T vt u. fi „ „-^ ,.f A^i,-., rii,U dillerent kinds of ./(wn/s, or nisli, tlu»u|ih uiKiunu- 
 upon the Israelites by the sin 01 Aclian (Joah. . . , , ,• ^ -^ ■ ,■ 
 . .1 1\ r A . -1 "'o '" such situations, are not suited lor pasfur- 
 *" ^ '-- ■ ' J' j^j,j.^ .j,„[ ;„ fj^Qt arp avoided by cattle. So are tlie 
 ACIIS.\H (nD?j;, ft« anklet; Sept. Axffo), i„^j„rity of the Cypcrucete. or sedge tribe; ami 
 the daughter oi Calel), whose hand her father also the numerous species of Cojvj-, which grow in 
 jti'ered in marriage to him who should lead the ,i,<,ist situations, yet yield a very coarse grass, 
 ittack on the city of Dil.ir, and take it. The which is scarcely if eve'r touched by cattle. A few 
 prize was won by his nephew Othniel ; and as species of Ci/pcius serve as pasturage, and the roots 
 the bride was conducted with the usual cere- of some of tliem are esculent and aromatic ; but 
 Brjony to her future home, she alighted from these must be dug up before cattle can feed on 
 oer ass, and sued her father for an addition of them. Some species of scirpus, or club-ni-sh, how- 
 «prings of water to her dower in lands. It is ever, serve as food for cattle': N. r(>s;»yos!(s, for in- 
 probable that custom rendered it unusual, or at stance, is the principal food of cattle and sheep in 
 least ungracious, for a reiiuest tendered under the highlands of Scotland, from the beginning of 
 such circumstances by a daughter to be refused ; 
 and Caleb, in accordance withher wish, bestowed 
 upon her 'the upper aiid the nether springs ' (Josh. 
 X7. 16-19; Judg. i. 9-15> 
 
 ACHSHAPH («1^'?« ; Sept. 'ACi<i>, 'Ax<ra^, 
 and 'Ax'^)) a royal city of the Canaanites (Josh, 
 xi. 1), has been sujiposed by many to be the 
 same as Aciizib, both being in the tribe of 
 Asher. But a careful consideration of Josh. xix. 
 and 29, will make it jirobable that the places 
 were ditVerent. Tliere is more reason in the 
 conjecture (Ilamclsveld, iii. 237) that Achshaph 
 was another name for Accho or Acre, seeing 
 that Accho otherwise does not occur in the list 
 of towns in the lot of Asher, although it is 
 certain, from Judg. i. 31, that Accho was in the 
 {X)rtic>n of that tribe. 
 
 ACHU (^nN). This word occurs in Job viii. 
 1 1, where it is said, ' Can the rush grow up with- 
 out mire' can the fi.ao grow without water?' 
 Here Jiar/ stands for achu ; which would seem to 
 indicate some specific plant, as gome^ or rush, in 
 tiie first clause of the sentence, may denote trie 
 papyrus. Achu occui-s also twice in Gen. xli. 2, 
 IS, ' .\iid, ()eliold, there came up out of the river 
 seven well-favoureil kine and I'at-lleshed, and they 
 fed n\ a. incadotp :^ here it is lendeied tneaduw, 
 ami must, therefore, have been considei-ed by our 
 tiaiislatjrs as a general, and not a sjieciHc term. 
 In this difliculty it is desirable to ascertain the 
 iiiterpietation put upon the word by the earlier 
 translators. Ur. Harris has already remarked that [Cyperus esculentus.] 
 
 ' tlie word IS retained in the Septuagint, in Gen. 
 
 iv rw ox« ; and is used by the son of Sirach, But it is well known to all acquainted witli 
 
 Eccles. xi. Ui, &xi or ax^i, for the copies vary, warm countries sulyect to excessive drought, that 
 Jerome, in his Helirew questions or traditions on the only pasturage to which cattle can lesoit 
 Genesis, writes ' AcJu ne(^ue Gra;cus sermo est, is a gi-een strip of difl'eix^nt grasses, with some 
 nee Latinus, sed et Hebiaius ipse corruptus est.' sedges, which runs along tlie banks of rivers or of 
 The Hebrew vau ^ andiod ^ being like one pieces of water, varying more or less in breadth 
 another, difl'iriiig only in length, the LXX., lie according to the height of the bank, tiiat is, the dis- 
 observes, wrote TIX, acAi, for 'iPIX, achii, and tance of water from the surface. Cattle emerging 
 according to their usual custom put the Greek x from rivers, which they may often lie seen doing 
 for tlie double aspirate H {Nat. Uist. of Uve in hot countries, as has l>een well renuukwl by the 
 B/6/e, in ' Flag '). editor of the 'Pictorial Bible' on Gen. xli. 2. would 
 
 From the context of the few jiassages in which natvnally go to such green heiliage as intimated 
 achu occurs, it is evident that it indicates a in this jutssige of (Jenesis, and which, as indicated 
 plant or plants which givw in or in the neigh- in Job xviii. 2, could not grow without water in 
 bourhood of water, and also tiiat it or they wei-e a warm dry country an<l climate. As no similar 
 Ruitable as jiasturage for cattle. Now it is gene- name is known to lie a])plied to any plant or 
 
 rally well known that most {A the plants which 
 grow in water, as well as many of those wliich 
 grow in its vicinity, are not well .suited as food for 
 e*ttle; some being \ery watery, otiiers very coarse 
 
 plants in Hebrew, endea\oiii-s have lieen mad*' to 
 find a similar one so ajijilied ir the cognate lan- 
 guag»;s; and, as (pioted liy Dr. Harris, tlie le»> ,.ed 
 Ciidpellon says, ' we lia\e no radix tiir iHK
 
 M 
 
 ACHZIB. 
 
 unless v/e derive it, as Sclmltens does, from (lie 
 Arabic achi, to lAnd or join together.' Heuco it 
 has been inferred that it might be some one of tlie 
 grasses or sedges employed in foiTner times, as 
 some still are, for making ropes. But there is 
 prol/'il)ly some other Arabic root which lias not yet 
 been ascertained, or '.vhich may have lieconie ob- 
 solete; for there are numerous words in the Arabic 
 language having reference to greenness, all of 
 *vhich i)a»'e akh as a common element. Thus 
 
 ^u^\^^ akhyas, thickets, dark groves, places full 
 
 of reeds or flags, in which animals take shelter; 
 
 / wjlio-1 akhevas, jmtting forth leaves; so akh- 
 
 zirar, greenness, verdure ; akhchishah, abounding 
 in grass. These may be connected with kah, 
 a conmnni term for grass in Northern India, 
 derived from the Persian, whence amber is callecl 
 kah-robfhy^ grass-attracter. So Jerome, with 
 I'efercnce to achu, says, " Cum ab eruditis qua;- 
 rerem, quid hie sermo significaret, audivi ab 
 j^gyptis hoc nomine lingua eorum omne quod in 
 palude viiens nascitur appellari." — J. F. R. 
 
 ACHZIB (^npK). There were two places 
 of this name, not usually distinguished. 
 
 1. AciiziB (Sept. 'AcxaCO' '"^ ^^^^ tribe of Asher 
 nominally, but almost always in the possession of 
 the Pha'nicians; being, indeed, one of the jilaces 
 from which the Israelites were unable to expel the 
 former inhabitants (Judg. i. 31). In the Tal- 
 mud it is called Ciiezik. The Greeks called 
 it KcniPi'A, from tlie Aram;ean pronunciation 
 SHDl^ (Ptol. V. 15) ; and it still survives under 
 the name of Zib. It is upon the Mediterranean 
 coast, about ten miles north of Acre. It stands 
 on an ascent closeby the sea-side, and is described 
 as a small place, with a few jialm-trees rising 
 above the dv,'ellings (Pococke, ii. 115; Richter, 
 
 ■p. 70 ; Maundrelf, p.. 71 ; Irby and Mangles, 
 p. 19C ; Buckingham, ch. iii.). 
 
 2. AcHziB (Sept. 'AxCf'/3) in the tribe of Judah 
 (Josh. XV. 44 ; Mic. i. 11), of which there is no 
 historical mention, but, from its {jlace in the cata- 
 logue, it appears to have been in the middle part 
 of the western border-land of the tribe, tov/artls 
 the Philistines. This is very possibly the Chezib 
 (STD) oi" Gen.'xxxviii. 5. 
 
 ACRA Q'fiLKpa), a Greek word, signifying a 
 citadel, in which sense NIpH also occurs in the 
 Syriac and Chaldaic. Hence the name of Acra 
 was acquired by the eminence north of the Tem- 
 ple, on which a citadel was built by Antiochus 
 Kpiphanes, to command the holy place. It thus 
 became, in fact, the y^cropolis of Jerusalem. 
 Josephus describes this eminence as semicircular; 
 and reports that when Simon Maccab.Tus hacl 
 succeeded in expelling the Syrian garrison, he not 
 only demolished the citadel, liut caused the hill 
 itself *o be levelled, that no neighbouring site 
 might thenceforth be higher or so high as that on 
 which the temple stood. The people had suffered 
 80 much from the garrison, tliat they willingly 
 lalioured day and night, for three years, in this 
 great work {Antiq. xiii. 6. 6; Bell. jud. v. 4. ]^. 
 At a later period the palace of Helena, queen of 
 Adiahcne, stood on the site, whicli still retained 
 the name nf Acra, as did also, probalily, the coun- 
 «i]-ho»ise, and ihe repository of the archives 
 
 ACTS OF THE APOSTLSS. 
 
 (Bell. Jud. vi. 6. 3; see also Descript. Urbis lera 
 solt/mw, per J. Heydenum, li!). iii. cap. 2). 
 
 \. ACRABATTENE, a dist-ict or toparcliy 
 pf Juda'a, extending between Sheclietn (now Na- 
 bulus) and Jericho, inclining east. It was about 
 twelve miles in length. It is not mentioned in 
 Scri])ture, but it occurs in Josephus {Bell. Jud. ii. 
 12, i; iii. 3, 4, 5). It took its name from a town 
 called Acrabi in \\\e Onomastkon,%.\' .' h.Kpa^^eiv, 
 where it is described as a large villai*e, nine 
 Roman miles east of Neapolis. on the road to 
 Jericho. In this quarter Dr. Rooinson (Bib. Re- 
 searches, iii. 103) found a village still existing 
 under the name of Akrabeh. 
 
 2. ACRABATTENE, another district in that 
 portion of Jud;ea, which lies towarils the south 
 end of the Dead Sea, occujiied by the Edomites 
 during the Cajjtivity, and afterwards known as 
 Idumaea. It is mentioned in 1 Mace. v. 3; 
 Jose]ih. Antiq. xii. 8. 1. It is assumed to have 
 taken its .name from the Maaleh Akrabbim 
 (C'lllpy 'iwVf^)i or steep of the Scorpions, men- 
 tioned in Num. xxxiv. 4. and Josh. xv. 3, as 
 the southern extremity of the tribe of Judah 
 [Akrabbim]. 
 
 ACRE. [AccHO.] 
 
 ACTS OF THE APOSTLkS. This is the 
 title of one of the canonical books of the New Testa- 
 ment, the fifth in order in the (Xjmmon arrange- 
 ment, and the last of those propel ly of an historical 
 character. Commencing with a reference to an 
 account given in a former work of the sayings 
 and doings of Jesus Chrisi. before his ascension, 
 its author proceeds to conduct us to an acquaint- 
 ance with the circumstances attending that event, 
 the conduct ()f the disciples on tlieir return from 
 witnessing it, the outpouring on them of tl)e Holy 
 Spirit according to Christ's promise to them be- 
 fore his crucitixion, and the amazing success 
 which, as a consequence of this, attended the first 
 announcement by them of the doctrine concerning 
 Jesus as the promised Messiah and the Saviour 
 of the World. After following the fates of the 
 mother-church at Jerusalem up to tlie period 
 when the violent persecution of its members by 
 the rulers of the Jews had broken up their society 
 and scattered them, with the exception of the 
 apostles, throughout the whole ol" the surrounding 
 region ; and after introducing to the notice of the 
 reader the case of a renifirKable conversion of one 
 of the most zealous persecutors of the church, who 
 afterwards became one of its most devoted and 
 successful advocates, the narrative takes a wider 
 scope and opens to our view the gradual expansion 
 of the church by the free admission within its 
 pale of persons directly converted from heatlienism 
 and wVio had not passed through (he jireliminary 
 stage of Judaism. The first step towards this 
 more liberal and cosmopolitan order of things 
 having been effected by Peter, to whom the 
 honour of laying the foundation of the Christiau 
 churcli, lioth within and without the confines of 
 Judaism, seems, in accordance with our Lord's 
 declaration concerning hi.n (Matt. xvi. 18), to 
 have been reserved, Paul the recent convert and 
 the destined apostle of tlie Gentiles, is brought 
 forward as the main actor on the scene. On his 
 course of missionary activity, his successes and 
 his sufferings, the chief interest of the narrative 
 is thenceforward concentrated, until, having fol- 
 lowed him to Rome, whither he had been sent ax
 
 ACTS OF THE APOSTLKS. 
 
 & ])iisona: Vo.aliide liis trial, on liis own appeal, ;it 
 ;lie bar of tlic emperor himself, IIk' Ixxtk abrii))tly 
 closes, leaviii!^ us (o s-atlier fiatlier infomiation 
 CO iceniingf liini and the ibrtunes of the church 
 fro n other sources. 
 
 llespecting the mdhorship of tliis liook there 
 can be no ground for doubt or hesitation. It is, 
 unquestionably, the prodiiction of the same writer 
 by wliom the tliird of tlie four Gospels was com- 
 posed, as is evident from the introductory se;i- 
 tcnces of both (conip. Luke i. 1-4, with Acts i. 1). 
 Tiiat this writer was Luke has not in either case 
 been called in question. Witli regard to the book 
 now 'itider notice tradition is (irni and constant 
 in ascribing it to Luke (Irenirus. Adc. ITeer. lib. i. 
 0.31; iii.l4; Clemens Alexandr. S^row. v. 'i)..>KS; 
 Tertullian, Adv. Marcion. v. 2; De Jejun. c. 10 ; 
 Origen, apud Euseb. Hist. Ecclcs. vi. 23, ^c. 
 Eusebii'.s himself ranks this book among tlie 
 6i.i.(j?^yovneva, H. E. iii. 25). From the book itself, 
 also, it a])pearsthat the author accompanied Paul 
 to Rome when he went to that city as a prisoner 
 (xxviii.). Now, we know from two epistles 
 written by Paul at that time, that Luke was with 
 him at Rome (Col. iv. 14; Phil. 24), which 
 favours the supjMsition that he was the writer of 
 the narrative of the apostle's journey to that city. 
 Tlie only parties in jjrimitive times by whom this 
 book was rejected were certain heretics, such as 
 the Marcionites, the Severians, and the Maui- 
 cheans, whose objections were entirely of a dog- 
 matical, not of a historical, nature ; indeed, they 
 can hardl^f-lie said to have questioned the authen- 
 ticity of the book ; they rather cast it aside be- 
 cause it did not favour their peculiar views. At 
 the same time, whilst this book was acknowledged 
 as genuine where it was known, it does ngt ap- 
 pear to have been at first so extensively circulated 
 as tiK other historical books of the New Testa- 
 nient; foi we find Chrysostom complaining that 
 by many . in his day it was not so much as 
 known (Horn. i. m Act. sub init.). Perhajjs, 
 however, there is some rhetorical exaggeration in 
 this statemtTit; or, it may be, as Kuinoel {Prolegi. 
 in Acta App. Comment, torn. iv. p. 5) suggests, 
 that Clirysosfom's complaint refers rather to a 
 prevalent omission of the Acts from the number 
 o\' books ))uhlicly read in the churches, which 
 would, of erturse, lead to its being comparatively 
 little kii(>wn among the people attending those 
 churches. 
 
 Many critics are inclined to regard tlie 
 Gospel by Luke and the Acts of the Ajwstles as 
 having foraied originally only one work, con- 
 sisting of two parts. For this opinion, liowever, 
 there does not ajipear to be any satisfactory au- 
 thority; and it is hardly acco-dant with Luke's 
 own description of the relation of these two wri- 
 tings to each other : being called by him, the one 
 the former and the other iiie YMct treatise (\6yos), 
 a term which would not oe appropriate had he 
 intended to designate oy it the first and second 
 parts of the seme treatise. It would l)e diflicult^ 
 also, on this hypothesis to account for the two, 
 invariably and from the earliest times, appearing 
 with distinct titles. 
 
 Of- the greater tvayt of the events recorded in 
 Ihe Acts the writer himself appears to have been 
 witness. He is for tlie first time introiluced into 
 the narrative in ch. xvi. 11. where he speaks of ac- 
 companying Paul ' ) Philippi. He then disap- 
 
 ACTS or TlIK APOSTLES 
 
 51 
 
 jiears from the narrative until Paul's i<nini to 
 Phili)ipi. more than two years afterward.s, wImii 
 it is stated tliat they left that jihice 'n com]i;iny 
 (xx.fi); from whirh it may lie ju^itly inferred that 
 Luke sjient the interval in that town. From this 
 time to the close of the ]>erio(l embraced by liis 
 narrative he ajijiears as the conqianion of the 
 ajxistle. For the mateiiaks, therefore, ot' all he 
 has recorded from ch. xvi. 11, to xxviii. 31, he may 
 be regarded as lia\ing drawn upon his own recol- 
 lection or on that of the apostle. To the latter 
 source, also, may be confidently traced all he 
 has recorded concerning the earlier events of the 
 apostle's career: and as respects the circum- 
 stances recorded in the first twelve cha]:t(is of 
 the Acts, and wiiicli relate chiefiy to the cliurch 
 at Jerusalem and tlie laliours of the ajiostle Peter, 
 we may readily suppose that thej' were .«o mucii 
 matter of general notoriety among the Christian; 
 with whom Luke associated, that he needed no 
 assistance from any other merely human source 
 in recording them. Some of the German critics 
 have lalioured hanl to show that he must have iiad 
 recourse to written documents, in oiiler to com- 
 pose those parts of his history which record what 
 did not pass under his own obseivation, and they 
 have gone the length of su[ijx)sing the existence of 
 a work in the laniruage of Palestine, under tJie 
 
 title of NS''2n navD or NnnDN, of which 
 
 the Apocryjihal book Ilfiafsis Tlfrpou or Krpvyixa 
 Uerpov, mentioned liy Clement of Alexandria 
 and Origen, was an interpolated editiun (Hein- 
 richs, Proiegg. in Acta App. p. 21 ; Kuinoel, 
 Prole;/, p. 14), All this, ho«e>er, is mere un- 
 grounded supposition."'' There is rot the shadow 
 of evidence tli.it any written documents were 
 extant from which Luke could nave (hawn his 
 materials, and with regard to the alleged imj;os- 
 sibility of his learning fiom traditionary report 
 the minute particulars he has lecoided (which is 
 what these critics chiefly insist «i\ it is to be 
 rememijered that, in common with all the sacred 
 writers, he enjoyed the superintclnding and in- 
 spiring influence of the Divine Spirit, w hose oflice 
 it was to preserve him from all error and to guide 
 him into all truth. 
 
 A more impoitant inquiry res])ects the de- 
 sif/n of the evangelist in writing this inxik. A 
 prevalent jxipular ojiinion on tliis 1 ead is, that 
 Luke, having in his Gosjiel given a history of the 
 life of Christ, inteniled to follow that ujiby giving 
 in the Acts a narrative of the establishment tnn\ 
 early progress of his religion in the world. That 
 this, however, cpiild not liave been his design is 
 obvious from the very partial and limited view 
 which his narrative gives of the state of tilings in 
 
 * This is admitted by Heinrichs : 't^uot enini 
 et (jualia t'uerint ilia nioinmienta. quo idiomate 
 consignata, num Syriaco, Aiamasi, an Giwco, 
 quo titulo vulgata, quotusque a Liica excerpta, 
 &c. de his ipiideni non certissi:ii»^ z;>l ex con- 
 jecturannn 1antunim<Mlo unibris jioterit disquiri 
 (Heinrichi!, I. c. p. 21). Of documents whose 
 names, nature, language, as well as the extent to 
 which tliey were used by a writer wbc is sai<l to 
 have liccn indebted for his niateiials to them, can 
 be gathered only out of the 'shadowy n gions of 
 conjecture,' one would think no mind that is ac- 
 customed to weigh evidence wwdd think il wnrti 
 while to t»lie anv notice.
 
 iW 
 
 ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. 
 
 the cburch generally durino; the period tlirough 
 which it extends. As little can we regard this 
 book as desigrhod to record the oflicial liistory of 
 the apostles Peter and Paul, for we find many 
 particulars conccjuing both these apostles men- 
 tioned incidentally else\j']>eie, c^ which Luke 
 'Ates no- notice (comp. 2 Cor. xi. ; Gal. i. 17; 
 ii. 11 ; I Pet. v. 13. See also Michaelis, Intro- 
 duction, vol. iii, ]). 32S. Haenlein's EinUitung, 
 ti. iii. s. 150). Heinrichs, Kiiinoel, and others 
 are of opinion that no particular design sliould be 
 ascribetl to the evangelist in composing this l)ook 
 tjeyond tiiat of furnishing his friend llieophilus 
 with a pleasing and instructive narrative erf such 
 events a? l)ad comeuiTder his own personal notice, 
 either iiTiinetliately through tlie testimony of Ills 
 senses or througli the medium of the reports of 
 others; but such a view savours too much of the 
 las opinions whicli these writas unhappily enter- 
 tained reganling the sacred writers, to l)e adopted 
 by tliose who regard all the sacred lx)olis as de- 
 signed f(»r tlie pei-manent instruction and benefit 
 of the church universal. Much more deserv- 
 ing of notice is the opiniwi of Haenlein, with 
 wliich that of Michaelis substantially accords, 
 that ' the general design of tiie autlior of this book 
 was, Ijy means of liis narratives, to set forth the 
 co-operation of God in tlie diffusion of Cliristi- 
 anity, and along with that, to pro^'e, by remark- 
 able facts, the dignity of tlie apostles and the 
 perfectly equal rigi>t of the Gentiles witli the 
 Jews to a participation in the blessings of tliat 
 religion' {Einleitung, th. iii. s. 156. Comp. 
 Micliaelis, Introduction, vol. iii. p. 330). Perhaps 
 we sliould come still closer to tlie truth if we 
 were to say that the design of Luke in writing 
 the Acts was to supply, by select and suitable 
 instances, an illustratioii of the power and 
 working of that religion which Jesus had died 
 to establish. In his gospel he liad presented 
 to bis readers an exhibition of Christianity as 
 embodied in the person, character, and works of 
 its gi'eat founder ; and having followed him in 
 his narration until he was taken up out of the 
 sight of his. disciples into heaven, this second work 
 was wiitten to show how his religion operated 
 when committed to the hands of those by whom 
 it was to lie announced 'to all natiflns, beginning 
 at, Jerusalem ' (Luke xxiv. 47). In this point of 
 view the recitals in this book present a theme that 
 is iiractically interesting to Christians in all ages 
 of the chnrch and all places of the world ; for 
 they exhibit to us what influences guided the 
 actions of those who laid the foundations of the 
 church, and to whose authority all its members 
 must defer — what courses they adopted for the 
 extension of the church, — what ordinances they 
 apiiointed to be observed by those Christians who, 
 miller their au«Dices, associated together for 
 mutual edification, — and what difficulties, pri- 
 vations, an<\ trials were to be expecteil by those 
 who should zealously exeit themselves for the 
 triumph of Christianity. We are thus taught not 
 liy dogmatical statement, but by instructive nar- 
 rative, under what sanctions Christianity appears 
 in our world, what blessings she olfers to men, 
 and by what means her influence is most ex- 
 tensively to be promoted and the blessings siie 
 offers to be most widely and n»ost fully enjoyed. 
 
 Respecting the time when tliis book was com- 
 pos*"! it is imjwssible to sjieak with certainty. 
 
 ACTS OF THE ATOSTLKS. 
 
 As the history is continued up to the close rtf th» 
 second year of Paul's imprisonment at Rome, it 
 could not have been written before a.d. Go ; it 
 was probably, however, compoied very soon after, 
 so that we shall not err far il we assign the in* 
 terval between the year 63 and tlie year 65 as tiiC 
 period of it3 comjiletion. Still greater uncertainty 
 hangs over the^)/«fe where Luke composed it, but 
 as lie accompanied Paul to Rome, perhaps -it was 
 at that city and under the auspices of the apostle 
 tlxat it was prepared. 
 
 The »tijle of Luke in the Acts isL, like his 
 style in his Gospel, much jjurer than that of most 
 other books of the New Testainent. Tlie Ile- 
 biaisms which occasionally occur are almost 
 exclusively to be found in the speeches of others 
 which he has reported. Tliese speeches are in- 
 deed, for the most {'art, to be regarded rather as 
 summaries than as full reports of what the speaker 
 uttered ; but as these suinmaries are given in the 
 speakers' own words, the apiiearance of Hebi-aism.» 
 in them is as easily accounted for as if the ad- 
 dresses had been reported in full. His mode of 
 narrating events is clear, dignified, and lively; 
 and, as Michaelis observes^he 'lias well supported 
 the character of each person whom he has intro- 
 duced as delivering a public harangue, and has 
 very faithfully and happily preserved the manner 
 of speaking which was peculiar to each of his 
 orators' (^Introduction, vol. iii. p. 332). 
 
 Whilst, as Lardner and others have very satis- 
 factorily shown (Lardner's CiedibiUti/, Worlii!, 
 vol. i. ; Biscoe, On the Acts ; Paley's lIorcB Pau- 
 lina ; Benson's Histori/ of the First Planting of 
 Christianity, vol. ii. &c.), the credibility of the 
 events recorded by Luke is fully autheirticated both 
 by internal and external evid(>nce, very gie-it ob- 
 scurity attaches to the chronology of these events. 
 Of the many conflicting systems which have been 
 published for the purpose of settling the questions 
 that liave arisen on this head, it is impossible 
 within such limits as those to which this article ia 
 necessarily confined, to give any minute account. 
 As little do we feel ourselves at liberty to attemjit 
 an original investigation of the subject, even did 
 such promise to be productive ot any very satis- 
 factory result. The only course that appears 
 open to us is to present, in a tabular form, the 
 dates afiixed to the leading events by those writers 
 whose authority is most deserving of consideration 
 in such an inquiry. — (.See next page.') 
 
 The majority of these dates can only be regarded 
 as approximations to Ine truth, and the diversity 
 v.hich the above table presents shows the uncei- 
 tainty of the whole irjatter. The results at which 
 Mr. Greswell and Dr. Anger havc^ arrived are, in 
 many cases, identical, and ujwn the whole tlie 
 earlier date which they assign to the ascension of 
 Christ seems worthy of adoption. We cannot 
 help thinking, however, that the interval assigned 
 by these writers to the events which transpired be- 
 tween the ascension of Christ and tlie stoning of 
 Ste])hen is mucli too great. Tlie date whic'li tiiey 
 assign to Paul's first visit to Jtrusakt.a is also 
 plainly too late, for Paul himself tells us tlat his 
 flight from Damascus occurred whilst that town 
 was under the authority of Aretas, whose tenure 
 of il cannot be extended beyond the year 38 of the 
 con mon sera (2 Cor. xi. 32. See als(i Neander's 
 remarks on tliese in Gcschichte der Pflanzung 
 und Leitung dcr Chrisxlichcn. Kit he, Btl i.
 
 ACTS UF THE APOSTLES. 
 
 ACTS, SPURIOUS. 
 
 53 
 
 The Asce.isian of Christ 
 
 Stoning of Stf piien 
 
 Conversion of Paul 
 
 Paul's liist journey to Jeiusalein(Actsix.26) 
 
 James's Mailyicloni, &c 
 
 Paul's second journey to Jerusalem (Acts 
 
 xi. 12) 
 
 Paul's iirst missionary tour 
 
 Paul's third journey to Jerusalem (Acts xv.) 
 
 Paul an-ives at Corinth 
 
 Paul's fourth journey to Jerusalem (Acts 
 
 xviii. 22) 
 
 Paul's abode at Ephesus 
 
 Paul's Hfth journey to Jerusalem (Acts 
 
 xxi. 17) 
 
 Paul arrives in Rome 
 
 33 
 34 
 35 
 
 38 
 44 
 
 44 
 
 45-46 
 53 
 54 
 
 56 
 56-59 
 
 59 
 63 
 
 33 
 34 
 
 35 
 
 38 
 44 
 
 44 
 
 44-47 
 
 49 
 
 52 
 
 54 
 54-57 
 
 58 
 61 
 
 33 
 37? 
 41 
 44 
 
 54 V 
 
 60 
 63 
 
 31 
 
 35 
 3S 
 44 
 
 44 
 44 
 52 
 53 
 
 55 
 56-58 
 
 59 
 62 
 
 33 
 36 
 36-3S 
 39 
 44 
 
 44 
 
 49? 
 54 
 
 54 
 
 60 
 63 
 
 30 
 37 
 37 
 41 
 43 
 
 43 
 44 
 
 48 
 50 
 
 52 
 53-55 
 
 56 
 59 
 
 31 
 37 
 3S 
 41 
 43 
 
 44 
 44 
 48 
 52 
 
 5t 
 55-09 
 
 58 
 61 
 
 %. 80). Perhaps the following is the ti-ue order 
 of tl."8 events of the apostle's early career as 
 a Cliristian. In Gal. ii. 1, he speaks himself 
 of going up to Jerusalem fourteen years, or about 
 fouiteen years, after his con\ersion (for so we un- 
 derstand his words). Now this visit could not 
 have been that recorded in Acts xv., becaiise we 
 cannot conceive that aj'fer tiiii events detailed in 
 that chapter Peter would liave acted as Paul 
 describes in Gal. ii. 11. We conclude, therefore, 
 that the visit heie referred to was one earlier than 
 that mentioned in Acts xv. It must, therefore, 
 liave been tliat mentioned in Acts xi. 12. Now, 
 this being at the time of the famine, its date is 
 pretty well fixed to the year 45, or thereabouts. 
 Subtract 14 from this, then, and we get 31 as tlie 
 date of Paul's conversion, and adding to this the 
 three years that elapsed between liis conversion and 
 his first visit to Jerusalem (Gal. i. 18), we get the 
 year 34 as the date of tliis latter event. If this 
 aiTangement be nut adopted, the \isit to Jerusalem 
 mentioned in Gal. ii. 1, must, for the reason just 
 mentioned, be intercalated between the commence- 
 ment of Pauls first missionary tour and his visit 
 to Jerusalem at the time of the holding of the so- 
 called council ; so that the number of Paul's 
 visits to tliat city would be six, instead of Jive. 
 Schradcr adopts somewhat of a similar view, only 
 he places tliis additional visit between the fourtli 
 and tiftli of tluise mentioned in the Acts (^iJer 
 Apostel Pcuilus, 4 Th. Leipz. l!=30-lR38,i. 
 
 9. Of separate coumientaries on the Acf^ of 
 tlie Ajjostles tlie most valuable are the following: 
 Limborch, Commcntarium in Acta A2X)sf.ol'irum, 
 &c. fol., Roterodami, 1711; J. E. M. Walcli, 
 
 Bremae, 1686, p. 641. 
 0/J/J. Posthuina. 4tc 
 
 * Aniiales. Folio. 
 
 * Annriles PauUiii. 
 Lend. 1688. 
 
 ' Jiitroduciioii to the New Test&meiit, vol. iii. 
 ), 33t. 
 
 * Einleitung, 3te Auflage, Bd. ii. s. 307. 
 
 * Einleitung, 2te Aufl. Bd. iii. s. 157. 
 
 * Dissertations, &c. 5 vols. 8vo. Oxf. 1837. 
 7 De Temporum in Actis App. Ratione. 8\o. 
 
 Lips. 1833. 
 
 Dissertt. in Acta App. 3 torn. 4to. Jena, 1756 
 1761 ; Sam. F. N. Morus, f'ersio et Esplicatin 
 Act. App. ed. Dindorf, 2 tom. 8vo. Leips. 17i'4 ; 
 Richard Biscoe's History of the Acts, conjirnicd 
 from other authors, &c. 8vo. Oxford, 1^29 ; 
 Kuinoel, Comment. In Acta Aj^p. wliicli foims 
 the fourth vol. of his Comment, in Libros Hint. 
 N. T. Leips. 1818; Heinrichs, Acta ApjJ. per- 
 petua Annott. illustrata, being the third \o!. 
 of the Nov. Test. Koppianum. The works of 
 Benson on the Planting of the Christian Churches, 
 3 vols. 4to. ; and of Neander, GescMchle dcr 
 Lcitung und Pflanzunr/ der ChristUchcn Kirche 
 durch die Apostel (recently translateil into Eng- 
 lish as 2»rt of the Edinburr/h Bihlvcal Cabinet ,^ 
 may be also viewed in the light of Commentaries 
 on the Acts. — W. L. A. 
 
 AC^rS, SPURIOUS [Apockvi'ha]. This 
 term luis been applietl to se\eral ancient wri'/ngs 
 pretended to have been coni})Osed by, or to sujijily 
 historical facts respecting oiu- Blessetl Sa\ ;our 
 and his disciples, or other indixiduals wliose ac- 
 tions are recorded in the holy Scriptures. Of 
 these spurious or pseudepigraphal writings seveial 
 are still extant; otiiers are only known to lave 
 existed, by the accounts of them which are to bo 
 met with in ancient authors. 
 
 Acts ok Ciiimst, Sfurious. Several sayinf;s 
 attribute<l tb our Lord, and alleged to be haiided 
 down by tradition, may be included uniler tli s 
 head, as tJiey are sujjposed by some learned iiieii 
 to have been derived from histories wliidi aie no 
 longer in existence. As explanatory of our 
 meaning it will suflice to refer lo the l)eaiiiifr. i 
 sentiment cited by St. Paul (Acts xx. 35 y, 
 MaKoipiSv ((TTt paWof SiS6i/cu ij Kap^avfiv, tc 
 which the term ajx)cryplial has been sometinics 
 applied, inasmuch as it is not contained in any 
 of the written biograj)hies of our Lord. TMs 
 term is so ajiplied ijy M. Gaussen of Giiieva. ui 
 Ids Theopncustia (Englisii translation, Hai.>;cf 
 1842). The learned Heinsius is of ojiinion lliat 
 the passage is taken from some lost apocrypiial 
 book, such as tliat entitled, in tlie Ilccor/nitium 
 of Clement, ' the Book of the Sayings of Clu;»t,' 
 or the pretended Constitutions of the Apo»(ie$
 
 54 
 
 ACTS, SPURIOUS. 
 
 Others, liowevei-, conceive that the apostle, in 
 Acts XX. 35, does not refer to anj' one saying of 
 our Savio'ir's in particular, l)nt that he deduced 
 Christ's sentiments on this head from several of 
 his savings ami paraLles (see Matt. xix. 21; xxv. ; 
 ami Luke xvi. 9). But the probability is tliat 
 St. Paul received this passage by tradition from 
 the other apostles. 
 
 There is also a saying ascribed to Christ to be 
 found in the Epistle of Barnabas, a work at 
 least of tlie second century : • Let us resist all 
 niiquity, and liate it ;" and again, ' So they wlio 
 would see me, and lay hold on my kingdom, 
 must receive me through much suffering and tri- 
 bulation :' but it is not improbable that these 
 passages contain merely an allusion to some of 
 our Lord's discourses. 
 
 Clemens Ronianus, the third liislio}) of Rome 
 after St. Peter (or the writer who passes under 
 the name of (Jlement), in his Second Epistle to 
 the Corhuluans, ascribes the following saying 
 to (yhrist : — ' Tliough ye sliould be united to me 
 in my boso;n, and yet do not keen my corn- 
 man. Iment-;, I will reject you, and say. Depart 
 from me, I know not wlience ye are, ye workers 
 ni iniquity.' This passage seems evidently to be 
 taken from St. Luke's gospel, xiii. 25, 36, 27. 
 
 Tliere are n.any similar passages, whicli several 
 eminent writers, such as Grabe, Mill, and Fabri- 
 cius, have considered as derived from apocryphal 
 gojjjels, but which seem ;/ith greater probability 
 to be notliing more than loose quotations from 
 the Scriptures, which were very common among 
 tlie apostolical leathers. 
 
 There is a saying of Christ's, cited by Clement 
 :ii tlie same epistle, which is found in the ajwcry- 
 phal gospel of the Egyptians : — ' Tiie Lord, being 
 askerl when Ins kingdom should come, replied, 
 When two shall be one, and that which is with- 
 out as that which is within, and the male with 
 the female neither male nor female ' [Gospels, 
 Apocryphai,]. 
 
 \\ e may here mention that the genuineness of 
 the Second Epistle of Clement is itself disputed, 
 and is rejected by Eusebius, Jerome, and otliers ; 
 at least Eusebius says of it, 'We know not that 
 thi.s is as highly approved of as tlie former, or 
 that it has lieen in use with the ancients ' {Hist. 
 Eccles. iii. 3S, Cruse's translation, 1R42). 
 
 Eusebius. in tlie last chapter of the same book, 
 states that Papias, a companion of the apxistles, 
 ' gives another history of a \voman who had lieen 
 accused vf many sins before the Lord, which is 
 also contained in the Gospel according to the 
 Nazarenes.' As this larrer work is lost, it \i 
 i' lubtful to what woman the history refers. Some 
 sap'jo^e it allutles to the history of the woman 
 laken in adultery ; others, to the woman of Sa- 
 maria. Tlicie are two discourses ascribed to 
 Christ by Papias, jireserved in Irenaeus {Adve-'sus 
 Hares. V. 33), lelating to the doctrine of the 
 Millennium, of which Papias appears to have 
 been the first projiagator. Dr. Grabe h;xs de- 
 fended the truth of these traditions, but tlie dis- 
 couises tJiemselves are unworthy of our blessed 
 Lord. 
 
 There is a saying ascribed to Clirist by Justin 
 Martyr, in his Dialogue with Trypho, which has 
 been sujiposed by Dr. Cave to have been taken 
 f)om the Gospel of the Kazarenes. Mr. Jones 
 conceives it to liave been an allusicii to a passage 
 
 ACTS, SPURIOl^. 
 
 in the jirophet Ezekiel. The same Father fur» 
 nishes us with an apocryphal history of Christ'i 
 baptism, in which it is asserted that 'a Hie wajs 
 kindled in Jordan.' He also ac(|uainf3 us that 
 Christ worked, when he was on earth, at the trade 
 of a carpenter, making ploughs and yokes foj 
 oxen. 
 
 There are some apocryphal sayings of Christ 
 pre3er\ed by Irenaeus, but his most remarkable 
 observation is, that Christ ' lived and taught be- 
 yond his fortieth, or even (iitieth year.' This h» 
 founds partly on absurd inferences drawn froiy 
 the character of his mission, partly on John vii- 
 57, and also on what he alleges to have beer 
 John's own testimony, delivered to the jiresbyter 
 of Asia. It is scarcely necessary to refute tint 
 absurd idea, which is in contradiction with all 
 the statements in the genuine gospels. There ia 
 also an absurd saying attribute < to Christ by 
 Athenagoras, Legal, pro Christ -lis, cap. 2H. 
 
 There are various sayings a? ibeil to our Lord 
 by Clemens Alexandrinus i A several of the 
 Fatheis. One of the most rer irkable is, ' Be ye 
 skilful money-changers.' 1 lis is supjiosed to 
 have been contained in the tiospel of the Naza- 
 renes. Others tiiink it to ha " been an early in- 
 terjxilation into the text of ^ripture. Origen 
 and Jerome cite it as a sayr , of Christ's. 
 
 In Origen, Contra Celstm lib. i., is an apocry- 
 phal Instory of our Savioui nd his parents, in 
 which it is reproached to CI t that lie was born 
 in a mean village, of a pooi woman who gained 
 her livelihood by spinning, and was turned olV by 
 her husband, a carpenter. Celsus adds that Jesus 
 was obliged by poverty to work as a servant in 
 Egypt, where he leainecl many powerful arts, and 
 thought that on this account he ought to be 
 esteemed as a god. There was a similar account 
 contained in Siime apocryphal books extant in the 
 time of St. Anru.itine. It was jirobably a Jewish 
 forgery. AuguiKne, Epiphanius, and others of the 
 Fathers equally cite sayings and acts ot Christ, 
 which they probably met with in the early ajio- 
 crj^ihal gospels. 
 
 There is a .sjiurious hymn of Christ's extant, 
 ascribed to the Priscillianists by St. Augustine, 
 There are also many such acts and sayings to be 
 found in the Koran of Mahomet, and others in 
 the writings of the Mohammedan doctors (se*. 
 Toland's Nazaremis). 
 
 There is a jnayer ascribed to our Savioii' br 
 t!ie same persons, which is printed in L.ttin 
 and Arabic in the learned Selden's Commentary 
 on Entj/chius's Annals of Alexandria, published 
 at Oxford, in 1650, by Dr. Pococke. It contains 
 a petition for pardon of sin, whiclt is sufficient to 
 stamp it as a forgery. 
 
 We must not omit to mention here the two 
 curious acts of Christ recorded, the one by Eu- 
 sebius, and the other by Evagrius. The first of 
 tlie.se included a letter said to have been written 
 to our Saviour by Agbarus (or Abgaius), king of 
 Edessa, requesting him to '■ome and heal a <lis- 
 ease under which he lalioureil. The letter, to- 
 gether with the supjxised reply of Christ, are pre- 
 served by Eusebius. This learned historian asserts 
 that he obtained the documents, togetlver with the 
 history, from tlie public registers of the city of 
 Edessa, where they existed in his time in th» 
 Syriac language, from which he translated them 
 into Greek.
 
 ACTS, SPURIOUS. 
 
 Tliese letters are also mentioned by Ejiliraim 
 Syru3, deacon of Edessa, at tlie close of tlu' toinlh 
 century. Jerome refers to them in his comment on 
 Matt. x.,andtheyare mentioned IjyPiipe Gelasiiis, 
 who rejects them as spurious and ajxicryphal. They 
 are, howeier, referred to as i^^enuine l<y Kvagrius 
 and later historians. Among modem writers the 
 genviinencss of these letters has been maintained 
 by Dr. Parker, in the preface to his Demonstra- 
 tion of the Law of Nature, and the Chrisiiem 
 Religion, part ii. § 16, p. 2 55 ; by Dr. Cave, 
 in his Ilistoria Liferaria, vol. i. p. 23 ; and 
 by Grote, in his SjncUegium Patrum, jiarticularly 
 p. 319. On the otlier hand, most writers, in- 
 cluding tlie great majority of Roman Catliolic 
 divines, reject them as spurious. Mr. Jones, in 
 nis valuable work on the Canonical Attthoritij of 
 the New Testament, allhougli he does not venture 
 to deny that the Acts were contained in the public 
 registers of tlie city of Edessa, yet gives it, as a 
 prol)able conjecture, in favour of which l)e adduces 
 some strong reasons, drawn from internal evi- 
 dence, that this whole chapter (viz. the 13tli 
 of the first book) in the Ecclesiastical Histonj of 
 Eusebius is itself an interpolation. But the let- 
 ters, will speak for themselves: — 
 Cop;/ of a Letter tcritten by King Agharus to 
 Jesus, and sent to him at Jerusalem, by Ana- 
 nias, tlie courier. 
 
 'Agbarus, prince of Edessa, sends greeting, to 
 Jesus, the excellent Saviour, who lias appeared in 
 the borders of Jerusalem. I have heard the re- 
 ports resjiecting tliee and thy cures, as performetl 
 by thee without medicines and without tlie use of 
 herbs. Fov, as it is said, thou cansest the blind 
 to see again, the lame to walk, and thou cleansest 
 tlie lepers, and thou c;istest out impure sjiirits and 
 demons, and thou healest those who are tormented 
 by long disease, and thou raisest the dead. And 
 hearing all these things of thee, I concluded in 
 my mind one of two things : eitlier, that thou art 
 God, and having descended from heaven, doest 
 these things; or else, doing them, thou art the Son 
 of God. Therefore, now I have wril ten, and be- 
 sought thee to visit me, and to i'.eal the disease 
 with which I am afflicted. I have also lieard 
 that the Jews murmur against thee, and are plot- 
 ting to injure thee; I have, liowever, a very small 
 but noble estate, which is sntlicient for us both.' 
 The Answer of Jesus to King Agbarus, by the 
 
 courier Ananta,s. 
 'Blessed art tliou, O Agbarus, who, without 
 ■eeing, hast believed in me. For it is written 
 concerning me, that they who have seen will not 
 believe, that they who have not seen may believe, 
 and live. But in regard to what thou hast 
 written, that I should come to thee, it is neces- 
 sary that I should fallil all things here, for which 
 I am sent, and after their fulfilment, then to be 
 received again by him that sent me ; and after I 
 have been received up, I will send to tliee a 
 certain one of my disci])les, that he may heal tliy 
 allliction, and give life to thee and those wlio are 
 witli thee' [Episti.ks. Spurious]. 
 
 Tiie other apocryphal history related by Eva- 
 grius, out of Procopius. states that Agl:)arus sent a 
 limner to draw the picture of our Saviour, but 
 that not being able to do it by reason of the bright- 
 ness of Christ's countenance, our Saviour 'took a 
 cloth, and laying it ujion his divine and life- 
 giving face, 1 e impressed his likeness on it." Tliis 
 
 ACTS, SPURIOUS. 
 
 59 
 
 story of Christ's picture is related by several, jn 
 the Second Council of Nice, and by other aiicieiit 
 writeis, one of whom (I^eo) ;i.sserts that he we!ii to 
 Edessa, and saw 'the image of Christ, not mad-* 
 with h.inds, worship))eil by the peojile.' This ii 
 the first of the four likenesses of Christ mentioned 
 by ancient writers. The second is that said to 
 have l>een stamped on a handkeachief liy Christ, 
 and given to Veronica, who had followed him to 
 his crucilixion. The third is the statue of Chri.^r, 
 stated by Eusebius to have been eree.'ed by the 
 womiUi whom he had cuied of an issue of blood, 
 and which tlie learned historian acquaints us 
 he saw at Csesarea Philippi (Eusebius, HiM. 
 Eccles. vii. IS). Sozonien and C!assiodorus assert 
 tliat the emperor Julian took down this stutue 
 and erected his own in its place. It is, how- 
 ever, stated by A-sterius, a writer of the fouith 
 century, that it was taken away by Maximinus, 
 the predecessor of C'onstaiitine. The fouith pic- 
 ture is one whicli Nicoilemus presented to Ga- 
 maliel, which was preserved at Berytus, and which 
 having been crucified and jiierceil with a spear by 
 the Jews, there issued out from the side blood and 
 water. This is stated in a s|)urious treatise con- 
 cerning the passion and image of Christ, falsely 
 ascribed to Athanasius. Eusebius the historian 
 asserts (loc. cit.) that he liad here seen tbe jiictuies 
 of Peter, Paul, and of Christ himself, in his time 
 (see also Sozomen, Hist. Eccles. v. 21). 
 
 Acts ok the Aposti.es, Spuuiou.s. 
 
 Of these several are extant, otliers are lost, or 
 only fragments of them are come down to us. 
 
 Of the following we know little more tliaii tjiat 
 they once existed. They are here arranged chro- 
 nologically : — The Preaching of Peter, lefened 
 to by Origen, in liis Commentary on St. John's 
 Gospel, lib. xiv. ; also referred to by Clemens 
 Alexandrinus. — The Acts of P(ter, sujijmsed by 
 Di-. Cave to be cited by Seiapion. — The Acts oj 
 Paid aiicl Thecla, mentioned by Tertullian, Lil). 
 de Buptismo, cap. xvii. : this is, however, sii|)- 
 po.sed by some to be the same which is founil in 
 a Greek MS. in the Bodleian Liijiary, and iias 
 been published by Dr. Gralie, iij his Spied. Pc- 
 trum Secid. I. — The Doctrine of Peter, cited l)y 
 Origen, ' Procem.' in Lib. de Prtncip. — Ti.e Acts 
 of Paul, \h.de Princip. i. 2. — The Preaching oj 
 Paid, referred to by St. Cyprian, Tract, de nou 
 iterando Baptismo. — 'The Prcachinf/ of Paid and 
 Peter at Rotne, cited by Lactanlius, De vera Sap. 
 iv. 21. — The Acts of Peter, thrice mentioned by 
 Eusebius, Hist. Eccles. iii. 3 : 'as to that work, 
 however, which is ascribed to hini, called "The 
 Acts" and the "Gospel according to Peter," we 
 know nothing of tlieir licing haruied down a.s Ca- 
 tholic writings, since neither among the aiicieui 
 nor the ecclesiastical writeis of our own day luis 
 there been one that has appealeil to testimony 
 taken from them." — The Acts of Paul, ib. — 
 T'he Revelation of Peter, ib. — Tlie Acts of 
 Andrew and John, ib. cap. 25. Thus," he 
 says, ' we have it in our jiower to know . . . 
 those books that are ailduced by the heretics, 
 under tlie name of the ajxjstles, such, viz. as com- 
 jxjse the gospels of Peter, Thonuis, and Matthew^ 
 .... and sucii as contain the Acts (jf the Ai;ostle.'. 
 by Andrew and John, and others of which i.o OQC 
 of those writeis in the ecclesiastical ^ucces-iion 
 has condescended to make any mention in \\\i 
 works; and, indeed, the character of the style it-
 
 6r. 
 
 A DAD. 
 
 ADAM. 
 
 sell' is very iliffcrenl t'lom lliatof (lie apostles, and 
 the sentiments ;iiul the iiurjioit of tiiose things tliat 
 are alvanceJ in them, deviatiuir as J'.ir as jjossihle 
 iVom sDHu.l oitiioiloxy, evidently |)roves tliey are 
 tlio fictions of licieticMl men: wiience they are to 
 be ranked iu>t only anioii^ the spuriDus writings, 
 but are to lie rejected as alto^'ether atisurd and 
 impious.' — The Acts of Petor, John, and Thomas. 
 Athanasius, Si/iinps. § 76 — The Writings of Bar- 
 tholomcw the ApostL', mentioned hy the pseudo- 
 Dicriysius. — The Acts, Precwhinr/,anfl Revelation 
 of Peter, cited liy .leronie, in his Cntal. Script. 
 Eccha. — The Acts of the Apostles htj Seleiicu^, 
 ill. Epist. ad Chroin , kc. — The Acta of Paul and 
 Thecla, ill. Catiloc/. Script. Ecclcs. — The Acts of 
 the Apostles, used by Hie Ehionites, cited by 
 Ej)ip!ianins. .4f/yersii<s Hceres. 6 16. The Acts of 
 Leucias, Lentius, or Lejiticiits, called the Acts 
 of the Apostles, Augustin. Lib. d<t Fid. c. 3S. — 
 The Acts of the AjMstles, used by the Manichees. 
 — TJie Revelations of Thomas, ^aul, Stephen, 
 A'C. Gelasius, de Lib. Apoc. apud Gratian. Dis- 
 tinct. 1-5. c. 3. 
 
 To these may !>« added the r/enitine Acts of 
 Pilate, appealed to by Tertnllian and Justin 
 Martyr, in their Apolor/ies, as being then extant. 
 Tertnllian describes tliem as 'the records which 
 were transmitted from Jerusalem to Tiberius 
 concerning Christ.' He refers to the same for 
 t'ne jmwf of our Saviour's miracles. 
 
 Tiie following is a catalogue of the principal 
 spurious Acts still extant; — The Creed of the 
 Apostles. — The Epistles of Barnabas, Clement, 
 Ignatius, and Polycarp. — The Eecognitions of 
 Clement, or the Travels of Peter. — The Shep- 
 herd of Hermas. — The Acts of Pilate (spurious), 
 or the Gospiel of Nicodemus. — The Acts of 
 Paul, at tlie Martyrdom of Thecla. — Abdias's 
 History of the Ttcelve Apostles. — The Consti- 
 tutions of the Apostles. — The Canons of the 
 Apostles. — The Liturgies of the Apostles. — St. 
 .Paul's Epistle to the Laodiceans. — St. Paul's 
 Letters to Seneca. Together with some others, 
 for which see Cotclerius's Ecclesiie Grcecee Mo- 
 numenta, Parisj 1677-92 ; Fabricius, Codex Apo- 
 crypha.^, N. T. ; ])u Pin, History of the Ca- 
 non of the Nero Testament, London, 1699; 
 Grabe's Spicileyium Patmm, Oxford, 1714; 
 Lardner's Credibility, &c. ; Jones's ISeic and Just 
 Method of Settling the Canonical Authority of 
 the New Testament ; BirelTs Tucta.rium,liai'n'iaB, 
 1801 ; Thilo's Acta St. Thomtr, Lips. 1823, and 
 Codex Apocryphus N. T, Lips. 1832. — W. W. 
 
 ADAD is the name of the chief deity of the 
 Syrians, the sun, according to Macrobius, whose 
 words are (Saturnal. i. 23): ' Accipe quid 
 Assyrii de Solis potentia opinentur; deo enim, 
 ^uem ?uminnm maximumque venerantur, Adad 
 nomen doderunt. Ejus nominis interpretatio 
 
 S'gnificat vnus Simulacrum, Adad in- 
 
 Signe cemitur radiis inclinatis, quibns monstratvir 
 vim coeli in radiis esse Solis, qui demittuntur in 
 terram.' Moreover, Pliny (Hist. Nat. xxxvii. 11, 
 71), speaking of remarkable stones named after 
 parts of tlie body, mentions some called ' Ada- 
 dunepbros, ejusdem oculus ac digitus dei ;' an<l 
 adds, ' e( hie colilur a Syris.' He is also called 
 'ASojooy 0a<rtAfhs deiiv by Philo Byblius (in 
 Eusebii Prtepar. Evan. i. 10), where the occur- 
 i-ence of the long o for a is to be ascribed to the 
 ch.iractcristic pronunciation of the Western Ara- 
 
 maean dialect. The passage of Hcsychnis Polcc 
 Hardiiin adduces in his note to Pliny, concern- 
 ing the worship of this god by the Phrygians, 
 only contains ttie name "ASoiSos by an emenda- 
 tion of S.ilmasius, which Jablon.ski declares to ba 
 inatimissible (i)e Ling. Lycaonica, p. 61). 
 
 This Syrian deity claims some notice here, be- 
 cause his name is most probably an element in 
 the names of the Syrian kings Benhadad and 
 Hadadezcr. Moreover, several of the older' com- 
 mentators have endeavoured to find this deity in 
 Isaiah Ixvi. 17 ; eiilier by altering the text there 
 to suit the name given by Macrobius; or by 
 adapting the name he gives to his interpretation 
 and to the reading of the Hebrew, so as to make 
 that extract bear testimony to a god Achad. 
 Michaelis has argued at some length against both 
 these views : and the modern corninentators, such 
 as Gesenius, Hit/.ig, Bottcher (in Prohen AltesL 
 Schriftcrkliir.), and Ewald, Jo not admit tlie 
 name of any deity in that passage. — J. N. 
 
 ADAD-RIMMON, properly Hadad-Rimmon 
 
 (pG'I'lTn ; Sept. pociv, a garden of pomegror 
 nates'), a city in the valley of Jezreel, where 
 was fouglit the famoug battle between King Jo- 
 siah and Pharaoh-Necho (2 Kings xxiii. 29 ; 
 Zech. xii. 11). Adad-rimmon was afterwards 
 called Maximianojiolis, in honour of the emperor 
 Maximian (Jerome, Comment, in Zach. xii.). 
 It was seventeen Roman miles from Caesarea, and 
 ten miles from Jezreel (Itin. Hieros.). 
 
 ADAH (iTiy, adornment, comeliness; Sept. 
 'A5a): 1. one of the wives of Lamech (Gen. iv. 
 19). 2. one of the wives of Esau, daughter of 
 Elon the Hitfite (Gen. xxxvi. 4). She is called 
 Judith in Gen. xxvi. 34. 
 
 ADAM iUl.^), the word by which the Bible 
 designates the first human being. 
 
 It is evident that, in the earliest use of lan- 
 guage, the vocal sound employed to designate the 
 first perceived object, of any kind, would be an 
 appellative, and would be formed from something 
 known or apprehended to be a characteristic pro- 
 perty of that oljject. The word would, therefore, 
 1)6 at once the appellative and the proper name. 
 But when other olijects of the same kind were dis- 
 covered, or subsequently came into existence, dif- 
 ficulty would be felt; it would beaime necessary 
 to guard against confusion, and the inventive 
 faculty would be called upon to obtain a discri- 
 minative term for each and singular individuaJ, 
 while some equally appropriate term would be 
 fixed upon for the whole kind. DilVereiit me- 
 thods of efl'ecfing these two purposes might be 
 resorted to, but the most natural would be to 
 retain the original ternr in its simple state, for the 
 first individual: antl to make some modification 
 of it by prefixing another sound, or by subjoining 
 one, or by altering the vowel or vowels in the body 
 of the word, in order to have a term for the kind, 
 and ibr the separate individuals of the kind. 
 
 This reasoning is exemplified in the first appli- 
 cations of flie word bid'ure us: (Gen. i. 26), 'I;et 
 us make man [Adam] in our image;' (i. 27), 
 ' Anil God created the man [the Adam] in his 
 own image.' Tiie next instance (ii. 7) expresses 
 the source of deri\ation, a character or propertyj 
 namely, tlie material of which the human body 
 was formed : ' And the Lord God [Jehovi«h 
 
 I
 
 ADAH. 
 
 Kloliim] fonned the man [tlie Adam] dust from 
 the [ground [tlie adaina,h]'. Ttie nifaniiis; of the 
 piniary woid is, most ]nohal)ly, any kiml ol 
 reddish tint, as a bpautit'ul human complexion 
 (Lam. iv. 7) ; but its various derivatives are 
 applied to dill'creiit objects ol' a red jr bro»vii hue, 
 or approaching to such. Tlie word ylrfciwi, there- 
 fore, IS an a])pellative noun matle into a jivojjer 
 one. It is further remarkalile tliat, in all the 
 other instances in t he second and tliird chapters 
 of Genesis, which are nineteen, it is put with the 
 article, the man, or the Adam. It is also to be 
 obser'-ed that, thougli it occurs very frequently ill 
 tlie Old Testament, and though there is no grarn- 
 malical dilliculty in fliewayof its being declined 
 by llie dual and plural terminations and the ])ro- 
 no/ninal sullixes (as Its derivative D^? dam, 
 lilood, is), yet it never undergoes those changes; 
 it is used abundantly to denote man in the gene- 
 ral and collecti\e sense — munkind, the human 
 race, but it is never found in the plural num- 
 ber. ^Vlien the sacred Mriters design to express 
 men distril)utlvely, they use either the compound 
 term, sons of men (DTS ^J2. benei adam), or 
 ti>e plural ofVUX enosh, or B^^X ish. 
 
 The question arises, \Vas the uttered sound, 
 originally employed for this purpose, the very 
 vocable Adam, or was it some other sound of cor- 
 respondent signillcation? This is equivalent to 
 asking, what was the primitive language of men? 
 
 That language originated in the instinctive 
 cries of human beings herding together in a con- 
 dition like that of common animals, is an hypo- 
 tliesis whicii, apart from all testimony of revela- 
 tion, must appear unreasonable to a man of seri- 
 ous reflection. There are other animals, besides 
 man, whose organs are capable of producing arti- 
 rilate sounds, through a considerable range of 
 variety, and distinctly pronounced. How, then, 
 is it that parrots, jays, and starlings have not 
 among themselves developed an articulate lan- 
 guage, transmitted it to tiieir successive genera- 
 tions, and improved it, both in the life-time of 
 the individual and in the series of many gene- 
 rations 1 Those birds never attempt to speak 
 till they are compelled by a difficult process on 
 the part of their trainers, and they never train 
 each other. 
 
 Upon the mere ground of reasoning from the 
 necessity of the case, it seems an inevitable con- 
 tusion that not the capacity merely, but the 
 actual use of speech, with the corresjionding fa- 
 culty of promptly understanding it, was given to 
 the first human beings by a superior power: and 
 it would be a gratuitous absurdity to suppose that 
 power to be any other tiian the Ahnighty Creator. 
 In what manner such communication or infusion 
 of what would be equivalent to a habit took 
 place, it is in vain to inquire ; the subject lies 
 Iieyond the range of liuman investigation : but, 
 from the evident exigfncy, it must iiave been in- 
 stantaneous, or nearlj so. It is not necessary to 
 suppose that a copious language was thus be- 
 stowed upon the human creatures in the first stage 
 of their existence. We need to supnose only so 
 much as would Ije requisite for tiie notation of the 
 ideas of natural wants and tiie most ini])oi-tant 
 mental conceptions ; and from rliese, as germs, 
 the powers of tiie mind and the faculty of vocal 
 ilfsignalion would educe new words and combina- 
 tions as occasion demanded 
 
 ADAM. 
 
 19 
 
 Tliat flie language thus fonned co.ttjnued to be 
 the universal speech of mankind I ill after tha 
 deluge, and till the great cause of diversity 
 [LvNtiUAOK] took jjlace, is in itself the most 
 probable sujiposition. If there were any fami- 
 lies of men which v/CTii not involved in tha 
 crime of the Babel-buiklei-s, they would almost 
 certainly retain the jirimeval language. The 
 longevity of the men of that jjeriod would be a 
 ])owerful conservative of tliat language ai^iiii»t 
 tlie slow changes of time. That there were sucii 
 exceptions seems to lie almost an indubitable in- 
 ference from the fact that Noali long survived the 
 unholy attempt. His faithful piety woulil not 
 have sulTered him to fall into the snare; and it is 
 dillicult to sujipose that rione of his children and 
 descendants would listen to liis admonitions, and 
 hold fast tlioir integrity by adhering to iiim : oa 
 the contrary, it is re;isonable to sup])ose that the 
 habit and character of piety were established in 
 many of them. 
 
 The confusi(m of t(mgues, tiierefore, whatever 
 was the nature of that jutlicial visitation, would 
 not fall upon that portion of men which was the 
 most orderly, thoughtful, and pious, among whom 
 the second father of mankind dwelt as their ac» 
 kiiowledged and revered head. 
 
 If tlus supposition be admitted, we can have no 
 difficulty in regarding as the mother of languages, 
 not indeed the Hebrew, absolutely sjieakiiig, but 
 that which was the stock whence brancheil the 
 Hebrew, and its sister tongues, usually called the 
 Shemitic, but more properly, by Dr. Prichard, the 
 Syro-Arabian. It may then be maintained that 
 tlie actually spoken names of Adam and all the 
 others mentioned in tiie ante-diluvian liistoiy were 
 those which we have in the Hi'brew Brtile, very 
 slightly and not at all essentially varied. 
 
 On the other hand, some of the greatest names 
 in tlie study and comparison of languages main- 
 tain that ' the prinleval language has not been 
 anywhere preserved, but that fragments of it 
 must, from the common origin of all, everywhere 
 exist; that these fragments will indicate the ori- 
 ginal derivation and kindredship of all ; and 
 that some direct causation of no common agency 
 has operated to begin, and has so jieiTnaneiitly 
 afl'ected mankind as to establish, a striking and 
 universally experienced diversity ' (Mr. Sharon 
 Turner ' On the Languages of (he ^^'orl^l,' &c., in 
 the Transact iotis of the lioi/al Surii'ti/ of Lite- 
 rature, the volumes published in 1S27 and 1^04). 
 We take this citation from Dr. Bosworth's Anglo- 
 Saxon Dictionary, Pref. p. iii., where that eminent 
 scholar and antiquary seems tacitly to intimate 
 his concurrence with Mr. Turner, anil sid'joins, — 
 ' A gentleman, whose ei-udition is universally ac- 
 knowledged, and whose 0]iinion, from his exten- 
 sive lingual knowledge and especially from his 
 critica>l acquaintance with the Oriental tongues, 
 deserves the greatest attention, has come to this 
 conclusion ; for he has stated, " Tiie original lan- 
 guage, of which the oldest daughter is the Sanskrit, 
 the fruitful mother of so many dialects, exists no 
 longer" (Prof Hamaker's Academische I'vorle- 
 zingen, Leyden, 1S35). 
 
 Upon this hypothesis it will follow that a 
 knowledge of the proper names of the liist huiiian 
 family, and of all down to the times of Abraham, 
 is absolutely unattainable ; and that the Hebrew 
 designations which we jwssess are not echoes of tlie
 
 w 
 
 .iDAM, 
 
 sounds, \,.if represen atives or translations of their 
 signification. We acknowledge that the former 
 seems to us the more jjrobable opinion. 
 
 Tliat men and otiier animals have existed from 
 eternity, by each individual being born of parents 
 and dying at the close of his period, that is, by an 
 inKnite succession of finite beings, lias been as- 
 serted by some: whether they really believed their 
 own assertion may well be doubted. Others have 
 maintained tiiat the first man and his female 
 mate, or a number of such, came into existence 
 by s<jme spontaneous action of the eartli or the 
 elements, a cliance-combination of matter and 
 properties, witlioutan intellectual designing cause. 
 We hold these notions to be unworthy of a serious 
 refutation. An upright mind, upon a little se- 
 rious reflection, must perceive their absurdity, 
 self-contradiction, and impossibility. To those 
 wlio may desire to see ample demonstration of 
 what we here assert, we recommend Dr. Samuel 
 Clarke Oti the Being and Attributes of God; Mr. 
 Samuel Drew's Essays; or an admirable work 
 not known in a manner corresponding to its 
 worth, Discourses on Atheism, by the Rev. Thomas 
 Allin, 1828. 
 
 It is among the clearest deductions of reason, 
 that men and all dependent beings have been 
 created, tliat is, protluced or brought into their 
 first existence by an intelligent and adequately 
 powerful being. A question, however, arises, of 
 great interest and importance. Did the Almighty 
 Creator produce only one man and one woman, 
 from whom all other human beings have de- 
 scended ? — or did he create several parental pairs, 
 from wliom distinct stocks of men have been de- 
 rived ? The aflirmative of the latter position has 
 been maintained by some, and, it must be con- 
 fessed, not witiiout apparent reason. The mani- 
 fest and great differences in complexion and 
 figure, which distinguish several races of man- 
 kind, are supposed to be sucli "as entirely to forbid 
 the conclusion that they have all descended from 
 one father and one mother. The question is 
 usually regarded as equivalent to this : whether 
 there is only one species of men, or there are 
 several. But we cannot, in strict fairness, admit 
 that the questions are identical. It is hypotheti- 
 cally conceivable tliat the Adoralile God might 
 give existence to any number of creatures, which 
 should all possess the properties whicli charac- 
 terize identity of species, even without such ditl'er- 
 ences as constitute varieties, or with any degree 
 of those ditlerencps. A learned German divine, 
 Dr. de Schrank, thinks it riglit to maintain tliat, 
 of all organizeil beings besides man, the Creator 
 gave existence to innumerable individuals, of 
 course in their proper pairs {Comm. in Gen. p. 69, 
 Sulzhach, 183.5). His reason probably is, that 
 otherwise there would not be a provision of food : 
 but whether the conjecture be admitted or not, it 
 is plain that it involves no contradiction, and 
 that therefore distinct races of men might have 
 b«en created, differing within certain limits, yet 
 all possessing that which physiologists lay down 
 as the only proper and constant character, the 
 perpetuity of propagation. 
 
 Eut the admission of the possibility is not a 
 concession of the reality. So great is the evidence 
 :n favour of the derivation of the entire mass of 
 liunian beings from one pair of ancestors, tiiat it 
 aas obtained the svilfrage of the men most com- 
 
 ADAM. 
 
 petant to judge ujxin a question of comjK.rative 
 anatomy and piiysiology. The late illustrioin 
 Cuvier and lilumenljach, and our countryman 
 Mr. Lawrence, are examples of the highest order. 
 But no writer has a claim to deference upon this 
 subject superior to that of Dr. ,1. C. rricliaid. lie 
 has devoted a large work, which is still in the 
 progress of publication, to this subject and others 
 allied to it — Researches into the Physical Iliaiory 
 of Mankind, 3 volumes, and one more at least 
 to come, 1836-1841 : also another work, just 
 completed — The Natural History of Man, 1S42. 
 In tlie Introductory Observations co) tained in 
 the latter work we find a passage which we cite 
 as an example of that noble impartiality and dis- 
 regard of even sacred prepossessions with which 
 the author has pursued his laborious investigation : 
 ' I sliall not pretend that in my own mind I re- 
 gard the question now to be discussed as onf of 
 which the decision is indifferent either to religion 
 or to humanity. But the strict rule of scientific 
 scrutiny exacts, according to modem phih)S0])her3, 
 in matters of inductive reasoning, an exclusive 
 homage. It requires that we should close our 
 eyes against all presumptive and extrinsic evi- 
 dence, and abstract our minds from all consider- 
 ations not derived from the matters of fact which 
 bear immediately on the question. The maxim 
 we have to follow in such controversies is, fiat 
 justitia, rvxit caelum. In fact, what is actually 
 true, it is always most desirable to know, what- 
 ever consequences may arise from its admis- 
 sion.' 
 
 The animals which render eminent services to 
 man, and pecviliarly depend upon his protection, 
 are widely diffused — the horse, the dog, the hog, 
 tlie domestic fowl. Now of these the varieties in 
 each species are numerous and diil'erent, to a de- 
 gree so great, that an observer ignorant of ])hy- 
 siological history would scarcely lielieve them u 
 be of the same species. But man is the most 
 widely diffused of any animal. In the progress 
 of ages and generations, he has naturalized him- 
 self to every climate, and to modes of life which 
 would prove fatal to an individual man suddenly 
 transferred from a remote jioirit of the field. The 
 alterations produced affect every part of the body, 
 internal and external, without extinguishing the 
 marks of the specific identity. A further and 
 striking evidence is, that when persons of dilVereiit 
 varieties are conjugally uniteil, the olVsjiring, 
 especially in two or' three generations, becomes 
 more prolific, and acquires a higher perfection in 
 physical and mental qualities than was found in 
 either of the parental races. From the deejiest 
 Atiican black to the finest Caucasian white, the 
 change runs through imperceptible graiiations ; 
 and, if a middle hue be assumed, suppose some 
 tint of brown, all the varieties of complexion may 
 be explained upon the principle of divergence in- 
 fluenced by outward circumstances. Tlie con- 
 clusion may be fairly drawn, hi the words of th« 
 able translators and illustrators of Baron Cuvier's 
 great work:- ' Vv'e are fully wairanted in con- 
 cluding, both from the comparison of man with 
 inferior animals, so far as the inferiority will 
 allow of such comparison, ami, beyond that, by 
 comparing him witii himself, that the s;reat family 
 of mankind loudly proclaim a descent, at some 
 jjeriod or other, from one common origin.' (Ani 
 mul Kingdom, with the Supplements of Mr. K
 
 ADAM. 
 
 Griffith, Col. Hamilton Smith, aiid Mr. Pidgeon. 
 vol. i. p. 179). 
 
 Thus, by an investigation totally indcjjondent 
 of iiistorical autlioiity, we are hrouLjht t<) the con- 
 clusion of the inspired writings, tliat the Creator 
 ' hatii m.ide of cue blood all nations' of men. for 
 to d\vell on all the face of tlie earth ' (Acts 
 xvii. 26). 
 
 We shall now follow ie course of tiiose sacred 
 documents in tracing the history of the first man, 
 persuaded that their riglit interpretation is a sure 
 basis of trutli. At tlie same time we shall not 
 reject illustrations from natural history and tlie 
 reason of particular facts. 
 
 It is evident upon a little reflection, and the 
 closest investigation conlirms the conclusion, that 
 (he first human ]iair must liave been created in a 
 state equivalent to that which all subsequent hu- 
 man beings lia\'e had to reach by slow degrees, in 
 growth, experience, observation, imitation, and 
 the instruction of others : that is, a state of prime 
 maturity, and with an infusion, concreation, or 
 whatever we may call it, of knowledge and ha- 
 bits, botli jiliysical and intellectual, suitaljle to 
 the place wliich man liail to occupy in the system 
 of creation, and adequate to his necessities in that 
 place. Had it been otherwise, the new beings 
 could not have preserved their animal existence, 
 nor have held rational converse witli each other, 
 ■aor ha\"e paid to tlieir Creator the homage of know- 
 ledge and love, adoration and obedience ; and 
 reason clearly tells us that tlie last was the no- 
 blest end of existence. Those \vhom unha]ipy 
 prejudices lead to reject revelation must either 
 admit this, or must resort to suppositions of pal- 
 pable absurdity and impossibility. If they will 
 not admit a direct action of Divine power in 
 creation and adajitation to the designed mode of 
 existence, they must admit sometliing far beyond 
 the miraculous, an infinite succession of finite 
 beings, or a spontaneous jnoduction of order, orga- 
 nization, and systematic action, from some unin- 
 telligent origin. The Bible coincides with this 
 dictate of honest reason, expressing these facts in 
 simple and artless language, suited to the cir- 
 cumstances of the men to wliom revelation was 
 fii'st granted. Tliat this production in a mature 
 state was the fact with regard to the vegetable 
 part of the creation, is declared in Gen. ii. 4, 5 : 
 ' In the day of Jehovah God's making the earth 
 and the heavens, and every shrub of the field 
 before it should be in the earth, and every herb of 
 the field beliire it sliould bud.' The reader sees 
 that we have translated the verbs (which stand 
 in the Hebrew future form) by our potential 
 mood, as the nearest in correspondence witli the 
 idiom called by Dr. Nordheimer the ' Dependent 
 Use of the Future' {Critical Grammar of the 
 Heb. Lang., vol. ii. p. ISO; New York, 1841). 
 The two terms, shrubs and herbage, are put, by 
 the common synecdoclie, to designate the wliole 
 vegetable kingtlom. The reason of the case com- 
 prehends the other division of organized nature; 
 and this is applied to man and all other ani- 
 mals, in the words, ' Out of the ground — dust 
 out of the ground — Jeluivah God formed them.' 
 
 It is to be observed that there are two narratives 
 at the beginning of the IMosaic records, dilH-rent 
 jn style and manner, distinct and independent; 
 at first sight somewhat discrepant, but when 
 •ttictly examined, perfectly compatible, and each 
 
 ADAM. 
 
 59 
 
 one illustrating and comjileting the otl er. Xlie 
 first is contained in Gen. i. 1, to ii. 3; an<l tlte 
 other, ii. 4, to iv. 2<). As is the case with thn 
 Sciiptuie liislory generally, they consist of a few 
 principal facts, <letaclied anecdotes, leaving much 
 of necessary implication which (lie good sense of 
 the reader is called upon to supply ; and jiassiug 
 over large .sjiaces of the histijiy of life, ujion which 
 all conjecture would be fruitless. 
 
 In the second of these narratives we read, 
 'And Jehovah God formed the man [lleb. \\\e 
 A<lam], dust from the ground [HDlXii, fiaada- 
 wjrtA], and blew into his nostrils the breath of 
 life; and the man became a living animal' (Gen. 
 ii. 7). Here are two ol)jects of attention, the 
 organic mechanism of the human body, and tlie 
 vitality with which it was endowed. 
 
 The mechanical material, formed (moulded, or 
 arranged, as an artificer models clay or wax) 
 into the human and all other animal bodies, is 
 called 'dust from the ground.' This would be a 
 natural and easy expression to men in the early 
 ages, before chemistry was known or minute jihi- 
 losophical distinctions were thought of, to convey, 
 in a general form, the idea of earthy matter, the 
 constituent substance of the ground on whicli we 
 tread. To say, that of this the human and every 
 other animal body was formed, is a position which 
 would be at (;nce the most easily apprehensible to 
 an uncultivated mind, ami which yet is the most 
 exactly true ujwn the highest philosoiihical 
 grounds. We now know, from cljemical ana- 
 lysis, that the animal body is composed, in tl»e 
 inscrutable manner called or(jaiiizution, of car- 
 bon, hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, lime, iron, sul- 
 phur, and pliosjihorus. Now all these are mineral 
 substances, which in their various combinations 
 form a very large part of the solid ground. 
 
 Some of our readers niay be surjaised at our 
 having translated iTTl L^'D3 nephesh hhaija by 
 living animal. There are good interpreters and 
 preachers who, confiding in the common traiLsla 
 tion, living soul, have maintained that here is 
 intimated the distinctive pre-emuienct." of man 
 above the inferior animals, as juissessed of an im- 
 material and immortal sjiirit. But, however true 
 that doctrine is, and supjiorted by aliundant 
 argument from both jJiilosophy and the .Scriji- 
 tures, we sliould be acting unlaithlViUy if we v.ere 
 to allirm its being containetl or imiiiled in this 
 passage. The two woiils are irequently conjoined 
 in the Hebrew, and the meaning of the can jiound 
 phrase will be a])parent to the Englisii reader, 
 when he knows that our version renders it, in Gen. 
 i. 20, ' creature that hath life ;' in verse 24, ' li\ ing 
 creature,' and so in ch. ii. 19 ; ix. 12, 15, 16 ; and 
 in ch. i. 30, 'wherein there is life." 
 
 This expression therelbre sets before us the or- 
 ganic i.itE of the animal frame, that m\sterioi;3 
 something which man cannot create nor restoiCj 
 wiiich bailies the most acute pliilosoiihers tosearcli 
 out its nature, and which icason combines witli 
 Scripture to refer to the immediate agency ol' the 
 Almighty — 'in him we live, and move, and have 
 our being.' 
 
 The otl'er narrative is contained in these wortls, 
 'God created man in his own image: in the image 
 of God created he him; male and female, created iiu 
 them' (Gen. i. 27). The image {Db)i tschm, 
 resemblance, such as a shadow bears lu tiie object 
 which casts it^ of God is an exllres^ion whick
 
 60 
 
 ADAM. 
 
 ADAM. 
 
 breaches at once archaic simplicity and the most 
 reconilite wisdom : for what term could the most 
 cultiviitod and copious lan^uaL!;e bring forth 
 more suiUible to iJiC jiuiposeV It presents to us 
 man as made in a resemblance to the author of 
 his being, a true resemblance, but faint and sha- 
 dowy ; an outline, faithful according to its capa- 
 city, yet inlinitely remote from the reality : a 
 distant form of the intelligence, xcisdoni, powci; 
 rectitude, goodness, and dominion of the Adorable 
 Supreme. To the ini'erior sentient bein^'s with 
 which he is connected man stands in the j)lace of 
 God. We have every reason to think that none 
 of them are capable of conceiving a being higher 
 than man. All, in their difl'erent ways, look up 
 to him as their sujjcrior ; tlie ferocious generally 
 flee before him, afraid to encounter his power, and 
 the gentle court his protection and show their 
 highest joy to consist in serving and pleasing 
 him. Even in our degenerate state it is manifest 
 that if we beat tlie domesticated animals with 
 wisdom and kindness, their attachment is most 
 ardent and faithl'ul. 
 
 Tims had man the shadow of the divine domi- 
 nioH and author iij over the inferior creation. 
 The attribute of poicer was also given to him, in 
 his being made able to convert the inanimate ob- 
 jects and those possessing only the vegetable life, 
 into the instruments and the materials for supply- 
 ing his wants, and continually enlarging his 
 spliere of command. 
 
 In such a state of things knoicledge and wis- 
 doni are implied : the one quality, an acquaint- 
 ance with those substances and their changeful 
 actions wiiich were necessary for a creature like 
 man to understand, in order to his safety and com- 
 fort ; the other, such sagacity as would direct him 
 in selecting the best objects of desire and pursuit, 
 and tiie right means for attaining them. 
 
 Above all, moral excellence must have been 
 comprised in this ' image of God ;' and not only 
 forming a part of it, but being its crown of beauty 
 and glory. The Christian inspiration, tlian 
 which no more perfect disclosure of God is to take 
 place on this side eternity, casts its light upon 
 this subject ; for the apostle Paul, in urging the 
 obligations of Christians to perfect holiness, evi- 
 dently alludes to the endowments of the first man 
 iji two parallel and mutually illustrative epistles ; 
 ' — the new man, renewed in knowledge after the 
 image of Him that created him; the new man 
 which, after [/fara, according to] God, is created 
 in righteousness and true holiness' (Col. iii. 10; 
 Eph. iv. 24). 
 
 In this perfection of faculties, and with these 
 high prerogatives of moral existence, did human 
 nature, in its first subject, rise up from the creating 
 hand. The whole Scripture-narrative implies 
 that this STATE of existence was one of corre- 
 spondent activitij and enjoyment. It plainly 
 represents the Dkity himself as condescending to 
 assume a hunutn form and to employ human 
 speech, in order to instruct and exercise the 
 happy creatures whom (to borrow the just and 
 beautiful language of the Apocryphal ' Wisdom'} 
 • God created for incoiriaptibility, and made him 
 an image of his own nature.'* The only plau- 
 
 sible objection to tliis is, that the condescension vt 
 too great, an ol)jection which can be no otJier than 
 a presumptuous limiting of the Divine goodness. 
 It was the voice of reason which liurst through the 
 trammels of an infidel philosophy, when the cele» 
 brated G(n'man, Fichte, wrote, ' Who, then, edu- 
 cated the first human pair'^ A spirit bestowed 
 its caie upon tlicm, as is laid down in an ancient 
 and venerable original record, which, taken alto- 
 gether, contains tlie profoimdest and the loftiest 
 wisdom, and presents those results to which all 
 pliilosophy m\ist at last retuiTi' (cited in the 
 German Bible of Brentano, Dereser, and Scholz, 
 vol. i., p. 16, Frankfort, 1820-1833). 
 
 The noble and sublime idea that man thus 
 had his Maker tor his teacher and guide, jire- 
 cludes a thousand difficulties. It shows us the 
 simple, direct, and efl'ectual method by wliich 
 the newly fomied creature would have communi- 
 cated to him all the intellectual knowledge, and 
 all the practical arts and manipulations, which 
 were needful and beneficial for him. The uni- 
 versal management of the ' garden in Eden east- 
 ward ' (Gen. ii. 8), the treatment of the soil, the 
 use of water, the various training of the planta 
 and trees, tlie operations for insuring future pro- 
 duce, the necessary implements and the way of 
 using them ; — all these must have been included 
 in the words ' to dress it and to keep it' (ver. 15). 
 To have gained these attainments and habits 
 without any instruction previous or concomitant, 
 would liave required the experience of men in 
 society and co-operation for many years, with 
 innumerable anxious experiments, and often the 
 keenest disappointment. If we suppose that the 
 first man antl woman continued in tJieir primitive 
 state but even a few weeks, they must have re- 
 quired some tools for ' dressing and keeping the 
 garden :' but if not, the condition of their chil- 
 dren, when severe labour for subsistence became 
 necessary, presented an obvious and undeniable 
 need. Tiiey could not do well without iron in- 
 struments. Iron, the most useful and the most 
 widely ditlused of all the metals, cannot be 
 broirght into a serviceable state without processes 
 and instruments which it seems impossible to 
 imagine could have been first possessed except in 
 the way of supernatural communication. It 
 would, in all reasonable estimation, liave re- 
 quired the difficulties and the experience of some 
 centuries, for men to liave discovered the means 
 of raising a sufficient heat, and the use of fluxes : 
 and, had that step been gained, the fused iron 
 would not have answered the purposes wanted. 
 To render it malleable and ductile, it must be 
 beaten, at a white heat, by long continued strokes 
 of prodigious hammers. To make iron (as is the 
 technical tenn) requires previous iron. If it be 
 said that the tirst iron used by man was native 
 metallic iron, of which masses have been founil, 
 the obvious rej)ly is, not only the raritj' of its oc- 
 currence, but that, when obtained, it also requires 
 previous iron instruments to bring it into any 
 form for use. Tulial-cain most probably lived 
 before the death of Adam ; and he acquired fame 
 as ' a hammerer, a universal workman in brass 
 and iron ' (Gen. iv. 22). This is tlie most literal 
 
 * Wisd. Sol. ii. 23. eV a({>6ap<rla, incorrtipti- a better word. The exact meaning of the Gr«eb 
 hility, often denoting immortality. We have is, the whole combination of characteristic peci*- 
 translated i5i6Ti]s, nature, not being able to find li&ritivs.
 
 ADAM. 
 
 translation of tliis gnmimatlcally difliotiU clause. 
 In this biicf ilescription it is evident that iinicli is 
 implied beyond our power of asceitaininff. Tlie 
 necessity and importance of tlie greatest hammers 
 seem to be included. Considering tiie.se in- 
 stances as rejiresentatives of many similar, we are 
 conlirmed in our belief that God not only gave to 
 the earliest human families snch knowled^ge as 
 was requisite, but the materials and the instru- 
 ments withou* wliich knowledge wciild have been 
 in vain. 
 
 Religious Icnowledge and its ajipropriate habits 
 also required an innnediate infusion : and these 
 are pre-eminently comprehendetl in the ' image of 
 God.' On the one hand, it is not to be snpjwseil 
 tliat the newly created man and his female com- 
 panion were inspired with a very ample share of 
 the doctrinal kijowledge which was communi- 
 cated to their jwsterity by the successive and 
 accumulating revolutions of more than four thou- 
 sand years: and, on the other, the idea of their 
 bsing left in gross ignorance upon the existence 
 and excellencies of the Being who had made them, 
 their obligations to him, and tlie way in wliich 
 tiiey miglit continue to receive flie greatest bless- 
 ings from him. It is self-evident tiiat, to have 
 attained such a kind and degree of knowledge, by 
 spontaneous etlort, under even the fa\ouiable cir- 
 cumstances of a state of negative innocence, 
 would have been a long and arduous work. But 
 the sacred narrative leaves no room for doubt 
 upon tliis head. In the primitive style it tells 
 of God as speaking to them, commanding, in- 
 structing, assigning their work, jiointing out their 
 danger, and showing liow to avoid it. All this, 
 reduced to tlie dry simplicity of detail, is equi- 
 valent to saying that tlie Creator, infinitely kind 
 and condescending, by the use of feiins and n.odes 
 adapted to their capacity, fed their minds witli 
 truth, gave them a ready understantiing of it and 
 that delight in it wliicli constituted holiness, 
 taught them to hold intercourse with himself by 
 direct addresses in both praise and prayer, and 
 gave some disclosures of a future state of blessed- 
 ness when they should have fulfilled the condi- 
 tions of their j'l'obation. 
 
 All especial instance of this instruction and in- 
 fusion of practical habits is given to us in the nar- 
 rative : ' Out of the ground Jehovah God formed 
 every beast of the field and every fowl of the air 
 [Hebr. of tlie heavens] ; and brought them unto 
 the man [Hebr. the Adam], to see what he would 
 call them " (Gen. ii. 19). This, taken out of the 
 style of condescending anthropomoi-jihism, amounts 
 to such a statement as the following : the Creator 
 had not only formetl man with organs of speech, 
 but he taught him the use of them, by an imme- 
 diate commujiication of the jiractical faculty and 
 its accomjianying ititelligence; and he guided 
 the man, as yet the solitary one of his species, to 
 this among the first applications of sjieech, the 
 lesignating of tiie animals with which he was 
 connected, by ajijiellative words which would 
 both be the help of his memory and assist his 
 mental o))erations, and thus would be introductory 
 and facilitating to more enlarged ajijilications of 
 thought and language. We are further war- 
 ranted, by the recognised fact of the anecdotal 
 and fragmentary structure of the Scrij)turc 
 Listo -y, to regard this as the selected instance for 
 exhilitin^' a whole kind or class of ojierations or 
 
 ADAM. 
 
 CI 
 
 processes; \m\ >.iigfhat, in fl.o same cr siniilat 
 manner, the first man was Itnl U, understand some- 
 thing of the qualities and relations of vegetabli-i^ 
 earthy matters, t!ie visible liea\<'ns, and the other 
 external objects to which he had a relation. 
 
 The next im]iortant aiticle in this primeval 
 history is the cieation of the human finale. It 
 has been maintaine«l that the Creator forrncd 
 Adam to be a .sole creature, in some mode of an- 
 drogynous constitution cajiable of multijilyii'a' 
 from his own organization without a conjiigat* 
 partner. This notion was advanced by Jacob (.)i 
 Jani's) Ijui-hmen, the Silesian 'Thensopliist," and 
 one \t'ry similar to it has been recently ))roniul 
 gated by Baron Giraud (I'hilosophie CntltuliqiH 
 de niisfoire, Paris, 1841), who supjioscs that th* 
 ' deep sleep ' (Gen. ii. 21) was a luurul fainting 
 ('del'aillance '), the first step in dejiaiting liom 
 God, the beginning of sin, and that Eve was its 
 personified jirwluct by some sort of divine concur- 
 rence or ojjerat ion. To mention these vagaries ia 
 sullicient for their refutation. Their absurd and 
 unscriptural character is stamped on their front. 
 The narrative is given in tlie more summaiy man- 
 ner in the former of the two ilociiments : — •• ^Male 
 and female created he them ' (Gen. i. 27). It 
 s^tands a little more at length in a third docu- 
 ment, wliich begins the fifth cliajiter, and has the 
 characteristic heading or title by which the He- 
 brews de>ignated a .separate work. ' Thi.s, the 
 book of the generations of Adam. In the day 
 God created Adam ; he made him in the likeness 
 [n^DT dcmufh, a difVeri'iit word from that al- 
 ready treated ujion, and which merely signifies 
 7■ese/nblance^ of God, male anil female he createti 
 them ; and he blessed them, and he called their 
 name Adam, in the day of their being created ' 
 (ver. 1, 2). The reader will oliserve that, in 
 this passage, we have translated the word for man 
 as the proper name, because ii is so taken up in 
 the next following sentence. 
 
 The second of the narratives is more circumstan- 
 tial : ' And Jehovah God saiil, it is not gc.od 
 the man's being alone : I will make for him a 
 help suitable for him.' Then follows the passage 
 concerning the review and the naming of tiie in- 
 ferior animaks; ami it continues — ' but for Adam 
 he found not a help suitable for him. And Je. 
 hovah God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the 
 man [the Adam], and he sle])t : and he took on« 
 out of his ribs, and closed up the Hesh in its place . 
 and Jehovah God built up the ri'.>*wi.ich he had 
 taken from the man into a womaii, and he brought 
 her to the man : and the man sai<l, this is the 
 hit; bone out of my bones, and flesh out ol' my 
 flesh; this shall be called woman [ishafi],i\)T this 
 was taken from out of man [/«/<]" (Gen. ii. 18-23V 
 
 Two remaikable words in this passage demand 
 attention. ' Suitable for him' (1"iS3D cheiicf/do'), 
 literally, accordin;/ to his front-presence, than 
 which no words could better exjiri'ss a perfect 
 ad agitation or coiTesjxmdence. That we render 
 DySin hajypaam, the hit, seems strange and 
 evin vulgar; but it ajipears necessary to the ])r»- 
 servation of riginous fidelity. The word, indeed, 
 might have acquired a secondary adverbial 
 meaning, like our Knglish nnic, when very em- 
 phafical and jiaitaking of the nature of an inter- 
 jection; tint theie is only one passage kn which 
 that signification may be ])leaded. and ii is tlier* 
 repeated — ' now in the open place, miw in tbt
 
 SI 
 
 ADAM. 
 
 streets ' (Pmv. vii. 12). It properly means a 
 Bmart, hold, successful stroke, and is used to sig- 
 nify hitting the precise time of any action or re- 
 quirement. In tliis first and primitive instance 
 it is equivalent to sayinj^, tliis is the very thing, 
 this hits the mark, this reaches to what was de- 
 sired. 
 
 Tiiis peculiar manner of the creation of tlie 
 %vr)man has, ^y some, been treated as merely a 
 childish fahle ; by others, as an allegorical fiction 
 intended to represent the close relation of the 
 female sex to the male, and tlie tender claims 
 which women have to sympathy and love. That 
 such was the intention we do not doubt ; but 
 why should that intention be founded upon a 
 mythic allegory? Is it not taught much better, 
 and impressed much more forcibly, by its stand- 
 ing not on a fiction, but on a fact? We have 
 seen that, under the simple archaic phrase that 
 man was made of the ' dust of the ground,' is 
 fairly to be unrlerstood the truth, which is verified 
 by the analysis of modem chemistry ; and, in the 
 case of the woman, it is the same combination of 
 materials, ttie same carbon, and hydrogen, and 
 lime, anil i\\e rest ; only that, in the first instance, 
 those j)rinK)rdial substances are taken immedi- 
 atelij, but in the second, mediately, having been 
 brought into a state of organization. Let an 
 unprejudiced mind reflect, and we think that he 
 must see in this part of the will and working of 
 tiie Almighty, at once, a simplicity gentle and 
 lender, adapted to afi'ect, in the strongest manner, 
 the hearts of primitive men ; and yet, a subli- 
 mity of meaning worthy of ' Jeho^'ah of hosts,' at 
 wiiose commanil stand all atoms and organisms, 
 and ' who is wonderful in counsel and excellent 
 in working.' 
 
 The form of direct speech which a])pears here 
 and in every part of these most ancient writings, 
 and is a characteristic of the Hebrew and other 
 ancient writings, should make no ditlicultj*. It 
 is the nat\ual language of lively description ; and 
 it is equal to saying, such was the wise and be- 
 nevolent will of God, and such were the feelings 
 ttnd ffioughts of Adam. Tlie 21tli verse is a 
 comment or doctrinal application of the inspired 
 writer ; pointing out the great law of marriage as 
 founded in the original constitution of human 
 nature. 
 
 The next particular into which the sacred his- 
 tory leads us, is one which we cannot approach 
 without a painful sense of its difficulty and deli- 
 cacy. It stands thus in the authorized version : 
 And they were both naked, the man and his 
 wife ; and were not ashamed ' (ii. 25). The 
 common interjnetation is, that, in tliis respect, the 
 two human beings, the first and only existing 
 ones, were precisely in the condition of the 
 voungvsT, infants, incapable of perceivnig any 
 incoJigruity in the total destitution of artificial 
 clothing. But a little reflection will fell us, and 
 tlie more carefully that reflection is pursued tlie 
 more it will apjiearjust, tiiat this su]i])osition is 
 inconsistent with what we have established on 
 solid grounds, tlie supernatural infusion into the 
 minds of our fiist parents and into their nervous 
 and muscular faculties, of the knowledge and 
 practical haliits wliicli their descendants have 
 had t ) acquire by the long process of instruction 
 ajid example. We have seen the necessity that 
 there must have been communicated *a them, 
 
 ADAM. 
 
 directly by their Creator, no inconsiderable raear 
 sure of natural knowledge and the methods oj 
 applying it, or their lives could net have been 
 secured ; and of moral and spiritual ' knowledge, 
 righteousness, and true holiness,' such a measure 
 as would belong to the sinless state, and would 
 enable them to render an intelligent and perfect 
 worship to the Glorious Deity. It seems impos- 
 sible for that state of mind and habits to exist 
 witliout a correct sensibility to proprieties and 
 decencies which infant children cannot under- 
 stand or feel ; and the cajiacities and duties of 
 their conjugal state are implied in the naiTative. 
 Further, it cannot be overlooked that, though we 
 are entitled to ascribe to the locality of Eden the 
 most bland atrhosphere and delightful soil, yet 
 the action of the sun's ra)'s upon the naked skin, 
 the range of temperature through tlie day and tlie 
 night, the alternations of dryness and moisture, the 
 various labour among trees and bushes, and ex- 
 posure to insects, would render some protective 
 clothing quite indispensable. 
 
 From these considerations we feel ourselves 
 obliged to understand the word DIIJ? {cironi) in 
 that whicli is its most usual signification in the 
 Hebrew language, as importing not an absolute, 
 but a imrtial or comparative nuditj'. It is one 
 of a remarkable family of words which appear to 
 have branched off in dill'erent ways from the 
 same root, oihginally "iy {ar or <??•), but assuming 
 several early forms, and producing five or six di- 
 vergent participials : but they all, and especially 
 tltis arom, are employed to denote a stripping off 
 of the upper garment, or of some otlier usual 
 article of dress, when all the habiliments were 
 not laid aside ; and this is a more frequent signi- 
 fication than that of entire destitution. If it be 
 asked, Whence did Adam and Eve derive this 
 clothing'? we reply, that, as a part of the divine 
 instruction which we have estalilished, they were 
 taught to take of!" the inner bark of some trees, 
 which would answer extremely well for this pur 
 pose. If an objection be drawn from Gen. iii. 7, 
 10, 11, we reply, that, in consequence of the trans 
 gression, the clothing was disgracefully injured. 
 
 Another inquiry presents itself. How long did 
 the state of paradisiac innocence and hajspiness 
 continue? Some have regarded the period as 
 very brief, not mora even than a single day ; but 
 this manifestly falls very short of the time which a 
 reasonable jirobabilily requires. The first man 
 was brouglit into existence in the region called 
 Eden; then he was introduced into a particular 
 part of it, the garden, replenished with the richest 
 ]n'oductions of the Creator's bounty for the de- 
 light of the eye and the other senses ; the most 
 agreeable labour was required ' to dress and to 
 keep it,' imjilying some arts of culture, preserva- 
 tion from injiuy, training flowers and fruits, and 
 knowing the various uses and enjoyments of the 
 produce ; making observation upon the works ol 
 God, of which an investigation aiul designating of 
 animals is expressly speeiticd; nor can we suppose 
 that there was no contemplation of the magnifi- 
 cent sky and the heavenly bodies: above all. the 
 wondrous communion with the condescending 
 Deity, and probably with created spirits of supe- 
 rior orders, by which the mind would be excited, 
 its capacity enlarged, and its holy felicity con- 
 tinually increased. It is also to be remarked, 
 that the narrative (Gen. ii. 19, 20) conveys the
 
 ADAM. 
 
 ifinplicatid 1 that some time was iillowcd to elapse, 
 that Adam might discover and feel liis want of a 
 Companion of his own species, ' a help correspond- 
 ent to him.' 
 
 These considerations impress us with a sense of 
 probability, amomiting to a. conviction, that a 
 period not very short was requisite for ttie exercise 
 of man's faculties, the disclosures of liis hajipi- 
 nejs, and the service of adoration which he could 
 pay to his Creator. But all these considera- 
 tions are strengthened by the recollection that they 
 attach to man's solitary state; and that they all 
 require new and enlarged application when the 
 addition of conjugal life is brought into the ac- 
 count. The conclusion appears irresistible that a 
 duration of many days, or rather weeks or months, 
 woukl be requisite for so many and important 
 pur]X)ses. 
 
 Thus divinely honoured and happy were the 
 progeniroi-s of mankind jii the state of their 
 creation. 
 
 The next scene which the sacred history brings 
 before us is a dark reverse. Another agent comes 
 info the field and successfully employs liis arts 
 for seducing Eve, and by her means Adam, from 
 their onginal state of rectitude, dignity, and hap- 
 piness. 
 
 Among the provisions of divine wisdom and 
 goodness were two vegetable productions of 
 wondrous qualities and mysterious significancy ; 
 ' the tree of life in tlie midst of the garden, and 
 the tree of knowledge of good and evil ' (Gen. ii. 9). 
 It would add to the precision of the terms, and 
 perhaps aid our understanding of them, if we were 
 to adhere shictly to the Hebrew by retaining the 
 definite pi-efix : and then we have ' the tree of the 
 life ' and ' the tree of tlie knowledge.' Tluis 
 would be indicated the particular !{fe of which 
 the one was a symbol and instrumei t, and the 
 fatal knon'leclf/e springing from the abuse of tlie 
 other. At the same time, we do not maintain 
 that these appellations were gi\'en to them at the 
 Deginning. We rather suppose that they were ap- 
 plied afterwards, suggested by the events and 
 connection, and so became tlie historical names. 
 
 We see no sufKcient reason to understand, as 
 Botne do, ' the tree of the life,' collectively, a"! im- 
 plying a species, and that there were many trees 
 of that species. Tlie figurative use of the ex- 
 pression in Rev. xxii. 10, where a plurality is 
 plainly intended, involves no evidence of such a 
 design in this literal narrative. Tlie phraseology 
 of the text best agrees with the idea of a single 
 tree, designed for a special i:)urpose, and not in- 
 tended to perpetuate its kind. Though in the 
 state of innocence, Adam and Eve might be liable 
 to some corjNiral suflering from the changes of the 
 seasons anil the weather, or accidental circum- 
 stances; in any case of whicji occun-ing, this tree 
 had been endowed by the bountiful Creator with 
 a medicinal and restorative property, probably in 
 the way of instantaneous miracle. We think 
 also that it was designed for a sacramental or 
 symbolical purpose, a representation and pledg;; 
 of ' the life,' emphatically so called, liea\enly 
 immortality when the term of probation should be 
 happily conip ited. Yet we by no means suppose 
 that this ' tree of the life ' possessed any intrinsic 
 
 tiroperty of coviimunicatiiig imniortality. In the 
 after view, it was a sign and .se:il (.f the divine 
 pron>ise. l^ut, with regard to <he Pomier inten- 
 
 ADAM. 
 
 6S 
 
 tion, we see notliing to forbid the idea that it had 
 mo»t ellicacious medicinal ])roj)erties in its fruit, 
 leaves, a«ul other parts. Such were called trees 
 of life by the Hebrews (Prov. iii. 18; xi. 30; 
 xiii. 12 ; xv. 4). 
 
 The ' free of the knowledge of good and evil ' 
 might be any tree whatever; it might be of any 
 s])ecies even yet remaining, tliough, if it A-ere so, 
 we could not determine its species, for tlie plain 
 reason, that no name, description, or information 
 whatever is given that could possibly lead to the 
 ascertainment. One cannot but lament the vul- 
 gar practice of painters rejircsenting it as an 
 apjile-tree; and thus giving occasion to profane 
 and silly witticisms. 
 
 Yet we cannot but think the more reasonable 
 probability to be, that it was a tree having poi- 
 sonous j)ro])erties, stimulating, and intoxicating, 
 such as are found in some existing species, espe- 
 cially in hot climates. On this groxuid, the pro- 
 hibition to eat or even touch the tree was a bene- 
 ficent provision against the danger of pain and 
 deatli. Should any ca\il at the placing of so 
 perilous a jilant in the garden of delights, the 
 abode of sinless creatures, we rejily, that virulent 
 poisons, mineral, vegetable, and animal, though 
 hurtful or fatal to those who use them impro- 
 perly, perform impoifant and beneficial parts in 
 the general economy of nature. 
 
 But the revealed object of this ' tree of the 
 knowledge of good and evil ' was that which 
 would require no ])articular properties beyond 
 some degree of external beauty and fruit of an 
 immediately pleasant taste. That object was to 
 be a test of' obedience. For such a purjiose, it ia 
 evident that to select an indiilercnt act, to be 
 the object prohibited, was necessary ; as the obli- 
 gation to refrain should be only that which arises 
 simply, so far as the subject of the law can know, 
 from the sacred will of tlielawgi\er. This does 
 not, however, nullify what we have said upon 
 the possibility, or even jjrobability, that the tree in 
 question had noxious qualities : for upon either 
 the afliiTnative or th.e negative of the sujiposition, 
 the subjects of this positive law, having ujion all 
 antecedent grounds the fullest conviction vi' the 
 perfect rectitude and benevolence of their Creator, 
 would see in it the simple character of a test, n 
 means of proof, whether they would or would not 
 imjilicitly confide in him. For so doing they 
 had every possible reason ; and against any 
 thought or mental feeling tending to the viola- 
 tion of the precept, they were in jiossession of 
 the most powerful motives. There was no ditli- 
 culty in the observance. They were surrounded 
 with a jiaradiseof delights, and they had no rea- 
 son to imagine thai any good whatever would 
 accrue to tlum from their .seizing iijion anything 
 prohibited. If perjilexity or douL't arose, they 
 had ready access to their divine benefactor for 
 obtaining information and direction, liut they 
 allowed the thought of disobedience to foim itself 
 into a disposition, and then a purpose. 
 
 Thus was the seal broken, the integrity of the 
 heart was gone, the sin was generated, and the 
 outward act was the consnmniafion of the dire 
 process. Eve, less infoimed, less cautious, less 
 endowed with strength of mind, became the more 
 readj' victim. 'The woman, being derfi\ed, was 
 in tlie transgression ;' but ' Adam wa.s not de- 
 ceived' (1 Tim. ii. 14). He rushed knowingly
 
 64 
 
 ADAM. 
 
 aiiil deliberately to ruin. The oflencc .lad grievous 
 aggravations. It was the preference of a trifling 
 gratitication to the approbation of the Supreme 
 Lord of the universe ; it implied a denial of the 
 wisdom, holiness, goodness, veracity, and power 
 of God ; it was maiked with extreme ingratitude ; 
 and it involved a contemptuous disregard of con- 
 secjuencesj awfidly impiotis as it referred to their 
 iir.meiliate connection with the moral government 
 oi' (rod, and cruelly seltish as it resjiected their 
 posterity. 
 
 The instrument of the temptation was a ser-- 
 pent ; whether any one of the existing kinds it is 
 evidently impossible for us to know. Of that 
 numerous order many species are of brilliant co- 
 lours and playful in their attitudes and manners; 
 so that one may well conceive of such an object 
 attracting and fascinating the first woman, 
 ^^'liether it spoke in an articulate voice, like the 
 human, or expressed the sentiments attributed to 
 it by a succession of remarlcable and signilicant 
 actions, may be a subject of reasonable question, 
 riie latter is possible, and it seems the prel'erable 
 hypothesis, as, without a miraculous intervention, 
 the mouth and throat of no serpent could form a 
 vocal utterance of words ; and we cannot attri- 
 bute to any wicked spirit the power of working 
 miracles. 
 
 This part of the narrative begins with the 
 Words 'And the serpent was crafty above every 
 anirnal of the field' (Gen. iii. 1). It is to be ob- 
 served that this is not said ^i" the order of serpents, 
 as if it were a general 2^"''<'Pe'ty of them, but of 
 that particular serpent. Had the noun been in- 
 tended generically, as is often the case^ it would 
 have required to be without the substantive verb; 
 for such is the usual Hebrew method of expressing 
 universal propositions : of this tlie Hebrew scholar 
 may see constant examples in the Book of Pro- 
 verbs. 
 
 Indeed, this ' cunning craftiness, lying in wait 
 to deceive' (Eph. iv. 14), is the very character of 
 that malignant creature of whose wily stratagems 
 the reptile was a mere instrument. The existence 
 of sjjirits, superior to man, and of whom some 
 ^.•ave become depraved, and are labouring to 
 spread wickedness and misery to the utmost of 
 their power, has been found to be the belief of all 
 nations, ancient and modern, of whom we possess 
 information. It has also been the general doc- 
 trine of both Jews and Christians, that one of 
 those fallen spirits was the real agent in this first 
 and successful temjjtation. Of this doctrine, the 
 declarations of our Lord and his apostles contain 
 strong confirmation. In the same epistle in which 
 St. I'aul expresses his apprehension of some of the 
 Corinthian Christians being seduced intx) error 
 and sin, he adveits to the temptation of Eve as a 
 monitory examjjle : 'Lest Satan should get an 
 advantage over us, for we are not ignorant of his 
 devices. I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent 
 beguiled Eve tlu-ough his subtlety, so your minds 
 should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in 
 Christ. Such are false apostles, deceitful workers, 
 transforming themselves into ajjostles of Christ; 
 and no marvel ; for even Satan himself is trans- 
 formed into an angel of light" ('2 Cor. ii. 11; xi. 
 3, 14). In the book of the Revelation the great 
 ''impter is mentioned as ' that old (^apxa-^os, he 
 of antiquity') serjient, who is called the devil 
 and the Satan, who deceiveth tlie whole world 
 
 ADAM. 
 
 (2 Cor. xii. 9 ; xx. 2). The language of Jesm 
 is a very definite allusion to the guilty trans- 
 action of Eden : 'Ye are of your father the devil, 
 and the desires of your father ye are determined 
 (OeAere) to do. He was a man-murderer (a.vdpw 
 TTo/CTfiyos) from the beginning; and in the truth 
 he stood not, for truth is not in him. When 
 he speaketh falsehood, out of his own (stores) 
 he speaketh, for a liar is he, and tlie father ot 
 it (i. e. of falsehood) ' (John viii. 44). The 
 summary of these passages piesents almost a 
 history of the Fall — the tempter, his manifold 
 arts, his serpentine disguises, his falsehood, his 
 restless activity, his bloodthirsty crueltj', and 
 his early success in that career of deception 
 and destruction. The younger Rosenmiiller says 
 upon this passage, ' That it was not a natural ser- 
 pent that seduced Eve, but a wicked spirit which 
 had assumed the form of a serpent ; and although 
 Moses does not expressly say so, from the fear of 
 affording a handle to superstition, yet it is probable 
 that he designed to intimate as much, from the 
 very fact of his introducing the serpent as a ra- 
 tional beiiig, and speakmg ; also, that this o])inion 
 was universal among the nations of Cential and 
 Upper Asia, from the remotest antiquity, appears 
 from this, that, in the system of Zoroaster, it is 
 related that Ahriman, the chief of wicked spirits, 
 seduced the first human beings to sin by putting 
 on the form of a serpent' (Schol. in Gen. iii. 1 ; 
 and he refers to Kleuker's German version of tlie 
 Zcndavesta, and his own Ancient and Modem 
 Oriental Country). 
 
 The condescending Deity, who had held gra- 
 cious and instructive communion with the pa- 
 rents of mankind, assuming a human form and 
 adapting all his proceedings to their capacity, 
 visibly stood before them ; by a searching inter- 
 rogatory drew from them the confession of their 
 guilt, which yet they aggravate<l by evasions and 
 insinuations against God himself; and pro- 
 nounced on them and their seducer the sentence 
 due. On the woman he inflicted tfie pains of 
 child-bearing, and a deeper and more humiliating 
 dependence ujjon her husband. He doomed the 
 man to hard and often fruitless toil, instead of 
 easy and pleasant labour. On both, or rather on 
 human nature universally, he pronounced the 
 awful sentence of (.leath. The denunciation cA 
 the serpent jiartakes more of a symbolical cha- 
 racter, Und so seems to carry a strong implication 
 of the nature and the wickedness of the concealed 
 agent. The human sufferings threatened -Mi all, 
 excepting the last, which will require a separat« 
 consideration, of a remedial and corrective kind. 
 The pains and subjection of the female sex, when 
 they come into coimection with the benignant 
 spirit of the gospel, acquire many alleviations, 
 and become means of much good in relative lifin, 
 which reacts with a delightful accumulation of 
 btnetit upon the Christian wife, mother, daughter^ 
 sister, friend. So also human labour, in the cul 
 tivation of the various soils, in all geognostie 
 operations, in all fabrics and machinery, in means 
 of transit by land, and in the wonders of naviga- 
 tion over the ocean, wiiich for many ages was 
 regarded as the barrier stenily forbidding inter- 
 course ; — while these have been the occasion ol 
 much suffering, they have been always towenng 
 o\er the sufl'ering, counteracting and lemedying 
 it, diminishing the evil, and increasing the sua
 
 ADaM. 
 
 ADAM. 
 
 66 
 
 M gr<)(l. Furtlier, under tlie influence of true 
 Chrisfianiiy, these an'l all tlie other mechanical 
 and li'ieial arts are consecrated to tlie universal 
 impvovcnient of n\ankind ; they afl'ord means of 
 sjireading (lie go^jiel, niultiiilying every kind of 
 i;ood ag'ciK-y and incivasins; its force. Thu-. 'in 
 all laljoiir there is prolit,' and ' labour itself he- 
 comes a pleasure.' 
 
 Of a (juite dilVei'ent character are the jx-nal 
 denunciations ujjon the. serj^ent. If they he un- 
 derstood liteially. and of course ajiplied to the 
 whole order of Ojihidia (as, we believe, is the 
 coiunu.n intcijjretation), they will Ix; found to be 
 so lla.'rantly at, variance with the most demon- 
 strated facts in their jihysiology and economy, as 
 to lead to inferences unfavourable to belief in 
 revelation. Let us examine the particulars : — 
 
 ' Because toon hast done this, cursed art thou 
 .diove all cattle:' very pi{)])erly so reiiilered, for 
 we iiiive not an English singular noiui to answer 
 to n?.}n2, so as to ell'ect a literal translation of 
 'above every hchemnh.'' But the terpent tribe 
 cannot he classed with that of the behemoth. The 
 word is of very frequent occurrence in the Olil 
 Testament; and though, in a few instances, it 
 wems to be j)ut for brevity so as to be inolMsive 
 of the liocks as well as the herds, and in jiwtical 
 diction it sometimes stands nietonymically for 
 anivi'ils generally (as Jobxviii. 3; Ps. lxxiii,'22: 
 >1 cries, iii. 1^, U), 21); yet its proper and uni- 
 v«T>al a])plica1ion is to the large animals (pachy- 
 ceons arid ruminants), such as the elephant, 
 o-'.niel. deer, horse, ox, rhinoceros, hippopotamus, 
 * c. [ Bf.iikmotii]. 
 
 As little will the declaration, 'cursed — ,' agree 
 with natural truth. It may, indeed, be supposed 
 1o Ijc verified in the shuddering which persons 
 generally feel at the aspect oi any one of (he order 
 of serpents; but this takes place also in many 
 other cases. It springs from fear of the formi- 
 dable weapons with which some species are armed, 
 as feiv jiersons know beforehand which are venom- 
 ous and which are harmless; and, after all, 
 this is rather an advantage than a curse to the 
 animal. It is an etl'ectual defence without elVort. 
 Indeed, we may say that no tribe of animals is 
 so secure from danger, or is so able to obtain its 
 sustenance aiitl all the enjoyments which its capa- 
 city and habits require, as the whole order of ser- 
 pents If, then, we decline to urge tlie objection 
 from the word behcmah, it is difficult to conceive 
 that .s^rjients have more causes of sulfering than 
 any i her great division of animals, or even so 
 mucl 
 
 Fi":tlier, ' going upon the belly ' is to none of 
 them a punishment. With some dilVerences of 
 mode, their progression is produced by the pushing 
 of sc;Jes, shields, or rings against the ground, by 
 muscular contractions and dilatations, by elastic 
 springing?, bj' vertical undulations, or by hori- 
 zontal- wrigglings ; but, in every variety, the en- 
 tirc organizuiioii — skeleton, muscles, nerves, in- 
 teguments — is udapted to the mode of ]<rogression 
 lielonging to each s])ecies. That mode, in every 
 variety of it, is sulliciently easy and rajjid (often 
 very rapid) for all the purposes of the animal's 
 life and tlit atnpliiude of its ejijoymenls. To 
 imagine this mode of mi.tiou to be, in any sense, 
 a change from a prior attitude and habit oft lie 
 erect kind, or lieing fumisii^l with wings, iiidi- 
 tjttts a jM'rfect ignorance ol (he anutouiv of ser- 
 
 pents. Yet it has U'en said by learned and 
 eminent theological interpreters, that, In-fore thii 
 crime was committed, the seijient jirobalily did 
 'not go u])on his belly, but moved iipon the 
 hinder pail of his ImmIv, with his head, breast, and 
 belly upright' (Clarke's lUhh; ]). li,<>()). This 
 notion may have oblained credence fioni the fact 
 that some of the numerous seip'nt sjK'cies, when 
 excited, raise the neck pretty high ; l>uf the pos- 
 ture is to strike, and they cannot maintain it in 
 creeping except for a very shoit distance. 
 
 ^J either do they 'eat dust.' All serjients arf 
 carnivorous: their food, according to l!:e size ana 
 power of the species, is taken from the tiibes ol 
 insects, woims, frogs, and toads, and newts, birds, 
 mice and other small (juadrupeds, till the scale 
 ascends to the jiylhons and boas, which c;',n mas- 
 ter and swallow very large animals. The excel 
 lent writer just cited, iti his anxiety to lio honour, 
 as he deemed it, to tlie accuracy oi Sciiptiiie 
 allusions, has said of (he serpent, ' ^l'ow that ht 
 creeps with his very mouth upon the earth, he 
 must necessarily take his food out of the dust, and 
 so lick in some of the dust with it." But this ii 
 not the fact. Serpents habitually obtain theii 
 food among herbage (■ in water ; they seize theii 
 prey with the mouth, often elevate the .head, and 
 are no more ex])osed to the necessity of swallowing 
 adherent earth than are carnivorous birds or (jua 
 diu])eds. Ax the same time, it may be undersloi.'d 
 figuratively. 'Eating the dust is liiit another 
 term for grovelling in the dust; and this is equi- 
 valent to being reduced to a condition of menn- 
 ness, shame, and contempt. — See Micah vii. 17' 
 (Bush on Genesis, vol. i. p. 81. New York, 1810). 
 But these and other inconsistencies anil difli- 
 culties (insuperable they do indeed ajipear to us) 
 are swept away when we consider the fact lieforH 
 statetl, that tlie Hebrew is iT'il K'tlin Jianna- 
 chash haiah. Tin; serpent teas, &c., aiid that it 
 refers specifically and personally to a rational and 
 accountable being, the spirit of lying and criir/tg, 
 the devil, the Satan, the old serpent. That God, 
 the infinitely holy, good, and wise, .should have 
 permitted an^f one or more celestial s])iriis to 
 apostatize from ]iurity. and to be the suc.i-cssfiil 
 seduceis of mankind, is indeed an awful and over- 
 whelming mystery. But it is not more so than 
 the permitted existence of manv among mankind, 
 whose rare talents and extraordinary command of 
 power and opportimity. combined with extreme de- 
 pravity, have rendered (hem the jjlague and curse of 
 the earth; and (lie whole meiges into the awful 
 and insolvable problem, \^'hy has the All-peifect 
 Deity jjermitted evil at all? We are firmly 
 assured (hat He will bring forth, at last, tlMi 
 most triumjjhant evidence that ' He is right- 
 eous in all liis ways, and holy in all hi;* 
 works.' In the mean time, our ha))])iness lii-s in 
 the implicit cojifidence which we cannot but feel 
 to be due to the Being of Infinite Perfection. 
 
 The remaining part of the denunciation ujxin 
 the false and cruel seducer sent a beam of ligiit 
 into the agonized heaits of our guilty li:-»l jarents 
 'And enmity will I put Ijetween thee and the 
 woman, ;uid fielween thy seejl and her seed : he 
 will attack (hec [on] the hejui, and thou wilt 
 attack him [at] the heel.' The verb here u.sed 
 twice, occurs in only two other places of the ( ). 
 T. : Job ix. 17, ' \\ ho breaketh upon ine wiiJi a 
 tenijiestuous horror;' and Ps. cxwix. 11. ' .And if
 
 66 
 
 ADAM. 
 
 ADAR. 
 
 I sy.y, Surely <l;iikness will burst iijion me/ i. e. 
 as a sudden and impervious covering. Tlie menn- 
 iriif is established by Gesenius after Umbreit as 
 the idea of a violent and cayer assault. Christian 
 interpreters generally regard this as the Protevaii- 
 (/eliton, the first gosjiel-promise, and we think 
 with gi)od reason. It was a manifestation of 
 mercy : it revealed a Deliverer, wlio ' should be a 
 hiunan being, in a peculiar sense the oll'spring of 
 tiie female, wlio should also, in some way not yet 
 made known, counteract and remedy tiie injury 
 inflicted, and who, tliough partially sulfering from 
 ti.e malignant ix)wer, should, in the end, com- 
 pletely conquer it and convert its very success 
 into its own punishment' (J. Pye Smith, Scrip- 
 ture Testimoni/ to the Messiah, vol. i. )). 226). 
 
 The awful tlireatening to man was, ' In tlie day 
 fliat tliou eatest of it, thou wilt die the death.' 
 Beyom, literally in the day, was also used as a 
 general adverb of time,, denotin-g when, without 
 a stri'-t limitation to a natural day. The verbal 
 repetition is a Hebrew idiom to represent not only 
 llie (Y;?-frtW!^(/ of tlie action, but its intensity and 
 efficacy : we therefore tliink tliat tlie yjhrase die 
 the death would more exactly convey the sense of 
 the original than what soiae have proposed dying 
 t.lioii shalt die. The infliction is Death in the 
 ni;)st comprehensive s^nse, that which stands op- 
 posed to Life, the life of not only animal enjoy- 
 tT.eiit, but holy happiness, the life which com- 
 ported with the image of God. This was lost by 
 I lie fall ; and the sentence of physical death was 
 pronounced, to be executed in due time. Divine 
 mercy gave a long respite. 
 
 Tiie same mercy was displayed in still more 
 tempering the terrors of justice. The garden of 
 delights was not to be the abode of rebellions 
 creatures. But ttefore they were turned out into 
 a bleak and dreary wilderness, God was pleased 
 to direct them to make clothing suitable to their 
 new and degraded condition, of the skins of ani- 
 mals. That those animals had been otl'ered in 
 sacrifice is a conjecture supported by so much 
 prolialile evidence, that we may regard it as a 
 well-established truth. Any attempt to force back 
 the way, to gain anew the tree of life, and take 
 violent or fraudulent posssession, would have been 
 equally imjiious and nugatory. The sacrifice 
 (which all apyiu)ximali>e argument obliges us to 
 admit), united with the promise of a deliverer, 
 and tlie provision of substantial clothing, con- 
 tained much hojie of pardon and grace. The 
 terrible debarring by lightning Hashes and tlieir 
 consequent thunder, and by visible supernatural 
 agency (Gen. iii. 22-24), from a return to the 
 bowers of bliss, are expresied in the characteristic 
 patriarchal styleofanthropopatliy, but the meaning 
 evidently is, tha^ the fallen creature is unable by 
 any efforts of his own to reinstate himself in the 
 favour of God, .i; d tluvt whatever hope of restora- 
 tion he may be allowed to cherish must spring 
 solely from free lienevolence. Thus, in laying tlie 
 first stone of the 'emple which shall be an im- 
 mortal habitation of the Divine glory, it was 
 manifested that 'Salvation is of the Lord,' and 
 that 'grace reigne'.li through lighteousness unto 
 eternal life.' 
 
 From this time we have little recorded of the 
 lives of Adam and Eve. Their three sons are 
 mentioned with important circumstances in con- 
 nscti'.iii with each of them. See the articles C.vi;;, 
 
 Abei,, and Seth. Cain was probably bom la 
 the year after the fall; Abel, iH)ssil)ly some yeart 
 later; Setii, certainly one hundred and thirty 
 years from the creation of his parents. Alter tiiat, 
 Adam lived eight hundreil years, and had song 
 and daughters, doubtless by Eve, and tiien he 
 died, nine hundred and thirty years old. In that 
 prodigious period many events, and those of gre«,t 
 importance, must have occurred; but the wise 
 ])rovidence of God has not seen fit to preser\'e to 
 us any memorial of them, and scarcely any ves- 
 tiges or hints are afforded of the occupations and 
 mode of life of men through the antediluvian 
 period TAntkuiluvians]. — J. P. S. 
 
 2. ADAM, a city at some distance east from 
 the Jordan, to which, or beyond which, the over- 
 flow of the waters of that river extended when 
 the course of the s'ream to the Dead Sea wa.s 
 stayed to afford the Israelites a ])assage across its 
 channel. Our jiublic version follows the keri, 
 or marginal reading, of Josh. iii. 16, ' very far 
 from Adam ' (DTJ^Oi; but the Ari'/«/i, or textual 
 reading, is, 'in Adam' (DTX^). Tlie former 
 suggests that the overflow extended beyond Adam, 
 the latter that it reached thereto. It appears 
 from 1 Kings iv. 12; vii. 46, that Zarethan was 
 on the west side of the Jordan, in the tribe of 
 Manasseh : where<js certainly A<lam was on the 
 east side of that river, where the Israelites ai- 
 readj- were. Tlie text must therelbre signify that 
 the overflow reached on the east side to Adam, 
 and on the west tO Zarethan ; and it admits of 
 the construction that the ' heap of waters ' was 
 ' beside ' Zarethan and beyond Adam, instead cf 
 that Zarethan itself was ^beside Adam.' Tiie 
 name of the city Adam {red) was probably de- 
 rived t'rom the colour of the clay in tiie neigh- 
 bourhood. 
 
 ADAMAH. [Admah.] 
 ADAMANT. [Shamir.] 
 ADAR ("l>^ ; 'A5ap, Esth. iii. 7; the Mace- 
 donian Aiarpos) is the sixth month of the civil 
 and the twelfth of the ecclesiastical year of the 
 Jews. The name was first introduced after the 
 Captivity. The following are the chief days iu 
 it which are set apart for commemoration : — The 
 7th is a fast for the death of Moses (Deut. 
 xxxiv. 5, 6). There is some difference, however, 
 in the date assigned to his death by some ancient 
 authorities. Josephus {Antiq. iv. 8) states that 
 he died on the ,first of tiiis month ; which also 
 agrees with Midrash Megillath Esther, cited by 
 Reland {Antiq.Hcbr.'w . 10) : whereas theTalmud- 
 ical tracts Kiddushim and Sota give the seventh 
 as the day. It is at least certain that the latter 
 was the day on which the fast was observed. On 
 the 9th there was a fast in memory of the conten- 
 tion or open ru]iture of the celefirated schools of 
 Hillel and Shammai, which hajij^ened but a few 
 years before the birth of Christ. The cause of 
 the dispute is obscure (Wolf's Biblioth. IIeb)\ 
 ii. 826). The 13th is the so-called ' Fast of 
 Esther.' Iken observes (Antig. Hebr. p. 150) 
 that this was not an actual fast, but merely a 
 commemoration of Esther's fast of three days 
 (Esth. iv. 16), and a preparation for the ensuing 
 festival. Neierlhcless, as Esther ajipears, ^lom 
 the date of Ilanian's edict, and I'rom the course 
 of the niirrati\e, to have fasted in Nisan, Buxtorf 
 a()duces from the Rabbins the following accoi'ii!
 
 ADARCONIM. 
 
 of the name of t*»is fast, and of tl>e foundation 
 of its olfservaiice in Adar (S</naij. Jiul. \t. 5o-l) : 
 that the Jhws aiisoinhlcd togt'lher on tho 13tli, in 
 the time of Kstlier, and tliat, after tlie eXaniph' of 
 Moses, wlio fasted when the Israelites were ahoiit 
 to engage in haUhi witii the Ainak^kites, they 
 tievoteil tliat day to fasting and prayer, in prepa- 
 ration for llie perilous tiial which awaited them 
 on (he morrow. In tliis sense, this fast would 
 stand in the most direct rel.ition to the feast of 
 Pij*im. Tlie I3th was also, ' by a common 
 decree,' appointed as a festival in memory ol tlie 
 death of Nicanor (2 Mace. xv. 36). The 1 1th 
 a:id l.ith were devoted to the fea^t of Purim 
 ^Esth. ix. 21). In case the year was an inter- 
 calary one, when the month of Adar occurred 
 twice, this feast was first modevately ohserved in 
 the intercalary Adar, and tiien celebrated vvitli 
 fdl splendour in the ensuing Adar. The former 
 af these two celebrations was then called the 
 lesser, and the latter the great Puri/n. These 
 designations do not a))ply, as Home has erro- 
 sieously stated (Introduction, Hi. 177), to the two 
 days of the festival in an ordinary year, but to its 
 double celebration in an intercalary year. — J. N. 
 
 ADARCONIM (D'-yn-llS* i.q. D^jiD3"}1 ; 
 Sept. Spaxy-'h and xpi^coSs ; Vulg. drachma and 
 aureus). Gesenius and most others are of opinion 
 that tiiese words, whicli occur in 1 Chron. xxix. 7: 
 Ezra viii. 27; ii. <)9; Neh. vii. 70-72, denote the 
 Persian Daric, a gold coin, wliich must have been 
 in circulation among the Jews during their sub- 
 jection to the Persians. The X is prosthetic ; and 
 PDIT occurs in the Ral»bins. Dr. Lee disputes 
 die etymology of the word with Gesenius: but it is 
 sufficient to observe that the Daric, which is radi- 
 cally included in these v/ords, is not, as might lie 
 fancied, derived fnim the name of any particular 
 
 king, hut from the Persian \ .^^^ dant, a king. Tlie 
 
 last of these words seems to identify itself with the 
 Greek Spaxi^V ] and, oljserving that in some of 
 the texts it is manifestly connected with words 
 denoting weight, and in none with names of coins, 
 he expresses some doubt of its being the SapeiK^is 
 (daric) of the ''Jrcoks. He is rather inclined to 
 suppose, with Scilinasius, that the Arabic dirhcm 
 
 jj^^y •"* *r*^ presents us with the same woixl. 
 
 The opinion of Heeren (Researches, i. 410) would, 
 indirectly, go to discoimtenance the notion that the 
 daric is to be here understood. He aflirms that 
 * before the time of Darius Hystaspes the Persians 
 liad no coinage of their o^vn, and that the daricus 
 coined by him was jirobably a medal (Kerod. iv. 
 166) of the tinest gold. Wlien the darics became 
 current, esjjecially after the mercenary troops 
 were paid in them,tlieir numbers must have 
 been gi\;atly augmented : yet Straljo assures us 
 (1. XY. p. 1(}68) tliat the coin was by no means 
 abundant among (he Persians, an<l tliat golil was 
 employed by them rather in dcairation than as 
 a circulating medium.' This, however, is of 
 little real consequence ; foi' it proceeds on the 
 erroneous supposition that the coin derived its 
 name from the first IXu-ius, and couhl not have 
 previously existed. In the later day of Sirabo the 
 coin may have liecome scarce, although once 
 plentiful. Be t lis as it may, the daric is of 
 Biterest, not only as the most ancient gold coin of 
 
 ADASHIM. 
 
 67 
 
 which any sjjccimens have been preserved to tlie 
 present day, liiit as the earliest roineii money 
 which, we can be sure, was known to and used 
 by the Jews. The (listint:iiis'.iiig mark of the 
 coin was a crowneil arciier. who ajipcars with 
 some slight variations on dilVerent sj»ccimens. H»« 
 
 garb is the same which is seen in the s^u!ptu^e« 
 at Persepolis, and the figure on tlie coin is failed, 
 in numismatics, Sagittarius. The s|K'<iiii(iis 
 weighed by Dr. Bernard were filYecn grain- hea- 
 vier than an English guinea, and llicir intrinsic 
 value may, thci-efore, be reckoned at twenty-five 
 shillings i^Eckhcl, Doclrina Numornm Vetotim ; 
 Bernard, l)e Mcnsuris et Potiderihns). 
 
 ADARGAZERIN (nni^S). This is a 
 Chaldee word which occurs in Dan. iii. 2, 3, 
 where the titles of the Baljylonian ollicers are 
 enumerated. It is difficult, jK-rirajis iui]K;ssible, 
 to determine the ])arlicular office which (lie woid 
 ilescribcs; and o])inions and versions liave ililler.'d 
 greatly. The Sept., wliich is fijllowed by the 
 Vulgate, has rvpavvoi. Our version has ' trea- 
 surers ;' and altiiough we do not know tlie rea8<in 
 on wliich they proceeded, we may find one in the 
 fact that ffaza {ya.(^a\ whicli seems the principal 
 element of the word, m(\ms a treasury, i\nd was 
 avowedly adopted bv" the Greeks from tiic Per- 
 sians. Jacchiades, who identifies all these officers 
 with those o'i the Turkish court and government, 
 compares the present to the dejterdars, wlio liave 
 llie charge of tlie leceijits ixnd disbr.rsomtnts of 
 \\\e ptd>lic treasury, Gesenius and othci-s conceive 
 that the wortl means chief-judges (liom "ITN, 
 •magnificent, and I^TjI, deciders) ; but Dr. Lee, 
 while admitting the uncertainty of the whole 
 matter, seems to pefer seeking its metining in the 
 
 Persian jt)' fire, and jjj passing; and hence 
 
 concludes that the Adargazerin were jsobably 
 ofiicers of state who presided over '.he ordeals by 
 fire, and otlier matters connected with the govern- 
 ment of ikibylon. This last exjilaii.ition is not, 
 however, new, being the one reject etl bv (^esenius. 
 ADASA, or Aj>aks.4. ('ASaad). called also liy 
 Josephus .-Vk/Vzer, .\nACo, and .-Vcouaco, a city 
 in the trilje of Kjihraim, said to luive been four 
 miles from Betli-hoion, and not far from (Tojibna 
 (Jo?e\t]i.Atitiq. xii.l7; Eiiseb.0.7L)wa.s^ in'A5a<rii). 
 It was t!ie scene of some important tumsactlons in 
 the history of die Ma'-caliees (1 Mac. vii. 4U, 15; 
 Joseph. yl«</y. xii. 17; Bc/l. Jtid. i. 1). 
 
 ADASHIM (C'Chy^; Sept. ,paK6s; Vulg. 
 lens). 'Lentii.ks' is the internretation given 
 by our own anil most other version.s, and there i,? 
 no reason to question its accuracy. In Syria 
 
 lentiles are still called in .\rabic lut'XS- adii<ti 
 
 (Russel, K. II. of AU'ppo, i. 71). Lc'ililes aj*- 
 pear to have been chiefly used for niakiii,' a k.ad 
 of pottage. The red jwttage for which ^Isau bar-
 
 es 
 
 ADASHIM. 
 
 tered his birll.riglit, was of lentiles (Gen. xxv. 29- 
 34). The term red was, as witli us, extended to 
 ycUoicish broicn, whicli must have been the true 
 colour of the jiottago, if derived from leiitiles. 
 The Greeks and Romans also called lentiles red 
 (see authorities in Celsius, i. 105). Lentiles were 
 a— long the provisions hrous^ht to David when he 
 fled from Alisalom (2 Sam. xvii. 2S), and a field 
 pf lentiles was the scene of an exploit of one of 
 David's liei-oes (2 Sam. xxiii. 11). From Ezek. 
 iv. 0, it would appear that lentiles were sometimes 
 used as bread. Tliis was, doubtless, in times of 
 «^'arcity, or by tlie jxior. Sonnini ( Travels, p. G0.3, 
 English translation) assures us that in soutliern- 
 most Egypt, where corn is comparatively scarce, 
 .entiles mixed with a little ijarley form almost 
 the only bread in use among the poorer classes. 
 It is called bettan, is of a golden yellow colour, 
 and is not bad, althoua^li ratlier heavy. In that 
 country, indeed, proliably even more than in Pa- 
 lestine, lentiles anciently, as now, formed a chief 
 article of foo<l among the labouring classes. Ting 
 is repeatedly noticed by ancient authors ; and so 
 muc'n attention was paid to tlie culture of tliis use- 
 ful pulse, that certain varieties became remark- 
 able for their excellence. Tlie lentiles of Pe- 
 lusium, in the part of Egypt nearest to Pales- 
 tine, were esteemed both in Egypt and foreign 
 countries (Virg. Georcf. i. 22S) ; and this is pro- 
 bably the valued Egyptian variety which is men- 
 tioned in the Mishna (tit. Kilvim, xviii. S) as 
 neither large noi- small. Large quantities of 
 lentiles were exported from Alexandria (Augustin. 
 (Jomm. in Ps. xlvi.). Pliny, in mentioning two 
 Egyptian varieties, incidentally lets us know tliat 
 one of them wag red, by remarking that they like 
 a red soil, and by speculating whether the pulse 
 mav not have thence derived the reddish colour 
 which it imparted to the pottage ma<ie with it 
 {Hist. Nat. xviii. 12). Tliis illustrates Jacob's red 
 pottage. Dr. Shaw (i. 257) also states that 
 these lentiles easily dissolve in boiling, and form 
 a red ot chocolate coloured pottage, much 
 esteemed in North Africa and Western Asia, 
 Putting these facts together, it is likely that the 
 reddish Icntile, which is now so common in Egypt 
 (D^seript. de I'Egypte, xix 65), is the sort to 
 wliicli all these statements refer. 
 
 The tomb-paintings actually exhibit the opera- 
 tion of preparing pottage of lentiles, or, as Wilkin- 
 nm (Anc. Ecftjptians, ii. 3S7) descriljes it, ' a man 
 engaged in cooking lentiles for a soup or porridge j 
 his companion brings a bundle of faggots for the 
 (ire. and the lentiles themselves are seen standing 
 near him in wicker baskets.' Tlie lentiles of Pa- 
 ie«tine have been little noticed by travellers. 
 
 fi&w {Voyage Nouveuu, li. 13) mentions lentiles 
 aiong witli corn .ind j»ase, as a principal article 
 of traffic at Tortoura ; D'Arvieux (il/fm&z're*, ii, 
 237) speaks of a mostpie, originally a Christian 
 church, over the jiatriarchal tomb at Hebron, 
 cimnected with wliich was a large kitchen, where 
 
 ADDEK. 
 
 lentile pottage was prepared every Taj , and dis- 
 tributed freely to strangers and p(or people, in 
 memory of tlie transaction lietween Esau and 
 Jacob, whicli they (erroneously) believe to have 
 taken place at this spot. 
 
 The lentile {Krvum lens) is an annual plant, 
 and the smallest of all tlie leguminossc whicii ar« 
 cnltivated. It rises with a weak stalk about 
 eighteen inches high, having pinnate loaves at 
 each joint compostid of several pairs of narrow 
 leaflets, and terminating in a tendril, which- sup- 
 port* it by fastening about some other plant 
 
 Lentiles (Cicer leTJs). 
 
 The small flowers, which come out of the sides o» 
 tlie branches on short jicduncles, three or four 
 together, are ])nr])le, and are succeeded by t'ne 
 short and flat legumes, which contain two or 
 three flat round seeds slightly curved in the 
 middle. Tlie flower ajipears in May, and the 
 seeds ripen in July. When ripe, the plants are 
 rooted up, if they have been sown along wiiii other 
 plants, as is sometimes done ; but they are cut 
 down when grown by themselves. Tliey aw 
 tlueslied, winnowe-'J, and cleaned like corn. 
 
 ADBEEL, one of the twelve sons of Ishniael, 
 and founder of an Arabian tribe (Gen. xxv. 
 13, 16). 
 
 ADDER, the English name of a kind of ser- 
 pent, is a dialectical variation of the same word 
 in a variety of languages of the Gotliic and Teu- 
 tonic family. Another name, varying, in five 
 old European tongues, from ag, ach, to ha^, 
 has more connection with the Semitic ; and in 
 tlie south of Europe, where the Latin and its 
 derivatives prevail, both are represented by the 
 word vipera (vijier). The first radically indicates 
 poison ; the second, pain, distress, strife ; the third, 
 parturition of oiTsping, not in the state of an egg;, 
 but of the perfect animal. Thougli not clearly 
 distinguished, in common acceptation, from riv. 
 noxious snakes, all strictly indicate serpent* 
 armed with poisonous fangs, and therefore all aM 
 truly viviparous. In the English \ersion of tl»t 
 Bible the name 'afldev' occurs several times, and vt 
 there used not for a particular species, but gene> 
 rally for several of this dangerous class of reptiles, 
 without, therefore, being intended to be confined to 
 a genus, in the sense modern systematists would 
 ascribe to that denonunjitlon. We havt before m(
 
 ADDER 
 
 • Lst, far f-oin complete, of the erpctology of Pales- 
 tine, Ara )ia, and Egypt, in which there are, 
 among for:y-three species indicatod, about eight 
 whose bile is accompanied with a venomous ellu- 
 sion, and therefore almost all very dangerous. 
 The Hebrew names applicable to them, depending 
 upon some radical word descriptive of a property 
 or character of the animal, are in themselves 
 nfiostly insufficient to distinguish the one meant 
 siiecilically ; and therefore recourse nnist be had to 
 the kindreil dialects, and to a carel'ul study of 
 each sijecies. Tliis object is so far from being 
 accomplished, that, in our present statu of know- 
 ledge, we deetv. <t best to discuss, undor the words 
 Serpent and Vipeii, all the Hebrew names not 
 noticed in this ai-ticle, and tu refer to them those 
 occurring in our version under the appellations of 
 ' asp,' ' cockatrice,' &c.; and likewise to review tlie 
 allusions to colossal boas and pi'thons, evidently 
 meant, in some places, whei* the terms |n tlian 
 and p3n thannin are used ; and, linally, to 
 notice water-snakes and miua-iue, which translators 
 aJid biblical naturalists have h>tally overlooked, 
 
 ADDER. 
 
 69 
 
 although they must exist in the lakes uf the 
 Delta, are abundant on the north coast of Africa, 
 and olten exceed eight ieet in length. 
 
 In tliis place we shall retain that genus alone 
 which Laurenti and Cuvier have establi.ih«;i upon 
 characters distinguished Ironi the innocuou-- colu- 
 ber and the venomous vijienu, and denominated 
 iiaja, one of the Sanscrit forms of the sauie apj*!- 
 latioir whence we have the word hay, before 
 noticed; and tu the same nxit, in tlie Seu)itic 
 tongues, we may refer the Hebrew 31t^'3i' «f«- 
 sitb, found in Psalm cxi. 3, and declared to he 
 derived from a verb imjilying ' to In'nd back upon 
 oneself — a characteristic which most, if not .ill oi 
 the species of the genus Naja evince. The Chaldee 
 parapb'ra^s render it by \l''''2'2)} acchubif. per- 
 haps erroneously applied to the sjiider, which, if 
 we refer to several of the noxious arachnide->, pos- 
 sesses nevertheless the faculty of sjiringing Lack 
 upon its victim, and therefore comes within the 
 radical meaning of the term. 
 
 The genus JS'aja — liaiidi ('i?) of Savary- is dis- 
 tinguished by a plaited head, large, very venonioua 
 
 Naja H.i.ie ; and the form of (^nfy^h from tlie 
 Kgyptian Monuments. 
 
 fangS) a neck dilatable und"r pxcitement, which 
 raises the ribs of the anterior jiart of the body into 
 the form of a disk or hood, when the scales, usu- 
 ally not imbricated, but lying in jvixta-position, 
 are separated, and expose the skin, which at that 
 time displays bright iridescent gleams, contrast- 
 ing highly with their brown, yellow, and bluisli 
 colours. The species attain at least an ef[ual, if 
 not a su])erior, size to the gepevality of the gentis 
 viper; are more massive in tlieu- structure; and 
 some jKJSsess the faculty of self-inflation to triple 
 their diameter, gradually forcing the lx)dy up- 
 wards into an erect position, until, by a convulsive 
 crisis, they are said suddenly to stiike backwards 
 a*: an enemy or a pvirsuer. With such powers of 
 dastroying animal lifc, and with an aspect at 
 0IIC3 terril)1e and resplendent, it may \>c easily ima 
 ginetl hovi' soon fear and sujier.^titioii wo ild com- 
 bine, at periods anterior to historical data, to raise 
 these monsters into divinities, and emleavour to 
 deprecate their wrath by the blandishments of 
 Wiirshijs; and how design and cupidity would 
 teach the.se very votaries the manner oi subduing 
 thcif fer'>3ity, of extract it»g their instruments of 
 
 Naja Tiipudians aiicl CoIth <li '"apello: or. Ho .')' d 
 arid Spectacled ."^iiakes. 
 
 nuschief. and making them STibscrvieiit to 'lie '.m 'i 
 der and amusement of the vulLrar. by u«iii<,' <i v- 
 tain cadences of sound which alTect their lioiiriii '. 
 and exciting in thern a desire to {icrform a kind ol 
 pleasurable movements that may be compared to 
 dancing. Hence the na<]as of the East, tiie hiri- 
 worms of the West, and the haje. have all brcn 
 deified, styled agathodaemon or good s]iirit : iind 
 figures of them occur wherever the su])erstiti<)ti of 
 Pagan antiquity has been acc<»mpanied by ti.e 
 arts of civilization. 
 
 The most prominent species of tiie genu< al 
 present is the naja tripudiaiis. cobra fli ca/idfo. 
 hooded or spectacled snake of India. \ enenited by 
 the natives; even by t lie serpent-charmers sty'cd 
 the good serfjent to this day, and yet so leroc-ous 
 that it is one of the very few that will attack a 
 man when «ur|)rised in its haunt, a'thotigh if nviy 
 be gorged witli prey. This species is usu.illy 
 marked on the na|)e with two round spots, trans- 
 versely connected in the form of a ]>air of >])ec- 
 tacles; but among se\erai varieties, one, j)erha;M 
 distinct, is without the marks anil has a glo^.iy 
 golden hood, which may make it idcn^'cal w>tr
 
 ?0 
 
 ADDER. 
 
 fiic ncija haje of Egyj)t, tlie iimlotiljfed Ihli-iiiiplii, 
 cnPiili, or aj^allioda'iiion of anciorit lil:J:ypt, and 
 icciuatuly reprcseiited on tlie walls of its lemjjles, 
 in almost iiinuriit'idljle instances, hotli in lijrm 
 and colour. This serpent also inflates the skin 
 on the neck, not iii the expanded form of a hood, 
 but rather into an intiimefaction of the neck. 
 As in the former, there is no marked .lilTerence of 
 a))peardnce between the sexes; h'lt the psilli, or 
 charmers, hy a paiticnlar pressuie on the neck 
 li.-ive tiie jKi.ver of renderinsj; the inflation of the 
 animal, already noticed as a character of tlie 
 jfc'iiiis, so intense, that the seqient become^ rigid, 
 and can be held out horizontally as if it: were a 
 rod. Tiiis practice ex])lains what the soothsayers 
 of Pharaoh could perlbnn when they were op- 
 posing Moses, anil re\eals one of the names by 
 which the Hebrews knew the species ; for although 
 the text (Exod. iv. 3) uses, for the rod of Aaron 
 converted into a serpent, the word t^'^3 nacJiush, 
 ■mA sii'osequently (vii. 15) ^371 thannin, it is plain 
 tli.if, in the second passage, the word indicates 
 ' monster," as applie<l to the nachasli just named — 
 'jlte first being an appellative, the second an epi- 
 llief. That the rods of the magicians of Pharaoh 
 were of tlie same external character is evident 
 from no different denomination being given to 
 them : therefore we may infer that they used a 
 real serpent as a rod — namely, tlie species now 
 called liajc — lor their imposture ; since they no 
 doubt did what the present serpent-charmers per- 
 (i)rm with the same species, by means of the 
 temporary asphi/xiation, or suspension of vitality, 
 before noticed, and producing restoration to active 
 life by liberating or throwing down. Thus we 
 have the miraculous character of the pro2)het's 
 mission shown by his real rod becoming a serpent, 
 and the magicians' real serpents merely assuming 
 tlie form of rods ; and when both were opposed, 
 in a state of animated existence, by the rod 
 (le.During the living animals, conquering the 
 gi-eat typical personification of the protecting di- 
 vinity of E.^'vpt. Nachash may, therefore, with 
 , some conlidcnce, be assumed to have been the 
 Ht lire.v name, or at least one of the names, of the 
 iiaja haje, el haje, and haje nacher, of the Arabs.* 
 Tiiis species may be regarded as extending to India 
 and Ce\"lon : and j)rol)al)ly the iiaja trqmdians 
 is Idiewise an inhabitant of Arabia, if not of 
 Egypt, althougii the assertion of the fact (common 
 in untliors) does not exclude a supjiosition that 
 they take the two species to be only one. We are 
 dis])()iea to refer the ' winged' or 'Hying' serpent to 
 tiie naja trlpudlans, in one of its varieties, because 
 ■ — with its hood dilated into a kind of shining wings 
 »n each side of tiie neck, staiiiling, in undulating 
 (PiD'iyjr} motion, one-half or more erect, rigid, 
 4Uil tierce in attack, and deadly poisonovis, yet 
 «till denominated ' good spirit,' and in Egypt 
 over ligured in combination with the winged 
 
 * Nachash was intensely the serpent of serpents 
 witli the Hebrews: and when figured with the 
 crowns or cajis of Ujiper and Lower Egypt, was 
 the crowneil ser])ent and iiasilisk. It is evident 
 that nach-rtsA led authors, and Pliny among the 
 nsimber, to alTix the term as}iis to the haje, which 
 l.cuvevt-r he did not recogni e as the sacred seqjent 
 (»!" Egypt. The true asp is a small viper, not- 
 witlijitanding the opinion of M. GeofTroy to the 
 eoDtrarv. 
 
 ADDER. 
 
 globe — it well may have received the name of 
 ClliJ' saraph, and may thus meet all the valid ob- 
 jections, and conciliate seemingly ojijiosite com- 
 ments (see Num. xxi. 6, 8; Deut. viii. 15- 
 Isa. xvi. 29 ; xxx. G ; and Paxton's lllustra- 
 tiims), excepting the authority of Herodotus, 
 Pausanias, and Bochart, which, with all the re- 
 spect due to their names, is not now snflicient tr 
 establish the existence of a kind of serpents whose 
 structure is contrary to the laws of zoological or- 
 ganization.* 
 
 AcnsuB (^IB'Dy naja (?), niflectrix, nobis) 
 is another name of a serpent which may L* con- 
 sidered as speciiically different from the former, 
 though it is most proliably one more of this group 
 of terrible creatures. The root of the name im- 
 plies bending back, recurving, liut not coiliiif;- uj>, 
 for all snakes have that faculty. The syllable 
 ach, however, shows a connection with the former 
 denominations ; and both are perfectly reconcil- 
 able with a serpent very common at the Cape ol 
 Good Hojie, not unfrequent in Western Africa, 
 and jirobalj'y extending over that whole continent, 
 excepting perhaps Morocco. It is the ' jioH-adder ' 
 of the Dutch colonists, about three feet in length, 
 and about six inches in circumference at the 
 middle of the body ; the head is larger than is 
 usual in serpents; the eyes are large, and very 
 brilliant; the back beautifully marked in half 
 circles, and the colours black, bright yellow, and 
 dark brown; the belly yellow; the appearance at 
 all times, but chiefly when excited, extremely 
 brilliant ; the upper jaw greatly jirotruding, some- 
 what like what occurs in the shark, jilaces the 
 mouth back towards the throat, and this structure 
 is said to be connected with the practice of tire 
 animal when intending to bite, to swell its skin 
 till it suddenly rises up, and strikes backwards as 
 if it fell over.f It is tiiis faculty which ajijjeiirs 
 to be indicated by tl it? Hebrew name achsiib,in\(\ 
 tiierefore we l)elie\e it to refer to that species, or 
 to one nearly allied to it. The Dutch name 
 (poH'-adder, or s])0()ch-adilei) shows tliat, in the act 
 of swelling, remarkable eructations and spittings 
 take place, all which no doubt are so many warn- 
 
 * In Isaiah xiv. 29, and xxx. 6, the epithet 
 P|Q1J?0 meo^jheph, ' vibrating,' (rendered 'Hying' 
 ill A. V.) is another form for 'winged,' and c-3cur3 
 in passages unconnected with the events in Exo- 
 dus. Both bear metaphorical interpretations. 
 
 X further confirmation of the 'fiery serpents,' 
 or ' serpents of the burning bite,' being najas, 
 occurs in the name Ras om Haye (Cape of ttie 
 Haje serpents), situated in the local. ty where geo- 
 graphers and commentators agree that the children 
 of Israel were alllioted by these reptiles. Should 
 it be objected that these are the haje, and not the 
 spectacle-snake, it may be answered that both 
 Arabs and Hindoos confound the species. 
 
 f The writer is indetited for the details concern- 
 ing this reptile to the kindness of Captain Stevens 
 of the Royal Marines, who killed several ; and fmm 
 whom we learn the further fact that, in order to 
 ascertain the truth of the universal report con- 
 cerning the mo ie c.f striking back, ascrilied to the 
 seiiient, he had a quill introduced into the vent of 
 one lying dead on t':e table, and blown into. Tltc 
 skin distended till \he body rose up nearly all ita 
 length : he then caused the experiment to stoj^ 
 from the alarming attitude it assumed.
 
 .\DDON. 
 
 ADONIBKZKK. 
 
 71 
 
 Jngs, the bite being lUtul. Tlie poff-adder usually 
 Ksides among brushwood in stony iibices and 
 Tocks, is fond of basking in the sun, rather slow 
 In moving, and is by nature timid [SuKriiNT ; 
 Viper].— C. II. S. 
 
 ADDON (p'lX), one of several ])laccs men- 
 tioned in Nell. vii. (il, l)eing towns in tlie land of 
 captivity, from which tliose wlio reiurned to Pa- 
 lestine were unable to ' shew tht'ir liilher's house, 
 or their seed, whether they were of Israel.' 'I'his, 
 pixibably, means that they were unable to furnish 
 such undeniable legal jiroof as was retjuired in 
 such case^. And this is in some degree explained 
 by the suiisequent (v. fi3) mention of jjriests who 
 were exjjelled the priesthood l)ecause iheir descent 
 was not found to be genealogically registeied. 
 These instances show the iuipoitance wiiich was 
 attached to their genealogies by the Jews [Ge- 
 nealogy]. 
 
 ADIABENE ( ' ASia^rjj/rj), the jjrincipal of 
 the six provinces into which Assyria was di- 
 vided. Pliny (Hist. Nat. v. 12) and Amniianus 
 (xxiii. 6, ^ 20) comprehend the whole of As- 
 syria tmder this name, which, iowever, properly 
 denoted only the province which w;x3 watered by 
 the rivers Diab and Adiab, or the Great and 
 Little Zab (Dhab), which How into the Tigris 
 below Nineveh (Mosul), from the north-east. This 
 region is not mentioned in Scrijiture; but in 
 Jo5eplius, its queen Helena and her son Izates, 
 who became converts to Judaism, are very often 
 named (Josej)!!. Atitiq. xx. 2, 4 ; Bell. Jud. ii. 
 16, 19; V. 4, 6, 11). 
 
 ADIDA ('ASiSa; Vulg. Addus), a fortified 
 town in the tribe of Judah. In 1 Mace. xii. 38, 
 we read that Simon Maccabaeus set up ' Adida 
 in Sejihela ('A5i5a eV t^ 2e(^Aa), and made it 
 strong with bolts and bars.' P2usebius says tliat 
 Sephela was the name given in his time to the 
 open country about Eleutheropolis. And this 
 Adida in Sephela is probably the same which 
 is mentioned in the next chapter (xiii. 13) as 
 ' Adida over against the plain," where Simon 
 Maccaba'us encamped to dispute the entrance 
 into Judaea of Tryphon, who liad treacherously 
 seized on Jonathan at Ptolemais. In tJie jiarallel 
 jiassage Josepims (^Antiq. xiii. G, 1) adds that this 
 Adida was upon a hill, belbre which lay the 
 plains of Judaja. Light foot, however, contrives 
 to multiply the single place mentioned in the 
 Maccabees and Josophus into four or five dif- 
 ferent towns (see Cliorocj. Dccad. § 3). One of 
 the places which Joseplius calls Adiila (^Bell. Jud. 
 fv. 9, 1) apjjears to liave been near the Jordan, 
 and was probably the Hadid of Ezra ii. 32. 
 
 ADJU RATION. This is a solemn act or 
 appeal, whereby one man, usually a jierson vested 
 witli natural or ollicial authority, imposes u])on 
 another the obligation of spe;iking or acting as if 
 under tlie solemnity of an oath. We find tlie 
 word y^3l^'^ used in tiiis sense in Cant. ii. 7 ; 
 jii. 5j &c. In the New Testament the act of 
 ailjuration is performed witli more marked ell'ect; 
 as when the high-priest tims calls u[)on Christ, 
 ' 1 adjure tliee l)y the living God, tell us &C. — 
 'E^opKi(,a) (76 Kara, rod &eo\J tov {uivros, &c. 
 (Matt. xxvi. (il). The word used liere is that 
 by which the LXX. render the Hebiiew (see also 
 Maik V. 7; Acts xix. 13; I Tiiess. v. 27). An 
 jatli, although thus imposed upon one without 
 
 big eonseiil, was not only binding, but toltmu 
 in the higiiest degree; and when connectiHl with 
 a question, an answer was compulsory, which 
 iuiswer being iis upon (jatli, any liilsehood in it 
 would be perjury. Thus our Saviour, who had 
 previously disilaiued to reply to the charges brought 
 against him, now felt himself bound to answer the 
 question [jut to him. The ahstiact moral right li 
 any man to impose so serious an obligation ui-on 
 another without his consent, may \ery much be 
 doubted — not, inileed, as comj^liing a trie* an- 
 swer, which a just man will give under all cir- 
 cumstiuices, but as extoiting a truth wiiich be 
 might have just ie;isons i'or withholding. 
 
 A])M,\II, one of tlie cities in tiie vale of 
 Sidilim (Gen. x. lit), which had a king of its 
 own (Gen. xiv. 2). It was destroy eil along with 
 Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen. xix. 21 ; Hos. xi. 8). 
 
 ADMONI CJI^IN; Sept. ^vppdKvs; Vulg. 
 rufus). This word means red-haired, imd is so 
 rendered in the ancient versions, although ours 
 understands a ruddy conip/exion. It would thus 
 iippear that Esau (Gen. xxv. 25) and Da\id 
 (1 Sam. xvi. \'2; xvii. 42) were red-haired. Red 
 hair is so uncommon in the East, that it forms a 
 particular distinction, as in the Scriptural in- 
 stances; but it is by no means unknown, espe- 
 cially in mountainous countries. Tlie writer has 
 observed it in Persia repeatedly, accomijanied 
 with the unual fresh complexion. Such hair and 
 complexion together seem to liave been regarded 
 as a Ijeauty among the Jews. The jiersonal chak- 
 racters of Esau and David aj)pear to agree well 
 with the temj>erament which red hair usually 
 indicates. 
 
 ADONAI C^HN ; Sejit. Kvpios, lord, master), 
 the old jjlural form of the noun jnX adon, 
 similar to that with the sutlix i)\' the Hist person ; 
 used as the 2}iu}-alis excellenticp, bj' way of dig- 
 nity, for the name of Jehuv.*.h. The similar 
 form ivith the sitffix is also used of men, as of 
 Joseph's master (Gen. xxxix. 2, 3, sq.); of Josejih 
 himself (Gen. xiii. 3(1, 33 ; so ako Isa. xix. 4). 
 The Jews, out of sujjersfitious levtreiice lor the 
 name Jehovak, always, in reading, pronounce 
 Adonui where Jehovah is written; and hence the 
 letters iTin'* are usually written with the )ioints 
 lielonging to yk/o«rtt [Jehovah]. The view that 
 the word exhiliits a p'lural leiminalion wi'hout 
 the allix is that of Gesenius {ThcHuur. s. i\ \)'^), 
 and seems just, though rather disapproved liy Pio- 
 fessor Lee (Lev. in jnN). The latter aild's that 
 'Our English bibles generally translate MIH^ l-y 
 LORD, in capitals ; when jjrecedcd iiy pT^^ri, 
 they translate it God; when ri"lN2V tzabunth 
 fi)llows, by Loud ; as in Isa. iii. 1, • The Loid. 
 the LoiiD of Hosts.' The (copies now in use a>e 
 not, however, consistent in this respect. 
 
 ADONIBEZEK (p.!5"''J"nX, lord of B-zck ; 
 Sept. 'h^wvi^i^iK), king or lord of Bezek, a town 
 which Eusebius (in BeJ^fK) places 17 miles east of 
 Nea(jolis or Shecliem. The small extent ot tlie 
 kingdoms in and around Palestine at the time of 
 its invasion ijy the Hebrews is shown by the fact 
 that this petty inelc/c had subdued no lesi than 
 seventy of tliem; and the baiiiarity of the war- 
 usages in tiiose early times is jiainful'v shown by 
 his cutting olV all tlie thuiiibs anil grea' toes oi 
 his prisoners, and allowing them uo food tut tliat
 
 73 
 
 AD tXI.(AIL 
 
 which tlu^y g:ith.'reil tiii.ler liis Lilile. Tliese can- 
 qiirsts niinle Adoiiilxv.i k ' i\ tviti)-.> ani«ng tlie 
 niiiininvs ;■ and we tin I liim at the head of the 
 confedeialeil CanaaJiitcs and Pevizzites, against 
 whom (he tiihes of Jiidah and Simeon marched 
 al'tei- the death of Joshua. ll\i army was roufeil 
 ami iiimself taUin prisoner. Tlie vicrors Jailed 
 not to exj.'rea-j their indignation at tl>e mode in 
 which he had treated his cajjtives, hy dealing 
 with him in the same manner. Ilia conscience 
 was then awiJ<tned t( the enormity of liis con- 
 duct, and in his own treafiii-nt lie recognised a 
 severe hut just application of the lex talionis. 
 Tliaf the act was so intended by tlie captors is 
 very clear : and it is strange that this strong re- 
 proi)atioii of his conduct liy the Israelites shouM 
 have heen constiueil into an example of tiieir own 
 l)iirV)aroiis usages in war. Adonil)ezek was taken 
 to Jerusalem, where he died, b.c. 1410. 
 
 ADONIJAH (-in':'"!^, Jehovah [is] my 
 Lord ; Sept. 'AScoj/ias), the fonrth son of David, 
 liy Haggiti). He was born after his father 
 became king, hut when he reigned over Judah 
 only (2 Sam. iii. 4). According to tlie Oriental 
 notion develojjed in the article Absalom, Ado- 
 nijali might have considered liis claim superior 
 to that of his eldest brother Amnon, who was 
 horn while his father was in a private station ; 
 but not to that of Absalom, who was not only his 
 eltler brother, and born while his father was a 
 king, but was of royal descent on the side of his 
 inotlier. When, however, Amnon and Absalom 
 *ere both dead, he became, by order of birth, 
 the heir-apparent to the throne. But this order 
 had been set aside in favom- of Solomon, who was 
 born while his father was king of all Israel. Ab- 
 salom perished in attempting to assert his claim 
 of primoLTeniture, in op}x>sition to this arrange- 
 ment. Unawed hy tliis example, Adonijah took 
 the same means of showing that he was not 
 disjx>sed to relinquish the claim of primogeniture 
 which Slow de\'olved u|)on him. He assumed 
 the state of an heir-apjiarent, who, from tlie ad- 
 vanced age of David, must soon be king. But it 
 does not appear to have been his wish to trouble 
 hi<i father as Absalom had done; for he waited 
 till David appearexl at the point of death, when 
 lie called around him a number of influential 
 men, whom he had previovisly gained o\'er, and 
 caused himself to be ])roclaimed king. Tliis was 
 a formidable attempt to subvert the appointment 
 made by the Di\ine king of Israel ; for Adonijah 
 was supported by such men as Joab, the ge- 
 neral-in-chief. and Abiathar, the high-priest; both 
 of whom had followed David in all liis fortunes. 
 The adliesion of such men, and the pre>'ious 
 defection of ttie nation to Aljsalom, show the 
 strength of the hereditary principle among the 
 Israelites. In all likelilKiod, if Absalom had 
 waited till Davi<l was on his death-bed, Joab and 
 Ahiathar would have given him their support ; but 
 Ijis premature and unnatural attempt to dethrone 
 his father, disgusted tliese friends of David, who 
 might not otherwise have been advtrse to his 
 claims. This danger was avoided by Adonijah : 
 but his plot was, notwithstanding, defeated by the 
 prompt measure taken bv David, who directed So- 
 lomon to be at once yroclaimed, and crowned, 
 and admitted to the real exercise of the sovereign 
 {tower. Adonijah then sa-v that all was lost, and 
 
 ADONI-ZKDEK. 
 
 fled to the altar, which he refused to leave with- 
 out a promise of jiardon from King SolomoiL 
 This he received, but was warned that any furtliei 
 attempt of the same kind would be fatal to hiin. 
 AccordJTigly, when, some time after the deatii ol 
 David, Adonijah covertly endeavoural to re* 
 produce his claim tliroiigh a marriage with Abi- 
 .sliag, the virgin widow of his father [Abisii.io]j 
 his design was at once penetrated by the king, 
 by whose order he was instantly pul to death 
 (1 Kings i.-ii. 13-:25). 
 
 ADONIRAM CD7?""»fr?. lord of heifjht, i. q, 
 hvfh lord ; Sejit. 'hdwfipa^ 1 Kings iv. 6). This 
 name is exhiljited in the contracted form of Ano- 
 UAM (DinX) in 'I Sam. xx. 24; 1 Kings xii, 
 TS; anil of Hadoram (DinH) in 2 Chron. x 
 IS. 
 
 1. AD(;NIRAM, or Hadoiiam, son of Toi, 
 king of Hamath, who was sent by his father to 
 congratulate David on his victory over ihfir com- 
 mon enemy Had-c'.rezer, king of Syria (1 Clnon. 
 xviii 10). Tliis prince is called Joram in 2 
 San J. viii. 10. 
 
 2. ADONIRAM. A person of this name is 
 mentioned as recei\er-general of the imposts in 
 the reigns of David, Solomon, and Rehoboam. 
 Commentators have been much at a loss to de- 
 termine whether the oflice was held by one person 
 for so long a peiiod, or by two or three j^rsons 
 of the same name. It ap{:)ears very unlikely that 
 even two persons of the same name should succes- 
 sively bear the same otKce, in an age when no 
 example occurs of the father's name being given 
 to his son. We find also that not more than 
 ibrty-seven years elapse between the first and last 
 mention of the Adoniram wlio was ' over the 
 ti'ibute ;■ and as this, although a long term of 
 service, is not too long for one life, and as tho 
 person who held the office in the beginning of 
 Rehoboam's reign had served in it long enough 
 to make himself odious to the yjeoplej it appears 
 on the whole most jMobaljie that one and the same 
 person is intended throughout. Only one incident 
 is recorded in connection with this pasnn. When 
 the ten tribes seceded from the house of David 
 and made Jerolioam king, Reholioam sent AcU>- 
 niram among them, for the purpose, we imay pre- 
 sume, of collecting tlie usual imposts, which had 
 become very hea\ y. Perhaps he had been rigitl in 
 his invidious otTice under Solomon : at all events 
 the collector of the imposts which had occasioned 
 the revolt was not the person whose presence was 
 the most likely to sooth the exasperated passions of 
 the people. Tliey rose upon him, and stoned him 
 till he died. Rehoboam, who was not far off, took 
 warning by his fate, and, mounting his chariot, 
 returned with all sjieed to Jerusalem (i Kings 
 xii. IS). 
 
 ADONIS. [Thammuz.] 
 
 ADONI-ZEDEK Cp■^V"*3^^i ; Sept. 'A5u.n- 
 P^C^K, confounding hiin with Adcnibezek). The 
 name Anvlvs lord of Justice, i.e. just fore?, but 
 some would rather have it to mean kliKj of Zedek. 
 He was the Canaanitisli king of Jerusalem when 
 the Israelites invaded Palestine; and tlie similarity 
 of the name to that of a more ancient king of (as 
 is supposed) the same place, Melchi-zedek {king 
 of jtistice, or king of Zedek^, has suggested that 
 Zedek was one of the ancient names of Jerusalem. 
 Be that as it may, this Adonizedek was the fins
 
 ADOPTION. 
 
 AJ)C)PTION. 
 
 73 
 
 Oi tlie uative princes that attinipted to make 
 bead against the invaders. Alter Jericho and 
 Ai were takiO, and the Gibeonites had succeeded 
 in formini,' a treaty with tlie Israelites, Adoni- 
 ze<lek was the lirst to rouse liiinseli' iVoiii the stiijior 
 wliicli liad iallcn on the Canaanites (Josh. i. !'-l 1), 
 and he induced tlie otherAinovitish kin:,'-s (iflleliron 
 — Jarniuth. Lachl^h, ami Kj: on — to join nini in a 
 confederacy at^ainst the enemy. Tliey did not, how- 
 ever, march ('iiectly a^rainst the invaders, Ijnt went 
 and hesies^ed the Gibeonites, to punish them t'ot the 
 discouragiii!,' exanij)le which their secession iVom 
 the common cause had atl'ordeil. Joshua no sooner 
 heard of this than lie marched all iii;.,'ht from 
 Gilgal to rjie relief of his allies; and fallin;; unex- 
 pectedly upon the besietrcrs, soon put them to utter 
 rout. The pursuit was Ion;,', and was sii^nalized by 
 Joshua's famous command to the sun and moon, as 
 well as by a tremendous hail-stoiiu, whicli ifreatly 
 distressed the fus^itive Amorites [Josnu.v]. The 
 five kings took refuge in a cave ; .liut were ob- 
 served, and by Joshua's onler the mouth of it was 
 closed with large stories, and a guard set over it, 
 until the pureuit was over. When the pursuers 
 returned, the cave was opened, and the five kings 
 brought out. The Hebrew chiefs then set theu" 
 feel upon the necks of the prostrate monai'chs — 
 on ancient mark of triuinpii, of which the monu- 
 ments of Persia and Egypt still afl'ord illus- 
 trations. They were then slain, and their bodies 
 hung on trees until the evening, when, as the law 
 forbade a longer exposure of the dead (Deut. 
 xxi. 23), they were taken down, and cast into 
 the cave, the mouth of which was tilled up 
 with large stones, which remained long after 
 (Josh. X. 1-27). The severe treatment of these 
 kings by Joshua has been censured and defended 
 with equal disregard of the real circumstances, 
 which are, that the war was avowedly one of ex- 
 termination, no quarter being given or expected 
 on either side : and that the war-usages of the 
 Jews were neither worse nor better than tliose of 
 the people with whom diey fought, who would 
 most certainly have treated Joshua and the other 
 Hebrew chiefs in the same manner, had they fallen 
 into their liands. 
 
 ADOPTION. The Old Testament does not 
 contain any word equivalent to this; but the act 
 occurs in various Ibims. The New Testament 
 has the word vlodetrla often (Rom. viii. 15, 23 ; 
 ix. i ; Gal. iv. 5 ; Epli. i. 5); but no example of 
 the act occurs. The term itself is well deliiied, 
 and the act descrilied, in tlie literal signilication 
 of the Greek word. It is the jjlaciui/ us a son of 
 cme who is not so by liirth. 
 
 The practice of adojrtion had itjs origin in tlie 
 desire for male ofl'spring among tliose who have, 
 in the ordinary course, been denied tliat blessing, 
 or have been deprived of it by ciicujustances. 
 This feeling is common to our natvne ; but its 
 operation is less marked in those countries where 
 the equalizing influences of high civilization lessen 
 fhe peculiar ])rivileges of t;he paternal character, 
 and where the se< urity and the well-observed laws 
 by which estates descend and propeity is trans- 
 miited, withdraw one of the principal iniluce- 
 ments to the jiraclice. And thus most of the 
 instances in the Bible occur in the patriarchal j)e- 
 rio«l. Tlie law of Moses, by settling the relations 
 ot families and the rules of descent, and by for- 
 mally es»^abli8hing the Levirate law,which in some 
 
 sort secured a rejiiesentative |io»lerity even to a 
 man who died without children, apjieurs to have 
 ]mt some cheok upon this custom. The allu- 
 sions in the New Testament are inostly to practices 
 of adoption which then existed among the Greikd 
 and Romans, and rather to the latter than to the 
 former; for among the more highl) ci\ ilized (ireeks 
 ado])tion was less fieipient than among the UoioiUix. 
 In the East the practice has always been com- 
 mon, especially among the Semitic ra:;es, iu 
 whom the love of oll'sjiring lias at d!l times been 
 strongly manifested. And here it may I e ob- 
 serveil that the additional and jjcculiar stimulus 
 which the Ilelirews derived fioni the hn] e of 
 giving biith to the Messiah, was inopwalive with 
 respect to adojition, through which that privilege 
 could not be realized. 
 
 In early times theie appears to have been no 
 limitatiiin or restriction of the exercise of the 
 power of achip! ion. But as the arrangements of 
 society became more complicated, some restric- 
 tions were imposetl, and certain jiublic furms 
 were made necessary to legalize the act. We are 
 not much acquainted with fhe usages in this 
 matter, which, in different ages, were, among the 
 Hebrews, connected with the act of adoption. 
 This is paitly because the jiractice had ceiL-ied to 
 be common among them by the time the sources 
 of information became moie open. And, indeeil, 
 the culpable facility of divorce in later times ren- 
 dered unnecessary those adojjtions which might 
 have arisen, and in earlier times did arise, from 
 the sterility of a wife. The want of positive in- 
 formation, however, is supplied, in some degree, 
 by our acquaintance with the iuialogous practices 
 of other Eastern nations. 
 
 It is scarcely necessary to say that adoption 
 was confined to sons. The whole Bible history 
 atlbrds no example of the adoption of a leinale; for 
 the Jews certaiidy were not behind any Oiiental 
 nation in the leeling expresseil in the Chinese 
 proverb — ' He is happiest in daughters who has 
 only sons ' {Mem. sur les Chinois, t. x. 1 19). 
 
 The first instances of adoption wiiich occur in 
 Scripture are less the acts of men than of women, 
 who, being themselves barren, give their I'emale 
 slaves to their husbands, with the view of adojit- 
 ing the children they may bear. Thus Sarah 
 gave her handmaid Ilagar U) Abraham ; an*i the 
 son who was born, Ishmael, appears to have been 
 considered as her son as well as Alnaham's, until 
 Isiiac was born. In like manner Rachel, having 
 no children, gave her handmaid Biliiah to her 
 husband, who had by her Dan and Najihtali 
 (Gen. XXX. 5-9) ; on which his other wife, Leah, 
 altiiough she had sons of her own, yet fearing that 
 she had left olY bearing, claimed the right of giv- 
 ing her handmaid Zilpah to Jacoi), that she might 
 thus increase their number ; and by this means 
 she had Gad and Aslier (Gen. xxx. 1>-I3j. In 
 this way the greatest [wssible a])proximation to a 
 natural relation was produced. The child was 
 the son of the husband, and, the motlier being the 
 property of the wife, the progeny must be her 
 property also; and the act of more particular 
 appidjiriation seems tt) have been that, at the time 
 ot birth, the handmaid brought forth her child 
 ' ujion the knees of the ado]itive mother' (Gen. 
 xxx. 3). Strange as this custom may seem, it 
 is in accordance with the notions at' representation 
 which we find very prevalent in analogous states jf
 
 74 
 
 ADOPTION. 
 
 •ociety. We do not see the use of explaining away 
 customs we do not like, or which do not agree with 
 our own notions, by allegin;,' that ijy this expression 
 nothing more is meant tJian tliat tlie son was to 
 be dandk'd and l>rought up upon the knees of tlie 
 adoptive motlier. In this case the vic;irious hear- 
 ing of the iiaiuhiiaid for the mistress was as com- 
 jilete as possible ; and tlie sons were regarded as 
 fully equal in right of heritage with those by the 
 legitimate wife. Tliis privilege could not, how- 
 ever, be conferred i)y the adoption of tlie wife, but 
 by tlie natura. relation of such sons t« the liusband. 
 A curious fact is elicited by the peculiar cir- 
 cumstances in Sarah's case, wliich were almost 
 the only circumstances that could have arisen to 
 try the question, wiietlier a mistress retained her 
 {x)wer, as such, over a female slave whom she had 
 thus vicariously employed, and over the progeny 
 of that slave, even though by her own husband. 
 The answer is given, rather startlingly, in the 
 allii-mative in the words of Sarah, who, when the 
 birth of Isaac had wliolly changed her feelings 
 and position, and when she Avas exasperated by 
 tlie olfensive conduct of Hagar and her son. ad- 
 dressed her husband thus, < Cast forth this bond- 
 woman and her son ; for the son of this bond- 
 woman shall not be heir with my son, even with 
 Isaac' (Gen. xxi. 10). 
 
 A previous instance of adoption in the history 
 of Abraham, when as yet he had no children, 
 appears to be discoverable in his saying, ' One 
 born in my house is mine heir.' This unquestion- 
 ably denotes a house-born slave, as distinguished 
 from one bought with money. Abraham had 
 several such ; and the one to whom he is sup- 
 jiosed here to refer is his faithful and devoted 
 steward Eliezer. This, therefore, is a case in 
 which a slave was ado.pted as a son — a practice 
 still very common in the East. A boy is 
 often purchased young, adopted by his master, 
 brouglit up in his faith, and educated as his son ; 
 or if the owner has a daughter, he adopts him 
 through a marriage with that daughter, and the 
 family which springs from this union is counted 
 as descended from him. But house-bom slaves are 
 Msually preferred, as these have never had any home 
 but their master's house, are considered members 
 of his family, and are generally the most faithful 
 of his adlierents This practice of slave adoption 
 was very common among the Romans ; and, as 
 such, is more than once referred to by St. Paul 
 (Rom. viii. 15; 1 Cor. ii. 12), the transition from 
 the condition of a slave to that of a son, and the 
 privilege of applying the tender name of ' Father ' 
 to the former ' Master,' affording a beautiful 
 illustration of the change which takes jilace from 
 the bondage of the law to the freedom and privi- 
 leges of the Cliristian state. 
 
 As in most cases the adopted son was to be 
 consid.'ied dead to the family from which he 
 sprung, the separation of natural ties and con- 
 nections was avoided by this preference of slaves, 
 who were mostly foreigners or of foreign descent. 
 For (he same reason the Chinese make their adop- 
 tions from children in the hospitals, who have 
 been aliandoned liy tlieir parents (Mem. sur les 
 Chinois, t. vi. 32.')). The Tartars are the only 
 peo])le we know v/ho prefer to atiojit their near 
 relatives — nephews or cousins, or, failing them, a 
 Tartar of their own banner {Ibid. t. iv. 136). The 
 91 Iv Scriptural examjile of this kind is that in 
 
 ADOPTION. 
 
 which Jacob ado])ted his own grandsons Ephrain 
 and JVIanasseh to be counted as his sons. Some 
 have questioned whetlier this was really an act oi 
 adoption : but it seems to us that there is no way in 
 which an act of adoption could be more clearly 
 ex)iressed. Jacob says tx) Josejih, (heir father — 
 * Thy two sons, Epliraim and Manasseh, shall be 
 mine : . . . . as Reuben and Simeon (his twa 
 eldest sons), ihetj shall be mine. ]Jut thy issue 
 which thou begette.st after tlieiii shall be tliine ' 
 (Gen. xlviii. 6). The object of this reiiiarkalile 
 adoption was, that whereas Josejih himself could 
 only have one share of his father's heritage along 
 with liis brothers, the ado}ition of his two sons 
 enabled Jacob, through them, to bestow two por- 
 tions upon hi? favourite son. One remarkable 
 etfect of this adoption was that the sons of Jacob, 
 and the tribes which sprung from them, thus be- 
 came thirteen instead of twelve ; but the ultimate 
 exclusion of Levi from a share of territory, recti- 
 fied this so far as regarded the distiibution of 
 lands in Canaan. 
 
 The adoption of Moses by»Phaiaoh's daughter 
 (Exod. ii. 1-10) is an incident rather than a 
 practice; but it recalls what has just been stated 
 respecting the adoption of outcast children by the 
 Chinese. 
 
 A man who had only a daughter would na- 
 turally wish to build up a family, to be counted 
 as his own, through her. We liave seen tkat, 
 under such circumstances, the daughter is often 
 married to a freed slave, and the children 
 counted as those of the woman's father, or tlie 
 husband iiimself is adopted as a son. An in- 
 stance of the former kind occurs in 1 Chron. ii. 
 34, sq. Sheshan, of the tribe of Judah, gives his 
 daughter to Jarha, an Egyptian slave (whom, as 
 the Targum premises, he no doubt liberated on 
 that occasion) : the posterity of the marriage are 
 not, however, reckoned to Jarha, the liusband of 
 the woman, but to her father, Sheshan, and as his 
 descendants they take their heritage and station 
 in Israel. The same chapter gives another in- 
 stance. Macliir (grandson of Joseph) gives his 
 daughter in marriage to Hezion, of the tribe of 
 Judah. She gave birth to Segub, who was the 
 father of Jair. Tiiis Jair possessed twenty-three 
 cities in the land of Gilead, which came to him 
 in right of his grandmother, the daughter of 
 Machir; and he acquired other towns in the same 
 quarter, which made up his possessions to three- 
 score towns or villages (1 Chron. ii. 2i-24; 
 Josh. xiii. 9; 1 Kings iv. 13). Now this Jair, 
 though of the tribe of Judah by his grandfather, 
 is, in Num. xxxii. 41, counted as of Manasseh, 
 for the obvious reason which the comparlsjn of 
 these texts suggests, that, through his grand- 
 mother, he inherited the property, and was the 
 lineal representative of Machir, the son of Ma- 
 nasseh. This case is of some imjjortance from the 
 ground which it ofl'ers for the opinion of those who 
 account for the ditference between the pedigree of 
 Christ as given by Matthew, and tluit in Ltike, 
 by supposing that the fonner is the j)edigree through 
 Joseph, his supposed father, and the latter through 
 his mother Mary. This opinion, which will be 
 examined in another ])lace [Gi5neai,ogyj, sup- 
 poses that Mary was tlie daughltr of HeJi, and 
 that Joseph is called his sun (Lake iii. 23) Ije- 
 cause he was adopted by Heli when he married 
 his daughter, who was an heiress, as is pro\ed by
 
 ADOF.AIM. 
 
 ADllAMMELECII. 
 
 the fact of her jjoing to Betiilelieni to be regis- 
 tered, wlien in the last stage of pregnancy. 
 
 The lblh)wini,' are among the foreign customs con- 
 nected with ado])tion wliich are siipjiosed to be 
 alluded to in the New Testament; and in explana- 
 tion of these it may be -emarked, that by tlie time 
 (ri' Clirist the Jews had, ilirougli various cliannels, 
 become well acquainted with the more remark- 
 able customs of the Greeks and Romans: and tlie 
 perfect familiarity of St. Paul, in particular, witli 
 Bucli customs would be probable from circum- 
 stances, even were it not constantly apparent in 
 his Epistles. In John viii. 3(), -If tlie Sun sliall 
 Tiiake you free, ye shall be free indeed,' is suj)- 
 jiosed by Grotius and other commentators to refer 
 to a custom in some of the cities of Greece, and 
 elsewliere, called a.Se\(po6eaia, wliereby the son 
 and heir was permitted to adopt lirotliers and ad- 
 mit them to the same rights which he himself 
 enjoyed. But it seems more likely that tlie refer- 
 ence was to the more familiar Roman custom, 
 by which tlie son, after liis fatlier"s deatli, often 
 made free sucli as were born slaves in his house 
 (Theophil. Antecensor, /«6//('«<. Inij). Justinian, i. 
 6. 5). in Rom. viii. 23, vloQ^alav aneKSexo/neuoi, 
 'anxiously vvaiting for the adoption," the former 
 word appears to be used in a sense dill'erent from 
 tliat which it bears in ver. 15, and to signify tlie 
 consiimmatiunoi the act there mentioned ; in wliich 
 point of view it is conceived to ajiply to the two- 
 i'cld ceremony among the Romans. Tlie one was tlie 
 private act, between the parties; and if tlie per- 
 son to be adopted was not already the slave of the 
 adopter, this pri\ate transaction involved the pur- 
 chase of him from his parents, when jnacticable. 
 In this manner Caius and Lucius were purcliased 
 from their father Agrijipa belbre their adojition by 
 Augustus. The other was the public acknowledg- 
 ment of that act on the part of the adopter, wlien 
 the adopted jjerson was solemnly a\owed and 
 declaaed to be iiis son. The peculiar force and 
 piopriety of such an allusion in an epistle to the 
 liomcms must be very evident. 
 
 In Gal. iv. 5, 6, there is a very clear allusion 
 to the privilege of adopted slaves to address their 
 former master by the endearing title of Abba, or 
 Fatlier. Selden has shown tliat slaves were not 
 allowed to use this word in addressing tlie master 
 of tlie family to which they belonged, nor the 
 corresponding title of Mama, mother, when speak- 
 ing to the mistress of it (Z>e Sticc. in Bona De- 
 funct, secund. Ilebr. c. iv.). 
 
 A more minute investigation tlian would here 
 \jH in jilace, might discover other allusions to the 
 custom of adoption. Tlie ideas and usages 
 connected with tlie adoption of an official suc- 
 cessor are considered elsewhere [Investiture]. 
 
 ADORAIM (DnnN*; Sept. 'ABo^pai/u.), a town 
 in the soutli of .luduli, enumerated along witli 
 Hebron and Waresliah, as one of the cities forti- 
 tied by Relioljoarn (2 (Jliron. xi. 9). Under tlie 
 name of Adora it is mentioned in the Apocry])iia 
 (I Mace. xiii. 20), and also ofien by Josephus 
 Antiq. viii. 10, 1 ; xiii. C, 4. 15, 4 ; Bell. Jiid. 
 I. 2, 6. P, 4), who usually connect^s Adora with 
 Maressa, as cities of the later Iduma.'a. It was 
 captured by Hyrcanus at tlie same 'ime wit!) 
 Maressa, and reliuilt by Guliinius (Josepl.. 
 Antiq. xiii. 9, 1 ; xiv. 5, op Tliis town does not 
 occur in any writer after Josephus, until tlie re 
 
 cent researches of Dr. Roliinsun, who discovered 
 it uniler the name of Dura, tlie lirsl feel)le lettei 
 having been dro]i])ed. It is situated live miles 
 AV. by S. from Hebron, and is a large village, 
 sealed on the eastern sloj)e of a cuUivaled hil 
 with olive-groves and fields of grain all around. 
 Tiiere are no ruins (Robinson's Bib. Besearches, 
 iii. 2-5). 
 
 AIX )R.-\T10N. Tliis word is comjiounded 
 of «f/ ' to,' and Of, oris, ' the moutli," and literally 
 signifies to apjsly he hand to the mouth," that is, 
 ' to kiss the iiand.' Tlie act is Uesciibed in 
 Scripture as one of worship. * Jol) says : — ' If 
 I had beheld the sun when it siiineil, or tiie 
 moon, walking in iirigiitness ; and my heart had 
 been secietly enticed, or my month had kissed 
 nry hand ; tliis also were an iniquity to lie 
 punished by the judge' (Job xxxi. 2<), 27). 
 And this very clearly intimates tliat kissing tiie 
 hand was considered an overt act of worslii)i in 
 the ICast. So Minutius Felix {I)e Sacri/ic. ca]). 
 2, ad fin.) remarks, that wh«n Ciecilius oliserved 
 the statue of Serajiis, ' L'i vulyus siipcrstitiusKS 
 solet, mamtm ori admovens, osculum labiis 
 pressit ; according to the cuslonv of tiie super- 
 stitious vulgar, he moved his hand to his mouth, 
 and kissed it witli liis lijis.' 
 
 The same act was used as a mark of respect 
 hi the presence of kings and persons high in oilice 
 or station. Or rather, ]ierha]is, the hand was not 
 merely kissed and tlien witliihawn from the 
 mouth, Imt iield continuously liefore or iijion the 
 mouth, to which allusion is made in sucii texts 
 as Judg. xviii. ID ; Job xxi. 5; xxix. 9; xl. 4 , 
 Ps. xxxix. 9 ; in which ' laying the hand u])on 
 the mouth' is used to descril.ie the highest de^riee 
 of reverence and suiimission ; as sucn, tins j'OS- 
 ture is exhibited on the monuments of Persia 
 and of Egypt. In one of the scul]itures at 
 Persepolis a king is seated on his throne, and 
 beibre him a person standing in a bent posture, 
 with his hand laid upon his mouth as he ad 
 
 diesses the sovereign (fig. 1). I'.xactly the same 
 attitude is observed in the scnl]iiuies at Tlielie-!, 
 where one jierson, among several (in various jios- 
 tures of res)ject; wiio appear before tlie scribes to 
 be registered, has his hand jilaced thus sul)mis- 
 sively ujion his mouth (iig. 2 j. The pail icular 
 object of this art is said to have been to preve'il 
 the breath from leacliing the face of the sujierinr. 
 But we are not to suppose that this was alwajn 
 its direct purjiose, seeing tliat many acts whicl. 
 originally had a specilic purpose, eventually l>e- 
 came merely conventional imnks of respect and 
 homage under given circumstances. 
 ADRA. [AuAD.] 
 
 ADRAMMKLKCH ("^^S1"1K, ASpapf\tx) 
 is mentioned, togetlur with Ana nnuh-ch, in 
 2 Kings xvii. 31, as one of th' idols wiios*
 
 76 
 
 adramm>:lech. 
 
 worship the inhabitants of Sepharvaim established 
 in Samaria, when they were transferred thither by 
 the king of Assyria, and wlioin they worshipped 
 by the sacrifice of their chiiihen by fire. This 
 constitutes the whole of our certain knowledge of 
 this idol. Witli regard to the etymology of the 
 name, the two most probable modes of interjneta- 
 tion are those wliich assume, either tiiat, as tlie 
 latter Inilf of the word is evidently Semitic, the 
 former is so too, and that it means the magnificence 
 of the kinij (and this is the view wliich Gesenius 
 now favours) ; or, according to a suggestion first 
 made by Reland (in his Dissertat. Miscell. ii. 
 I13j, that the former member is Assyrian, and 
 that the woril means tlic king of fire. It is to 
 be observed tluit, although it has been disputed 
 to what family of languages the Assyrian be- 
 lungs, some modem scholars incline to consideif 
 it as Medo-Persian (Gesenius, Geschivhte der 
 Hebr. Sprache, p. 6'2), and t.liat, in this case, the 
 position of that member of the compouml which 
 would be dependent ov tlie other as tlie genitive, 
 is exactly the converse of that wliich is necessary 
 in Hebrew and the other Syro- Arabian languages. 
 As to the figure under v-'hicli this idol was 
 worsliipped, tlie Babylonian Talmud (cited at 
 length in Carpzov"s Ai)jxiratus, p. 516; asserts 
 that lie was adored under that of a mule ; whereas 
 Kinichi says it was under that oi n peacock ; state- 
 ments upon which little reliance can be placed. 
 Thetc is greater unanimity in the opinion that 
 the power adored under this name was one of the 
 heavenly bodies, in general accordance with the 
 astrological character of the Assyrian idolatry 
 (Gesenius, Jesaia, iii. 327, seq.). Selden {De 
 biis Syris, i. 6) and others have identified liim 
 with Moloch, chiefly on the ground that the 
 sacrifice of children by fire, and the general sig- 
 nification of the name, are the same in both. 
 According, then, to the great ditl'erence of opinion 
 concerning Moloch, authorities of nearly equal 
 weight may be adduced for the ojnnion that 
 Adrammelech represents the planet Saturn, or 
 the Sun : the kind of sacrifice being the chief 
 argument in favour of the fonner ; the etymology 
 of the name being that in favour of the latter 
 [Moloch]. 
 
 Selden has also maintained (DeDiis Syris, ii. 9) 
 that Adrammelecli and Anammelech are only dif- 
 ierent names of one and the same idol. The con- 
 trary, however, is asserted by most ancient autho- 
 rities, and by Hyde, Jurieu, Gesenius, and others, 
 among the modems. No argument for their 
 identity can be drawn from the kethib, .in 
 2 Kings xvii. 31, because the singular TWpH 
 is not found in prose prior to the Captivity (and, 
 even if it were, it would be defectively written 
 here, of which there is only one instance in our 
 present text, unless when it has a prefix or suflix). 
 Besides, upwards of seventy MSS. .and several 
 early editions read the plmal C n?K in the 
 text here (De Rossi, Var. Led. ad loc.) ; and it is 
 also the A-ertof our printed copies. — J. N. 
 
 2. ADRAMMELECH, one of the sons and 
 inurderers of Sennacheril), king of Assyria (2 
 Kings xix. 27 ; Isa. xxxvii. 3S). 
 
 ADRAMYTTIUM ('ASpa^uTTjoi/), a sea-port 
 town in the province of Mysia in Asia Minor, op- 
 ]X)site the isle of Lesbos, and an Athenian colony 
 (Strabo, xiii.]).606; Herod, vii.42). It is mentioned 
 in Scripture only (Acts xxvii. 2_) from the fact 
 
 AiJULLAM. 
 
 that the ship in which Paul embarked at Casaf«a 
 as a jjrifKiner on his way to Italy, belonged to Adia 
 myttiuin. It was rare to find a vessel going direct 
 from Palestine to Italy. Tlie usual course tliere- 
 fore was to embark in some ship bound to one at 
 the ports of Asia Minor, and there go on boarii 
 a vessel sailing for Italy. This was the course 
 taken by the centurion who had charge of Paul. 
 Tlie sliij) of Adramyttium took them to Myra 
 in Lycia, and here they embarked in an 
 Alexandrian vessel bound for Italy. Some com- 
 mentators (Hammond, Grotius, Witsius, &c.) 
 strangely suppose that Adrametum in Africa 
 (PI in. v. 3 ; Ptol. iv. 3) was the port to which 
 the sliip belonged. Adramyttium is still called 
 ' Adramyt.' It is built on a hill, contains about 
 1000 houses, and is still a place of some com 
 merce (Turner, Tour, iii. 265). 
 
 ADRIATIC SEA ('ASplas, Acts xxvii. 27). 
 This name is now confined to the gulf lying be- 
 tween Italy on one side, and the coasts of Dal- 
 niatia and Albania on the other. But in St. 
 Paul's tune it extended to all that ]jart of the 
 Mediterranean between Crete and Sicily. Thus 
 Ptolemy (iii. 16) says that Sicily was bounded 
 on the east by the Adriatic, and that Crete was 
 bounded by the Adriatic on the west ; and Strabo 
 (ii. p. 1S5-, vii.p.'i88)says that the Ionian gulf was 
 a part of what was in his time called the Adriatic 
 Sea. This fact is of importance, as relieving us 
 from the necessity of finding the island of Melita 
 on which Paul was shipwrecked, in the present 
 Adriatic gulf; and consequently removing fh« 
 chief difficulty in the way of the identificatui ui 
 that island with the present Malta. To tliis use 
 it has been skilfully applied by Dr. Falconer in 
 his tractate On the Voyage of St. Paul. 
 
 ADRIEL (^Nnny, the flock of God ; Sept. 
 'A5f)i7)A), the person to whom Saul gave in 
 marriage his daughter Merab, who had been ori- 
 ginally promised to David (1 Sam. xviii. 19). 
 Five sous sprung from this union, who were taken 
 to make up the number of Saul's descendants, 
 whose lives, on the principle of blood-revenge, were 
 required by the Gibeonites to avenge the cruelties 
 which Saul had exercised towards their race 
 [Gibeonites]. In 2 Sam. xxi. 8, the name of 
 Michal occurs as the mother of these sons of 
 Adriel : but as it is known that Merab, and not 
 Miciial, was the wife of Adriel, and that Michal 
 had never any children (2 Sam. vi. 23), there * 
 only remains the alternati\'e of supposing eitlier 
 that Michal's name has been substituted for 
 Merab's by some ancient copyist, or that the word 
 which properly means bare (which Michal bare 
 unto Adriel), should be rendered brought up or 
 educated (which Michal brought up for Adriel U 
 The last is the choice of our public version, and 
 also of the Targurn. The Jewish writers conclude 
 that Merab died early, and that Michal adopted 
 her sister's children, and brought them up for 
 Adriel (T. Bab. Sanhed. fol. 19. 2). But, as tlie 
 word mp' will not easily take any other sense 
 than ' she bare,' the cliange of names seems the 
 easier explanation. 
 
 ADULLAM (D^"1K : Sept. '05oAA.a^), an 
 old city (Gen. xitxviii. 1, 12, 20) in tlie plain 
 country of U.e triU; of Judah (Josh. xv. 35), and 
 one of the royal cities of the Canaanitcs (JosU.
 
 ADi lla:\i. 
 
 ADULTERY. 
 
 xii. 15"). It was one of llie towns wliicli Reliolioam 
 fortified (2 Cliion. xi. 7 ; Micali i. 15), and is men- 
 tioned after tiie Captivity (Ne!i. xi. 30; 2 i\Iaec. 
 12. 3'^). En3i-l)ius and Jerome state that it ex- 
 irted in ilieir time as a lars.'-e villa^je, ten miles to 
 the eiist i;f' Eleuflierojiolis ; l)iit tiiey tollovv. the 
 Sept. in conlbxindiiig if witli E^jlon f Jvjy }, 
 wliereas it is certain tliat these were dill'erent 
 "rlaces, and had distinct kinj^s in the time of 
 Joshua (xii. 12, 1.)). It is eviilent that AiiulLim 
 wasoneofthe cities of'tlie valley, 'or plain iietween 
 the iiill country ol" Judah and tiie sea ; aTid from 
 its place in the lists of names (especially 2 Cliron. 
 xi. P<), it ap}iear3 not to have heen far from tiie 
 Philistine city of Gafh. This circmnsfanee 
 would suggest that tlie 'cave of Adullam" (1 .Sam. 
 xxii. 1), to which David witliiliew immediately 
 from Gatli, was near tlie city of that name. But 
 there is no passage of Scripture which connects 
 the city and the cave, and it is certainly not in 
 a plain that one would look for a cave capable 
 of affording a secure retreat to 400 men ; nor 
 lias any such cave been found in that quarter. 
 It is tlierefori' far from improbable that the ca\e 
 (f Adullam was in the mountainous wilderness 
 in the west of .ludah towards the Deail Sea, where 
 such caves occur, and where the western names 
 (as Carmel) are sometimes repeated. This con- 
 jecti'.re is favoured liy the fact that the usual 
 haunts of David were in this quarter ; whence 
 he moved into the land of Moab, which was (juite 
 contiguous, whereas he must have crossed the 
 ^hole breailth of the land, if the cave of Atlullam 
 liad been near the city of that name. Other 
 nasons occur which would take too much room 
 to state : but tlie result is, that there appears at 
 length good grounds for the local tradition which 
 fixes the cave on the borders of the Dead Sea, 
 although there is no certainty with regard to 
 the particular cave usually pointed out. Tlu 
 cave so designated is at a point to which David 
 was far more likely to summon his ])arents, whom 
 he intended to take from Bethlehem into Mo;/', 
 than to any jjlace in the western plains. It is 
 about six miles south-west of Bethlehem, in the 
 side of a deep ravine (Wady Khureitun) which 
 jiasses below the Frank mountain [IIhrodion] 
 on the south. It is an immense natural cavern, 
 the mouth of which can be approached only on 
 foot along the side of the cliff. Irby and Man- 
 gles, who visited it without being aware that it 
 was the reputed cave of Adullam, state that it 
 •runs in t)y a long winding, narrow passage, with 
 email chambers or cavities on either side. We 
 soon came to a large chamber with natm-al arches 
 of great height ; from this last there were nu- 
 merous passages, leading in all directions, occa- 
 sionally joined by others at right angles, and 
 forming a perfect labyrinth, which our guides as- 
 sured us had never l)een ])erfectly explored, the 
 people being afraid of losing themselves. The 
 ])assages are generally four feet high by three feet 
 wiile, and were all on a level with eacli other. 
 Tliere were a few petrifactions where we were : 
 nevertheless the grotto was jierfectly clean, and 
 the air pure and good' ( Travels, ])p. 3 10. 3 1 1 ). It 
 »eems probalde that David, as a native of Beth- 
 lehem, must have l<een well acquainted with this 
 remarkable spot, and had probably ol'len availed 
 iiiin!J«lf of its shelter when out with his lather's 
 B«x"/ks. It wou'.d thei ■*'jre naturally occur to 
 
 him as a place of refuge when he fled fiom Gafh; 
 and his jniriMise of forming a bund of follower! 
 was much more likely to lie realized liere, in tlie 
 neighbomhood of his native ])lace, than in the 
 wesrwarii jilain, where the citi/ of Adullam lay 
 These circumstances have considerable wi'igl.t, 
 when taken in connection with wliat has already 
 lieen adduced ; but the question is one which 
 there is no imans of ileciding with certainty. 
 
 ADl'LTl'vRY. In th<' conunon aeec|)liition of 
 the word adultery denoli s the sexual intercourse of 
 a married woman witli any other man tlian her 
 husband, or ol'a married man withany otlierviomaii 
 than his wile. But the crime is not un(lerst(Mid in 
 lliis exti lit amongEastern nations, nor was it so un- 
 derstood by the.fews. "With them, adultery was the 
 act whereby any married man was expose.l to the 
 risk of having a spuriour otVsjiring inqiosed upon 
 him. An adulferer was, ilierelbre, aiiv man Uiio 
 had illicit intercourse witli a married or lielrolhed 
 woinaii; and an adulteress was a l,>etrothed or niar- 
 rietl woman who had intercourse with any other 
 man than her husband. An intercourse between 
 a married man and an unmarried woman was not, 
 as with us, deenuHl adultery, but i'oinieation - a 
 great sin, but not, like a(lii!lery, iinolving the 
 contingency of polluting a descent, of turning 
 aside an inheritance, or of imposing u))on a man 
 a charge which did not belong to him. Adultery 
 was thus considered a great social \vrong, against 
 which society protected itself iiy much severer 
 ]i(nalties than attended an unchaste act not in- 
 volving the same contingencies. 
 
 It will be seen that this Oriental limitation of 
 adultery is intimately connected with the exist- 
 ence of jiolygamy. If adultery be defined as a 
 breach of the marriage covenant, then, where the 
 cotitrj^ct is between one man and one woman, as 
 hi Christian countries, the man as much as the 
 woman infringes the covenant, or commits adul- 
 ery, by every act of intercourse with any other 
 woman : but where polygamy is allow ed — where 
 the Imsband may marry other wives, and take 
 to himself concubines and sla\es, the iiiarriag« 
 contract cannot and docs not convey tothe womai 
 a legal title that tlie man should belong to hf 
 alone. If, therefore, a Jew .associated with a 
 woman who was not his wife, his concubine, or 
 his slave, he was guilty of unchastity, but com- 
 mitted no offence which gave a wife reason to 
 comjilain that her legal rights had l>een infringed. 
 If, however, the woman with whom he associated 
 was the wife of anotlier, he was guilty of adultery 
 — not by infringing his own marriage covenant, 
 but by causing a breach of that which existed 
 between that woman and her husband (Michaelis, 
 ^FosUbiches Ticrht. art. 2.')9; Jahn's Arcli'Iohx/ie, 
 1h. i. b. 2, § 183). By thus excluding from tlit 
 name and punishment of adultery, tfe ollence 
 which did not involve the enormous wronir of 
 imposing upon a man a supjiosititions olTspving, in 
 a nation where the succession to landed property 
 went entirely by birth, so that a father couhl not 
 by his testament alienate if from any one who was 
 regarded as his son — the law was enaUed, with 
 less si'verity than if the inferior ollence had 
 be< n i'lcluded, to punish the crime with death. 
 It is still so jiunislied wherever the practice of 
 polygamy has similarly operated in aiiting tlie 
 crime — not, perhaps, that the law expressly as- 
 signs that punishment, but it recognises the rij(h<
 
 78 
 
 ADULTERY. 
 
 ADULTERY. 
 
 of tiiC itijiired party to inflict it, and, in fact, 
 leavi's it, in a great decree, in his haixls. Now 
 death wiis the punishment of adultery before the 
 time of Moses; and if lie had assij^^ned a less pii- 
 nisiiin^nt, his law would have been inoperative, 
 for private veni^eance, sanctioned by usage, would 
 gtill liave inllicted death. But by adopting it 
 into the law, tlios.; restrictions were imposed upon 
 its operal ion whicli necessarily arise when the calm 
 iacpiiry of public justice is substituted for the im- 
 pulsive action of excited hands. Tims, death would 
 be less frequently inflicted ; and that this etfect 
 followed seems to be implied in the fact that tlie 
 whole biblical liistory oilers no example of capifcil 
 punishment for tlie crime. Indeed, Lightfoot goes 
 farther, and remarks, ' I do not remember that I 
 have anywnere, in rhe Jewish Pandect, met with 
 an examide o': a wife punished for adultery with 
 death. Tiiere is mention ( 7*. Hieros. Saiihed. 212) 
 of tlie daughter of a certain priest burned for 
 committing fornication in her father's house; but 
 she was not married' (Hor. Hebr. ad Matt. xix. S). 
 Eventually, divorce superseded all other punisii- 
 ment. There are indeed some grounds for thinking 
 that this had happened before the time of Clirist, 
 and we throw it out as a matter of inquiry, whe- 
 ther the Scribes and Pharisees, in attempting to 
 entrap Ciirist in tlie matter of the woman taken 
 in adultery, did not intend to put him between 
 the alternatives of either declaring for the revival 
 of a practice which had already become obsolete, 
 l>ut which the law wiis supposed to command; 
 or, of giving his sanction to the apparent infrac- 
 tion of the law, which the substitution of divorce 
 involved (Jolm viii. 1-11). In Matt. v. 32, Christ 
 seems to assume that the practice of divorce for 
 adultery already existed. In later times, it cer- 
 tainly did, and Jews wlio were averse to part 
 with their adulterous wives, were comj)elled to 
 put them away (Maimon. in Gerushiii, c. 2). In 
 the passage just referred to, our Lord does not ap- 
 pear to render divorce compulsory, even in case of 
 adultery; he only permits it in that case alone, 
 by forbidding it in every other. 
 
 In the law which assigns the punishment of 
 death to adultery (Lev. xx. 10), the mode in 
 which that punishment should be inflicted is not 
 specified, because it was known from custom. It 
 was not, however, stranr/tilatiori, as the Talmutl- 
 ists contenil, but stouiiif/, as we may learn 
 from various jjassages of Scripture (e. ff. Ezek. 
 xvi. 3'^, 10 ; John viii. 5) ; and as, in i'act, Moses 
 himself testifies, if we compare Exod. xxxi. 14; 
 XXXV. 2 ; with Num. xv. 35, 36. If tlie adulteress 
 was a slave, the guilty parties were both scourged 
 with a leathern whip (n"lp3), the number of 
 blo.vs not exceeding forty. In this instance the 
 adulterer, in addition to the scourging, was suli- 
 jeet to the further penalty of bringing a trespass 
 nfl'ering (a ram) to the, door of the tabernacle, to 
 be offered in his behalf by the priest (Lev. xix. 
 20-22). Those who wish to enter into the reasons 
 •^f this distinction in favour of the slave, may con- 
 
 ilt Michaclis (Mosdi.irhes Recht. art. 261). We 
 only observe that the Moslem law, derived from 
 old Arabian usage, only inflicts upon a slave, lor 
 this and other crimes, half the punisliment in- 
 curred by a free person. 
 
 It seems that the Roman law made the same 
 important distinction with the Hebrew, between 
 the infidelitv of tlic husband and of the n'fe. 
 
 ' Adultery' was defined by the civilians lo he th« 
 violation of another man's bed (violatio tori 
 alieni); so that the infidelity of the husband 
 could not constitute the ofl'ence. The more an- 
 cient laws of Rome, which were very severe 
 against the offence of the wife, were silent as to 
 that of the husband. Tlie offence was not capital 
 until made so by Constantine, in imitation of tiae 
 Jewish law ; but under Leo and Marcian the 
 penalty was abated to perpetual imprisonment, or 
 cutting olf theno.je; and, under Justinian, the 
 further mitigation was granted to the woman, 
 that she was only to be scourged, to lose hei 
 dower, and to be shut up in a convent. 
 
 The punishment of cutting off the nose bringi 
 to mind the passage in which the prophet E/.ekiel 
 (xxiii. 25 ), after, in the name of the Lord, reprov- 
 ing Israel and Judah for their adulteries (i. e. 
 idolatries) with fhe Assyrians and Chaldeans, 
 threatens the punishment — ' they shall take away 
 thy nose and thy ears," which Jerome states was 
 actuall)' the punishment of adultery in those na- 
 tions. One or both of these mutilations, most 
 generally that of the nose, were also inflicted by 
 other nations, as tlie Persians and Egyptians, and 
 even the Romans ; but we suspect that among the 
 former, as wit', the latter, it was less a judicial 
 punishment than a summary infliction by the 
 aggrieved party. It is more than once alluded ttf 
 as such by the Roman poets : thus Martial asks, 
 
 ' Quis tibi persuasit nares aiiscindere mu!cho?' 
 and in Virgil (^E/i. vi. 496; we read — 
 
 ' Ora, manusque ambas, populataque tempora 
 raptis 
 Auribus, et truncas inhonesto vulnere nares.' 
 
 It would also seem that these mutilations were 
 more usually inflicted on the male than the 
 female adulterer. Im Egypt, however, cutting olf 
 the nose was the female punishment, and tlie man 
 was beaten terribly with rods (Diod. Sic. i. 89, 
 90). The respect with which the conjugal union 
 was treated in that country in itie earliest times 
 is manifested in the liistory of Abraham (Getu 
 xii. 19;. 
 
 ADULTERY. TRIAL OF. It would b« 
 unjust to the spirit of the Mosaical legislation 
 to suppose that the trial of tlie suspected wiffe 
 by the bitter water, called the Water of Jcct- 
 lousy, was by it first j;roduced. It is to be 
 regarded as an attempt to mitigate the evils of, 
 and to bring under lesral control, an old custom 
 which could not be entirely abrogated. The ori- 
 ginal usage, which it was designed to mitigate, 
 was probably of the kind which we still find in 
 Western Africa ; and a comparison of the two may 
 suggest the real points of the evil which the law 
 of Moses was designed to rectify, and the real ad- 
 vantages which it was calculated to secure. The 
 matter deserves particular attention, inasmuch 
 as it relates to the oTily ordeal in use among the 
 Israelites, or sanctioned by their law. The illus* 
 trative details of the Trial by Red Water, as it ia 
 called, vary among different nations, in minute 
 particulars, which it would be tiresome to distin- 
 guish. The substantial facts may be embodied 
 in one statement: — 
 
 The ordeal :s, in some tribes, confined to the 
 case of adultery y but in others it is used in all cases. 
 Differences, rather than resemblances, must indi- 
 cate the (jaiticular points in which the Mosaical 
 law, while retaining the form, abandoned the 8' J*
 
 ADULTERY. 
 
 itance and obviated the eiils of tbis insfitudon. 
 riie d.fl'frences are in tai;t, all-important. In 
 Africa thcdrink is po s<)nous,antl calculated to pro- 
 duce theellectswliicli tlie oath imprecates; whereas 
 the 'water of jealousy,' however niiple;isant, was 
 prepared in a prcscril)t;d manner, witli ing-redients 
 known to all lo be perfectly innocuous. It could not 
 therefore injure the innocent; and its action upon 
 the guilty must have resulteil from tlie conscious- 
 ness of having- committed a liorrible perjury, which 
 crime, wlien tlie oath was so solemnly contirnied 
 by the draught, and attended by such awful im- 
 precations, Wii3 believed to be visitable with im- 
 mediate death from heaven. It caimot be too 
 strongly inculcated, tliat in the African examples 
 the eifect is not ascribed to the drink, but to a 
 supernatural visitation upon a perjury which the 
 confirmation of the oath-drink renders so awful. 
 This name of 'oath-drink" is commonly apjjlied 
 to it on tiie Gold Coast. And it was, iloubtless, 
 to strengthen such an imj)ression that this awful 
 drink, so much dreailed in Africa, was with the 
 Jews exclusively appropriated to the only ordeal 
 trial among them. On the Gold Coast the oath- 
 drink (not. of course, poisonous) is used as a 
 contiiination oi' all oaths, not only oaths of purga- 
 tion, but of accusation, or even of obligation. In 
 all cases it is accompanied with an imprecation 
 that the Fetish may destroy them if they speak 
 uiitnily, or do not perform the terms of their 
 obligation; and it is firmly believed tliat no one 
 who is perjured under this form of oath will live 
 an hour (Villault; Bosnian). Doubtless tlie im- 
 pression with respect to this more ordinary oath- 
 drink is tU'riveil from obser\ation of tlie efl'ects 
 attending the drink used in the actual ordeal ; 
 aiid it is our object to show tliat the popular 
 anil general opinion regards such an oath as of 
 so solemn a nature that perjury is sure to bring 
 down immediate punishment. The red-water as 
 an ordeal is confined to crimes of the worst class. 
 These are murder, adultery, witchcraft. Perhaps 
 this arises less from choice than from the fact that 
 such crimes are not only the highest, but are the 
 least capable of that direct proof for which the 
 ordeal is intended as a substitute. A party is 
 accused : if he denies the crime, he is required 
 to drink the red water, and, on refusing, is deemed 
 guilty of the oflence. The trial is so much 
 dreaded that innocent persons often confess them- 
 selves guilty, in order to avoid it. And yet, 
 the immediate ell'ect is supposed to result less 
 from tlie water itself tlian from the terrible oath 
 with whicli it is drunk; for there are instances 
 which show that the draught is the seal and sanc- 
 tion of the most solemn oatli which barbarous ima- 
 ginations liave been able to devi.se; anil in kind it 
 is the same — if we may be forgiven the familiar 
 illustration — which is heard but too ol"ten in our 
 own land, 'May this drink be my ])oison, if — .' So 
 the person who drinks the red water invokes tiie 
 Fetish to destroy him if he is really guilty 
 of the offence with which he is charged. The 
 drink is made by an infusion i'n water of jiieces 
 of a certain tree, or of herlis. It is highly 
 poisonous in itself; ami, if rightly pre])ared, the 
 only cliance of escape is the rejection of it by the 
 stomacli, in wliich case the party is deemetl inno- 
 cent; as he also is if, being retained, it has no 
 sensiiile eifect, which can only be tiie case when 
 the priests (so Ui call fhem\ who have the ma- 
 
 ADULTERY. 
 
 7» 
 
 nagement of the matter, are influenced by jirivi'te 
 considerations, or by reference to tlie probabilities 
 of tiie case, to prepare the draught with a view to 
 accpiittal. Tiie impn'cations upon tlie accused if 
 he be guilty, are repeated in an awful manner by 
 the priests, and the efl'ect is watched \<'ry keenly. 
 If the party seems affected by the draught, like 
 one intoxicatetl. and begins to fo;ini at the mouth, 
 he is considered undoubtedly guilty, ami is slain 
 on the spot; or else he is left to the ojieration of 
 the jioisonous draught, which causes the belly to 
 swell anil burst, and occasions death (Bariiot, 
 p. 126; Bosm.in. p. 14S; Artus, in De Bry, vi. 62; 
 Villault, p. 191 ; Corry's Windward Coast, ]). 71 ; 
 Church Missionari/ Paper, No. 17 ; Da\ is"3 
 Jovnial, p. 24). 
 
 The resemblances and the difl'erences between 
 this and the trial by bitter water, as described in 
 Num. v. 11-31, will be apparent on comjiarisori. 
 The object, namely, to disajver a crime incajiable 
 of being proved by evidence, is the same ; tlie oath, 
 and a draught as its sanction, are essentially the 
 same ; and similar also are the effects upon the 
 guilty. If, therefore, we supjxise the ]ire-<'xisting 
 custom to have been analogous to that which has 
 been described, similar jiractices may be produced 
 from other quarters. Hesiod, in his Theoyonia, re- 
 ports that when a falsehood had been told by any 
 of the gods, Jupiter was wont to send Iris to bring 
 some water out of the river Styx in a goldin 
 vessel ; upon this an oath was taken, and if the god 
 swore falsely, he remained for a \\hole year without 
 life or motion. Theie was an ancient tem])le 
 in Sicily, in which were two very deep basins, 
 called Delli, always full of hot and sulpiiurous 
 water, but never running over. Here the more 
 solemn oatiK were taken ; and perjuries were im- 
 mediately punished most severely (Diod. Sic. xi. 
 67). TJiis is also mentioned by Aristotle. Silius 
 Italicus, Virgil, and Maciobiiis ; and from tlie 
 first it would seem that the oath was written ujion 
 a ticket and cast into the water. Tfie ticket 
 floated if the oath was true, and sunk if it wiis 
 false. In the latter case the jninislinn'nt wliich 
 followed was considered as an act of Divine ven- 
 geance. 
 
 The result of these views and illustrations wilj 
 be, that the trial for suspected adultery liy the bit- 
 ter water amounted to this — that a woman sus- 
 pected of adultery by her husliand was allowed to 
 repel the charge by a public oath of nurgation. 
 wliich oath was designedly made sc scienm in it- 
 self, and was iittendeil by sucti awful circum- 
 stances, that it was in the highest degree unlikely 
 that it would be dared by any woman not sup- 
 ])orted by the consciousness of innocence. And 
 the fact that no instance of tlie actual apjdi- 
 cation of the ordeal occurs in Scriiituie, atlbrds 
 some counteii.ince to the assertion of the Jewi>h 
 writers — that the trial was so much dreaded by 
 the women, that those who were really guilty ge- 
 nerally avoided it by confession; and tlw' thus 
 the trial itself early fell into disuse. And if, as 
 we have supjiotied, this mode of trial was only 
 tolerated by Moses, the ultimate neglect of il 
 must liave been desired and intended by him. Ii 
 later times, 'ndeed, it was disputed in the Jewish 
 schools, whether the husband *as bound to prose- 
 cute his v/ife to this extremity, or wliet.ner it was 
 not lawful tor liim to connive at and pardon her 
 act, if he were so inclined. There were some who
 
 80 
 
 ADUMMIM. 
 
 held that he w as Ijounil by his duty to jjrosecute, 
 while others malnlained that it was left to his 
 pleasure (/". Hievos. tit. Sotah, fol. 16, 2). - 
 
 From tlie same source we learn tliat this form 
 of trial was tirially abrogated ai)Out forty years 
 before the destruction of Jerusalem. The reason 
 assigned is, tliat tlie men themselves were at that 
 time generally adulterous ; and that God would 
 not fullil the imprecations oi the ordeal oath upon 
 the wife while the husband was guilty oi' the 
 same crime (John viii. 1-S). 
 
 Anui.TEuv, in the symbolical language of the 
 Old Testament, )neans idolatry and apostacy from 
 the worsliip of the true God (Jer. iii. S, 9 ; Ezek. 
 \\\. 32 ; xxiii. 37 ; also Rev. ii. 22). Hence an 
 Adulteress meant an apostate church or city, par- 
 ticularly ' the daughter of Jerusalem," or tlie 
 Je.vish churcli and people (Isa. i. 21 ; Jer. iii. 6, 
 8, 9 ; E^ek. xvi. 22 ; xxiii. 7). Tliis figure resulted 
 from the primary one, which tlescribes the con- 
 nection between God and his sejjarated people as 
 a marriage bet.veen him and them. By an appli- 
 cation of the same figure, ' An adulterous genera- 
 tion " (Matt. xii. 39; xvi. 4; Mark viii. 38) 
 means a faithless and impious generation. 
 
 ADUMMIM (D"'?3"IN; ; Sept. 'ASau^iV ; va- 
 rious readings are 'A5ojU/^i/^ ,'Aboixfxi, and 'EScu- 
 ulfi), a place which is only twice named in Scrij)- 
 ture. Once (Josh. xv. 7), where, from the context, 
 it seems to indicate the border between Judah and 
 Benjamin, and that it was an ascending road 
 B''01X n^yO) between Gilgal (and also Jeri- 
 cho) and Jerusalem. The second notice (Josh. 
 xviii. 17) adds no further information, but repeats 
 'the asceut to Adummhia.' Most commentators take 
 the name to mean the place of blood (Jxom the Heb. 
 DT), and follow Jerome, who finds the place in 
 the dangerous or mountainous part of the roail 
 between Jerusalem and Jericho, and supposes that 
 it was so called from the frequent effusion of 
 blood by the robbers, by whom it was much infested. 
 In his time it was called corruptly Mali domin ; 
 in Greek, "hvafia. ; in Latin, Ascensus rufforum, 
 5ive rohentiam. Tliese are curious interpretations 
 )f the original word, which is most likely from 
 DIM, and merely denotes the redness of the soil 
 or rock. It does not appear that any traveller 
 mentions the geological aspect of the spot, and 
 therefore this must be regarded only as a probable 
 conjecture. However, as a difficult pass in a de- 
 solate rocky region, Ijetween important cities, the 
 part of the road indicated by Jerome, and all after 
 him, was as likely to be infested by robbers in 
 earlier times as in those of Jerome and at the pre- 
 sent day. Indeed, the character of the road was so 
 notorious, that Christ lays the scene of the parable 
 of the good Samaritan (Luke x.) upon it ; and Je- 
 rome infoims us tliat Adummim or Adommim was 
 believed to be the place where the tra\eller (taken 
 as a real person) ' fell among thieves. ' He adds 
 tb.at a fort and garrison was maintained here for 
 the safeguard of travellers (Jerome, in Loc. Heb. 
 Addomim, et ill Epit. Paxdw). The travellers 
 of the sixteenth and seventeentii centuries noticed 
 the ruins of a castle, and supposed it the same as 
 that mentioned by Jerome (Zualkirt. iv. 30 j ; but 
 the judicious Nau ( Voyac/e Nouveau de la Terre- 
 Sainte, p. 319) j erceived that this castle tielonged 
 to the time of tlie Crusades. Not far from this 
 •pot v/ds a khan, called the ' Samaritan"* khan " 
 
 ETHIOPIA. 
 
 (fe Khdn du Samaritain'), in the belief that ^ 
 was the ' inn to which the Samaritan brought the 
 wounded traveller. The travellers of the present 
 century mention the spot and neighbuurhood 
 nearly in the same terms as those of older date; 
 and describe tlie ruins as those of ' a convetit 
 and a khan" (Hardy, 193). They all represent 
 the road as still ini"ested by robbers, from whom 
 some of them (as Sir F. Henniker) have not 
 escaped without danger. Tlie place thus indi- 
 cated is about eight miles from Jerusalem, and 
 four from Jericho. 
 
 ADVOCATE (riapd/cATjTos), one who pleads tlic 
 cause of another ; also one who exhorts, defends, 
 comforts, prays for another. It is an appellation 
 given to the Holy Spirit by Christ (John xiv. IC ; 
 XV. 26 ; xvi. 7), and to Christ himself by an 
 apostle (1 John ii. I ; see also Rom. viii. 31 ; 
 Heb. vii. 25). 
 
 In the forensic sense, advocates or pleaders were 
 not known to the Jews until they came under the 
 dominion of the Romans, and were obliged tio 
 transact their law aflairs after the Roman manner. 
 Being then little conversant with the Roman 
 laws, and with the forms of the jurists, it was ne- 
 cessary for them, in pleading a cause before tlie 
 Roman magistrates, to obtain the assistance of 
 a Roman lawyer or advocate, who was well versed 
 in the Greek and Latin languages (Otti Spicil. 
 Crim. p. 325). In all the Roman provinces such 
 men were found, who devoted their time and laliour 
 to the jileading of causes and the transacting of 
 other legal business in the provincial courts (Lam- 
 prid. Vit. Alex. Scv. c. 44). It also appears (Cic. 
 pro Ccelio, c. 3.0) that many Roman youtlis who 
 had devoted themselves to forensic business used 
 to repair to the jirovinces with the consuls and 
 praetors, in order, by managing the causes of tlie 
 jjrovincials, to fit themselves for more important 
 ones at Rome. Such an advocate was Tertullus, 
 whom the Jews employed to accuse Paul before 
 Felix (Acts xxiv. 1) ; for although 'Prircip, the 
 term ajiplied to him, signifies primarily an oreitor 
 or speaker, yet it also denotes a plcailer or advo- 
 cate (Kuinoel, C'oOT/«eM^. and Bloomfield, Uecett^. 
 Synopt. a.(\ Act. xxiv. 2) [Accuser]. 
 
 ADYTUM, that which is inacce.ssil)le or im 
 penetrable: and hence considered as descriptive 
 of the holy of holies in the temple of Jenisalem, 
 and of the innermost chambers, or penetralia, of 
 other edifices accouTited sacred, and of the secret 
 places to which the priests only were admitted. 
 It is used metapliorically by ecclesiastical writers, 
 and employed to signify the heart and conscience 
 of a man, and sometimes the deep, spiritual 
 meaning of the Divine word. — H. S. 
 
 ^:GYPT. [Egypt.] 
 
 ^LIA CAPITOLINA. [Jerusalem.] 
 
 JENOX {Mvdov, from X\TV, fountain; Buxt. 
 Lex. Ch. Bab. Talm. 1601), the name of a place 
 near Salem, where John baptized (John iii. 23) ; 
 the reason given, ' because ttiere was much watei 
 there," would suggest that he baptized at the 
 springs from which the place took its name. On 
 the situation of yEnon nothing certain has been 
 determined, although Eusebius places it eight 
 Roman miles south of Scythojiolis (Bethshan)^ 
 and fifty-three nortli-cast of Jesusalem. 
 
 ^ERA. [Chronology.] 
 
 A:THI0PIA. [Etuiopia.I
 
 AFFINITY. 
 
 AFFINITY is relations! lip l>y marriage, <as 
 distingiiishetl IVotn consangidnUij, wnicli is rela- 
 tionsliij) l)y 1)1(k)(1. Marriages Iwiween jiersons 
 riiiw relafeil, in various degrees, wliidi ]irevious 
 usage, in tiill'erent conditions of society, had al- 
 lowed, were forbidden liy the law of Moses. These 
 degrees are enumerated in Lev. xviii. 7, sq. The 
 examijles before the law are those of Cain and 
 Abel, wlio, as the necessity of the case recjnired, 
 married tlieir own sisters. Abraham nianied 
 Sirah, the daugliter of his father l)y ;uiotlier wife : 
 and Jacob married thv' two sisters Leah and 
 Rachel. In tiie first instance, and even in the 
 s«cond, there was an obvious consanguinity, and 
 only tlie l;ist otTeied a jirevious relationship of 
 aflinity merely. So also, in the jiroiiibitlon of tlie 
 law, a consanguinity can t)e traced in wiiat aie 
 usually set down as degrees of alMnity merely. 
 The degrees of real aflinity interdicted are, that a 
 man shall not (noi a woman in the coriespond- 
 ing relations) marry — 1. his father's widow (not 
 his own mother) ; 2. the daughter of his father's 
 wife by another husband ; 3. the widow of his 
 paternal untde; I. nor his broither"* widow if he 
 has left children by her ; but, if not, he was 
 bound to marry her to raise up children to his 
 deceased brother [Levirate Law]. The other 
 •^frictions are connecte I witli the condition of 
 polygamy, and they jirohibit a man from having 
 — 1. a mother and hei' dauijhier for wives at 
 the same time; 2. or two sisters for wives at 
 the same time. These prohit'ilions, although 
 founded in Oriental notions, adapted to a parti- 
 cular condition of society, and connected with 
 the peculiarities of the Levitical marriage law, 
 have been imjiorted wholesale into our canon law. 
 The fitness of this is doul)ted by many : b\it as, 
 apart from any moral questions, the ]iroiiibited 
 marriages are such as ^tw would, in the present 
 condition of Euro.neari society, desire to contract, 
 and such as would be deemed repugnant to good 
 taste and correct manners, there is little real 
 matter of regret in this adoption of the Levitical 
 aw. Indeed, the objections to this adoption have 
 rested chiedy uoon one point ; and that happens 
 to l)e a point in which the law itself h^nipens to 
 have been egregiously misunderstood. This is in 
 the injunction vi/hich, under jjermitted ]X)lygamy, 
 forbade a man to have two sisters at once ; an in- 
 junction which has been construed, under the 
 Christian law, which allows but one wife, to apply 
 equally to the case of a man marrying the sister 
 of a deceased wile. The law itself, ho-.vever, is so 
 plain, that it is dillicult to conceive how its true 
 object — concerning whicli nearly all commentators 
 are agreed — could have lieen thus interpieted. It 
 is rendered in oiu' version, ' Neither shalt thou 
 take a wife to her sister, to vex her, to nncuver 
 her nakechiess, beside .tJie .'thisr in /wr lifetime.^ 
 Clear as this seems, it is still c.learer if, with 
 Gesenius and others, we take the word TIV. 
 Tendered to vex, to mean to rivtl, as in tlie 
 Sept., Arabic, ami Vulgate. The Targum of 
 Jonathan, the Mishna, and the celcfirated Jewish 
 eommentatois Jarclii and Ben Gerson, are satisfied 
 that ttoo sisters at once xre. intejided ; and '..'lere 
 •eems an obvious di'si:rn to present the occurjience 
 <if .•such imsecKiiy jealiiusie.> and c.inleiitions {le- 
 tween sister-wives as eu.biltored the li/e of Ja<rob 
 —the fatlier vt the twelve trilies. Tlie more 
 (econdite sense nas i»een eiti;icfed. witJi ratlier 
 
 AGABUS. 
 
 81 
 
 ungentle violence to the principle.s of Hebrew 
 construction, by making 'vex her' the antece- 
 derit of ' in her lifetime.' instead of ' take her 
 sister to her, in her iifelinie.' Under this view 
 it is explained, that the married sister siioidd 
 not be ' vexed' in iier lifetime l)y the jirosprct 
 that her sister might succeed her. It may I* 
 safely said that such an iilea woidd never 
 have occurred in the Kast, where unman icil 
 sisters are far moie rarely than in Kuroje l/iougiit 
 info such accpiaintance witii the husbazid of tlie 
 inarried sister as to give occasion ibr such ' vex- 
 ation' or 'livalry' as this. Yet, this view {,( 
 the matter, which is completely exjiloded among 
 sound bililical critics, has received the sanction of 
 several Christiart Councils yC<^Hril. lUiber. can 
 61; Aurat. can. 17; Auxcr. can. 30); and is 
 perhaps not calculated to do much liaini, ex- 
 cejit under peculiar circumstan<;es, and except 
 as it may jirove a snare to some sinceie tint 
 weak consciences. It may be remarked, that in 
 those codes of law which most ri'^^iiiMe that of 
 Mo.ses on the general subject, no jiiohibition of 
 the marriage of two sisters in atKccusion can be 
 founil. 
 
 AFFIRMATIVES. Among the Jews the for- 
 mula of assent or affirmatioti was ri'15'^ |2 
 <ru fliras, thou hast said, or, thou hast rit/hth/ 
 'said. It is stated by Aryda and others that this 
 is the prevailing mode in which a jierson expresses 
 his assent, at this day, in Lebanon, especially 
 when he does not wish to a.ssert anything in ex- 
 press terms. This explains the ansuei of our 
 Saviour to the high-priest Caiaphiw (Matt. xxvi. 
 64), when he was asked whether he was the Christ, 
 the son of Goil, and rejilieil <rii eliras (see aLsu 
 Matt. xxvi. 2')). Instances occur m the Talmud • 
 thus, ' A certain man was asked. " Is Rabbi <lead : " 
 He answered, " Ye have said ." on which they 
 rent their clothes" — taking it f.ir granted from 
 this answer that it was so (J*. Ilieros. Kilaim. 
 xxxii. 2). All readers even of translations are fa- 
 miliar with a frequent elegancy of the Scriptures, or 
 rather of the Hebrew language, in using an afKrm- 
 ative and negative together, by which tlie sense is 
 rendered more em])hatic : sometimes the negative 
 first, as Ps. cxviii. 17, ' I shall not die, but live,' 
 &c. ; sometimes the negative first, as Isa. xxxviii. 1, 
 ' Thou shalt die, and not live.' In John i. 20. 
 there is a remarkable instance of emphasis ])ro- 
 duced by a negative being placed between two 
 aflirmatives— /cai tl/to.W-yTjtre, Koi ovk ripvi)<TaTo. 
 KoX icjxoX6yrj(rtv — ' And he confessed, and denietl 
 noi, but confessed, I am not the Christ.' 
 
 AFRICA.. This ' quarter of the world' is not 
 mentioned its such by any general name in Scrip- 
 ture, although some of" its iegi(iiis are indicated. 
 It is thought by some, however, tiiat Africa, or ;v» 
 mucii of it a.s was then known, is denoteil by ' the 
 hmd of Ham" in several of the Psalms. But we 
 are inclined to think that the context rather re- 
 stricts this designation to Kgyjit. Whether .A. frifca 
 was really ' the land of Ham, that is, was peopled 
 by the descendants of H.ini, is quite anothei 
 question [Ha.mI. 
 
 AG.\BUS (■'A7a5oy; either from the Hebrew 
 23n, a lijcuxt, or 3y?, to love), the name of 
 ' a prophet,' siip|Kised to have lie>li one of the 
 sev«;nty disciples of Christ. He, with olherx, 
 came from Judiea U* Ai'tioch, wl>ile P.uil aiiii
 
 62 
 
 AG AG. 
 
 AGAPK. 
 
 Bamabafl (a.d. 43) were there, and announced nn 
 approaching famine, which actually occurred the 
 fallowing year. Some writers su{>p)se that the 
 Jiiinine was general; but most niodern commen- 
 tators unite in understanding that the large terms 
 of trie oi\i;inii],"0\r]v TTjv olKov/xeuvv, A])])]}' not 
 to the whole ivorld, nor even to tiie whole Roman 
 empire, but, as in Luke ii. 1, to Juda-a only. 
 Statements respecting four famines, which oc- 
 curred in the reign of Claudius, are jiroduced by 
 the commentators who sujjport this view ; and as 
 all the countries put together would not make up 
 a tenth ])art of even the Roman empire, they 
 think it ])lain that the words must be understood 
 To ajjply to that famine which, in the fourth year 
 of (Jlaudius, overspread Palestine. The jx'or 
 Jews, in general, were then relieved by the Queen 
 of Adiabene, who sent to purchase corn in Egypt 
 fur them (Joseph. Antiq. xx. 2, 0) ; and for the 
 relief of the Cliristians in that country contn- 
 liMtions were raised by the brethren at Antioch, 
 and conveyed to Jerusalem by Paul and Biir- 
 nabas (Acts xi. 27-30). Many years after, this 
 same Agabus met Paul at Csesarea, and warned 
 him of tlie suHierings which awaited him if he 
 prosecuted his journey to Jenisalem. 
 
 AGAG (JJX ; Sept. 'A^ay), the name of 
 two kings of the Amalekites, and perhaps a 
 common name oi' all their kings, like Pharaoh 
 in Egypt (comp. Nun;, xxiv. 7 ; 1 Sam. xv. S, 9, 
 20, 32). The first of these passages would imply 
 that the king of the Amalekites was, then at least, 
 a greater monarcli, and his people a greater 
 people, than is commonly imagined [Amai.e- 
 KiTE.s]. The latter references are to tliat ki'ng 
 of the Amalekites who was spared by Saul, con- 
 trary to the solemn vow of devotement to de- 
 struction, whereby the nation, as such, had of old 
 precluded itself from giving any quarter to that 
 people (Exod. xvii. 11 ; Num. xiv. 45). Hence, 
 when Samuel arrived in the camp of Saul, he 
 ordered Agag to be brought forth. He came 
 ' pleasantly," deeming secure the life which the 
 king had spareil. But tlie prophet ordered him 
 to be cut in i>ieces ; and the expression which he 
 employed — ' As thy sword hath made women 
 childless, so shall thy mother be childless among 
 women' — indicates that, apart from the obliga- 
 tions of the vow, some such example of retributive 
 justice was intended, as had been exercised in the 
 case of Adonibezek ; or, in other words, that Agag 
 had made himself infamous by the same treat- 
 ment of some prisoners oT distinction (jirdbably 
 Israelites) as he now received from Samuel. The 
 unusual mode in which his ileath was inflicted 
 strongly supports this conclusion. 
 
 AGAGITE, used as a Gentile name for Ama«- 
 lekite in Est. iii. 1, 10; viii. 3, 5. 
 
 AGAPE, Agap-'e {aya-KT)., ayairai), the Greek 
 term for love, used by ecclesiastical writers (most 
 frequently in tiie jilural) to signify the social 
 meal of tlie jnimitive Christians, which generally 
 accomjjaiiied the Eucharist. Much learned re- 
 search has been spent in tracing the origin of this 
 custom ; but though considerable obscurity may 
 rest en the details, the general historical connec- 
 tion is tolerably obvious. It is true that ttie 
 iftwoi and iraipiai, and other simila' institutions 
 ot Greece and Rome, presented some points of re- 
 ■erablance wVich facilitate! l)oth the adoption and 
 
 the abuse of the Agapa: by the Gentile coiiverfi otf 
 (Christianity; but we cannot consider them as th« 
 direct models of the latter. If we redect on th« 
 jirofoimd imjHesuion which tlie traTisactions oi 
 ' the night on which the Lord was betrayed ' (1 
 Cor. xi. 23) must have made on the minds of 
 the apostles, nothing can be conceived more na- 
 tural, or in closer accordance with the genius ot 
 the new dispensation, than a wish to j,«rpetuate 
 the commemoration of his death in connection 
 with their social meal (Neander, Lcboi Jesu, 
 p. 6 J3 ; Historij of the Plantiiui, &:c. of the ChriS' 
 tian Chnreh, vol. i. 27, Edinb.' 1S42). The pri- 
 mary celebration of the lilucharist had impressed 
 a lacredness on the previous repast (com]), iady- 
 61TUV avToov, Matt. xxvi. 26; Maik xiv. 22, with 
 fjLfra rh SenTPrja-ai, Luke xxii. 20; 1 Cor. xi. 25); 
 and when to this consideration we add the ardent 
 faith and love of the new converts on the one hand, 
 and the loss of property with the disruption of old 
 connections and attachments on the other, whicli 
 must have heightened the feelingof brotherhood, we 
 need nor look furtliertoaccount for the institution of 
 the Agaj^ae, at once a symbol of Christian love and 
 a striking exemplificaTion of its benevolent energy. 
 However soon il.s jiurity was soiled, at first it was 
 not undeserving of the eulogy jiionounced by the 
 great orator of the chuich — iOos K(xK\i<Troy kcUL 
 XpTjfri/UioTaTov icaX yap aya^Tjs vnoOeats i]V, KoX 
 TTfi/ias irapa/xudia, Kal tvKtjtov <rw(ppovi<Ty.6s, Koi 
 ra-Knvo<ppo(T{jv7)s diSaaKa\ia. ' A custom most 
 beautiful and most beiielicial ; fur it was a sup- 
 porter of love, a solace of poverty, a moderator of 
 wealth, and a discipline of humility !' 
 
 Thus the common meal and the Eucharist 
 formed together one whole, and were conjointly 
 denominated Se^wvov tov Kvpiou, SeiTrrov Kvpianiv, 
 and ayain). They were also signified (according 
 to Moslieim, Neander, and other eminent critics) 
 by the phrases kAooj/tcs dprov (Acts ii. 4G), K\dcr:s 
 TOV &pTov (Acts ii. 42). KXaaai aprov (Acts xx. 
 7). We find the term dya.Kai thus applied once, 
 at least, in the New Testament (Jude 12), 
 'These are spots in your feasts of charity ' (eV rcTs 
 aydirais i/xo)!'). The leading in 2 Pet. ii. 13, is 
 of doulit!'ul authoiity : 'S(x)tsan(l blemishes, living 
 luxuriously in tlieir Agapse ' {^vTpv<pdi>vres iv reus 
 dryanais alnwv) ; but the coiuiiion reading ig, ej» 
 rais aTrarais auTOji/, ' in their own deccivings.' 
 The phrase dydrrriu tcohIv wa.s eaily employed in 
 the sense of celeiirating tlie luicharist; thus in 
 the e))istle of Ignatius to the chuich at Smyrna 
 {(KK\7iaia T7? ovfff tV ^fxvptn]), ^ viii. oitK i^6v 
 iaT\v X'^P's 'Toi' cTTiCKOTrou, oiire. Bami^nv, oiire 
 ayaTTTiv iroif?;'. In ^ vii. dyairai/ appears to refer 
 more especially to the Agapai. 
 
 By ecclesiastical writeis several synonymes are 
 used for the Agapae, sucli as ffvjxiToina (BaLamon, 
 ad Can. xxvii. Concil. Laodicen.); Kcival rpd-^f- 
 (ai, evtaxia, Koival karidcnis. Koiva. ffv/j.'n6(Tia 
 (Chrysostom) ; 5e7irva Koii/d (CEcuuieuius) ; (Tva- 
 ffiTid Kal (Tvfx-KSffia (Zonaras). 
 
 Though the Agapae usually )>receded the Eu- 
 charist, yet they are not alluded to in Justin 
 Martyr's description of the latter (Apol. i. § 65, 
 67); while Tertullian, on the contrary, in his ac- 
 count of the Agapae, makes no distinct mention of 
 the ?2ucliarist. ' The nature of our Cana,' he sayg, 
 'may be gathered from its name, which is tlia 
 Greek term for love (dilcctio). Hoviever much it 
 maj- cost us, it is real gain to incur i^uch ex]:ieiisa
 
 AGAPE. 
 
 ill the ctiiise of jii^ty : tor we aid the {wor by this 
 refreshment ; we do not sit down to it till we 
 have first tasted of prayer to God (iioii pritis dis- 
 cumbitur, quam oratio ad Dciiiii preei/UJitetur) ; 
 we eat to satisfy our huns^er ; we drink no moie 
 tlian belits the temjieratc ; we feast as those who 
 recollect that they are to spend tlie night in de- 
 votion ; we converse as those who know tliat the 
 Lord is an ear-witness. Af'^r water lor washing 
 hands, and lights have been brought in, every 
 one is required to sing something to the praise 
 of God, either from the Scriptures or from his own 
 thoughts; by this me;ms, if any one has indulged 
 in excess, he is detected. Tlie fe;ist is closed with 
 prayer.' Contributions or oblatioi s of provisions 
 ttnd money were made on tlie^e occasions, and the 
 surplus was placed in the hands of the presiding 
 elder (6 irpoecrrciis — compare 1 Tim. v. 17, oi 
 wpofffTuTfs irpfcr&vTepoi), by wliom it was ap- 
 plied to the relief of orphans and widows, the sick 
 and destitute, prisoners and strangers (Justin. 
 Apol. i. 67). 
 
 Allusions to the KvpiaKhv Sflirfou are to be met 
 with in heathen writers. Thus Pliny, in his cele- 
 brated e])istle to the emperor Trajan, after de- 
 scribing the meeting of the Christians tor worship 
 represents them as assembling again at a later 
 hour, ' ad capiendum ribum, protniscmon tamcn 
 et innoxium.'' By the phrase ' cibum promiscmaii ' 
 (Augustine remarks) we are not to understand 
 merely food partaken in common with others, but 
 common food, such as is usually eaten; the term 
 innoxium also intimates that it was perfectly 
 wholesome and lawful, not consisting, for ex- 
 amnle, of human Hesh (lor, among other odious im- 
 putations, that of cannibalism had been cast upon 
 the Christians; whicli, to prejudiced minds, might 
 I'eiive some apparent support from a misinterpre- 
 tation of our Lord's language in John vi. 53, ' Un- 
 less ye eat the Hesli and drink tlie blood of the Son 
 of man ')., nor of herbs prepared witli incantations 
 and magical rites. Liician also, in his account 
 of the philosopher Peregrinus, tells us that when 
 imprisoned on the charge of being a Christian, he 
 was visited by his brethren in the faith, wlio 
 brought with them delizva iroiKiXa, whicli is gene- 
 rally understood to mean the provisions which 
 were reserved for the absent members of the 
 church at the celebration of the Loril's Sujiper. 
 Gesner remarks, on this expression, ' Ac/apas, 
 offerente unoquoque aliquid, quod una consume- 
 rent; hinc iroiKiKa, non d luxu.^ 
 
 FroDi the passages in tl>e Epistles of Jude and 
 Peter, already quoted, anil more particularly 
 from the language of Paul in I Cor. xi., it ap- 
 pears that at a very early perioil the Agapae were 
 perverted from their original design : the rich 
 frequently practised a selfish indulgence, to the 
 neglect of their ]X)orer brethren: (Kaaros rh thiov 
 SuTTvoy vpo\afi^av€i (1 Cor. xi. 21); i.e. the rich 
 feasted on the provisions they brought, without 
 waiting for the poorer memlters, or granting them 
 a {wrtion of their abundance. They apj)ear to 
 have imitated the Grecian mode of entertaintnent 
 called hilirvov airh (TwiipiSos (see Xenophon's jVe- 
 morabilia, lii. 14; Neander's History of the 
 Planting of the Christian Church, vol. i. (English 
 transl.), p. 292). 
 
 On account of these and similar inegularities, 
 and probably in ])art to elude the notice of their 
 persecutors, the Christians, about the middle of 
 
 AGAPE. 
 
 uc 
 
 the seco.id century, freijuently relebraled the Kti- 
 charist by itself and before daybreak {anteliuanit 
 cretibus) (Terlullian, De Cor. Militis, ^ 3). From 
 Pliny's Epistle it also apjears that the Agapte 
 were susi.ected by the Roman autiiorities of be- 
 longing to the chiss of Iletjeria- (tTaipiat), unions 
 or secret societies, which were often employed for 
 jiolitical jiurposes, ;uid iis such denounced by the 
 imjierial edicts ; for he says (referring to the 
 * cibum promisinnmi,' &c.) ' quod ipstim fcLCcre 
 desiisse post cdictum incuin, quo secundum man- 
 data tuu Uelte-rias esse vetueram^ (PI in. lip. 9ti, 
 al. 97). 
 
 At a still later period the Agapa; were 6ul)jecled 
 to strict regulation by various councils. Thus 
 by the 2Nth canon of the Council of Laodicca it 
 Wiis forbidden to hold them in churches : on oti 
 5«r iv rots KvpiaKois ^ iv rats iKKK-qaiai^ ras 
 Keyofifvas aydwas iroiiLV, ual iv tw oiK(f rov 
 &iov icrdieiv Kal aKov^ira (ciccuhitus) arp{t>vvvfiv. 
 At the Council of Carthage (a.u. 397) it was 
 ordered (Can. 29) that none sliould partake of the 
 Eucharist unless they had previously abstained 
 from food : * Ut sucramenta altaris nonnisi d 
 jejunis hominibus celebrentur ;' but it is added, 
 ' excepto uno die anniversario, quo coenu domini 
 cclcbratur.' Tliis exception favours tlie suppo- 
 sition that the Agapa; were originally held in 
 close imitation of the L;ist Supper, i.e. before, 
 instead of after, the Eucharist. The same jirohi- 
 bition was repeated in the sixth, seventh, and 
 ninth centuries, at the Council of Oi leans (C.'in. 
 12), A.D. 533; in the Trullanian Council at Con- 
 stantinople, A.D. 692 ; and in the council held at 
 Aix-la-Chapelle, a.d. 81G. Yet these regulations 
 were not intende<l to set aside tiie Agapa; alto- 
 gether. In the Council of Gangra in Paphla- 
 gonia (alxiut a.d. 360) a curse was denounced 
 (avdOi/xa etrro)) on v/hoever despised the 2)artakers 
 of the Agapa; or refused to join in them. When 
 Christianity was introduced among the Anglo- 
 Saxons by Austin (a.d. 596), Gregory the Great 
 advised the celebration of tlie Agapa', in bootijs 
 fcinied of the branches of trees, al the consecration 
 of churches. 
 
 Besides the Eucharistic Agap», three othe< 
 kinds aie mentioned l)y ecclesiastical writers : 
 1. Agapa; nalalitiv, held in commemoration of 
 the maityrs (Tiieodoret. L\-«>i//. Vcrit viii. pp. 923- 
 921, edit. Schulz); 2. Ayapee connubialcs, or mar- 
 riage-feasts (Greg. Naz. Epist. i. 14); 3. Affajxr 
 funerales, funeral feasts (Greg. Naz. Cunn. A'.), 
 probably similar to the TnplSfnryoy or veKpSSenr- 
 vov of the Gieeks. 
 
 In modem times social meetings bearing a 
 resemblance to tije Agapa?, and, in allusion 
 to them, termed Love-feasts, have iieen regularly 
 held by the Church of the United Biefhreri, or 
 Moravians, and tlie Wesleyan Methodists; also 
 in Scotland, by the followers of Mr. Robert 
 Sandeman. 
 
 (The following works may be consulted : Hal- 
 let's Notes and Discourses, vol. iii. disc. 6, 1736; 
 ."Vugusle, Ilnndbuch der Christlichen Anhiioloffie, 
 Leipz. IS3G-1S'37; Gieseler, Lcltrbuch dvi Kir- 
 chengcschichte, Bonn, 1^'31-1S40 (this work has 
 lieen translated in America, but is not yet coni- 
 })kted in the orig nal) ; Neander, AUrjemeine 
 Gcschichte, &c., Hamburg, 1^25-1840; Dre-cher, 
 De Veterum Christianomm Aijapis, Giessie, 
 1824 ; Brims, Cutumes Apostolorum et Cona/
 
 84 
 
 AGATE. 
 
 ir.-vil., Bcrolini, 1S30 ; Suicerl Thesaurus, 
 t.tiv. S.ya.Tn}, K\(i(Tis.) — J. E. R. 
 
 AGATE (b^ ; Sept. i-x^r-ns; Vnlg. achates), 
 a precious or rather ornamental stone, which was 
 one of those in the pectoral of the liigh-prie=;t 
 (Exod. xxviii. 10; xxxix. 12). The word nr/atc, in- 
 (le«(l, occurs also in Isa. liv. 12, and Kzel<. xxvii. 
 6, in our translation ; hut in tlie ori},'iiial the word 
 in these texts is aUo^'Ctlicr dilVerent, heinu; HSID 
 [Kadkou], It seems not to have heen tjuestioned 
 tliat s:)me stone of tlie a:;;ate kind is intended. 
 This stone is po]iularly known in this country 
 under the name of Scotch pehhle. Tiieoplnastns 
 describes tlie a^^ate as ' an ele^'ant stone, wiiich 
 took its name from tlie river Achates (now tlie 
 Drillo in the Val di Noto) in Sicily, and w;is 
 sold at a great price ' (Ka\hs Ka\ A(dos koI 6 
 'Axdrris u awh rov 'Axarnv irorafjiov roS eu 
 :^tKf\ia Kol 7ra,'Ae?Tai rifitos, 5'!). This, no doubt, 
 means that tlie stone was first found by the 
 Greeks in the Achates. But it must have been 
 known long before in the East ; and, in fact, there 
 are few countries in which airates of some quality 
 or other are not produced. The finest are those of 
 India; they are plentiful, and sometimes fine, in 
 Italy, Spain, and Germany; but those four>:l in 
 'his country are seldom good. 
 
 We have no evidence that agates were found in 
 Palestine. Thoss i-.sed in the desert were doubt- 
 less brought from Egypt. Pliny saj-s that those 
 found in the neighbourhood of Thebes were usually 
 red, veined with white. He adds tliat these, as 
 well as most other agates, were deen-.ed to be 
 eflectual against scoi-pions; and gives some curious 
 accounts of the pictorial delineations which the 
 variegations of agates occasionally assumed. Many 
 such instances are jiroduced by later authors. 
 Agate is one of the numerous modifications of 
 form under which silica presents itself, almost in 
 a, state of purity, forming 98 jier cent, of the 
 entire mineral. The siliceous particles are not so 
 arranged as to produce the transjiarency of rock 
 crystal, but a semi-pellucid, sometimes almost 
 opaque substance, with a resinous or waxy fiac- 
 ture ; and the various shades of colour arise 
 from minute quantities of iron. The same stone 
 sometimes contains parts of different degrees of 
 translucency, and of various shades of colour; and 
 tiie endless combinations of these produce the 
 beautiful and singular internal foitns, from which, 
 together with the high polish they are capable of 
 receiving, agate»s acquire their value as precious 
 stones. Agates are usually found in detached 
 rounded nodules in that variety of the trap rocks 
 called amygdaloid or mandelstein, and occasion- 
 ally in other rocks. Some of the most marvellous 
 specimens on record were probalily merely fancied, 
 and possibly some were the woik of aiT, as it is 
 known that agates may be artificially stained. 
 From Pliny we learn that in his time agates were 
 /ess valued than they had been in more ancient 
 tunes (Hi^t Nat. xxxvii. 10). The varieties of 
 •he agate are numerous, and are now, as in the 
 rime of Pliny, arranged according to the colour 
 )f their rround. The Scrijrfure text shows the 
 early use .A' this stone for engraving; and several 
 antique agates, engraved with exquisite beautj', 
 are still preserved in the cabinets of the curious. 
 
 AGE. [CHRONoi.oQTf ; Eternity ; Gene- 
 
 ItATlOSJ ; LONOBVITY.I 
 
 A6R 
 
 AGE^ OLD. Tlie sfrongderireof a piolractwd 
 life, and the marked resjiect with which aged jiw- 
 sons were treated among the Jews, are very olYen 
 indicated in the Scriptures. The most striking 
 instance which Job can give of the resjiect in 
 which he was once held, is that even old men stood 
 up as he passed them in the streets (Job xxix. 8), 
 the force of which is illustrated by the injunction 
 in the law, ' Before the hoaiy head thou slialt stand 
 up, and shalt reverence the aged' (Lev. xix. 30). 
 Similar injunctions are repeated in the A])ocrypha, 
 so as to show the de])oitment expected from young 
 men towards tlieir seniors in comjjany. Thus, in 
 descriliing a feast, the author of Ecclesiristicus 
 (xxxii. 3, 7) says, ' Sjjeak thou that art the elder, 
 for it becometh thee. S]ieak, young man, if there 
 be need of thee, and yet scarcely, when thou art 
 twice asked.' 
 
 The attainment of old age is constantly pro- 
 mised or described as a blessing (Gen. xv. 15 ; Job 
 V. 26), and communities are represented as highly 
 favoured in which old people abound (Isa. Ixv. 
 20 ; Zech. viii. 4, 9), while premature death is de- 
 nounced as the greatest of calamities to indivi- 
 duals, and to the families to which they belong 
 (I Sam. ii. 32); the aged are constantly sujijiosed 
 to excel in understanding and judgment (Job xii. 
 20; XV. 10; xxxii. 9; 1 Kings xii. 6, 8), and t'ne 
 mercilessness of the Chaldeans is expressed by 
 tlieir having ' no compassion ' upon the ' old man, 
 or him who stooped for age" (2 Chron. xxxvi. 17). 
 
 The strong desire to attain old age was necessa- 
 rily in some degree connected with or resembled 
 the respect ])aid to aged persons ; for people would 
 scarcely desire to he old, were the aged neglected 
 or regarded with mere suflerance. 
 
 Michaelis, cariying out a hint of Montesquieu, 
 fftncies that veneration for old age is 'peculiarly 
 suitable to a democracy,' and, consequently, ' to 
 the republican circumstairces of tlie Israelites.' 
 He adds, ' In a monarchy or aristocracy, it is 
 birth and office alone which give rank. The 
 more pure a democracy is, tlie move are all on an 
 equal footing ; and those invested with authority 
 are obliged to bear that equality in mind. Here 
 great actions confer respect and honour ; and the 
 right discharge of official duties, or the an i val of 
 old age, are the only sources of rank. For ho,v 
 else can rank be established among those who have 
 no official situation, and are by birth peifectly 
 equal ' (3fo.s. Rccht., art. cxl.). This is ingenious, 
 and partly true. It would perhaps be wholly so, if, 
 instead of connecting it with 'reimblican circum- 
 stances,' the respect for age were ruther regarded in 
 connecti(>n with a certain state of society, short of 
 high civilization, in which thesources of distinction, 
 from whatever causes, are so limite(i, that room is 
 left for the natural condition of age itself to be 
 made a source of distinction. Of all marks of re- 
 spect that to age is most willingly paid; becanst 
 every one who does homage, to age, may himself, 
 evntually, bcome an object of such homage. We 
 almost invariably observe that where civilization 
 advances, and where, in consequence, the claims 
 to respect are multiplied, the respect for old age ixi 
 itself, diminishes; {;::d, like other conditions, it is 
 estimated by the positive qualities which it exhibits. 
 In the East, at jiresent, this respect is majii- 
 fested itndrr every form oi go\'eniment. In the 
 United States the aged are certainly not treated wit'u 
 more consideration than under the monarchical and
 
 AGMON. 
 
 ■rliticratical governments of Europe. Prolessor 
 C. Stowe (in Am. Bib. Itcpos.), who had unusual 
 means ot" conai«rison, says they are there treatetl 
 with less; and this seems to j)rc)ve satisfactorily, 
 tliat it is rather the condition of civilization than 
 tire condition of govenmient, wliich produces die 
 greater or less respect for age. 
 
 Attention to age was very general in an- 
 cient timc-5 ; and is still observetl in all such 
 conditions of society as those through wliich the 
 Israelites parsed. Among tlie Egyptians, tlie 
 young men rose before the aged, and always 
 yielded to them the first place (Herod, il 80). 
 The you'-h of Spaita did the same, and were 
 silent — or, as tlie Helirews would say, laid their 
 hand upon their mouth — whenever their elders 
 spoke. At Athens, and in other Greek states, old 
 men were treated widi coriesponding respect. In 
 China defeience for the aged, and the honours 
 and distinctions awarded to them, form a capital 
 point in the government (^Me/n. sur les Chlnois, vol. 
 i. p. 450); and among the Moslem." of \Veitern 
 Asia, whose usages oiler so many analugies to those 
 of the Hebrews, the same regard for seniority is 
 strongly shown. Among the Arabs, it is very 
 seldom that a youth can be permitted to eat with 
 men (Lane, Arabian Nights, c. xi. note 26). With 
 the Turks, age, even between brothers, is the object 
 of maiked deference (Urquhart, Spirit of the 
 East, ii. 471). 
 
 In all such instances, which might be accumu- 
 lated without number, we see the respect for age 
 providentially implanted the most strongly in 
 tiiose states of social existence in which some 
 such sentiment is necessary to secure for men of 
 decayed jihysical powers, that safety and exemp- 
 tion from neglect, which are ensuied to tliem in 
 higher conditions of civilization by the general 
 rather than the paiticular and exemptive operation 
 of law and softened manners. 
 
 AGMON (PO^N) occurs in Job xl. 21 ; 
 xli. 2; Isa. ix. 14; xix. 15; Iviii. 5; in the first 
 of which passages it is translated in our authorized 
 version liy Jiac/ ; in the second by hook ; in the 
 two next liy rush ; and in the last by bulrush. As 
 Do plant is known under this name in the Hebrew 
 Jr cognate languages, its natuie has been sought 
 for by tracing the word to its root, and by judging 
 of its natuie from the context. Thus D3N agom 
 is said to mean a lake or pool of water, also a 
 
 reed ; and in Arabic ^il^'lj pronounced ijam, 
 
 is translateil reed-lied, cane-lied. Agom, is also 
 consiilered to be derived from the same root as 
 KD3 goina, the jiapyrus. Some have even 
 concluded that botli names indicate the same 
 ftiing, and have translated them by juiicus, or 
 rush. 
 
 Celsius is of opinion that in all the above pas- 
 sages agmon should be translated by arundo, or 
 reed. Dr. Harris (art. ' Reed ') has suggested that 
 in Job xli. 2, instead of ' Canst thou put an Iiook 
 WHO nis nose," we should read ' Canst thou tie up 
 his mouth with a rush rope,^ as had jneviously 
 been sugaesle.l by others (Celsius, Iliero-Bot. 
 vol. i. 46'3); and that in ver. 20 we should read 
 'out of his nostrils goetli smoke, and the rushes 
 are kindled before it,^ instead of ' as out of a 
 seetliing pot or caldron,' as iu the authorized ver- 
 lioD 
 
 AGONY. 
 
 83 
 
 Lobo, in his Voyage d'Abyssinie, speaking of 
 the Red Sea, says, ' Nous ne I'avons jias jamais 
 vue rouge, que dans les lieux ou il y a beaucoup d« 
 Gouemon.' ' 11 y a beaucouji de cetle lieibe uan« 
 la Mer rouge.' What this iierb is does not else- 
 where appear. Forskal ajiplies the name of 
 ghobeibe to a species of arun(h), which he consi- 
 dt'ieii closely allied Ui .S. jihrag/nid-s, i]\e j.lant 
 which Celsius conceive(i to be t]ie ag /no n ofScrij>- 
 ture. M. Bov6, in his Voyage Botani'jue en 
 Egypte, observed, especially on the boideis of the 
 Nile, quantities of Saccharum a-gyptiaeum and of 
 Arundo a-gyptiaca, which is, perhaps, only a va- 
 riety o\' A.doiHu; the cultivated Siianisli or Cy[)rus 
 reed, or, as it is usually called in tlic south of 
 Europe, Canna and Cana. In the neighbourhood of 
 Cairo lie found I'oa cynosuroides (the koosha, or 
 cusa, or sacied grass of the Hindoos), which, he 
 says, serves 'aux habitans pour faire des cordes, 
 cliauil'er leurs. fours, et cuire des briques et jiote- 
 ries. Le Saccliaruni vylindrlcum est employe 
 aux memes usages.' The Egyptian speciis of 
 arundo is probably the A. isiaca of Delilc, which is 
 closely allied to A. jihragmites, and its uses may 
 be supix)sed to be very similar to those of the latter. 
 This species is often raised to the rank of a genus 
 under the name of phragmites, so named from 
 being employed for making partitions, &c. It is 
 about six feet high, with annual stems, and is 
 abundant about the banks of pools and rivers, and 
 in marshes. The panicle of flowers is very large, 
 much subdivided, a little drooping and wavingin 
 the wind. The plant is used for thatching, making 
 screens, garden fences, &c. ; when split it is made 
 into string, mats, and matches.. It is \he gemeine 
 rohr of the Geunans, and the Cannaoi Cana 
 palustre of the Italians and Spaniards. 
 
 Any of the species of reed here enumerated will 
 suit the dillerent passages in which the word 
 agmon occurs; but several species of sacchanim, 
 growing to a great size in moist situations, and 
 reeu-like in ajipeaiance, will also fulfil all the 
 conditions required, as afVording shelter for the 
 beiiemoih or hippopotujnus, being convertible into 
 ropes, forming a contrast with their hollow stems 
 to the solidity and strength of the branches of 
 trees, and when dry easily set on fire: and when 
 in flower their light and feathery inflorescence 
 may be bent down by the slightest wind that 
 blows.— J. F. R. 
 
 AGONY {^' hywvia), a word generally denoting 
 contest, and especially the contests by wrestling, 
 &c. in the ]iublic games ; whence it is applied 
 metaphorically to a se\-ere struggle or confict 
 with pain and suflering. Agony is the actual 
 struggle wifli jiresent evil, and is thus distin- 
 guished from anguish, which arises from the re- 
 Uection on evil that is past. In the New Te?*a- 
 ment the word is only used by Luke(xx. 44), and 
 is employed by him with terriiile significance to 
 describe the fearful struggle which our Lord sus- 
 tained in the garden of Gethsemane. Tlie cir- 
 cumstances of this mysterious fiansaction me 
 recorded in Matt. xxvi. ^6-lCi ; Maik xiv. 152-42 ; 
 Luke XX. 39-18 ; Heli. v. 7, 8. None of thebe 
 ) assages, taken separately, contains a full hi.story 
 of our Saviour's agony. Each of the three Evan- 
 gelists has omitted some jiarticulars svhich tli« 
 others have recorded, and all are very brief. The 
 passage in Hebrevys is only an incidental notice. 
 The tluee Evangelista appear to liave had tin
 
 AGONY. 
 
 AGRAMMATOS. 
 
 (Ume design, namely, to convey to their readers 
 an idea of the intensity of (he Lord's distress ; but 
 tliey conipiss it in dilVeient ways. Luke alone 
 notices tiie a^ony, the bloody sweat, and the 
 a])[)earaiice of an ani^el from heaven strengthening 
 liim. Matthew and Mark alone record the change 
 which ajjpeared in liis countenance and manner, 
 tiie complaint v/liich he uttered of the over- 
 lioweiing sorrows of liis soul, and his repetition of 
 .lie same jiraycr. All agree that he piayed for 
 the removal of wliat he called ' this cup,' and are 
 careful to note that he qualiiied this earnest pe- 
 tition by a preference of his Father's will to his 
 own. 
 
 All tlie circumstances of this wonderful mental 
 conflict have been miniitely and ably examined 
 by ])r. Lewis Mayer, of New York, in the Am. 
 Bib. Repository for April, 1841. We are necessi- 
 tated to confine our attention to the most essential 
 points, tlie cause and nature of this agony. 
 
 Jesus liimself intimates the cause of his over- 
 whelming distress in the prayer, ' If it be possible, 
 ht this cup pass from me ;' the cup wliich his 
 Father liad appointed for him;* and the question 
 is, what does he mean l)y ' this cup.' Doddridge 
 and others think that he means the instant agony, 
 the t)oub]e that he then actually endured. But 
 this is solidly answered by Dr. Mayer, who shows, 
 by reference to Jolin xvili. 18, that the cup re- 
 specting which he prayed was one that was then 
 Iwjfore him, whicli he ha \ not yet taken up to 
 ilrink, and which he desired, if possible, that the 
 Father should remove. It could, therefore, be no 
 other tlian the scene of suft'ering upon which he 
 was about to enter. It was the death which the 
 Father had appointed for him — the death of the 
 cross- with all the attending circumstances which 
 aggravated its horror ; that scene of woe wliich 
 began with his arrest in tlie garden, and was 
 consummated by his death on Calvary. Jesus 
 had long been familiar with this prospect, and 
 had looked to it as the apjiointed termination of 
 liis ministry (Matt. xvi. 21; xvii. 9-12 ; xx. 17, 
 \% 2S ; Mark x. 32-31 ; John x. IS ; xii. 32, 33). 
 But when he looked forward to this destination, 
 as the liour ajijiroached, a chill of horror some- 
 times came over him, and found expression in 
 external signs of distress (John xii. 27 ; comp. 
 Luke xii. 49, 50). But on no occasion did he 
 exhibit any very striking evidence of perplexity 
 or anguish. He was usually calm and collected; 
 and if at any time he gave utterance to feelings 
 of distress and honor, he still preserved his self- 
 ])ossession, and quickly checked the desire whicli 
 nature put forth to be spared so dreadful a death. 
 It is, therefore, hardly to be supposed that the 
 near a])p;oa(h of iiis suH'erings, awful as they 
 were, apair from everyihing else, could alone 
 have wrought so great a change in the mind of 
 Jesus and in his whole demeanour, as soon as he 
 had entered the garden. It is manifest that 
 something more than the cross was now before 
 !iim, an 1 that he was now placed in a new and 
 hitherto UTitried situation. Dr. Mayer says : ' I 
 have no hesitation in believing that he was here 
 put ujion the trial of his obedience. It was the 
 purpose of God to suiiject the obedience of Jesus 
 to a severe ordeal, in order that, like gold tried 
 in the furnace, it might be an act of more }jerfect 
 and illustrious viitue; and for this end lie pei- 
 outted him t) be assailed bv the fiercest te.'njita- 
 
 tion to disobey his will and to refuse the ap 
 pointed cup. In pursuance of this purpose, thif 
 mind of Jesus was lelt to pass under a dark 
 cloud, his views lost their clearness, the Fatlier'j 
 will was shrouded in obscurity, the cross appeared 
 in ten-fold horror, and na*uie was lelt to indulge 
 her feelings, and to ])ut forth her reluctance.' 
 
 Dr. Mayer admits that the sacred writen 
 have not explained wliat that was, connected in 
 the inind of Jesus with the death of the cross, 
 which at this time excited in him so distressing a 
 fear. 'Pious and holy men have looked calmly 
 upon death in its most terrific forms. But the 
 pious and holy man has not had a world's sal- 
 vation laid upon him ; he has not been required 
 to be absolutely perfect before God ; he haa 
 known that, if lie sinned, there was an advocate 
 and a ransom for him. But nothing of tliis con- 
 solation could be jjresenfed to the mind of Jesus. 
 He knew that he must die, as he had lived, with- 
 out sin ; but if the extremity of sullering should 
 so far prevail as to provoke him into impatience 
 or murmuring, or into a desire for revenge, this 
 would be sin ; and if he sinned, all would be 
 lost, for there was no other Saviour. In such 
 considerations may jjrobalily be fwund the remote 
 source of the agonies and fears which deepened 
 the gloom of that dreadful niglit.' Under another 
 head [Bloody Sweat] will be found the con- 
 siderations suggested by one of the remarkable 
 circumstances of tliis event. 
 
 AGORA ('A70P0), a word of frequent occur- 
 rence in the New Testament: it denotes generally 
 any place of public resort in towns and cities 
 where the people came together; and hence more 
 specially it signifies, 1. A public place, a broad 
 street, &c., as in Matt. xi. Iti; xx. 3 ; xxiii. 7 ; 
 Mark vi. 56; xii. 38; Luke vii. 32; xi. 43; 
 XX. 46. 2. A forum or market-place, where 
 goods were exposed for sale, and assemblies or 
 public trials held, as in Acts xvi. 19 ; xvii. 17. 
 In Mark vii. 4, it is doubtful whether ayoph. 
 denotes the market itself, or is put for that wliich 
 is brought from the market ; hut the known cus- 
 toms of the Jews suggest a prei'eience of the former 
 signification. 
 
 AGORAIOS Q A.yopa7os), a Greek word signi- 
 fying the things belonging to, or persons fre- 
 quenting, the Agora. In Acts xix. 38, it is 
 apijlied to the days on which public trials were 
 held in the forum; and in cli. xvii. 5, it denotes 
 idlers, or peisons lounging about in tlie maikets 
 and otlier places of public re5ort. There is a 
 peculiar force in this application of the word, 
 when we recollect that the market-places or ba- 
 zaars of the East were, and aie at this day, the 
 constant resort of unoccupied people, the idle, and 
 the newsmongers. 
 
 AGRAMMATOS CAypdfi/xaTos). a Greek 
 word meaning tmlearned, illiterate. In Acts iv. 
 13, the Jewish literati apply the term to Peter 
 and John, in tiie same sense in which they 
 asked, with regard to our Lord himself, ' How 
 knoweth this man letfeis, having never learned' 
 (Jolm vii. 15). In neither case did they mean 
 to say that they had been altogether without 
 tlie benefits of the common education, which con- 
 sisted in leading ami writing, and in an acquaint- 
 ance with the sacred books; but that they were 
 not learned men, had not sat at tlie feet of any 
 of the great doctors of tlie 1-aw, i»iid had not beea
 
 AGRARIAN LAT> . 
 
 instructed in the mysteries and refinements of 
 iLeir jieculiiir learning and Htevatiue. 
 
 AGRARIAN LAW. To this, or some such 
 heading, lielons^s the consideiation of tlie jieciiliar 
 lawshy wliich the liistiilnition and lenuie of hind 
 lyere regulated among the Hel)iews ; while tlie 
 modes in wliich the land was cultivated lielong to 
 AaRicri.TURF.. 
 
 It has been the rnstom to regard the Ilebi-ews 
 as a pastoral jieoijle until they were settle<l in Pa- 
 lestine. In a great (le;:iTe they dovidtless weie 
 80 ; and when they entered agiiridtural Egypt, the 
 land of Goshen was assigned to them expressly 
 because tliat locality was suited to tlieir pas- 
 toral habits (Gen. x1vii. 4-6). These habits were 
 substantially maintained ; but it is certain that 
 they became acquainted with the EgyjitiiUi ])ro- 
 cesses of culture; and it is more than probable 
 tliat they raised for themselves such products 
 of the soil as they requiretl for their own use. 
 We may, indeed, collect tliat the jiortion of 
 their territory which lay in the immediate vi- 
 cinity of the Nile was jilaced . by them under 
 culture (Deut. xi. 10), while the interior, with the 
 free pastures of the deseit beyond their immediate 
 territory, sufficed aljundantly for their cattle 
 (1 Chron. vii. 21). This partial attention to 
 agriculture was in some degree a pvejwiration for 
 the condition of cultivators, into which they were 
 destined eventually to pass. While the Israelites 
 remained in a state of subjection in Egy])t, 
 the maintenance of their condition as shejiherds 
 was liighly instrumental in keeping tliem distinct 
 and separate from the Egyptians, who were agri- 
 culturists, and had a strong dislike to pastoral 
 habits (Gen. xlvi. -34). But when they became 
 an independent and sovereign nation, their sepa- 
 ration from other nations was to be promoted 
 by inducing them to devote their chief attention 
 to the culture of the soil. A large numt*er 
 of tlic institutions given to them had this object 
 of seijaration in view. Among tliese, those re- 
 lating to agiiculture— forming the agrarian law 
 of the Hebrew ]ieople — were of the first impoit- 
 ance. Tl^ey might not alone have Ijeeir sufli- 
 cient to secure the end in view, but no others 
 could have been etlectvial wirhout them; for, with- 
 mit such atteiition to agriculture as would render 
 them a self-subsisting nation, a greater degree of 
 in'"'fnnrse with the neigiiljoming and idolatrous 
 natiuiio must have been maintained than was con- 
 Bistent with the primary object of the Mosaical in- 
 stitutions. The con<mc-nest observation suffices 
 to show how much less than others agricultuial 
 communities are open to external influences, and 
 how mucli less disposed to cultivate intercourse 
 with strangers. 
 
 It was, doubtless, in subservience to tliis ob- 
 ject, and to facilitate the change, that the Israel- 
 ites were put in jtossession of a country ali«ady in 
 a state of higii cultivation (Deut. vi. 11). And 
 it was in order to retain them in this ctindition. to 
 give them a vital interest in it, and to make it a 
 source of happiness to tliem, that a very jiecidiar 
 agrarian law w.as given to them. In stating this 
 law, and in declaring it to have been in the highest 
 degree wise and salutary, regard must lie hatl 
 to its peculiar object with reference to the segrega- 
 tion of the Hebrew people: for there are jxiints in 
 which this and other Mosaical laws were unsuited 
 V> general usi>, some by the very circumstances 
 
 AGRARIAN LAW. 
 
 8: 
 
 which adapted them so admirably to their sjieclal 
 object. \\ hen tlie Israelite? were nimibcred just 
 before their entrance into the land of Canaan, and 
 were found (exclusive of the Lexile-) to exccwl 
 GOO.OOO men, the Lord said to Moses : ' l;nto 
 these the land shall l)e divided for an inheritance, 
 according to the munljcr of names. To many 
 thou shalt give the more inheritanre, and to tiie 
 few thou shalt give the less inheritanre ; to every 
 one shall ins inheritanre lie given according to 
 those that were numl)ered of him. Notwith- 
 standing the land shall lie divided by lot: ac- 
 cording to the name,s of the Irilws of their fathers 
 shall they inherit' (Num. xxvi. 33-51). This 
 equal distribution of the soil was the basis of the 
 agrarian law. Ky it provision was made for the 
 support of 600,000 yeomanry, with (according t(, 
 different calculation-;) fiom sixtei'ii to tweiity-tive 
 acres of land to each. This land they held inde 
 jiendent of all temporal superiors, by direct termre, 
 from Jehovah their sovereign, by whose j^ower 
 they were to acquire the territorj', and under 
 whose protection they were to enjoy and retain it. 
 ' The land shall not be sohl for ever, for the land 
 is mine, saith the Lord : ye are strangers and 
 sojoumei's with me' (Lev. xxv. '23> Thus tlie 
 basis of the constitution was an equal agrarian 
 law. But this law was guardeil by other provi- 
 sions equally wise and salutary. The accumula- 
 tion of debt was prevented, first, by jirohibiting 
 every Hebrew from accejjting of interest from 
 any of his fellow-citizens (Lev. xxv. 35, 36) ; next, 
 by establishing a regular discharge of debts every 
 seventh year; and, finally, by ordering that no 
 lands could lie alienated for ever, but must, on 
 each year of Jubilee, or every seventh S.ibbatic 
 year, revert to the families which originally pos- 
 sessed them. Thus, without absolutely depriving 
 individuals of all temporary dominion over tlieir 
 landed property, it re-establi'slied,every fift ieth year, 
 that original and equal distribution of it, which 
 was the foundation of the national ])olity ; and as 
 the jieriod of this reversion wils fixed and regular, 
 all jiarties had due notice of the terms on which 
 they negotiatetl ; so that there was no gionnd for 
 public commotion or jnivate complaint. 
 
 This law, by which landed jjroiJfity was re- 
 leased in the year of Jubilee fiomall existing obli- 
 gations, did not extend to houses in towns, which, 
 if not redeemed within one year after being sold, 
 were alienated for ever (Lev. xv. 29, 30). This 
 must have given to property in the country a de- 
 cided advantage over jiroperty in cities, and must 
 have greatly contributed to the essential object 
 of all these regulations, by aflording an induce- 
 ment to every Hebrew to reside on and culti- 
 vate his land. Further, the original distril)uti(jn 
 of the land was to the several tribes according to 
 their families, so that each trilx; was, .so to siieak, 
 settled in the same county, and each family in 
 the .same barony or hundred. Nor was the estate 
 of any family in one tribe jiermitted to pass into 
 another, even by the marriage of an heiress (Num. 
 xxvii.) ; so that not only w;is the oiiginal balance 
 of jiroperty preser\'ed, but the closest and dearest 
 connections of affinity affacned to eacli other tlie 
 inhabitants of every vicinage. 
 
 It often hapjiens that laws in appearance simi- 
 lar have in view entirely difVerent objects. In 
 Euro])e the entailment of estates in the direct line 
 is de-signed to encouiagc the format io- o( large.
 
 88 
 
 AGRARIAN LAW. 
 
 AGRICULTURE. 
 
 riojjCTties. In Israel ilie eflect was eiifiiely dif- 
 faeit, as the entail estendeil to all tlje small 
 estates ijito wliicli the land was oliLjinally divided, 
 so that they cotilil ncit le^^illy l)e viiiited to Ibim 
 a laiije piujieiMv, and tlien entailed iqion the de- 
 scendants (if liiiri hy whom tiie piopeity was 
 I'ormed. This division of the lantl in small estates 
 iiinon}^ the jjeople, who weie to retain tiiem in 
 perpetuity, was eminently suited to the leadini^ 
 objects of tlie Hehiew institutions. It is allowed 
 (in all liands tli'at such a condition of landed pro- 
 perty is in the hij;hest degiee faviiuiahle to liigli 
 cultivation, and to inciease of jxipulation, while it 
 is less favoiiialtle to jiasturage. The two first weie 
 ohjpcLs which the law had in view, and it did not 
 inteiul to all'urd undue encovirai^ement to the 
 pastoral life, while the lari,'e pastuies of the adja- 
 cent deserts and of the commons seemed thecoun- 
 :iy against such a scarcity of cattle as the di- 
 vision of the land into small heritages has alieady 
 ijrochiced in Fiance. 
 
 ^or tliis land a kind of quit-rent was jiayable 
 In the sovPieign ]iio]iiietiir, in the foim of a tenth 
 or tithe of the piotluce, which was assigned to the 
 priesthood [Titiiks]. The condition of military 
 service wa.s also attached to the land, as it ap- 
 pears that every fieeholder (Deut. xx. 5) was 
 obliged to attend at the general muster of the 
 national aimy, and to serve in it, at his cwn ex- 
 pense (often more than repaid by the ])lunder), as 
 long as the occasion requited. In this direction, 
 therefore, the agrarian law operated in securing a 
 body of 600,000 men, inured to labour and in- 
 dustry, always assumed to be ready, as they were 
 bound, to come forward at their country's call. 
 This great bwly of national yeomaniy. every oi.e 
 of whom had an important stake in nif national 
 inde))endence, was officered by its own neieilitaiy 
 chiefs, heads of tiibes and families (comp. Exod. 
 xviii. and Num. xxxi. 14); and must have ])re- 
 sented an insuperable obstacle to treacheious am- 
 bition and political intrigue, anil to eveiy attempt 
 to overthrow tlie Hebrew cominonwealth and esta- 
 l)lish despotic ])ower. Nor weie tliese institutions 
 less wisely adapteil to secuie flie state against 
 foreign violence, and at the same time ])i event otl'en- 
 sive wars and lemote conquests. For while this 
 vast body of hardy yeomanry were always teady 
 to defen<i tlieir country, when assailetl by foieign 
 fcMS, yet, being constantly employed in agiicult\ue, 
 attucheii to ilomestic life, and enjoying at liome 
 the society of the numerous lelatives who peojiled 
 their neighbouihood, war must have been in a 
 high ile^'ree alien to their tastes and habits. Re- 
 ligion also took part in pieventing them fiom 
 being captivated by the sjilendour of military 
 glory. On leturning fiom battle, even if vic- 
 torious, in order to bring them back to moie 
 ])eaceful feelings after the rage of war, the law le- 
 ijuired tliem to consider themselves as polluted l)y 
 the slaughter, and unworthy of a])pearing in the 
 camp of Jehovah until they had employed an en- 
 tire day ill the rites of ))uriHcation (Num. xix. 
 13-16; xxxi. 19). Besides, the force was en- 
 tirely infantry; the law forbiddijig even the kings 
 to multiply liorses in their train (Deut. xvii. 16); 
 and this, with tht ordinance requiring the atteJiii- 
 an< e of all the males three times every year at 
 Jerusalem, proveil the intention of the legislator 
 10 confine the natives within the limits of the 
 ffumised I^anf', and rendered long and distant 
 
 wars and conquests imjiossible without the virti:Aj 
 renunciation of that religion which was incorpo- 
 rated with tlieir whole civil polity, and which was. 
 in fact, the chaiter by which tliey held >heiy ))ro 
 } erfy and enjoyed all their riglits (Graves's LeO' 
 lures on the rtiituieuch, lect. iv. ; Lowmaii's Civil 
 Guv. of the Heb. c. iii. iv. ; Michaelis, Mot. 
 liecht, i. 240, sq.p). 
 
 AGRICULTURE. The antiquity of agricul- 
 tuie is indicated in the biief history of Cain and 
 Al)el, when it tells us that the former wiis a ' ♦ilier 
 of tlie ground,' and brought some of the fiuits of 
 his laiiour as an otfeiitig to God (Gen. iv. 2, 3), 
 and that jiart of the ultimate curse u]ii>n l»im was : 
 ' when thou tillest the ground, it shall not lierice 
 forth yield to thee her stiength' (iv. 12). Of tlie 
 actual state of agiicultuie before the deluge we 
 know nothing. It must have been modified con- 
 siderably l)y the conditions of soil and climate, 
 which aie supposed by many to have undergorre 
 some material alteiations at tlie flood. Whatever 
 knowledge Wivs jKissessed by the old world was 
 doubtless transmitted to the new by Noah and 
 his sons ; and that this knowledge was consider- 
 able is im])lied in the fact that one of the opera- 
 tions of Noah, when he ' began to be a liusband- 
 man,' was to plant a vineyard, and to make wine 
 with the fruit (Gen. ix. 2). There are few agri- 
 cultural notices belonging to the jiatriarchal pe- 
 riod, but they suffice to show that the land of 
 Canaan was in a state of cultivation, and that 
 the inhabitants possessed wiiat weie at a later date 
 the principal products of the soil in the same 
 country. It is reasonable theiefoie to conclude 
 that the modes of operation were then similar to 
 those which we afterwards find among the Jews 
 in the same country, and concerning wliicli out 
 iiifoimation is more exact. 
 
 In giving to the Israelites possession of a country 
 alrea<iy under cultivation, it was the Divine inten- 
 tion that they should keep up that cultivation, 
 and become tiiemselves an agricultural jieople ; 
 and in doing this they doubtless adopted the piac- 
 lices of agiiculture wliich they found already esta- 
 1)1 ished in the country. This may have been the 
 moie necessiiry, as agricultuie is a ])ractii',al art; 
 and those of the Hebiews who weie acquainted 
 with the piactices of Egyptian husbandry had 
 dietl in the wildeine~s; and even had they liveiL 
 the jirocesses proper to a hot climate and alluvial 
 soil, wateied by liver inundation, like that of 
 Egypt, although the same in essential foims, could 
 not have been altogether apjjlicable to so difl'eient 
 a countiy as Palestine. 
 
 As the natuie of the seiisons lies at the root of 
 all agiicultuial opeiati(;ns, it siiould be noticed 
 tliat the vaiiatioi.s of siuisliine and lain, which 
 witli us extend throughout the year, aie in Pales- 
 tine confined chielly tu the latter ]: ait of autumn 
 and the winter. Duiiiig all the lest of the yea. 
 tlie sky is almost uniiiteinqitedly cloudless, and 
 rain very laiely falls. The autumnal rains usu- 
 ally cumnieiK-.e at the latter end of October or 
 fjeginning of November, not suddenly, but by d«»- 
 giees, wliich gives ojijioitunily to the husbpiidman 
 to sow hi? wheat and liarley. The lains continue 
 during November and December, but afterwards 
 they occur at longer intervals ; and rahi is raie 
 after March, and almost never occurs as late hb 
 May. The cold of winter is not severe ; and a* 
 tlie ground is never froaen, the labours of the liu*
 
 AGRICULTURE. 
 
 AGRICULTURE. 
 
 89 
 
 L'4idman are not entirely iriternijited. Snow falls 
 in ditlereiit ))aits of tlie coiintiv, l)Ut ne\ or lies 
 long on the grouml. In the plains and valleys 
 tl)e heat of snnnncr is o|)|ire.ssive, liiit not in the 
 more elevated tiacls. In these high grounds the 
 ni gilts are cool, often with heavy dew. The total 
 absence of rain in siitnnier soon destroys the ver- 
 dure of the fields, and gives to the general lund- 
 scajje, even in the high country, an aspect of 
 drought and banenness. No green thing remains 
 but the foliage of the scattered fruit-tiees, and oc- 
 casional vineyards and lields of millet. In autumn 
 the whole land becomes dry and parched ; the 
 cisterns are nearly em]ily ; and all nature, animate 
 and inanimate, looks Ibiward with loiiging for the 
 return of the rainy season. In the hill countiy 
 the time of harvest is later than in tiie plains of 
 the Jordan and of the sea-coast. The barley har 
 vest is alxRit a fortnight earlier than that of wheat. 
 In the ])lain of the Jordan the wheat har\est is 
 early in May ; in the ])lains of the coast and of 
 Esdraelon, ii is towards tlie latter end of 'hat 
 month; and in the hills, not until June. The 
 general, vintage is in September, but the fiist 
 grajjcs ripen in July ; and from that time the 
 towirs are well supplied with this fruit (Robinson, 
 Biblical Researches, ii. i'G-lOO). 
 
 Sou,, <S;c. — The geological characters of the soil 
 in Palestine have never been satisfactorily stated ; 
 but the dillerent epithets of description which tra- 
 Telleis employ, enable us to know that it dilfers 
 considerably, both in its appearance and character, 
 in different jmrts of the land ; but wherever soil 
 of any kind exists, even to a very slight depth, it 
 is found to be highly fertile. As parts of Palestine 
 are hilly, and as hills have seldonr mucli depth of 
 soil, the mode of cultivating them in terraces was 
 anciently, and is now, much employed. A seiies 
 of low stone walls, one above another, across the 
 face of the hill, arrest the soil brought down by 
 tire rains, and afford a series of levels for the 
 operations of the husbandman. This mode of cul- 
 tivation is usual in Lebanon, and is not unfre- 
 quent in Palestine, where the remains of terraces 
 across the hills, in various parts of the country, 
 attest the extent to which it was anciently carried. 
 Tiiis tenace cultivation has necessarily increased 
 or declined with the population. If the jieople 
 were so few that the valleys afforded suflicient food 
 for them., the more difficult culture of the hills 
 was neglected ; but when the population was too 
 large tiir the valleys to satisfy with bread, tlien lire 
 IJUg weie laid uirder cultivation. 
 
 Ill such a chmate as that of Palestine, water is 
 tlie gieaf I'eitilizing agent. The rains of autumn 
 and winter, and tiie dews of spring, suffice for the 
 ordinary objects of agriculture ; but the ancient 
 inhabitants were able,.in some parts, to avert even 
 the aridity which the summer droughts occasioned, 
 and to keej) up a garden-like verilure, by means of 
 aqueducts communicating witli th.e brooks and 
 rivers (Ps. i. 3; Ixv. 10; Prov. xxi. 1 ; Isa. xxx. 
 23; xxxii. 2, "20 ; Ilos. xii. 11). Hence springs, 
 fountains, and rivulets were as much esteemed by 
 husbandmen as l)y sheplierds (Josh. xv. 19 ; Judg. 
 i. 15). The soil was also cleaied of stones, and 
 carefully cultivated; and its feitility w;is in 
 creased by the ashes to which the dry stubble and 
 K lierbaLC were occasionally reiiuced Ity being burned 
 over the surface of the ground (Prov.xxiv. 31 ; Isa. 
 vii. 23i xxxii. 13). L\ing, and, in the nei^dibour- 
 
 hood of .Jerusalem, the blood of animals, wete alio 
 used to enrich the soil (2 Kings ix. 37 ; Ps. IxxxiiL 
 10; Isa. XXV. 10; Jer. ix. 22; Luke xiv. 31, 35X 
 That the soil might not be exhausted, it waa 
 ordered tliat every seventh year should be a -aliliath 
 of rest to the land : there was then to l)e no snwing 
 or reaping, no pruning of vine- or oli\es, no vintage 
 or gathering of fiuils ; and wliatever grew of itself 
 was to be left to live jioor, tlie stranger, and tlie 
 beasts of the field (Lev. xxv. 1-7; D.ul. xv. I-IO). 
 Hut such an observance recpiiieil more faith than 
 the Israelites were jiiepaied to exercise. It was for 
 a long time utterly neglected (Lev. xxvi. 34, 35; 
 2 Chioii. xxxvi. 21), but after the Cajitivily it was 
 moie observed. By this icmaikable institution 
 the Ilelirews were also Iraineil to hal/ils of etc.nomy 
 and foiesight, and invited to exercise a large ile- 
 gree of trust in the bouritiful providence of their 
 Divine King. 
 
 FiKi.us. — U;ider the term \y^ dacjan, which 
 we translate *giain' and 'corn,' the Ilelirews 
 comprehended almost every object v(Jic/d cultuie. 
 Syria, including Palestine, was regaidtd by the 
 ancients as one of the fiist countries fur coin 
 (Pliny, Hist. Kat. xviii. 7). Wheat was abun- 
 dant and excellent; and there is still one bearded 
 sort, the ear of which is three times as heavy, and 
 contains twice as many grains, as our common 
 English wheat (Iihy and Mangles, ]i. 472). Bar- 
 ley was also much cultivated, not only for bread, 
 but because it was the only kind of coin which 
 was given to beasts ; for oats and rye do not grow 
 in warm climates. Hay was not in use ; and 
 therefore the barley was mixed with cliopjied straw 
 to form the food of cattle ((ien. xxiv. 25, 32 ; 
 Judg. xix. 19, &c.) Other kinds of field cultuie 
 were millet, spelt, various sjjecies of beans and peas, 
 peppeiwort, cummin, cucumbers, melons, flax, 
 and, perhajis, cotton. Many other articles might 
 lie mentioned as being now cultivated in Palest iie ; 
 but, as their names do not occur in Scripture, it is 
 diflicultto know whetlier they weie giown theie in 
 ancient times, or not. 
 
 Anciently, as now, in Palestine and the East 
 ths arable lands weie not divided into fielils by 
 hedges, as in this country. The ri);ening jirodiuts 
 therefore jiresented an expanse of culture un- 
 broken, although peihaps variegated, in a large 
 view, by the dill'erence of the [noducts grown. TI.e 
 boundaries of lands were therefore maiked by 
 stones as landmarks, which, even in patriaichal 
 times, it was deemed a heinous wrong to remove 
 (Job xxiv. 2); and the law jironounced a caise 
 upon those who, witiiout authority, removetl them 
 (Deut. xix. 14; xxvii. 17). The walls and hedges 
 which are occasionally mentioned in Scripture be 
 longed to orchards, gaidens, and vineyards. 
 
 Agricultural Operations — Of late year* 
 much light has been tlirown upon tlie agri-
 
 90 
 
 AGRICULTURE. 
 
 cultural opoations and imjilemeiits of ancient 
 times, by t!ie discovery of various vej^rcspntations 
 on tlie sculjitiued monuments and painted toml)s 
 of Egypt. As these agiee suiprisingly with the 
 notices in the Bilile, and, indeed, dilli'r little from 
 *liat we liiid employed in Syria and Ivu'vpt, it is 
 \eiy safe to receive ihem as guides on the jncsent 
 suhject. 
 
 Ploughing. — This lias always been a light and 
 «uj*»(icial opeuition in the E.tst. At first, the 
 ground was openeil with ])ointed sticks; th.en, a 
 kind of hoe was employed ; and this, in many 
 tarts of thf world, is still used as a substitute for 
 
 tijj plou;,'h. But tlie plougli was known in Egypt 
 and Syria hefine the Hebrews became cultivators 
 (^Job i. 14). In the East, however, it has always 
 been a light and inaitilicial imjjlement. At first, 
 it was little more than a stout branch of a tree, 
 from which )nojected another limb, shoitened and 
 {tinted. Tliis, being turned into the ground, 
 made the furrow ; while at the farther end of the 
 larger branch was fastened a transverse yoke, to 
 which the oxen were harnessed. Afterwards a 
 handle to guitle the jilough was added. Thus 
 the plough consisted of — 1. the pole; 2. the point 
 or share; 3. the handle; 4. the yoke. The Syrian 
 plough is, anil doubtless was, light enough for a 
 man to carry in his hand (Russell's Nat. Hist, of 
 Aleppo, i. 73). We annex a figure of the ancient 
 Egyptian plough, which had the most resemblance 
 
 to the one now used (as fignrod in p. 89), and ttie 
 (ompcrison lietueen them will ]jrt;bably suggest 
 ; fair idea of the plough whicii was in use among 
 th.' Hclnews. The following cut (fri.m Mr. Fel- 
 lo-ves" woik on Asia Minor) shows the parts of a 
 
 .^. Shares (varioai). 
 6. Ox-goad. 
 
 •till lighter plough used in ,\sia Minor and 
 Syria, with but a single hanrlle, and with dif- 
 
 AGRICULTURE. 
 
 ferent shares according to the work it haa tt 
 execute. 
 
 The ])lough was drawn by oxen, which wer« 
 sometimes urged by a scourge (Isa. x. 2C ; Na- 
 li'im iii. 2) ; but oftenfr liy a long stafl', fur- 
 nished at one end with a Hat jiiece of metal for 
 clearing the plough, and at the other with a spike 
 for goading the oxen. This ox-goad might be 
 easily used as a sjjear (Judg. iii. 31 ; 1 Sam. 
 xiii. 21). Sometimes men followed the plough 
 with hoes to break the clods (Isa. xxviii. 24) ; 
 but in later times a kind of han()W was em- 
 ]i]oyed, which apjiears to have been then, as now, 
 meiely a thick block of wood, jiressed down by a 
 weight, or by a man sitting on it, and drawn over 
 the ploughed field. 
 
 Sowing. — The ground, having been ploughed 
 as soon as the autumnal rains hail mollified the 
 soil, was fit, by the end of October, to receive the 
 seed ; and the sowing of wheat continiied, in dif 
 ferent situations, through November into December 
 Bailey was not generally sown till January and 
 February. The seed appears to have been sown 
 and harrowed at the same time ; although s(,me- 
 tinies it was jiloughed in by a cross furrow. 
 
 Plotrghifig in the Seed. — TheEgyptian paintings 
 illustrate the Scriptures by showing that in those 
 soils which neeiled no previous prejiaratioii by 
 the hoe (tor breaking the clods) the sower followed 
 the plough, holding in the left hand a basket ,;f 
 seeil, which he scattered with tlie right hand, 
 while another person filled a fresh luisket. We 
 also see that the mode of sowing was what we call 
 ' broad-cast,' in which the seed is thiown loosely 
 over the field (Matt. xiii. 3-S). In Egypt, when 
 the levels were low, and the water had continued 
 long upon the land, they often dispensed with the 
 plough altogether; and probably, like the ])resent 
 inhabitants, l)roke u]) the groimd with hoes, oi 
 simply dragged the moist mud with bushes after 
 the seed had been thrown u];on the surface. Tc 
 this cultivation without ploughing Moses probably 
 alludes (Deut. xi. 10), when he tells the Hebrews 
 that the land to which they were going was not 
 like the land of Egyjrf, wheie they ' sowed tneir 
 seed and watered it with their foot as a gardot oj 
 herbs.' It seems however that even in Syria, in 
 sandy soils, they sow without jiloughing, and then 
 plough down the seed (Russell's N. II. of Aleppo, 
 i. 73, &c.). It does not apjiear that any instrument 
 resembling our harrow was know n ; the word re»- 
 dered to harrorv, in Job xxxix 10, means literall.T
 
 AGRICULTURE. 
 
 AGRICULTURE. 
 
 91 
 
 fc break the clods, and is so rendered in Isa. xxviii. 
 2rl ; Hos. X. 11 : and for tliis ])Mrix)se the means 
 U9ed liave lieen already indicated. Tlie ]uissaLi;e 
 in Joli, however, is imjjortaiit. It shows tliat tliis 
 breakini? of the clods was not always hy the hi'.iid, 
 but that some kind of instrument was iliawn hy 
 an animal over the jjloug-lied field, most jiniiiuhly 
 the rough log which is still in use. 
 
 Harvest. — It has been already mentioned that 
 the time of tlie wheat harvest in Palestine varies, 
 in ditl'erent situations, from early in May to late 
 in June; and that the barley harvest is about a 
 fortnight earlier than that of wlieat. Among the 
 Israelites, as with all other ])eo])le, the harvest was 
 a season of jov, and as such is more than once al- 
 luded to in S<rii)ture(Ps. cxxvi. o ; Isa. ix. 13). 
 
 Reapiiir/. — Ditl'erent modes of rea])ing are in- 
 dicated in Sciinture. and illustrated Ijy the Iv^'yj)- 
 tian monuments. In the most ancient times, tlie 
 corn was jilucked uj) by the roots, wliicii continued 
 
 to be the practice witli ])articular kinds of grain 
 after the sickle was iv:?own. In Egy])t, at this day, 
 barley and dourra are jndled up by tlie roots. The 
 clioice between these moiles of !;j)era!ion was \m>- 
 bably determined, in Palestine, by the considera- 
 tion [lointed out by Russell (iV. //. of Aleppo, i. 
 71), who states tliat 'wheat, as well as barley in 
 ge'ieral, (hies not grow i-.alf as higli as in Britain ; 
 and is theiefore, like,(iliier grain, not rea])eil with 
 the sickle, but jduckeil uj) liy the roots with the 
 hand. In other ])art3 of the country, where the 
 corn grows ranker, the sickle is used.' 'When the 
 sickle was used, tiie wlieat was eitlier cropjied oil' 
 i:r der the ear or cut close to tlie ground. In tlie 
 li rmer case, the straw was afterwards plucKed up 
 
 cal of straw, they generally followed the former 
 
 method •, while the Israelites, whose lands derived 
 licnelit from the liurnt stiilible, used tlie latter; al» 
 though tlie practice of cutting olV tlie ears was alio 
 
 for use ; in the latter, the stubble was left and 
 burnt on tlie g.-ound for m.anure. As the Ki^yp- 
 tians needed not such manure, and were econumi- 
 
 known to tliem (Job xxiv. 21). Crop])ing t'le 
 ears sliort, the Kgyjitians did not generally bind 
 tliem into sheaves, but lemoved thein in iiaskets. 
 Sometimes, however, they bduiid tliem into double 
 sheaves ; and such as they jilucked uji were bound 
 into single long sheaves. The Israelites ajijiear 
 generally to have made uj) tiieir corn into slieaves 
 (Gen. xxxvii. 7 ; Lev. xxiii. 10-15 ; Ruth ii. 7, 
 15; Job xxiv. 10; Jer. ix. 22; Mich. iv. 12), 
 wiiich were collected into a hca]), or removed in a 
 cart (Amos ii. 13) to the tlneshing-tliKir. The 
 carts were probably similar to those which are 
 still employed for the same ^lurjiose. The sheaves 
 were never made u]) iiito shocks, as with us, al- 
 though the word occurs in our translation of Judg. 
 XV. 5 ; Job V. 2(5 ; for tlie original term signifies 
 neither a shock comjiosed of a few sheaves stanil- 
 ing temporarily in the field, nor a stack of many 
 sheaves in tiie home yard, jiroperly thatched, to 
 .stand for a lengili of time ; but a hea]) of sheaves 
 laid loosely togetlier, in order to be trodden out as 
 quickly as ]iossible, in the same way as is lU'Ue in 
 the I'-iust at tlie jiresent day (Brown, Antiq. of the 
 Jews, ii. 5!11). 
 
 \Vith rei;ard to sickles, tnere a])}iear to have 
 been two kinds, indicated by the .ditl'erent name* 
 chenncsh (C^'OTH) and mcr/fjol f 7i?0) ; and as 
 tlie former occurs only in the Pentateuch (l)eut. 
 xvi. it; xxiii. 20), and the latter only in the Pro- 
 ))hets (Jer. ii. 1() ; Joel i. 17), it would seem that 
 the one was tlie earlier and the ofiier the later in- 
 strument. But as we observe two very dit« 
 lerent kin-^s of sickles in use among the Kgyptians, 
 not only at the same time, Uit In tlie same field 
 (see tlie cut, ji. 92), it may iiave been so with the 
 Jews also. The tiguies of tliese Egyptian sickles 
 jmibably mark the ditl'eience between them. One 
 was very mucli like our common reajiitig-Aoo^ 
 while the other had more resemblanc-e in its sliajie 
 to a scythe, and in theE^y)itian examjdes a]<])ears 
 to have lie^-n tootli&l. Tliis last is jirobably the 
 same as the Hebrew vie()<!nl, which is indee»l ren- 
 dered by scythe in the margin of Jer. 1. Ifi. Tlie 
 reapers were the owners anil their children men-
 
 92 
 
 AGRICULTUllE 
 
 AGRICULTURE. 
 
 in. ^-machines, which are still used in Palestine, 
 anil Egypt. One of them, represented in the ai> 
 riexe.l (i^uie, is very mucli uaed in Palestine. It 
 
 servant^: and woiiicn— crvunts. and dav-lab .urers 
 'Ruth ii. 4, (I, 21, 2J; John iv. 3(); James v. 4). 
 RelVeshnjents ueie provided I'oi them, especially 
 Jiiiik, of which the gleaners were all.nved to par- 
 take (Ruth ii. 9). So in the Egyptian harvest- 
 scenes, we perceive a provision of water in skins, 
 imiig against tiees, or in jars upon stands, with 
 ;lie reapers ilrinking, and gleaners applying tc 
 share the draught. Among the I raelites, gleaning 
 
 was one of the stated provisions for the poor : and 
 for their benefit the corners of the iield were left 
 unieaped, and the reapers might not return for a 
 foigotteri sheaf. The gleaners, however, were to 
 ((jfain in the first place the express {)enTiission 
 olthe ]]roprietor or Ids steward (Lev. xix. 9, 10- 
 Deut. x.\iv. 19 ; Ruth ii. 2, 7). 
 
 Threshiny. — The ancient mode of threshing, as 
 de cribed in Scri]iture and figured on the Egyptian 
 monuments, is still preser\ed in Palestine. For- 
 merly tl»e sheaves were con\'eyeil from the field to 
 the thieshing-floor in carts ; but now they are 
 liorne, generally, on the backs of camels and asses. 
 The thieshing-flLior is a level plct of ground, of a 
 circidar shape, generally about fifty feet in dia- 
 meter, pre[)ared \\\v use by beating down the earth 
 till a hard Hoor is formed (Gen. 1. 10; Judg. vi. 
 37; 2 Sam. xxiv. Ki, 24). Sometimes several of 
 these lloors are contiguous to each other. Tlie 
 sheaves are spread out upon them ; and the grain 
 is trodden out by oxen, cows, and young cattle, 
 arrangeii five abreast, and ilri\en in a circle, or 
 rather in all directions, over the floor. This was the 
 common mode in the Bible times ; and Moses for- 
 bade that the oxen tlius em])loyed gliould be niuz- 
 iled to prevent them from tasting the com (Deut. 
 Kxv. 4 ; I^a. xxviii. 2«). Flails, or sticks, were 
 ooly used in threshing small quantities, or for the 
 lighter kinds cf grain (Ruth ii. 17; Isa. xxviii. 
 $Ty There were, however, some kinds of thresh- 
 
 is composed of two thick planks, fastened togethei 
 side by side, and bent uj)\vards in front. Shaip 
 fiagments of stone are fixed into holes bored in 
 the bottom. Tiiis machine is drawn over the corn 
 by oxen — a man or boy sometimes sitting on it to 
 niciease the weight. It not only separates tlie 
 grain, but cuts tlie straw and makes it lit for fod- 
 der (2 Kings xiii. 7). This is, most probably, the 
 Charutz rilH, or ' corn-drag,' whi(;li is men- 
 tioned in Scripture (Isa. xxviii. 27 ; xli. 15 ; 
 Amos i. 3, rendered ' threshing instiunient '), and 
 would seem to have been sometimes furnished with 
 iron points instead of stones. The Bible also no* 
 tices a machine called a Moreg, JIID (2 Sam. 
 xxiv. 22; I Chron. xxi. 23 ; isa. xli. L"^), which 
 is unquestionably the same which bears in Arabic 
 
 the name of^.y Koreg. This is explained by 
 
 Freytag (from tlie Kamoos Lex.) by — ' tribulum, 
 instrumentum, quo fiuges in area tentatur («« 
 Syria), sive ferreum, sive ligneum.' This ma- 
 chine is not now often seen in Palestine ; but is 
 more used in some jiarts of Syria, and is common 
 in Egypt. It is a sort of frame of wood, in which 
 are inserted three wooden rollers, armed with iron 
 teeth, &c. It bears a sort of seat or chair, in which 
 the driver sif5 to give the benefit of his weight. It 
 is generally drawn o\ er the corn by two oxen, artd 
 separates the grain, and bieaks up the .straw even 
 more etlectually tiian the drag. In all these 
 [irocesses, the corn is occasionally turned by a 
 fork ; and, when suHiciently threshed, is thrown 
 up by the same fork against the wind to separate 
 tlie grain, which is tlien gatl ered up and win* 
 nowed. 
 
 Winnotoing. — This was generally accomplished 
 by repeating the process of tossing up the grain 
 against the wind with a foik (Jer. iv. 11, 12), by 
 which the broken straw and chatf were dispersed 
 while the grain fell to the ground. The grain aft 
 terwards passed through a sieve to sejiarate the bit* 
 of earth and other impurities. After this, it un« 
 derwent a still further purification, by being to8«e(l 
 up with wooden scoojjs or short-handed shovf'
 
 AGRIELAl-\. 
 
 AH. 
 
 93 
 
 11130 a? we ^ee in Ei^yptiaii paintings (Isa. xxx. 
 24 ; .Taiin, Bihlhchcs Archiiologie, h. i. ch, : \a.\ 
 4 ; Winer, Biblhches Bealicorterbuch, s. !■. Ac- 
 kernau ;' Paulsen, Ackerbau d. Morffcnlandcr ; 
 Snrenlmsius, Misc/ma, parti.; Ugolini, De lie 
 Rustica Vett. Hchr<rnru>n, in Thesaitrus, t. xxix.; 
 N(irl)er<r, De Agrictilt. Orientali, in Opitsc. Acad. 
 iii. ; Reynier, De !' Eronnniie Puhlique ct Burale 
 dcs Arahes ct des Juifs ; Brown, AntiquMcs of the 
 Jewx; Robinson, Biblical Researches in Palestine ; 
 Wilkinson, Ancient Ef/i/piians ; Description de 
 I'l'jp/pfe, Antiquith, anil Etat Modcrne ; Rosel- 
 liii', Moni/menti dell' Er/itto. Information re- 
 specting' the I'ctiial products and agriculture '"^ 
 "alestine, collected from numerous travellei-s, 
 nay be seen in Kitto"s Pictorial Hisfori/of Palcs- 
 'ine, Physical History, ' History of the Months ') 
 
 AGRIKLAIA QPiypitXala; New Test, aypii- 
 KiLos). The wild olive-free is mentioned by 
 St. Paul in Romans xi. 17, 21. Here different 
 oiiinions have lieeii entertained, not only witii 
 respect to the jjlant, l)ut als.) with respect to the 
 explanation of the metajjlior. One great ililliculty 
 his arisen from the same name having lieen 
 applied to different plants. Tlius by Dioscorides 
 {De Mater. Med. i. 137) it is stated that fhe, 
 ' AypieXaia, or wild olive-tree, is by some called 
 Cotinus, and by others, the Etliiopic olive. So, in 
 the notes to Theoph. ed Boda .Sta])el, p. 224, we 
 read, ' Sed hie kotivos lego cum Athenaeo, id est 
 oleaster. Est vero alius cotinus, frutex, de quo 
 Plinius, xvi. IS. Est et in Apennino frufex qui 
 vocatur Cotinus, ad lineamenta modo conchylii 
 colore insignis.' Hence the wild olive-tree has 
 been confounded with rhus cotinus. or Venetian 
 sumach, with which it has no jioint of resem- 
 blance. Further confusion has arisen from the 
 present Elceagrixis anfjusti folia of l)otanists having 
 been at one time called Olea sylvestris. Hence it 
 has been inferred that tlie 'AypteKaia is this very 
 Eleagnus, E. angustifolia, or the narrow-leaved 
 Oleaster-tree of' Paradise of the Portuguese. In 
 rtiany jjoints It certainly somewliat resembles the 
 true olive-tree — that is, in the form and a])))eaiance 
 of the leaves, in the oblong-sbaped fruit (ediide 
 in some of the species), also in an oil being 
 expressed from the kernels; l)ut it will lujf ex))lain 
 the )ireMent passage, as rm process of grafting will 
 enable the Ehragnus to bear olives of any kind. 
 
 If we examinca little further the account gi\en 
 liy Dioscorides of the 'AypuXala, we find in i. Ill, 
 Hipi SaKpi'iou f'Aaiay AldioiriKris, that our olives 
 jnd wild olive-: exude Icais — that i'i, a gum or 
 ri-sin. like tlie Eliilopic olive. Here it is im- 
 portant to leniaik ttiat the wild olive of the 
 S'ei laiis is dijiinguislicd iVom t.'ie wild olive of 
 
 Ethiopia. 'Wliat jilant the latter may l)e, !t \» 
 not ]ierha]i9 easy to determine with certainty; but 
 Arabian authors translate the name by zait-aU 
 Soudan, or the olive of Ethiopia. Other synor.yme* 
 for it are lottz-al-bur, or wild almond ; and badam 
 kohcc, i. e. moimtain almond. Under the last name 
 the writer has obtained the kernels of the a])ricot in 
 Northern India, and it is given in Persian works 
 a.s one of the synonymes of the bnr-knnkh, or airti- 
 cot, which was originally called apricock and 
 jiraccocia, no iloubt f'lom the .Arabic hur-kookh. 
 The ajiricot is exteinively cultivated in the Hi- 
 malay.is, chiefly on account of the clear beautiful 
 oil yielded by its kernels, on which account 
 it might well be cotn])ared with the olive-tree. 
 But it does not serve better than the Ela-agnus to 
 explain the passage of St. Paul. 
 
 From the account of Dioscorides, hov/over, it is 
 clear that the Ethio])ic was distinguished from 
 the wild, aiul this from the cultivateil olive; and 
 as the plant was well known both to the Greeks 
 and Romans, tlieie was no danger of mi.sfaking it 
 for any other ])lant except itself in a wild state, 
 that is, the true 'A7pisAaia, Oleiister, or Olea 
 etirojxea, in a wild state. That this is the very 
 plant alluded to by the Ajwstle seems to l)e 
 proved from its having been the jmictice of the 
 ancients to graft the wild >ipon the cultivatal 
 olive tree. Thus Pliny (Hist. Nat. xvii. 1-) says, 
 * Airicc peculiare quidem in oleastro c»t inserere. 
 Quadam wternitate consenescunt jiroxima adoj)- 
 tioni virga emissa, atque ita alia ailwre ex eadem 
 juvenescente : iteiumtjue et quotics ojius sit, ut 
 a?vis eadem oliveta constent. Inseritur autem 
 oleaster calamo, et inocnlatione.' In the ' }*;o- 
 torial Bible' this practice has already been tiu- 
 duce<l as explaining the text ; and Tiieophrastu! 
 and Columella (De Re Bvst. v. 9) also refer to 
 it. The apostle, therefore, in comparing the Ro- 
 mans to the wild olive tree grafted on a cultivated 
 stock, made use of language which was most in- 
 telligible, and referred to a practice with which 
 they must have been jjerfectly familiar. — J. F. R. 
 
 AGRIPPA [Herodian Family]. Although 
 of the two Herods, father and son, who also bore the 
 name of Agrippa, the latter is iie^ known by his 
 Roman name, it seems proper to include him with 
 the other members of the Herodian dynasty, under 
 the name which he bore among his own people. 
 
 AGUR ("I-13X), the author of the sayings 
 contained in Prov. xxx., which the inscription 
 describes as comiioseil of the jiurejifs delivered 
 by 'Agur, the son of Jakeh,' to his friends 'Ithiel 
 and Ucal.' Beyond this everything that has been 
 stated of him, and of the time in which he lived, 
 is ]>uie conjecture. Some writers have regarded 
 the name as an ajiiiellative, but ditl'er as to ita 
 signification. Tlie Vulgate has ' Verba Con gre- 
 gantis filil Vomentis." Most of the fathers think 
 that Solomon himself is designated uTider this 
 name; ;ind if the word is to l)e understo.>d iw 
 an a))])eliative, it may be as well to look for its 
 meaning in the Syriac, where, according to Bar 
 
 Bahlul, in Castell. ^5Q,xJ means qui aapientia 
 
 studiit se apjtlicat. The Septuagint omits the 
 chajjter ascribed to .Vgur, iis well as tiie niiw first 
 verses of the following chapter. 
 
 AH (HN. brother) or rather Acii, is frecpiently 
 found, according to the ina<leqnate reprrscutatiov
 
 9t 
 
 AHAB. 
 
 of the ffiitt,n-al which is followed in our Version, 
 as the lirst syllaUle of coinpoiind Hebrew |)i-o]ier 
 names. The observations already ofl'cred in the 
 article Ab may he referred to for some illustration 
 of the metajiliorical use of the term brother in 
 such combinations, as well as for the law of tlieir 
 construction, whenever the two members are nouns 
 »f which one is de[)endent as a genitive on tlie 
 other. — J. N. 
 
 AHAB (INHN;, fatlier's brother; Sept. 
 *Axaa/3), son of Omri, and the sixth king of 
 Israel, who reigned twenty-one years, from B.C. 
 918 to 897. Ahab was, upon the whole, the 
 weakest of all tlie Israelitish monarchs ; and 
 althou,i,'h there are occasional traits of cliaracter 
 which show that he was not without good feelings 
 and dis])osittons, the history of his reign proves 
 that weakness of character in a king may some- 
 times be as injurious in its effects as wickedness. 
 Many of the evils of his reign may be ascribed to 
 the close cojinection wliich he formed with the 
 Plioenicians. There had long been a beneficial 
 commercial intercourse between that peo])le and the 
 Jews ; and the relations arising thence were very 
 close in the times of David anil Solomon. After 
 the sejjaratiiiii o{ the kingdoms, the connection 
 apjiears to have been continued by the nearer 
 kingdom of Israel, but to have l)een nearly, if not 
 quite, abandoned by that of Judah. The wife of 
 Ahab was Jezebel, the daughter of Ethbaal, or 
 Ithobaal, king of Tyre. She was a woman of 
 a decided and energetic character, and, as such, 
 soon established tliat influence over her husband 
 which such women always acquire over weak, and 
 not unfrt.quently also over strong, men. Ahab, 
 lieing entirely under the control of Jezebel, sanc- 
 tioned tlie introduction, and eventually established 
 the worsliip of the Phoenician idols, and especially 
 of the sun-god Baal. Hitherto the golden calves 
 in Dan and Betliel had been the only objects of 
 idolatrous worship in Israel, and they were in- 
 tended a.s symbols of Jehovah. But all reserve 
 and limitation were now aljandonetl. The king 
 built a temple at Samaria, and erecte;'. an image, 
 and consecrated a grove to Baal. A multitude 
 ol' the jniests and ])rophets of Baal were main- 
 tained. Idolatry became the i)redominant reli- 
 gion ; and Jeliovah, with the golden calves as 
 symbolical reju-esentations of liim, were viewetl 
 with no more re\-erence tlian B;ial and his image. 
 So strong was the tide of corrujrtion, tliat it ajj- 
 peared as if the knowledge of the true God was 
 soon to be for ever lost among the Israelites 
 But a man suitetl to this emergency was raised 
 up in the iierson of Elijah the projihet, wlio 
 boldly opjwsed himself to the regal authority, 
 and succaeiled in retaining many of his country- 
 men in the worship of the true Go<l. The greater 
 t.lw (Miwer which supjwrted idolatry, the more 
 striking were tlie jirophecies and miracles which 
 ilrected the attention of the Israelites to Je- 
 hovah, and brought disgrace on the idols, and 
 confusion on tlieir worsliipjiers. At length the 
 judgment of God on Aiiab and his house was pro- 
 nounced by Elijah, who announced that, during 
 Hie reign of his son, his whole race should be ex- 
 terminafeil. Ahab died of the wounds which he 
 received in a battle with the Syrian.s, according 
 to a preiliction of Micaiali, which the king dis- 
 believed, but y«t endeavoured to avert by dis- 
 
 (Dibr 
 
 AHALIM. 
 
 guising himself in the action (1 Kings xvi. 29 
 xxii. 40). 
 
 2. AHAB and ZEDEKIAH. The names of 
 two false prophets, who decei\eil the Israelites at 
 Babylon. For this they were threatened by i^ 
 remiah, who foretold that they should be put to 
 death by the king of Babylon in the presence o/ 
 those whom they had beguiled ; and that in fol- 
 lowing times it should become a common male» 
 diction to say, ' The Lord make thee like Ahab 
 and Zedekiah, whom the king of Babylon roastei 
 in the fire" (Jer. xxix. 21, 22). 
 
 AHALIM (D••^^^?) and AHALOTH 
 ^^\ usually ti-anslated Ai-oes, occur in 
 several passages of the Old Testament, as in 
 Psalm xlv. 8, 'All thy garments smell of myrrh, 
 and akaloth, and cassia;' Prov. vii. 17, ' I ha\e 
 perfumed my bed witli myrrh, witli chinamon 
 and ahalim ,-' Canticles, iv. 14, ' Spikenard and 
 saffron, calamus and cinnamon, with all trees of 
 frankincense, myrrh and ahaloth, with all the 
 chief spices.' From the articles whicli are as- 
 sociated with ahaloth and ahalim (both names 
 indicating the same thing), it is evident that it 
 was some odoriferous sul)stance, probably well 
 known in ancient times. Why these words have 
 been translated ' aloes,' not only in the English, 
 but in most of the older versions, it may not be 
 easy to ascertain ; but there is little doubt that 
 the odoriferous ahaloth of the above passages 
 ought not to be confounded with the bitter and 
 nauseous aloes famed only as a medicine. The 
 latter, no doubt, has some agreeable odour, when 
 of the best quality from the island of Socotra, 
 and when freslily-imported pieces are first broken ; 
 some not unpleasant odour may also be perceived 
 when small pieces are burnt. But common aloes 
 is usually disagreeable in odour and nauseous in 
 taste, and could never have been employed as a 
 perfume. Its usual name in Arabic, siibar, has 
 no resemblance to its European name. The 
 earliest notice of aloes seems to be that of Dios- 
 corides, iii. 25 ; the next that of Pliny (Xat. Hist. 
 xxvii. 5). Both describe it as being brought 
 from India, whence also probably came its name, 
 which is elwa in Hintlee. 
 
 The oldest and most complete account with 
 which we are acquainted of the fragrant and aro- 
 matic substances known to the ancients is that 
 gixen in the first twenty -eigtit chapters of the first 
 book of Dioscorides. There, along with Iris, 
 Acorum, Cyperum, Cardamomum, several Nards, 
 Asarum, Phu, Malabathrum, Cassia, Cinnamon, 
 Costus, Scliaenus, Calamus aromaticus. Balsa- 
 mum, Aspalathus, Crocus, &c., mention is also 
 made of Agallochum, which is described as a 
 wood brought from India and Arabia. In this 
 list, which we shall afterwards have frequent 
 occasion to refer to, we find Agallochum asso- 
 ciated with most of the same f.ibstances which are 
 mentioned along with it in tne above passages of 
 Scripture, whereas the author describes the true 
 aloe in a very different ]iart of his work. Subse- 
 quently to the time of Dioscorides, we find Agallo- 
 chum mentioned by Orobasius, .^tins,and P. j^gi- 
 rieta ; but they add nothitig to the first description. 
 The Ai-abs, however, as Rhases, Sera))ion, and Avi- 
 cenna, were well acquainted with this substanci", 
 of which they describe several varieties, roostlT 
 named from tlie places where they were produotiL
 
 AIIALni. 
 
 ami gi/e othei particulari respecting it, I)esl<le3 
 quoting Dioscoiides and pvevi.ms authors of llioir 
 own country. In the Lalin transhitlon of Avi- 
 cenna these descriptions ajipear under Agallo- 
 chum, Xihiloe, and Lignnm aloes; hut in the Ara- 
 bic etlition of the same author, under ^•»-U£l 
 Aghlajoon, ^j>-«j\ii Aghalookhi, but most fully 
 
 under ^i^ 'Aod, proiiotmced ood. This is one 
 
 Instance, and many others might be adduced, of 
 jhe Arabs descriljing the same thing under two 
 names, when they f>)und a substanfe described by 
 the Greeks — that is, Galen and Dioscorides, un- 
 der one name, and weie themselves acquainted 
 with it under another. In the Persian works on 
 Materia Medica (tnde Abattaciiim) we are in- 
 formed tliat arjallokhee is the Greek name of this 
 substance, and that theHindee name of one kind, 
 by them called add-i-hindec, is agijnr. Having 
 thus traced a substance which was said to come 
 from India to the name by which it is known 
 in that coiuifry, the next process would peihaps 
 n ituril' y h ive I'cen to ])rocure the substance, and 
 l*ace it to the nlant which yieUled it. We, how- 
 ever, followed the reverse method; having first 
 obtained tin; sulwtance calletl Aggur, we trAed 
 »t, through its Asiatic syn.inymes, to the Ag.illo- 
 ohum of Dioscorides. and, as lelated in the Illustr. 
 uf Ilimaltii/an Ilu/ani/. ji. 17 1. obtained in the 
 l>azaars of Noitheni India three varieties of this 
 far-famed and fragrant wood — 1. and-i-hindec ; 
 2. a kind procured by commerce from Surat, 
 which, however, does not appear to dill'er essen- 
 tially from the third, aod-i-kinarec, which was 
 said to come from China, and is, no doubt, the 
 alcamcricwn of Aviceiuia. 
 
 In the north-western provinces of India aggut 
 is said to be brought from Surat and Calcutta. 
 Garciasab Horto (Clusius, isxo^/c. Hist.), writing 
 on this subject near the former place, says that it 
 is called ' in Malacca (7a>T0, selectissimum autem 
 Calambac' Dr. Roxburgh, writing in Calcutta, 
 states that ugooroo is the Sanscrit name of the 
 incense or aloe-wood, which in Hindee is called 
 ugoor, and in Persian aod-hindee ; and that there 
 is little or no doubt that the real calambac or 
 agallochum of the ancients is yielded by an 
 immense tree, a native of the mountainous tracts 
 east and south-east from Silhet, in about 24° of 
 N. latitude. This plant, he says, cannot be dis- 
 tinguished from thriving plants exactly of the 
 same age of the Garo de Malacca received from 
 that jjlace, and then in the Botanic Garden of 
 Calcutta. He further states that small quantities 
 of agallnchum are sometimes imported into Cal- 
 cutta Ijy sea from the eastward ; but tliat such is 
 always deemed inferior to that of Silhet {Flara 
 bid. ii. 423). 
 
 The Garo de Malacca was first described by 
 Lamarck Irom a specimen presented to him by 
 Soimerat as that of the tree which yielded the 
 hois d'aigle of commerce. Lamarck named this 
 tree Aquilaria Malaccensis, wiiich Cavanilles 
 afterwards changed unnecessarily to A. ovafa. 
 As Dr. Roxburgh foinid tliat his plant belotiged 
 to tlie same ge.:us, he named \t Aquilafia Agallo- 
 chuvi, but it is printed Agallocha in his Flora 
 Itidica, probably by an oversight. He is of 
 oiuiiion ♦hit the AgcUorImm secundaririm of 
 
 AIIALIM. 
 
 M 
 
 Rumphius (.A)iib. ii. 31, f. 10), which that author 
 received under the name of Agallochum mnUic 
 ce»se, also belongs to flie same genus, as well aj 
 the Siiifoo of Ka-mpfer (A mail. Kxot. o. 903), 
 and the Op/iispcrmuin sinense of Loureiro. 
 
 [Aquilaria Aj;a'.!oclium.] 
 
 These plants belong to the Linn-xan class and 
 order Dccandrin inonogyiiia, and the natural 
 family (jf Aquihirittece ; at all events, we have 
 two tiees a.sccrtained as yielding this fragrant wood 
 — one, Aquilaria Agallochum, a native of Silhet ; 
 and tlie other, A. ovata or malaccensi.'s, a native 
 of Malacca. The missionary Loureiro, in his 
 description of the Flora of Cochin-China, desciibes 
 a third plant, which he unmes Aloejcghun, ' idem 
 est ac lignum aloe,' and the .species A. Agallo- 
 chxim, rejncsented as a large tree growing in the 
 lofty mountains of Champava Ijelonging to Co- 
 chin-China, about the 13th degree of N. lat., near 
 the great river ' Lavum :' ' Omnes veri aloes ligni 
 species ex hac arbore procedunt. etiam pretiosis- 
 sima, quae dici solet Calambac' This tree, be- 
 longing to the class and oruer Decanilrla monO' 
 gynia of Linnaeus, and the natural family of 
 Leguminosce, has always l)een admitted as one 
 of the hees yielding Agallochum. But as Lou- 
 reiro himself confesses tliat he had only once .seen 
 a mutilated brancii of the tree in flower, which, 
 by long carriage, had the |)etiils, anthers, and 
 stigma much liruised and torn, it is not impos- 
 sible that this may also belong to the genus Aqui- 
 laria, especially as his tree agrees in so manv 
 points with that described by Dr. Roxburgh, 
 as already observed by the latter in his Hist. 
 Flor. Ind. 1. c. Rum])liiu3 has described and 
 figured a third jilant, which he named arbor cx- 
 ca;caris, from ' Blindiiout,' in consequence of 
 its acrid juice destroying sight — whence the 
 generic name of Exca-cwia ; the sjiecific on 
 of agallochum he apjilied, because its wood is 
 similar to and often substituted for agallochum ; 
 ' Lignum hoc tanlam habet cum agallocho simi- 
 lituilinem.' And he states that it w;is sometimes 
 exported as sucli to Enroj*, and even to China. 
 This tree, the Excaecai-ia agallochum, of the Liii- 
 nsean class and order DicEcia triandria, and tlie 
 natural family of Euphorliiacea', is also very com- 
 mon in the delta of the Giuiges, wliere it is calle-J 
 Gpi-ia ; ' but tiie wood-cutters of the Suuder>
 
 »d 
 
 AHALIM. 
 
 bunils,' Dr. Roxburgh says, ' who are the peo])le 
 best acquainted with tlie nature of this tree, re- 
 port, the jKile, white, milky juice tliereof to be 
 highlf acrid aitd very daiigenius.' Tlie only use 
 made of the tice, as fa«- as Dr. Roxl)urgii could 
 lean 1, was for chajxoiil and (irewood. Agalloclium 
 of any sort is, hi' tx'lieved, never found in this 
 tree, whicli is olten tiie only one quoted as tliat 
 I yiekiin,^ ajila-wood ; hut, tiotwitlistaiiding flie 
 negative testimony of Dr. Riix!iuv..;h, if may. in 
 .:urticahir situations, as stated liy Rumpliius, yield 
 A substitute for liiat fra:^rant and long-famed wood. 
 Having thus traced the agailochum of commerce 
 to the titjfs wliich yield it, it is extremely iiiterestuig 
 to find that the Malay name of the substance, 
 wliich is agila^ is so little dillei-ent from the 
 Heltrew ; not more, indeed, than may l)e ol>served 
 iu many well-known wends, where the hard (f of 
 one lauguajre is turned iuU) tiie aspirate in another. 
 It is tlieiefore probable that it was by the name 
 agila {cffhil, in RosenmoUer, Bibl Bot. p. 23 i) 
 that this wood was first known in commerce, 
 Iwing cotcveyed across the Bay of Bengal to the 
 island of Ceylon or the |)eninsula of India, which 
 the Arab or Pliosnician ti-aders visited at very 
 remote periods, and where they obtained tlie eaily- 
 knowu spices arid precious stones of India. It is 
 tiot a little cvuious that Captain Hamilton (Ac- 
 comtt of E. Ttidies, i. C!S) mentions it by the name 
 of afja!.a, an odoriferous wood at Muscat. We 
 know that tise Poituguese, when they reached the 
 eastern coast from the peninsula, olttained it under 
 this name, whence tliey called it pao d"aguila, or 
 eagle-wood ; which is the origin of the generic 
 itame Aquiiaria. 
 
 The term arjila, which in Hehi-ew we suppose 
 t.) ha\e been converted into a!iel, and from 
 wl.ich were fonned ahalim and ahalnih, ap]x?ai-s 
 to have hpeu the source of its confusion with 
 aloes. Sprengel has observed that the primiti\e 
 name seems to be preserved in the Arabic ap- 
 
 jjellations Jajj' sind ^(Jj*, which may be read 
 alloek (<x alioet) ajid allieh. These come ex- 
 tremely »ear ' Jj^ aelica, pronounced elwa — the 
 
 Hindoo name of the medical aloe. Hence 
 the two names became confounded, and one of 
 them apjilied to two very diflerent eubstaivce*. 
 But it was soon found necessary to distin- 
 guish the agallochum by the term ^vKoAoriy, 
 which has been transhxted into '.ign-aioe. That 
 the name aloe was considered to be synonymous 
 with ahalim, at aji early (K^riod, is evident, as 
 ' the Chaldee tianslation of the Psalms and Can- 
 ticles, tlie t)ld Latin version of the Proverbs and 
 Canticles, and the Syriac tran.slation, have all 
 rendei'ed tlie Ilebiew word by aloes' (Rosenmiiller, 
 I. c. p, '234 . Tlieie can lie little or no doubt 
 that the same oiSoril'exous agila is intended in the 
 ()assag« of Jolin xLx. 39. When the body of our 
 Siviour was taken down from the cross, Nico- 
 demus, we are told, brought myrrh and aloes 
 for the pwipose of winding it in linen clothes 
 with the^ spices But the quantity (lOtlUis.) 
 u.'sed has lieen olijecfed to by some writers, and 
 tlierefore Dr. Harris has suggested, that, ' instead 
 tX kKHTov, it might originally have lieen ScwaToV, 
 10 lljs. weight." It is well known, however, that 
 Very large cpiantities of spices were occasionally 
 uaeA at the funeiaU o! Jews. But before olyect 
 
 AHALIM. 
 
 m^ to the qtiaiitlty of this exi^ensive wood, (K»- 
 putanfs should have ascertained tlie prnportiont 
 in wliich it was mixed with the myrrh, an articlt 
 sufficiently abundant and of moderate price, be- 
 cause easily obtained by the Aral/ians from the 
 opposite coast of Africa. Dr. Harris has, more- 
 over, ol»jected, that ' the Indian lign-aloes is so odo- 
 riferous and so agreealdc, that it stands in no nec<l 
 of any composition to increiise or moderate ita 
 jjerfume.' But this very excellence makes it 
 better suited for mixing with less fragrant sub- 
 stances, ami, however large the qu;intity of thcss 
 substances, like the broken vase, ' the scent of the 
 roses will hang round it still.' 
 
 The only passage where there is any difficulty 
 is that in which there is the earliest mention of 
 the ahiilok (Num. xxiv. 6"). Here Balaam, 
 referring to the flouri.shing conditioTi of the Israel- 
 ites, says, ' as the trees o{ ahaUm, which the 
 Lord hath planted, and as cedar trees beside the 
 waters.' Whether the expression is liere to be un- 
 derstood literally, or merely as a poetical form, 
 is doubtful, especially as authorities differ as to 
 the true reading ; some versions, as tlie Septua- 
 gint, Vulgate, Syriac, and Arabic, having * tents' 
 instead of ' lign-aloes,' from which it would seem 
 
 tliat, in place of D V^K, akalim., tliey liad found 
 
 in their copies DvIlX, ohalini (Rosenmiiller, 
 p. 235). 
 
 In Arabian avithors nvimerous varieties of agallo- 
 chum are mentioned. These are enumerated by 
 various writers (Ce\s. Hierohot.\).\i'-\'\. Peisiati 
 authors mention only three : — 1. Aod-i-hiiidce, that 
 i.s, the Indian; 2. Aod-i-ckinec, or Chinese kind 
 (probably that from Cochin-China) ; while the 
 third, nr Sttmimdiirce, a term generally apjilied to 
 tilings brought from sea, may have reference to 
 the inferior variety from the Indian i.shmds. In 
 old works, such as those of Bauhin and Ray, 
 three kinds are also mentioned : — I. Agallochum 
 prwstantissimum, also called Calamhac ; 2. A. Of- 
 (icinarum, or Palo de Aguilla of Linschoten ; 3. 
 A. sylvestre, or Aguilla brava. But besides these 
 varieties, obtained fiom ditlerent localities, per- 
 haps from ditfererit plants, there are also distinct 
 varieties, obtainable from the same plant. Thus 
 in a MS. account by Dr. Roxburgh, to which 
 we have had access, and where, in a letter, dated 
 8tli Dec, 1808, from R. K. Dick, esq., judge 
 and magistrate at Silliet, it is stateil that four dif- 
 ferent qualit'es may l>e obtaiiwd from the same 
 tree: — 1st. G/tiirkee, wh\ch sinks in water, and 
 sells fiom 12 to 16 rupees per seer of 2 lbs. ; 2nd. 
 Doinh, 6 to S rupees per seer; 3rd. Satiula, 
 which floats in water, 3 to 4 rupees ; and 4tli, 
 ChooruDi, which is iu small jiieces, and also 
 floats in water, from I to \^ lujjee ]«r seer (tlit 
 three last names mean only '2nd, 3rd, and 4tl 
 kinds); and that sotnetimes 80 lbs. of these four 
 kinds may l;»e obtaineil from one tree. All these 
 tvcffjitr-tiecs, as they are called, do not prwluce 
 the Afffjiir, nor does every pait of even the most 
 productive tree. Tlie natives cut into tlie wood 
 until they observe dark -coloured veins yielding 
 the perfume : these guide tliem to the place 
 containing the aggur, which generally extendi 
 but a short way through the centj-e of the trunk or 
 branch. An essence, or attur, is obtained by 
 bruising the wood in a mortar, and then infusing 
 it in boiling water', when the attur (Joats on tJx
 
 All ISUERUS. 
 
 riTlace. Early decay does not seem incident to 
 all kinds oi' agalloclmm, i'.a- we possess s])eciiiiL'ns 
 v"vf the wood gorged with fragrant resin (Illustr. 
 Hirn. Bot. p. 173) which sliow no symptoms of it ; 
 but still if is staii'd that tile wood is sometimes 
 buried in the earlh. This may he lor tlie jjurpo^i" of 
 iticreasing its spocilic fjravity. A large sjwcimen 
 ill the Museiun of tiie East India House dis))lays 
 a cancellated structure, in which the resinous 
 puts remain, the rest of the wood having been 
 letnoved, apparently by decay. — -J. F. R. 
 
 AHASUERUS (C'1"lip'nt?\ or Achasuve- 
 Ri;sH, is the name, or ratlier tiie title, of four Median 
 arid I'ersian nionarchs mentioned in the Bible. The 
 eailier attempts of Siuionis and others to derive this 
 rij-uie iVom tlie Persian achash aie unworthy ot 
 noiii'e. Hyile (Z)e Reliy. Vet. Pers. p. 43) more 
 ijdldly proposed to disie.;ard tiie M;i.soretic juinc- 
 tuation, and to lead the cunsonants, Acsvxircs, 
 so as to correspond witli '0^i;o/;rjy, a Persian royal 
 title. Among uiose who assume the identity of 
 the nama Achashverosh and Xer-xes, Cirotefend 
 heiieves he has disco\eied the true oitho.,'raphy of 
 Xerxes in the arrowhead inscriptions of Peisepolis. 
 He has deciphered signs representative of the 
 soimds khshhershe, and considers the tirst part 
 of tlie word to be the Zend fomi of the later 
 shah, 'king" (Heeien's Idco^ i. 2, 350). Ge^enius 
 also (in his Tliesaunis) assents to this, except that 
 (as Reland had done before) he takes the first 
 liarl of the word to be tlie original form of sh'r, 
 a lion, and the latter to be that of shnh. The 
 Hebrew Achashverosh might thus be a modifica- 
 tion of khshhershe : the prosthetic aleph being 
 prefixed (as even Scaliger suggested), and a 
 jjeiV vowel being inseited between the firvt two 
 sooiids, merely to obviate the ditliculty whicli, as 
 i- well known, all Syro-Avaliians lind in jjio- 
 uouiiciiig two consonants befurc a vowel. One of 
 tlie highest aatlioiities in such questions, however, 
 A. F. Pott {Lty/nol. Forschungcn, i. p. Ixv.), 
 Considers Xerxes to be a comjwund of the Zend 
 csaihra, king (with loss of the t), and csahija, also 
 meaning king, the original foim of shuli ; and 
 P'l^'ge^ts that Achashveiosli — its identity with 
 Xe.xe*, as he thinks, not lieing estaljlished — may 
 be the Peiilvi hiczvaresh,' hero' (from A«,' good," and 
 zuar, * strength"), coi responding to aprjios, which 
 Henjdotus (vi. 9S) says is the true sense of Xerxes. 
 Jahn, iiidee<I, first proposed the deiivation from 
 zvaresh (in his Arckdul. ii. 2, 211); but then lie 
 still thouglit that the tirst jiart of the name was 
 uchask — a modern Persian word, which only seems 
 to denote /iric'e, value. Lastly, it deserve; notice 
 that the kethib, in Esther x. I, has ti'lD'nN, 
 pointed Achashresh ; and that the Syriac version 
 always (and sometimes the Arabic also, as in Dan. 
 ix. 1) writes the name Ae'/ish!resh. Ilgeii ado|)ts 
 the kethib as the authentic con.sonants of the 
 name; but changes the vowels to Ach5/idrt.sh, a.nd 
 modilies his etymology accordingly. 
 
 Tlie ^rst Ahasueruis (Sept. 'Atraoinipos, Tt.eo- 
 (lotioii, s.fp^Tjs) is incidciitally mentioned, in 
 Dan. ix. 1, as the lather of Darius the Mede. It 
 is generally agreed that the )>eis(.ri here referred to 
 U the Astyages of jirofane history. See the article 
 Uakius. 
 
 The secotid Ahasuerus (Sej)t. 'AcrcouTypoy) oc- 
 curs in Ezra iv. 6, wheie it is said that in the 
 begiuuing of lus leign the enemies oi the Jews 
 
 AIIASIERUS. 
 
 91 
 
 wrote an accusation against theiri, the result of 
 whicli is not mentioneil. Tiie whole question, as 
 to the Persian king here meant, de;ieJids on ilie 
 light in which the passage of (his chapter, ttoxn 
 ver. 6 to 21, is legarded. The view which Mt 
 Howes seems to have first ])roposed. and which lit 
 Hales adopted in his Aituly.sis of i'hnmohjgij 
 proceeds on the theory that the wri'er of ihischa])- 
 ter, after mentioning the inteiruj/tion to (he build- 
 ing of the temple from the time of Cyrus down to 
 that of Daiius, king of Persia (ver. 1 -.*);, is led, 
 by the association of the subject, to enter into a 
 detail of the hindrances thiown in the way ^-i 
 building and foitii"ying the vit>i Rafter the lemi le 
 had been completed), under the successors of 
 Darius Hystaspis (ver. (5-23) ; and that, after 
 tills digiesslve anticiiiation of events jiosierior to 
 the reign of Darius, he returns (in \er. 24 j to the 
 history of the building of the temjjle under tiial 
 prince. This view necessarily makes the Achasli- 
 verosh and Aitachshashta of ver. (i and 7 to he tlm 
 successors of Darius Hystaspis, i. e. to be Xerxes 
 and Artaxerxes Lonc/imamts. The main argu- 
 ment on which this fheoiy tests, seems to be the 
 circumstance that, in the whole jvissage, tlieie is 
 no mention whatever of the lemplc ; but, on the 
 contrary, that the setting iqi the walls of the lebel- 
 lious citg forms the sole giou'nd of complaint : so 
 that the passage must rel'er to what occuueil after 
 the temple was finished (see the extract fion; 
 Howes in the Pictorial Bible, ad loc.). 
 
 There are, however, some objections against tht 
 conclusiveness of this reasoning; lor, fiist, even 
 assuming the object of the enemies of the Jews, in 
 this accusation, to have been to hinder the build- 
 ing of the temjile, it is yet eiisy to conceive how 
 the omission of all mention of the temple might be 
 compatible with their end, and dejiendent on the 
 means they wcie obliged to enqiloy. Tliey could 
 only obtain tlieir object tluough the Persian king; 
 they theiefoie used arguments likely to weigh 
 with him. They ap];ealed to motives of state 
 policy. Accordingly, they sought to aliriri Lis 
 jealousy le>t the lebellious city should become 
 strong enough to resist tribute, and lefuse to allow 
 the transit of his armies; they diew attention to 
 the rebuilding of the defences, as the main point of 
 the argument ; and said nothing about the temjjle, 
 because that would be a matter of secondary 
 importance in the only point of view in which the 
 subject would appear to the Persian king. But, 
 secondly, it has been shown by a minute inquiiy 
 by Tiendelenburg (in Eichhoin's Einleit. in die 
 Apocryph. Schrift. p. 351), that the first book of 
 the apocryjihal Esdras is princijially a t"iee, liut in 
 pails continuous, translation of the canonical 
 Ezra. It is, theiefoie, lemaikable that the author 
 of Esdras, who has taken this very account of the 
 accusation from Ezra, was so far from discemiiig 
 tlie omission of the temple, iind the conclusion that 
 Mr. Howes has drawn from it, that his letter 
 (ii. 16-30) states, that 'The Jews, being come into 
 Jerusalem, that reliellious city, do build the mar- 
 ket-jjlace, and repair the walls of it, and do lag ti^e 
 foundation of (he temple .... Ami foiasmucli 
 as the things pertaining io the temple are now in 
 hand, we think it meet not to neglec: such a mat- 
 ter." Josephus also (.4?(^jj. xi. 2), conformablir 
 to his general adheience, in this pa.-t, to the a])o- 
 cryjihal Esdias, both iise.s, in his lerfer. the same 
 teinis about the reconnt-uction of tlie temple being
 
 M 
 
 AHASUERUS. 
 
 t'.en coinmeuced, ami even tells the wliole story as 
 ret'eiiiiii,' to Cambi/ses, v/hicli makes it rlear tliat 
 ftf vindeistoCHl the jiassaire of the immediate suc- 
 cessor of Cyrus. Tliiiilly, it is even i)rol»al)le, <) 
 priori, that the reliuildiu;; of the temple an<l of 
 the city itself would, to a certain extent, necessa- 
 rily ;.^o on to:^'et.her. The Jews must have had 
 sutlicient time and need, in the fitleen years be- 
 tween the accession of Cyrus and that ofDarius Hys- 
 taspis to erect some l>uiliiin;^s for the sustenance 
 and defence of the colony, as well as for carrying; 
 on the'structure of the teniple itself As we read 
 of ^ ceiled hiinses' in Ha.g\;a.\ i. 4, they may have 
 built defences sufficient to give a colour to the 
 statements of the letier; and enough to free a crl- 
 ti" from the necessity of transferring the passage 
 in Kzra to the time of Artaxerxes Longimanus, 
 solely liecause it speaks of the election of the icalls 
 Moie(n er, a* Ezra (ix. 9) speaks of God having ena- 
 b'eil the Jews to rejjair the temple, and of ids hav- 
 ing 'given them a wall in Jerusalem,' we find that, 
 when the temple was linished (and no evidence 
 sliows how long before thai ), they actually had 
 h-iilt a wall. Joseplius also (Antiq. xi. 4, 4) 
 mentions even 'strong walls with which they had 
 sm-rouuded the city " &e/ore th«> temple was com- 
 ji^red. (It is wortli while to remark that Dr. 
 Hales, s])eaking of this jt!o7z of Ezra, endeavours, 
 consistently with his theory, to make it ' most 
 pnil)ably mean the fence of a. shepherd's fold, 
 here liguratively taken for tlieir e>tablishment in 
 their own land.' But any lexicon will show that 
 "nj means a fence, a rcall, generally ; and that 
 it is only limited by the context to mean the wall 
 of a (jar den, the fence of a fold.) Again, it is 
 assumed that Nehemiah shows that the walls of 
 tiie city were not built until his time. Not such, 
 nc:r the same, as he erected, granted. But — to 
 boiTow a remark of J. D. Michaelis — when we 
 read in Neh. i. 2, of the Jews who returned to 
 Persia, and who answered Nehemiah"s inquiry 
 after the fate of the colony, by informing him that 
 ' tlie wall of Jerus ilem is broken down and the 
 gate', thereof burned with tire," is it ))ossible that 
 they can refer to the destruction of the walls by 
 Nebuchadnezzav, 144 years before? Was such 
 news so long in reaching Nehemiah? Is it not 
 much easier to believe that the Jews, soon after 
 tlieir return, erected some defences against the 
 hostile and predatory clans around them ; and 
 that, in the many years which intervene between 
 the hooks of Nehemiah and Ezra (of which we 
 have no record), there was time enough lor those 
 tribes to have burnt the gates and thrown down 
 ttie walls of their imjjerfect fortifications? Lastly, 
 tiie view of Mr. Howes seems to require peculiar 
 philological arguments, to reccr.cile the construc- 
 tion of the digression with tl.e ordinary siyle of 
 Hebrew narrative, and to point out the jiarticles, 
 01 other signs disjunctive, by which we may know 
 ti'.at ver. 24 is to be se\ered from tiie preceding 
 Nor is it altogether a trivial olijection to his 
 theory, that no scholar a]i])ears to have entertaineil 
 it l.-eloie himself. Tlie nearest approach to it lias 
 keen made liy \'itringa, who, in-his Hypotypvsi 
 'J cmnorum (cited in M.\t\i<iey\s's Adn' ft. l^berior), 
 «ii,'gest3, indeed, that \er. 6 refers to Xerxes, but 
 tikplaiiis all the rest d'the passage iis applying to 
 »j.imbyses. 
 
 If ttie arguments here adduced are satisfactory, 
 tne Ahas'ierus of our jiassage is the inunediate 
 
 AHASUtRUS. 
 
 successor of Cyrus — the frantic tyrant Cambywd, 
 who came to the throne u.c. .529, and dietl after a 
 reign of seven years and five months ; and tin 
 discrepancy between Ezra and the apocryphal 
 Esdras and Jose])hus — both of whom leave out 
 ver. 6, and mention only the king of whom the de- 
 tailed etory of the letter is related, whom the on« 
 calls Artaxerxes, and the other Cainbyses — irjty 
 be reconcilefl, by supposing that they each make 
 the reigns of Cambyses and of the impostor Smer- 
 dis into one. 
 
 The third Ahasuei'us (Sept. 'Apra^ep^ris) -is the 
 Persian king of the book of Esther. The chief 
 facts recorded of him there, and the dates of 
 their occurrence, which are important in the sub- 
 sequent inquirv, are these : In the third year o/ 
 his reign he made a sumptuous banquet for all 
 his nobility, and prolonged the feast for 180 daj'S. 
 Being on one occasion merry with wine, he 
 ordered his queen Vashti to be brought out, to 
 show the people her beauty. On her refusal to 
 violate the decorum of her sex, he not only in- 
 dignantly divorced her, but published an edict 
 concerning her disobedience, in order to insure tc 
 every husband in his dominions the rule in his 
 own house. In the seventh year of his reigu 
 he married Esther, a Jewess, who however con- 
 cealed her parentage. In the ticelfth year of his 
 reign, his minister Haman, who had received 
 some slights from Mordecai the Jew, offered him 
 10,000 talents of silver for the privilege of or- 
 dering a massacre of the Jews in all ]iarts of the 
 empire on an appointed day. The king refused 
 this immense sum, but acceded lo his request; 
 and couriers were despatched to the most distant 
 provinces to enjoin the execution of this decree. 
 Befoi'e it was accomplished, however, Mordecai 
 and Esther obtained such an inl'uence over iiim, 
 that he so tar annidled his recent enactment as to 
 despatch other couriers to empower the Jew^i to 
 defend themselves manfully against their enemies 
 on that day ; the result of which was, that they 
 slew SOO of his native subjects in Slmshan, and 
 75.000 of them in the provinces. 
 
 Although almost every Medo-Peisian kin ^, fiom 
 Cyaxarei I. down to Artaxerxes III. (Ochus),has in 
 his turn found some champion to assert his title to 
 be the Ahasuerus of Esther, yet the ])resent inquiry 
 may reasonably be confined within much nar- 
 rower limits than would be requisite for a dis- 
 cussion of all the rival claims which have been 
 ])referred. A succinct statement, princijially de- 
 rived from Justi's ingenious Vcrsuch iiber den 
 Kimig Ahasverus (in Eichhom's Repertnrium, 
 XV. 1-3S"), will suffice to show that Darius Ilysta- 
 spis is the earliest Persian king in whom the 
 plainest marks of identity are not evidently want 
 ing; that Darius Hystasjns himself is, nevcrtht^ 
 les=, excluded on less obvious, but still adequate 
 grounds ; and t'.i t the whole question lies, and 
 with what preponderance of probaliility, iietween 
 Xerxes find his successor Artaxeixes Longi- 
 manus. 
 
 As Ahasuerus reigned from India to Ethiopia 
 (Esth. i. 1), and imposed a tribute (not neces- 
 sarily for theyi'rif time) on tiie land and ihles of 
 the sea (x. 1); and laid the disobe^liwice of 
 Vasiiti bef(/re the seven princes wiiich see the 
 king's face, and sit first in tlm kingdom (i. 14), 
 it is argued that these three cin:ui!istances coiicuj. 
 acconling to the testimony of jjiofane histur)'
 
 AIIASUERUS. 
 
 iD«Xclu(lt' all t le (iredecwsors orDiuius Hy^tasiiis. 
 For Darius was the liist Persian kiiii; wlio suli- 
 due»l India, which theiiceioith foinieil the twen- 
 tieth province of liis em|iire; and, as for Ethiopia, 
 Candiysej, wlio (irst invaded it, only ohtained a 
 partial con([ue>t tlicre (^Ilorod. iv. 4 i ; iii. 25, 
 9-1). Darius was al>o (he (iist who inijiosed a 
 (tilted tjiOute on the dillerent ]irovinces of tlie 
 empiie, as, from the tini&> of Cyrus, tlie levenue 
 (lepencU'd on the vohnitiny u;ifts of the jieojile 
 (Herod, iii. SDj. Lastly, th.e seven jirinces, and 
 t'leir pi'ivile.,'e of seeins^lhe kint;"s face, aie traced 
 to the events attendiii;^ tlie elevation of Daiius to 
 the throne : when the seven conspirators wiio slew 
 the usurjjer Snierdis stipulated, Lefore ever it was 
 decitled which of their number sliould ohtain tlie 
 jrown. tliat all the seven shoidd enjoy s|x,'cial j)ri- 
 vileges, and, among others, this veiy one of se^in;; 
 the Kiiit; at any time without announcement 
 ^Ke.od. iii. S4). Tliis is conliinied hy the fact, 
 i.liat altliouf,di the Persian counsellors oi' tlie time 
 .interior to Darius aie often mentioned (as when 
 «3amljyses laid licfoie them a question parallel to 
 that alx.Hit V'iishti, Herod, iii. 31), yet the tlolinite 
 nundjer sei'cu doe.-; not occur ; wheieas. after 
 Darius, we find the .seven counsellors Iwlii in 
 Estlier, and again in the leignof Artaxerxes Longi- 
 manus (^Ezra vii. 14V (It is an oversi;i;ht to ap- 
 jieal to this account of the seven consjiirators, in 
 imler to find the precise number of seioi princes. 
 For the narrative in Herodotus shows tliat, as 
 Darius was cliosen king fiom among the seven, 
 there could only be six }.ei.sons to claim the pri- 
 vilege of seeing the king's face ; not to insist tliat 
 Otaiies, who made a separate demand for himself, 
 and wlio withdiew from the paity before those sti- 
 {Rilations were made, may possibly have leiluced 
 •iie number of privileged counsellors \oJive.) 
 
 But neither can it be Darius Hystaspis himself, 
 sltlwugh he jw^sesses all theie marks of agieemeut 
 with the i)ers(m intend«d in tl>e book of Estlier. 
 For, thst, net only can none of the names of the 
 seven conspirators, as givjen either by Herodotus 
 or by Ctesias, be l)roug}*t t/) accoid witii the 
 Jiames of ti»e seven iirinces in Esther; Init, what 
 is of gieater imjiortance, it is even more dillicult 
 to lind tlie name of Darius himself in Acha^ihve- 
 rosh. For, notwithstanding the diverse c-orruji- 
 tions to which projjer names are exposed when 
 tiiinsnjitt*;.! througli ditleient foreign languages, 
 there is _vet such an agreement lietween tlie Zend 
 name found by Grotefend in the cmieifoim in- 
 scrijitions, antl the Dari^is ot" the Gieeks, and 
 Darjuvesh (tiie nawK- by which Darius Hystasjiis 
 is undoubtedly designale<l elsewhere in the Old 
 Testament), that the genuineness of tliis title is 
 open to less susjn(non tlian that of almost any 
 (ither P«'.>uui king. It would, tlierethre, lie nie.K- 
 piicable that tlie aullwr of tlie Look of lOsther 
 above all others should not •«nly not call him by 
 tlie autlisiitic name of sacred as well as profane 
 histcry, but should ajiply to him a itime which 
 lias been shown to be given, in almost ail con- 
 temporary l^Hiks of the Old Testament, to other 
 Persian kings. Secondly, the moral evidence is 
 •gainst him. The mild and just cliaracter 
 ascritied to Darius itiiders it highly improlvable 
 that, after favouring the Jews from the second to 
 the si.'vth year of his reign, he should liecome a 
 senseless tool in the hands of Ilaman. and con- 
 Wiit to thtiir extir atiou. La,itlj, we read of his 
 
 AII.VSUEHUS. 
 
 99 
 
 marrying two daughters and a granddaughtet of 
 Cyrus, and a daugliter tif Otanes — anil these only ; 
 would Darius have repudiated one of these for 
 such a trifle, wliei- his peculiar jwsition, as lh« 
 first king of his race, must have rendeitsi such 
 alliances indispensable ? 
 
 It only remains now to weigh the evidence 
 against Aitaxerxe.s, in order to l'.?ail nioie co- 
 gently to the only alternative left — that it is 
 Xerxes. As Artaxerxes allowed Ezra to go to 
 .Jerusalem with a colony of exiles in the seventh 
 year of his reign (Ezia vii. 1-7) ; and as he issued 
 a decree in teims so exceedingly liivouiable lo 
 the religious as well as civil infeicsts of the .Jews 
 (giving them lilieral grants and immunities, 
 speaking of their law as the law of the (iod or 
 heaven, and threatening punishment t.i whenever 
 would not do the lawof Ciod and of the king. E/ia 
 vii. 11-26): hov/ could \lM\\M\,/icc years af\ei- 
 tcards. veiitnie (o descrilie the Jews to him as a 
 [leople whom, on the very account of their law, it 
 was not lor the king's profit to suffer? .\nd low 
 could Hainan so directly propose their extermi- 
 nation, in the face of a decree so si^riially in their 
 favour, and .so recently issued by the same kiiiu' .' 
 especially as the laws of the Medes and Pei^ian? 
 might not be altered! Again, as Aitaxpixes 
 (as.suming always that he is the Art.ichsiia>t if 
 Ezra vii. 1, and not Xerxes, as is nevertiielcss 
 maintained by J. D. Michaelis, Jalin, and De 
 Wetle) was cajiable of such lifjeialitv to tiie 
 Jews in the seventh year of his reign, let i.s not 
 forget that, if he is tlie Ahasuerus of the boi.k of 
 Esther, it was in that same year that he mairie<f 
 the Jewess. Now, if— by taking the (list and 
 tentli months in llie seventh ye.ir of the king (the 
 dates of ihe dejiartnre of Ezra, and of the riiiLiiiage 
 of Esther ) to be the first iuid tenth months of tlie 
 Hebrew year (-as. is the usual mode of notation; 
 see Hit/ig, Die xii Kleintu Proijhcteii, note to 
 Haggai i. 1), and not the first and 'entii from the 
 period of his ftccwstou —we assume that the lie- 
 jiarture of Ezra took jilace after his maiiinge 
 with her, his clemency might lie the elliect of her 
 influence on his niiniL Tlieii we have to explain 
 how he could lie induced to consent to the cxtir- 
 patioJi of the Jews in tlie tueUtu year of his icigu, 
 n.itwilhst^nding that her influence still continneci 
 — for we find it evidently at woik in the tvvelfth 
 year. But if, on the other liaiul, his indulgencp 
 to Ezra Wiis before his marriage, then we have 
 even a greater difKculty to encounter. For then 
 Artaxerxes must have acted from his own un- 
 biassed lenity, and his jiiirposed cruelty in the 
 twelfth year woulfl place him in an incongruous 
 op]iosition with himst-lf As we, moreover, lind 
 .•\rta,\erxe-^ again propitious to their ijiteies*.--, in 
 the twentietfi year of his reign — when he allowed 
 iV'eheniiah lo leturn to Jerusalem — it is nuicl 
 easier to lielieve that he w;is also favouiably di- 
 posed to them in the twelfth. At any rate, it 
 would lie allowing Esther a long time to exerci.-e 
 iui ini|iieiic«;oii his dis|x>sition, if his clemency in 
 tlie twentieth year was due to her, anil not to his 
 own inclination. Besides, the fact that iioitl.ei 
 Ezra nor Nelieniiah gives the least hint that the 
 Inderal [lolicy >)f Arta.verxes towards them waj. 
 owing to the infliieiK'e of their countrywoman, \t, 
 an important negative point in tlie scale of )ii(iba- 
 bilities. In this i-itse also there is a seiious dijli 
 culty in tiie name As Artaxerxes is caIImI
 
 KK> 
 
 AHASUERUS. 
 
 Artachshast in Ezra and Nehemiah, we cer- 
 tainly miglit expect, the author of tlie book of 
 Esther to agree with them in the name of a king 
 whom tiiey all l'a<^l '"^'^ such occasion to know. 
 Nor is it, ijerluxps, uniinpoitant to add, that 
 Norherg asserts, on the authority of native Per- 
 sian historians, that tlie mother of l}ahman, i. e. 
 Aitaxerxes Longimanus, was a Jewess {Opua- 
 cula Acad. iii. 218). This statCTTiwit would 
 agree excellently witlj tlie theory tliat Xerxes was 
 Ahasuc-rus. Lastly, llie joint testimony borne 
 to his clcincncy and magnanimity by tiie acts 
 recorded of liim in Ezia and Neliemiali, and by 
 the accordant voice of profane writers (Plutavcli, 
 Artaxerxes ; IJiodor. Sic. xi. 71 ; Ammian. Mar- 
 cell. XXX. ^), prevents us from recognising Ar- 
 taxerxei in the doliauclied, imbecile, and cruel 
 tyrant of the book of Esther. 
 
 On tlie ground of moral resemblance to that 
 tyrant, however, every trait leads us to Xeixes. 
 The king who scourgal and fettered the sea ; wlio 
 liehejded his engineers because the elements de- 
 .st roved their bridge over the Hellespont j who so 
 n.thleidy slew tlie eldest son of Pythius because 
 Ins fathev ijesought him to leave him one sole sup- 
 port of his declining years ; who dishonoured the 
 remains of the valiant Leonidas •, and wlio be- 
 guiled the shame of liis defeat by such a course of 
 seiisuality, that he publicly oflered a reward for 
 the inventor of a new pleasure — is just the despot 
 to divorce his queen because she would not ex- 
 pose herself to the gaze of drunken re\ ellers ; is 
 just the deqjot to devote a whole people, his sub- 
 jects, to an indiscriminate massacre j and, by way 
 of preventing that evil, to restore them the right 
 of selt-de!'ence (which it is hard to conceive how 
 the fust edict e\'er could have taken away), and 
 t'lus to sanction tlieir slaughteiing tliousands of 
 his other subjects. 
 
 There are also reinarkable coincidences of date 
 between tlie history of Xerxes and that of Aha- 
 suerus. In the third year of his reign the latter 
 gave a grand feast to Ids nobles, which lasted W(> 
 days (Esth. i. 3) ; the former, in his third year, 
 also assembled his chief oHiceis to deliberate on 
 the invasion of Greece (Haod. vii. S). Nor 
 should we wonder to find no nearer agreement in 
 the two accoimts than is expressed in themeie 
 f.ict of the nobles being assembled. The two le- 
 lations are quite compatible . each writer only 
 mentioning that aspect of the event which had 
 interest fin him. Again, Ahasuerus married 
 Estlier at Shushan, in the seventli year of Ids 
 reign : in the same year of his reign, Xerxes re- 
 turned to Susa with the mortification of his de- 
 feil, and .sought to forget himself in jdeasure ; — 
 not an unlikely occasion for that quest for fair 
 < irgins for the harem (Esth. ii. 2). Lastly, the 
 tiibute imposed on the land and isles of the sea 
 also accords with the state of his revenue ex- 
 hausted by liis insane attempt against Greece. 
 In line, these arguments, negative and atMrmative, 
 render it so lughly ^noliable that Xerxes is tlie 
 Ahaiuei'us jf the book of Esther, that to de- 
 mand more conclusive evidence, would be to 
 mistake the very nature of the q\iestion. 
 
 'Y\ie fourth A\vjiM\en\i{'h(Tov7\pos) is moitioned 
 in Tcibit xiv. 15, in connection with the destruction 
 of Nine\«ili. Tliat circumstance jioints out Cy- 
 axares I as the iierson intended (Herod, i. 106). 
 
 -J.N. 
 
 AHAZ. 
 
 AHAVA (Njni? ; Sept. 'Avui, Ezra viii. )» 
 31, and 'Eut/, verse 15), the rivei by which tM 
 Jewish exiles assembled their second caravk> 
 under Ezra, when returning to Jerusalem. \\ 
 would seem I'roin ch. viii. "ii>, that It was tlesig' 
 nated from a town of the same name : ' I as 
 sembled them at the river that Hows toward* 
 Ahava.' In that case, it could not liave been of 
 much importance in itself-, and jio^sibly it was 
 no otlier than one of the numeious canals with 
 which Baliylonia then abounded. Tliis is .pro- 
 bably the true reason that Biblical geographers 
 have failed to identify it. Home have sought tlie 
 Ahava in the Lycus or Little 2^il), finding that 
 this rivei' was anciently callel Adiaba or Diaba, 
 But these names would, in Hebrew characters, 
 have no resemblance to Ji{'>nN ■, and it is exceed 
 ingly unlikely that the rendezvous for a Palestine 
 caravan should have been north-east uf the-Tigri? 
 in Assyria, with the two great rivers, Tigris and 
 Euphrates, between tliem and the ])lains tliey weie 
 to traverse. It is not so clear, however, that 
 Ro.->enmi!ller is right in sup|K)sing that it proliably 
 lay to the south-west ol' Babylonia, because that 
 um» in the direction of I'alestine. It is too 
 much forgotten l)y him and other writeis, that 
 caravan routes seldom run in straight lines be^ 
 tween two jilaces. In this ca<e, a straight line 
 would have taken the caravan through the whole 
 breadth of a desert seldom traveisetl but by the 
 Arabs; and to avoid this, the usual route for 
 lai ge caravans lay, and .still lies, north-vi est through 
 Mesopotamia, much above Baliyhmia ; and then, 
 the Eujihrates being crossed, the directiwi is south- 
 west to Palestine. The greater probability, tliere- 
 iliie, IS, that the Aliava was one of the streams 
 or canals of Mew))otamia (■omnriunicating with 
 the Eujihrates, somewiieie in the north-west of 
 Baliylonra. 
 
 AHAZ (?nj<, possessor; Sept. 'Axa^v Joseph. 
 'AxaC^O' *'"' "f Jotham, an<l eleventh king of 
 Judah, wlio reigned sixteen years, from n.c. 775 
 to 751). ■ Ahaz was tlie most corrupt monarch that 
 had hiflierto apjieired in Judah. He resjiected 
 neitlier Jehovah, the law, nor the projihets ; he 
 broke through all the restraints which law anil 
 custom had imposed upon the Hebrew kings, and 
 had regaril only to his own depraved inclinationst 
 He introtluced tiie religion of the Syiians int* 
 Jerusalem, elected altars to the Syrian goils, al- 
 teiei-l the temjile in many respects aftei' the Syrian 
 model, and at length ventured to shut it uji altt> 
 gether. Such a man could not exa'cisethat^('<i^/« in 
 Jehovah, as the political head of the nation, which 
 ought to animate the courage of a Hdiuiv king. 
 Hence, after he had sustained a few rqiulses frors 
 Pekah and Rezin, his allied iiies, when the Edom- 
 ites had revolteil from him, and the Philistines 
 were making incursions into liis ccuntiy, notwitli- 
 standing a sure promise of di\ ine drlive»ance, I'M 
 called Pul, the king of Assyria, to hi* aid [Assy- 
 ria]. He even became trllmfary to that monarch, 
 on condition of liia obliging Syria and Israel to 
 abandon their design of destroy in<r the kingdom 
 of Judali ; and thus afliirded to Tiglafh-jiiieze*, 
 the successor of Pul, an oppoitunity of compierinjf 
 Syria, Israel beyond the Jordan, and Galilt*. It 
 would be wrong, liowevei-, to say that tliis would 
 not have occurred but for the apjilication oA 
 Aliaz-, for tlie Assyrians were then prepared tit
 
 AHAZIAH. 
 
 extend tlieir empire west of the Eujihrates, and 
 trould assuredly have done so without llie imme- 
 diate C ^i'a«ioB whicli tliat ajiplicatioii olVered. 
 rtie Assyrians, as niij^lit l)0 expected, acted only 
 with a view to their own interests, and alVorded 
 Ahaz no real assistance; on tlie contrary, they 
 drove him to such extremities that he was 
 scarcely able, with all the riches of the temple, 
 of the noliility. and of flie royal treasury, to 
 purchase release from his troulilesome protectors. 
 He died at tlie a:,^e of thiity-sii: {2 Kings xvi. ; 
 2 Chroii. xxviii. ; Isa. vii. ; jahn, Bih/isc/ics Ar- 
 chuoh(/ie, ii. 185; iii. 143; li.ilci, A/id/ysii, ii. 
 417-419). 
 
 1. AHAZIAH (nnns and -innnN, w/iom 
 
 Jehovah sitstains ; Sept. 'Oxo^'^as), son and suc- 
 cessor of Ahab, and seventh kinu; of Israel. He 
 reig'.ied two years, b c. 897-R95. It seems that 
 Jezebel exercised over her son the same influence 
 which had guided her husband; and Aliaziah 
 pursued the evil courses oi' his father. The 
 most siirnal ])ul>'.!c event of his reign was the 
 revolt of the Moabites, who took the opportrinity 
 of the defeat anil death of Ahab to discontinue 
 the tribute which tliey had paid to tlie Israelites. 
 Aliaziah became a ]iarty in the attempt of Jeho- 
 •haphat, kintj of Judah, to revive the maritime 
 tratiic by the Red S>?a ; in consef^uence of wiiich 
 the eiiteiprise w.ls blasted, and came to nothing 
 (2 Chron. xx. 35-37). Soon after, Aliaziali, having 
 been much injured by a fall from tlie roof-gallery 
 of his palace, had the infatuation to send to 
 consult the oracle of B;ial-zebub, the god of 
 Ekron, resjietting his recovery. But tlie mes- 
 sengers were met ;md sent liack by Elijah, who 
 announced to the king that lie shoulil rise no more 
 from the bed on which he lay (I Kings xxii. 51, 
 to 2 Kings i. 50). 
 
 2. AHAZL\H, otherwise Jehoahaz, son of 
 Jehoram by Athaliah, daughter of Ahab and 
 Jezebel, and sixth king of Judah. He reigned 
 but one year (b.c. 885), and that ill, suflering 
 himself in all things to l>e guided by tlie wicked 
 coimsels of his idolatrous mother, Athaliah. He 
 cultivated the coimections which had unhappily 
 grown up lietween tiie two dynasties, and which 
 nad now been cemented by marriage. Hence he 
 joined his uncle Jehoram of Israel in an ex]>e- 
 dition against Hazael, king of Damascene-Syria, 
 for tlie recovery of Ramoth-Gilead ; and atter- 
 vrards paid him a visit while he lay wounded in 
 his summer palace of Jezreel. The two kings 
 rode out in their several chariots ta meet Jehu ; 
 and when Jelioram was shot through tlie heart, 
 Ahaziah attem])ted to escajic, but was pursued, 
 and being mortally woundccl, had only strength to 
 reach Megiddo, where he died. His liody was 
 conveyed by his servants in a chariot to Jeru- 
 salem for interment (2 Kings ix. 2"l-2R). In 
 2 Chron. xxii. 7-9, tlie ciicumstances are some- 
 what dill'erently stated; but the variatioji is not 
 »ul)stantial, <uid lequires no jiarticular notice. It 
 apjiears from tliat passage, however, that Jeiiu 
 was right in considering Ahaziah as includeil 
 in his commission to root out the house of Ahab. 
 lie was Ahab's descendant (grandson by the 
 motlier's side) both in iilood and character; and 
 nis presence in Jezreel at tlie time of Jehu's 
 D^« rations is considered as an arrangement of 
 Fn vidence for accomiilis''ing his doom. 
 
 AIIIMAAZ. 
 
 101 
 
 AIIL-UI (H^'nX. f rater Jchorce, ''.p. ftU-nd 
 of (u)d ; Se]it. 'Ax'tti 1 Sam. riii. 3), wm ri 
 Ahitul), and high-jiriest in thai reign of Saul, 
 and lirother anil predecessor of the .\iiim''lech 
 whom Saul slew for assisliiiir Havid. Seeing' tl.at 
 Alilnielech, a son of .-Vhitnli, was also high-]irie(«t 
 in the same reign (I Sain. \rJt\. \\ some have 
 thought that both names lielongeil to the same 
 {lerson ; but this seems less likely than the expla- 
 nation which has just lieeii given. 
 
 AHIAII. one of the two secietavies of Solo- 
 mon (1 Kings iv. 3). Two other );ersons of this 
 name occur in I Sam. xiv. 3; 1 Chron. viii. 7. 
 
 AHIAM, one of David's thirty heioes (•}, Sam. 
 xxiii. 33). 
 
 AHIKZER, the hereditary chief or prince of 
 the tribe of Dan at the time that the Israel ite^ 
 quitted Egypt (Num. i. ) 2). 
 
 AHIIIUD, a prince of the tribe of .\-her, 
 who, witii the other chiels of tril»es, acted with 
 Joshua and Eleazer in dividing the Promised 
 Land (Num. xxxiv. 27). 
 
 AHIJAH (same name as Ahiah), a prophel 
 residing in Shiloh in the times of Solomon and 
 Jeroboam. He ayijiears to have put on record 
 some of the transactions of the former inign 
 (2 Chron. ix. 29). It devolved on him to an- 
 nounce and sanction the separation of the ten 
 tribes from the house of Daviil, as well as the 
 foundation (1 Kings xi. 29-39), and. after many 
 yeai'S, the suiiiersion of the dynasty of Jerolioam 
 (1 Kings .\iv. 7-11) [Jkrokuam]. 
 
 AHIKAM, one of the four jiersons of distinc- 
 tion wliom Josiah sent to consult Iluldah, the 
 projjhetess (2 Kings xxii. 12-14) Ahikani and 
 his family are honourably distinguished l'..r their 
 protection of the jirophet Jeieiniali (Jer. xxvi. 29; 
 xxxix. 14). 
 
 AHIMAAZ ("yiD-riN. brother of an(n'r, ':. e. 
 -irascible; Sei)t ' Axtna.as\ son and successor of 
 Zadok, who was joint high-jiriest in the reign 
 of David, and sole higli-priest in that of Snldiiii.n. 
 His history chi fly belongs to the time of ])a\ id. 
 to whom he rendered an important service duiiiig 
 the revolt of Absalom, Davi<l having refused to 
 allow the ark of God to Ije taken from J<-rusalem 
 when he fled thence, the high-priests, Zadok and 
 Abiathaj', necessarily reniaiiwd in atteiidaiice 
 upon it; but their sons. Ahimaaz and Jo.iathan, 
 concealed the i selves outside the city, to be in 
 readiness to liear off to David any imjiortant in- 
 formation resjiecting the movements and desig-.i* 
 of Ab.salom which they miglit receive fiom 
 within. Accordingly, Hushai tuning connnu- 
 nicated to the jiriests the result of the council of 
 war, in which his own advice was piefejied to 
 that of Ahilhophel [.\usai.u.m], they instantly 
 sent a girl (]irobid)ly to avoid suspicion) to diiect 
 Ahimaaz and Jonathan to sliced away with the 
 intelligence. The transaction, however, was wit 
 nessed and lietrayed by a lad, and tlie messvngeri 
 Avere so hotly jiursiieil tliat they took lefuire in a 
 dry well, over which the woman of the liouse 
 placed a covering, and spread thereon p.uclwd 
 corn. She told the ])(irsuei'g that the messcngei« 
 had passed on in haste; and wiien all was safe. 
 she released them, on whicli they nii'de their way 
 to David r2 Sam. xv. 21-37; xvii. 1.5-21). As 
 may lie inferred from his being chost-n for ttiii 
 service, Ahiinaaz was suifl of foot. Of this we
 
 )02 
 
 AIII-\L\N. 
 
 Live a notable example soon after, when, on flie 
 defoat and dealh of ,AI)saloin, he piev;ii!ed on Joab 
 to allow him |o ciiriy tlie tidinLjs to Da\id. 
 Anotlier me.iSi'iiger, Cuslii, had previously been 
 de^putcht'd, but Aliiniaaz out--:tiipped liiiin, and 
 (list came in with the )iews. He was known afar 
 o.V by the manner of his running, and ihe king 
 saiil, ■ He is a f^ood man, and cijmeth with good 
 tidings:' and this favonialjlc cliarai tor is justified 
 by th,' delicacy witii which he waived tliat part 
 of hij intelligence concerning the death of Ab- 
 s.il )m, which he knew woidd greatly distress so 
 fond a father as David ("2 Sam. xviii. 19-33). 
 
 AH I MAN, one of tlnee famous giants, of the 
 race of Anak. who dwelt at Hebron when the 
 Keiiie.v sjiies explored the land (Num. xiii. 22). 
 
 AKIMKLECH ('5ll?P''nX. brother of the king, 
 i. e. the king's friend ; Sept. 'A;8ijueA6x ; Cod. 
 Alex. ^AxitJ-t\ex)i *'^" '^^ Ahitub and brother of 
 Ahiah, who was most probahly his predecessor in 
 the higli-priestiiood [Ahiau]. When David fled 
 from Saul, he went to Nob, a city of the priests 
 in Benjamin, where the tabernacle then was; and 
 by representing himself as on pressing business 
 from the king, he obtained from Ahimelech, who 
 had no other, some of the sacred bread which had 
 been removed from the presence-table. He was 
 also finnislied with the sword which he had him- 
 self taken from G-nliah, and which had lieen laid 
 up as a trophy in the 'abernacle (1 Sam. xxi. 
 1-9). These circumstances were witnessed by 
 Doeg, an Edomite in the service of Saul, and 
 were so reported by him to thi jealous king as to 
 appear acts of connivance at, and support to, 
 David's imagined disloyal designs. Saul imme- 
 diately sent for Ahimelech and the other priests 
 then at Nob, and laid this treasonaljle otlence to 
 their charge; but they declared their ignorance 
 of anj- hostile designs on the part of David 
 tov.'anls Saul or his kingdom. This, ho.vever, 
 availed them not; for the king conmianded his 
 giMrd to slay them. Their refusal to fall upon 
 pt-rson; invested with so sacred a character might 
 have l>ronght even Saul to reason; but he re- 
 peated tiie order to Doeg himself, and was too 
 readily obeyed by that malignant jjerson, who, 
 with the men uniler his orders, not only slew 
 the ])rie3ts then jnesent. eighty-sis in number, but 
 m.irclied to Nob, and put to the s.vord eveij' 
 li. iiig creature it contained. The only piiest that 
 es'-ared was Abiathar, Ahimelech's son, who lied 
 to David, avA afterwards became high piiest (1 
 Sam. xxii.) [AbiathahJ. 
 
 AHIXADAB, one of th^ twelve officers who, 
 111 as many districts into which the country was 
 divided, raised .supplies of provisions in monthly 
 r.iatii/i fvjr the royal household. Ahinadab's 
 district was the s.mthern half of the region beyond 
 'he .birdan (1 C'hron. vi. 23). 
 
 AHlNOA.M (B^rnSJ, brother of grace; 
 Seof 'Axn"iw), a woman of Jezreel, one of the 
 wires of David, and mother of Amnon. She was 
 taken captive by tiie Amalekites when they plun- 
 dered Ziklag, but was recovered by David (1 Sam. 
 XXV. 13; xxvii. 3; xxx. ."5; 2 Sam. ii. 2; iii. 2). 
 
 AUlO (VnN, brotherly ; Sejjt.. as an appel- 
 lative. A/s |Uzzah's] brothers — ol a^eKcpol avrov\ 
 mie oi' the sons of Abinadab, who, with his brother 
 Uzzah, drove the new cart on which the ark was 
 
 AHITUB 
 
 placed when David first attempted to remove h 
 to Jerusalem. Ahio went hefore t« guide tht 
 oxen, while Uzzali walkeil by the cart (2 Sam. 
 vi. 3, 1. [UzzAii.] 
 
 .'VHIR.-V, chief of the tribe of Naphtali when 
 the Isriielites quitted Egypt (Num. i. 15). 
 
 AHISH.VR, the otlicer who was ' over th« 
 household" of King Solomon (1 King^ iv.fi). 
 This has always i)een a place of high iinjiortance 
 and great influence in the East. 
 
 AHITHOPHEL ('??h''n«, brother of fool- 
 ishness, i.e. foolish; Sept. 'Ax'To^eA), the very 
 singular name of a man who, in the time of 
 David, was renowned throughout all Israel for 
 his worldly wisdom. He is, in fact, tlie only 
 man mentioned in the Scriptures as ha\ ing ac- 
 quired a reputation for {Kjlitical sagacity among 
 the Jews ; and they regarded his counsels as 
 oracles (2 Sam. xvi. 23). He was of the council 
 of David ; but was at Giloh, his native place, at 
 the time of the re olt of Absalom, by whom he was 
 summoned to Jeiusalem ; and it shows the 
 strength of Absalom's cause in Israel that a man 
 so capable of fore.seeing results, and estimating 
 the probabilities of success, took his side in so 
 daiing an attempt (2 Sam. xv. 12). The news 
 of his defection appears to have occasioned 
 David more alarm than any other single in- 
 cident in the rebellion. He earnestly prayed 
 God to turn the sage counsel of Ahithophel 
 'to foolishness ' (probably alluiling to his name) 
 and heing immediately after j ined by his 
 old friend Hushai, he induced him to go 
 over to Absalom with the exjiie.ss view that he 
 might be instrumental in defeating the counsels 
 of this dangerous person (xv. 31-37). Psalm Iv. 
 is supposed to contain (12-1 1) a further expres- 
 sion of David s feelings at this treachery of one 
 whom he had so completely trusted, and whom 
 he calls ' My companii)n, my guide, and my 
 familiar friend." The detestable advice which 
 Ahithophel gave Absalom to ayi]iriipriate his 
 fathers harem, commilted him abs-.duiely to the 
 can.se of the young prince, since after that he 
 could hoj)€ for no reconcilement with David 
 (2 Sam. xvi. 20-23). His projiosal as to the con- 
 duct of the war undoubtedly indicated the hesf 
 course that could have been taken under the cir- 
 cumstances; and so it seemed to the council, 
 until Hushai interposed with his plausible ad- 
 vice, the ol)ject of whicfi was to gain time to 
 enable David to collect Ills itsources [Ahsai.om]. 
 When Ahitho])hel saw that his counsel was re- 
 jected for that of Hushai, the far-seeing man 
 gave up the cause of Absalom for lost ; and lie 
 forthwith saddled his ass. returned to his lK)m8 
 at Gilol), deliberately settled his afl'airs. and then 
 hanged himself and was buried in the sepulchre 
 of his fathers, b.c. 1023 fcli. xvii.). This is the 
 only case of suicide which the Old Testament re- 
 cords, unless the last acts of Samson and Saul 
 may be regarded as such. 
 
 1. AHITUB (n-ID'-riN, brother of goodnesj 
 or benignity, i.e. benigji ; Sept. 'AyitoS/S). son of 
 Phinehas. and grandson of tlie hii,di -priest Eli. 
 His father Phinehas having been slain when the 
 ark of God was taken by the Philistines, he suc- 
 ceeded his grandfather Eli n.c. 1111, and wa* 
 himself succeeded by his son Ahiah about b.c. 
 IDS).].
 
 -\H1TUB. 
 
 )k. AHITUB was also the name of the father 
 nf Zadok, wlio was made liigli-jiriest by Saul 
 after tlie death of Ahimelech (2 Sam. viii. 17 ; 
 I Chron. vi. 8). There is not the slii,'htest ground 
 for the notion tha^ tliis Ahituh w;is ever high- j»iit'st. 
 himself — indeed, it is iiistorically impossihle. 
 
 AHOLAH and AHOLIBAH (H^HN and 
 
 nSvnS), two fictitious or symbolical names 
 adopted by Ezekiel (xxiii. 4) to denote ttie 
 two kingdoms of Samaria (Israel) and Judah. 
 There is a significant force in these names which 
 must be noted. Ahoi.ah, npHX, is usually 
 rendered ' a (cnf,^ but more jiropeily, tentorium 
 mum (lirJtet ilia), ' s!ie has her awn tent or 
 temple," signifyiiig that she lias a tent or tal)cr- 
 nacle of her. own or of human invention. Aiio- 
 i.iBAU, n^PnX, means ' my tent, i. e. temple, 
 is in her,'' that is t>) say — I, Jehovah, have 
 given her a temple and religious service. Tliey 
 are botli symbolically described as lewd women, 
 adulteresses, prostituting themselves to the Kgyp- 
 tians and the Assyrians, in imitating their abomi- 
 nati.ais and idolatries ; wherefuie Jehovah aban- 
 doned them to those very people for whom they 
 showed snch inordinate and impure affection. 
 They were carried into captivity, and reduced to 
 the severest servitude. But tlie crime of Aliolibah 
 was greater than that of Aholah, for she possessed 
 more distinguislied privileges, and refused to lie in- 
 structed by the awful examnle of her sister's ruin. 
 The allegory is an epitome of tlie history of the 
 Jewish church. 
 
 AHOLIAB, of the tril* of Dan, a skilful 
 artificer appointed along witli Bezaleel to cousti'uct 
 the Taljernacle (Exod. xxxv. 34). 
 
 AHUZZATH ( ri-inX , a possession), the 
 'friend' of Ahimelech II., king of Gerar, who 
 attended him on his visit to Isaac (Gen. xxvi. 26). 
 In him occurs tlie fir.st instance of that imonicial 
 but important ]5ersonage in iincient Oriental 
 courts, called ' (he king's friend,' or favourite. 
 Several interpreters, following the Chaldee and 
 Jerome, take Ahuzzath to be an appellative, de- 
 noting a co7npnny of friends, who attended Ahi- 
 melech. The Sept. has 'OxoCa9 6 vvi.upay<i>yhs 
 avTov. 
 
 AI QV, Josh. vii. 2; '•yn. Gen. xii. 8; in 
 Neh. xi. 31, X*j; ; in Isa. x. 28, n*y ; Sept. 
 'Ay)'ai, 'Ayyat, and Fat; Vulg. Hai), a royal 
 city of the Caiiaanites, which lay east of Bethel. 
 It existed in The time of Abraham, who pitched 
 nis tent between it and Bethel (Gren. xii. 8 ; 
 xiii. 3) ; but it is chieHy noted for its capture 
 and destruction by Joshua (vii. 2-5 ; viii. 1-29). 
 This, as a military transaction, is noticed else- 
 where [AMBU.^CAUI■:]. ■ At a later period Ai 
 was rebuilt, and is mentioned by Isaiah (x. 2''), 
 and also after the captivity. The site was 
 known, and some scanty ruins still existed in 
 the time of Eu.sebius and Jerome ( Onotnast. in 
 A^ai), tmt ])r. Robinson w;is unable to discover 
 my certain traces of cither. He remarks (Jiib. 
 Researches, ii. 313), however, that its situation 
 with regard to Bethel may lie well determined by 
 the facts recorded in Scripture. That Ai lay to 
 the eas» of Bethel is distinctly stated ; and tlie two 
 cities were net so far distant fxim each otlicr but 
 d.itt tlie men if Bethel mingled in the pursuit of 
 
 .VI L. 
 
 103 
 
 the Israelites wlien they feigned to flee l*fore tlie 
 king of Ai, and thus both cities were left deft-nce- 
 less (Jo.sh. viii. 17); yet they were not «« uear 
 but that Joshua co>d(l place an ambush on the 
 west (or south-west) of ,\i, witho'it its being ob- 
 served t)y the men of Bctiiel, while he himself 
 remained l)eiiii)d in a valley to the norlli of Ai 
 (Josh. viii. 4, 11-13). A little to the soiilii of a 
 village called ])eir Diwaii, and une iiour's journey 
 from Bethel, the site of an ancient place is in- 
 dicated liy reservoirs hewn in the rock, exca- 
 vated tombs, and foundations of hewn stone. 
 This, l)r. Roiiinson inclines to think, may mark 
 the site of Ai, as it agrees with all the intimations 
 as r.) its position. Near it, on the north, is ihe 
 deep Wady el-Mutyah, and towards the .soiith- 
 west other smaller wailys, in which the ambus- 
 cade of the Israelites might easily have Ijeen 
 concealed. 
 
 AIL (?|t< ; Sept. Kpi'oj; rf^'cr, generically, ac- 
 
 . coiding to Dr. Shaw) : 
 
 AJAL ( P^K ; Sept. tXaipos; hart, in Dent. xii. 
 
 . 15 ; Ps. xlii. I ; Isa. xxxv.fi): 
 
 AJALAH (n^X ; Sept. o-reAexos ; hind, in 
 
 Gen. xlix. 21 ; 2 Sam. xxii 
 
 34: Job xxxix. 1; Ps. xviii. 31; Prov. v. I9j 
 
 Cant ii. 7; Jer. xiv. 5; Habak. iii. 19). 
 
 [Cervus barbarus.] 
 
 The hart and html of our versions and of tiie older 
 conmients ; but tliis inteijiretation is generally 
 rejected by recent writers, who either suppo."** 
 ditVercnt sjiecies of aiiteloiie to be meant, or, 
 with Dr. Shaw, consider the teim to be generica! 
 for se\ eral species of deer taken together. Sir J. G. 
 Wilkinson lielieves .\jal to lie the Ethiopian oryx, 
 with nearly straight homs. In the article Ante- 
 lope it will lie slimvn under what terms the Orvges 
 ajjpear to be noticed in tlie Bilile, andat jiresent we 
 only observe that an Efliioijian s])ecies could noi 
 well be meant where the clean animals fit for tl.e 
 food of Hebrews are indicated, n")r where allu- 
 sion is made to suffering fmm thirst, and to iiigh 
 and rocky places ;us ihe refuge of females, or of 
 b;th, since all the sjwcies of oryx inhabit the 
 cpen ])lains, and are not remarkable for their (h«iiie 
 of drinking; nor can e-ther of these propensities 
 be properly ascribed to the true antelopes, or gn- 
 zella?, of Araliia and Syria, all l)eing residents of 
 the plain and the desert; like tlie oryges, often
 
 10 J 
 
 .A jr. 
 
 AIR 
 
 •*eri it immrnse (lis*.u)cp< from wnfpr, and nn- 
 wilhrir to venture i!il>i i'oiwfs, wlicie tlieiv velocify 
 of lYi^ht ami I'.elicivcy (>J' stmcture imiieile am', 
 »l«stv(>y them. Tak iipp rlie oliler inf«pi Nation, 
 niid rwiewrng all the tcxf^ vvlit-ie liait and liiiul 
 3re mcnrioneil, '*e Hint none whoe these ob- 
 jection* fniiy app'y. Aiiima's of tlie .s'^a^ I^inil 
 juref'cT thtr gpciirify of forjN'ts, are alw.iys most 
 lohnst rn roi-ky tncnm^iiin cov'ei.9, ancl seek vvatei- 
 with coiisiileiable anxlefv; tor of all the Tiirlit- 
 )(X)'ed luminaiit.-i, thpy al.iiie ])rotrmle tlie f»>ufriie 
 wlien hard (Hesse I in fhecha'e. Nv).v, c(iiT>]xiiinsf 
 these qaafrfiei with se\-«al te'xts, we find tliein 
 fieifectty anprrtjMrafe ti> the spefve; of tliriP f^aiera 
 alone. Ajdl apjie:ir.'> to l)e a m'itati(,«> of a cor/r- 
 TTi.in name wifii fAoMpo?; aisd alfho't.x'i no ifieat 
 sues-! s!ifni?d lie laid on luimes whfcft. moie jrar- 
 flciilarly in eaily tiiiiesr. wae used w'thouf much 
 attention fo .sjiecific idwitity, yet we (hid the 
 ClialdeeAjal and .Sirmatic Jf^'ei strictly a])plie(l 
 to stas^. K«ice the ditiiculty lay in themodnn 
 •leniaT that vninijiant.9 with hraiichci dp"i(hu>ns 
 l'>)rns-pxfsf«l in the south-west olWsi'a and Eg-vjjf ; 
 andCuvier fw some tiniedouhtel,i)otwithstaiidfn!»' 
 V'Ti^'^il's notice, whether they were found in ar?v 
 part of Africa; ikt erthel ess, thou s:h not abundant 
 where water is rare, tlieJr existence from Moro'-co 
 to the Nile and beyond it cannot he denietl •, and 
 it is likely that an Asiatic s[)ecies s^ill appears 
 sometimes in Syria, and, no dwilit, was formnly 
 common thei-e, 
 
 Tiie first species here refwretl to is now known 
 hj file name of Cervns Barbaras, or Barbarv s-tag, 
 ill size betvveen onr red and fallow deer', digtin- 
 g-nisiied by flie want of a bisatitlei'. or second 
 Jiranch an tliehorns, reckoning from l)elow,and Iit 
 a spotted livery, wliich is elVaced only in the third 
 nr f)uith year. Tliis s]5ecies is figured on Egyptian 
 Tnonnrnents, is still occasionally seen about the 
 Natron lakes w(^ of the Nile, and, it seem», was 
 «)!)«prved by a revei'end friend in the deseit east of 
 t e Dead Sea, on his route from Cairo towards 
 Dimiscns. We take this to be the IgiaT or Aial 
 of tlie ^\i'ah?, the same which they accuse of 
 e^it'n,'- fish — that is, the ceps, lizards, and snakes, 
 a propensity common to other species, and simi- 
 larly a.'scribed to the Virginian and Mexican 
 deer. 
 
 'File otha- is the Persian sffag, or Mara! <,f the 
 T ihtar natii>ns, and Gewazen of Armenia, larger 
 fhin tlie stag of Eurojie, clotlied with a hen-y 
 m ine, and likewise destitute of bisanlteis. We 
 lif'ieve this !»p(?cies to l)e the Soegur of .\siatic 
 Turkey, and Mara of the Arabs, an(l therefore resi- 
 dinaron (liebordei's of the mountain forests of Syria 
 and Palestine. One or iioth of tliese species were 
 rtedi<',atci_l fo the local brnia Jea on Mount Li- 
 banu.i) — a presumptive proof that deer were found 
 in the vicinity. 
 
 Of the hind it i» unnecessary to say mos-e than 
 that she is the female of the stag, or hart, and that 
 in the manners of these animals tlie males always 
 a;e the last to liurrv info coxct." — C. H. S. 
 
 * In Gen. xlix. 21, Bochart's version apjieais 
 A) be preferable to our jiresent translation — 
 ' Naphtali is a hind let I(X)se ; he giveth goodly 
 words;' this, hv a slight alteration of the punc- 
 ^Iatio^ in tie Helirev, lie renders ' Naplitali is a 
 «)ireadin2r tiKe. shrwiting fortli beautiful branches.' 
 Ill Ps. XKix. 9 instead of 'The voice of the I rd 
 
 AIN ((T u-^ially "En in the English ver 
 sion), the Hebrew word for a fountain, wliick 
 signification it also Ix'ars in Arabic, Syriac, and 
 Efhiirjiic. It chiefly attracts notice iis combined 
 .with the proper niimes of various places ; and 
 in all such cases if jwints to soirie ren»ar)»aF/I« oi 
 important four)tain iieay o? at the spot. Tln'n, 
 nrpy, Tiw-.^^T/Z/foTTOfamoffeids' [Eif-GEDi]: 
 D''JJ"[''y, En-gamiim f Josh. xv. 31), ' fountain 
 of the gardens ;" "iN"7~J"'J7, Eyi-dm; ' hou.se-foun- 
 fai'n ■ (fins hnhitnthmix. Gesenins) [En-»o.h] ; 
 mrr''y'. En-hmhlah (Josh. xix. 21), 'sharp;,' 
 i. e. ' swif> flmiitaiu ; ' ^^SSTOI^, Eii-mukpai 
 (Gen. xiv. 7\ ' fountain of judgmemt ;' them 
 also called V^p, hnf prolqitically, as that nam* 
 ayiijears to liave origniated at a, later period 
 (Num. XX. I3\ [Kai>esh]; _ C^JN-jT, En- 
 eqlnim, ' fountain of two calves" (Ezi4<. xlvii. 10] 
 [EN-Ecij,Aiiw] ; Ji'7D5P"pJ?, Ev'Sheinesh (J(di. xv 
 7), ' f(Riiitain of the sun;' 7!ITpi7, En-rond 
 (2 Sam. xvii. 17, &c.), literally ' fou3i(ain of the 
 fliot," which is construed in the Targirm '^fuller'j 
 fonutain,' because the fullers fheie trod the cloths 
 with their feet; ofheis, 'fountain of the spy' 
 [En-rogkl}. There are other nanws with wJiicb 
 py is thus used in corrrposition ; brrt these art 
 the most impirtanl. In one ca.se pj? occurs 
 alone as the nsTrie of a place in the north-east oil 
 Palestine (Geseiiiu?, Tkescmr. in pjj. in tli< 
 pTural it only occurs iw the Ne\v Testameiu 
 (John iii. 23) as TF^ftoTi (Alvdv), or fij7ititairis, as 
 in our Foimtarns Abbey in Yorkshire. 
 
 AIR (a-^p), the atmospliere, as ofjposed to th«- 
 ether (^al9r]pS, or higher and purer region of the sky 
 f.-\.cts xxii. 21; 1 Thess. iy. 17; Rev. ri. 2; xv> 
 17 ). Tlie phrase ei'y alpa >.a\uv — to apeak into ihi 
 air (I Cor. xiv. 9), is a proverbial expression to de- 
 note speak nig in vain, Irke vevtis verba prnfiinden 
 hi Latin f Lucret. iv. 929), and a siirrrTar one ii 
 our own language ; and ely a.4pa. Sepeiv, to beay 
 the air (1 Cor. ix. 2()), denotes acting h\\ vain, 
 and is a ]ir>)verbial aTlusion to an abortiv< 
 sti-oke nifo tlie air in pugilisfic contests. Tlw 
 later Jews, in cummoJi with the Gentiles, espe 
 daily the Pythagoreans, believed the air to Ih 
 peoplerl with spirits, under the government of a 
 chief, who there held his seat of empire fPhilo 
 31, 2''?; Diog. Laert. viif. 32). Tlie.se spirits 
 were .suy)]iose(I to lie powerful, but malignasit, and 
 to incite men to e\ il. Tliaf the ,Few5 held this 
 opinion is plain from the Kal)liiiiicai citations of 
 Lighffoot, Wetstein, &c. Tlius in Ptrke Ahoth 
 ''3. 2, they are described n^ filling tJie whole air 
 arranged in troops, in regular suboidination. Tlit 
 early CliristiiUi fathers entertaiired the same belief 
 (Ignat. Ad Ephcs. ^ 13), which has indeed come 
 down to OUT own times. It is to this notion tha? 
 St. Paul is supposed to allude in Eph. ij. 2, where 
 Satan is called Apx^fv riji (^ovaias tov a^pos, 
 'prince of the piwer (?'. e. of those who exercise 
 the piwer) of tlie air.' Some, however, explain 
 avp here by darkness, a srn.se which it bears als(> 
 in jirofane writers. But the apistle no doubt 
 s[ie;iks according to the notious entertained by most 
 of those to whom he wrote, without expressing (he 
 
 makefh the hind to calve, and discovereth thp 
 forests,' Bi.shop Lowth gives. ' The voif e of the Lord 
 striketh the oak, and discovereth f-e forestgj" whirj? 
 is also an improvement.
 
 AJALON. 
 
 extent of liis own lelief (see Litrhtfoot, \^^.itl)y, 
 Kopi)t, \Vefsti'iii. ai.'l Bloomlield. in loc). 
 
 AJALON (|v'¥» ; Sept. AlaAciy). a town and 
 valley in the tiil)e ol' Dun (Josh. xix. 42), which 
 was f^iven to tlie Levites (Josh. x.\i. 21 ; I Chron. 
 vi. 69). It wits net fai- from Hethsiiemesli 
 (2 Cln-on. xxviii. l'>), and was one of the places 
 which Rclioboani fortitieil (2 Cliron. \i. 10 i, and 
 arruing the stronijholds which the Philistines took 
 from Aliaz (2 Chron. xwiii. l'>). But the to\vT>, 
 01' rather tlie valley to which the town gave name, 
 fleiives its chief len )wn from tiie circmnstance 
 that wlien Josliua, in pmsnit of the live kings, ar- 
 rived at some ]ioint nearUjiJier Betii-horon, looking 
 back upon GiljCju and down upiin ihe nuhle valley 
 before him. ho uttered tlie cel(;l)rated connnand : 
 ' Sun, stand thou still on Gibei)n, and (hou moon, 
 in the valley of Ajalon ' (Josh. x. 12). From 
 the indications of Jerome, who places Ajalon two 
 Roman miles from Nicopolis, on the way to Je- 
 ru.saleni, joined to the preservation of the ancient 
 name in the form rf YiUo, Dr. Robinson (Bibl. 
 lie-searches, iii. ()3^"' appears to have identilied the 
 valley and the site of the town. From a house- 
 top in Beit Ur (Beth-horon) he looked down 
 upon a broad and beautil'ul valley, which lay 
 at his feet, towards Ramleh. This valley runs 
 out west by north throiigh a tract of hills, and 
 then bends oil' .south-west through the great 
 western plain. It is called Merj Ibn 'Omeir. 
 Upon the side of the long hill which skirts the 
 valley on the soutli, a small village was per- 
 ceived, called Yalo, which cannot well be any 
 other tha'.i the ancient Ajalon ; and there can be 
 little question that the broad vvady to the north 
 of it is the \allev of the same name. 
 
 AKKO. [Go.vr.] 
 
 AKRABBIM ( D'^^li^jy nhv.'Q, Scorjnon 
 hei;/ht ; Sept. 'Ai/ajSatris 'AKpajilv). an ascent, 
 hill, or cliain of hills, which, from the name, 
 would appear to have been much infested l)y 
 scorpions and .sei-jients, as some districts in that 
 quarter certainly were (Deut. viii. 15 ; comp. 
 Volney. ii. 25(i). It was one of the points which 
 are only mentioned iii describing the frontier-line 
 of the Promised Land southward (Judg. i. 30). 
 Shaw conjectures that Akrabbim may probably 
 be the same with the mountains of Akabah, by 
 which he understands the easternmost range of 
 the fjL^Kava upy], ' black mountains' of Ptolemy, 
 extending from Paranto Juda?a. This range has 
 lately become well known as the mountains of 
 Edom, being those which bound the great valley 
 of Arabah on the east {Travels, ii. 1-0). More 
 specifically, he seems to refer Akrabbim to the 
 siiuthernmost portion of this range, near the for- 
 ticss of Akabali, and the extremity of the eastern 
 gulf of the Red Sea ; where, iis he observe.s, 
 ' from the badness of the roads, and many rocky 
 passes that are to be surmounted, the Mohamme- 
 dan jiilgrims lo.se a number of camels, and are no 
 less fatigued than the Israelites were formerly in 
 getting over them.' Burckhardt {Syria, p. !i()9) 
 reaches nearly the same conclusion, except that 
 he rathei refers ' the ascent of Akralibim," to the 
 acclivity of tlie icestern mountains from tlie plain 
 of Akabah. Tliis ascei t is very steep, ' and has 
 probably given to the ji.ace its nime of Akabah, 
 which means a clitf, or steep declivity.' The 
 probability of this identification depends upon the 
 
 ALABASTER 
 
 ir.3 
 
 question, whetlicr the south-pa.stern frnntlei of 
 Judali would be laid down so far to the soutii in 
 the time of Moses and Joshua. If so, the identi- 
 fication is fair enough ; lint if not, it is of iir 
 weight or value in it'^tdf. The apjiaient anah gj 
 of names can be little else than accidental, wjien 
 the sieinificatioii in the two languages is altogethei 
 dilfeient". 
 
 AKROTIIINION Q^KpoOivtov). This Greek 
 word, which occurs in Ileb. vii. 4, nicans (he 
 best of (he spoils. The Greeks, after a battle, 
 were accustomed to collect the spoils into a 
 heap, from which an ol1'eri!;g was first made to 
 the gods : this was the aKpoQlviov (Xenoph. Cyi-op. 
 vii. 5, 3r)-, Herodot. viii. 121, 122; Find. Ncm. 
 7, 5S). In the firs.t-cited case. Cyrus, after the 
 taking of Babylon, ^?-.s< calls the magi, and com- 
 mands them to choose the d.KpoOivia of certain 
 portions of the ground foi- sacred purjioses. 
 
 ALAB.-VSTKR {'AAdfiaa-Tpov). This word oc- 
 curs in the New Testament only in the notice of 
 the ' alabaster box,' or rather vessel, of ' ointment 
 of spikenard, very jirecious,' which a woman 
 liroke, and witli its valualile contents anointed 
 the head of Jesus, as he sat at sujiper in Bethany 
 in the hou.se of Simon the leper ( Matt. xxvi. 7 ; 
 Mark xiv. 3). At Alabiistron.in Egypt, there was a 
 manufactory of small pots and vessels for holding 
 perfumes, which were made from a stone found in 
 the neigh bouiing mountains. The Greeks gave to 
 
 these vessels the name of the city from which ti>ey 
 came, calling tliem alubastrons. This name waj 
 eventually extended to the stone of which they 
 were formed : and at length the term alnhas- 
 tra was apjilied without distinction to all per- 
 fume vessels, of whatever materials they consisted. 
 Theocritus speaks of golden alabastra, Ivplto 
 ixvpca xP'^^'f'' a.ka^a(TTpa (Idyl- xv. lit ; and 
 pcrfunte vessels of dilVfrrent kinds of stone, of 
 glass, ivory, bone, and shells, liave been found in 
 the Egyptian tombs (Wlk'inson, iii. 379). It 
 does not, thcrefire, by any means follow that the 
 alabastron which the woman used at Bethany was 
 really of alabaster: but a jirobability that it was 
 such arises from the fact that vessels niade of 
 this stone were deemed jiecniiaily suitable for th* 
 most costly and powerful perfumes ( PI rii. UisL 
 yat. xiii. 2; xxxvi. 8, 24). The woman is said
 
 106 
 
 ALAH. 
 
 to liave ' broken ' the vessel ; which is explained 
 by 8npjx)siiig that it was one of those shaped 
 somewhat like a Florence oil-Hask, witli a long 
 and narrow neck ; and tlie mouth being curiously 
 and (irmly sealed up, tlie usual and easiest way 
 of getting at tlie contents was to break off the 
 u per part of the neck. 
 
 The alabasti-a were not usually made of that 
 white and soft gypsum to which the name of 
 alabaster is now fnr the most part confined. Dr. 
 John Hill, in his useful notes on Tlieophrastus 
 sets this matter in a clear light : — ' The alabas- 
 trum and alabastrites of naturalists, although 
 by some esteemed synonymous terms, and by 
 otliers confouTided with one another, are dif- 
 ferent substances. The alabastrum is ]jroperly 
 the soft stone [the common "alabaster"] of a 
 gypseous substance, burning easily into a kind of 
 plaster ; and the alabastra, the hard, bearing a 
 good polish, and approaching the texture of 
 marble. This stone was by the Greeks called 
 also sometimes onyx, and l)y the Latins marmor 
 onychites, from its use in making boxes to pre- 
 serve precious ointments ; which boxes were com- 
 monly called, " onyxes " and " alabasters." Thug 
 Dioscoride^, dXajSaffTpirris d Ka^ovfievos 6yv^. 
 And hence have arisen a thousand mistakes in the 
 later authors, of less reading, who liave misunder- 
 stood Pliny, and confounded the onyx marble, as 
 the alabaster was frequently called, with the pre- 
 cious stone of that name.' 
 
 This is now better understood. It is appre- 
 hended that, from certain appearances common 
 to both, the same name was giver* not only to the 
 common alabaster, called l)y mineralogists ffyp- 
 sum, and by chemists sulphate of lime ; but also 
 to the carbonate of lime, or that harder stone 
 from which the alabastra were usually made, 
 and which was often distinguished by the name 
 of o!iyx alabaster, on account of the approach of 
 its colour to that of the human finger-nails. 
 
 ALAH (n7X\ the name of a tree, which, 
 ooth in its singular and plural form, occurs often 
 in tlie Scriptures. It is variously rendered in an- 
 cient and modern versions — as oak, terebinth, 
 teil (linden) tree, elm, and even plain. This 
 has occasioned more of apparent perplexity than 
 now really belongs to the subject. In the mas- 
 culine singular (7''^) it occurs only in Gen. 
 xiv. 6, in connection witli Paran, or as El-Yaxaxi. 
 This the Sept. renders by terebinth (Tep€/3iV0ou 
 Ti}s ^apdy) ; Aquila. Symmachus, and Tlieodo- 
 tion by 'oak,' quercus ; and the Samaritan, 
 Onkclos, Kimchi, Jerome, &c., by ' plain,' 
 which is also adopted in the margin of our Billies. 
 The primary import of the word is strength, 
 poiiier ; whence some hold that it denotes any 
 mighty tree, especially the terebintli and the 
 oak. But the oak is not a mighty tree in 
 Palestine ; aiid as it possesses its own distinct 
 name [Ai.i.on], wliich is sliown, by the apposition 
 of tlie names in Isa. vi. 13, and Hos. iv. 13, to 
 denote a dill'erent tree from alah, one can have 
 little hesitation in restricting the latter to the 
 terebinth. Indeed, this c(/iiclusion lias not been 
 miicli questionevl since it was shown liy Celsius 
 (Hierobotaii. ii. 34-5S) that the terebinth was 
 most ])rohably denoted liy tlie Hebrew alah ; 
 
 that the terebinth is tlie but^m aM> of tlie Arabs ; 
 
 ALAH. 
 
 and that the Arabian but'm is frequent in Pal'^ 
 tine. The Krst jiosition is of course inca]iable ol 
 absolute jiroof; tiie second has lieen contirmed 
 by Forskal and Ehrenberg ; and the third is 
 attested by a host of travellers, who speak of it 
 under both names. Celsius exhibits tlie testimo- 
 nies which existed in his time : to which those of 
 Forskal, Ilasselquist, and Dr. Robinson may no-,7 
 be added. The last-named traveller gives the best 
 account of the tree as it is found in Palestine. At 
 the point where the roads from Gaza to Jerusa- 
 lem, and from Hebron to Ramleh, cross each 
 other, and about midway between the two last- 
 named towns, this traveller observed an immense 
 bufm-tiee, the largest he saw anywliere in Pales- 
 tine. ' This sjiecies (Pistacia Terebinthus) is, 
 without doubt,' he adds, • the terebinth of the 
 Old Testament ; and under the shade of such a 
 tree Abraham may well have pitched his tent at 
 
 [Pistacia Te.ebintlius.] 
 
 Mamre. The but'm is not an evergreen, as Is 
 often represented ; but its small featliered lancet- 
 shaped leaves fall in the autumn, and are renewed 
 in the spring. The flowers are small, and fol- 
 lowed by small oval berries, hanging in dusters 
 from two to five inches in length, resemblii.g 
 much the clusters of the vine when the grapes are 
 just set. From incisions in tlie trunk there is 
 said to flow a sort of transparent balsam, consti- 
 tuting a very pure and line species of turpentine, 
 with an agreeable odour, like citron or jessamine, 
 and a mild taste, and hardening gradually into a 
 transparent gum. In Palestine nothing seems to 
 be now known of this product of the butm. The 
 tree is found also in Asia Minor (many of tliem 
 near Smyrna), Greece, Italy, the south of 
 France, Sjiain, and in the north of Africa ; and 
 is described as not usually risin^' to the heiglit of 
 more than twenty fpe\. It often exceeded that 
 size as we saw it in the mountains ; but here in 
 the plains it was very much larger.' 
 
 In Palestine and the neighbouring countriej 
 the tereliintji seems to he regarded with much he 
 same distinction as the (vik is iii our northern lati-
 
 ALCIMUS. 
 
 tales. Tte tree is long-lived: aiid it i' cpitaiii 
 thit there were in the cuuntr)- ancient tereliinlhs, 
 re.iowneil for their real or supposed connection 
 with scriptural incidents. Thus, about the time 
 ■yi Christ, there was at Manire, near Hel)ron, a 
 renerahle terelnnth, which a tradition, old in 
 f the time of Josophus, allei^'ed to be that (rendered 
 'plain' in oiu- version of Gen. xiii. IS) under 
 which Abraham nilciied his tent: and which, 
 indeed, was t)elie\ed to be as old as the creation 
 of the world (Josepli. Bell. Jud. iv. 9, 7 ). The 
 later hadition was content to relate that it sprang 
 from the stalV of one of the anirels wlio aiijieared 
 there to Altraham (Gen. xviii. 2). Having, 
 from respect to the memory of the ])atriarch, and 
 as one of the s})ots consecrated by the presence 
 of ' commissioned angels,' become a jjlace of 
 great resort and pilgrimage both of Jews and 
 Christians, the Plupnicians, Syrians, and Ara- 
 b'uis were attracted to it witli commercial ob- 
 jects; and it thus liecame a great fiir. At this fair 
 thousands of captive Jews were sold for slaves by 
 order of Hadrian in a.u. 135 (Jerome. Com m. in 
 Zcr/i. xi. 4, De Locis Ileb. 87 : Hegesipp. iv. \J ; 
 Sozom. Hist. Eccles. ii. 4, .5; Niceph. viii. 30; 
 Reland. Valoest. p. 714). Being a place of such 
 hefe-rogeneons assemblage, great abominations and 
 scandals, religious and moral, arose, to which 
 a stop was at length put by Eu.sebius of Cajsarea 
 and the other bishops of Palestine, who, by 
 order of Constantine, cast down all tiie ].agan 
 altars, and built a church by or under the tree. 
 It is .'aid that the tree dried up in the reign of 
 Theodosius the Younger ; but that the still vital 
 trunk threw otf shoots and branches, and ]3ro- 
 duced a new tree, from which Brocard (vii. 64), 
 Salignac ( x. 5), and other old travellers declare 
 that tiiey brought slips of the new and old wood 
 * J their own counti-y. Zuallart, who alleges that 
 Sume of its wood was given to him by the 
 monks at Jerusalem, candidly admits the ditfi- 
 culty of believing the stories which were told of 
 its long duration : but he satisfies himself with the 
 authority of the authors we have mentioned, and 
 concludes that God may have specially interfered 
 to preserve it, with other old memorials, for his 
 own glory and for our instruction {Voyage de 
 Jeyttsa!em, iv. 1). The tree was accidentally 
 destroyed by lire in 1646 a.d. (Mariti, p. 5'iO). 
 
 ALCIMUS, or J ^clMvs ("AXki/jlus 6 KaVldicei- 
 uoi, Joseph. Antiq. xii. 9. 3, Gra'cised forms of 
 Eliakim and Joachim — names often interchanged 
 in Hebrew), an usiuping high-priest of the Jews 
 in the time of Judas Maccabaeus [Maccabees; 
 
 Puil,.STS, HlGIi]- 
 
 ALEXANDER THE GREAT. This mighty 
 king is named in the opening of the first bi)ok of 
 Maccabees, and is alluded to in the prophecies of 
 Daniel. These, however, are not the jjrincipal rea- 
 Rtins for giving his name a place in this work : lie is 
 chiefly entitled to notice here Iwcause his military 
 f-Hieer jjermanently alVected the political state of 
 the Jewish jjeojile, as well as their ])hilosophy and 
 literature. It is not our part, therefore, to detail 
 even the outlines of his history, but to jioint out 
 the causes aud nature of this great revolution, and 
 the influence v/nich, formally through Alexander, 
 Greece has exerted over the religious history of 
 the West. 
 
 The conquest of Western Asia by Greeks ivas 
 •o thorougldy jirovidcd for by predisposing causes. 
 
 ALKXANDKR. 
 
 107 
 
 as to be no mere accident ascribable to .Mexai dei 
 as an individual. The wars which were earned 
 
 on between Greece and Persia in the reigns of 
 Darius, Xerxes, and .\rtaxerxes — fiom B.C. 400 
 to B.C. 449 — sufhciently sho\ied the derisive 
 superiority in arms whiih ihe Greeks po.s,sessed, 
 though no Greek as yet aspired to the coiKjuest of 
 Persia. Ihave freemen, attached to their own 
 soil, would not risk aliaiidoning it for evei fur the 
 satisfaction of chasing their \W out of his home. 
 But after the convulsions of the Peloponnesian 
 War (b.c. 431-401) had filled Greece with exiles, 
 whose sole trade was that of soldiers, a devoted 
 standing army could be had for money. By the 
 help of such mercenaries, Cyru.s, younger brotlier 
 of Artaxerxes II., atteuijjfed to .-■•ei/p the crown 
 of Persia (b.c. 401 I ; and although he was him- 
 self slain, thi.s, in its results ('wliicli cannot he l.eie 
 properly detailed), did l»iit show more signallv that 
 Greeks might foice their way to the very palace 
 of the great king, just as they afterwards trium- 
 j)liantly retreated through the heart of his empire. 
 Soon after this, Agesilaus. king of Sparta, ajipeai-* 
 to have had serious designs of fviiinding a Sjiaita 
 province in Asia Minor, wliere he met wii'li eas 
 success : but he was recalled by troubles at hom 
 (b.c. 394). About the year b.c. 374, Jason, th 
 chief man of Phera*, in Thessaly, and \irluall;.' 
 monarch of the whole province. lia\ing secured 
 the alliance of Macedon, seriously meditated the 
 conquest of the Persian emjiire ; and he 'or hij 
 son) might probalily have etVected it. hail lie not 
 been assassinated, b.c. 370. Tlie generation who 
 heard of that e\ ent witnessed the rise of Mace- 
 don to supremacy under the great Philij). whose 
 reign reached from b.c. 3")9 to b.c. 33*. He too 
 had ])ropo.*ed to himself the invasion and conquest 
 of Persia as the end of all his campaigns and tl.e 
 reward of all his labours; and he too was suddenly 
 taken off by the assassin's dagger. He was suc- 
 ceeded by his greater son, fi)r whom it was re- 
 served to accom])lish that of whicli Grecian 
 generals had now tor sev<'ntv years dreamed. It 
 seems theiefore clear that Greece was destined to 
 overflow into Asia, r 'en without Alexander; for 
 Persia was not likelj to have such a series of able 
 monarchs. and such an exem].tion from civil 
 wars, as alone could have hindered the event. 
 The personal genius of tiie Man-donian hero, 
 however, determined the form and tlie sudik'iiness 
 of ti'.e conquest ; and. in sj)ite of his ])ieniature 
 death, the jKilicy which he pursjied sfenis to have 
 left some jjennanent effects. It is indeed jx^ssil)!* 
 that, in regard to the toleration of Uiiental cu»>
 
 108 
 
 ALEXANDER 
 
 ALEXANDER. 
 
 totns and religions, no other policy than his could 
 have heltl the empire together. Since the Romans 
 in Asia and the British in India Iiave followed 
 the same ]>rocedure, any otlier (xieek conquerors 
 oi' Persia might have done the same had Alex- 
 GVider never existed. Be this as it may, it is 
 certain that his conciliatory policy was cojjied 
 bv his successors for at least a century and a 
 half. 
 
 His respectful behaviour to the Jewish high- 
 priest has been much dwelt on by Josephus (An- 
 tiq. xi. S, 4-6), a writer whose trustworthiness 
 has been greatly c 'errated. Special reasons for 
 questioning the story may be found in Thirlwall 
 (Hist, of Greece, vi. '20(51 : but in fact, as it evi- 
 dently vests on mere tradition, even a knowledge 
 of human nature, and of the particular author, 
 justifies large deductions from the picturesque 
 tale. Some of the results, however, can hardly be 
 wroneous, such as. that Alexander guaranteed to 
 the Jews, not in Judaea only, but in Babylonia 
 and Media, the free observance of their liereditary 
 laws, and on tliis ground exempted them from 
 tiiiiute every seventh (or sabbatical) year. From 
 the Romans in lata- times they gained the same 
 indulgence, and it must no doubt have been en- 
 joyed under the Persian king also, to whom they 
 paid tribute at the time of Alexander's invasion. 
 It is far frera improbable then that the politic 
 invader all'ected to have seen and heard the high- 
 priest in a dream (as Josephus relates), and 
 showed him great reverence, as to one who had 
 declared ' that he would go before him and give 
 the empire of Persia into his hand.' The pro- 
 found silence observed concerning Judaea by all 
 the historians of Alexander, at any rate proves 
 that the Jews jiassed over without a struggle from 
 the Peisian to the INIacedonian rule. 
 
 Innnediately after, tie invaded and conquered 
 Er^ypt, and showed to its gods tlie same respecl as 
 to those of Greece. Almost without a pause he 
 foumled the celebrated city of Alexandria (b.c. 
 332), an event v/hich, jierhaps more than any 
 other cause, peiTnanently altered the state of the 
 East, and brought about a direct interrhang:e of 
 mind between Greece, Egypt, and Judsea. Sidon 
 had been utterly ruined by Artaxerxes Ochus 
 (b.c. 351), and Tyre, tliis very year, by Alexan- 
 der : the rise of a new commercial metropolis 
 on the Mediterranean was thus facilitated ; and 
 when the sagacious Ptolemy became master of 
 Egypt Tb.c. 323"), that counti'y presently rose to 
 a prosperity whicli it never could have had under 
 its distant and intolerant Persian lords. The 
 Indian trade was diverted from its former course 
 up the Eu])hra1es into tlie channel of the Red 
 Sea ; and the new Egyptian capital soon became 
 a centre of attraction for Jews as well as Greeks. 
 Under the dynasty of the Ptolemies the Hellenic 
 race enjoyed such a practical ascendency (though 
 >n the whole to the benefit of the native Egyptians ) 
 that the influx of Greeks was of course immense. 
 At the same time, owing to the proximity of the 
 Egyptia^i religion, both tlie religion and the philo- 
 sophy of the Greeks assumed here a modified 
 form , and the m.onarchs, who were accustomed to 
 tolerate and protect Egyptian superstition, were 
 natural'.y very indulgent to Jewish peculiarities. 
 Alexa.utria therefore became a favourite resort of 
 the Jews, who here lived under their own la\rs, 
 administered bj a governor (idvdpxvs) of their own 
 
 nation; but they learned the Greek tongue, and 
 were initiated more or less into Greek philosophy, 
 Their numbers were so great as to make them & 
 large fracti'in of the whole city; and out of theii 
 necessities arose the translation of the Old Testa- 
 ment into Grfek. The close coniiectioi i which thit 
 Egyptian colony maintained with thtir brethre* 
 in Palestine produced various important mental 
 and spiritual elf^cts on the latter [Essenes]. 
 The most accessible specimen of rhetorical mo- 
 ralit)' produced by the Hebrew culture of Greek 
 learning is to be seer a the book called the Wis- 
 dom of Solomon : the most elaborate development 
 of Hebrew Platonism is contained in the work* 
 of Philo. In the writing called the Tliird Book 
 of the Maccabees is a sulticiently unfavourable 
 specimen of an attempt at rhetorical history by a 
 mind educated in the same school. How deep 
 an impress has been left on the Christian Church 
 by the combination of Greek and Helirew learning 
 which characterized Alexandria, it needs many 
 pages for the ecclesiastical historian to discuss. 
 The Grecian cities afterwards built in northern 
 Palestine [Decapoi.is] seem to have exerted little 
 spiritual influence on the south ; for a strong re- 
 pulsion existed in the stiictly Jewish mind against 
 both Samaria and Galilee. 
 
 The tolerant policy of Alexander was closely 
 followed by his great successor Seleucus, who ad- 
 mitted the Jews to equal riyrhts with Macedonians 
 in all his new cities, even in his capital of Antioch 
 (Joseph. Antiq. xii. 3, 1) ; and similar or greater 
 liberality was exercised by the succeeding kings 
 of that line, down to Antiochus Epiplianes [An- 
 TiocHus]. It can scarcely be doubted that on 
 this to a great extent depended the remarkable 
 westward migration of the Jews from Media and 
 Babylon into Asia Minor, which went on silently 
 and steadily until all the chief cities of those 
 parts had in them tlie re]iresentatives of the twelve 
 tribes. This again greatly influenced tlie planting 
 of Christianity, the most favourable soil for which, 
 during the time of its greatest puritj', was in a 
 Greek population which had previously received a 
 Jewish culture. In passing we may remark, that 
 we are unalile to firiil the shadow of a reason for 
 the popular assumption that thernodern European 
 Jews are descendants of the two more than of the 
 other ten or eleven tribes. 
 
 The great founder of Alexandria died in hi? 
 thirty-second year, b.c. 323. The empire which 
 he then left to be quarrelled for by his generals 
 comprised the whole dominions of Persia, with 
 the homage and obedience of Greece suyieradded. 
 But on the final settlement which took jilace after 
 the battle of Ipsus (b.c. 301), Seleucus, the Greek 
 representative of Persian majesty, reigned over a 
 less extended district than the last Darius. Not 
 only were Egypt and Cyprus severed from the 
 eastern empire, but Palestine and Coelesyria also 
 fell to their ruler, placing Jerusalem for nearly a 
 century beneath an Egyptian monarch. On tiiii 
 subject, see further under Antiochu.s. 
 
 The word Alexander means the helper or res- 
 cuer of men, denoting military prowess. It ii 
 Homer's ordinary name for Paris, son of Priam, 
 and was borne by two Kings of Macedon before 
 the great Alexander. The history of this con- 
 queror is known to us by the works of Arrian and 
 Quintus Curtius especially, besides the genera! 
 sources for all Greek history. Neither of them
 
 ALKXAXDER. 
 
 ft\i(hi)rs wrote witliiii four cenluries of the death of 
 Alexander ; but they had access to copious cou- 
 terajiorary nairativos siiice lost. — F. W. N. 
 
 2. ALKXAX13KR, surnamed HAL AS, fn.ir. 
 Ids mother Bala, a ])ersoiiag-e who figures in tlie 
 history ol" llie Maecahees aUvl in Josephus. His 
 extraction ia douhtful ; hut lie professed to he the 
 
 ALJ. i VNDRIA 
 
 109 
 
 natural son of Antiochus E])iplianes, and in that 
 capacity, out of opposition to Demetrius Soter, 
 he was recognised as king of Syria hy the king of 
 Egy])t, by the Romans, and eventually by Jonathan 
 Maccabx'us, on the ])art of the Jews. The degree 
 of strength and inliuence which the Jewish cliief 
 possessed, was suii.cient to lender his adhesion 
 valuable to either paity in the contest for the throne. 
 As iie was jbliged to take a side, and had reason 
 to distrust the sincerity of Demetrius, Jonathan 
 yielded to the solicitations of Alexander, wiio, on 
 arriving at Ptolemais, sent him a purple robe and 
 a crown of gold, o induce him to espouse his cause 
 (I Mace. X. ISj. Demethius was not long after 
 slain in battle, and Balas obtained ])osse.ssion of 
 the kingdom. He tlien sought tosfrengiheii him- 
 self by a marriage with the king of Egypt's 
 daughter. This marriage was celebrated at Pto- 
 lemais, and was attended by Jonatlian, who re- 
 ceived marks of higli consideration from the 
 Egyjitian (Ptolemy Philomi or) and Syrian kings 
 (1 Mace. 51-5<i ; Joseph. Antiq. xiii. 4). Pros- 
 perity ruined Alexando' . he soon abandoned 
 himself to voluptuousness and debauchery, leav- 
 ing the government in the hands of mini.sters 
 wliose misrule leuderetl his reign odious. This 
 encourageil Demetrius Nicator, the eldest son of 
 tlie lat< Demetrius Soter, to ap])ear in arms, and 
 claim liis father's crown. Alexander took the 
 field against him ; and in the brief war tliat fol- 
 lowed, although his father-in-law Ptolemy (who 
 had his own designs u])()ii Syria ) abandoned his 
 cause, Jonathan lemained faithful to him, and 
 rendered him very important services, which the 
 king rewarded by bestowing on him a golden 
 chain, such as princes only wore, and by giving 
 him possession of Ekron (' hKKapdiv) . The defec- 
 tion of the Egy])tian king, however, was fatal to 
 the cau.se of Balas ; lie was defeated in a pitclied 
 l)attle, and fled with 500 cavalry to Abte in Ara- 
 bia, and souglit refuge with the iina- Zabdiei. 
 The Aialiian murdeied his confiding guest in the 
 fifth year of liis leign over Syria, and sent his head 
 to Ptolemy, who himself died the same year, u.c. 
 140. Balas left a young son, who was evenmally 
 Diade king of Syria by Tryphon, un(k'r the name 
 if Aniioclius Theos (1 Mace. xi. 13-lS; Joseph. 
 Antiij. xiii. 4). 
 
 ."]. ALEXANDER JANN^^^US. the first 
 frince ( f tlie Maccalijean dynasty wlio assu]i}«d 
 tilt' title of' kii g [M.\..;c.4.iii;ii3]. 
 
 . 4. ALEX.WDEU. s(ni of Herod (he Great ajjd 
 Marianne [Hbhodian F.a.mii.^I. 
 
 5. .\LEXANDER, a Jew of E])hesu», '^nown 
 only from tlie ])art he took m the ujiroar about 
 liiana, which wa^ raised tlieie by the ])reaching of 
 Paul. /Vs tlie inlialiitaiils confounded the Jew» 
 and Jewish Christians, tlie foinier put forward 
 Alexander to speak on their liehalf, bni he w;is 
 unalile in the tumult to oi-tain a hearing (Acts 
 xix. 33). Some suppose that this person is tiie 
 same with 'Alexander the coi)i>eismitii,' of 2 Tim. 
 iv. 14, but this is by no means probable; the 
 name of Alexander wiis in those times very 
 common among the Jews. 
 
 0. ALEXANDER, a coppersmith or l)razier 
 (mentioned in I Tim. i. ■20; 2Tiin. iv. 14\ w!io 
 with Hymenieus and others iiroaciied certain he- 
 resies touching the lesuriection, for which thev 
 weieexcotnmunicated liy St. Paul. The.-e peisons, 
 and esjiecially .Alexander. ap]iear to have iiial'gncd 
 the faith they had fois.iken, and the cliaracter 
 of the apostle. As every Jew learned .some trade, it 
 has been imagined that Alexander was leally a man 
 of learning, and not an artizan, although actjuainted 
 with the brazier's craft. But we are not awaie 
 that it was usual to designate a literate jjeis. n 
 by the name of tlie tia<le with which he was ac- 
 quainted, although tills may possilily iiave been 
 tlie case wlieu a man bore a name so common and 
 so undistinguishing as that of Alexander. 
 
 ALEXANDRE, or SALOME, wife of Alex- 
 ander JallllijeUS I M.\CCAHKE.s]. 
 
 ALEXANDRIA ('AAe^ai/Speic, 3 Mace. ui. 
 1, 21), the cliief maritime city, anil long the 
 metropolis k)^ Lower Egypt. As this city owed 
 it.s foundation to Alexander the Great, the Old 
 Testament canon had closed before it existed ; 
 nor is it often mentioned in the Apociyjiha. or 
 ill the New Testament. But it was in many ways 
 most importantly connected with the later histoiy 
 of the Jews — as well from the relations which 
 subsisted between them and the Ptolemies, who 
 reigned in that city, as from the vast numbeis 
 of Jews who were settled there, with whom a 
 constant intercourse was maintained by the Jews 
 of Palestine. It is j)eihaps safe to say that, from 
 the foundation of Alexandria to the destruction 
 of Jerusalem, and even after, the foimrrwas of all 
 fori ign placei* that to which the attention of the 
 Jews was mosi directed. And this ap])tars to 
 have been hue even at the time when Antioch 
 first, and alYerwards Rome, be<:amt (he seat of 
 the power to which tlie nation Wius suliject. 
 
 Alexandria is situateil on fh<,' I\lLildeiraiiean, 
 twelve miles west of the Canojiic moutl of 
 the Nile, in' 31^ 13' N. lat. and 2P .J3' E. 
 long. It owes its origin to the compieiiensive 
 policy of Alexander, who jierceived that the 
 usual channels of commerce might Ik' advanta- 
 gfMUsly alteied; and ihat a city occupying this 
 site could not fail to become the common empo- 
 riritri fi;r the tratlic of the eastern anil western 
 worlds, by means of the river Nile, and the two 
 adjacent seas, the Red Sea and the Meditenanean : 
 and the high prospeiity which, as such, Alexandiia 
 \ery rapidly attained. ])roved the soundness of liisi 
 judgmeni. and exceeded any exjiectatioiis whitli 
 even he could have entertained. Y<.,x a l.'iig period 
 Alexandria was the gieatest of kn.nvn cities; foi 
 Nineveh and Babylon ii.id fallen, and Rornw 'nad 
 uot yet risen to jne-eminence ; and even wbw
 
 uo 
 
 ALEXANDRIA. 
 
 Rome became the mistress of the world, aiid_ 
 Alexaiidria only the metropolis of a province, the 
 latter was second only to the former in wealth, ex- 
 tent, and importance ; and was honoured with 
 tlie mas^niticent titles of the second metropolis of 
 the worKl, the city of cities, the queen of the 
 East, a second Rome (Diod. Sic. xvii. ; Strab. 
 xvii.: Ammiaii. Marcell. xxii.; Hegesipp. iv. 27 ; 
 Joseph. Bell. Jud. iv. 11,5). 
 
 The city was founded in B.C. 332, and was 
 built under the superintendence of the same 
 arcliitect fDinocrates) who had rebuilt the 
 Temple of Diana at Epliesus. As a foreign 
 city, not mentioned at all in the Old Testa- 
 ment, and only accidentally in the New 
 (Acts vi. 9 ; xviii. 21 ; xxvii. 6), it is intro- 
 iuced into this work only on account of its con- 
 oectiad with tiie history and condition of the 
 
 ALEXANDRIA 
 
 Jewish people. To the facts resulting from o» 
 bearing on tliat connection, our notice must thfte- 
 foie l)e limited, without entering into those de« 
 scriptions of the ancient or of the modern city 
 which are given in general and geographical cyclo- 
 paedias. It may suffice to mention that the ancient 
 city appears to have been of seven times tiie extent 
 of the modern. If we may judge from flie length 
 of the two main streets (crossing each other at rig) 1 
 angles) by wliich it was intersected, the city was 
 about four miles long by one and a half wide : and 
 in the time of Diodorus it contained a free popu- 
 lation of 300.000 persons, and altogether pro- 
 bably 600,000, if we double tlie former number, as 
 Mannert suggests, in order to include the slaves. 
 Tlie port of Alexandria is described by Josephus 
 [Bell. Jud. iv. 10, 5); and his description is in 
 jierfect conformity with the best modem accounts 
 
 ■^f% -=^^ 
 
 ;-^?§&efel6^, 
 
 
 It was secure, but difficult of access ; in conse- 
 quence of which, a niaguiticent pharos, or light- 
 house, was ei-ected upon an islet at the entrance, 
 whicli was connected witli the maiidand by a 
 dyke. This jiharos was accounted one of the 
 ' seven ' wonders of the world. It was begun by 
 Ptolemy Soter, and completed under Ptukmy 
 Philadel])lius, l)y S.istratus of (aiidus, b,c. 2*^3. 
 It was a square structure of white marble, on the 
 top of whicli tires were kept constantly buniing 
 fi)r the direction of mariners. It was erected at a 
 ost of SO * talents, wliich, if Attic, would amount 
 to 1()5,000('., if Alexandrian, to Twice tliat sum. 
 It was a wonder in those times, when sucli erec- 
 tions were almost unknown ; bul, in itself, the 
 Eddystoue lijlitimuse is, in all probability, ten 
 limes more wonderful. 
 
 Tlie business of wi.rking out the great design 
 of Alexander could not liave devolved on a inore 
 titting person tlian Ptolemy Soter. From his first 
 arrival iu Egyjit, he made Alexandria his resi- 
 
 dence : and no sooner had he some respite frcm 
 war, than he bent all the resource? of his mind to 
 draw to his kingdom the wiiole hade of the East, 
 which the Tyrians had. up to his time, carried on 
 by sea to Elath, and from tiience, by the way of 
 Rhiiiocorura, to Tyre. He iiuilt a city on the 
 west side of the Red Sea. whence he sent out fleets 
 to all those countries to which the Pha-niciaiiS 
 haded from Elath. But, observing that the Reil 
 Sea, by reason of rocks and shoals, was very danger- 
 ous towards its northern extrt.'mity, lie ti-ansferred 
 tlie trade to another city, which he founded at the 
 greatest praclicalile distance southward. This 
 port, which was almost on the borders of Ethiopia 
 he called, from his mother, Berenice ; but tli» 
 harbour bein» found inconvenieiii, the neighbour- 
 ing city of Myos Horinos was pveferred. Th;iiier 
 the products of the east and sourh were conveyed 
 by sea ; and weiT from thence taken on camels t'j 
 Coptus, on the Nile, where tl:ey were agair: 
 shipped for Alexandria, and from that city >ere
 
 ALEXANDRIA. 
 
 di»p«;rsed into all tlie nations of the west, in ex- 
 change for meic)i;ui<lise which wiis afterwards 
 exported to the East (Strabo. xxii. j). SUr) ; Pliii. 
 Hist. Aat. vi. 23). By the<!e means, the whole 
 trade was tix«d at Alexamhia, wliicli thus Ix'canie 
 the cliief mart of all the tiallic. Ix'tween the Kast 
 and West, and which ccntiniied to be flie greatest 
 enijiorium in tlie world for al)ove seventeen cen- 
 turies, until the lUscovery of the passage by the 
 Cape of Good Hope opened another channel for 
 the commerce of the Kast. 
 
 Alexandria became not only the seat of com- 
 mi'ice, but of learning and tlie liberal sciences. 
 This distinction also it ow<mI to Ptolemy Soter, 
 nimself a man of education, who founded an aca- 
 demy, or society of learned men, who devoted them- 
 selves to the study of philosophy, literatuie, and 
 science. For their use he made a collection of 
 choice books, which, by degrees, increased under 
 his successors until it became the linest library in 
 the world, and numbered 700,000 volumes (Strab. 
 xvii. p. 791; Y.useh. Ckroii.) It sustained repeated 
 losses, by fire and otherwise, but these losses were 
 as repeatedly repaired ; and it continued to l)e 
 of great fame and \ise in those parts, until it 
 was at length burnt by the Saracens when they 
 made themselves masters of Alexandria in a.d. 642. 
 ll^ndoubtedly the Jews at Alexandria shared in 
 the benefit of these institutions, as the Christians 
 did afterwards ; for the city was not only a seat of 
 heathen, but of Jewish, and sui)sequently of Chiis- 
 tiaii learning. The Jews never had a more pro- 
 foundly learned man than Philo, nor tlie Christians 
 men more erudite than Origen and Clement ; and 
 if we may judge from these celebrated natives of 
 Alex.indria, who were remarkably intimate with 
 the heathen philosophy and literature — tlie learn- 
 ijig acquired in the Jewish and Ciiristian schools 
 of that city must have been of that broad and com- 
 jirfiiensive character which its large and liljeral 
 institutions were titteel to jiroduce. It will be 
 remembered that the celebrated translation of 
 the Hebrew Scriptures into Gieek [SKPTUAtiiN'r] 
 was made, untler everv encouragement from Pto- 
 lemy Philadelphus, priiicijially for the use of the 
 Jews in Alexandria, who knew only the Greek 
 language ; but parti)', no doubt, that the great 
 library might possess a version of a book so re- 
 markable, and, in some ]ioints, so closely con- 
 nected with the ancient history of Egyjjt. Tlie 
 work of Josephus against Ajiion alfouls am])le 
 evidence of the attention which the Jewish Scrip- 
 tures excited. 
 
 At its foundation Alexandria was peopled less 
 by Kgyjil ians than by colonies of Greeks, Jews, and 
 other Ibreigners. The Jews, however much their 
 reli^'ioti was disliked, were valued as citizens; and 
 every encouragement was held out by Alexan- 
 der himself and by liis sOccessi^rs in Egypt, to in- 
 duce them to settle in the new city. The same 
 ]<rivileges as those of the first class of inhabit- 
 ants (the Greeks) were accorded to them, as well 
 as the fiee exercise of ti.eir religion and j)eculiar 
 nsages : and this, with the protection and security 
 whi(-h a yiowertul state allorded against the jx'rjie- 
 tual conliicls and troubles of Palestine, and willi 
 the LMclination to tiafhc, uhicli iiad been ac()iiired 
 during tiie Captivity, gradually drew such im- 
 fr.cnse numbers of Jews to Alexandria, that tliey 
 eventualiy finned a veiy large portion of ils vast 
 p<il)i;l-*tion, and at 'lie same 'inie coiistifuied a 
 
 ALEXANDRIA. 
 
 Ill 
 
 most thriving and important section of the Jewlnh 
 nation. The Jewisli inlial)itanis of .Alexandria are 
 therefore often mentioned in the later history of 
 tiie nation; and their importance as a section ,)f 
 that nation would doubtless have been tnore fre- 
 quently indicated, had not the .lews of Egypt 
 thrown off their ecclesiastical dependence ujiun 
 Jerusalem and its temple, and foimed a .sepaiate 
 establishment of their own, at On or Heliopolia 
 [On; Onias]. This left thein less inducement 
 or occasion tlian they would otherwise have had 
 to mix themselves up with the alVairs of tlie pa- 
 rent country : but they were not wanting in fie- 
 coming patriotism; and they were on more than 
 one occasioti involved in measm-es directed against 
 the Jews as a natiun, and occasionally expe- 
 rienced some efl'ects of that anger in the ruling 
 powers, or of exasijcralion in the pojiulace, of 
 which the Jews in Palestine were the primary 
 objects, or which resulted from the course which 
 they had taken. 
 
 The inhabitants of Alexandria were divided 
 into three classes : 1. The Macedonians, the ori- 
 ginal foundersof the city ; i. the mercenaries who 
 had served under Alexander ; 3. thenati\e Egvp- 
 tiuns. Througli the favour of Alexander and Ptole- 
 my Soter, the Jews were admitted into the first of 
 these classes, and this privilege was so important 
 that it had great effect in drawing them to the new 
 city (Hecatgeus, in Joseph. Contra Apion. 1. ii. : 
 Bell. Jud. ii. 3fi ; Q. Curt. iv. R). These j^ivi- 
 leges they enjoyed undistmbed luitil the time cf 
 Ptolemy Philopator, who, being exasperated at 
 the re^stance he had met with in attempting to 
 enter the temple at Jerusalem, wreaked his wraili 
 upon the Jews of Alexandria, on his return to 
 Egypt. He reduced to the third or lowest class 
 all l>ut such as would cunsent to oiler .sacrilic^■s 
 to the gods he worshipjied ; but of tiie whole hi dy 
 only 300 were found willing to abandon their piin- 
 cipies in order to jireserve their civil advantages. 
 The act of the general body in excluding the 3(10 
 ajKistates from llitir congiegations was so reiiie- 
 sented to the king as to move his anger to the 
 utmost, and he madly determined to exteimiiiate 
 all the Jews in Egyjit. Accordingly, as many 
 as could be found were lirought together, and shut 
 up in the spacious hippodrome of the city, with 
 the intention of letting loose 500 elephants upi.n 
 them ; but th* animals refused their horrid task, 
 and, turning wildly iqion the sjiec tutors and 
 the soldiers, destroyeil large nunibeis of them. 
 This, even to the king, who was present, seemed 
 so manifest an interposition of Providence in 
 favour of the Jews, that he not only lestineii their 
 privileges, but loaded them with new favotirs. 
 Thisstoiy, as it is omitted by Josejihus and other 
 writers, anil oidy found in the thiid bocik of 
 MaccalxTS (ii.-v.), is consideied doulitl'id. 
 
 The dreadful ])ersecution whicli the Jews ol 
 Alexandria underwent in a.d. 39, shows that, 
 notwithstanding their long establishment theie, 
 no friendly relations ha<l arisen between ilitm 
 and the othir inh.ibitaiits. by whom in fact they 
 were intensely h ited. This feding was so well 
 known, that at the date indicated, the Ri inan 
 governor Avillius Elaccus, who was anxious to in- 
 gratiate himself with the Citizens, was ]ieisuadt(l 
 that the surest way of winning their afl'eclii'iii 
 was to withdraw his protection frotn the Jews, 
 against whi.ni tlie emjeror was alreaUy exasjie-
 
 (13 
 
 ALEXANDRIA, 
 
 tdtei) by their refusal to acknowledge his right 
 <o aiviiie h,«iouis wliich he insanely claimed, 
 o'. to admit his images into their synagogues. 
 The Alexandriaiis soon found out that they would 
 not be called to account for any proctt'dings they 
 might have reconise to against the Jews. The in- 
 sult and latter mockery with whicii they, treated 
 Herod Agrippa when he came to Alexandria, be- 
 fore proceeding to take possession of the kingdom 
 he had receiv(;d fr;>m Caligula, gave the tiist iati- 
 Diation of their dispositions. Finding that tire 
 governor cannived at their conduct, they pio- 
 ceeded to i;isist that the emjjeror's images should 
 be introduced into tlie Jewish synagogues; and 
 on resistance being ollered, they destroyed m,)st 
 oi' them, and polluted tlie others by introducing 
 the imjjerial images Ijy force. The example thus 
 Set by the Alexandrians was followed in otlier cities 
 of Egypt, which contained at this time about a 
 million of Jews ; and a vast number of oratories 
 —of which the largest ajid. most beautiful were 
 called synagogues— w«e all either levelled with 
 the ground, consumed ly fire, or profaned by 
 the emperor's statues (Philo, Li Flacc. p. 968- 
 lOUIt, ed. 1640; De Leg. ix.; Euseb. Chron. 
 27, 2S}. 
 
 Flaccus sooti after declared himself openly, by 
 publishing an edict depriving the Jews of the 
 rights of citizenship, which they had so long en- 
 joyed, ajid declaring them aliens. The Jews 
 then occupied two out of the five quarters (which 
 to <k their names from the live lirst letters of the 
 alphabet) into which the city was divided ; and 
 as they wei-e in those times, before centuries of 
 oppression had broken their spirit, by no means 
 remaikable for their submission to wrongous 
 treatment, it is likely that they made some eH'orts 
 towards the maintenance of their rights, wliich 
 Pliilo neglects to record, but which gave some 
 kind of pretence for the excesses which followed. 
 At all events, the Alexandrians, regarding them 
 as abandoned by the authorities to their mercy, 
 o})enly proceeded to the most violent extremities. 
 The Jews were forcibly driven out of all the 
 other parts of the city, and confined to one quar- 
 ter ; and the houses from wliich they hiid been 
 driven, as well as their shops and warehouses, 
 were plundered of all their etVects. Impoverished, 
 and {leut up in a naiTOw corner of the city, where 
 tlie gieater part were obliged to lie in theojjen air, 
 and where the supplies of food were cut off, many 
 of them ilied of hardship and hunger ; and who- 
 ever was found beyond the boundary, whetlier he 
 had escaped from the assigned limits, or had 
 come in from the country, was seized and put 
 to death with horrid tortures. So likewise, when 
 a vessel Ijelongiiig to Jews airived in port, it was 
 boarded by the mob, pillaged, and then burnt, 
 togedier with the owners. 
 
 At length king Herod Agrippa, who stayed long 
 enough in Alexandria to see the beginning of 
 these atrocities, ti-ansmitted to the emperor such a 
 report of the real state of aifairs as imiuced him to 
 send a centurion to arrest Flaccus, and bring him 
 a prisoner to Rome. This put the riot«?rs in a false 
 position, and brought some relief to the Jews ; but 
 the tumult still continued, and as the magistrates 
 refused to acknowledge the citizenship of the 
 Jews, it was at length agreed that both parties 
 should send delegates, five on each side, to Rome, 
 «D«J I'ffer tlie lecLsion of tlie cmtroversv to the em- 
 
 ALEX.\NDRIA 
 
 peror. At tl. . head of the Jewish delegation wa« 
 the celebrated Philo, to whom we owe the ac<'.ou£;J 
 oi these transactions ; and at the head of the Alex • 
 andrians was the noted Apion. The latter chiefly 
 rested theii- case upon the fact that the Jews were 
 the only {jeople who refused to consecrate imager 
 to the emperor, or to swear by his name. But on thii 
 point the Jewish delegates defended themselves 80 
 well, that Caligula himself said, ' These men are not 
 so wicked as ignorant and unhappy, in not believ- 
 ing me to be a god !' Tlie ultimate result of thi« 
 appeal is not known, but the Jews of Alexandria 
 continued to be harassed during the reniainuei of 
 Caligula's reign ; and tlieir alabarch Alexander 
 Lysimachus (brother of Philo) was thrown into 
 prison, where he remained till he was discharged by 
 Claudius, upon whose accession to the empire tlie 
 Alexandrian Jews lietook themselves to arms. This 
 occasioned such disturliauces that they attracted 
 the attention of the emjieror, who, at the joint en- 
 treaty of Herod and Agrippa, issued an edict con- 
 ferring on the Jews of Egj'pt all their ancient privi- 
 leges (Philo, hi Flacc. Op. p. 1019-1043 ; Joseph. 
 Antiq. xviii. 10; xix. 4). The state of feeling 
 in Alexandria whicli these facts indicate, was very 
 far from being allayed wlien the revolt of the Jews 
 in Palestine caused even those of the nation who 
 dwelt in foreign parts to be regarded as enemies, 
 both by the populace and the go\ernmeiit. lu 
 Alexandria, on a public occasion, they were «it- 
 tacked, and those who could not save themselves 
 by flight were put to tire sword. Only three were 
 taken alive, and they were dragged through the 
 city to be consigned to the flames. At this spec- 
 tacle the indignation of the Jews rose beyond all 
 bounds. They first assailed the Greek citizens with ' 
 stones, and then rushed with lighted torches to the 
 ampliitlreatre, to set it on fire and burn all the 
 l)e()])le who were there assembled. Tlie Roman 
 prefect Tiberius Alexander, finding tliat milder 
 measures were of no avail, sent against them a 
 body of 17,000 soldiers, who slew about 50,000 of 
 them, and plundered and Immed their dwellings 
 (Joseph. Bell. .hid. ii. IS. 7 ; comp. Matt. xxiv. 6). 
 After the close of the war in Palestine, new 
 disturbances were excited in Egypt by the Sicarii, 
 many of whom had lied thither. They endea- 
 voured to persuade the Jews to acknowledge no 
 king but God, and to throw off the Roman yoke. 
 Such jjersons as opposed their designs and ten- 
 dered wiser counsels to their brethren, tliey secretly 
 assassinated, according to their custom. But the 
 principal Jews in Alexandria having in a general 
 assembly earnestly warned the people against 
 these fanatics, who liad been the authors of all 
 the troubles in Palestine, about 600 of them were 
 delivered up to the Romans. Several fled into 
 the Thebaid, but were apprehended and brought 
 back. The most cruel tortures which could be 
 devised had no etl'ect in comjielling them to ac- 
 knowledge the em])eror for their sovereign ; and 
 even their children seemed endowed with souls 
 feailess of death, and boilies incapable of pain. 
 Vespasian, when informed of these transactions, 
 sent orders that the Jewish temple in Egypt should 
 be destroyed. Lupus the jirefect, liowever, only 
 siiut it up, after having taken out the consecrated 
 gifts : but his successor Paulinus stripped it com- 
 jjletely, and excluded tlie Jews entirely from it 
 This was in A.rj. 75, being the 343rd year fxoza 
 its erection by Oui<is.
 
 ALKXANDRIUM. 
 
 S,. Mark is said to have iiitrocUicetl tlie 
 Christian religion into Alexandria, uliich early 
 became one of the strongholds of the true faith. 
 The Jews continued to form a jnincipal portion of 
 the iiiliiihitants, and remained in the enjoyment 
 of their civil riijhti till a.d. 41.'), when they in- 
 curred the hatred of Cyril tiie patriarch, at ulune 
 instance they were expelled, to the nund)er of 
 40,000, and their synagogues destroyed. How- 
 ever, wiien Amrou, in a.d. 640, took the place for 
 the caliph Omar, he wrote to his ni;ister in tliese 
 terms : — ' I have taken the great city of tlie west, 
 which contains 4000 |)alaces, 4000 baths, 400 the- 
 at^res, 12.000 shops for th<! sale of vegetable food, 
 and 40,000 tributan/ Jcics.' From that time the 
 prosperity of Alexantlria very rapidly declined ; 
 and when, in 909, the Fatemite caliplis seized on 
 Egypt and built New Cairo, it sunk to the rank 
 of a secondary Egyptian city. The discovery of 
 the ])assage to the E;ist by the Cape, in 1 197, 
 almost anniliihited its reirtaining commercial im- 
 portance; and althou,di the commercial and ma- 
 ritiane enterprises of Mehemet Ali have again 
 raised it to some distinction, Alexandria must still 
 lie accounted as one of those great ancient cities 
 wliose gloi V has departed. When Benjamin of 
 Tadt'la visited the jilace (Itiii. i. 15S, ed. Aslier), 
 the number of Jews was not more than 3000, and 
 does not now exceed 500 (J. A. St. John, Egypt, 
 i\. 3S4). The whole po])ulation at the prei;ent 
 tmie (1S43) is between 36,000 and 40,000, of 
 wliom 4S7(> are foreigners (Hogg's Visit to Alex- 
 andria, i. 101). 
 
 ALEXANDRIUM, a castle built by Alex- 
 ander Jannseus on a mountain near Coreae 
 •KopiaC), one of the principal cities of northern- 
 most Judwa towards Samaria. The princes of 
 the fo\nider"s familj' were mostly buried here; 
 and hither Herod carried the remains of his sons 
 Alexander and Aiistobulus (who were maternally 
 of that family), after they had been put to death 
 at Sel)aste (Joseph. Antiq. xiii. 24 ; xiv. 6, lo, 27 ; 
 xvi. 2, et vli.). The situation of Coreae, which 
 determines that of the castle, is not known ; but 
 Dr. Robinson (Bib. Beseardus, iii. R3) conjectures 
 that he may have foimd it in the modern Kuriyzet, 
 which is about eight miles S. by E. from Nal)ulus 
 (Shechem ). But this ])1ace, we imagine, is too far 
 north fo have been within even the northernmost 
 limits of Judaea. 
 
 ALGUM (D''Q-'1-1^«), or Ai.muq Trees 
 (Ci^OpX). These are, no doubt, two forms 
 of the same word, as they occur in passages re- 
 ferring to flic same events, and differ only in the 
 transjiosition of letters. In I Kings x. 11, it is 
 eaid, ' And the navy also of Hiram, that brought 
 gold from Ophir, brought in from 0{)hir great 
 plenty of almug-ti-ees and precious stones. And 
 llie king made of tlie almug-ti-ees pillars for fiie 
 house of the Lord, and for the king's liouse, 
 har])3 also and psalteries for singers.' In the jja- 
 rallel passages of 2 Cliron. ix. 10, II, the word 
 algum is sulistituted for almug, and it is added, 
 • There were none siu.h seen before in the land of 
 Juddh.' As no similar name has yet Ix'en disco- 
 vered whicli is apjjlicable to any kind of wood 
 Icom the comitries whence the almug-trees aie 
 supposed to have l)een brought, various conjec- 
 tures have been formed resnectiiig them. It is 
 necessary first to settle wheice tiiese Trees were 
 
 ALGUM. 
 
 iia 
 
 brought. Tc us tl)ere apix'ars no doubt that 
 Oj)liir was to tlie soutiiward of the Red Sea, and 
 was most probably in some nart of India {Pic- 
 torial Bibk, ii. 349-366). The jiroducts l)r<)ught 
 from thence, such as g(dd. pR'cious stones, ivory, 
 ajjes, and jx^acocks, were all jirocnrald*^ only from 
 that country. Even tin, ol)tained at a lal.rperiod 
 from Tarfessus, was prolialdy first jirocnred fioni an 
 earlier Tarshish, as it is al)undant in Tcnnaserim, 
 the Malayan jK'niiisuhi, the islaml of Banca. &c 
 Its uses were well known to the Indi.uis, who le- 
 ceived it also in exciiange when brouglil to them 
 by the lied S<'a, as it no (h)iibt was, at the time 
 when the Perij)lus of fiie Erythva-an Sea was 
 written. 
 
 Various trees have l)e*n at(em])led lo be iden- 
 tified with the almug. These it is unnecessajy t(» 
 einunerate at length, as only a few of them seem 
 deser\ ing of attejition. The Greek translator o'' 
 the book of Kings explains the Hebrew woid l.y 
 B.vKa dw(\iKriTu, ' unliewn wood ;' but in bolli I'oe 
 places in Chronicles it is rendered =.vKa TrevKiyr., 
 'pine-wood.' Tiiis is also the interpulation ol 
 the old Latin version at 2 (jiuon. ii. S ; l)ul i'> 
 the two other passages that version gives it the ac- 
 ceptation of ' thyine-wood ' {Lifjua thijina). The 
 tliyine-wood which is mentioned in Rev. xviii. 12, 
 is no doubt tlie Lignum tliyiiium, wliich was also 
 called citrintim, citron-wood. It w;is highly valiud 
 by the iromans, and emjdoyed by tiiem for tiie 
 doors of their temjdes and liie images of their gods. 
 This wood was obtained from the nortli of Afiica, 
 where the tree producing it lias recently been re- 
 discovered. If algum-wood wiLs brougiit from 
 the north coast of Africa, there certainly does not 
 ajipear any tree more woilhy to be consideied 
 as such than Thuya aiticulata, or Callitiis cjua- 
 dri\al\is [Thyine \'\'ood]. From the jiassage 
 of 2 Chion. ii. 8: — 'Send me also cedm-tiees. 
 fir-liees, and algum-trees out of Lebanon,' it 
 ha.s been inferred that tliis might lie one ai 
 the pine trilje procuiable in that mountain : but 
 hi the imiallel passage in 1 Kings v. 8, only 
 timl)er of cedar arid timber of fir aie mentioned. 
 On this RosenmiiJler obseives. ' that the addi- 
 tion of "almug' in the book of Chronicles 
 appears to have lieen the interpolation of a 
 tianscriber' {Bibl. Bot. p. 245). If the almug 
 liiid been a tree of Lebanon, we should have a 
 dilhculty in understanding how, after the time 
 of Solomon, ' theie came no such almug-tiees, 
 nor were such seen luito this day' (1 Kings 
 X. 12). 
 
 We feel satisfied, however, that almug-tiees 
 were brought from southern legions by tlie Red 
 Sea; and it could not have lieeii more dill.cult 
 to convey them from tlieiice to tlie iledileiianeau 
 than it must have been to transpoit timber fioni 
 Joppa to Jerusalem. If we consider the gieat db- 
 ficiency of tindier on the coasts both of Aial>!a 
 and of Egypt — a deficiency which, from tiie ge- 
 neral dryness of tlie soil and climate, must liave 
 been expeiienced in remote ages, as well as at the 
 piesent time — we should oxix'ct that, wiieie we 
 have notices of so much shi])])ing, fheie must 
 eaily have licen established a tiade in fiinbei. 
 Foiskal j/aiticulaily mentions tin- inipoitation of 
 f imlier-woiKls from India into Aialiia. Of the kinds 
 enumerated, it hius been sliown tliat saj. abnoos, and 
 s/iis/ium are teak, ebony, and sissoo {Essay on 
 IIi)idoo Medicine, \>. 12"^}. Foiskal also n enUiiur
 
 114 
 
 ALGUM. 
 
 the Teak as 'mpovied into Egypt : ' Carina navis 
 fundatur Ligiio saj • Vj ^^ India allato,' p. Ivi. 
 
 Having been broiiglit from so great a distance, 
 and thought sulliciently remaikable to be worthy 
 (if special record, it is reasonaljle to suppose 
 (hat alniiig-trees possessed properties not common 
 111 the timber usually met with in Palestine, 
 whether in appearance, in colour, or in odour. 
 Sevt-ral Indian trees have lieen enumerated as 
 likely to have been the almug. Of these, bukkum, 
 or sapan vvooil (Ccesalpinia sappan), much used 
 in dyeing, belongs to the same genus as the Brazil- 
 wood of South America, but its nearest locality 
 is the eastern side of the Bay of Bengal. The 
 teak, liighly valued from its indestructible nature, 
 great size, and strength, miglit be more reasonalily 
 adduced, because more easily procurable, from 
 the greater accessiliiliiy of the Malabar coast; but 
 lieing a coarse-grained w *.d, it might not lie so 
 well suited for musical instruments. If one of 
 the pine trilie he lequiied, none is more deserving 
 of selection than the deodar (rfeo, god ; (lar, 
 wood : Pinus deodara), as it grows to a large size, 
 yields excellent timber, which is close-grained 
 and fragrant ; but the tree is found only in very 
 inaccessible situations. 
 
 Others have been in favour of sandal-wood, but 
 have confounded with the true and far-famed kind 
 what is called red sandal-wood, the product of 
 Pterocarpus santaUims, as well as oi' Adenanthera 
 pavoniaa. But there are two kinds of fragrant 
 sandal-wood, the yellow and the white, both men- 
 tioned in old works on Materia Medica. Both 
 these aie tliought by some to lie the produce of 
 the same ti'ee, the younger and outer layers of 
 wood forming the white, while the centre layers 
 become coloured, and fonn the yellow. 
 
 Recent investigations confirm the opinion of 
 Garcias, that the yellow and white sandal-woods 
 are the produce of ditVerent trees, both of w'uch, 
 however, belong to the same genus, Santamm. 
 M. Gaudichaud has described the species, which 
 lie has named .S. Freycinetianum, as that yield- 
 ing the yellow sandal-wood so much valued by 
 the Chinese, and obtained by them from the 
 Feejee, Marquesas, and Molucca Islands. 
 
 But the most common sandal-wood is that 
 which is best known and most highly esteemed in 
 India. It is produced by the Hantalum album, 
 a native of the mountainous parts of the coast of 
 Malabar, where large quantities are cut for export 
 to China, to dil!erent parts of India, and to the 
 Persian and Araliian gulfs The outer parts of tiiis 
 tree are white and without odour; the parts near 
 the root are most fragrant, especially of such trees 
 as grow in hilly situations and stony ground. 
 The trees vaiy in diameter from inclies to a 
 foot, and are about 2b or 30 feet in height, but 
 the stems soon Ijegiii to branch. This wood is 
 white, fine-grained, and agreeably fiagiant, and is 
 much employed for making rosaries, fans, ele- 
 gant iKjxes and cabinets. The Cliinese use it also 
 as incense both in their temples and private 
 b-juses, and Inirn long slender candles foimed 
 ♦jy covering the ends of sticks with its sawdust 
 mixed with rice-paste. 
 
 As sandal-wood has l>een famed in the Kast 
 from very early times, it is more likely than any 
 otlier to have atlractel the notice of, and lieen 
 desired by, more norf. icrn na'ions. We do not, 
 
 ALGUM. 
 
 however, trace it by its present it any siialbur 
 name at a very early jjeriod in the writings ol 
 
 [Santalum album._ 
 
 Greek authors : it may, however, have been con- 
 founded with agila-wood, or agallochum, which, 
 like it, is a fragrant wood and used as incense. 
 Sandal-wood is mentioned in early Sanscrit works, 
 and also in those of the .\rabs. Actuarius is the 
 earliest Greek author that expressly notices it, but 
 he does so as if it liad lieen familiarly known. In 
 tlie Periplus of Arrian it is mentioned as one of the 
 articles of commerce obtainalde at Omana, in Ge- 
 drosia, i)y the name Ei^Aa SayaAivo, which Mr. 
 Vincent remarks may easily have iieen corrupled 
 from 1av^a.\iva. As it was produced on the 
 Malabar coast, it could easily be obtained by the 
 merchants who conveyed the cinnamon of Ceylon 
 and other Indian products to the Mediterranean. 
 That sandal-wood has often been employed in 
 buildings is evident from J. Barb, ' Viaggio alia 
 Persia :' ' La porta della camera ora de sandal; 
 entarsiata con file d'oro,' &c. The Hindoo temple 
 of Somnat, in Guzerat, which was plundered 
 and desti-oyed by Mahomed of Ghizni, had gates 
 made of sandal-wood. Tliese were carried oil' by 
 the conqueror, and afterwards formed the gates oi 
 his tomb, whence, after 800 years, they were 
 taken by the British conquerors of Ghizni, an<l 
 brought back to India in 1R42. 
 
 That sandal-wood, therefore, might have attained 
 celebrity, even in very early ages, is not at all 
 unlikely; that it should have attracted the notic* 
 of Phoenician merchants visiting tlie west coast of 
 India is highly probable: an<l also tliat they should 
 have thought it worthy of lieing taken as a part of 
 their cargo on their return from Ojiliir. That it is 
 well calculated for musical iiisfrunients, the au- 
 thor is happy to adduce the opinion of Professor 
 Wheatstone, who says, ' I know no reason wiiy 
 sandal-wood should not have been employed in 
 ancient days far constructing musical instrumei.tg. 
 It is not so employed at presera. Ijecause there are 
 many much chea])er woods whi';h present a far 
 handsomer a]ipearaiice. Musical instruments 
 would appear very unfiiiislied to modern taste 
 miless varnished or French-polished, and it woul'l 
 be worse than useless to treat fragrant woods ?li 
 this way. Formerly jierhaps it nilglit havt! lievn
 
 ALISGEMA. 
 
 more the fashion to delight the senses of sini'll ami 
 hearing simultaneously than it is with us, in 
 which casv. odorirt'ious woods would 1k' picfoirfd 
 for things so much liaudlcd as musical instru- 
 ments aie.' — J. F. 11. 
 
 ALISGEMA ('AAiVyr/jua), a Hellenistic word, 
 ft'liich occurs in Act; xv. 20 (comp. vor. 29 and 
 1 Cor. viii.), wilh reference to meat sacri(ice<l to 
 idols, a:id there means dcJilcmc/U, polltitio/t. The 
 Apostle in tiiese piissages alludes to tiie customs of 
 fhe Cir«ntiles, among whom — after a sacrilice haJ 
 been concluded ;uid a. jjortion of tlie victim had 
 been assigned to the priests — it was usual to hold 
 a sacrificial feast in honour of the god, on which 
 occasion they ate the residue of the Hesli. Tliis feast 
 miglit take place either in the temple or in a j)ri- 
 vate house. But there were manj' who, fruni need or 
 avarice, salted and laid up tlie remnants for future 
 use i Tlieoph. Char. c. x.), or even gave them to 
 the Initchers to sell in the shandjles (Shoettg. Hur. 
 Hcb, ad Act. xv. 20; I Cor. viii.). Tills tlesh, 
 having Ijeen ottered to idols, was held in alm- 
 niination hy the Jews ; and thej' considered not 
 only'tliose wlio liad l)een present at tliese feasts, 
 hut also those who ate the flesh vvhicli had heen 
 ottered up, wlien afterwards exposed for sale in tlie 
 shambles, as infected hy the contagion of idolati-y. 
 The council at Jerusa-lem, tlierefore, at the sug- 
 gestion t)f St. James, directed that converts sliould 
 refuse all invitations to such feasts, and abstain 
 from the use of all such meat, that no oflenct 
 might be given to those Cliristiaiis \vlio had 
 been Jews. See more largelj' Kuinoel, ad Act. 
 XV. 20. 
 
 ALLEGORY (^AWt^yopia), This word is 
 found in the Authorized Version of Gal. iv. 24, 
 hut it does not actually exist as a noun hi the 
 Greek Testament, nor even in tlie Septuagint. 
 In the passage in question Saint Paul cites the 
 (listory of the free-born Isaac and the slave-l'orn 
 Ishmael, and in proceeding to apply it spiritually 
 says, oLTLVii iariv aWriyopovij.ei'a, whicli does 
 Jiot mean, as hi the A.V., ' whicli things are an 
 <illeijory,' but ' vN'liicii things are allcyorizcd.'' 
 Tliis is of Some importance; for in the one case the 
 Apostle is made to declare a port inn of Old Testa- 
 ment history an allegory, whereas in truth he only 
 speaks of it as allegiirically apjilied. Allegories 
 themselv<',s are. however, of frequent occurrence 
 in Scripture, altliough that name is not there ap- 
 plied to them. . 
 
 An Allegory lias been sometimes considered 
 as only a lengthened metaphor ; at otlier times, as 
 a continuation of metaphors. But the nature of 
 allegory itself, and the cliaracfer of allegorical 
 interpretation, will lie liest understood by attend- 
 ing to the origin of the term which denotes it. 
 Now tlie term ' Allegiiry,' according to its ori- 
 ginal and proiXT meaning, denotes a rejiresenta- 
 tion of one tiling which is intended to excite tlie 
 representation of iuiother thing. Every allegory 
 must tJierel'ore be subjected to a twofold exami- 
 iiation : we must first examine the immediate re- 
 j»rese?Uation, and tlien consider what other repre- 
 sentation it is intended to excite. In most alle- 
 gories the immediate representation is made in 
 tlie form of a narrative; and, since it is the object 
 of tlie allegory itself to convey a moral, uut an 
 historic truth, tiie narrative itself is commonly 
 iiclitious. Tlie immediate representation is of no 
 fuithei value tlian as it leads to the ultimate 
 
 ALLEGORY. 
 
 115 
 
 representation. It is the a)>plicalion or tlie moral 
 of the allegory which constitutes its woitli. 
 
 Since, then, an allegory com])r»liends two dis- 
 tinct representations, the interjH-etation of an al- 
 legory must comineliend two distinct operations. 
 The first of tlieni relates to the immediate repre- 
 sentation, and the second to the ultimate repie- 
 seutation. The immediate representation if un- 
 derstood from tlie words of the allegory ; tlie 
 ultimate re])resentation depeiifls upon the imme- 
 diate lejiiesentation ap])lied to the proper end. 
 In the interpretation, therefore, of tlie former, we 
 are concerned with the intei-pretation of ao^f/* ; 
 in the interpretation of the latter, we are con- 
 cerned with the thnif/s .tif/nified iiy the words. 
 Now, whenever we speak of allegorical inter- 
 pretation, we have always in view tlie ultimate 
 representation, and, consequently, aie tlieii con- 
 cerned with the interjiretation of things. The 
 interpretation of the words, which attaches only 
 to the immediate representation, or the plain nar- 
 rative itself, is comnioiilycalled the 'iraiiDnaticol 
 or the literal interpietatioii : altlungh we sh.ould 
 speak moie correctly in calling it the verbal in- 
 terpretation, since e\en in the plai!:est narratives, 
 even in narratives not designed for moial ajijilica- 
 tion, the use of words is never restricted to tlieii 
 mere literal senses. Custom, however, having 
 sanctioned the use of the term ' literal," instead i./ 
 fhe term 'verbal' interpretation, to mark the oj-uo- 
 sition to allegorical interpretation, we must un- 
 derstand it accordingly. But whatever be the 
 term, whether verbal or literal, which we employ 
 to expi-e«s the interpretation of fhe words, it must 
 always be borne in mind that the allegorical in- 
 terpretation #s tlie interpretation of things — of tlie 
 things signified by the words, not of the woids 
 themsehes. 
 
 Bishop Mars!), from fhe tifth of whose Lectures 
 cm the Criticism utul Jnterpretation of ike Hible, 
 these principles are deriveil, proceeils, in (hat Lec- 
 ture, to apply them to a \'ev/ of the Scriptural exam- 
 ples. Every parable is a kind ot'alle:,'ory ; ajid there- 
 fore the parable of fhe sower (Luke \ iii. 5-15), 
 heing especially clear and correct, is taken as tiie 
 first example. In this we have a plain narrative, 
 a statement of a iew simple and intelligible facts, 
 such, jirobahly, as had fallen within the observa- 
 tion of the persons to whom our Saviour addiessed 
 himself. When lie had finished fhe narrative, or 
 the immediate rejiresenfation of the allegory, he 
 then gave the ex{)l;matioii or ultimate representa- 
 tion of it; that is, he gave the allegorical inter- 
 pret.ition of it. And that the iiilerjiietalion w;i3 
 an inferjiretation, not of the woids. but of the 
 things sigiiiljed by the words, is evident from the 
 explanation itself: 'Tlie seed is the word of God ; 
 those by the w-iyside are they that hear,' Ac. 
 (v. 11, &c.) The iriipressive and pathetic alle- 
 gory addressed by Nathan to David atVords a 
 similar instance of an alleg(iric...l narrative ac- 
 companied with its explanation ('-'.Sam. xii. 1 14 i. 
 Allegories thus accompanied, constitute a kinii of 
 simile, in both parts of which the words them- 
 selves are construed either literally or figuratively 
 according to the respective use of them ; and then 
 we institute the com|>arison between the thiiigt 
 signified i»i the fi;rmer part, and tlie thii.gs sig- 
 nified in the latter part. 
 
 But allegorical narratives are frequently left tc 
 explain tliemselv(«, esfjecially when the reseto
 
 116 
 
 ALLELULIA. 
 
 blance behveeii the imniediate ami ultimate re- 
 presentation is sufficiently aj)pa>»?iit to make an 
 explanation unnecessary. Of tliis kind we cannot 
 have a more striking example than that l)eautit!ul 
 one contained in the 80th Psalm : ' Tliou 
 brouglitest a vine out oC Egypt," &c. 
 
 The use of allegorical interpretation is not, 
 however, conlined to mere allegory, or fictitious 
 narratives, but is extended also to liistory, or real 
 narratives. And in this case the grammatical 
 meaning of a passage is called \\s historical mean- 
 ing, in contradistinction to its allegorical meaning. 
 There are two ditl'erent modes in which Scripture 
 liistory has Ijcen thus allegorized. According to 
 one mode, facts and circumstances, especially 
 lh;)5e recorded in the Old Testament, have been 
 applied to other facts and circumstances, of which 
 they iiave l>een des[Til)ed as represc-ritative. Ac- 
 cording to the other mode, tiiese facts and circum- 
 stances have been described as mere emblems. 
 The former mode is warranted by the practice of 
 tlip sacred writers themselves; for when facts and 
 circum'itanrcs are so a])plied, they are applied as 
 types of tliose things to wliich tlie application Is 
 • made. But the latter mode of allegorical inter- 
 pretation lias no sucli authority in its favour, 
 tlicagh attempts liave been made to procure such 
 autlior'ty. For t!ie same things are there de- 
 sciibed not as types or as real facts, but as mere 
 ideal rejiresentations, like the immediate repre- 
 .lenfatioTis in allegory. By this mode, therefore, 
 history is not treated as allegory, but converted 
 into allegory. That this mode of interpretation 
 can;iot claim tlie sanction of St. Paul, from lils 
 treatment of the history of Isaac and Ishmael, has 
 already been shown : the consideration, however, 
 of the allegorical modes of dealing with the real 
 hisrories of Scripture is a different subject from 
 tbat of allegories and their interpretation, and he- 
 longs to anotlier place [Interpretation, Bi 
 ni,ic4i,l. 
 
 ALLELUIA. [HAi.r.Ei,ujAH.] 
 ALLIANCES. From a dread lest the example 
 of foreign nations should draw the Israelites into 
 the worship of idols, tliey were made a peculiar 
 and separate jieople, and intercourse and alliance 
 wit'o sucli nations were strongly interdicted (Lev. 
 xviii. 3, 4 ; XX. 22, 23). The tendency to idolatry 
 was in those times so strong, that the safety of the 
 Israelites lay in the most complete isolation that 
 could be realized; and it was to a.ssist this object 
 tli3t a country more than usually separated from 
 otliers by its natural boiuidaries was assigned to 
 fiiem. It was sluit in Ijy flie sea on the west, by 
 desert.s on the south and east, and by mountains 
 a'ld forests on the nortli. Among a people so 
 sitnated we slioiild not expect to hear much of 
 alliances with other nations. 
 
 By far the most remarkable alliance in the po- 
 litical history of the Hebrews is that between 
 Solomon an<l Hiram king of T3're. It is in a 
 great degree connected with considerations which 
 belong to another head [Commerce]. But it 
 may primarily lie referred to a partial change of 
 feeling which originated in the time of David, and 
 which continued to operate among his descendants. 
 During his wanderings he was brouglit into con- 
 tact with several of tbe neighbom-ing princes, from 
 some of whom he received sympathy and su])port, 
 which, after he ascended the throne, he gratefully 
 fWnembered ("2 Sam. x. 2). There was probably 
 
 ALLIAXCE.S. 
 
 more of this friwidly intercourse thai fVe Scriptui* 
 lias had occasion to record. Such timely aid. com- 
 bined with the resjiect which liis subsequently vic- 
 torious career drew from foreipi nations, must have 
 gone far to modify in him and those about him that 
 aversion to strangers whii-li tlie Hebrews generally 
 liad been led to entertain. He m.arried the 
 daughter of a heathen king, and had by her his 
 favourite son (2 Sam. iii. 3) ; the king of Moab 
 protected liis family (\ Sam. xxii. 3, 4); the king 
 ofAmmon showeil kindnc.ss to him (2Sam. y. 2); 
 the king of Gath showered favours upon him 
 (1 Sam. xxvii.; xxviii. 1,2) ; tlie king of Hamath 
 sent his own son to congratulate him on his vic- 
 tories (2 Sam. viii. 15^ : in short, the rare power 
 which David possessed of attaching to himself the 
 good o])iiu"on and favour of other men, extended 
 even to the neighbouring nations, and it would have 
 lieen difficult for a j)erson of his disposition to repel 
 the advances of kiu(hiess and consideration which 
 they made. Among those who made such ad- 
 vances was H i-ram, king of Tyre; for if eventually 
 transpires that ' Hiram was ever a lover of David ' 
 (I Kings V. 2); and it is probable tliat other in- 
 tercourse had precede<l that relating to the palace 
 which Hiram "s artificers built for David (2 Sam. 
 V. 11). The king of Tyre was not disposed to 
 neglect the cultivation of the friendly intercourse 
 with the Hebrew nation which hail thus been 
 opened. He sent an embassy to condole with 
 Solomon on the death of his tather, and to con- 
 gratulate him on his accession (I Kings v. \). 
 Tlie plans of the young king rendered the friend- 
 ship of Hiram a matter of importance, and ac- 
 cordingly ' a league" was formed (1 Kings v. 12) 
 between them : and that this Itrague had a re- 
 ference not merely to the special matter then in 
 view, but was a general league of amity, is evinced 
 by the fact tliat more than 2)0 years after, a pro- 
 phet flenounces the Lord's vengeance ujxin Tyre, 
 because she ' remembered not the brotherly cove- 
 nant" (Amos i. 9). Under this league large 
 bodies of Jews and PhoGnicians were associated, 
 first in preparing the materials for the Temjilc 
 (1 Kings V. 6-lS), and afterwards in navigating 
 the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean (1 Kings 
 ix. 26-28) : and this increasing intercourse with 
 the heathen appears to have considerably weak- 
 ened the sentiment of separation, wliich, in the 
 case of the Hebiews, it was of the utrirost im- 
 portance to maintain. The disastrous consequences 
 of even the seemingly least objectionable alliances 
 may be seen in the long train of evils, both 
 to tlie kingdom of Israel and of .ludah, which 
 ensued from the marriage of Abab with Jezebel, 
 the kiiigofTyre"s daughter [Ahab; Jezebei.}. 
 These consequences had Ireen manifested even in 
 tlie time of Solonaon ; for he formed matrimonial 
 alliances with most of the neighbouringkhigdoms, 
 and to the inflneiice of his iilolatrous wives are 
 ascrilied the abominations which darkened tl>e 
 latter days of the wise king (1 Kings xi. 1-S). 
 
 The prophet.s, who were alive to these conse- 
 quences, often raised their voices against sucb 
 dangerous connections (1 Kings xx. 38; 2 Ciiron. 
 xvi. 7; xix. 2; xxv. 7, &c. ; Isa. vii. 17); t)ut it 
 was found a difficult matter to induce even the 
 best kings to place such absolute faith in Jehovah, 
 the Head of their state, as to neglect altogethei 
 those human resources and aliiancis by whicb 
 other nations strengthened tbemselves against theii
 
 ALLIANCES. 
 
 enemies. The Jewish history, after Soh)moii, 
 affords examples of several treaties with ilill'ereut 
 •:ings of Syria, aiid with the kings of Assyria ami 
 Sabyloii. Asa, one of the most pious moiiarchs 
 hat ever sat on tiie throne of Judah, finding his 
 kingdom menaced and his frontier invaded, sent 
 ly Benhadad, who reigned in Damascus, tlie most 
 W)stly presents, reminding him of tlie league which 
 had long subsisted between them and their fatheis, 
 aiid conjuring him not to succour the enemies of 
 Judali, nor renounce the obligations of tiieir old 
 alliance (1 Kings xv. lG-20). Attacked by an- 
 other king of Israel, whom another king of Da- 
 mascus protected, Ahaz implored the king of 
 Assyria .for aid, and with tlie treasures of the tem- 
 ple and the palace purchased a defensive alliance 
 (2 Kings xvi.. 5, &c. ; 2 Cliron. xviii. IG, itc). 
 In later times, the Maccabees appear to liave con- 
 sidered tliemselves unrestrained by any but the 
 oiduiary prudential considerations in contracting 
 alliances; but they conlined their alliiuices to dis- 
 tant states, which were by no means likely ever to 
 exercise that inllueuce upon the religion of the 
 people whicli was the chief object of dread. The 
 most remarkable alliances of this kind in tlie 
 whole Hebrew history are those which were con- 
 tracted with the Romans, who were then begin- 
 ning to take a ])art in the atVairs of Western Asia. 
 Judas claimed their friendly intervention in a 
 negotiation then jjending between the Jews and 
 Aiitiochus Eupator (2 Mace. \i. 31, 5(7.); and two 
 years after he sent ambassadors to the banks of 
 the Tiber to propose a tieaty of alliance^uidauiity. 
 By the terms of this treaty the Romans ostensibly 
 tluew over the Jews the broad shield of their 
 dangerous protection, promising to assist them 
 in their wars, and forbitlding any who were at 
 peace with themselves to be at war with tlie 
 Jews, or to assist directly or indirectly those who 
 were so. The Jews, on their part, engaged to 
 assist the Romans to tne utmost of their power in 
 any wars they might wage in those parts. The 
 obligations of this treaty might be enlarged or 
 diminished by the mutual consent of the contract- 
 ing parties. This memorable treaty, having been 
 concluded at Rome, was graven upon brass and 
 deposited in the Capitol .1 Mace. viii. 22-28; 
 Josephus, Antiq. xii. 10 : other treaties with the 
 Romans are given in lib. xiii.). 
 
 Anterior to the Mosaical institutions, such al- 
 liances with foreigners were permitted, or at least 
 tolerated. Abraham was in alliance with some 
 of the Canaanitish princes (Gen. xiv. 1.'3); he also 
 entered into a regular treaty of alliance, being 
 tlie Krst on record, with tlie Philistine king Abi- 
 melech (ch. xxi. 22, sq.), which was renewed by 
 their sons (ch. xxvi. 26-30). This primitive treaty 
 is a model of its kind : instead of minute stipu- 
 lations, it leaves all det^ails to the Imnest inter- 
 pretation of the contracting parties. Abimelech 
 eays : ' Swear unto me here by God that thou wilt 
 not deal falsely with me, nor with my son, nor 
 with my sons son ; but according to the kindness 
 that I have done unto thee, thou shalt do unto me, 
 and unto the land wherein thou hast sojourned.' 
 Even after the la\y, it aj«{)ears, trorn some of the 
 instances already adduced, that such alliances 
 with distant nations as could not be supposed to 
 have any dangerous efl'ect upon the religion or 
 murals of tlie people, were not deemed to be inter- 
 dicted. Th ! treaty with the Gibeonites is a re- 
 
 ALLON. 
 
 117 
 
 markable proof of Uiis. Believing that the am- 
 bassadors came from a great distance, Joshua ai.'J 
 the elders readily entered into aji uUiance with 
 them ; and are condemned for it only on tJis 
 ground that the (iibeoniles were in fact their i«'ai 
 neighbours (Josh, ix, 3-27). 
 
 From the time of the |)atriarclis, a covenant •>( 
 alliance was sealed by tlie blood of S(.nie vi< tini. 
 A heifer, a goat, a ram, a turtle dove, and a young 
 pigeon, were immolated in conlirmalion of the <'o- 
 venant between the Lord and Abraham xjiii.u. 
 XV. 9). The animal or animals saci"ificed we'.e 
 cut in two I except birds, ver. 1(1), to typify the 
 doom of perjurers. This usage often recurs in ll:e 
 jjrophets. and there are allusions to it in the \ev; 
 Testament (Jer. xxxiv. 18; Dan. xiii. .5.5; Matt, 
 xxiv. 51.; Luke xii. 46). The jierpetuity of co- 
 venants bf alliance thus contracte<l is exjue^sed 
 by calling them ' covennnis of salt" (Num. xviii 
 19: 2Chron. xiii. 5), salt being the symbol nf 'n- 
 corruption. The case of the Ciibeonitts alloids an 
 exemplary instance, sciu'cely e(|ualled in the an- 
 nals of. any nation, of sciupulous adherence to 
 such engagements. The Israelites had been abso- 
 lutely cheated into the alliance; but, having btm 
 conliimed by oaths, it was deemed to be in\io- 
 lable (Josh. ix. 19). Long afterwards, the tr>'aty 
 having be^n violated by Saul, the whole nation 
 was punigfied for the crime by a horrible famine 
 in the time of David (2 Sam. xxi. 1, sqq-). The 
 prophet Ezekiel (xvii. 13-16) pours terrible 
 denunciations u])on king Zedekiah, for acting 
 contrary to his sworn covenant with the king of 
 Babylon. In this respect the Jews were certainly 
 mo.st iinourably distinguished among the ancient 
 nations; and, from runnerous intimations in Jose- 
 phus, it appears that their character foi iidelity to 
 their engagements w;i8 so generally rec>)gni.se(l 
 after the Captivity, as often to procure for tl.em 
 highly favourable consideration from the rulers of 
 Western Asia and of Egypt. 
 
 ALLON (P^N; Sept. Bd\avos; Vulg. Quer- 
 cus ; Auth. \'ers. Oak). The Hebrew word, thus 
 pointed, as it occurs in Gen. xxxv. S; Josh. xix. 32; 
 Isa. ii. 13; vi. 13; xliv. 11; Hos. iv. 13; Amos 
 ii. 9; Zech. xi. 2, was understood by the ancient 
 translators, and has been supposed by must inter- 
 prefers, to denote the oak, and there is no reason 
 to disturb this conclusion. In om- version oilier 
 words are also rendered by • oak," particuLuIy 
 Alah (n?X), which moie probably denotes the 
 terebinth-tree [Ai.aii]. Tiie oak is, in fact, less 
 frequently mentioned in the original than in the 
 A. v., where it occurs so often as to suggest that 
 the oak is as conspicuous and as common ui Pales- 
 tine as in this country. But in Syiia oaks aie by 
 no meiins common, except in hilly regions, nlieia 
 the elevation gives the etliect of a moie noitiieiii 
 climate; and even in such ciicumstauces it dies 
 not attain the granileur in which it often apixais in 
 our latitudes. Indeed. Syria has not tlie sjiecie;* 
 {Quvrcus rubur) which forms the glory of oin- own 
 forests. The 'oaks of Ba.shan' aie in Scripture 
 mentioned with jjeculiar distinction Hsa. ii. 3; 
 E^ek. xxvii. 6 ; Zech. xi. 2). as if hi the hills be- 
 yond the Jordan the oaks had been moie abundant 
 iuid of larger growth tiian elsewhere. This is the 
 case even at the present day. In the hilly regioiu 
 of Bashait and Gilead, Burckliaidt iei)eateitly 
 meutions forests of thick oaks — thicker tliai^uiy
 
 ii8 
 
 ALLON. 
 
 forests he liad r^een in Syria. He spca1<s gratefully 
 of the shade ihui afforded; anij donlrtless it was 
 the ])reseiire of oaks which imparted to the scenery 
 th.at Euro})eaii character which he notices (Syria, 
 2')5, 3i^). Oil tlrat side of the river a tliick oak- 
 ferest occurs as fa.' south as the vicinity of Amman, 
 the capital of the Ammonites (p. 35fi). Oaks of 
 low statm-e are frerpieiit in the liills and plains neai 
 tlie sources of the Jordan I'pp. 45, 312, 315): 
 and some of large dimensions arc' found in differ- 
 ent parts of the country, beside the natural re- 
 servoirs of water fed l)y springs (pp. 193, 315). On 
 
 [Branch of Quorcus /Egilops.] 
 
 the lower slopes of Lebanon low oak-trees are nu- 
 merous, and the inhabitants employ their branches 
 in the construction of the fl it roofs of their dwell- 
 ings (pp. 4, 7. IS, 193, 312, &c). Next to 
 Burckhardt, Lord Lindsay is the traveller who 
 inakes tiie most frequent mention of oaks in Pales- 
 ;i!:e. He contirms their existing abundance in the 
 jountries of Ba.-han and Gilead. He calls them 
 •noble prickly oaks,' and 'evergreen oalcs,' and 
 aotices a variety of tlie latter with a broader leaf 
 than usual (Triivrh, ii. 122, 124, 127 ^. 
 
 But oak -trees are by no means wanting on the 
 west of the Jordan, in the proper Land of Ca- 
 naan Lord Lindsay describes the hills of 
 souti.'cri) Judaea about Hebron as covered to (he 
 top with low shrnl)s of the prickly' oak. Fine 
 park scenery, composed chiefly of prickly and 
 evergreen oaks, occurs between Samaria and 
 Mount (Januel. The same trees abound on the 
 soutliem prolongations of tliat mountain, and on 
 the banks of (he Kishon. The thick woods wliicli 
 CO -er Mount Tabor are composed chieHy of oaks 
 U^A pistachio-trees ; and oaks are found in the 
 vaiieys which trend from that mountain CLind- 
 BAy. !i. 51, 77, ^.5 I. Hassehjuist found groves of 
 tl;e Kermes oak (Q. cocci fera^ in the valleys 
 beyond the plain of Acre, 'on the road to Naza- 
 reth ( Travels, p. 1 53). 
 
 From the above and other notices we collect 
 ♦i;»t the species of oak found in Palestine, and 
 p!ol)ably all comprehended under the word Al- 
 lot*, are — 1. Tlie Evergreen Oak {Qucrciia Hex), 
 which is met with not only in Western Asia, but in 
 Nor' hem .Africa and Southern Europe, lliis is a 
 tall but not wide-spreading tiee ; and the timber, 
 
 ALLON-BACHUTH. 
 
 1 . ■ 
 
 being very hard, is much used for jmrposes ll 
 which compactness and durability are required. 
 2. The Holly-leaved Montpelier Oak {Q. fjra- 
 muntia). another evergreen, which may be inserted 
 on the authority of I'ococke. Tliis tree alw, as 
 its name imports, is a native of Southern Europe, 
 and is markedly distinguished from tne foiiner 
 by its numerous straggling branches and the 
 thick unilerdown of its leaves 3. Tiie Hairy- 
 cu])ped Oak (Q. crinata). so called from the 
 bristly apjjearance of the calyx. !<■ grows to a 
 consideralile size, and furnishes an excellent tiiti 
 her, much used by the Turks in the building ol 
 shi])S and houses. But although this species 
 exists in Syria, it is much more common in Asia 
 Minor. 4. The Gi eat Prickly-cupped Oak (Q. 
 yEfjilops or J'alonia >. which takes its n me from 
 its large prickly calyx. This sjecies is common 
 in the Levant, where it is a handsome tree, which 
 it is not in our ungenial climate, though it has 
 lung been cultivated. The wood of this spe- 
 cies is of little worth : but its acorns form the 
 valonia of commerce, of which 150.00(1 cw(. are 
 yearly imjjorted into this country for (he use ol 
 tanners. 5. The Kermes Oak (Q. coccifera') 
 takes its name from an insect (kermes, of the 
 genus coccus) which adheres to the branches ot 
 this bushy e\ergreen shrub, in the form of small 
 reddish balls about the size of a pea. This alVords 
 a crimson dye, formerly celebrated, but now supei 
 seded by cochinc-al. This dye was used by the 
 ancient Hebrews; for the word n^lH, which 
 denotes a worm, and ]>articularly the kermes worm, 
 denotes alsi the dye prepared from it (Isa. i. 18; 
 Lam. iv. 5), and is accordingly rendered k6kkivc» 
 in those passages where it occurs. 
 
 it 
 
 
 [Qiiercus .^^gilops or Valonia.] 
 
 From the hints of travellers there appe.ar to b* 
 some other s]iecies of oaks in Palestine, hat their 
 information is not sufficiently distinct to enable 
 us to identify them. 
 
 ALLON-BACHUTH (the oak of weeping), a
 
 ALMON. 
 
 place hi Bethel, where Rebekahs nurse was buried 
 (Gen. XXXV. 8). 
 
 ALMON (liO?y ; Sept. 'AXfxiiv, v. r. rd^aXa), 
 one of the three cities wliich l)eU)iigi'il to the |iiiests 
 in the tribe of Benjamin (Josh. xxi. IS). It is suj)- 
 posed *^o be the same as the Alemeth of 1 Chion. 
 vi. 60. Jaichi and Kimchi identify it witli Ha- 
 harim, which name the Tai-giim (2 Sam. iii. 16) 
 renders by Alnieth — both words signifying ' youth.' 
 The site is unknown. 
 
 ALMON-DIBLATHAIM, one of tlie sta- 
 tions of tiie Israelites on their way from Mount 
 Hor to the phiins of Moab, round by Mount 
 Seir (Num. xxxiii. 40). 
 
 ALMOND-TREK. [Luz.] 
 
 ALMS (^\eriiuio<rvtrri). The English word is an 
 abridged form of the Greek, brought down in se- 
 veral successive corruptions, still to !« found in 
 the Anglo-Saxon and eai'ly English dialects: 
 thus the Saxon ti-anslation of tlie original term is 
 (Matt. vi. 4) Eelmessan ; Luther's, almosen ; 
 Wiclif "s, almesse ; Cranmer's, aln)ose ; Tyndale"s, 
 almes. The Greek word is derived from eAeoy, 
 pity or mercy ; and hence conies to denote our 
 manifestation of pity, namely, benefactions to the 
 needy — ' an almes-deede.' as it is hanslated in 
 the Rheims version of the New Testament. The 
 primary meaning of ' alms ' does not, as is the 
 case in its Greek original, appear on the face of 
 the word, and the derivative signification only 
 remains in the English term ; so that a word 
 which properly signified merciful feelings and 
 merciful actions towards the indigent has, in pro- 
 cess of time, been restricted to one particular kind 
 of charitable deeds, denoting now scarcely any- 
 thing more than giving money to beggars. Tliis 
 departure from the etymological meaning of the 
 original word should be carefully borne in mind 
 by those who undertake to exiiound such passages 
 of Scripture as t)car on the subject. 
 
 The regulations of the Mosaic law resj^jecting 
 property, and its Ijenign spirit towards the poor, 
 went far to prevent the existence of jienury a.3 a 
 permanent condition in society, and, consequently, 
 by precluding beggary, to render the need of 
 almsgiving unnecessary. Poverty, however, con- 
 sidered as a state of com])arative want, Moses 
 seems to have contemplated as a probable event 
 in the social frame whxh he had establislied; and 
 accordingly, by the appointment oi' sjx^cific regu- 
 lations, and the enjoining of a general spirit of 
 tender-heartedness, he sought to jnevent destitu- 
 tion and its evil consequences. The law wliich 
 he promulgated in this matter is found in Lev. 
 XXV. 35 : ' And if thy brother lie waxen poor. 
 aijd fallen into decay with thee, then shalt 
 thou relieve him.' The benignity and large- 
 ness of spirit of the legislator appear in the con- 
 cluding words — ' Yea, though he lie a stranger 
 or a sojourner, that he may live with thee.' The 
 whole of the chapter may be advantageously con- 
 sulted. The consideration by which tliis merci- 
 ful enactment is recommended has peculiai' force, 
 ' I am the Lord your God, which brought you 
 forth out of the land of Egypt to give you the 
 land of Canaan, atid to be your God ' The spi- 
 rit of the Hebrew legislator on this point is forci- 
 bly exhibited in Deut. xv. 7 >;t seq. : ' If there l»c 
 among you a poor man .... thou slialt open thine 
 hanJ wide unto him Beware that tliine eye 
 
 ALMS. 
 
 119 
 
 lie T.o( evil against thy poor brotiier, and fhou 
 givest him nought ; and lie cry luilo the Lord 
 against thee, and it Im' sin unto thee. Tlmu shah 
 surely give him, and thine heart siiall not lie 
 grieved when thou givest unto him : U'cause tiiat 
 for this the Lord t!iy (iod sliall liiess liiee in all 
 thy works.' The great antiquity of the practice 
 of lienevolenc<' towards the ])oor is shown in the 
 very beautiful jiassiige whicii is found in Job 
 xxix. 13 c( seq. The plirttse, ' father to the poor,' 
 there given to the venerable patriaicii, involves 
 higher praise even tiian Ciceros ' jiater jmtrise.' 
 How high the esteem was ii: which this virtue con- 
 tinued to lie held in the time of the Hebiew 
 monarchy may be leanit from Psalm xli. 1 — 
 ' Blesse<l is he that consiihreth the ]ioor ; the 
 Lord will remember him in time of froidde.' 
 See also Psalm cxii. 9; Prov. xiv. 31. Tiie pro- 
 gie.ss of social conuption, however, led to tlie 
 oppression of the poor, which the jirophets, after 
 their manner, faithi'ully re))robated (Isaiaii Iviii. 3) : 
 where, among other neglected duties, the Israel- 
 ites are recpiired to deal their bread to the hungry, 
 and to bring the outcast poor to their house. See 
 also Isaiah x. 2 ; Amos ii. 7 ; Jer. v. 28 ; Ezek. 
 xxii. 21). 
 
 However favourable to the poor tiie Mosaic m- 
 stitutions were, they do not ajijx'ai- to have who'.ly 
 prevented beggary ; for tlie imprecation f )und in 
 Psalm cix. 10. ' Let his childrei. tie vagabond* 
 and Ijeg,' implies the existence o*" oeggary as a 
 known social condition. Begging naturally led 
 to almsgiving, though the language of the Bible 
 does not present us with a term for ' alms ' till the 
 peri> d of the Babylonish captivity, during the ca- 
 lamities attendant on which the need ]n-obably 
 inti'oduced the practice. Hp"!^ corresponds h itii 
 the Greek iKfrjuocrvyT], signifying originally that 
 which is right, just, — and thence, derivatively, 
 mercy and merciful deeds; and ali'oids an intei- 
 esting illustration of the gentle spirit of the Mo- 
 saic religion, since the ideas of justice and mercy 
 are represented as springing from tlie same ladicai 
 conception. In Psalm cxlv 7, occurs, jierhajis, 
 the earliest passage in which the word cleiuiy sig- 
 nifies love or mercy. ' Tiiey shall abundantly 
 utter the memory of thy great goodness, and siiall 
 sing of thy riyhtiousncss ;'' where the | aialU lisni 
 shows that by HplV 'mercy' is int<nded. Jn 
 Daniel, however, iv. 27, we find the wind actu- 
 ally rendered i\€-r)fxo(Tvvri in the Sejituagint — 
 though ' righteousnes-s ' is retained in our version. 
 Tlie ensuing memlier of the sentence puts the 
 nieiuiiiig lieyond a question — ' t) king, Lieak (," 
 th)' sins by righteousness and thine iniquities I v 
 showing niercy to the potir, if it may U- a length- 
 ening of thy tranquillity.' Anew iilea is here pre- 
 sented, namely, that of merit and jiurchase. which 
 is found more forcibly expressed in the Gre»k ver- 
 sion afiapTias crov iv fK(r]/j.oavi'ais Xvrpciiaai. 
 Almsgiving had come to be regarded jls a means of 
 conciliating God's favour and of waiding oil 
 evil. At a still later period this idea took a lirir. 
 se;it in the national mind, and alms-deeds w-re 
 regarded as a mark of distinguished virtue (T'.bi. 
 ii. 1-5; iv. 11). That liegging wa.s customary i" 
 the time of the Saviour is clear from Maik x. Jt. 
 ' Blind Bartimeus sat by th'! wayside begging* 
 and Ads iii. 2, ' A lame man was l.iid daily f- 
 the gate of the tenii)le, called Be; iititul, to as^ 
 alms.' Comp. verse 10. And tliat i was usual foi
 
 l») 
 
 ALOE. 
 
 fhc \Vvirsl.ijr,)''is. as they iiiteit'd tlif tein])!**, to give 
 -ilifl. a])piMis from the c>)iit^>;t., .uid jwiticularly 
 fi-om fhe line answ'T to the Jame iiiaiTs eiifieaty, 
 ■made hy tlif ajMslh^ ]*eter. Tlit- f,'-ei]<'ial sjiirit of 
 Cliristiaiiify. in leg-ard to stticc, lining tlie iit*dy, is 
 'lowheie hetffr swii tliau in 1 Jnhn iii. 17 : — 
 Whoso )iatli tills w.. lid's good, and sreth his 
 Ijrother liave nffd. and shntteti) up liis howels 
 from him. l),nv livvellilli the l.ive ut' G.xl in lii/nV' 
 Willi flie t'aithfiil and c>)nscit'nti,iiis ohservance of 
 the ' royal law ' of hive, j)artic«]ar manifesitations 
 of mercy tj the p,>or seem to he left liy Christi- 
 anity to Iw determined by time, {)lace, and civ- 
 sumsfaiices; and it canii.it he siip2X)sed that a 
 relitfi.in, one of who.se piincijiles is ' that, it' any 
 woulil not wori;. neither sh.mld lie eat ' (2 The.ss 
 lit. 10), can give any sanction (o indiscriminate 
 almsgiving, or intend to encovnage the crowd of 
 *andering, idle beggars with wliich some jiarts of 
 he woild are still infested. The emphatic lan- 
 guage emj)loyed by the Lord Jesus Christ and 
 others (Luke iii. 11 ; vi. 30 ; xi. 41 ; xii. 33 ; 
 Matt. vi. 1 ; Acts ix. 37 ; x. 2, 4 is designed to 
 enforce the general doty of a merciful and prac- 
 tical regard to the distresses of the. indigent — a 
 duty which ail history shows men have been la- 
 mentably prone to neglect : while the absence of 
 ostentation and even secrecy, which the Saviour 
 enjoineil in connection with alm.sgiving, was in- 
 tended to correct actual abuses, anil bring the 
 ])ractice info harmony with the spirit of fhe Gos- 
 pel. Li the inimitable reflections of Jesus on fhe 
 widow's mite (Mark xii. 42) is found a prhiciple 
 of great value, to fhe effect that the magnitude of 
 men's oflerings to God is to be measured by fhe 
 disposition of mind whence they proceed ; a prin- 
 ciple which cuts up by the very roots the idea 
 that merit attaches itself to almsgiving as such, 
 and increases in proportion to the number and 
 costliness of our alms-deeds. 
 
 One of the earliest effects of the working of 
 Christianity in the hearts ot its professors was the 
 care which it led them to take of the poor and in- 
 tKgenf in the ' household of faith.' Neglected 
 and despised by the world, cut oil' from its sympa- 
 thies, and denied any succour it might have given, 
 tlie members of the early churches were careful 
 not only to make provision in aach case for its 
 own poor, but to contribute to the necessities of 
 other though distant communities (Acts xi. 29 ; 
 xxiv. 17; 2 Cor. ix. 12). This commendable 
 pactice seems to have had its Christian origin in 
 the dee])ly interesting lact (v/hicli ajipears fVom 
 John xiii. 29) that the Saviour and his attend- 
 ants were wont, notwithstanding their own compa- 
 rative poverty, to contribute out of their small 
 lestiurces something for the relief of the needy.— 
 
 ALOE. [Aii.«.im]. 
 
 ALPHA (A), the first letter of the Greek al- 
 phabet, corresponding to the Hebrew X, Aleph. 
 Both the Hebrews and the Greeks employed fhe 
 letters of their alpliabefs as numerals, and A 
 {Alpha or Alejjh) therefore denoted one or the 
 first. Hence our Lord says of himself that he is 
 Qrh A) Alpha and '^ro Cl) Omega, i. e. the first 
 and fhe last, the beginning and the ending, as he 
 himself explains it (Rev. i. S, 11; xxi. 6; xxii. 
 13). 
 
 ALPHABET. The origin of alphabetical 
 welting belongs to a period long antecedent to the 
 
 ALPHABET. 
 
 date of any historical testimonies, o\ ancient a»o» 
 nunients, wtiich have come down tt us. Thii 
 want of documentary evidence, however, has lef* 
 a wider field for conjecture; and a mistaken and 
 sornetin>e3 disingenuous ze.al for the honour of 
 the Scriptures has not only led many learned 
 men to ascribe the invention of letters to Adam, 
 Seth, Enoch, and Noah, but to produce copies 
 of the very alpliabefs they employed. Several 
 such alphabets, <lerived chiefly from Bonaventura, 
 Hepburn, Roccha, and Athanasivis Kircher, may 
 lie .seen in Bangii Calum Orient, s (or. according 
 to fhe new title which was suhsequenfly prefixed 
 to it, Exercitatluncs de Ortu et Progressu Lite- 
 raru»i\ Hafnite, 1657, p. 99, sfjq. Our own 
 tnne also has produced an attempt to pove, from 
 the astrological chaiacter of tlie Hebrew aljihabet 
 — i. e. from its representing the relations of tlie 
 zodiac and seven planets - that it was discovered, 
 prol>ably by Noah, on fhe 7th Sept. B.C. 31J6 
 (Seyffart's Ihiser Alphabet ein Abbild dcs Thier' 
 kreises, Leip.s. lS31j. 
 
 The leailiest and surest data, however, on which 
 any sound speculation on this subject can be 
 based, are found in fhe genuine pal8eogiap]i'-;il 
 monuments of fhe Phoenicians; in the manilest 
 derivation of all other Syro-Aiabian and almost 
 all European characters from that type, and iu, 
 fhe testimony which history bears to the use and 
 transmission of al'jhabetical writing. 
 
 The true principles of comparative Syro-Ara- 
 bian jjalaeography are a discovery of ahnost mo- 
 dem date. Bochart, Bernard, and others, in their 
 early affemjits, did not even possess the Phoenician 
 aljihaliet at all, but only the Samaritan of printed 
 books or of fhe Hasmonaean coins ; for RhenferU 
 was the first that produced the genuine aljihabet, 
 in 1705. Besides, there was a very general pre- 
 judice that our present square Hebrew character 
 was the primitive type (a list of some of the 
 champions of which opinion is given in Carjaov's 
 Vrit. Sacr. p. 227); and tlie want of documents 
 long concuneil with that notion in hinilering aisy 
 imporfiint effort in the right direction. It was 
 reserved for Kopp to make (in his Bilder iind 
 Schriften der I'orzeit, Mannheim, If" 19) the first 
 systematic rejiresentation of the genealogy of an- 
 cient Syro-Arabian alphabets. The latter portion 
 of bis .second volume contains elaborate tabular 
 views of the cliaracters of a wide ethnograjihical 
 circle, arranged according to their proximity to 
 the parent type ; and, by the breadth of his com- 
 parison, as well as by his deductions from the 
 laws affecting fhe art of writing, he first suc- 
 ceeded in estalslishing a number of new and un- 
 expected truths, which have had a permanent 
 influence on all sub.sequent inquiries. Lastly, 
 Gesenius, who possesses infinite philological ad- 
 vantages over Kop]), and who has also long de- 
 voted a more exclusive attention to Phojnician 
 remains, has recently given accurate copies of the 
 completest collection of them ever jinblished, and 
 has illustrated fhe characters and the language of 
 the monuments themselves, and fhe general sub- 
 ject of palceography, with great learning and 
 acumen : Scriptura Lingv.ceque Phwnicia Motiu- 
 nienta, P. 111., Lips. 1S37 — to which this article 
 has many obligations. 
 
 Seventy-seven inscriptions and numerous coins 
 — found chiefly at Tyre and Sidon, at Malta and 
 C'yprus, in Sicily, the north of AJ'rica, and on tbe
 
 ALPHABET. 
 
 coast of Spain — have preserved to us the eailiest 
 form of that alphabet iVuni which all others have 
 been derived. These remains themselves l)elon}j 
 generally to the period between Ale\aii<ler the 
 Great and the reign of Augustus ; yet one is snp- 
 
 i»osed to belong to the year ii.c. 394, and tlie 
 atesi to be of the year a.u. 203. They are thus 
 much later than the oldest Greek inscriptions ; 
 but that, nevertlieless, does not all'ect their claim 
 of preserv ing the most ancient known form of the 
 primitive alphabet. 
 
 The characters of this alphabet, as seen on these 
 monuments, are remarkable for tlieir very angular 
 and comparatively complex sliapo. This is an 
 evidence of their antiquity ; as tliis is just that 
 feature whicli the'tachygraphy and softer wiiting- 
 materials of later times would naturally tend to 
 obliterate. They also ajjjnoach nearer to rude 
 resemblances of the physical objects after which 
 they are named, than those in any other Syro- 
 Arabian alphabet, and, as another contirmatiou, 
 resemble most their nearest descendant, the ohlest 
 Greek letters. This al])habet may .l)e .sai(i to con- 
 »ist solely of consonants ; as in it '• 1 X do not, 
 excej)t under the very narrowest limitations, jxis- 
 •ess the power of denoting the place and quality 
 of wel, as they do in Heljrew. The mode of 
 wii'i.'g is, to use a teclmical term, in every re- 
 spect much more defective than in Hebrew, espe- 
 cially in the middle of a word. Tlieie are no 
 vestiges of vowel points nor of Hnal letteis. Words 
 aie chiefly written continuously, yet sometimes 
 with intervals, and with a rudimental interpunc- 
 tion. The use of diacritical marks seems to have 
 been known ; and that of abbreviations is very 
 frequent. The course of the wiiting is from right 
 tolelt, and tiiere aie no traces of the alternate or 
 Pov<Trpo<pr]5hv order. This alphabet was evidently 
 invented, or first used, by a people speaking a 
 Syro-Arabian language ; as an alphabet consist- 
 ing so exclusively of consonants is possible only 
 in that family of language in which the vowels 
 express meiely the accidental part, the modifi- 
 cations and relations of the idea, and not its 
 essence. It is, moreover, fully ade([uate to denote 
 all the sounds of their speech ; for it distinguishes 
 that remarkable series of gutturals which is jje- 
 culiar to the Syro- Arabians ; and is able to ex- 
 press every sound without compound letters, to 
 which other nations, who adapted Phoenician cha- 
 racters to their own native sounds, liave been 
 obliged to have recourse. The names of the 
 twenty-two characters and the order of their ar- 
 rangement can only be gathered (but then with 
 considerable certainty) from the Hebrew and 
 Greek alphabets. The names are evidently Syro- 
 Arabian ; and, as they appear in Hebrew, belong, 
 as to their form, to a period anterior to tlic ile- 
 velopment of tliat language as we find it in tlie 
 earliest books of the Old Testament: and, as they 
 appear in the Greek, they have undergone modi- 
 fications which (although some have considered 
 them to betray signs of the Aramaic stMtas cm- 
 phatims) are explained by Geseriius to be chiefly 
 the etl'e>it of an influence, which is seen in other 
 words (?33, fajSAa ; t27(2, fj.a.\6a) which the 
 Greeks derived from the Phoenicians. 
 
 In tracing the derivation of all other alphabets 
 from this tyjie, the records of the intercourse of na- 
 tions with each otlier and of their gradual ac(;ui- 
 Eition of the ails of civilization furnish indeed an 
 
 ALPHABET. 
 
 lai 
 
 important evidence ; but the cijc, esjiccially wher 
 trained in the scliool of sucli observation, is alone 
 qualified to test the trulii of even liistorical de- 
 ductions on such a subject. It is, therefoie, oi ly 
 tlie attentive view of accurate plates wiiicti will 
 enalile the reader fully to understiuid Uie follow- 
 ing genealogical talile of aljihabets, v.hich is 
 taken from Gesenius. To give it entire \s, never- 
 tlieless, tlie shortest way of laying btture the stu- 
 dent the results of a tedious incpiiry ; and wWl, 
 at the same time, secure the ojiportunity nf .>iubse- 
 quent reference, by which the treatineut of tiie 
 several 8yro-Arabian languages, under their re- 
 spective heads, may be materially facilitated. 
 
 The lines which run between the diflVrent 
 names are infended to mark tlie cliannel, and 
 sometimes the distinct yet convergent chanuels, 
 through which any given chaiacler has been de- 
 rived. Thus, to give an illustration, the square 
 Hebrew of our printed books is shown to descend 
 from the old Aranuean of Egypt, liut to be mo- 
 dified by the influence of the Palmyrene. 
 
 This primitive alphaliet underwent various 
 changes in its transmission to cognate 'and alien 
 nations. The former cliiss will be incidentally 
 noticed when treating of the Syro-Arabian lan- 
 guages separately. Among tlie latter, those mo- 
 difications which were necessary to adapt it to 
 tlie Greek language are the most remarkable. 
 The ancient Greek alphabet is an immediate de- 
 scendant of the Pha'iiician ; and its letters cor- 
 respond, in name, figure, and order, to those of its 
 prototype. Even the course of the writing, from 
 right to left, was at first oliserved in short inscrip- 
 tions ; and then half retained in the fiouaTpo(pr)S6y. 
 But as the characters were reversed in tlie alter- 
 nate lines of the ^uvcrTpo(piiS6y^' and the order 
 from left to right became at length the standard 
 one, the systematic reversal of the characters be- 
 came the law. This of itself was a sti'ikhig de- 
 parture from the Phoenician mode of writing. A 
 more important change was produced by the na 
 tura of the language. The Greeks found the nume- 
 rous gutturals superfluous, and at the same time 
 felt the indispensafde necessity of characters to 
 denote their vowels. Accordingly, they con- 
 verted Aleph, He, Jod, and Ain into A, E, I, O. 
 This last transmutation (which is the only sur- 
 prising one) is accounted for bj' Gesinius, on the 
 ground that the Pha'iiician Ain leaned so much 
 to (he O sound, that it was written in Phuenician 
 insciiptions to express that vo^vel (in cases wlieK 
 it arose from the fusion of the sounds A and L), 
 and that the Greeks, when writing a Phoenician 
 word in tlieir own way, represented it by O, as 
 'Bo>Kad-i)s = Tl^y^. Moreover, the LXX. appair 
 to have felt the same influence, as Mcoxa for 
 nSyC Gen xxii. 24 (F/V/e Gesenii iVo«K/««,nte, 
 p. 131). Cheih alsu became liie rough breathing, 
 and subsequently was apinopriated to the long Ji 
 
 The two al])habets correspond as follows : 
 
 X A D y o 
 
 n B '•I en 
 
 : r D K V — 
 
 n A b A p KJmro 
 
 HE DM n P 
 
 1 F Bar 3 N V S. XJ» 
 
 T Z D 2iV« n 1 
 
 n H
 
 123 
 
 ALPHABET. 
 
 ALPHABEI 
 
 The earliest Phoenician. 
 
 ▲ndent Greek. Ancient Persian. Ancient Hebrew Arama-an, Later Himjori** 
 
 ,v \j. on Harmon, coins. on tgypt. mon. Phoenici&n, 
 
 Etruscan. Roman. 
 
 Umbrian. 
 
 Oscan, 
 
 Samuite. 
 
 Oeltiberian. 
 
 Bthiopio 
 
 Kufic. Peshito. Uigui. 
 
 Nftchi 
 
 There is evidence that the Greeks received all 
 these letters (except Tsade), because they con- 
 tinued to employ them as numerals, after they 
 had ceased to use them as letters. The loss of 
 Tsade, however, affected the numerical value of 
 all letters below its place in the series. They 
 subsequently rejected three letters in writing : 
 /3aC, the Roman F ; Kdmra, the Roman Q ; and 
 one of the sil)ilants. Gesenius explains the last 
 case thus : Tlie ancient alphabet liad adopted 
 Zeta for Zaiii, Sigma properly fur Samech, and 
 San for Shin. As the sound sh was disagreeable 
 to tlie ear of the Greeks, it was dropped. Having 
 thus no need of two characters to express their 
 single S, the two letlers gradually coalesced, and 
 were indiscriminately called Sigma and San. 
 But the S retained the position of the Sliin, and 
 not of the Samech ; and wlien Xi was introduced, 
 if usurped the place of the Samech. He also 
 thinks that, in tlie statement of Pliny (Hist. Nat. 
 vii. 5i)), about sixteen or ei(/kteen Ca.d\nea,u letters, 
 the first numljer is decidedly too small ; but finds 
 suir^ ground for the eighteen of Aristotle, in the 
 facts that the Greeks rejected three, and so rarely 
 used Z, that the actual number of current letters 
 was reduced to that amount. 
 
 The historical testimonies respecting the use 
 and transmission of letters disagree much as to the 
 nation to which tlie discovei"y is to be ascribed. 
 There are, however, only three nations which can 
 C(nnpete for tiie honour — the Babylonians, the 
 Phuiiiicians, and the Egyptians. Many eminent 
 men, among whom are Kopp and Hoffmann, 
 support the Bal)yloniaii claim to the priority of 
 use. The chief arguments, as stated by them 
 
 (Bilder iind Schriften, ii. 147; Gram. Syr. 
 p. 61), are based on the very early civilization of 
 Babylon; on numerous passages which attiibute 
 the discovery to the '2,vpoi, Syri, and XaXSaloi 
 (quoted in Hoffmann, I. c.) ; and especially on 
 the existence of a Babylonian brick containing 
 an inscription in characters reseiniiling the Phoe- 
 nician. To these arguments Geseuius has re 
 plied most at length in the article Pal^ographib. 
 in Ersch and Gruber's Allgemeine Enci/clopiidie. 
 He especially endeavours to invalidate the evi- 
 dence drawn from the brick (of which Kopp pos- 
 sessed an inaccurate transcript, and was only able 
 to give an unsatisfactory interprei^.tioii), and 
 asserts that the characters are Phoenician, but by 
 no means tliose of the most antique shape. He 
 considers the language of the inscription to be 
 Aramaic ; and maintains that the only conclu- 
 sion which call fairly be drawn from the exist- 
 ence of such an inscription there, is, that during 
 the time of the Persian kings the Babylonians 
 possessed a common alphabet almost entirely 
 agreeing with the Plioenician. And, indeed, as 
 this inscription only contains seven letters, irs 
 claim to originality is not a matter of nnicli mo- 
 ment ; for, in th" only j)ractical question of pa- 
 laiography, the Phoenician alphaliet still continues 
 to be, to us at least, the jnimitive one. He also 
 objects that it is, in itself, im])ri,r)able that the 
 alphabet was inveoteil by the AraniBeans, on the 
 ground that, in their dialect, as far as it is known 
 to us, ■• 1 y N are very weak and indistinct; 
 whereas the existence of such letters in the pri- 
 mitive alphabet at all, is an eviden(;e that they 
 were well marked consonants^ at least to th»
 
 ALPHABET. 
 
 people who felt the necessity of denoting them by 
 
 •eparate signs. 
 
 JJearl)' an equal number of ancient authorities 
 ajight be cited as testimonies that the discovery of 
 letters was ascribed to llie Pluvnicians and t* (lie 
 Tlgyptians (see Walton's Prolcyoinena, ii. 2'). 
 Aiid, indeed, there is a view, sugijested by Gese- 
 iiius {raheof/raphic, L c), by whicli their rival 
 claims might, to a certain extent, lie reconciled: — 
 that is, by the supposition that the hierog'ly- 
 phical was, indeed, the earliest kind of all 
 writing ; but that the Phoenicians, whose com- 
 merce led them to Egypt, may have borrowed 
 the first germ of alpbalietlcal writing from tlie 
 phonetic hieroglyphs. There is at least a re- 
 niarkaljle coincidence between the Syro-Arabian 
 alpliabet and the phonetic hieroglyj)h3, in that in 
 both tlie figure of a material object was made the 
 lign of that sound witii wiiich tlie 2iame of the 
 object began. To follow this further would lead 
 beyond the object of this article. But, if tins 
 
 ALPHABET. 
 
 IM 
 
 theory were true, it would still leave the Plia-ni- 
 ciaiis the ])o?sibility of having actually devel()j)ed 
 the first aljihabetical writing ; and tliat, fog-lhei 
 with the fact thut the earliest monuinents of tli« 
 Syro-.\rabiaiis have ])ieserved f/ieir eliaracfer«, 
 and the \inanimous consent witJi which anci«it 
 writers ascrilie to (hem the tiansniission of (he 
 aljihabet to the Greeks (Ilerod. v. 5"^ ; ])iod. 
 Sic. v. 71), may make the iirobabililles piepon 
 derate in their favour [Wuitinu ; Wuitino 
 
 MATEKlAl.s]. J. N. 
 
 Ai.i'HAUETiCAi, Soi-NHS. In Connection with 
 the subject of the Ilel)re\v and Greek al|)hal>ets, 
 we may be allowed to eii(er on some consider- 
 ations which are seldom duly develo])e<l in tiie 
 grammars of either language; and which will 
 besides throw some light oa the Greek sj^lling of 
 Helirew names. 
 
 Let us first request (lie reader to l>estow a little 
 study on the following table of consonants : — 
 
 
 Explosive. 
 
 Continuous. 
 
 
 
 Thin. 
 
 Full. 
 
 ' Thin. 
 
 1 
 
 Full. 
 
 Liquid. 
 
 Nasal. 
 
 
 Labial . . 
 
 P 
 
 b 
 
 / 
 
 V 
 
 w 
 
 m 
 
 (I) 
 
 Dental or 
 Palatal 
 
 l^ 
 
 d 
 
 e 
 
 S 
 
 I 
 
 n 
 
 (3) 
 
 Guttural or 
 Palatal 
 
 {> 
 
 9 
 
 X 
 
 t 
 
 7 
 t 
 
 Softest 
 German 
 ck or ff 
 
 ng 
 
 (3) 
 
 Aspirate . 
 
 M 
 
 V 
 
 n h 
 
 n ? T- hh 
 
 y 
 
 Freiich w 
 
 (4) 
 
 Sibilant or 
 Vibratory 
 
 
 
 I s D 
 
 z 
 French j 
 
 \- 
 
 
 (5) 
 
 Tie names annexed to the left-hand of (he 
 rc'ws are not perfectly satisfactory. To ' Labial ' 
 no objection can be made. Neither ' Dental ' nor 
 ' Palatal ' fitly describes the second row, in 
 which the sounds are produced by contact (more 
 or less slight and momentary) of the tongue with 
 the teeth, gums, or palate; while tlie tliird row, 
 on the conti-ary, does not need contact. The 
 term 'Guttural' is a])t, improperly, to give the 
 idea of a roughness which does not exist in k 
 and g. The soft palatal sounds of Xt 7> ^'^> 
 cannot be named al)solutely ' Palatals.' without 
 confounding them with those of the row above. 
 The word ' Aspirate' (or breathing) has in English 
 been generally apjiropriated to a ' rough' breatii- 
 ing; and it is against our usage to conceive of 
 the liquid y as a br/ athi/ir/ at all. 
 
 Those consonants are called explosive on which 
 the voice cannot dwell when they terminate a 
 Word; as ap, ak, ad. At (heir end a rebound of 
 the organs take* place, giving the sound of an 
 
 obscure vowel; us appr for ap : for if this final 
 sound be withheld, but half ol' the consonant is 
 enunciateil. Tlie Latins, following the Greeks, 
 called these 'Mutes.' Or. the contraiy, we name 
 those continuous tlie sound of which can he in- 
 definitely jirolonged, as ajfjlf' • •, assss. . . 
 
 For the namas thi7i and full, others say sliarp 
 and fiat ; or hard and soft ; or surd and sonant ; 
 or whispering and vocal. I( would ajipear (hat 
 in whispering the two are nieigeil in ime; for 
 instance, p cannot be distinguished from l>, nor 
 z from s. Yet the ' Asjiirates* (or fourth row) will 
 not strictly hear this (est. 
 
 By the (iieek letters e, S, x, 7> we understand 
 tlie sounds given to them by the modem (tieeks; 
 in which e = Engli.^h tli. in tiiin; 5 = English 
 th in thai ; x = German or Irish ch ; y — Dutch </, 
 To conceive of the last sound, when we know that 
 of Xj it is only requisite (o consider that (he fol 
 lowi.ng j)ro])ortioii strictly holds : — g (haid) : k :' 
 y ' X' At the same time, 7 and x have a doubi*
 
 121 
 
 ALPHABET. 
 
 pronuiKfuition. louglier and smoother, as ch in 
 Gkrman lias. When their roughness is much 
 
 eicaggerateil, they give the Arabic sounds ^ (klia) 
 
 and C (ghain), which last is the consonant gh 
 
 lieard in gargling. As for the softer soimds, when 
 their sot'tness is exaggerated, the x passes through 
 the softest German ch into a mere y ; wliile the y 
 is gradually merged in the soft imperfect r of 
 iispers, ind linaily in w. 
 
 But he fourth row, or the ' Aspirates,' yet more 
 urgently need explanation to an Englishman. 
 The explosive aspirates come under tlie general 
 head of what is called the Soft Breathing in Greek 
 grammar (although y in the Arab mouth is far 
 enough from soft), while the continuous aspirates 
 ire Rough Breathings. Moreover, y is a fuller 
 and stronger X, just as H is a fuller and stronger 
 n ; and although the relation does not seem to be 
 precisely that of b : p, or cl : t, it is close enough 
 to justify our tabular arrangement. As for H, it 
 is rather softer than our English A; and H, or hh, 
 is the Irish A, a wheezing sound. The consonant 
 a is the hiatus heard between the vowels in the 
 Greek word Irjie, and ]} is the same sound exag- 
 gerated by a compression of the throat. The last 
 is, in short, a jerking hiatus, such as a stuttering 
 man often jjrelixes to a vowel-sound, when with 
 ell'ort he at length utters it. That N, y, are ex- 
 plosi\'e, and H, D, continuous, is e\ident on trial. 
 It is also clear that the hiatus K readily softens 
 itself into the liquid y. Just so, for the name 
 
 ??^?Pn'? (Max'lal'el) the Se])t. reads MoAcAe^A, 
 where the e before 17A is in fact meant for an 
 English y. On this ground we have put y into 
 the fourth row. 
 
 It is important to observe how the consonants 
 of diiferent nations differ. For instance, the Ger- 
 man n and b are iiitermediafe to the English p 
 and b, so as to be difficult to our ears to distin- 
 guish, and the Armenians have two different p's. 
 So the English h is intermediate in strictness to H 
 and n, if at least we assume that these Hebrew 
 
 letters had the sound of the Arabic t and ^, 
 
 Now this is a general phenomenon, in comparing 
 the Indo-European with the Syro- Arabian sounds. 
 Our k is between the two Hebrew or Arab k's ; 
 our t is between their two ^'s; and so on. To 
 explain this, observe that we may execute a. t \n 
 various ways; first, by slapping the tongue flat 
 against tlie teeth, as an Irishman or man of Cum- 
 bsvland does when he says vjciter ; secondly (what 
 IS rather less broad), t)y sliglitly touching the root of 
 the teeth, as a Frenchman or Italian does ; thirdly, 
 by touching only the gums, which is the English 
 method ; fourthly, by touching the [lalate, or by 
 pressing on the gums with a muscular jerk. One 
 
 or other of tlie liist is the Hebrew 13, the Arab ^ ; 
 
 hence some call it a palatal, otliers a strong t. 
 In touching the palate, the tliroat is involuntarily 
 'jpened, and a guttural sound is imjiarted to the 
 letter and to the following vowel ; for which 
 reason it lias been also called a guttural t. The 
 Other method, of pressing tlie tongue firmly, but 
 not on the ]ialate, is an Armenian t, but perhaps 
 not the true Syro-Araliian. 
 
 Wliat we liave here tx) insist on is, that difl'er- 
 CDces which with us are provincialisms, with 
 
 ALPHABET. 
 
 tnem constitute differences of elementary soand* 
 To a Helirevv, T\ tliffers from tO, cr 3 from p, at 
 decidedly as with us 2> f'om b. On the ctha 
 hand, t and th (thin), as d and th (lull), which 
 with us have an elementary distinction, are but 
 euphonic variations in Hebrew. 
 
 After this, we have to explain diat 3 was ori- 
 ginally sounded forwarder on the palate tlian 
 English k, as p was fixr back warder, at the root 
 of the tongue. So D was probably forwarder, 
 and if certainly liar li warder than our 5, each of 
 them being nevertheless a kind of s. That X 
 was not ts is seen by HPV, l^^*, D^IVO, &c. &C., 
 which are written SeAAci, 'Zidi/, Mtcrpaiu, &c. &c. 
 in tlie Sept., as well as from the analogy of the 
 
 Aiabio ^p , The ts pronrmciation is a late in- 
 vention, as is the ng sound, which has been arbi- 
 trarily assigned to J?. Nevertheless, out of "IIX the 
 Greeks made Typos, which is contrary to the ana- 
 logy of 'XiSoju fur I'lT'V : yet the adjective Sarra- 
 nus, instead of Tyrius, used by Virgil, may jirove 
 that Sarr or Sour was in ancient, tis in modern 
 days, the right jironunciation of Tyre. In English 
 we have the doulile sound s and sA, wlii('li is illus- 
 trative of n and D, 3 and p, &c., to which modifi- 
 cation it is closely analogous. For sh is only a 
 modified s, being formed with the broad or central 
 part of the tongue, instead of the tip. In this action 
 the forepart of the tongue forms itself into a sort of 
 cup, the whole rim of which comes near to the 
 palate while the breath rushes between. On the 
 contrary, in sounding )i, only a single transverse 
 section of the tongue approaches the palate ; but 
 this section is far back, and the lips are protruded 
 and smacked, so as to constitute a mouthing s. 
 Farther, the alliance of r to s, so strongly marked 
 in the Greek and Latin languages, justifies our 
 arranging tnem in one row. The r is foimed by 
 a \ibration along the tongue, which bears some 
 analogy to the rush of the breath along its surface, 
 on which the s and sh depend. The Armenians 
 have a t\vofold r, of which one, if we mistake not, 
 is related to the other, as our sh to s. 
 
 The Hebrews were commonly stated to have 
 given two sounds to each of the letters Q H H 
 *1 D 3 so as to produce the twelve sounds, pf, 
 b V, t 0, d 5, k Xj ff y ') Iju' it i* ""* generally ad- 
 mitted that it was not so originally. The Greek* 
 (at least provincially), even in early days, pro- 
 nounced BiJTa, Veta, as they now also say 
 Ghamma, Dhelta ; and the Italians for Latin b 
 sometimes have v, sometimes b. The Hebrew 
 corruption was however so early as constantly to 
 show itself in the Sept. ; indeed, as a general 
 rule, we must regard the thin consonants D n 3 
 as having assumed tlie continuous, instead of the 
 e.c/jfo67'ye, pronunciation;, i.e. they weie becom* 
 /, e, X- Thus |1t>'S, Pn-in, jy^S are written 
 ^KTwu, &o0e\, Xafady, in spite of the dageah leiie 
 by which the later iMasorites directed the initial 
 letters to be sounded P, T, K. Yet there is no 
 immovable rule. Thus the DTlS is in the same 
 book variously rendered Xerieiei'/u and KirieW 
 (I Mace. i. 1, and viii. 5). It will be oUserved 
 that a decidedly dental t is very near to th, and 
 a k, very mincing and forward in the mouth, 
 easily melts into ky, as in the Turkish language, 
 and thence into soft x- I" this way, and x 
 having fieen ailopted for T\ and D, t and k werfl 
 left as the general representatives of D ajid p. It
 
 ALPHaBKT. 
 
 wwel/ known that the Eplnainiites at an eaily 
 peiiod said s, al least, in some words, lor s/i, as in 
 the celebrated tale of Sliihiioletli ; idit fliis cot 
 ru))tion went on increasing after tlie orthography 
 had lieen lixed, so that it became requisite to 
 denote by a dot many a i^' s/i, the sound of 
 Which had dei^enerated into D ■«• It is rather 
 f)eriile\in;jr to find D occupy tlie same place in tht 
 Hei)revv aljihabet as E in tlie Greek, a f.ict which 
 petiiaps still needs elucidation. 
 
 But we must turn to an important subject — 
 the tendency of aspirates to dci/enernte into 
 vowels. The muscular language of baibarians 
 seems to lo\e aspiiiSPes ; in fact, a vowel ener- 
 getically sounded is itself an aspiiate, as an 
 as])irate soAened is a vowel. Let il be noticed in 
 passing lliat an over-vocalised language is by no 
 means soil. Such a word as Itjic liiis of necessity 
 strong hiatuses between the vowels, which hiatuses, 
 although not written in Western languages, are 
 virtually consonantal aspirates; in which respect 
 an English representation of some barluirous lan- 
 guages is very m'sleading. The Hebrew s))elling 
 of Greek names often illustrates this; for ex- 
 ample, Antiochus is D'13'lX"'tOJi<, where the central 
 K indicates the hiatus between i and o. That the 
 letters H (linal), ^, 1, from the earliest times were 
 used for the long vowels A, I, U, seems to be 
 beyond doubt. At a later period perhaps, X was 
 used for another A : the Greeks adopted J? for O, 
 and finally n for a long E. It is ])robable that a 
 corruption in the Plebrew pronunciation of H 
 and n had already come in when the Sept. 
 adopted the spelling of jnoper names which we 
 liiid. As for n. it is the more remarkable that the 
 Greek as^jirate should not have been used for it ; 
 for both in Greece and in Italy the h sound must 
 have been very soft, and ultimately has been lost. 
 So we find in the Sept. 'A)3f'A for 73 H Rebel, 
 'flcTTje for yC'in Iloshe'a ; and even the rougher 
 and stronger asjiirate H often vanishes. Tlius 
 •Evojx ft"- lijn llhenDk ; 'Vow^Jid for nh'm Kch- 
 hobot, &c. Sometimes howe\er the H becomes Xj 
 
 as in Xo/i for DPI, yioKax foi' Tw'2 ; which may 
 possibly indicate that PI, at least in jiroper names, 
 occasionally retained the two sounds of Arabic 
 
 and ^ hh and ^ kh. The J? was of necessity 
 
 omitted in Greek, since, at least when it was be- 
 tween two vowels, no nearer rejjrescntation could 
 lie made than by leaving a hiatus. Where it has 
 been denoted by Greek y, as in TSfioppa, TaiSaS, 
 ^Tiydp, there is no douljt that it had the force of 
 
 fhe Arabic C (ghain), whether or not this sound 
 
 ever occurred in Hebrew except in jirojier names. 
 Resjiecting the vowels, we may add that it is 
 now hi.stori<;ally estalilishcil, alike in the Syro- 
 Araliian and in the Indo-European languages, 
 that the sounds e and 5 (pronounced as in tnaid 
 anil boat) are later in time tlian those of fi, 7, ft, 
 and are in fact corru[)tions of the diiihlliotigs ai, 
 au. Hence, originally, tliiee long vowels, a, 1, ii, 
 with tlnee vowel-points for the same when shoit, 
 ajjjjeareil to suilice. On the four very short 
 vowels cf Ilebiew a needless obscuiily is left in 
 our grammars by its not being obscrve<l that we 
 have the same number in the English language, 
 really distiti-t ; as in suddrn \ot castlr), con- 
 trary, nobxlij, brncnth ; altliough it is probab'e 
 
 ALT Alt 
 
 121 
 
 that with n tne vowel wa.» clearer and sliarjMr 
 than in any short English a. We have even \\,« 
 furtive vowel of which the Iltljrew pramniArg 
 speak ; namely, when a word ends in r, ]irecedcJ 
 by a long accenteil vowel or diphthong. In tiiis 
 case, a very shoit a i.s heard in tiue English 
 spee<-Ii, but not in Irish, l)efore the r, as in beer, 
 shore, jhnir (whence the oifliogra|;liy flower, 
 bower, &c.), which corres]ionds to the Hebrew 
 n-n, y"l. The Arabs have it also when the linal 
 letter is p.— F. W. N. 
 
 1 . ALPH.9-:US f 'AA(^c7oy). father of James the 
 Less (Matt. x. 3; Luke vi. 15), and husband of 
 Mary, the sister of our Lords mother (John x\\. 
 25); for which reason James is called 'the Lord's 
 brother' [Bhotheh]. IJy conijiaring John xix. 
 25, with Luke xxiv. 10, and Matt. x. ;5, it ap- 
 pears that Alpha-US is the same jiersoii as Cleo- 
 phas; Alphaeus being his Greek, and C'leopha.s 
 his Hebrew or Syriac name, according to the 
 custom of the provinces or of the time, when meji 
 had often two names, by one of which liiey were 
 known to their friends and countrymen, and liv 
 the other to the Romans or strangeis. Possiblv, 
 however, the double name in Greek arises, in this 
 instance, from a diversity, in pronouncing the PI 
 in his Aramaean name, '•S'pn, a diversity which 
 is common also in tl)e Sejjtuagint (see Kuini.el 
 in Joan. xix. 25) [Names]. 
 
 2. ALPIL^';US, the father of the evangelist 
 Levi or Matthew (Mark ii. Ji). 
 
 AI,TAR (ngtP from r\2\, to slay (a victimy 
 but used also for the altar of incense ; Sept. ge- 
 nerally Bvcriaarripiov, sometimes Pa>fj.6s). Tlie 
 first altar we read of in the Bible was that erected 
 by Noah on leaving the aik. According (o a 
 Rabbinical legend, it wiis jiartly formed fiom the 
 remains of one built by Adam on his expulsi(,n 
 from l^aradi^e, and afterivaids used liy Cain and 
 Abe], on the identical spot wheie Abraham pie- 
 pared to offer up Isaac (Zoliar, In Gen. fol. 51, o, 
 4; Targum, Jonafiian, Gen. viii. 20). Metition 
 is made of altars erected by Abraham (Gen. xii. 
 7; xiii. 4 : xxii. 9); iiy Isaac (xxvl. 2));' by Jacob 
 (xxxiii. 20; xxxv. 1, 3); by Moses (Excid. xvii. 
 15). Afler the giving of the law, the Israelites were 
 commanded to make an altar of eaitli (Pl^IfD 
 ^JD^N); they were also jiermitted to emjiloy 
 stones, but no iron tool was to lieapj^lied to thein. 
 This has been generally understood as an inter- 
 diction of sculpture, in order to guaid against a 
 violation of the second conimandnjcnl. Aifais 
 were frequently built on high places (HD^, mD3, 
 fiw/xoi); the word being used not only for the 
 elevated s]jot.s, but for the sacrificial structures ujion 
 them. Thus Solomon built an high place for Clie- 
 mosh (1 Kings xi. 7), and Josiah brake down and 
 burnt the hi;;h place, and stamped it small to 
 powder. (2 Kings xxiii. 15); in which ])assage 
 nD3 is distinguishwl from n3tD. This practice, 
 however, was forbidden by the Mosaic law (Deut. 
 xii. 13; xvi. 5), except in paiticular instances, 
 such as those of Gideon (Judg. \i. 2*)) and David 
 (2 Sam. xxiv. IS). It is said of Solomon ' that he 
 loved iheLordjWalkingin the statutes of David, his 
 father, only he sacrificed and burnt incciise on the 
 high places' (1 Kings iii. 3). Altars weie some- 
 times built on the roofs of houses : in 2 Kingi 
 xxiii. 12, we read of the altars that wcic on tl« 
 fop of the upi'er '-liamber of Aha/. In the taher-
 
 126 
 
 ALTAR. 
 
 nacle, and afterwards in the temi)le, two altars 
 were erected, one for sacrifices, the other for 
 incense : the table for the shew-bread is also 
 sometimes called an altar. . 
 
 1. The altar .,f burnt-offering (n?yn HnTO) 
 Ixilonfjfing to the t<»^iernacle was a hollow square, 
 five cubits in length and breadth, and three 
 cubits in heiglit; it was made of Shittim-wood 
 f Shittim], and overlaid witli plates of brass. In 
 tlie middle there was a ledge or projection, 
 2D13, deambulacrtim, on which the priest stood 
 while ofliciating ; immediately below this, a brass 
 grating was let down into the altar to support the 
 fire, with four rings attached, through which poles 
 were passed, when the altar was removed. Some 
 critics have supposed that this grating was placed 
 perpendicularly, and fastened to the outward 
 edge of the 3D13, tluis making the lower part of 
 the altar larger than the upper. Others have 
 imagined that it extended horizontally beyond 
 the iD^D, in order to intercept the coals or 
 portions of the sacrifice which might accidentally 
 fall off the altar. Tims the Targumist Jonathan 
 says, ' Quod si cadat frustum aut pruna ignis ex 
 altari, cadat super craticulam nee pertingat ad 
 tenam ; turn capieut illud sacerdotes ex craticula 
 et reponent in altari.' But for such a purpose 
 (as Dr. Biihr remarks) a grating seems very un- 
 suitable. As the priests were forbidden to go up 
 by steps to the altar (Exod. xx. 26), a slope of 
 earth was ))robal)ly made rising to a level with 
 the ZIDID- Ai-coiding to the Jewish tradition 
 this was on the south side, which is not im- 
 probable ; for on the east was ' the place of the 
 ashes' {p'^r\ DlpO), Lev. i. 16, and tire laver 
 of brass was probably near the western side, so 
 <bat only the north and south sides were left. 
 Those critics who snppise the grating to have 
 been perjiendicular or on the outsi le, consider the 
 injunction in Exod. xx. 21, as applicable t» this 
 altar, and that (he inside was filled with earth ; 
 so that the boards of Shittim-wood formed merely 
 a case fur the real altar. Thus Jarchi, on Exod. 
 xxvii. 5, says, ' Altare teireum est hoc ipsum 
 a>!ieum altare, cujus concavum tensi implebatur 
 cum castra metaientur.' 
 
 In Exod. xxvii. 3, the following utensils are 
 mentioned as belonging to the altar, all of which 
 were to be made of brass. (1) mTD sirafh, 
 nans or dishes to receive the ashes that fell 
 through the grating. (2 . Q^y rjaini, shovels (for- 
 oipes, Vulg.) for cleaning the altar. (3) nip'nT''.2 
 misrakoth (basons, Auth. Vers. ; <pi(i,\ai, Sept. ; jutr 
 tera sacrijica, Gesenius), vessels for receiving, the 
 olood and sprinkling it on the altar. (4j ni37TD 
 mizlagoth Q flesh-hooks,^ Auth. Vers.; Kpedypai; 
 Sept. ; fuscinulce, Vulg.), large forks to turn 
 the jiieces of fle.sh or to take them of!" the 
 fire (see 1 Sam. ii. 13). (5) ninPlD niachthofh 
 (• flre-pans,^ Auth. Vers.; rb -Kvpuov, Sept.): 
 the same word is elsewhere translated censers. 
 Num. xvi. 17; but in Exodus xxv. 38, ' sju'ff- 
 dishes ,' inroOefxaTa, Sept. 
 
 2. The altar of burnt-offering in Solomon's 
 temple v.as of much larger dimensions, ' twenty 
 cubits in length and breadth, and ten in height' 
 '2 Chroii. iv. I), and was made entirely of brass. 
 it is said of Asa that he renewed (BHri 1, that is, 
 either repaired (in which sense the word is evi- 
 .lently used in 2 Chion. xxiv. 4) or reconsecrated 
 (■iviKaiviffi, Sept.) the altar of the Lord that was 
 
 ALTAR. 
 
 before the porch of the Lord (2 Chron. xv. 8), 
 This altar was removed by king Ahaz (2 Kiugf 
 xvi. 14; it was 'cleansed' CintO, aryvi^o)) by 
 Hezekiah ; and in the latter part of Manasseh's 
 reign was rebuilt (pM ketib ; p''1 keri). 
 
 3. Of the altar of burnt-olloring in (he second 
 temple, the canonical scriptures give us no in- 
 formation excepting that it was erecjed Ijefore 
 the foundations of the temple weie laid (Ezra 
 iii. 3, 6) on the same place where it had formerly 
 been built, e(f>' oo koX irpSripov ?\v d.vcfKo^ofjirijj.evov 
 Towov (Joseph. Ant,q. xi. 4. 1). From the Apo- 
 crypha, however, we may infer that it was made, 
 not of brass, but of unhewn stone, for in the 
 account of the restoration of tlie temple service by 
 Judas Maccabaeus, it is said, ' They took whole 
 stones (Aldovs 6\oK\7]povs), according to the law, 
 and built a new altar according to the fVmer' 
 (1 Mace. iv. 47). When Antiochus Epipiianes 
 pillaged Jerusalem, Josephus informs us that he 
 left the temple bare, and took away the golden 
 candlesticks and the golden altar [of incense] 
 and table [of shew-bread], and the altar of buint- 
 otiering, to Bvataar-fipia (^A)itiq. xii. 6. 4). 
 
 4. Tlie altar of burnt-oll'ering erected by 
 Herod is thus described by Josephus (/>e Bell. 
 Jud. V. 5. 6) : ' Before this temple stood the 
 altar, fifteen cuijits high, and equal both in 
 length and breadth, each of which dimensions 
 was fifty cubits. The figure it was built in was 
 a square, and it had cornels like horns (/cepa- 
 Toei5e?y -Kpoo-vex^^ yccvlas), and the passage up 
 to it was b}' an insensible acclivity from ihe 
 south. It was form.ed without .any iron tool, not 
 did any iron tool so much as touch it at any 
 time.' The dimensions of this altar are differently 
 stated in the Mishna. It is there described as a 
 square 32 cubits at the base ; at the height of a 
 cubit it is reduced 1 cubit each way, making it 30 
 cubits square ; at 5 cubits higher it is similarly 
 contracted, becoming 28 cubits square, and at 
 the base of the horns, 26 cubits ; and allowing a 
 cubit each way for the deambulacrum, a square 
 of 24 cubits is left for the fire on the altar. Other 
 Jewish writers place the deambulacrum 2 feet 
 below the surface of the altar, which would cer- 
 tain! 3' be a more suitable construction. The 
 Mishna states, in accordance with Jt)Sephus, that 
 the stones of (he altar were imhewn. agreeably to 
 the command in Exod. xx. 25 ; and that they 
 were whitewashed every year at the Passover an4 
 the feast of tabernacles. On the south side was 
 an inclined plane, 32 cubits long and 16 cubits 
 broad, made likewise of unhewn stones. A pipe 
 was connected with the south-west horn, through 
 which the blood of the victims was discharged by 
 a subterraneous passage into the brook Kedron. 
 Under the altar was £t cavity to receive the drink- 
 offerings, which was covered with a marble slab, 
 and cleansed from time to time. On the north 
 side of the altar several iron rings were fixed io 
 fasten the victims. Lastly, a red line was drawn 
 round the middle of the altar to distinguish 
 between the blood that was to be sprinkled above 
 and below it. 
 
 II. The second altar belonging to the Jewish 
 Cultus was the altar of incense, "ItDptDH 0310 
 or ^^t!lp^ n3TO ; OuffiaffTi^ptov du/uidfiaros, 
 Sept. ; Bvfxiar-fipiov, Josejihus ; callfHl also the 
 golden altar (Num. iv. 11) 3nTn 0310. It 
 was placed between the table of shew-bread
 
 ALTARS. 
 
 ALTARS. 
 
 127 
 
 tnd the golden Ciuidlcstick, in the nijgt holy 
 place. 
 
 1. This altar in tlie tabernacle was made of 
 Siiittim-wood overlaid with j^old plates, one culjit 
 in length and hrcadtli, and two cultits ni heif^lit. 
 It had horns (Lev. iv. 7) of tlie same materials ; 
 and round the (lat surface \v:is a hinder ("IT, crown, 
 Aiith. \ ers. ; arpfirTijv (TT«pdvrjv XP'^^^V^^ Sept.) 
 of irokl, \in(hM'iieath wliich were the rinjjs to 
 ree.t'ive ' the staves (DnZl, (TKVTaKai) made of 
 Shitlin.-wood, overlaid with {johi to hear it withal' 
 Exod. XXX. 1-5; Joseph, .l^i/^. iii. 6. 8). 
 
 2. The altar in Solomon's Temple was similar, 
 but made of cedar (1 Kings vi. 20; vii. 48 ; 
 1 Chron. xxix. 18) overlaid with gold. 
 
 3. The altar in the second temple was taken 
 away by Antiochus Epiphanes (I Mace. i. 23), 
 and restored by Judas Maccabajus (1 Mace, 
 iv. 49). On the arch of Titus there ajijx-ars no 
 altar of incense ; it is not mentioned in Heb. ix., 
 nor by Josepli. Antiq. xiv. 4. 4 {vide Tholuck 
 On the Ilcbrcits, vol. ii. p. S ; Biblical Cabinet, 
 vol. xxxix.) (IViner's Realicirtcrbuch, articles 
 ' Altar,' ' Brandopfer altar,' ' Raucheraltar ; ' 
 Biihr's Symbol ik des Mosalschen Cult us, bd. L 
 Heidelberg, 1P37).— J. E. R. 
 
 ALTARS, FORMS OF. In the preceding 
 article the reader is furnished with all the posi- 
 tive information which we possess respecting the 
 altars mentioned in Scripture ; but as, with rei,'ard 
 to material objects so frequently named as altars, 
 we feel a desire to have distinct images in tlie 
 mintl, some furtlier remarks respecting the forms 
 which they probably bore, may not be unac- 
 Cejitable. 
 
 The direction to the Israelites, at the time of 
 their leaving Egypt, to construct their altars 
 of unhewn stones or of earth, is doubtless to be 
 understood as an injunction to follow the usage" 
 of their patriarclial ancestors; and not to adopt 
 the customs, full of idolatrous associatidns, which 
 they had seen in Egypt, or might see in the land 
 of Canaan. As they were also strictly enjoined to 
 destroy the altars of the Canaanites, it is more than 
 probable that the direction was levelled against 
 such usages as those into which that jieojile had 
 fallen The conclusion deducilde from this, that 
 the patriarchal altars were of unhewn stones or of 
 earth, is confirmed by the cii cumstances under 
 which they were erected, and by the fact that 
 *Jiey are always descrilied as being ' built.' The 
 provision that they niiyht be made of earth, ap- 
 plies doubtless to situations in which stones could 
 not be easily obtained, as in the ojjen jdains and 
 wildernesses. Familiar analogies lead to the 
 inference that the largest stones that could be 
 found in the neiglibourhood would be employed to 
 form the altar; but where no large stones could 
 be had, that heajjs of smaller ones might be made 
 to serve. 
 
 As the.-e altars were erected in the open air, and 
 w«e very carefully jireserved, there is at least 
 a strong probability tliat some of those ancient 
 monuments of unhewn stone, usually called Dru- 
 idical lemains, whicl] aie found in all paits of tlie 
 world, we;e derived from the altars of ]iriniitive 
 timei. These are vaiious in their foims; and their 
 peculiar u^es have been veiy unicli disputed. It 
 18 admitted, however, that some of them must have 
 l>een altars ; but the difliculty is, to determine 
 whethei these altars aie to be sought in the Crom- 
 
 lechs or the Kistvaens. In another worK (Piv 
 tortal Hist, of Palestine, Sup]). Notes to b. iii. 
 clis. i. iii. iv.) the whole subject is largely ex- 
 aminetl in its scriptural relatidus; and 'he author, 
 through a mass of authority and illustration, there 
 reaches the conclusion that tiie arguments pre- 
 iKinderate in favour of the opinion tiiat the Crom- 
 lechs are the representatives of the primitive 
 altars, and that the Kistvaens (stones disposed 
 in a chest-like form) are analogous to the arks 
 of the Jewish ritual and of some of the pagan 
 religions [Auk]. 
 
 Cromleclis, as is well known, are somewhat ip 
 the form of a table, one large stone being sup- 
 ported, in a liorizontal or slightly inclined j)osi- 
 tion, ujMin three or more, but usually three stones, 
 set upright. That they weie used as altais is 
 
 almost instinctively suggestetl to every one that 
 views them ; and this conclusion is strengthened 
 when, as is often the case, we oltserve a stnal) cir- 
 cular hole through which probably the rope was 
 run by which the victims, when slaughtered, were 
 bound to the altar, as they weie to the angular 
 projections or 'horns' of the Jewish altar ( Ps. 
 cxviii. 27). It was natural that \diere a suffi- 
 ciency of large stones could not be found, hea; s of 
 smaller ones should be em])loyed : and that, when 
 practicable, a large Hat stone would be placed on 
 the top, to give a proper level (br the (iie and 
 the sacrifice. Such are the cairn-altars, of v.liich 
 many still remain; but as they are sometimes 
 found in places where stones of large size might 
 have been obtained, it seems that in later times 
 S7tch altars had a sjiecial ajipropriation ; and 
 Toland (Hist. B. Druids, 101) shows that the 
 sacred fiies were binned on them, and sacrifices 
 olTcred to Bel, Baal, or the Sun. 
 
 The injunction that there should be o ascent by 
 steps to the rt/fr'r appears to have been .mperfectly 
 understood. Tlieie are no accounts or figurei of 
 altars so elevated in their faiiric as to require such 
 steps for the ofliciating priests; but when altars 
 are found on rocks or hills, the ;rscpnt to them is 
 sometimes facilitated liy steps rut in the rock. 
 This, therefore, may have been an indirect way of 
 preventing that erection of altars in high jjlaces 
 which the Si-iiptures so often repiobate. 
 
 It is usually supposed, however, that the effect 
 of this ])rohibition was, that the tabernacle altar.
 
 128 ALTARS. 
 
 like most ancient altars, was so low as to need no 
 ascent ; or else tliat some other kind of ascent 
 was provided. The i'ormer is Calmefs view, 
 the latter Laniy's. Lamy t(ives a sloping ascent, 
 while Calinet merely provides a low standing' 
 board for the olli'.-iating priest. The latter ii 
 prol)al)ly right, f'oi the altar was but three cubits 
 higli, and was designed to be portable. Tiieie 
 is one error in tliese and other figures of tiie Jewish 
 altars comjiosed from the descriptions; namely, 
 with regard to the ' liorns,' whicli were placed 
 at the corners, called ' the horns of the altar' 
 (Exod. xxvii. 2; xxix. 12; 1 Kings ii. 2Sj, and 
 to which the victims were tied at the time 
 of sacrifice. The word horn (pp keren) was 
 applied by the Jews as an epithet descriptive 
 
 ALTARS. 
 
 known to tliose by whom Herod's altar was built. 
 Very dilTeient figures, however, have been formad 
 from Mipse descriptions. 
 
 
 of any point projecting in any direction afrer tlie 
 manner of a horn (not necessarily like a horn 
 in shape) ; and there is no reason to doubt 
 that tlie horns of the successive altars of burnt- 
 offerings resemljled those corners projecting up- 
 wards which are seen in many ancient altars. 
 These are shown in the vif'w now given (from 
 the Pictorial Bible), whi(;h, although sul)stantially 
 the same, is, in this and other respects, a con- 
 iiderable improvement upon that of'Calmet. 
 
 Tlie first figure is taken from Calmet's original 
 work, and exhibits the form which, with slight 
 variation, is also preferred by Beiiiard Lamy, and 
 by Prideanx {Connection, i. 200). It is excel- 
 lently conceived ; but is open to the ol))ection 
 that the slope, so far from being ' insensible." as 
 Josephus describes it, is steep and inconvenient ; 
 and yet, on the other hand, a less steep ascent 
 to an oliject so elevated must have l)een incon- 
 veniently extended. 
 
 Calmet gives the above only as in accordance 
 with the Rabbinical descriptions. His own view of 
 
 the matter is conveyed in the annexed figure. This 
 is certainly a very handsome altar in itself, but it 
 would be scarcely possible to devise one more un- 
 suitable for the actual, and occasionally exten- 
 sive, services of the Jewisli altar. None of these 
 olijections apply to the next figure, derived from 
 Suienhusius (^Mishna, torn, ii. p. 261), which, for 
 
 By the time of Solomon it appears to have been 
 understood that the interdiction of steps of ascent 
 did not imply that tlie altar was to be low, but 
 rather that it was to be liigli, and that onlv a par- 
 ticular mode of ascent was forliidden. T le altar 
 of the temjile was not less tlian ten cubi^s high, 
 and some means of ascent must have been pro- 
 vided. The usual reinesentations of Solomon's 
 altar are formed chiefly from the descriptions of 
 that in Herod's (emple given by Josephus and the 
 Riililiins ; and altliough this last was almost one- 
 third higlier and larger than tlie other, it was 
 doubtless u])on the same model. Tlie altar of tlie 
 fu-st temple had been seen, and could be described, 
 by many of those who were present wlien that of use and efTect, fai exceeds any other rejiresentation 
 Uie se:;ond temple was erected"; and tlie latter was that has hi^Lerto been attempted An asc«it
 
 ALTARS. 
 
 by an iiic ined plane to an altar so h'u^h as lliat 
 of Solomon must eitlier liave been inconveni- 
 enlly steep, or liave had an unseemly extension — 
 objections ol)viated by the provision of fhiee as- 
 cents, of four stejis oach, conducting to successive 
 platforms. In the description of Ezekiel's temple, 
 'stei's' (rivJ/'D) aie placed on the east side of 
 the altar (Ezek. xliii. 17) ; and as it is i,'eiierally 
 supposed that the details of that description a;,'ree 
 witii those of Solomon's temple, it is on that au- 
 thority the steps aie introduced. If tliey actually 
 existed, it may be asked how this was consistent 
 with the law, which forbade steps altogetlier. TliC 
 obvious answer is, that, as jjublic decency was ttie 
 jstensible ^Mound uf the prohibition (Exod. xx. 26), 
 it might be supjwsed tliat it was not imperative 
 if steps could be so disposed that decency should 
 not be violated; and that, if a law may be in- 
 terpreted by the reason of its enactment, this law 
 coidd only be meant to forbid a continuous fli^dit 
 V f steps, and not a broken ascent. If it is still 
 urged against this view that, according to Jo- 
 sephus, the ascent in the .temple of Herod was 
 by an insensible slope, an answer is found in the 
 fact,' that, at the time of its erection, a mode of 
 inter])reting the law according to the dead letter, 
 rather than the spirit, had arisen ; and we have 
 no doubt tliat even liad it been then known that 
 steps actually existed in Solomon's altar, or in 
 that of the second temple, tins would luive been 
 regarded as a serious departure from the strict 
 letter of the law, not to be repeated in the new 
 altar. In a similar way the student of the Bible 
 may account for some other discrejiancies between 
 tl>e "^emples of Solomon and Ezekiel, and tliat of 
 H"iod. 
 
 ALTARS. 
 
 129 
 
 The ai.tar ok inxensk, being very simple in 
 its parts and uses, has been represented with so little 
 dilfeience, exrej)t in some ornamental details, fliat 
 one of tiie figuies designed fioni the (les(ri])ti()ns 
 may sutTice. It is the same as the one inserted in 
 the Pictorial Bible (Exod. xxx.) ; and, as to the 
 coiners (' horns "), &c., is doubtless more accurate 
 tlian tliose given liy Calmet and others. 
 
 It is not our object to descril)e the altars of other 
 nations; liut, to supply materials for comparison 
 and illustration, a group of the altars of tlie jiiin- 
 cijial nations of Oriental and classical antiquity 
 U here introduced. One obvious remark occurs 
 
 namely, that all the Oriental altars are square or 
 oblong, whereas tho.se of Gieece and Rome are 
 more usually round ; and that, ui;-,/n die whole, 
 the Hebrew altais were in accordance with the 
 general Orietital type. In all of them we observe 
 bases with corresponding ])rojections at the top; 
 and in some we find the true model of tlie horns,' 
 or prominent and pointed angles. 
 
 1,2,3. Greek. 4. Egyptian. .'). Hahylonian. 
 6. Roman. 7, H. I'ersian. 
 
 Not regarding the table of sheto-bread as an 
 altar, an account of it is reser\'ed for the ))roper 
 head; and other articles afford information re- 
 specting the uses and jnivileges of tlie altars of 
 burnt-oii'ering and of incense [A.svi.um ; Censer; 
 Incense; S.\.CRn'icEj. 
 
 Ai.T.iR AT Athens. St. Paul, in his admired 
 address liet'oie tlie judges of the Aieopagus at 
 Athens, declares that he perceiveil that tlie Athe- 
 nians were in all tilings too sujwrstitious,* for 
 that, as he was pa.ssing by and beholding their 
 devotions, he found an altar, inscrilied, ' To tub 
 Unknown God;' and adils, with unexjiected 
 force, ' //?/» whom ye worship without knowing 
 (tv oliv dyvoovvres euffipeiTe), I set fortii untc 
 you' (Acts xvii. 23, 23). Tiie questions sug- 
 gested by the mention of an altar at Athens, thus 
 inscribed ' to the unknou n God,' have engaged 
 much attention; and dill'crent opinions ha\e lieen, 
 and probably will continue to be, enteitained on 
 the subject. 
 
 The principal difficulty arises from this, that 
 the Greek writers, especially such as illustrate 
 the Athenian antiquities, tnake mention of many 
 altars ileilicatcd ayvwcTTOis ©eoiy, to the un- 
 known ffods, but not of any one dedicated dy- 
 v<i>(rT(f 06(3, to the unknotoi god. The passage 
 
 * Afi(ri5ai/Aov((TT(povs — a word that only occurs 
 here, and is of ambiguous signification, beintf ca- 
 pable of a good, bad, or itulilVeient sense. Most 
 modern, .and some ancient, exjiositors hold that it 
 isliere to be taken in a good sense (rccy re/Z^io?^*), 
 as it was not the object of the ajntstle to give need- 
 less ollence. This explanation also agrees best 
 with the context, and witii the circumstances or 
 the case. A man may Ijc ' very religious,' tliou|^ 
 (lis religion itself may l)e false.
 
 130 
 
 ALTARS. 
 
 ALTARS 
 
 in Lucian {Philojm/r. § 9), which has ofien 
 been appealed to as evideiic*- that there existed 
 at Atliens an altar dedicated, in tiie sini^'ular, 
 (c tlie unknown God, dyyuicrTw 0e&", is ol' little 
 worth for the purpose. For it has been ahown 
 liy Eichhorn, and Nieineyer (Interp. Oral. IJauL 
 Ath. in Areop. hah.), that this witty and profane 
 writer only repeals the expression of St. Paul, witli 
 tlie view of caslin;^ rlilicule ujj^m it, as he does 
 on other occasions. The other passages from 
 Greek writers only enable us to conclude that 
 there were altars at Athens dedicated to many 
 tmknoicn f/ods fPaiisan. i. 1 ; Philostrat. Vit. Ap. 
 vi. 3). It has also been supposed that the allusion 
 may be to certain anonyinoiis altars, which were 
 erected l)y the j)hilosopher Kpiinenides, in tlie 
 time of a ti-rrilile pestilence, as a solemn expiation 
 for the country (Uiog. Laert. Vit. Epimen. i. 29). 
 Dr. Dodth-idije. among others, dwells much on 
 lliis. . Hut it is a strong objection to the view 
 which he has taken, tliat the sacrifices on these 
 altars were to be offered not ayvuicnct! ©eoj, but tw 
 ■Kpoa-riKOVTL 0fi5, i.e. to the God to whom this 
 all'air a)ipertains, or the God wlio can avert tlie 
 pestilence, whoever he -.nay bt; and such, no 
 iloubt, would iiave been the inscription, if there 
 had been any. But these altars are expressly 
 said to have been /Scoyuoi dvcivufioi, i. e. aiimiy- 
 )nous altans. evidently not in the sense of altars 
 inscribed to the unknown God, but altars without 
 any natyte or inscription. 
 
 Now, since the ancient writers tell us that 
 there were at Athens many altars inscribed to the 
 imknon'n gods, Erasmus, Le Clerc, Broda'us, and 
 many others, have maintained that St. Paul 
 changed the plural number into the singular in 
 accommodation to liis jmrpose. Of this o])inion 
 was Jerome (^Comment, in Tit. i. 12), who testifies 
 that this inscription (whicli, he .says, had been 
 read by liim) was, 0e»?s 'Arr/as koI Eup'Jnrrjs Koi 
 \i0vri^, &eo7s dyv'Jxrrots koI ^fuots, 'To the gods 
 of Asia, Euro])e, and Africa ; to the unknown and 
 strange gods." Bretschneider. relying on this 
 autliority, supposes (Lex. N. T., s. ». 'dyvwcTTos') 
 the inscription to have lieen dyvuxTTois 0eo?s, 
 t. e. to the gods of foreign nations, unknown to 
 t]i€ Atlienians; indicating that either foreigners 
 might sacrifice upon that altar to their own gods, 
 or that Athenians, who were about to travel 
 abroad, might first by sacrifice propitiate the 
 favour of tiie gods of the countries they were 
 alxjut to visit. He quotes the sentiment of Ter- 
 tullian : ' I find, indeed, altars prostituted to 
 unknown gods, liut idolatry is an Attic tenet ; 
 also to uncertain gods, liut superstition is a tenet 
 of Rome.' To tlie view that such was the in- 
 scription which Paul noticed, and that he thus 
 accommodated it to his immediate jmrpose, it has 
 b^en \'ery justly objected that, if tliis interpretation 
 be admittetl. tlie whole strength and weight of the 
 a]M»sTle"s argument are taken away; and that his 
 assertion might have been convicted of falsity bv 
 his opponents. Tiierefore, wliile admitting the 
 anthoiities for the faci. that there were altars in- 
 scribed to the unknown gods, they contenil tliat 
 St. Paul is at le:ist equally gooil authority, Hir 
 the fact that one of these altars, if not nmie. was 
 in*?,iibeil in the singular, to the unkiwion God. 
 Cliry^osiom (In Acta Ap.^,. who olijects strongly 
 to the preceding hyi'ofliesis. oilers the conje'-ture 
 tk-it the Atlienians, wlio v^ere a people exceedingly 
 
 superstitious, being apprehensive that they »iign< 
 have overlooked some divinity and omilteil to wor- 
 ship him, ejected altars in some part of their city 
 inscribed to the unknotrn God ; whenc* St. Paul 
 took occasion to preacli to the Areopagites Je» 
 hivah as a God, with respect to them truly wn- 
 known ; but whom they yet, in some sort, adored 
 without knowing him. Similar to this in es.sential 
 im])ort is the conjecture of Eichhorn yAllrjem. 
 Biblioth. iii. Ill) to wliich Nienieyer suliscribet, 
 that there were standing at Athens several very 
 ancient altars, which had originally no iriscrip- 
 tior. and which were afterwards not destroyed, 
 for fear of provoking the anger of the gods to 
 wliom tliey had been dedicated, although it 
 was no longer known who these gods were. He 
 supposes, therefore, that the inscription dyvil)(Tri^ 
 06'S, to un [somc'\ imkncwyi God, was placed 
 upon them ; and that one of these altars was .seen 
 l)y the apostle, who, not knowing that there were 
 others, siioke accordingly. To this we may add 
 the notion of Kuinoel (C'ow?w. in Act. xvii. 23), who 
 consiilers it proved that there were seveial altarj 
 at Athens on which the inscription was written in 
 the plural numlier; and believes that there waa 
 also one altar with the inscription in the singular, 
 although the fact has been recorded by no other 
 writer. For no argument can lie drawn from this 
 silence, to the discredit of a writer, like St. Paul, 
 of unimpeached integrity. The altar in question, 
 he tliinks, had probably been dedicated o.yvdicrrto 
 ®eco, on accoynt of some remarkable benefit re- 
 ceived, wliicti seemed attributable to so?ne God, 
 although it was uncertain to ichom. 
 
 It would be improper to dismiss this subject 
 without noticing the opinion of Augustine, who 
 had no doubt that the Athenians, under the ap- 
 pellation of the unknown God, really worshipped 
 tlie true one. Otliers besides him h ive thought 
 that the God of tlie Jews was th.e real' object of 
 tliis altar, he being a powerful God, but not fully 
 known to them, as the Jews never u^e.l his name 
 in speech, but substituted 'The Loimj" for ' Je- 
 hovah." One of the warmest modern advocates 
 of Augustine"s opinion is Dr. Hales, who, among a 
 multitude of other matters, irrelevant to his ' Chro- 
 nology,' but interesting in themselves, has criti- 
 cally examinetl this subject (vol. iii. pp. 519-5I51). 
 Alluding to the alleged iact that Athens was 
 colonized from Sais in Egypt, where there was a 
 temjile to Neith, the Egyptian goddess oi' wisdom, 
 on which v/as the famous inscription, '£701) elfji 
 TIAN T^ yiyivos, koX ov, koL iffoixevoi/' Ka\ rbv 
 f/xhy TTiirKoi ouSelx tto) 6vt]rhs aTTSKaKv^ei' — ' I 
 am Ai.i. that has been, and is, and shall be ; and 
 my veil no mortal ha,th yet uncovered^ lie seems 
 disjxised to connect this inscription with the one 
 on the Athenian altar, and to refer both to that 
 remote ' unknowable" Wisdom, fa,r beyond all 
 known causes, wliom the heathen dimlj' guessetl at 
 under oliscure metajihors and recondite phrases ; 
 but wliom the Helirews knew under the name 0/ 
 Jehovah. 
 
 But there is no end of these hypotheses ; and 
 we are cnntcnt to rest in the conclusion of Pro- 
 fessor Robinson (Add. in Am. Edit, of f-almet)' 
 ' S I much at least is certain, that altars to an 
 unknown god or gods existed at 'Vtliens. But 
 the attempt to ascertain definitively whom \ht 
 .\thenians worship).ed iiiiapr this nppellatiop 
 must ever remain fruitless tiT want of suliicii»cs
 
 ALFKAII. 
 
 AMALKK. 
 
 131 
 
 da a. The inscriptuni alVoriled to Paul ;i happy 
 occasion of proclaiuiing the Gospel ; and those 
 who emUraceil it foiiiiii inileed tiiat the lieing 
 whom tiiey had thus " igiimaiitly woishipiied," 
 WAS the one only living and true God.' 
 
 ALUKAH (nj^-lS;?; Sept. BStWa; Vulg. 
 Saufjfuisuyja ; A. V. ' Horse-leech') occurs only 
 in Prov. xxx. 15 rgenus, vermes; order, intesti- 
 nata, Linn. Viviparous, brings forth only o«e 
 ollf^iriug uX. a time : many species). * The horsc- 
 leecii " is properly a species of leech discarded for 
 medical ])ur()oses on account of the coarseness of 
 its hite. There is no ground Wn- the distinction of 
 species mjide in tli • I'nglish Uilile. 
 
 Although the Hehiew word is translated leech 
 in all the versions, there has been much dispute 
 yvhether that is if.s proper meaning. Against the 
 received translation, it has heeii urged that, upon 
 an examination of the context in which it occr.rs, 
 the introduction of the leech seems strange: that 
 it is impossible to understand what is meant by 
 its ' two daughters,' or three, as- the Septuagint. 
 Syriac, and Aral)ic versions assign to it ; and 
 tliat, instead of the incessant craving apparently 
 attributed to it, tiie leecli dro])s oil' when Idled. 
 Li crder to evade tliese difliculties it has been at- 
 tempted, but in vain, to connect the p;issage either 
 with the preceding or subsequent verse. It liiis 
 also been attempted to give a ditlerent sense to 
 the Hebrew word. But ;is it occurs nowhere 
 besides, in Scripture, and as tlie root from which 
 it woidd seem to be derived is ncxer used as a 
 verb, no assistance can be obtained from the Scrip- 
 tures themselves in this investigation. Recourse is 
 therefore had to the Arabic. The following is tlie 
 line of criticism pursued l)y the learned Bocliart 
 ( Ilierozoicon, a Rosenmiiller. iii. 7^5. &c.). The 
 Arabic word for leecti is aiakah, wliicli is de- 
 rived from a verb signifying to hang or to adhere 
 to. Bui the Hebrew word, ab.kali, he would de- 
 rive from another Arabic root, aluk, which means 
 ' fate, lieavy misfortiuie, or im-ending calamity" ; 
 ami lience he infers tha alukah properly means 
 destiny, and particularij the necessity of di,inr/ 
 whidi aftaclies to every man by the decree of 
 God. He urges that it is not strange that 
 ojfspring should be ascribed to this divine ap- 
 pointment, since, in Prov. xxvii. 1, otVspring 
 is attril)uted to time, a day — ' Thou knowest 
 not what a day may bring forth.' And tlie 
 Heijrews call e\euts the children of time. We 
 also speak of the womb of time. Thus, th.en, 
 Bochart considers that destiny, or the divine de- 
 cree coricerning death, is here personilied and 
 represented as having * two daughters crying, 
 give, give ;' namely, blXK^, Hades., or the state 
 of departed souls, and the grave. He cites Prov. 
 xxvii 20. as a paiallel jiassage : ' Hell (slicol) 
 and the grave are never full.' which the Vulgate 
 renders ' infernus et perditio." Hence he su])- 
 poses that shcul au<l tiie grave are the two 
 daughters of Alnkah or Destiny ; each cries ' gi\ e' 
 at the same moment — the former asks i'or the soul, 
 Wid the latter for the liody of man in death ; buth 
 •re insatiaide, for both invol\e all mankind in one 
 conmion ruin. He further thinks that both these 
 are called daughters, because each of the words 
 is of the feniinine, or, at most, of the com- 
 mon gender ; and in die 16 h verse, tlie grave 
 (»h<*olj 18 sjiecilied as one of he ' things that are 
 
 never .satisfied.' In furthe confirmalioii of *hif 
 view, Bochart cites rabbinical writers, who state 
 tout iiy the word alukah. whicli occurs in the 
 C.ialdee {Kiraphrasc on tiic Psalms, they uiidcr- 
 staiid destiny to be signiiied ; iLud also i>'maik 
 that it has two ilaughlcrs — Kden and Gehenna, 
 Paradise and Hell — the former of wIioik never 
 has enough of the souls of the righteous, the latter 
 of the souls of the wicked. 
 
 In behalf of the received translation, it is 
 urged that it is scarcely credible that all the 
 ancient translators should liave confounded alukati 
 with alakaii; liiat it is peculiarly unlikely tliat 
 this should have b<H?n the case with the .Septua- 
 gint translator of the book of Proverbs, becaiix; 
 it is believed that ' this ranks next to the lians- 
 lation of the Pentateuch for ability u:i'. fidelity 
 of execution;" and that the author of it must 
 have been well skilled in the iwo la.igu.igts 
 (Home's Introduction, ii. 43: td. 1R'2R). Ii \.i 
 further jileaded tliat the ajip'icaiion of Arabic 
 analogies to Hebrew words is not decisive , 
 and llnally, that the theory j)roposed by Bo- 
 chiirt is not esseni'al to the elucidaion of tiie 
 passage. In the preceding verse the wiiter (not 
 Solomon — see verse I "I sjieaks of ' a generation, 
 whose teeth are as swords, anil their jaw-teeth as 
 knives to devour \he poor from oft" the eaitii, and 
 the needy frt>m among men ;" and then, afttr tiio 
 abrupt and j)ictuiesque stj'le of the East, espe- 
 cially in their ])roverbs, which is novl.eie moie 
 vividly exemplilied t!i:in in t'lis whole i-liapr<-r. tie 
 leech is introduced ;i.s a;i illi.stratiun of tiie covet- 
 ousness of such persons, and of the two distin- 
 guishhig vices of whicli it is the parent, avarice 
 and cruelty. May not also the ' two danghters 
 of the leech, crying, Give, give," lie a figurative 
 description of the two lips of the cieatiire (for 
 these it has, and perfectly formed), which aie 
 a part of its veiy cuniplicafed mouth'/ It cer- 
 tainly is agreealrte to the Hebrew style to call the 
 oll'spring of inanimate things I'attghters, f"or so 
 branches are caUed daughters of tiees (Gen. 
 xlix. 22 — margin). A similar u*e of the woid 
 is found in Eccles. xii. 4, ' .\.ll the daughters of 
 music shall be brought low,' meaning the lips, 
 i"ront tectli. and other parts of the mouth. It is 
 well remarked by Professor Paxton, that ' this 
 flgiiirative application of the entire genus is sulTi- 
 cient to justify the iiiterpretativ.n. The leech, as a 
 symbol, in use ainong rulers of every class and in 
 all ages, f"or avarice, rapine, plunder, rajiacity, 
 and even assiduity, is too well known to need il- 
 lustration' (Plan. Epidic. art. 2; Cicero, ad At- 
 tic. ; Horace, .irs. Poe<. 476 ; Theocritus, iVirt?- 
 tnaceut. ; &c. &c.). — J. F. D. 
 
 ALUSII (L'''l'pK; Sept. PdXovs), one of the 
 ])laees at which the Hebrews rested on their way 
 to Mount Sinai (Num. xxxiii. 13). It was Ije- 
 tweeii Dophkah and Rephidim. The Jewish Cliio- 
 nology (Seder Olam Rabba, c. 5, p. 27) makeu 
 it twelve miles from the former and eight frum 
 the latter station. The Taigum of .Fonathan ••alio 
 it ' a strong fort;' and it is alleged (upon ai in- 
 terpretation of Exod. x\i. 3(1) that in Alu>h the 
 Saliliath was instituted, and the first Salibath 
 kejit. 
 
 AMALEK (p!?pj?). a son of Elii^liaz (ihe 
 first-lwm of Esau) liy his concubine Timna : he
 
 '32 AMALKKITES 
 
 iTfts the chieftain, or lilmir (P|vX, Sept. 'lyifj.iiy, 
 Auth. V. Duke), ot' an IdumiKan tribe (Gen. 
 xxxvi. 16). 
 
 AMALEKITES, the name of a nation inha- 
 fiiting tlie coMiirfy to the south of Palestine l)e- 
 tweeii Idnniapa and Egypt, and to the east of tlie 
 Dead Sea <iTui Mount Seir. 'Tlie Anialel<ite3 
 dwell in the land of the aontli" (233n flS3, 
 Num. xiii. 29.) 'Saul smote the Amalekites 
 from Havilah until thou comest to Shur, that 
 is over ai^ainst Egypt' (1 Sam. xv. 7). 'David 
 went np and invaded the Geshurites, and Gezriies, 
 and tlie Amalekites, for those nations were of 
 old the inhabitants of the land as thou goest 
 to Sliur, even unto the land of Egypt' (1 Sam. 
 xxvii. S). In 1 Chron. 4i'. 42, it is said that 
 the sons of Simeon went to Mount Seir and 
 iimote the rest of the Amalekites that were es- 
 ',a]»e(l. Accovfling to Josepiius ( Antiq.\u.%^\) 
 rhe Amalekile-i inliabited Gobolitis (733, Ps. 
 Ixxiii. 8; FeffaXa, Fa/SaAa, Stephainis Byz. ; 
 Ve0a\7)vri, ra0a\rjvn, Euseb.) and Petra, and 
 were the most warlike of the nations in those 
 parts ; o'l re rr)v TofioKiriv koCI rriv Vlerpap Karot- 
 Hovvres,, ot KaXovvrai ^iv 'A,aoA?;/c7Tai, fxaxif^iti- 
 ■rarot 5e Toiy tKucre i^vCiv virripxov- In another 
 passage he says, • Aliphaz had five legitimate 
 sons, Tlieman, Omer, Saphus, Gotham, and 
 Kanaz; lor Amalek was not legitimate, but hy a 
 concubine, wiiose name was Thamna. These 
 dwelt in that part of Irlumoea called Gobolitis, 
 and that called Amalekitis, from Amalek ' (Antiq. 
 ii. 1) ; and elsewhere he sjieaks of them as 
 ' rcacfiing from Pelusium of Egy];t to the Red 
 Sea ' (Antiq. vi. 7). We find, also, that they had 
 a settlement in tiiat part of Palestine which was 
 allotted to the tribe of Ephraim. Abdon, one of 
 the judges of Israel, was Imricd in Pirathon, in 
 the land of. Ephraim, in the mount of ttie Ama- 
 lekites, ^pb^iJil. "in3- In Deborah's triumphal 
 ode it is said p7^]}2 D"jh^ DnSN 'i», ' out 
 of Ephraim was there a root of tliem against 
 Amalek ' (Auth. Vers.), which Ewald (Die Poe- 
 tischen Riicher des Alten Bundes, &c., Got- 
 tingen, 1R;59, Band. i. 120) translates ' Vo7i 
 Efraim die, deri n Wttrzel ist in A maleq,' ' of 
 Ephraim those wliose root is in Amalek,' i. e. 
 the Ephraimites who dwelt in the mount of the 
 Amalekites. On comparing tliis text and Joshua 
 xvi. 10, 'they drave not out the Canaanites that 
 dwelt in Gezer (1T23), but the Canaanites dwelt 
 among tlie Ephraimites unto this day ' — with 
 1 Sam. xxvii. ft, ' David invaded the Geshurites, 
 and Gezrites, and the Amalekites,' &c., — it seems 
 Iffobable that the Gezrites (HTS) were the inha- 
 bitants of Gezer (ITS) {v. Gesenius); but in that 
 case David must have marched northward instead 
 of southward, and the southern position of tlie 
 Amalekites is expressly stated. The first mention 
 of the Amalekites in the Bible isGen. xiv. 7; 
 Chedorlaomer and his confederates •.r'an-ned and 
 came to En-mlshpat, which is Kadesh. and smote 
 all the country of the .\malekites, and also the 
 Amorites tliat iwelt in Hazezon-tamar.' From 
 this passage it h;is been inferred that the Amale- 
 kites existed as an inilependent nation at that 
 time, and were, therefore, totally distinct from the 
 descendants of the son of' Eliphaz On the other 
 tianii, it l;as been reniaiked that while several other 
 nations are specified ('the Repliaims, the Zuzims, 
 Um Knoims,' v. 5, ' the Horites,' v. 6, and ' the 
 
 AMALEKITES. 
 
 AmorilM,* v. 7), the jjorase ' all .the ecnmtry ml 
 the Amalekites" ('p7Dyn mb'-^S) may hav. 
 been used by the sacred historian to denote th« 
 locality not then, but long afterwards, occupied 
 by the posterity of Amalek v.flengstenberg'8 Dit 
 Antkcntie des Pentutcuche.i. Band ii. 305). Tiie 
 LXX. appear to have read '"IJJ03, (ill the 
 princes, instead of m"'"T'3, all tlie country, 
 KaTfKO\f/av iravras tovs &pxovras 'KfxaXitK ; a 
 reading which, if correct, would be in favoJir of 
 the former sujiposition. Origen says (In Nurrt'T 
 IIomiL xix.), interfeceriint onines principes Amc- 
 hk, Ruliiius's Latin version. After starting tli« 
 question, whether this name belonged to two na- 
 tions, without attempting to settle it, he turns 
 of!" to its allegorical interpretation (Opera, x. 
 230, Berol. 1S40). Tlie Amalekites were the 
 first assailants of the Israelites after their passage 
 through the Red Sea (Exod. xvii.). In v. 13 it 
 is said 'Joshua discomfited Atnnk-k and his 
 people with the edge of the sword.' Amalek may 
 here be employed as the name of the chief of the 
 tribe, as Pharaoh was the name of the successive 
 kings of Egypt, and in this case the words must 
 mean the prince and his army. But if ' Amalek ' 
 stand for the nation, ' his people " must mean theii 
 confederates. It has been thought imjirobable 
 that in so short a peiiod the descendants of Esau's 
 gran<lson could have been suflicu-ntly numerous 
 and powerful to attack the host of Israel ; but 
 within nearly the same periorl the tribe of Ephraim 
 bad increased so that it could muster 40.500 men 
 able to bear arms, and Manasseh 32,200 : and 
 admitting in the case of the Isr elites an extraor- 
 dinary rate of increase' (Exod. i. 12, 20), still, if 
 we consider the prostrating influence of slavery on 
 the national character, and the absence of warlike 
 habits, it is easv to conceive that a comparatively 
 small band of niar:iuders would be a very for- 
 midable foe to an undisciplined multitt^de, cir- 
 cumstanced as the Israelites were, in a locality so 
 adapted to irregular warflire. It appears too that 
 the attack was made on the most defenceless por- 
 tion of the host. ' Remember (said Moses) what 
 Amalek did unto thee by the way when ye were 
 come forth out of Egypt ; how he met thee by the 
 way and .smote the hindmo.st ofthee, even all that 
 were feeble behind thee (Qvt."'TOn ; Sept. ko-ki- 
 wvTes, Vulg. lassi), when thou wast faint and 
 weary " (Deut. xxv. 17). In Balaam's prophecy 
 (Num. xxiv.) Amalek is denominatetl ' the lirst 
 of the nations," D''13 IT'fi'X'l. The Targumists 
 and several expositors, both Jewish and Christian, 
 have taken this to mean 'the first of tlie nations 
 that warred against Israel ' (Marg. reading, Auth. 
 Vers.). But it apjiears more agreeable tc. the an- 
 tithetical character oi' Oriental poetry to interpret 
 it of the rank held by the Amalekites among the 
 surrounding nations, their ])re-eminence as a war- 
 like tribe, here conti-a.sted with their future down- 
 fall and extinction. Or if we understand the 
 term n*k^'N"l, of priority in time, of the antiquity 
 of tlie nation, this would liecome a striking con- 
 trast with 'his latter end' (innnX) In the 
 Pentateuch the Amalekites are frequently men- 
 tioned in connection with tlie Canaanites (Num. 
 xiv. 25, 43, 45), and, in the book of Judges, with 
 the Moabites pjid Ammonites (Judg. iii. 13"), 
 with the Midianites (Judg. vi. 3; vii 12: ' TL« 
 Miiiianites, and the Amalekites, and all the chil- 
 dren of the Ea*t lay along in the valley l'***
 
 amalek;tes. 
 
 frasshoppers for nuiltitude; anil their camels 
 were without number, as the sand by (he sea-side 
 for multitude'); with tlie Koi ites, 1 Sam. xv. 6. 
 By divine ci. minaud, as a retribution for tlieir 
 •^03tility to the Israelites on leavinsf Egypt 
 (1 Sam. XV. 2), Saul invaded tlieir country with 
 an a'liiy of 210.000 men, and ' uttetiij destroyed 
 (C^~inn, stratiij;i'ly taken fur a iirojjei- name in 
 the Sept. : iravra rhv Xabv Koi 'leftlfj. airiKruvev) 
 all the people with the edge of the sword ;' but 
 he pi-eser>fe<l their king .-Vgag alive, and the best 
 of tiie caltle, ajid by this act of disobedience 
 forfeited the legal authority over Israel. Josepliiis 
 states tiie number of SauTs army to be 400,000 
 men of Israel and 30,000 of Judali. He also 
 represents Saul as besieging aud taking the cities 
 of the .\malekites, 'some by warlike machines, 
 some by mines dug underground, and by building 
 walls on the outside; some iiy famine and thirst, 
 and some by other metliods " (Aniiq. vi. 7, ^ 2). 
 About twenty years later they were attacked by 
 David during his residence aniyng tlie Philistines 
 (1 Sam. .\xvii.). It is said 'that he smote the 
 land and left neither man nor woman alive:' this 
 language must lie taken with some limitation, for 
 shortly after tiie Amalekites were sulKcieiitly re- 
 covered from tiieir defeat to make repri^Is, and 
 burnt Ziklag with lire (1 Sam. xxx. ). Dsvid, on 
 liis return I'rom tiie camp of Achisli, surprised 
 tliem while celelirating their success, ' eating, and 
 drinking, and dancing," and ' smote them from 
 twilight even unto the evening of the next day, 
 and there escajted not a man of them save 400 
 young men vviiich rode upon camils, and tied ' 
 (I Sans. xxx. 17). At a later period, we find 
 that David dedicated to the Lord the silver and 
 gold of Amalek and other conquered nations 
 (2 Sam. viii. 12). The last notice of the Ama- 
 lekites as a nation is in 1 Chron. iv. 43, from 
 which we learn that in the days of Hezekiah, king 
 of Judah, 500 men of tlie sons of Simeon ' went 
 to Mount Seir, and smote the rest of the Ama- 
 lekites that were escaped." 
 
 In the book of Esther, Haman is eailed the 
 Agagite, and was probably a descendant of the 
 royal line (Num. xxiv. 7 ; 1 Sam. xv. 8). Jo- 
 sephus says that he was by birth an Amalekite 
 i[Aniiq. xi. (3, ^ 5). 
 
 The editor of Cal met snp])oses that there vyere 
 no less than three distinct tribes of Amalekites. — 
 
 1. Amalek the ancient, referred to in Gen. xiv. ; 
 
 2. A tribe in tlie region east of Egypt, between 
 Egypt and Canaan (Exod. xvii. 8; 1 Sam. xv. 
 &c. ) ; 3. Amalek. the descendants of Eliphaz. 
 No such distinction, however, ajjpears to be 
 made in the Biblical narrative; the national 
 character is everywhere the same, and the dif- 
 ferent localities in which we Hnd the Ama- 
 lekites may be easily explained by their habits, 
 which evidently were such as belong to a warlike 
 aomade people. Le Clerc was one of the first 
 critics who advocated the existence of more than 
 one Amalek. Hengstenberg inlisrs from 1 Chron. 
 iv. 42, 4•^, that in a witler sense Amalekites might 
 be considered as belonging to Idinmea, and urges, 
 in behalf of the descent of the Amalekites from 
 the son of Eliphaz, the inqirobability that a ]ieii]jle 
 who acted so conspicuous a ])art in the Israelitish 
 kistnry should have their origin concealed, and 
 "oe, as he terms it, ' iyiveaXiy-qros, contrary to the 
 whole plan of the Pentateuch " (t'. Die Authentic, 
 
 AMASA. 
 
 nr- 
 
 r \ 
 
 &c., ii. 303). Arabian writei-s mention 
 ^jmj14>£^ u}l>«>£) Amalika, Amalik, Imlik, as 
 
 an aboriginal tribe of their country, desceiidfd 
 from Hani ' Abiilfeda says t"rom Slieni), and moi* 
 ancient than the Ishmaeliles. They also give the 
 same name to the Philistines and other Canaanites, 
 anil assert that the Amalekites who w.^re con- 
 quereil by Joshua jiassed over to Noilh Africa. 
 Pliilo {Vita Moysis, i. 39) calls the Amah-kites 
 who fought with the Isiaelilcs on leaving Egyjit, 
 Phoenicians (•Po/ri/cey). The same writer inter- 
 pro's the name .Vmalek as meaning 'a ] eojde 
 that licks u]) or exhausts:" o 'A/iaA7)«, ?»y kpfj.r)viv- 
 erai \ahs f/cAei'xo'J' (Lcf/i.i Alte(j</r. iii. (50, Lih. 
 de Miijr. Abr. 20, I'ong. erud. yrat. 1 1). — J. E. It. 
 
 1. AMANA (n3DN), a mountain nientioneil 
 m Cant. iv. S. Some have su))]iosed it to be 
 Mount Amanus in Cilicia, to which the dominion 
 of Solomon is alleged to have extendeil noitinvard. 
 But (lie context, with other ciicumstances. le.ives 
 little doubt that this iMount Ainana was latlier liie 
 southern jiait or suinmjt of Anti-Libanus. and 
 was so called perha]is fiom i:ontaining the source* 
 of the river Amana [Au\na1. 
 
 2. AMANA, a river of Daniasiuis [Aban.^1. 
 
 1. AMARIAH. (nnnt>?, word of Jehovnh, 
 Sept. 'Awapia, 'Afxapia:], mentioned in 1 Clnou. 
 vi. 7, in the list cf the descendants of Aaion liv 
 Ins eldest son EieiUi;r. He \v;ls tlie soti of Me- 
 raic-Ui and the fatl:or of Ahitub. who was (not 
 the grandson and si-.ccessor of Eli of the same 
 name, but) the i'allior of tliat Zadok in whose 
 person Saul restoied the high-priesthood to the line 
 irt' Eleazer. The years dining which tiie youn/er 
 line of Ithamar enjoyed the jiontificaie in tli* 
 p'ersen? '.>'" Eli. Ahitub, and Abimelerli ,'wlio was 
 slain by King Saul ai Nob) doubtless moie iliiHi 
 cover the rime of Amaiiah and his son Ahituh , 
 and it is therefore sufficiently certair. .nat ilie\ 
 never were high-juiests in fact, although ilieii 
 names are given to carry on the diiect line >>f 
 succession to Zadok. 
 
 2. AMARIAH, high-priest at a later perio.i, 
 the son of Azaiiah, and also father of a second. 
 Aliitub (1 Chron. vi. 11). In like mannei, ir 
 the same list, there are tluee higii-priests bearijig 
 the name of Azariah. 
 
 3. AMARIAH, gieat-grandfathe. of the prophei 
 Zephaniah (Ze[ih. i. 1). 
 
 1. AMAS.A (NB'OJ!, a burden; Sept. 'A/ie^ 
 (rat), son of Abigail, a sister of king David.' ,\!. 
 his name does not occur jiiior to ,-Viisalom's lAtA 
 lion (2 Sam. xvii. 2o), he must have been negleiieil 
 by David in comparison with Joali and .-Vbisbai 
 the sons of his other sister Zeiiiiah, who had belbn 
 then been raised to gieat jiower and inllnence 
 This apparent estrangement may leihajis he con- 
 nected with the fac* that Abigail had man led an 
 Islimaelite called Jethcr, wiio was the falhei cf 
 ."Vmasa. This is the more likely, as the faci is 
 pointedly mentioneil (1 Chron. ii. 17), or co- 
 vertly indicated (2 Sam. xvii. 20) whenever the 
 name* of Abigail occurs, wheiciis we aie t|niie 
 ignorant who was the husband of the oilier si.sler, 
 Zeiuiuh, and father of her ilistingui.-hed sous. 
 We may thus form a conjecture ol' llie giounds on 
 wliicti Amasa joined .'Vbsalom, and olitaiueil tlif 
 command of the lebel a) my. He was defejue<l
 
 .34 
 
 AMASA. 
 
 hy liii cousin Joab, who commanded the army of 
 I/Avid Tnis transaction appears to have made 
 Daviil sensible oi" the neglect witli which Amasa 
 had heen treated ; and he eventually olVeied 
 fiirn not only pardon, hut the command of the 
 at my in the room of Joah (2 Sam. xix. 13), 
 wiiose overhearing coniluct had hecome intoler- 
 able to him, and to whom lie could not entirely 
 forgive the death of Absalom. David, however, 
 wui too good a soldier himself to have made this 
 ofler, had not Amasa, notwithstanding his defeat, 
 tlisplayel higr. militaiy rjualities during his com- 
 jn.iml of Absalom's army. But on the breaking 
 out of Sliel)a's rebellion, Amasa was so tardy in 
 his movements ( | rol)ably from the reluctance of 
 the troops to follow him), tliat David despatched 
 Abishai with the household troops in puisuit of 
 Sheba, and Joab joined his brother as a volunteer. 
 When they reached ' the great stone of Gibeon,' 
 they were overtaken by Amasa with the force he 
 liad been able to collect. Joali thought this a fa- 
 vourable o;)poitunity of getting rid of so dangerous 
 a rival, and immediately executed the treacherous 
 purpose he had formed. He saluted Amasa, 
 askal him of his health, and took his beard in his 
 right hand to kiss him, while with the unheeded 
 left hand he smote him dead with Ids suord. 
 Joab then put himself at the head of the troops, 
 and continued the pursuit of Sheba ; and such 
 was his jiopularity with the army, that David was 
 unable to iemo\e him frori. the command, or call 
 him to account for this bloody deed: B.C. 1022 
 [Abner ; Au.sAi,OM ; JoAu]. 
 
 2. AMASA, a chief of Ephraim, who, with 
 others, vehement!}' resisted the retention as pri- 
 soners of the jiersoiis whom Pekah, king of Israel, 
 had taken captive in a successful campaign 
 against Ahaz, king of Judah (2 Chron. xxviii. 
 12). 
 
 AM-\SAI, the principal leader of a consider- 
 able body of men from tiie tribes of Judah and 
 Benjamin, \v\\o joined David at Ziklag. Tlie 
 voids with whicii David received them indicate 
 some apjirehension, which was instantly dissipated 
 bv a fer\ent declaration of attachment from 
 Amasai (1 Chron. xii. Ifi-lS). 
 
 AMATH, Ematii. or H amath, a city of Syria; 
 ti^e same w^tli Eniesa on the Orontes [Hamath]. 
 
 AMATHITIS, the district in Syria of which 
 Amath or Hamath on the Orontes was the capital 
 (1 Mace. xii. 2.5) [Hamath]. 
 
 AMATHUS CAtxadoxs), a fortified town beyond 
 the Jordan, which the Onomnst. (s. v. j55meth) 
 places 21 Roman miles south of Pella. It was taken 
 by Alexander Jannajus (Joseph. Bell. Jud. i. 4, 2 ; 
 Antiq. xiii. 13, 5j, and its importance is shown 
 by the fact that Galiinius made it tlie seat of one 
 of ihe five juiisdictions (trure'Spjo) into which he 
 divided the country (Antiq. xiv. 5, 4 ; Bell. Jud. 
 i. S. .5). Josephus elsewiiere {Aiiiiq. xvii. 10, 6) 
 nientions that a palace was burnt eV 'A/j.a6o7s on 
 the Jordan, which was ])robably the same place. 
 
 I. AM.\ZIAH (njVJ?^?. strength of Jehovah ; 
 Sept. 'AutffffLas ; V'ulg. A masias). son of Joash, and 
 eightii king of Judah. He was 23 years okUwhen 
 he began to leign, and he leigned 29 years— from 
 B.C. S38 to B.C. 80'J. He commenced his sove- 
 reignty by punishing the murderers of his father ; 
 and it is mentioned that he resjiected the law of 
 Moaes, by not including the children in the doom 
 
 AMB.\SSAi OR. 
 
 of their parents, which seems to show tiiat a contmrj 
 practice had previoirsly i-xisred. In the twelfth 
 year of his reign Amaziah dtt<'mpted to reim[M)8« 
 upon the Edomites tlie yoke i' Judah, which they 
 had cast oil' in the time of Jenoram. The strength 
 of Edom is evinced by the fact that Amaziah con- 
 sidereil the unaided strength of his own kingdom 
 unequal to this undertaking, and therefore hired 
 an auxiliary force of 10'),000 men from the king 
 of Israel for 100,000 talents of silver. This is the 
 first examiile of a mercenary army that occurs 
 in tlie history of the Jews. It did not, however, 
 render any other service thaii that of giving Ama- 
 ziah an opportunity of manifesting that he knew 
 his true ])lace in the Hebrew constitution, as the 
 viceioyand vassal of the king Jkiiovah [Kinu]. 
 A projihet commanded him, in the name of the 
 Lord, to send back the auxiliaries, on the gioimd 
 that the state of alienation fiom God in which the 
 kingdom of Israel lay, rendered such assistance 
 not only useless but dangerous. The king obeyed 
 this seemingly hard command, and sent the men 
 home, although by doing so he not only lost their 
 services, but the 100,000 talents, which had been 
 already paid, and incurred the resentment of the 
 Israelites, who were naturally exasperated at the 
 indignity shown to them. This exasperation they 
 indicated by plundering the towns and destroying 
 the ):eop]e on their homeward march. 
 
 The obedience of Amaziah was rewarded by a 
 great victory over the Edomites, ten thousand of 
 whom Were slain in battle and ten thousand more 
 savagely destroyed liy (jeing huiled down from the 
 high dill's of tlieir native mountains. But the 
 Edomites afterwards were a\enged for among the 
 goods which fell to the conqueror were some of 
 their idols, which, although impotent to deliver 
 their own worshi])pers, Amaziah betook himself 
 to worship. This jnoved his rvun. Pulled 
 up by his late victories, he thought also of re- 
 ducing the ten tiibes under his dominion. In this 
 attempt he was defeated liy king Joasli of Israel,, 
 who carried him a prisoner to Jerusalem Joash 
 broke down great part of the city wall, jdundered 
 the city, and even laid his hands u]<or the sacred 
 things of the temple. He, however, left Amaziah 
 on the throne, but not without taking hostages for 
 his good behavioiu'. Tlie disasters which Ama- 
 ziah's infatuation bad brought upon Judah pro- 
 bably occasioned the consjiiracy in which he lost 
 his life. On receiving intelligence of this con- 
 spiracy he hastened to throw himself into the 
 tbrtress of Lachish ; but he was ])uisued and .slain 
 by the consjiirators, who brought back his body 
 ' upon horses ' to Jerusalem foi' interment in the 
 royal sepulchre (2 Kings xiv. ; 2 Chron. xxiv.). 
 
 2. AMAZIAH, tiie ])riest of the golden calves 
 at Bethel, in the time of Jeroboam II. He com- 
 ])lained to the king of Amos's pwophecies of coming 
 evil, and urged the jirophet himself to withdraw 
 into the kiniidom of Judah and ]irojihesy there 
 (Amos vii. 10-17). 
 
 AMBASSADOR. The relations of the Hebrews 
 with foieign nations were too limited to allbrd 
 much occasion for the .services of ambassadors. 
 Still, the long course of their h'stoiy alVordg 
 some examples of the emjJcyment of such func- 
 tionaries, which enable us to discover the position 
 which they were considered to occupy. Of am- 
 bassadors resident at a foreign court they had, of 
 couise, no notion ; all the embassies of which we
 
 AMBER. 
 
 wad being * extraordinary,' or for special services 
 and occasions, such as to congratulate a kin-,' on 
 his accession or victories, or to condole with him 
 in his troubles (•2Sam. viii. 15; x. 2; 1 Kini,'* v. 1\ 
 to remonstrate in the case of wron^ (Judj,'. xi. 12), 
 to solicit favours (Num. xx. 14), or to contract 
 alliances (Josh. '\^. 3, sqq.; 1 Mace. viii. 17). 
 
 The notion that the ambassador represented the 
 person of the sovereign who sent him, or the dig- 
 nity of the state from whi< h he came, <lid notexl.-t 
 in ancient times m the same sense iis now. He 
 was a highly distinguished and privileged 7nes- 
 senger, and the inviolability of his person (2 Sam. 
 X. i-5) was rather that of our heralds tlian of 
 er.r ambassadors. It may have been owing, in 
 soir.e degree, to ihe proxii)iity of all the nations 
 with which the Israelites had intercourse, tiiat their 
 ambassadors were intrusted with few if any dis- 
 cretionary powers, and could not go beyond the 
 letter of their instructions. In general their duty 
 was limited to the deliverin,'- of a message and 
 the receiving of an answer : and if this answer 
 was such a^ required a rojoii der, they returned Ibr 
 &esh instructions, unless they had been authorized 
 tow to act or speak in case such an answer should 
 be given. 
 
 The largest act performed by ambassadors ap- 
 pears to have been the treaty of alliance cnn- 
 tiacted with the Gibeonites (Josh, ix.), who were 
 8upj)0sed to have come from ' a far country ;' 
 and the treaty which they contracted w;is in 
 agreement with the instructions with which they 
 professed ^o be fmnished. In allowing for the 
 eflect of proximity, it must be remembered that 
 the ancient ambassadors of other nations, even 
 to countries distant tiom their own, generally 
 adhered to the letter of their instructions, and weie 
 reluctant to act on their own discretion. Generals 
 of armies must not. however, be contbunded with 
 ambassadors in this respect. 
 
 AMBER. [Chasmil.1 
 
 AMBIDEXTER, one who can use the left hand 
 as well as the right, or, more literally, one whose 
 hands are both right hands. It was long sup- 
 posed that botli hands are naturally equal, and 
 that the preference of the light hand, and com- 
 parative incapacity of the left, are the result of 
 education and habit. But it is now known 
 that the difference is really physical (see Bell's 
 Bridgwater Treatise on the Hand), and tliat 
 the ambidexterous condition of the hands is not a 
 natural development. 
 
 The canacity r)f equal action with both hands 
 was highly prized in ancient times, especially in 
 war. Among the Helnews this quality seems to 
 tiave been most common in the tribe of Benjamin, 
 as all the ])ersfms noticed as being endued with it 
 were of that tribe. By comparing Judg. iii. 15, 
 xx. 16, with 1 Chron. xii. 2, we may gather that 
 the ])ersons mentioned in tlie two former texts as 
 ' left-handed," were really ambidexters. In the 
 latter text we learn that the Benjamites who 
 joined David at Ziklag were ' mighty men, helpers 
 of the war. Tiiey were armed with bows, and 
 could use both the right hand and the left in hurl- 
 ing [slinging] and shooting arrows out of a bow.' 
 Tliere were thirty of them : and as they appear to 
 tiave been all of one family, it might almost seem as 
 if Oie greater commonness of this ])ower among the 
 Benjamites arose from its being a hereditary pe- 
 euliarity of certair. families in that trilie. It may 
 
 AMEN 
 
 I8S 
 
 also (larlly havi lieen the result of cultivation; 
 for although the left hand is not naturally an 
 etpially strong mid leady instnimen' as '.be rigiif 
 hand, it may doubtless be otleii rendered such by 
 early and suitable training. 
 
 AMBUSCADE and AMBUSH, in mil!f;iry 
 phraseology, are terms used promiscuously, tlio'rgji 
 it is understood thift the (irst more jiroperly ap- 
 plies to the act. and the second to the localitv, of 
 a stratagem which consists mainly in the con- 
 cealment of an army, or of a detachment, \v|ieie 
 the enemy, if he ventuies, in ignorance of the 
 measuie, within the sj;here of its action. i= .sud- 
 denly taken at a disadvantage, and liable to be 
 totally defeated. The principles which niu.$t 
 giiiile thu contrivers of an ambuscade have been 
 nearly the same in all ages; embracing con- 
 cealment from the observation (.f an eiieiuy so as 
 to cieate no suspicion; a position of advintage 
 in case of being attacked by sujierior forces, and 
 having the means of retreating, as well as of 
 issuing forth to attack, without imjiediment, when 
 the projjer moment is arrived. The e.xainjjle of 
 Joshua at the capture of Ai shows the art to have 
 been jwactised among the Jews on the best possible 
 principles. The failure of a first attempt was suie 
 to produce increased confidence in the assailed 
 who, being the armed, but not disciplined, inhabit 
 ants of a strong place, were likely not to he undci 
 the control of nuich caution. Joshua, encamping 
 within sight, but with a valley inten-ening, when 
 he came up to make a false attack, necessarily 
 apj)eared to disadvantage, the enemy being above 
 him, and his retreat towards his own camp ren- 
 dered difficult by its being likewise above him 
 on the other side, and both sides no doubt very 
 steep, as they are in general in the hills near 
 Libauus. His men therefore fled, as diiected, imt 
 towards the north, wliere the camj) was. Iiut east- 
 ward, towards the plain and desert; while in the 
 hills, not beliind, but on the west side, lay the 
 ambuscade, in sutTicient force alone to vaiiqirsh 
 the enemy. This body of Israelites had not tlicie 
 fore the objectionable route to take from behind 
 the city, a movement that must have bet u sefii 
 from the walls, and would have given time to 
 close the gates, if not to warn the citizens back : 
 but. rising from the woody hills, it had the shoit- 
 est distance to pass over to come down directly 
 to the gate: and, if an accident had caused foil'- 
 ure in the army of Josluia, the defachiiient cuuld 
 not itself be intercepted befoie reaching the canii 
 of the main body; while the citizens of Ai, piu' 
 suing down hill, had little chance of retnininj,' 
 up to the gales in time, or of being in a condition 
 to make an etlictual onset. This example, as a 
 military operation, may be cited as ],eifect in all 
 its details. In the attempt to surjnise Sheclnin 
 (Judg. ix. 30, sqq.) the operation, so far as it 
 was a military manauvre, was unskilfully la'd, 
 although ultimately successful in consequence of 
 the party spiiit within, and the intelligence which 
 Abimelech maintained in the fort;es8. — C. H. S. 
 
 AMEN (1??X ; New Test. 'A/ui)^). This woid 
 is strictly an adjective, signifying ^ Jtrnu and, 
 nietajihorically, 'faithful.' Thus in I^ev.i'i. 
 It, our Lord is called ' the amen, the faif/iful 
 and trve witness." In Isa. Ixv. 16, the Heb. 
 has ' the God of amen,' which our vers 'on ren- 
 ders ' the God of truth,' i. e. u\'Jid«lity. In its a<l-
 
 136 
 
 AMETHYST. 
 
 AMIR. 
 
 rerb'.al seijse amen ine.ms certainhj, truly, surely. 
 It is used in the Ue^iiiniiig- ol a sentt^nce by way 
 of eiri|ibasis — rarely in tlie Old Tcit. fjer. xxviii. 
 6), l)ut often by oiiv Sa\ii)nv in flie New, wli»ie 
 i* is comnionlv traiulatel ' verily.^ In Joiins 
 {jWiiel alone it is often me I l>y him in tliis way 
 ilouhle, /. c. ' verily, veiily- In the end of a 
 seJitence if otVen occurs sijyly or rejieated, espe- 
 cially at the eiiil of iiyivins or jiiayers, as ' anien 
 and ainen ' I Ps. xli. li; Ixxii. i9; Ixxxix, 53). 
 The])i<)[!er si-jnilicafi.rti of it in this )))sitiou is to 
 cori/iiir! the words whicli have i;re<;eded, and in- 
 voke the fulfilment of tlieni : 'so l)e \t,' Jiat ; 
 Sept. yeyoiTo. Hence in oaths, ailer the priest has 
 rejieated the wwds of the covenant or impreca- 
 tion, all thooe who pronounce the amen hind 
 themselves liy the oatli (Num. v. 22; Dent, xxvii. 
 15,17; Nell. V. 13; vlii.fi; 1 Clm«. -xvi. 30 ; 
 comp. Ps. cvi. 4S). 
 
 AMETHYST {Wobnii ; Sept. 'Afteduaros ; 
 \\i\i;. Amethystiis), a |ireclons stone, mentioned 
 in Scripture as the ninth in the l)ieast])late of the 
 liigh-priest (Exod. xxviil. 19; xxxix. 12); and 
 the twelfth in the foundations of the New Jaii- 
 isalem (Rev. xxi. 20). Tlie concurrence of various 
 circumstances leave little doid)t that the stone 
 anciently known as the umeihyst is really de- 
 noted by the Hebrew word ; and as the stone so 
 called by the ancients was ceitainly that which 
 still continues to bear the sarrre name, their iden- 
 tity may be consiilered as establishal. 
 
 The transparent gems to which tliis name is 
 ajijilied are of a colour wliicli seems composetl of 
 a strong blue and deep retl ; and according as 
 either of tliese jirevails, exhibit diflerent tinges of 
 j.nrple, sometimes approaching to violet, and 
 sometimes declining even to a rose colour. From 
 these dillerences of colour the ancients distin- 
 guished five species of the amethyst : modern 
 collections aflbvd at least as many varieties, but 
 they are all comiirehcnded under two species, 
 the Oriental Amethyst and the Occidental Ame- 
 thyst. These names, however, aie given to 
 stones of essentially different natures; whic^i 
 were, no doubt, anciently confounded in the 
 same manner. The Oriental amethyst is very 
 scarce, anil of great harilness, lustre, and beauty. 
 It is in fact a rare variety of the adamantine 
 Bjiar, or corundum. Next to the diamond, it is 
 the harilest substance known. It contains about 
 90 per cent, of alumlne. a little iron, and a little 
 silica. Of this species, emery, used in cutting 
 and jiolishing glass, &c., is a granular variety. 
 To this species also belongs the sapjihire, the 
 most valuable of gems next to the diamond; 
 and (if which the Oriental amethyst is meiely 
 a violet variety. Like other sapjihires, it loses 
 its colour in the fire, and comes out with so 
 much of the lustieand colour of the diamond, 
 that the most experienced jeweller may be de- 
 ceived by it. 
 
 The moie common, or Occidental amethyst, is a 
 variety of quaitz, or lock crystal, and is found in 
 various foims in many parts of the world, as 
 India, Silieria, Sweden, Geunany, Spain; and 
 even in England \eiy beautiful sj.ecimens of 
 tolerable hauhiess have been discovered. This 
 also loses its colour in the fire. 
 
 Atr.ethysts were much used by the ancients 
 foe ting? 'ind cameos ; and the ri i«>u given by 
 
 Plinj' — because they were easily cut — 'scnlpturi* 
 faciles' (IHat. Nat. xxxvii. 9), shows that the 
 Occidtmtal species is to lie understood. The 
 ancients lielle\'ed that the amethyst possessed the 
 power of disiielling drunkenness in those who wore 
 or toucheil it, and hence its Gieek name (' al> a pri- 
 vativo et niQvw elirius sum' Martini,' L'.w«r«. ]). 
 158). In like mannei', the Rabbins deiive its 
 Jckvish name from itssu|)[X).sed jiower of procuring 
 
 ilreams to the wearer. 13 /'H signifyin? ' to drca.n ' 
 (Bruckmann, AblinmUnny van der Edchteine ; 
 Hill's Tlreophrastus, notes; Bochait, Ilieroz. ; 
 Hlllier, Tract de xli. Gemmis in Vector. Pontif. 
 IJebrccoriun ; Winer, Biblisches Realwortcrbuch ; 
 Rosenmiillei-, Mineraktyy, 3;c. of the Bihle\ 
 
 1. AMINADAB (Il^jnsj;, famuhts pnnci- 
 pis; Sept. ' Afxtya^djB), one at the ancestors of 
 David and of Christ (Matt. i. 4). He was tlie 
 son of Aram, and the father of Naasson, and of 
 Elisilieba, who liecame the wife of Aaron (Exotl. 
 vi. 23). 
 
 2. AMINADAB, in Cant. vi. 12. Tlie cha- 
 riots of this Amlnadab are mentioned as pro- 
 veibial for their swiftness. Of himself we know 
 nothing more than what is here glanced at, from 
 which hea)i]iears to have l)een, like Jehu, one of 
 the most celelirated charioteers of his day. In 
 many MSS. tlie Hebrew term is divided into two 
 words H^IJ '''ty^, Ami nadib ; in which case, in- 
 stead of the name of a person, it me;ins ' of my 
 willing,' or 'loyal peojile." This division hasl'een 
 fi)llo'.ve<l intheSyriac, iiy the Jews in their Spanish 
 veision. and by many modern translators ; liut, 
 taken in this way, it is difficult to assign an\r 
 satisfactory meaning to the passage. See Good's 
 Sony of Sonffs, note on vi. 12. 
 
 AMIR ("t'pX ; Sept. eV &Kpo'j fxiredpav in 
 Isa. xvii. 6, antl ol 'Afioppaloi in ver. 9 ; Vulg. »u>n' 
 fnitate rami; Auth. Vers. ' ujijiermost bough'). 
 Tlie word occurs only in Isa. xvii. 6. 9. It has be.>n 
 
 usual to derive it from the Araljic t<i, and to 
 
 take its signification from^*Vd»^l^ which means a 
 
 general, or Emir, and hence, in toe ))i esent text, the 
 higher or upjier branches of a tree. Gesenius admit* 
 
 that this interpretation is unsatisfactory; and Lee, 
 who regards it iis very fanciful, endeavours (Lex. in 
 voce) to estaidlsh tliat it denotes tlie caul or sheath 
 in which the fruit of the date-palm is enveloped. 
 According to this view he translates the verse thus: 
 ' Two or three berries in the head (or iqiper part) 
 of the caul (or pod, properly sheath), yo«r or Jive 
 in its fssures.'' On this he remarks : ' fj'yD sig- 
 nifies any fissure, and is also apjilled to those o/ 
 rocks. If, therefore, the word "i''OX signifies this 
 caul or pod, the word P|*yD, in the following 
 conte.Kt, ajijilies well to it.s opening, iiut is quite 
 unintelligible in any other sense.' This is at 
 leiist ingenious; and if it be admitted as a sound 
 interpretation of a passage confessedly dithcult, 
 this text is to be regarded as affording the only
 
 AMMAN. 
 
 ».Ti-j)tur;il allujioii to llie t'iu t that the fn.i of (lie 
 date-puhu is, iluiin^' iis growth, cont.iin.il in a 
 slieath, wiiicli luiids as the iVuit ii|u!i~;, unci at 
 first partially, ami aftehvaids more fully, exposes 
 its precious contents [Pai.m]. 
 AMMA^. [RvuBAii.] 
 AMMON. [Nt Ammon.J 
 AMMONITES (])r2V \:2, 0*31 fSy ; Sept. 
 viol ^A/x/.iav, ^A/j.i.iai'^Tai), the des cKiLiiits of the 
 younger son (if Lot (Gen. xix. 3S). They ori- 
 yirially occupied a tract of country east of tiie 
 Aniorites, and sepaiated from the Moahitcs liy 
 the river Aiiion. It was |)re\ iously in tlie ])os- 
 session of a gigantic race called Zainzummins 
 (Deut. ii. 20), 'hut the Lord destroyed them 
 bef.ire the Ammonites, and they succeeded them 
 and dwelt in their stead." The Israelites, on 
 reaching tlie borders of llie Promised Land, were 
 commanded not to molest the children of Aminon, 
 for the sake of tlieir progenitor Lot. But, though 
 thus preserved from the anuoyance which the 
 passage of such an immense hos.t through their 
 country might have occasioned, they showed 
 them no hospitality or kindness; they were there- 
 fore jH'ohibited from 'entering the congregation 
 of tbe Lord' (i. e. trom being admitted into the 
 civil community of the Israelites) 'to the tenth 
 generation for ever' (Deut. xxiii. 3). This is 
 evidently intended to be a perpetual y)rohibition, 
 aiid was so luiderstood by Nehemiah (Neh. 
 jciii. 1). The first mention of their active hos- 
 tility against Israel occurs in Judges iii. 13 : 
 ' The king of Moab gathered unto him the chil- 
 (Len of Amnion and Amalek, and went and 
 ■inote Israel.' About 110 years later we are in- 
 formed that the children of Israel forsook Jehovah 
 and served the gods of various nations, including 
 those of the children of Ammon, and the anger 
 of Jeliovah was kindled against them, and he 
 »old them into the hands of the Philistines and 
 of the chiklren of Ammen. The Ammonites 
 crossed over the Jordan, and fought with Jud.ih, 
 Benjamin, and Ephraim, so that ' Israel was sore 
 distressed.' In answer to Jephthah's messengers 
 (Judg. .\i. 12), the king of Ammon charged the 
 Israelites with having taken away that part of his 
 territories which lay between the rivers Arnon 
 and Jabok, which, in Joshua xiii. 25, is called 
 • tialf the land of tiie children of Ammon,' but 
 T7as in the possession of tlie Amorites when the 
 Israelites invaded it ; and this fact was urged by 
 Jephthah, in order to prove that tlie charge was 
 ill-founded. Jephthah 'smote them from Aroer 
 to Minnith, even twenty cities, with a very great 
 slaughter" (Judg. xi. 33; Joseph. Antiq. v. 7). 
 The Ammonites were agaiii signally defeated by 
 Saul (b.c. 1095) (1 Sam. xi. 11), and, according 
 to Josepluis, their king Naliash was slain {Antiq. 
 VI. 5). His successor, who bore the same name, 
 was a friend of David, and died some years after 
 his accession to the throne. In consecpience of 
 the gross insult olTered to David'n ambassadors by 
 his son Hanun (2 Sam. x. 1 ; J.iseph. Antiq. vii. 
 6;, a war ensued, in which the Aiunionites were 
 defeated, and their allies the Syrians were so 
 daunted ' that they feared to lulp the children 
 of Ann noil any lodie' (2 Sam. x. 19). In the 
 following year David took their metro])olis, Kab- 
 bah, and great abund mce of spoil, which is pro- 
 bably mentioned by anticipation ui 2 Sam. viii. 
 
 AMMONITES. 
 
 \n 
 
 12 (2 .Sam. x. 11; xii. 2(5-31; Josci h. ..ijinj 
 vii. 7;. In the reign of Jeboshai.bat (u.c. «0()) 
 the Ammonites joined with the Moal.itts and 
 other tribes belonging to Mount Seir,'' to inv.ide 
 Judah; but. by the divine iiiteivenlion, were led 
 to destroy one another. Jehoshaphat and Ids 
 people were three days in gathering the spoil .'2 
 Chron. XX. 25). The Ammonites 'gave gills' 
 to Uzziali (2 Chron. xxvi. R i. and ])aiil a fiibnfe 
 to his s.in Jothani for tliiee successive years, c( ii- 
 sisting of 100 talents of silver, 1000 nieasnies of 
 wheat, and as many of barley. AVhen the two 
 and a half tril)es were carriecl away captive, tlie 
 Ammonites took ]iossession of the towns belo;iging 
 to the tril)e of Gad (Jeiem. xli\. I). ' Bal.vls of 
 the chiliben of Aminon ' and i>{ other natinns 
 came up with Nebuchadnezzar against Jerusalem 
 (b.c. 607), and joined in exulting over its fall 
 (Ezek. xxv. 3, 6). Yet they allowed so;ne of tlie 
 fugitive Jews to take refuge among them, and 
 even to intermarry (Jer. xl. 11 ; Neh. xiii. 13). 
 On tlie return of the Jews from Baliylon the Am- 
 monites manifested their ancient iiostility liy 
 deriding and op-posing the rebuilding of Jerusa- 
 lem (Neh. iv. 3, 7, S). Both Ezra and Nehemiah 
 exjiressed vehement indignation against those 
 Jews who had intermarried with the heathen, and 
 thus transgressed the divine command (Deut. vii. 
 3 ; Ezra x. ; Neh. xiii. 25). Judas Maccabacus 
 (B.C. 161) fought many Ijattles with the Ammo- 
 nites, and took Jazer with the towns belonging 
 to it : tV 'Ia^-);p Kol ras duyarepas avTrjs. Justin 
 Martyr atlirms that in his lime the Ammonites 
 were numerous : 'A/xapTTcov i<ni uvv ttoAv TtAfj^oy 
 (Dial, cu/n Tri/ph. ^^ 119). Origen speaks of tlieir 
 country under the general denomination of 
 Arabia. Jose])hus says that the Moabiles and 
 Ammonites were inhabitants of Cade-Syria 
 (Antiq. i. 11, ^5). 
 
 Their national idol was Molech or MHcom, 
 whose worshij) was introduced among the Israel- 
 ites by the Ammonitish wives of Solomon (1 
 Kings xi. 5, 7); and the high })^aces built by 
 tiiat sovereign fortius 'abomination ' were not de- 
 stroyed till the reign of Josiah (b.c. 610) (2 
 Kings xxiii. 13). 
 
 Besides Nahash and Hanun, an Ammonitish 
 
 * In 2 Chron. xx. I, it is said, ' It came to 
 pass after this also, that the children of IMoab and 
 the children of Ammon, and wit/i them [uthe' j 
 beside the Ammonites, came against Jelmsbaphat 
 to battje.' Auth. Vers. D^JIOynO would be 
 correctly translated '^j^r^ (or *o//(c) of the A>i\- 
 mo/iitcs,' as in Exod. xvii. 5, ''3ptD, 'some of 
 the eldirs; 2 Sam. xi. 17; Gen. xxxni. 15, 
 Dyn"|D, ' some of the people.'' But as the 
 children of Ammon had already been mentioned, 
 a doubt arises as to the correctness of the )nesent 
 reading. As the inhabitants of Mount Seir are 
 joined with the Moaliites and Ammcnnfes, in 
 verses 10, 22, 23, possilily the word D'DlXnD, 
 ' some of the Edomites,' stoml in the original 
 text, or, by a slight tianspositjon of two letters, 
 we may read D^JiyCHD, ' some of the Me- 
 hunims ;' Se])t. f/c rHv ^liva'iwv, a tribe men- 
 tioned in 2 CJhron. xxvi. 7, im tovs Mu'a/out. 
 In the Sth verse, for ' the Ammonites gave gifts,' 
 the Se)it. reads iSaiKav ol Mii'a7oi. Sapa ; r. 
 Maurer, ('ommentnrius (Jrammaticus Critictu in 
 Vet.Test., Lips. 1835, i. 210.
 
 IS'? AMNON. 
 
 kinij Baalis (D''^y3 ; Sept. Be\f tffffi and BeXiirrf) 
 is mentioned by Jeremiah (xl. 14). Sixteen 
 manuscripts read D vV^. Baalim ; and Josephus, 
 BoaAei^ (Antiq. x. 9, § 3). 
 
 In the writings of the prophets terrible denun- 
 ciations are uttered against the Ammonites on 
 account of their rancorous hostility to the people 
 of Israel ; and the destruction of tiieir metropolis, 
 Rabbaii, is distinctly foretold (Zeph. ii. 8 ; Jer. 
 xlix. 1-6; Ezek. xxv. 1-5, 10; Amos i. U-Vj). 
 These passages will be more ijroperly noticed 
 under the article Rahb.^h. — J. K. R. 
 
 AMNON (I'l^pX, faithful), tlie eldest son of 
 David, by Ahin.jam of Jezveel. He was born at 
 Hebron, about B.C. 1056. He is only known for 
 his atrocious contluct towards his half-sister Tamar, 
 wliich his full-brother Absalom revenged two years 
 after, by causing him to be assassinated while a 
 guest at his table, in B.C. 1032 (2 Sam. xiii.) 
 [Absalom]. 
 
 AJMOMUM (afjLWfiov). This word is only 
 found in Rev. xviii. 13, and is even there omitted 
 in some MSS., ])rubably from the homceoteleuton. 
 It denoted an odoriferous plant or seed, used in 
 preparing precious ointment. It differed from the 
 modem amomum of tl)e druggists, but the exact 
 species is not known (see Schleusner's and Robin- 
 son's Greek Lexicons). 
 
 AMON (flDK, Jer. xlvi. 25) is the name of 
 an Egyptian god, in whom the classical writers 
 unanimously recognise their own Zeus and Ju- 
 piter, The primitive seat of his worship appears 
 to have been at Meroe, from whicli it descended 
 to Tliebes, and thence, according to Herodotus 
 (ii. 54), was transmitted to the Oasis of Siwah 
 and to Dodona ; in all which places there were 
 celebrated oracles of this god. His chief temple 
 
 and oracle in Egypt, however, were at Thebes, a 
 city ]ieculiarly consecrated to him, and which is 
 probably meant by the No and No Amon of tne 
 projjhets. He is generally represented on Egyptian 
 monuments by the seated figure of a man with a 
 ram"s head, or by that of an entire ram, and of 
 a blue colour. In honour of him, the inhabitants 
 of the Tliebaid abstained from the tlesh of sheep, 
 cut they annually sacrificed a ram to him and 
 dresse*.! his image in the liide. A religious reason 
 for that ceremony is assigned by Herodotus (ii. 
 42); but Diodor'us fiii. 72j ascribes his wearing 
 boms to a more trivial cause. Tliere appears to 
 
 AMON. 
 
 be no accoun. li" the manner in which hisoiacmal 
 •esponses were given ; but as a sculpture at 
 Qarnaq, which Creuzer has copied from the De- 
 scrijAion d'Egypte, rejjresents his portable tai)er- 
 nacle mounted on a boat and Iwine on the 
 shoulders of forty priests, it may be conjectured, 
 from tlie resembhuice between several features of 
 that representation and the description of the 
 oracle of Jupiter Amnion in Diodorus, xvii. 50, 
 that his responses were communicated by some 
 indication during the solemn transportation of 
 his tabernacle. 
 
 As for tiie power which was worshipped under 
 the form of Amon, Macrobius asserts (.S'«<w?->W. 
 i. 21) that the Libyans adore*! tlie setting sun 
 under that of their Ammon ; but he jioints to th« 
 connection between tlie ram"s horns of the god 
 and Aries in the Zodiac. Jablonski, however, 
 has endeavoured to show that Amon n present' d 
 the sun at the vernal equinox (^Pantheon, i. IGi, 
 sqq.). This again has been questioned by Jo- 
 mard (in the Descript. d'Egypite), who maintains 
 that tliC ancient vernal equinox was in Taurus, 
 and considers Amon to denote the overllow of the 
 Nile at the autumnal equinox. The precise 
 ground of this objection is not apparent ; for the 
 Egyptian year was movable, and in every 119 
 years the vernal equinox must have fallen in a 
 ditlerent sign of the Zodiac (Ideler, Hanclbuch 
 der Chronologie, i. 94). But Creuzer ( Symbolik, 
 ii. 205) still adheres to Jablonski's opinion ; and 
 the fact that Amon bears some relation to the sun 
 seems placed beyond doubt by enchorial inscrip- 
 tions, in which Anion Ra is found, Ra meaning sun 
 (Kosegarten, De Prisca ^gi/ptiorum Literatura, 
 p. 31). F. S. de Schmidt also, in his essay De 
 Zodiaci Origine jEyyptia, p.- 33, sqq. (inserted ir 
 his Opuscida qiiibus Res ALgyptiacoe ilhistraidin , 
 Carolsruliffl, 1765), endeavours by other aig'i- 
 ments to prove the connection between Amon and 
 Aries. In doing this he points out the coinci- 
 dence of the festival of Amon, and of the sacrifice 
 of the ram, with tlie period and with the kind of 
 offering of the Jewish Passover, as if the appoint- 
 ment of the Paschal lamb was in part fntended to 
 separate the Jews more entirely from the Egyp- 
 tians. For this he not only cites the passage of 
 Tacitus, cceso ariete velut in co^dumeliam Ham- 
 motiis (Hist. V. 4), but ailduces an extract to the 
 same effect from Rabbi Abrah. Seba ; Biihi-, hew- 
 ever (in his Symbolik des 3Iosdischen Ctdtus, A. 
 641), when objecting to Baur's attempt to driiw a 
 similar parallel between the festival of Amon urd 
 the Passover, justly remarks that the Hebrew text, 
 besides allowing the Paschal olfering to be a kid, 
 always distinguishes between a male lamb and a 
 ram, and that the latter is not the sacrifice of the 
 Passover {Ibid. p. 296). 
 
 The etymology of the name is obscure. Eus- 
 tathius says that, accoriluig to some, the word 
 raearLs shepherd. Jablon^i:! jiroposed an etymology 
 by which it would signify 2}roducing light ; and 
 Cliampollion, in Lis latest interpretation, assigned 
 it the sense of /((V/(/e«. There is little doui)t that 
 the pointed Hebrew text correctly represents the 
 Egyptian name of the god, and, besides what may 
 be gathered from the foims of the name in the 
 classical writers, Kosegarten argues that the en- 
 chorial Amn was pronounced Amon, because 
 names in which it forms a part are so written ia 
 Greek, as 'Aii.ovpa<i6v67)p. iioreover, 'A/xuiv and
 
 AMON. 
 
 Anovf are found in lamblicus and Plutarch; 
 •lid the latter expressly says that the Greeks 
 changed the native name into ''Aufj.uv. 
 
 There is no reasmi to douljt tliat the name of 
 this fj^od really occurs in tlie passa;j;e ' Behold, I 
 will visit Amon of Xo," in Jer. xlvi. 2'J. The 
 context and all internal grounds are in favour of 
 this view. The Sept. has rendered it by 'A/iuuv, 
 as it has also called No, in Ezek. xxx. 11, AitJo- 
 voKis. The Peshito likewise takes it as a ])ro- 
 per name, as p!DS does not exist in Syriac in the 
 Bii^uification which it bears as a pure Hebrew word. 
 The Targimi of Jonatliau and the Vulji-ate, liow- 
 ever, have rendered tlie passage 'the uiLdtitude of 
 Alexandria.' The reason of their taking \)J2ii 
 to mean 'multitude' may perhaps be found in the 
 feet tliat, in Ezek. xxx. 15, we read pDH, 
 which di>es bear that sense. Nevertheless, modem 
 scholars ire more disposed to emend the hitter 
 reading by the former, and to find Amon, the 
 Egyptian god, in both places. — J. N. 
 
 AMON (|i05^, artificer), son of Manasseh, and 
 fourteenth king of Judah, who began to reign b.c. 
 644, and reigned two years. He appears to have 
 derived little benefit from the instructive example 
 which the sin, punishment, and repentance of his 
 father oil'ered ; for he restored idolatry, and again 
 set up the images which Manasseh had cast down. 
 He was assassinated in a court conspiracy ; but 
 the people put the regicides to death, and raised 
 to ti-ie throne his son Josiah. then but eight years 
 old (2 Kings xxi. 19-26 ; 2 Chron. xxxiii. 21-25). 
 
 AMORITES Clb^n; Sept. 'Afiop^aloi), 
 the descendants of one of the sons of Canaan : 
 *lbX; Sejit. rhv ' Aixoppoiov; Auth. Vers, the 
 Emorite. They were tlie most powerful and dis- 
 tinguished of the Canaanitish nations. We find 
 tliem first noticed in Gen. xiv. 7 — ' tlie Amorites 
 tliat dwelt in Hazezon-tamar,' "IDH |Vi'n, the 
 cuttinff of the palm-tree, afterwards called En- 
 gedi, nj'i'y, fountain of the kid, a city in the 
 wilderness of Judcea not far from the Dead Sea. 
 In the promise to Abraliam (Gen. xv. 21), the 
 Amorites are specified as one of the nations whose 
 country would be given to his posterity. But at 
 that time three confederates of the patriarch be- 
 longed to this tribe; Mamre, Aner, and Eshcol 
 (Gen. xiv. 13, 24). When the Israelites were 
 aljout to enter the promised land, the Amorites 
 occupied a tract on both sides of the Jordan. 
 That part of their territories which lay to the east 
 of the Jordan was allotted to 'he tribes of Reuben, 
 Gad, and half the tribe of Manasseh. Tliey were 
 under two kings — Sihon, king of Heshbon (fre- 
 quently called king of the Amorites), and Og, 
 king of Bashan, wlio ' dwelt at Ashtaroth [and] 
 in [at] Edrei,' ■^]3-]-\ii2 mn:^•y3 (Deut. i. 4, 
 compared with Josh. xii. 4; xiii. 12). Before 
 hostilities commenced messengers were sent to 
 Sihon, requesting peiTnission to pass through his 
 land ; but Sihon refused, and came to Jahaz and 
 fought with Israel; and Israel smote him with 
 the edge of the sword, and possessed his land from 
 Amon (Modjeb) unto Jabbok (Zerka) (Nurn. 
 xxi. 24). Og also gave battle to the Israelites at 
 Edrei, and was totally defeated. After the cap- 
 ture of Ai, five kings of the Amorites, whose do- 
 minions lay within the allotuieiit of the tribe of 
 •Judah, leagued together to wrealv vengeance on 
 the Gibeonites for having made a separate peace 
 
 AMOS. 
 
 IW 
 
 with the invaders. Joshua, on being ai pritwl of 
 their design, marcheil to iribeon and defeAled 
 them with great alaugiiter Josh. x. 1(1). Another 
 confederacy was shortly after formed on a still 
 larger scale; the associated f irccs are describetl 
 as 'much peojile. even as tlie sand ujwm the sea- 
 shore in multitude, with iioises anil chariots very 
 many' (Josh. xi. 4). Josephus says that tiiey 
 consisted of 300,000 armed foot-soli I iers, 10,00i) 
 cavalry, and 20,0(Ml ciiariots (A/tdq. v. 1). 
 Joshua came suddfiilv u]ion tiieni by the waters 
 of Merom (the lake Samachonites of Josephus, 
 Antiq. v. 6, ^ 1, and the mo<lern Ba)irat-al- 
 Hule), and Israel smote them until tliey lef' 
 none remaining (Josh. xi. 8). Still, alter tiieir 
 severe defeats, the Amorites, by means of their 
 war-cliariots and cavalry, confined the Danites to 
 the hills, anil would not stiller them to settle in 
 tiie plains : they even succeeded in retaining 
 possession of some of the mountainous part« 
 ' The Amorites would (7KV obstinaverxcnt se, 
 J. H. Michaelis) dwell in Mount Heres in Aija- 
 Ion, and in Shaalbim, yet the hand of the house 
 of Joseph prevailed, so that they became tribu 
 taries. And the coast of the .Amorites was f'ron' 
 the going up to Akrahbim, D^H'^py TOV^ {tl>* 
 steep of Scorpions) from the rock and upwards ' 
 (Judg. i. 34-36). It is mentioned as an extra- 
 ordinary circumstance that in the days of Samuel 
 there was peace betu een Israel and the Amorites 
 (1 Sam. vii. 14). In Solomon's reign a tribute 
 of bond-service was levied on the remnant of the 
 Amorites and other Canaanitish nations (I Kings 
 ix. 21 ; 2 Chron. viii. 8). 
 
 A discrepancy has been supposed to exist be- 
 tween Deut. i. 44, and Num. xiv. 4.5, since in the 
 former the Amorites are said to have attacked the 
 Israelites, and in the latter the Amalckitts ; the 
 obvious explanation is, that in llie first pa-^sage 
 the Amalekites are not mentioned, and the .\mo- 
 rites stand for the Canaanifes in the second pas- 
 sage. From the language of Amos ( ii 9) it has 
 been inferred that the Amorites in general wer<> 
 men of extraordinary stature, but jierhaps thu 
 allusion is to an individual, Og, king of Ba-han, 
 who is described by Moses as being the last ' of 
 the remnant of the giants.' His bedstead was ol 
 iron, ' nine cubits in length and four cubits in 
 breadth ' (Deut. iii. 21). Though the Gibeonites 
 in Josh. ix. 7, are called Hiviics, yet in 2 Sam. 
 xxi. 2, they are said to be ' of the remnant of the 
 Amorites,' piobably because they were descended 
 from a common stock, and were in subjection to 
 an Amoritish prince, as we ilo not read of any 
 king of the Hivites.— J. E. R. 
 
 AMOS (DiDJ^), carried, or a burden; one 
 of the twelve minor prophets, ar»d a contem- 
 porary of Isaiah and Ilosea. Gesenius conjec- 
 tures that the name may be of Egyptian origin, 
 and the same as Amasis or Amosis, which means 
 son of the moon (y. Geseiiil Thesaur. s. v. D1DJ? 
 and nL"D). He was a native of Tekoah, about 
 six miles S. of Bethlehem, inhabited chiel'y 
 by shepherds, to which class he belonged, Ijeing 
 also a dresser of sycamore-trees. Though 
 some critics have supposed that he was a 
 native of the kingdom of Israel, and took re- 
 fuge in Tekoah when persecuted by Ania/.iah ; 
 yet a cnmiiaiisoii of tiie passages Amos i. 1 ; vii. 
 14, with Amaziahs language vii. 12, leadu us U
 
 140 
 
 AMOS. 
 
 AMPHIPOLIS. 
 
 oelie^o that he was Inirn and brouglit up in that 
 place. The period during which he filled tlie 
 prophetic olHce was of short duration, unless we 
 suppose tliat lie uttered otlier predictions which 
 are not recorded. It is stated exprtssly that he 
 prophesied in the days of Uzziah, ki;:g of Jmlah, 
 and in tlie days of Jeroboam, the son of Joash, 
 king of Israel, two years before tlie earthquake 
 (Amos i. 1). As Jeroboam died in the .ifteenth 
 year of Uz/.iah's reign, this eartiiquake, to which 
 there is an albision in Zechariah (.\iv. 5), could 
 not have haji])ened later tlian the seventeenth year 
 ot Uzziah. Josephus indeed {Antiq. ix. 10) and 
 some other Jewish writers represent the earthquake 
 as a mark of the divine displeasure against 
 Ujziah (m addition to his leprosy) for usurping 
 the priest's office. Tliis, however, would not 
 agree with thesacrvd narrative, which informs us 
 that Jotham, his son, acted as regent during tlie 
 remainder of his reign, was twenty-five years old 
 when he became his successor, and consequently 
 was not born till the twenty-seventh year of his 
 father's reign. As Uzziah and Jeroboam were 
 contemjjoraries for about fourteen years, from B.C. 
 79S to 78 1, the latter of these dates will mark the 
 period when Amos prophesied. 
 
 In several of the early Christian writers, Amos 
 the prophet is confounded with Amoz ("IDX), 
 the father of Isaiah. Thus Clement of Ale.vandria 
 (Strom, i. 21, ^ US), -KpocpTjTivovffi 5e eV auTOv 
 Afiiis Kol 'Haaias b vihs avrov : this mistake 
 arose from their ignorance of Hebrew, and from 
 the name 'A.fjLws being applied to botli in the 
 Septuagint. In our Authorized Version the names 
 are, as above, correctly distinguished, though, 
 strange to say, some commentators have asserted 
 tiiat the two individuals are named alike. 
 
 Wiien Amos received liis commission, the king- 
 dom of Israel, which had been ' cut short * by 
 Hazael (2 Kings x. 33) towards the close of 
 Jehu's reign, was restored to its ancient limits 
 and splendour by Jeroboam the Second (2 
 Kings xiv. 25). But the lesf oration of na- 
 tional prosperity was followed by tlie prevalence 
 of luxury, licentiousness, and oppression, to an 
 extent that again provoked the divine displeasure, 
 and Amos w.is called from the sheefj-folds to be 
 the harbinger of the coming judgments. Not that 
 his commission was limited entirely to Israel. 
 The thundi'r-itorm (as Ruckert poetically ex- 
 })resses it) rolls over all the surrounding king- 
 doms, touches Judahin its progress, and at length 
 settles upon Israel. Chap. i. ; ii. 1-5, form a 
 solemn prelude to the main subject; nation after 
 nation is summoned to judgment, in each instance 
 will the striking idiomatical expression (similar 
 to t lat in Proverbs xxx 15, 18, 21, and to the 
 Tph Kol TiTpaKis, the terque quaterque of the 
 Greek and Roman poets), ' For three transgres- 
 sions — and for four — I will not turn away the 
 punishment thereof Israel is then addressed in 
 the same style, and in chap. iii. (after a brief 
 rebuke of the twelve tribes collectively) its de- 
 generate state is strikingly portrayed, and the 
 denunciations of divine justice are intermhigled, 
 like repeated thunder-claj)s, to the end of chap. 
 vi. The seventli and eighth chapters contain 
 TsHous symbolical visions, with a brief historicijl 
 episode (vii. 10-17) In the ninth chapter the 
 majesty of Jehovah and the terrors of his justice 
 are set forth with a sui)li uitv of diction which 
 
 rivals and partly copies that of the royal Psdlini^t 
 (comp. vers. 2, 3, with Ps. cix., and ver. 6 with P». 
 civ.). Towards the close the scene brightens, and 
 from the eleventh verse to the end the promises o/ 
 the divine mercy and returning favour to the 
 chosen race are exhibited in imagery of great 
 beauty taken from rural life. 
 
 The allusions in the writings of this propiiet 
 are numerous and varied ; they refer to natural 
 objects, as in iii. 4, 8; iv. 7, 9 ; v. 8 ; vi. 12; 
 ix. 3: to historical events, i. 9, 11, 13;. ii. 1; 
 iv. 11 ; V. 26 : to agricultural or pastoral employ- 
 ments and occurrences, i. 3; ii. 13; iii. 5, 12; 
 iv. 2, 9; V. 19; vii. 1; ix. 9, 13, 15: and to 
 national institutions and customs, ii. S; iii. 15; 
 iv. 4 ; V. 21 ; vi. 4-6, 10 ; viii. 5, 10, 14. 
 
 Some peculiar expressions occur ; such aa 
 ' cleamiess of teeth,' a 'parallelism to ' want of 
 bread,' vi. 6. ' God of Hosts ' is found ordy in 
 Amos . and the Psalms. ' The high places of 
 Isaac,' vii. 9; 'the house of Isaac,' vii. 16. 'He 
 that createth tlie wind,' iv. 13. In the ortho- 
 graphy there are a few peculiarities, as 2XriD 
 for^nynO, vi. 8; DDD^n for DDDDU, V. 11 ; 
 pnb''' for pri^'" (found also in Ps. c\-., and 
 Jerem. xxxiii.). 
 
 The evidence afforded by the writings of this 
 prophet that the existing religious institutions both 
 of Judah and Israel (with the exception of the 
 corruptions introduced by Jeroboam) were framed 
 according to the rules prescribed in the Penta- 
 teuch, and the argument hence arising for the 
 genuineness of the Mosaic records, are exhibited 
 very lucidly by Dr. Hengstenberg in the second 
 part of his BcitrlUje zur Einleitung ins AUe 
 Testament (^Contributions to an Introduction tc 
 the Old Testament) — Die Authentle des Peti- 
 tateiwhes (The Authenticity of the Pentateuch), 
 i. p. 83-125. 
 
 The canonicity of the book of Amos is amply 
 supported both by Jewish and Christian autho- 
 rities. Philo, Josephus, and the Talmud include 
 it among the minor prophets. It is also in the 
 catalogues of Melito, Jerome, and the 60th canon 
 of the Comicil of Laodicea. Justin Martyr, in 
 his Dialogue toith Trypho (§ 22), quotes a con- 
 siderable part of the 5th and 6th chapters, which 
 he introduces by saying, d/coiVaTe ttws -mpi 
 TovTQov Keyei ^io. 'A/j.ws fphs twv SciSena — ' Heai 
 how he speaks concerning these by Amos, one of 
 the twelve.' There aie two quotations from it in 
 the New Testament: the first (v. 25, 26) by the 
 proto-martyr Stephen, Acts vii. 42; the second (ix. 
 11) by the apostle James, Acts xv. 16. — J. E. R. 
 
 AMOSIS, an Egyptian monarch, the founder 
 of the eighteenth dynasty, who ascended the throne 
 in B.C. 1575. The period of his accession, and 
 the change which then took place in the reigning 
 family, strongly confirm the opinion of his being 
 the 'new king who knew not Joseph' (Exod. i. 8) ; 
 and if it be considered that he was from tlie dis- 
 tant province of Thebes, it is reasonable to exjiect 
 that tlie Hebrews would be strangers to him, and 
 that he would be likely to look upon them -.vith 
 the same distrust and contempt with which the 
 Egyptians usually regarded foreigners (Wilkin- 
 son's Anc. Egyptians, i. 48; also Sharpe's Earlf 
 Hist, of Egypt, ])p. 12, 48) [Egypt]. 
 
 AMPHIPOLIS {'Aij.(t>lwo\is), a city of Greec«% 
 througli which Paul and Silas passed on tl eir way 
 »Tom Pliilippi to Tliessalonica (Acts xvii. 1\ It
 
 AM RAM. 
 
 viu sjhiated ontVp left i>iuik of iIip liveiStrymnn, 
 jnst below its ei^iess fiom the lake Keikine (now 
 Taivino), and about tbiee miles al>o\e its inUiix 
 into the sea. This situalion u]i(ni the l)anks of a 
 navi,i<al>le rivev. a slioit distance from the sea, wiili 
 the vicinity of the woods of Kerkine, and the sjold- 
 mines of Mount PaTi;:a.>'is, rendered Am|)hiiM)lis 
 a ])lafe of much imjiortance, and an object of 
 contest between tlie Tliracians, Athenians, Lace- 
 daemonians, and Macedonians, to whom it suc- 
 cessively beloni::ed. It lias loiiiT licen in ruins; 
 and a viUai^e of about one hundred houses, called 
 Jeni-keiii, now occupies part of its site (Thucyd. 
 i. 100; iv. 102, sq. ; Herod, vii. 117 ; Diod. Sic. 
 xvi. S: Appian. iv. 101, sq. : Plin. iv. 17; Liv. 
 xlv. 20 ; Cellar. Notiy. i. 1053. .iq.). 
 
 AMR.-VM. son of Koliath, of tiie trilieof Levi. 
 Ke married his fatlier"s sister Jocliebad, by whom 
 he had Aaron, Miriam, and Moses. He died in 
 Egy[)t, at the a;^'e of 137 years (Exod. vi.). 
 
 AMRAPHKL, kin^ of Shinar, one of the four 
 kings who invaded Palestine in the time of Abra- 
 liam (Gen. xiv. 1, 2, sq.) [Abr.\u.^m ; Che- 
 
 DOltLAO.MElt]. 
 
 AMULET (])robably from the Arabic 5U.*-, 
 
 a pendant; Isa. iii. 20, a"'D'n'? : Talm. myCp). 
 From the earliest at^es tlie Orienta-'s have believed 
 in the influences of the stars, in spells, witchcratV, 
 and the mali^'n power of the evil eye; and to 
 •protect themselves against the maladies and other 
 evils which such intluences were su])jx)sed to occa- 
 *ion, almost all the ancient nations wore amulets 
 ^Plin. Hist. Nat. xxx. 1.5). These amulets con- 
 gisted, and still consist, chiefly of tickets inscribed 
 with sacred sentences (Shaw, i. 3().5 ; Lane's 
 Mod. Egypt, ii. 36.5), and of certain stones (comp. 
 Plin. liist. Nat. xxxvii. 12, 34) or jiieces of metal 
 (Richardson, Z)j.sserto;ton ; D"Arvienx, iii. 208; 
 Chardjn, i. 213, S'/q. ; iii. 20.5 sqq. ; Niebuhr, 
 I. 65; ii. 162). Not only were jicrsons thus pro- 
 tected, but even liouse? were, as they still are, 
 guarded from supposed malign inlluences by cer- 
 ^in holy inscriptions ujwn the doors. 
 
 AiMlLET. 
 
 ^A\ 
 
 1. Modern Oriental 
 
 Tl e previous existence of these cus'oms is im- 
 |lied in the attem])t of Moses to tu:n them to 
 becoming uses, liy diiecting that certain ]iiLS- 
 tages extracted from the law should be em)]loved 
 fExod. xiii. 9, IG ; Deut. vi. 8 ; xi. 18). The door- 
 
 scliedulps being noticed eLsewhere [Mkji. zltii 1, 
 we here limit our attention to ]iprso)ial amu- 
 lets. 1-Jy this religiotis a)ipropri;itioii flie then 
 all-iiervading tendency to vdobitry were in tijis 
 matter ol)viated, although in later times, when 
 the tenriency to idolatry had pas?e<l awav, such 
 written scn)lls degeTierated into instruments of 
 sujieistilion. . 
 
 The D-rn!) of Isa. iii. 20 (Sept. irepiUi^ia, 
 Vulg. inaurcs ; Auth. Vers, carrinqs). it i.s now 
 allowed, denote ayniilrts. although fliey served also 
 the ])ur|)ose of ornament. They were probably pre- 
 cious stones, or small plates of gold or sil\cr^ with 
 sentences of the law or inagic formula' inscrilied on 
 them, and worn in the ears, or suspended by a chain 
 round the neck ' Earrings" is not peiJKH's a bad 
 
 [Egyptian Ring and Earring .\iniilet3.J 
 
 translation. It is certain that earrings were some- 
 times used in this way as in.strumer.ts of su}iei 
 stition, and that at a very eaily peiiod, as in Gen. 
 XXXV. 4, where .Jacob takes away the earrings of 
 his people along with their false gods. Earrings, 
 with strange figures and characteis. are still used 
 as charms in the East (Chardin, in Harnicr, iii. 
 314). Augustin speaks strongly against earrings 
 that were woin as amulets in his lime (Ijn'st. 75, 
 ad Pas.). Sc)irorder, however, deduces fioni 
 the Arabic that these amulets weie in the foini of 
 serjient*, and similar jirobably to those golden 
 amulets of the same form which the women of the 
 jiagan Arabs wore susjieiidcd between their breasts, 
 the use of which was iiifeidicted l)y Mohamnieo 
 (SchriH'der, Dc Vvstitii Midieriim. cap. xi. ]i)). 172, 
 173; (irotefend, a\\. Amuh'te, in Ersch and Gru- 
 \msEnrycloj).; Roseimiiiller, Of/ysrt. iii. 20; Ge- 
 senius,(7r/ cintd.; and in his T/iesnvni.i, ait. C'H?). 
 That these hvhanhim were chainis inscribed on 
 silver and goUl was the opin-ori of Alien E/riU 
 Tlie Aiabic has hojcvs of amulets, man tk-.tly con- 
 cluding that they weie similar to those ornamental 
 little cases forwiitten chaims which are stilj use<l 
 by Ar.di women. Tliis is leinesenteil in ;h« 
 tint figure uf cut 1. Amulets of tliU kind
 
 143 
 
 ANAB. 
 
 are called hhefjah, and are s;)ecially adapted to 
 protect and picjerve those written charms, on 
 wiilcli the Moslems, as did tlie Jews, cliielly 
 rely. The writing is covered with waxetl cloth, 
 and enclosed in a case of thin emliossed gold 
 or silver, which is attached to a silk string, or a 
 chain, and generally hung on the right side, above 
 the girdle, the string or chain being passed over 
 the k'l't shoulder. In the s[)eeinion heie figured 
 there are three of Ihese hhegabs attached to one 
 string. The sijuare one in the miildle is almost 
 an inch thick, and contains a folded paper; tlie 
 others contain scrolls. Amulets of tliis shape, or 
 of a triangular form, are worn by women and 
 clilldren; and those of the latter shape are often 
 attaciied to cliililren's head-dress (Lane's Modern 
 E,gypiiaiis, ii. 365). 
 
 The superstitions connected with amulets grew 
 to a great height in the later jjeriods of the Jewish 
 cistory. ' Tliere was hardly any people in the wiiole 
 world,' says Lightfoot (//or. flcbr. ad Matt. xxiv. 
 °H\ ' that more used or were more fond of amulets, 
 channs, mutterings, exorcisms, and all kinds of 
 enchantments. . . . Tlie amulets were either little 
 roots hung about the neck of sick persons, or, wliat 
 was more (common, bits of paper (and parchment), 
 with words written on them, whereby it was sup- 
 posed that diseases were either driven away or 
 cured. Tliey wore such amulets all the week, but 
 were forbidden to go abroad with tliem on the 
 Sabbath, unless they were ' appro\'ed amulets,' 
 that is, were jirescribed by a person who knew 
 that at least tnree persons had been cured by the 
 same means. In these amulets mysterious names 
 anvi characters were occasionally employed, in 
 lieu of extracts from the law. One of the most 
 usual of these was the cabalistic hexagonal figure 
 known as " the shield of David " and '• the seal of 
 Solomon" ' (Bartolocc. Bihliutheca Rabbiuica, i. 
 
 576; Lakemacler, Obscrvatt. Philol. ii. 143, 
 
 tqqX The reputation of the Jews was so well 
 established in this respect, that even in Arabia, 
 before the time of Mohammed, men applied to 
 them when they needed charms of peculiar* virtue 
 {Mischat-ul-Masabih, ii. 377). 
 
 ANAB ( 23y), one of the cities in the moun- 
 tains of JuiLah. from which Josliua expelled the 
 Anakim (Josh. xi. 21 ; xv. 15). From Main 
 (the Maon of Scripture) Dr. Robinson {Be- 
 searches. ii. 1S15) observed a place of this name, 
 distinguished by a small tower. 
 
 ANAH (njj? ; Sept. 'Avd), son of Zibeon the 
 Hivite, and father of Esau's wife Aholibamah 
 yG^w. xxxvi. 21). While feeding asses in the 
 desert he discovered ' warm springs ' (aqiifs ca- 
 »V/(/"), as theorigin.il D"*©^ is ri« dered by Jerome, 
 «vho Uates that th.e word had still this si jnilication 
 
 ANAMME'LECH. 
 
 in the Punic language. Gesenius. and mcwt 
 modern critics think this interpretation correct, 
 supported as it is by the fact that warm tpringj 
 are still found in the region east of the Dead Sea, 
 The Syriac has simply ' waters,' which Dr. Lee 
 seems to prefer. Most of tlie Greek translators 
 retain the original as a proper name la/ASi/i, pro- 
 bably not venturing to translate. The Samaritan 
 text, followed by the Targums, has ' Einims.' 
 giants. Our version of ' mules' is now generally 
 abandoned, but is supported by the Arabic and 
 Veneto-Greek versions. 
 
 ANAKIM (D'PJi^), or Benei-Anak (""a? 
 p}V.) and Benei-Anakim (D"'p3jr''3:^), a wan- 
 dering nation of southern Canaan, de.scended 
 from Anak, whose name it 6ore (Josh. xi. 21). 
 It was composed of three tribes, descended from 
 and named after the three sons of \nak — Alii- 
 man, Sesai, and Talmai. Wl.t-n the Israelites 
 invaded Canaan, the Anakim were in jxissession 
 of Hebron, Debir, Anak, and other towns in the 
 country of the south. Their formidable stature 
 and appearance alarmed the Hebrew spies ; but 
 they were eventually overcome and expelled by 
 Caleb, when the remnant of the race took refuge 
 among the Philistines (Num. xiii. 23 ; Deut. 
 ix. 2; Josh. xi. 21; xiv. 12; Judg. i. 20). This 
 favours the opinion of those who conclude that 
 the Anakim were a tribe of Cushite wanderers 
 from Babel, and of the same race as the Philis- 
 tines, the Phoenicians, the Philitim, and the 
 Egyptian shepherd-kings. 
 
 ANAMME'LECH ("^Ppi?. 2 Kings xvii. 31) 
 is mentioned, together with Adrammelech, as a 
 god of the ijeople of Sepharvaim, who colonized 
 Samaria. He was also worshipped by the sacrifice 
 of children by fire. No satisfactory etymology 
 of the name has lieen discovered. Hyde {Rel. Vet. 
 Persar. \). 12^) considers the first part of the 
 word to be the Aramaean NIJ? or |y sheep, and 
 the latter to he king (although, from his rendering 
 the compound Pecus Rex, it is not at all clear 
 in wliat relation he consideied the two elements 
 to stand to each other). He takes the whole 
 to refer to the constellation Ceplieus, or to that 
 part of it in which are the stars called by the 
 Arabs the shepherd and the sheep («;■ Rd'i wal 
 Ganatri), wliich Ulug Beg terms the stars of fne 
 flock (Katoukib ul Firq). This theory is erro- 
 neously stated both by Gesenius and Winei 
 (by the former in his Thesaxinis, and l)y th« 
 latter in his Realic'orterbuch), who make out 
 that the constellation Cepheus itself is called 
 by the Arabs the shepherd and hiS sheep. Hyde 
 certainly does not say so; and al Qazwini (in 
 Ideler's Untersuchungen I'ber die Sternnamen, 
 ]). 42) expressly assigns the name of ' the shepheid ' 
 to the star in the left loot of Cepheus ; that of ' the 
 sheep ■ (al Agnuin, as he calls it) to those between 
 his feet ; and that of ' the flock ' to the one on !iis 
 right shoulder. The most that can be said of 
 Hyde's theory is, that it is not incompatible with 
 the astrology of the Assyrians. Gesenius, in the 
 etymology he proposes, consideis the first part(( 
 the name to be the Araliic <:anain, ' image,' with 
 a change of V into J?, which is not unusual ir 
 Aramaic (see Ewald's Uebr. Oraimnar, ^. 106) 
 The latest etymology proposed is tliat by Benfey 
 (Monafsnamen einiger alter Volkcr, p. TSS i, who 
 suggests that the first part of the word may M
 
 ANANIAS. 
 
 8n alihreviaf ion of tlie name of tlie Persian goddess 
 Anahit, or of that of the Ized Aniran. The same 
 obscurity jircvails as to the form under which tlie 
 god was worshipped. Tlie Bal)ylonian Talmud 
 states that his image liad tlie ligiire of ahorse ; but 
 Kiniehi says that of a pheasant, or quail (Carp- 
 ■ov's Apparatus, p. 51G). - J. N. 
 
 ANANIAS, son of Nebed;)eus, was made higli- 
 priesf in tUe time of the procurator • Tilierius 
 Alexander, about a.d. 47, by Herod, king of 
 Chalcis, who for this jnu'imse removed Josejih, son 
 of Camydus, from the high-])riestliootl (Joseph. 
 Antiq. XX. 5, 2). He held the oHice also under 
 the procurator Cumalius, who succeeded Tilierius 
 Alexanrler. Being implicated in the quarrels of 
 tlie Jews and Samaritans, Ananias was, at the in- 
 stance of the latter (who, being dissatisfied with 
 the conduct of Cumanus, .appealed to Ummidius 
 Quadratus, president of Syria), sent in bonds to 
 Rome, to answer for his conduct before Claudius 
 Csesar. The emjieror decided in fivour of the 
 accused party. Ananias appears to have returned 
 with credit, and to have lemainetl in his priest- 
 hood until Agrippa gave his oiKce to Ismael, 
 the son of Tabi {Antiq. xx. 8, 8), who suc- 
 ceeded a short time before the departme of the 
 procurator Felix, and occupied the station also 
 under liis successor Festus. Ananias, after re- 
 tiring from his high-priesthood, ' increased in 
 glory every day ' (Antiq. xx. 1, 2), antl ob- 
 tained favour with the citizens, and with Albinus, 
 file Roman procurator, by a lavish use of the great 
 wealth he had hoanled. His prosperity met with 
 a dark and painful termination. The assassins 
 {ticarii\ who played so fearful a part in the 
 Jewish war, set fire to his house in the commence- 
 ment of it, and (-omiielled him to seek refuge by 
 concealment ; but being discovered in an aque- 
 duct, he was captured and slain {Antiq. xx. 9, 2 ; 
 Bell. Jitd. ii. 17, 9). 
 
 It was this Ananias before whom Paul was 
 brought, in the procuratorship of Felix (Acts 
 xxiii.). The noble declaration of the apostle, 'I 
 have lived in all good conscience before God until 
 this day,' so displeased liim, that he commanded 
 the attendant to smite him on the face. Indig- 
 nant at so unprovoked an insult, the apostle re- 
 plied, 'God shall smite thee, thou whited wall :' a 
 threat which the jirevious details serve to prove 
 wants not evidence of having taken effect. Paul, 
 howeveiv, immediately restrained his anger, and 
 allo-'.ved that he owed re^jiect to the office which 
 Ananias bore. After this hearing Paul was sent 
 to Cacsarea, whither Ajianias repaired, in order to 
 lay a formal charge against him before Felix, who 
 postponed the matter, detaining the apostle mean- 
 while, and placing him under the su])ervision of a 
 Roman centurion (Acts xxiv.). — J. R. B. 
 
 ANANIAS, a Christian belonging to the in- 
 fant church at Jerusalem, who, conspiring with 
 bis wife Sapphira to deceive and defraud the 
 brethren, was overtaken by sudden death, and 
 immediately buried. The Christian community 
 at Jerusalem apjiear to have entered into a solemn 
 agreement, that eacli and all should devote their 
 pro])eTty to the great work of furthering the gospel 
 and giving succour to the needy. Accordingly 
 tLey pr.iceeded to sell their possessions, and 
 broughc die jiroceeds into the common stock of 
 the church. Tlius Barnabas (Acts iv. 36, 37) 
 ' having land, sold it, and brought the money, 
 
 ANANIAS. 
 
 149 
 
 find laid it a: the apostles' feet.'' Tlie a[X)»tles then 
 had the general disjiosal, it' they had not also the 
 immediate distribution, of the common funds. 
 The contributions, therefoie, were lesigned for the 
 sacred purjioses of religion (Acts v. l-ll). 
 
 As all the members of the Jerusalem chiircl 
 had thus agreed to luild their projH'rty in common, 
 for the furtherance of the holy work in which lliey 
 were engaged, if any one of them withheld a 
 part, and oll'ered the remainder as the whole, he 
 committed two offences — he defrauded the church, 
 and was guilty of falsehood : and as his act re- 
 lated not to secidar but to religious alTairs. and 
 had an injurious bearing, both as an cxamjile, 
 and as a positive transgression against the Gospel 
 while it was yet struggling into existence; Ana- 
 nias lied not unto man, but unto God, aiui was 
 guiUy of a sin of the deepest dye. Hail Ananias 
 chosen to keep his jirojerty for his own worldly 
 purposes, he was at lilierty, as Peter intimates, so 
 to do; but he had in fact alienated it to pious 
 jiurposes, and it was therefore no longer his o« n. 
 Yet he wished to deal with it in jiart as if it 
 were so, showing at the same time that he wiis 
 conscious of his misdeed, by presenting the lesi- 
 due (o the common treasury as if it had been his 
 entire property. He wished to satisfy his se'fish 
 cravings, and at the same time to enjoy the lepu- 
 tation of being purely disinterested, like the lest 
 of the church. He attempted to serve God and 
 Mammon. The original, ivoacpiaaro, is much 
 more expressive of the nature of his misdeed than 
 our common version, ' kept Ihick " (part of the 
 pnice). The Vulgate renders it 'fraudavit;' and 
 both Wiclif and the Rheims version employ a 
 ';onf'S[)onding teim, ' defraudid,' ' defrauded. 
 In the only other text of the New Testament 
 where the word is found \^Tit. ii. 10), it is trans- 
 lated 'purloining.' It is, indeed, pro]ierly appliet' 
 to the conduct of ];ersons who apjnopriate to thei; 
 own puqioses money destined for puldic uses. 
 
 It is the more important to place the crime ol 
 Ananias and his wife in its true light, because un- 
 just reflections have been cast upon the apostle 
 Peter (Wolfenb. Fragm. ZAveck Jcsxi, p. 256) for 
 his conduct in the case. Whatever that conduct 
 may have lieen, the misdeed was of no tiivial 
 kind, either in itself or in its possible cou'ie- 
 quences. If, then, Peter re]!roves it with warmth, 
 he does no more than nature and duty alike re- 
 quired ; nor dors there ajipiear in his language on 
 the occasion any undue or uncalled for severity. 
 He sets forth the crime in its naked heinousness, 
 and leases judgment in the hands of Him to 
 whom judgment belongs. 
 
 With stiange inconsistency on the part of those 
 who deny miracles altogether, i.ni.elieveis have 
 accused Peter of cruelly smiting Ananias and his 
 wife with instant death. The sacred narrative, 
 however, asciibe^ to Peler nothing more than a 
 spirited exposure of their aggiavated offence. 
 Their death, the reader is left to infer, was by the 
 hand of Grod ; nor is any gnnnid afforded in the 
 narrative (Acts v. 1-11) for holding that I'eter 
 was in any way employed as iUi immediate in- 
 strument ol"tlie miracle. 
 
 That the death i if those evil-doers wasmiraculouj 
 seems to be implieil in the iCK-ord of the transaction, 
 and has lieen the general opinion of the church. An 
 attempt, however { Amnion. Krit. Jnut-n. d. Thecl. 
 Lit. \. 219), has lieen made to ex\>liin the fad
 
 ANANIAS. 
 
 by llie supposition of apoplexy, caused hy the 
 ■hame and disgrace with which tlie guilty pair 
 were suddenly overwlielmed at the detection of 
 their baseness. It' such an hyimthesis mi;^ht ac- 
 count for the death of Ananias, it could scarcely 
 BuiHce to explain that of his wife also ; for that 
 two persons should he thus taken oil' l)y the same 
 physical cause is, in the circumstances, in the 
 highest degree improbahle. A mathematical cal- 
 culation of the doctrine of chances in the case 
 would furnish the best exposure of this anti-sujier- 
 natural ex]ilanation. 
 
 "Ehe vie.v now given may serve also to show 
 liow'erroneous is the interpretation of those who, 
 like Tertiillian, have maintained that the words 
 of Perer were a sjjecies of excommunication which 
 the chief of the apostles fulminated against Ana- 
 nias and his wife. Tlie thunders of a corrujjt 
 church find no sanction in the sacred record. 
 
 The early Christian writers were divided as to 
 the condition of Ananias and Sapphira in the 
 unseen world. Origen, in his treatise on Matthew, 
 maintains that, being purified by the punishment 
 they underwent, they were saved l»y their faith in 
 Jesus. Others, among wiiom are Au2:u9tin and 
 Basil, argue tliat the severity of their punishment 
 on eartli sliowed how great their criminality had 
 been, and left no iiope for them hereafter : — pa- 
 riter et vitam [lerdiderunt et salutem.— J. R. B. 
 
 ANANIAS, a Christian of Damascus (Acts ix. 
 10 ; xxii. 12), held in high repute, to whom the 
 Lord ajipeared in a vision, and bade him jiroceed 
 to ' the street which is called Straight, and inquire 
 in the house of Judas for one called Saul of 
 Tarsus : for, behold, he prayeth.' Ananias had 
 diiKcully in giving credence to the message, re- 
 membering how much evil Paul had done to the 
 saints at Jerusalem, and knowing that he had 
 come to Damascus with autliority to lay waste 
 the church of Christ there. Receiving, however, 
 an assurance that the persecutor had been con- 
 verted, and called to the work of ])reaching the 
 Gospel to tlie Gentiles, Ananias went to Pan], 
 aaid, putting his hands on him, bade him receive 
 his sight, when immediately there fell from 
 his eyes as it had been scales ; and, recover- 
 ing tlie sight which he had lost when the Lord 
 appeared to him on his way to Damascus. Paul, 
 the new convert, arose, and was baptized, and 
 preached Jesus Christ. 
 
 Tradition represents Ananias as the first that 
 publisheil tlie Gospel in Damascus, over which 
 place he was subsequently made bishop: but 
 having roused, by his zeal, the hatred of the 
 Jews, he was seized by them, scourged, and finally 
 stoned to death in his own church. — J. R. B. 
 
 AN.\PHA (nt^iH; Sept. xapaSpiJs; Vulg. 
 caradryon and caradrium ; Eng. V'ers. heron, 
 Lev. xi. 19, .and Deut xiv. IS), an unclean bird, 
 but the particular bird denoterl by the Hebrew 
 word has been much disputed. The kite, wood- 
 cock, curlew, peacock, pan-ot, crane, lapwing, 
 an.l several others have been suggested. Since the 
 word occurs but twice, and in both instances is 
 isolated, no aid can be derived from a comparison 
 of passages. 
 
 ■Recourse has consequently been had to etymo- 
 logy. The root anaph signifies to breathe, to 
 snort, especially from anff'-r, and thence, figura- 
 tively, to be ang)-y. Parkhurst observes tliat ' as 
 the heron is remarkable for its angry disjiosition, 
 
 ANAPHA 
 
 especially when ?mrt or xooicnded, this bird swina 
 to be most probably intended.' But this equally 
 ap])lies to a great number of different species m 
 birds. Bochart supposes it may mean the niowi' 
 tain falcon, called dvoTraia liy Homer (Odi/s. i. 
 320), l)ecause of the siniihuity of the Greek 
 word to the Hebrew. But if it meant any kind 
 of en(/le or /laiv/c, it would proltably have been 
 reckoned with one or other of tliose species mert- 
 tioned in the preceding verses. Perhaps, under 
 all the circumstances, the traditional meaning 
 is most likely to lie correct, which it will now be 
 attempted to trace. 
 
 The Septuagint renders the Hebrew word by 
 XapaSpios. Jerome, who, though professing to 
 translate from the Hebrew, was no doubt well 
 acquainted with the Sejjtuagint, adhered to the 
 same word in a Latin form, caradryon and cara- 
 drium. The Greek and Roman writers, from the 
 earliest antiquity, refer to a bird which they call 
 charadrius. It is particularly described i)y Aris- 
 totle (IJist. An. vii. 7), and by ^lian {Hist. An. 
 XV. 26). The latter naturalist derives its name 
 from x^pixSpct, a hollow or cliasm, esiiecially one 
 which contains water, because, he says, the bird 
 frequents such places. It is, moreover, ceitain, 
 that by the Romans the charadrius was also called 
 icterus, which signifies the jaundice, from a notion 
 that patients afl'ected with that disease were cured 
 by looking at this bird, which was of a yellow 
 colour (Pliny, xxxiv.'; Ccel. Aurel. iii. 5), and 
 hy the Greeks, x^'^p'^'^" ; ^^'^^ '" allusion to the 
 same fabulous notion, tKrepos (Aristotle, Hist. An. 
 ix. 13, 1.5, and 22; ^lian. Hist. An. iv. 47). 
 Tliese writers concur in describing a bird, same- 
 times of a yellow colour, remaikable for its vora- 
 city (from which circumstance arose the phraje 
 Xapaipiov Pios, apj)lied to a glutton), migratory, 
 inhaljiting watery places, and especially mountain 
 torrents and valleys. 
 
 Now, it is certain that the name charadriuo 
 has been applied by ornithologists to the same 
 species of birds' from ancient times down to the 
 present age. Linnrcus, under Order iv. (consist- 
 ing of waders or shore birds), places the genus 
 Charadrius ; in which he includes all the nu- 
 merous species oi plovers. The ancient accounts 
 may be advantageously com]jared with the fol- 
 lowing description of the genus from Mr. Selby's 
 British OrnitJwlogy, ii. 230 : ' The members of (his 
 genus are numerous, and possess a w ide geographical 
 distribution : species being found in every quarter 
 of the globe. They visit the east about April. 
 Some of them, during the greater part of the year, 
 aie the inhabitants of operj districts and wide 
 wastes, frequenting both dry and moist situations^ 
 and only retire toward the coasts during the 
 severit)' of winter. Others are continually re- 
 sident upon the banks and about the mouths of 
 rivers (particularly where the shore consists of 
 small gravel or shingle). They live on worms, 
 insects, and their larvae. The llesh of many ttiat 
 live on the coasts is unpalatable.' 
 
 The same writer describes one 'sjiecies, char^ 
 drius ))luvialis, called the golden plover from it« 
 colour,' and mentions the well-known fact that 
 this sjjecies, in the course of moulting, turns com- 
 pletely black. Analogous fac*.s respecting the 
 charadrius have been established by observations in 
 every ]iart of the glol e, \i7. that tliey are gregarioni 
 and migratory. Tlie habits of the majority are
 
 • ANATHEMA. 
 
 Urtoral. TTiey obtain tlieir food alonq; the banTjs 
 of livP'-s and the shoves of lakes ; 'lilce the gulls, 
 they tjeat tiu moist soil with their jwtteiing 
 feet, to tenifj' the inciimhent worms, yet are often 
 found in desert.-:, in green and sedjjy meadows, or 
 on upland ntoors.^ Tlieir AxkI consists chiefly of 
 mice, worms, r-aterpillars, insects, toails, and 
 frogs; whicli of course places, them among Uie 
 class of birds ceremonially unclean. 
 
 On the whole, the pvejionilerance of evidence 
 derived from an unbroken chain of well asi-er- 
 tained facts, seems in favour of tiie conclusion 
 tha*: tiie Hebrew word anapha designates the 
 numerous spei'.ies of the plover (may not this be 
 ■Jie genus of birds alluded to as tlie fowls of the 
 mountain, Ps. i,. 11: Is? xvlii. 6:). Various 
 species of the genus are known in Syria .and 
 I'alestiav as th.» 9. pluvialis (golden r.lover, of 
 
 ANATHEMA. 
 
 145 
 
 [Charadrius pluvialis — winter plumage.] 
 
 which a figure is here given), C. cedicnfrnus (stone- 
 curlew), and C. spinosus (lapwing). (Kitto's 
 Physical Hist, of Falestme, p. 106.) And, in 
 connection with some of the preceding remarks, it 
 is important to observe that in these species a yel- 
 low colour is more or less maiked. — J. F. D. 
 
 ANATHEMA {dvidifxa), literally anything 
 laid up or suspended (from avaTiQi)fjn, to lay 
 ujj), and hence anything laid up in a temple, 
 set apart as sacred. In this general sense the 
 foiTO employed is dvaOrj/jLa, a word of not unfre- 
 quent occurrence in Gre'k classic authors, and 
 found once in the N. T., Luke xxi. 5. Tiie form 
 oj/a^s/icc, as well as its meaning, appear* to be 
 peculiar to the Hellenistic dialect (Vale cenaer, 
 Schol. torn. i. p. 593). Ttie distinction nas pro- 
 bably arisen from the special use made of the 
 word by the Greek Jews. In tlie Septuagint, 
 avdOefjia is the ordin.iry rendering of the Hebrev/ 
 word Din, cherein (although in some instances it 
 varies between t'ne two fonns, as in Lev. xxvii. 
 2S, 29), and in order to ascertain its meaning it 
 will be necessary to inquire into the signification 
 of this word. 
 
 We find that the DIH was a person or thing 
 consecratefl or devoted inevocably to God, and 
 that it diflfere<I from anylliing merely vowed or 
 sanctified to the Lord in tliis ns[ject, that the 
 latter c<iuld be redeemed (Lev. xxvii. l-"27), 
 whilst the former was ineclaimable , Lev. xxvii. 
 21, 28) : h.'nce, in reference to living creatures, 
 the demoted thing, whether man or beast, must be 
 put to death TLev. xxvii. 21)). The prominent 
 xlea, therefore, which the word conveyed was that 
 
 of a person or thing devoted to dcxtrurtinv, or 
 accursed. Thus the cities of the Canaanites were 
 anathematized (Num. xxi. 2, 3). anil after their 
 complete destruction the name of tiie ])lace wan 
 called Hormah (HDin ; Se])t. di/a^e/uo). Thus, 
 again, the city of Jericiio was maih'an anathema 
 to the Lord (.Fosh. vi. 17), that is, every livinuj 
 thing in it (excejit Rahab and her family) was 
 devote<l to tieafh ; that wiiicti could l)e destroyetl 
 by fire was burnt, and all that could not l)e tlius 
 consumed (as gold and silver) w;is for ever alien- 
 ated from man and devoted to tiie use of the 
 sanctuary (Josli. vi. 21). The jirominence thus 
 given to tlie idea of a thing accursed led naturally 
 to the use of the word in cases where there was no 
 reference whatever to consecration to tlie service 
 of God. as in Dent. vii. 26, where an idol is 
 called D"in, or dfadf/xa, ami the Israelites are 
 warned against idolatry lest they should t)e ana- 
 thema like it. In these instances the term dc- 
 Tiotes tlie ot)ject of the curse, but it is sometimei 
 used to designate the curse itself (e. g. Deut. xx. 
 17, Sejjt. ; comp. Acts xxiii. 11), and it is in 
 this latter sense tiiat the English word is generally 
 employed. 
 
 In tliis sense, also, the Jews of later times use 
 the Hebrew term, though with a sc.me^hat dil- 
 ferent meaning as to the curse intended. The 
 D~in of the Rabbins signifies excommunication 
 or exclusion from the Jewish ch.urch. The more 
 recent Rabbinical writers reckon three kinds or 
 degrees of excommunication, all of which are 
 occasionally designated by the generic term D~in 
 (Elias Levita, in Sepher Tishi). The first of these, 
 ^n3, is merely a teni])(;rary separation or suspen- 
 sion from ecclesiastical privileges, involving, how- 
 ever, various civil inconveniences, pai-ticularl v 
 seclusion from society to the distance of four 
 cubits. The person tlius excommuniratt'd was 
 not debarred entering the temple, but instead of 
 going in on the right hand, as was customary, he 
 was obliged to enter on the left, the usual way of 
 departure : if he died whilst in tliis condition 
 there was no mourning for him, but a stone was 
 thrown on his coflin to indicate that he was se- 
 parated from the j)eo])le and had deserved stoning. 
 Buxtorf (Lex. C/>a/d., Tahn. et Ilahhin., col. 
 1304} enumerates twenty-four causes of this kind 
 of excommunication : it lasted thirty days and 
 was pronounced without a curse. If the indi- 
 vidual did not repent at the expiration of the 
 term (which, however, according to Buxtorf, wa* 
 extended in such cases to sixty or ninety days), 
 the second kind of excommui ication was resorted 
 to. Tliis was called simplj' and more ])roper1y 
 Cnn. It could only be pronounced l)y Sn as- 
 sembly of at least ten ))ersons, and was alwavs 
 accompanied with curses. The formula employed 
 is given at length liy Buxtoif (Lej-. col. S2Sj. A 
 person thus excommunicated was cut off from all 
 religious and social privileges : it was unlawful 
 either to eat or drink with him i comiiare 1 Cor. 
 V. 11). The curse cotild be dissolved, however, 
 by three common persons, or by one jn-ison of 
 dignity. If the excommunicated ptison si ill 
 continued impenitent, a yet more severe .sentence 
 was, accoi-ding to the later Rabbins, jironounced 
 against him, which was termed NflJ^'C (Elias 
 Levita, in Tiabi). It is describeil as a coin]ilete 
 excision fvom the church and the giving up of 
 the individual to the judgment of God and to
 
 146 
 
 ANATHEMA. 
 
 ANATHEMA. 
 
 final perdition. There is, however, reason to be- 
 lieve that these three grades are of recent origin. 
 The Talmudists frequently use the terms by 
 whic.li the (irst and last are designated inter- 
 •'hangeahly, and some Ral)l)inical writers (whom 
 Lightfoot has followed in his Horce Hcbr. et 
 Tal/n., ad 1 Cor. v. .5) consider the last to be a 
 lower grade than the second ; yet it is probable 
 that the classilication rests on the fact tliat the 
 sentence was more or less severe according to 
 tlie circumstances of the case ; and though we 
 cannot expect to find the tliree grades distinctly 
 marked in the writings of the N. T., we may not 
 improbably consider the phrase dirocrwdyayoi' 
 ■noieiv, John xvi. 2 (comp. ix. 22; xii. 42), as re- 
 'erring to a ligliter censure than is intended by 
 one or more of the three terms used in Luke vi. 
 22, where perhaps dilferent grades are intimated. 
 Tiie phrase TrapaSiSJfai rca craTai'B. (I Cor. v. 5; 
 1 Tim. i. 20) has been by many commentators 
 unilerstood to refer to the most severe kind of 
 excommunication. Even admitting the allusion, 
 .nowever, there is a very imjjortant ditference be- 
 tween the Jewish censure and the formula em- 
 ployed by the .A.])ostle. In the Jewish sense it 
 would signify the delivering over of the trans- 
 gressor to final perdition, whilst the Apostle ex- 
 pressly limits his sentence to the ' destruction of 
 the (lesh " (i. e. the depraved nature), and resorts 
 to it in order ' tliat the spirit may be saved in 
 tlie day of tlie Loril Jesus.' 
 
 But whatever diversity of opinion there may be 
 as to tlie degrees of excommunication, it is on all 
 haiids admitted that the term D~)n, v/ith which we 
 are more particularly concerned as the equivalent 
 of the Greek dviQ^fxa, properly denotes, in its Rab- 
 binical use, an excommunication accompanied 
 with the most severe curses and denunciations of 
 evil. We are therefore prepared to find that the 
 anathema of the N. T. always implies execration ; 
 but it yet remains to be ascertained whether it is 
 ever used to designate a judicial act of excom- 
 munication. That there is frequently no sucli 
 reference is very clear : in some instances the 
 individual denounces the anathema on himself, 
 unless certain conditions are fulfilled. The 
 noun and its corresponding verb are thus 
 used in Acts xxiii. 12, 14, 21, and the verb 
 occurs with a similar meaning in Malt. xxvi. 74; 
 Mark xiv. 71. The phrase ' to call Jesus ana- 
 thema ' (1 Cor. xii. 3) refers not to a judicial 
 sentence jironounced by the Jewish authorities, 
 but to the act of any private individual who ex- 
 ecrated him and pronounced him accursed. That 
 this was a common practice among the Jews ap 
 pears'from the Rabbinical writings. The term, 
 as it is used in reference to any who should preach 
 another gospel ' Let him be anathema ' (Gal. i. 
 8, 9), has the same meaning as, let him be ac- 
 counted execrable and accursed. In none of 
 these instances do we find any reason to think 
 that tiie word was employed to designate specifi- 
 cally and technically excommunication either 
 from the Jewish or the Christian church. There 
 remain only two passages in which the word oc- 
 curs in the N. T, both presenting considerable 
 difficulty to tlie translator. With regard to the 
 first of these (Rom. ix. 3) Grotius and others un- 
 derstand the phrase dvadefia ilvai amb tov Xpiff- 
 ToC to signify excommunication from the Chris- 
 tian clrucli whilst most of tlie fathers, togetlier 
 
 with Tlioluck, Riickert, and a great number erf 
 moilcrn interpretuis, explain the term as referring 
 to the Jewish practice of excommunication. On 
 the other liand, Deyling, Olsliausen, De Wette^ 
 and many more adopt the more gi'ueral meaning 
 of accursed. The great dilliciilty is to ascertain 
 tlie extent of tlie evil which Paul exjiresses hit 
 willingness to undergo ; Chrysostoni, Calvin, and 
 many others understand it to in'.iude final separa- 
 tion, not indeed from the love, but from the pre- 
 sence of Christ ; others limit it to a violent death ; 
 and others, again, explain it as meaning the same 
 kind of curse as that under which the Jews than 
 were, from which they might be deliveretl by re- 
 pentance and the reception of the Gospel (Dey- 
 lingii Obscrvatt. Sacree, P. II. p. 495 and sgq.'). 
 It would occupy t(X) much space to refer to other 
 interpretations of the passage, or to pursue the in- 
 vestigation of it further. There siems, however, 
 little reason to suppose that a judicial act of the 
 Christian Church is intended, and we may re- 
 mark that much of the difficulty which commen- 
 tators have felt seems to have arisen from their 
 not keeping in mind that the Apostle ihies not 
 speak of his wish as a possible tiling, and their 
 consequently pursuing to all its results what 
 should be legardeil simjily as an exjjyession of the 
 most intense desire. 
 
 The pliiase dvddefxa fxapav dSa (1 Cot. xvi. 22) 
 has been consiih'red liy many to he equivalent to 
 the NDDC^ of tlie Rabbins, tiie most severe form 
 of excommunication. This ojiiiiion is derived 
 from the supposed etymological identity of 
 the Syriac phrase NFlN I've, ' the Lord cometh,' 
 with the Hebrew word which is consiilered 
 by these _ commentators to be derived from 
 NnX DC^', ' the Name (i. e. Jehovah) cometh.' 
 This explanation, however, can rank no higher 
 than a plausible conjecture, since it is sup- 
 ported by no historical evid.nce. The Hebrew 
 term is never found thus divided, nor is it ever 
 thus explained by Jewish writers, who, on the 
 contrary, give etymologies different from this 
 (Buxtorf, Lex. col. 2166). It is moreover very 
 uncertain whether this third kind of excommuni- 
 cation was in use in the time of Paul ; and the 
 phrase which he employs is not found in any 
 Rabbinical writer (Lightf>Kit, IIoxb Hebr. et 
 Tabu., on 1 Cor. xvi. ',i2 *). The literal meaning 
 of the v.'ords is clear, but it is not easy to under- 
 stand why the Syriac phrase is here employed, or 
 what is its meaning in connection with anathema. 
 Lightfoot supposes that the Apostle uses it to sig- 
 nify that he pronounced this anathema against 
 the Jews. However this may lie, the supposition 
 that the anathema, whatever be its precise object, 
 is intended to designate excommunication tVom 
 the Christian church, as Grotius and Augusti 
 understand it, appears to rest on very slight 
 grounds: it seems jteferable to regtird it, with 
 Lightfoot, Olshausen, and most other commen- 
 tators, as simply an expression of detestation. 
 Though, however, we find little or no evidence o^ 
 the use of the word anathema in the N. T. a* 
 
 * Augusti (Handbiick der Christl. ArchaoL 
 vol. iii. p. 11) has fallen into a strange mistake 
 in apj>ealing to Buxtorf and Lightfoot in support 
 of this inter])retation : the former speaks very 
 doubtfully on the sulijecf, and tlie express object 
 of the latter >» *o controvert it.
 
 ANATHOTH. 
 
 (he tccliiiicaj temi for exconimunicution, it is 
 certain thai it obtained tiiis meaning iti the early 
 ages of tlie church; for it is thus employed in tiie 
 apostolic canons, in the canons of various coun- 
 cils, hy Chrysostom, Tiieodoret, and other Greek 
 fathers (Suiceri Thesuarui Eccl. sub voce, dvd- 
 0e/xa and a(popiafj.6s). — V. \V. G. 
 
 ANATIKrni (mn:y; Sept. 'Avae<ie), one 
 of tlie towns belonging to tlie priests in tiie tribe 
 of Benjamin, and as such a city of refuge (Josh. 
 xxi. IS ; Jer. i. 1). It occurs also in 2 Sam. 
 xxiii. 27 ; Ezra ii. 23 ; Neh. vii. 27 ; but fs 
 chieHy memorable as the birthplace and usual 
 residence of tlie propliet Jcremiaii (Jer. i. 1 ; xi. 
 21-23; xxix. 27), whose name it .seems to have 
 borne in the time of Jerome, ' Anathotli, quaj 
 hodie apfiellatur Jeremiae' {Unonuist. s.v. Aim- 
 thoth). The same writer {Comment, in Jer. i. 1) 
 places Anathotli three Roman miles nortli of Je- 
 rusalem, which correspond with tlie twenty stadia 
 assigned by Josephus (Aiitiq. x. 7. 3). Pro- 
 fessor Robinson ajipears to have disco\ered this 
 place in the present village of Anata, at the 
 distance of an hour and a quarter from Jeru- 
 salem. It is seated on a broad ridge of hills, 
 and commands an extensive view of the eastern 
 slope of the. mountainous tract of Benjamin ; 
 including also the valley of the Jordan, and 
 the northern part of tlie Dead Sea. It seems 
 to have been once a walled town and a place of 
 strength. Portions of the wall still remain, built 
 of large hewn stones, and apparently ancient, as 
 are also the foundations of some of the houses. 
 It is now a small and very poor village. From 
 the vicinity a favourite kind of building-stone is 
 carried to Jerusalem. Troops of donkeys are met 
 .\ith employed in this service, a hewn stone being 
 j-licii^' on eacli side; the larger stones are trans- 
 p.)ite>l on camels -(Robinson, Researches, ii. 109; 
 Raumers Palastiiui, n. 169). 
 ANCHOR. [Ship.] 
 
 ANDREW QAvSptas), one of the twelve 
 apostles. His name is of Greek origin, but was 
 in use amongst the Jews, as appears from a 
 passage quoted from the Jerusalem Talinutl by 
 Lightfoot {Harmony, Luke v. 10). He was 
 a native of the city of Bethsaida in Galilee, and 
 brother of Simon Peter. He was at first a dis- 
 ciple of Jolm the Baptist, and was led to receive 
 Jesus as the Messiah in consequence of John's 
 expressly jxjinling him out as ' the Lamb of God ' 
 (John i. 36). His tirst care, after he had satis- 
 fied himself as to the validity of the claims of 
 Jesus, was to hring to him his brother Simon. 
 Neitiier of tliein, liowever, became at that time 
 Stated attendants on our Lord ; for we lind that 
 they were still pursuing their occupation of fisher- 
 men on the sea of Galilee when Jesus, after John's 
 imprisonment, called them to follow him (Mark 
 i. 14, 16). Very little is related of Andrew by 
 any of the evangelists : the principal incidents in 
 which his name occurs during the life of Christ 
 are, the feeding of the five thousand (John vi. 9); 
 bis introducing to our Lord certain Greeks who 
 desired to see him (John xii. 22) ; and his asking, 
 along with his brother Simon and the two sons 
 ti Zebedee, for a further explanation of what our 
 Lord had said in referetoce to the destruction of 
 the temple (Mark xiii. 3). Of his subsequent 
 history and labours we liave no authentic record. 
 Tratlition assi^jns Scythla (Euseb. iii 1, 71), 
 
 ANETIION. 
 
 147 
 
 Greece (Tiieodoret, i. 1125)', anu Thrace (Hip- 
 poly tus, ii. 30) as the scenes of his n.ii.istiy : he 
 is said to have suflered crucifixion at Patra; in 
 Achaia, on a cross of the form called Crux de- 
 cmsata (X), and commonly known as • St. An- 
 drew's cross' (Winer's Bibl. liealworierbuch, sub 
 voce). His relics, it is saitl, were afterward* 
 removed from Patra; to Constantinople. An ajx)- 
 cryphal book, bearing the title of 'The Acts -jf 
 Andrew,' is mentioned by Eusebius, Kpiphanius, 
 and others. It is now completely lost, and seems 
 never to have been received except by some here- 
 tical sects, as the Encratites, Origenians, kc. 
 This book, as well as a ' Gosjiel of St. Andrew,' 
 was declared ajxicryphal by the deciee of Poi* 
 Gelasius (Jones, On the ('anon, vol. i. p. ! 79 and 
 sqq.) [Acts, Si'uuious ; Gosi'ki.s, SpukiousJ. — 
 
 F. W. G. 
 
 1. ANDRONICUS ('AySpoi^'tKos), the regent- 
 governor of Antioch in the absence of Antiuchiw 
 Ejiipiianes, who, at the instigation of Menelans, 
 put to death the deposed hi^^'h-priest Onias; for 
 which deed he was himself ignominiousiy slain- 
 on the return of Antiochus (2 Mace, iv.) b.c. 
 109 [Onias]. 
 
 2. ANDRONICUS, a Jewish Christian, tlie 
 kinsman and fellow-prisoner of Paul (Rom. 
 xvi. 7). 
 
 1. ANER (13^; Sept. Ahud,'), ESHCOL, and 
 MAMRE, three Canaanitisli chief-i in tiie neigh- 
 bourhood of Hebron, who joined their forces witli 
 those of Abraham in pursuit of Chedorlaomer and 
 his allies, who had pillaged Sodom and carried 
 Lot away captive (Gen. xiv. 24). These chief? 
 did not, however, imitate the disinterested conduct 
 of the patriarch, but retained their jjortion of the 
 spoil [Auuauam]. 
 
 2. ANER, a city of Manasseh, given to the 
 Levites of Kohath's family (1 Chron. vi. 70). 
 
 ANETHON {iv-nOov) occurs in Matt, xxiii. 
 23, where it is rendered anise, ' Woe unto you — 
 for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin.' 
 By the Greek and Roman writers it was employed 
 to designate a plant used both medicinally and 
 as an article of diet. The Arabian tranJators vi 
 tlie Greek medical authors give as its synonymu 
 
 U: ■^■ ' ■ M i shahit, the name applied in eastern 
 
 countries to an umbelliferous plant with flattened 
 fruit commonly called ' seed,' which is surrounded 
 witli a dilated margin. In Euioik; the word has 
 always been used to denote a similar plant, wiiich 
 is familiarly known by the name of Dill. Hence 
 there is no doubt .'liat in the abo\e piissage, in. 
 st^ad of ' anise,' ivr^Qav sliould have been trans- 
 lateu ' dill ;' and it is said to be rendered by a 
 synonymous word in every version exce])t our 
 own. 
 
 The common dill, or anethum graveolens, is 
 an annual plant, growing wild among the com 
 in Spain and Portugal ; and on the coast of (j 
 Italy, in Egypt, and afiout Astracan. It re- 
 sembles fennel, but is smaller, has more glau- 
 cous leaves, and a less pleasant smell ; the friiil 
 or seeds, which are finely divided by capillary 
 segments, are elliptical, broader, (latter, and sur- 
 rounded witii a membraneous disk, they have 
 a warm and aromatic taste, o.\ ing to the presence 
 of a pale yellow volatile oil, which itself ' jtM a 
 hot taste and a peculiar fienetiating odour.
 
 148 
 
 ANGELS. 
 
 Tlie error in translation here pointed out is 
 not of very groat consequence, as both the nniie 
 and the dill are uinbellilerous plants, which are 
 
 [Anethiim graveolens.] 
 
 found cultivated in the south of Europe. The 
 seeds of hoth are ern])l(>yed as condiments and 
 carminatives, and have been so from very early 
 times; hut the anethon is more especially a 
 genus of eastern cultivation, since either tlie dill 
 or another sjoecies is reared in all the countries 
 from Syria to India, and known by the Tiame 
 shubit; while the anise, tliough known, appears 
 to be so only by its Greek name avicrov. R )spn- 
 miiller. moreover, says, ' In the tiaft Massroth 
 (of Tithes), cap. iv. ^ 5, we read, '_' Tlie seed, flie 
 leaves, and the stem of dill (J\1V) shnhotli) are, 
 according to Rabbi Eliezer, sul)iect to tithe," ' 
 which indicates that the herb was eaten, as is 
 indeed the case with the eastern species in the 
 present day; and, therefore, to those acquainted 
 witii tlie ctdtivated plants of eastern coimtries, 
 the dill will appear more appropriate than anise 
 in the above passage. 
 
 ANGELS (■'AyyeXoi, used, in the Sept.. and 
 New Test, for th^ Hebrew C???? ; sing. '^«?0), 
 a word signifying both in Hebrew and Greek 
 messengers, and therefore used to denote what- 
 ever God employs to execute his purposes, or to 
 manifest his presence or his power. In some pas- 
 sages it occurs in the sense of an ordinary mes- 
 senger (Job i. 14 ; 1 Sam. xi. 3 ; Luke vii. 4 ; ix. 
 52) : in others it is applied to propliets (Isa. xliii. 
 19; Hag. i. 13; Mai. iii.) : to priests (Eccl. v. 
 5; Mai. ii. 7): to ministers of the New Testa- 
 ment (Rev. i. 20). It is also applied to imper- 
 sonal agents; as to the pillar of cloud (Exod. 
 xiv. 19) : to the pestilence {1 .-jam. xxiv. 16. 17 ; 
 2 Kings xix. 30) : to the winds (' who maketl ''-e 
 winds his angels,' Ps. civ. 4) : so likewise, 
 
 filagues generally, are called ' evil angels ' (Ps. 
 xxviii. 49), and Paul calls his thorn in the 
 flesh an * angel of Satan ' (2 Cor. xii. 7). 
 
 But this name is more eminently and distinc- 
 tively applied to certain spiritual beings or 
 heavenly intelligences, employed by God as the 
 ministers of His will, and usually distinguished 
 as angels of God or angels of Jehovah. In 
 this case the name has respect to their oJlicial 
 capacity as ' messengers,' and not to their nature 
 or condition. The term ' spirit," on the other 
 hand (in Greek irvtZfio, in Hebrew nil), has re- 
 ference to the nature of angels, and characterizes 
 Uiem as incorjx)real and invisible essences. But 
 
 ANGELS. 
 
 neither the Hebrew HIT nor tlie Greek irreC/uo, 
 nor even the Latin «/j«V»<2as, convsponds exactly 
 to the English spirit, whicli is opjiosed to matter, 
 and designates what is immaterial ; wlieieas the 
 other terms are not ojjposed to matter, but to body, 
 and signify not what is immaterial, but what is 
 incorporeal. Tlie modern idea of spirit was un« 
 known to the ancirnts. They conceived si)irits 
 to be incorpoieal and invisible, but not imma- 
 terial, and supposed iheir essence to be a pure air 
 or a subtile fire. The proper meaning of Trfevfia 
 (from -Kvldi, I blow, I breathe) is air in motion, 
 wind, breath. The Hebrew nil is of the same 
 invport ; as is also the Latin spiritus, from spiro, 
 1 l)low, 1 breatlie. When, therefore, the ancient 
 Jews called angels spirits, they did not mean to 
 deny that they were endued with bodies. When 
 they aflirmed that angels were incorporeal, they 
 used the tei-m in the sense in which it was un- 
 derstood by the ancients ; — that i.s, as free from 
 the impurities of gross matter. The distinction 
 between 'a natural body ' and 'a spiritual body' 
 is indicated by St. Paul (1 Cor. xv. 44) ; and 
 we may, with sufTicient safety, assiime that angels 
 are spiritual l)odies, rather than pure spirits in the 
 modern acceptation of the word. , 
 
 It is disputed whether the term Elchim D^n'PN 
 is ever ajiplied to angels, but the inquiry belongs 
 to another place [Ei.ohim]. It may suflice here 
 to observe that both in Ps. viii. 5, and xcvii. 7, 
 the word is rendered by angels in the Sept. and 
 other ancient versions; and botli these texts are so 
 cited in Heb. i. .fi ; ii. 7, that they are called 
 Beni-Elohim, D"'n7X ""J^, -Sows of Cxod. In the 
 Scriptures we have frequent notices of spiritual 
 intelligences, existing in another state of being, 
 and constituting a celestial family, or hierarchy, 
 over which Jehovah presides. The Bilde does 
 not, however, treat of this matter })rofe.sse(ily and 
 as a doctrine of religion, but merely adverts to It 
 incident. illy as a fact, without fuinisliing any 
 details to gratify curiosity. It speaks of no obli- 
 gations to these spirits, and indicates no duties 
 to be performed towards them. A belief in the 
 existence of such beings is not, therefore, an essen- 
 tial article of religion, any more than a belief 
 that there are other worlds besides our own : l)ut 
 such a belief serves to enlarge our ideas of the 
 works of God, and to illustrate the greatness of 
 his power and wisdom (Mayer, Am. Bib. Jiepos. 
 xii. 360). Tiie practice of the Jews, of referring 
 to the agency of angels every manifestation of 
 the greatness and power of God, has led some to 
 contend that angels have no rei 'xistence, but 
 are mere ])eisonifications of unknown powers of 
 nature : and we are rcminiled that, in like man- 
 ner, among the Gentiles, whatever was wonderful, 
 or strange, or unaccountable, was referred by 
 them to the agency of some one of their gods. 
 Among the numerous passages in which angels 
 are mentioned, there are, however, a few which 
 cannot, witliout improjier force, be reconciled 
 with this hypotheds. It may be admitted that 
 the jiassage? in which angels are described us 
 sjjeaking and delivering messages, might be inter- 
 preted of forcible or ajijiarently supernatural sug- 
 gestions to the mind : but they are sometimes 
 represented as ])erl()rming acts which are wht 5" f 
 inconsistent with this notion (Gen. xvi. 7-12: 
 Judg. xiii. 1-21 ; Matt, xxviii. 2-4); and if Matt. 
 XX. 30, stood alone in its testimony, it ought t«
 
 ANGELS. 
 
 ■ettle the quest" on. Christ there says, that ' in tJie 
 wsurrection tiiey neither marry iKir are given in 
 nairiage, but are as the anijcls of God.' The 
 force of tliis passage cannot be eluded by the 
 hyjiothesis [Accommodation] tliatChrist mingled 
 with his instructions the erroneous notions of 
 those to whom they were addressed, seeing uiat he 
 spoke to Sadducees, who did 7iot believe in the 
 existence of angels (Acts xxiii. S). St) likewise, 
 tlie jiassage in wiiich tlie high dignity of Ciirist is 
 established, by arguing that he is sujjcrior to the 
 angels (Heb. i. 4. sc/q.), would be without force or 
 meaning if angeis had no real existence. 
 
 That these superior beings are very numerous is 
 evident from the following expressions, Dan. vii. 10, 
 ' thousands of thousands," anil ' ten thousand times 
 t"Tl thousand;" Malt. xxvi. 53, ' more than twelve 
 Itjicns of angels ;" Luke ii. 13, 'multitude of tiie 
 heavenly host ;" Hel). xii. 22, 23, ' myriads of 
 angels.' It is probaiile, fiom the nature of the 
 case, tliat among so great a nuiltitude there may be 
 difl'erent grades and classes, and even natuies — 
 ascending fioni man towarils God, and forming a 
 chain of being to till up the vast space between the 
 Creator and man — the lowest of his intellectual 
 creatures. This may be inferred fiom the analo- 
 gies which j)ervade the ciiain of being on the earth 
 whereon we live, which is as much the divine crea- 
 tion as the world of spirits. Accordingly the Scrip- 
 ture describes angels as existing in a society com- 
 posed of membei-s of unequal dignity, {wwer, and 
 excellence, and as having chiefs and rulers. It is 
 admitted tliat this idea is not clearly expressed 
 in the books composed before the Babylonish cap- 
 tivity; but it is develo])ed in the biK)ks written 
 during the exile and afterwards, especially in the 
 writings of Daniel and Zecliariah. In Zecli. i. 1 1, 
 an angel of the highest order, one who sfands be- 
 fore God, api ears in contrast with angels of an 
 inferior class, w'..oiu he employs as his messengers 
 and agents (comj). iii. 7). In Dan. x. 13, the ap- 
 pelration I^B'SIH "lb, and in xii. I, |n:n 111^ 
 are given to Michael. Tiie Grecian Jews ren- 
 dered this appellation by the term apx^-YYt^os, 
 Archangel, wiTich occurs in the New Testament 
 ^Jude 9; 1 Tliess. iv. 16), where we are tauglit 
 tliat Christ will appear to judge the world ei/ (pwvT] 
 i.pxayyiKov. This word denotes, as the very 
 analogy of the language teaches, a chief of tlje 
 mgels, one superior to tlie other angels, like 
 ipX'^^P^'^^i a/>X"'''''poTT)7os, apxi-f^vvaywyos. The 
 opinion, therefore, that there were various orders 
 of angels, was not peculiar to the Jews; but was 
 held by Christians in the time of the apostles, and 
 is mentioned by the apostles themselves. The 
 distinct divisions of the angels, accoidiiig to their 
 rank in the heavenly hierarchy, which we find in 
 the writings of the later Jeivs, were either almost 
 or wholly unknown in tiie apostolical period. The 
 appellations apxo.i, i^ovalai, Swd/xfts, 6p6voi, 
 KvpiiiTTjres, #re, indeed, applleil in Kjiii. i. 21, 
 Col. i. \G, and elsewhere, to the angels ; not, 
 however, to them exclusively, or with the intention 
 of denoting th.eir particular classes ; but to them 
 in comrr.on with all beings possessed of might 
 and power, visible as well as invisible, on earth 
 as well a-s in heaven. 
 
 In the Scrijitiues angels appear with bodies, 
 and in the human form ; and no intimation is any- 
 where given that these bodies are not n al, or tliat 
 they are only assumed for tlie time and then laid 
 
 ANGELS. 
 
 149 
 
 aside. It was manifest indeed to the ancientj 
 that the matter of these bodies was not like that 
 of their own, inasmueii as angels could make 
 themselves visible and vanisii again from their 
 sight. But this ex])erieiiee would suggest no 
 doubt of the reality of their bodies : it would 
 only intimate that tiiey were not com|)<«ed o/ 
 gross matter. .\l'ter his resurrection, Jesus otten 
 apjjeared to his disciples, and vanisiied again 
 before them ; yel they never doubted tiiat they saw 
 the same body which liad been crucilied, although 
 they must have perceived that it had under- 
 gone an important change. The fact that angels 
 always appealed in the human foim, does not, in- 
 deed, [.rove that they really have tliis form; but 
 that the ancient Jews believed so. Tiiat which ig 
 not pure spirit must lia\ e some form or otlier : 
 and angels mcnj liave the human form ; but otliei 
 forms are jiossible. The (juestion as to the food 
 of angels has been very much discussed. If they 
 do eat, we can know notiiiiig of their actual food; 
 for the marina is iiianil"estl y called ' angels' food ' 
 (Ps. Ixxviii. 2) ; \Visd. xxi. 20), merely by v/ay 
 of expressing its excellence. The only real ques- 
 tion, therefore, is whether they feed at all or not. 
 We sometimes find angels, in their terrene mani- 
 festations, eating and drinking (Gen. xviii. 8; 
 xix. 3) ; but in Judg. xiii. 1.5, 16, the angel who 
 appeared to Manoah declined, in a very pointed 
 manner, to accept his hospitality. The manner 
 in which the Jews obviated the apjjarent discre- 
 jmncy, and the sense in which tliey understood 
 such passages, appear from the a[!ocryphal book 
 of Tobit (xii. 19), where the angel is made to say : 
 ' It seems to you, indeed, as though I did cat and 
 drink with you : liu I use invisible ftMid which 
 no man can see." This intimates that they were 
 sujiposed to simulate wiien they appeared to par- 
 take of man"s food ; but that yet they had hjod 
 of their own, pioper to their natures. Milton, 
 who was deeply lead in the 'angelical " literature, 
 derides these questions : — 
 
 ' So down they sat 
 And to their viands fell : nor seemingly 
 The angel, nor in mist (the common gloss 
 Of theologians), Ijut with keen dispatch 
 Of real hunger, and concoctive heat 
 To transubstantiate : what redounds 
 Transpires through spirits with ease.' 
 
 Par. Lost, v. 4-33-439. 
 The same angel had previously satisfied the 
 curiosity of Adam on the subject, by stating that 
 ' W hatever was created, needs 
 To be sustained and fed.' 
 If tliis dictum were capable of proof, except 
 from the analogy of knoxcn natures, it would settle 
 the question. But if angels do twi need it; if 
 tiieir spiritual bodies are inherently incajiuble of 
 waste or death, it seems not likely that they gra- 
 tuitously perform an act designed, in all its 
 known relations, to promote growth, to repair 
 wa^te, and to sustain existence. 
 
 The passage already referred to in Matt. xxii. 
 30, teaches by implication that there is no dis- 
 tine' ion of sex among the ang<'ls. The Scripture 
 never makes mention of female angels. The Gen- 
 tiles had their male and female div mitics, who were 
 tilt jiarents of other gods. But in the Jjcripturea 
 the angels are all males : and they apjiear to be 
 so re)nesentetl, not to mark any distinction of sex, 
 but because the masculine is the more kmuuxaLk
 
 150 
 
 ANGELS. 
 
 gender. Ani^els are never described witli marks 
 of age, buf sonietiines witb those of youth (Mark 
 xvi. 5). The constant .ibsence of the features of 
 age indicates the continual vigour and freshness of 
 immortality. The angels never die TLuke xx. 
 36). But no being besides God himself has es- 
 sential immortality (1 Tim. vi. 16): every other 
 being therefore is mortal in itself, and can be im- 
 mortal only by the will of God. Angels, conse- 
 quently, are not eternal, but liad a beginnin*. 
 . As Moses gives no account of the creation of 
 angels in bis description of the origin of the world, 
 although the circumstance woidd have been too 
 important for omission had it then taken place, 
 there is no doubt that tliey were called into 
 being before, probably very long before the acts 
 of creation wliich it Wivs the object of Moses to 
 relate. 
 
 The preceding considerations apply chiefly to 
 the existence and nature of angels. Some of 
 their attributes may be collected from otlier pas- 
 gages of Scripture. That they are of super- 
 human intelligence is implied in Mark xiii. 32 : 
 * But of that day and hour knoweth no man, not 
 even the angels in heaven.' Tliat their power is 
 great, may be gathered from such expressions as 
 ' mighty angels ' (2 Thess. i. ~); ' angels, power- 
 ful in strength ' (Ps. ciii. 20); 'angels who are 
 greater [tlian man] in power and might." The 
 moral perfection of angels is shown by such phrases 
 as ' holy angels " (Luke iv. 26) ; ' the elect angels' 
 ( 2 Tim. V. 21). Their felicity is beyon<I question 
 in itself, but is evinced by the passage (Luke xx. 
 36) in which the blessed in the future world are 
 Baid to be laayyeKoi, Ka\ viol tov dtov, ' like unto 
 the angels, and sons of God.' 
 
 The ministry of angels, or that they are em- 
 ployed by God as the instruments of His will, is 
 very clearly taught in the Scriptures. Tiie very 
 name, as already explained, shows that God em- 
 ploys their agency in the dispensations of His 
 Providence. And it is further evident, fi-om certain 
 actions which are ascribed wholly to them (Matt. 
 xiii. 41, 49 ; xxiv. 31 ; Luke xvi. 22) ; and from 
 the Scriptural narratives of other events, in the 
 accomplishment of which they ac!ed a visible 
 part (Luke i. 11, 26; ii. 9, sq. ; Acts v. 19, 20 ; 
 X. 3, 19; xii. 7 ; xxvii. 23), that their agency is 
 employed principally in the guidance of the des- 
 tinies of man. In those cases also in which the 
 ajiency is concealed from our view, we maya<lmit 
 the probability of its existence; because we are 
 tol'i that God sends them forth ' to minister to 
 th(,se wlio shall be hen-s of salvation ' ( Heb. i. 14 ; 
 also Ps. xxxiv. 8, 91 ; Matt, xviii. 10). But the 
 angels, when employed for our welfare, do not 
 act indepen<lently, liut as the instruments of Goil, 
 anil by His cornmaml (Ps. ciij. 20; civ. 4 ; Heb. 
 i. 13, 14): not unto them, thi^refore, are our con- 
 fidence and adorati'T ')'"> *>"f onlv unto Hin-, 
 (Rev. xix. 10 \\u. 9^ wnoin .ue t.ige.a ...le.i.- 
 gclves reverently worship. 
 
 Guardian Angels.— h was a favourite opinion 
 of the Christian fathers that every individual is 
 under the care of a particular angel, who is as- 
 siurned to him as a guardian. They spoke also 
 of two angels, tiie one good, the other evil, whom 
 they conceived to be attendant on each individual : 
 the goaii angel prom[)ting to all good, and averting 
 ill ; and tlie evil angel prompting to all ill, and 
 avtTtuig good ( IJermas, ii. 6). The Jews (except- 
 
 ANGLING. 
 
 ing the Sadducees) entertained Jiis l^'lief, as d: 
 the Moslems. The heathen held it in a moditieo 
 form — tiie Greeks having their tutelary dcenion, 
 and the Romans their genius. There is, however, 
 nothing to support this notion in the Bible. Tlie 
 passages (Ps. xxxiv. 7 : Malt, xviii. 10) usually 
 referreil to in su])port of it, have assuredly no such 
 meaning. Tt.e former, divested of ita poetical 
 shape, simply denotes that God employs the mi- 
 nistry of angels to deliver his people from afflic- 
 tion and danger ; and the celebrated passage in 
 Matthew cannot well mean anything more dian 
 that the infant children of believers, or, if prefer- 
 able, the least among the disciples of Christ, whom 
 the ministers of the church might be disposed to 
 neglect from their apparent insignificance, are in 
 such estimation elsewhere, that the angels do not 
 think it below their dignity to minister to them 
 [Satan] (Storr and Flatt"s Lekrhuch der Ch. 
 Dogmatik, ^ xlviii. ; Dr. L. Mayer, Scriptural 
 Idea of Angels, in Am Bib. Repository, xii. 356- 
 3S8 ; Moses Stuart's Sketches of Angelology in 
 Robinson's Bibliothcca Sacra, No. L ; Merheim, 
 Hist. Angelor. Spec. ; Schulthess, Engelwelt, &c.y. 
 
 ANGLING. The word n3n, which tha 
 Auth. Vers, render.s ' angle,' in Isa. xix. 8 ; Heb 
 i. 15, is the same that is rendered ' hook,' in Job 
 xii. 1, 12. In fact, 'angling' 's described as 
 ' fishing with a hook.' The Scripture contains 
 .several allusions to this mode of taking fish. The 
 first of these occurs as early as the time of Job : — • 
 ' Canst thou draw out leiiathan with an hook ; or 
 his tongue \ palate, which is usually pierced by the 
 liook] with a cord [line], which thou lettest down? 
 Canst thou put a hook into his nose, or bore his 
 jaw through vvith a thorn '^' (Job xii. 1, 2). This 
 last phrase obviously refers to the thorns which 
 were sometimes used as hooks, and which are long 
 after mentioned as nj''T niT'D!!, i- e. with ike 
 tJiorns of fishing (Amos iv. 1), in the Auth. Vers. 
 ' tish-hooks.' 
 
 Of the various passages relating to this subject, 
 the most remarkable is that which records, as a» 
 important part of the ' burden of Egyjit,' that 
 ' the fishers also shall mourn : and all they thai 
 cast angle [the hook] into the brooks shall lament, 
 and they that spread nets ujion the waters shall 
 languish' (Isa. xix. ^). In this jioetical description 
 of a part of the calamities which were to befal 
 Egypt, we are furnished with an acco-mt of the
 
 ANKLETS. 
 
 various iiiode? of tisliinf^ practisrtl in that country, 
 which is in exact conformity witli the scenes de- 
 picted in the oUl tombs of Kgy])t [Fishing]. 
 An;j;ling a]ijieiiis to l:ave hten i-e<.'ai'de(i cliieliy as 
 an amusement, in which the Egyptians of all 
 ranks found imich enjoyment. ' Not content 
 with the ahunihince atlorded by the Nile, they 
 constructed within thei'r ground siwcious sluices 
 or ponds for lish (Isa. xix. 10), like tlie vivaria 
 of the Romans, where they fed them for tlie tahle, 
 whei-e they auuised themselves hy angling, and 
 by the dexterous use of the bideiit. These favourite 
 occufjatioiis were not confined to young pei-sons, 
 nor tliought unwoitliy of men of serious habits ; 
 lurd an Egyptian of consequence is frequently 
 represented in the sculptures catching tish in a 
 canal or lake, with the line, or spearing tliem as 
 tliey glided past tlie hank. Sometimes the angler 
 posted himself in a shady sjwt at the water's edge, 
 and having ordered his servant to spread a mat 
 upon the ground, he sat upon it as he threw the 
 line; and some, with higher notions of comfort, 
 uaed a chair for the same purpose. The rod was 
 
 ANNA 
 
 131 
 
 Y^^ 
 
 fk 
 
 
 ^11 
 
 1 , 
 
 A "^ "■ II 
 
 / / 
 
 
 
 1^ III III tp 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 / 
 
 
 1 iFi I 
 
 <s^ >^^- 
 
 \ 
 
 short, and apparently of one piece; the line usu- 
 ally single, though instances occur of a double 
 line, each fumislied with its own hook. The 
 fisheimen generally used the net in preference to 
 the line, but on some occasions they used the 
 latter, seated or standing on the bank. It is, 
 however, probable that tliere were people who 
 could not ailord the expense of nets ; and the use 
 of the line is generally cx:»nf^ned in like manner, 
 at the present day, to the jxwver classes, who de- 
 pend upon skill or gcwd fortune for their subsist- 
 eaice' (\Vilkinson"s Anc. Egyptians, iii. 54). 
 
 This last was doul)tless the stale of many in 
 ancient Palestine, and probably furnished the 
 only case in which angling was there practised, 
 as we find no instance of it for mere amusement, 
 riie fish caught in tlie lake of Tiljcrias were, some 
 time since, taken exclusively with the rod and 
 line, in the absence of boats upon that water ; and 
 probably this is the case still. Tlie Egyptian 
 nooks were of bronze, as appears from the speci- 
 mens that have been found. Insects, natural or 
 artificial, were not used in angling, ground bait 
 being exclusively employed : and the flotit does 
 not appear to have been known. 
 
 ANIMAL FOOD. [Foou.] 
 
 ANKLETS. Tills word does not occur in 
 Scripiure, but the ornament which it denotes 
 is clearly indicated by ' the tinkling (or jin- 
 flinp) ornaments about the feet,' mentioned in 
 
 the ctirious description of 'emale atiire vhicfa 
 we find in Isa. iii. Even in the absence ol 
 special notice, we might very sal'cly conclude 
 that an ornament to which tlie Orii'iital women 
 have always b<'en so partial was not unknown 
 to the Jewisii ladies. In Egypt ankl<-ts of gold 
 have lieen fovuid, which are generally in tiie 
 shape of simple rings, often however in that of 
 snakes, and sometimes inlaitl with enamel or 
 even ])recious stones. The scul))lures show that 
 they were worn by men as well as women (Wil- 
 kinson's Anc. J^ffi/ptiaiis, iii. 375 v Their pre- 
 sent use among the women of .Vraliia and Egypt 
 suthciently illu.strates the Scriptural allusion. 
 The Koran (xxiv. 31) fo«'l>i(is women ' to make 
 a noise with their feet,' which, .says Mr. Lane 
 (Mod. Er/r/ptiaiis, i. 221), 'alludes to the ]jrac- 
 tice of knocking together the anklets, wlii'-,h the 
 Arab women in the time of tlie jnopiiet used 
 to wear, and which are still worn by many women 
 in Egypt.' Elsewhere (ii. 3()1) the same writer 
 states, 'Anklets of solid gold and silver, and of 
 the form here sketched (like (ig. 3), are worn by 
 some ladies, but are more uncouinion than they 
 formerly were. They are of course \ery heavy, 
 and, knocking together as the woman walk.s, 
 mak"^ a ringing noise.' He thinks tliat in the 
 text referred to (Isa. iii. 16) the [nopliet alludes 
 to this kind of anklet, but admits that the 
 descrijjtion may apply to another kifld, ot 
 which he tlius speaks fuither on (ii. 368) : 
 ' Anklets of solid silver are worn l)y the wives 
 of some of the richer peasants, and of the 
 sheykhs of villages. Small ones of iron are 
 woin by many children. It was also a common 
 custom among the Arabs for girls or young 
 women to wear a string of bells on their feet. I 
 have seen many little girls in Cairo with small 
 round bells attached to their anklets. Perhaps 
 it is to the sound of ornaments of lliis kind, rather 
 than of the more common anklet, that Isaiah 
 alludes' (see also Cluudin, torn. i. 133, 118, 191). 
 These belled anklets occur also in India among 
 the several sorts wliich the dancing-girls employ. 
 It is right to add that the anklets which tlie pre- 
 sent writer has himself seen in use among the 
 
 1, 2, 5, 6, 7. Ancient Oriental. 3, 4, 8. Moilern Oriental. 
 
 Arab women in the country of the Tigris and 
 Eu])hrates are not usually solid, b>it hollow, S'j 
 that, in striking against ea<'.h other, they emit a 
 tnuch more sharp and sonorous sound than solid 
 ones. 
 
 1. ANNA ('Avya), w'l't of Tobit, whose bi»
 
 152 
 
 ANNA. 
 
 iLNOlNTiNG. 
 
 »x<rv is confained m the ajjocryphal book named 
 after liim (Tob. i. 9, &c.). 
 
 2. ANNA, an aj:e(l widow, daiiji;Iiter of 
 Pliani.el, of the rribe of Ashei. Siie liad iiiairled 
 early, but aftfr seven years lier husband died, 
 and durin,:; her long widowliood she daily at- 
 tended the niorninfj and evening ser\ ices of the 
 Temple. Anna was eighty-four years old when 
 the infant Jesus was brought to tlie Temple by his 
 motl'er, and entering as Simam pronounced his 
 thanksgiving, she also broke forth in praise to 
 -xckI for the fuKilaient of his ancient promises 
 (Luke ii. 36, 37). 
 
 ANNUNCIATION. This word, like many 
 others, has obtained a jjarticular signilication in 
 Iheological writings. As a general term, it ex- 
 presses the communication of important intelli- 
 gence by chosen messengers of Heaven ; but it 
 became, at an early per*)d of Christianity, re- 
 stricteil to the announcement of the l)lessed Vir- 
 gin's miraculous concejition. The first formal 
 mention that we meet with of its being com- 
 memorated among tlie festivals of the church, is 
 in tlie decrees of the Council of Trullo, convened 
 at the close of the se\'enth century. By one of 
 the acts of this assembly it is orderetl to be oli- 
 Ddfved, though occurring in tlie solemn season of 
 Lent, like the Sabbath and the Lord's day. So 
 nighlv was it regarded at this time, that authors 
 speak'of it as the crown of all i'estivals, as exhi- 
 biting the beginning and head of our salvation. 
 Sermons attributed to St. Athanasius and other 
 ■Isathers have been referred to as proving the ob- 
 servance of the tlay long belbre the seventh cen- 
 tury ; but the l>est critics consider these discourses 
 as s])urious. 
 
 The etVect of the solemn announcement upon 
 the mind of the blessed Mai-y was doubtless deep 
 and permanent. It is conjectured by some that 
 her hastening to Elisabeth was tlie consequence 
 of an eager desire to ]MOve at once the reality of 
 the angelic visitation. The pious writers who 
 have haairded this opinion seem to have forgotten 
 that sucii a notion rejnesents the Virgin as more 
 wanting in faith than Zacharias liimself, and 
 that it can scarcely be made to agree witli the 
 oeauti^'ul and devout sentiment, ' Behold the 
 na;ndmaid of the Lord : Be it unto me according 
 to thy word!"— H. S. 
 
 ANOINTING. The practice of anointing 
 with perfumed oils or ointments ap]iears to liave 
 beer very common among the Hebrews, as it was 
 among the ancient Egyptians. The practice, as 
 to its essential meaning, still remains in the East ; 
 but perfumed waters are now far more commonly 
 employed than oils or ointments. 
 
 In the Scriptures three kinds of anointing are 
 distinguishable : — \. For consecration and inau- 
 guration ; 2. For guests and strangers ; 3. For 
 health and cleanliness. Of these in order. 
 
 1. Consecration and Inaitguration. — The act 
 of anointing ajipears to have been viewed as em- 
 blematical of a particular sanctitication ; of a de- 
 eignation to the service of God j or to a holy and 
 f icred use. Hence the anointing of the high-priests 
 (Kxod. xxix. 20 ; Lev. iv. 3), and even of the 
 «;icred vessels of the tabernacle (Exod. xxx. 26, 
 %c.) ; and hence also, probably, the anointing of 
 tlie king, who, as ' the Lord's anointed,' and, 
 under the Hebrew constitufii;n, the viceroy of 
 Jehovah, was undoubtedly imr sted with a sacred 
 
 character. Th.s was the case also among lh4 
 
 Egyjjtians, among whom the king was, ex officio, 
 the high-priest, and i.^ such, doubtless, rather than 
 in his secular cajjacity, was solemnly anointed at 
 his inauguration. 
 
 The first instance of an(iinting which the Scrip- 
 tures record is that of Aaron, when he was solemnly 
 .set apart fo the higb-iirlest!iood. Being fii st invested 
 with the rich robes of his bigli ollice, the sacred oil 
 was ])()ured in nuicli profusion upon his head. It il 
 from this diat the high-jjriest, as well as the king, 
 is called ' the Anointed " (Li-v. iv. 3 ; v. 16; vi. 
 15; Ps. cxx.\iii. 2). In fact, aiiointing being th(' 
 principal ceremony of regal inauguration among 
 the Jews, as crowning is with us, * anointed,' as 
 apjilied to a king, has much the same signification 
 as 'crowned.' It does not, however, a])peartliat this 
 anointing was repeated at every sticcession, the 
 anointing of the founder of the dynasty being 
 considered efficient for its purpose as long as 
 the regul'ar line of descent was undisturbed : 
 hence we find no instance of unction as a sign 
 of investiture in the royal authority, except in the 
 case of Saul, the first king of the Jews, and of 
 David, the first of his line; and, sulwequently, in 
 those of Solomon and Joash, who both ascended 
 the throne under circumstances in which there 
 was danger that their right rr"ght be forcibly dis- 
 })uted (1 Sam. xix. 21; 2 Sam. ii. 1; v. 1-3; 
 I Cliron. xi. 1, 2; 2 Kings xi. 12-20; 2 Cliron. 
 xxiii. 1-21). Those who were inducted into the 
 royal othce in the kingdom of Israel apjjcar to have 
 been inaugurated with some peculiar ceremonies 
 (2 Kings ix. 13). But it is not clear that they 
 were anointed at all ; and the omission (if real) 
 is ascribed by the Jewish writers to the want of the 
 huly anointing oil which coidd alone be use<l on 
 such occasions, and which was in the keeping of 
 the jniests of the Temple in Jerusalem. The pri- 
 vate anointing which was performed by the pro- 
 jjhets (2 Kings ix. 3 ; comp. 1 Sam. x. 1) was not 
 ruiderstood to convey any abstract right to the 
 crown ; but was merely a symbolical intimation 
 that the uerson thus anointed sliould eventually 
 ascend the throne. 
 
 As the custom of inaugural anointing first oc- 
 curs among/ the Xsiaelites imme<liately after they 
 left Egypt, and no example of the same kind ts 
 met with jaeviously, it is fair to conclude that (lie 
 jiractice and the notions connected with it wene 
 acquired in that country. ' With the Egyi)tian3, 
 •IS widi t'le Je.vs," the investiture to any sacred 
 office, iV3 tliat of king or priest, was confirmed by 
 this external sign ; and as the Jewish lawgiver 
 mentions the ceremony of pouring oil upon the 
 head of the high-priest after he had put on his 
 entire dress, with the mitre and crown, the 
 Egyjitians lepresent the anointing of their jiriests 
 and kings after they were attired in their full 
 robes, with the cap and crown upon tlieir hea/l« 
 (cut 1). Some of the sculptures introduce a 
 priest pouring oil over the monarch " (Wilkin- 
 son's Anv. Ei.iyptians, iv. 2W)). 
 
 2. The aiioutiiig of our Saviour's feet by 
 ' the woman who was a sinner' (Luke vii. 38\ 
 led to the remark that the host himself had 
 neglected to anoiiit his head (v. 16); whence 
 we learn that this was a mark of atJention which 
 those who gave entertainments paid to (heir guests. 
 As this is the only direct mention of the custom, 
 the Jews are supposed by some to have borrowed
 
 ANOINTING. 
 
 It from flie Romans at a late peiiod, and ^V'etstein 
 aiid others liave l)rouglit a large quantity of Latin 
 wuditioii to litar on the sul;je<:t. But the caietiil 
 reader of f:io Old 'iVstament knows that tlie 
 pustom was an old one, to wliicli there are various 
 
 ANOINTING. 
 
 153 
 
 indirect allusions. TJie circumstances connected 
 with feasts and entertainments are indeed rarely 
 intimated ; nor would the present direct reference 
 to this custom have transpired but for the remarks 
 which the act of the woman in anointing the feet 
 of Jesus called forth. Such passages, however, as 
 Ps. xxiii. 5 ; Prov. xxi. 7 ; xxvii. 9 ; Wisd. ii. 7 ; 
 as well as others in which the enjoy7nents of 
 oil and wine are coupled together, may be re- 
 garded as containing a similar allusion. It is, 
 therefore, safer to reler the origin of tliis custom 
 among the Hebrews to their nearer and ni ;re 
 ancient neigiibours the Egy])tians, than to the 
 Romans or the Greeks, who themselves had pro- 
 bably derived it from the same peojile. ' Among 
 the Kgy])tians the antiquity of the custom is 
 evinced by their monuments, which ofl'er in this 
 respect analogies more exact than classical anti- 
 quity, or modern usage, can produce. With them 
 * the custom of anointing was not confined to 
 the appointment of kings and jjriests to the 
 iacred ollices they held. It was the ordinary 
 token of welcome to guests in every j)arty at the 
 liouse ot" a friend ; and in Egypt, no less than in 
 Judaea, tl.e metaphorical expression "anointed 
 
 Wifli the oil of gladness " wa? fully understood, 
 «nd applied to the ordinary occurrences of life. 
 
 It was customary for a servant to a'tend e\ery 
 guest as he seaf<'d himself (cut 2), und to anoint 
 his heail ' (Wilkinson's Aiic. Mgtjptidns, iv. 279; 
 ii. 213). 
 
 3. It is probable, however, '.laf the Kgypt'ans, 
 as well as the Greeks and Jews, anointed them- 
 selves at home, before going al)roail, ailiiougli 
 tliey expected the observance of lliis etiijoelle 
 on the ])art of their entertainer. That the Jews 
 thus anointed tliemselves, not only when ]iayin(^ 
 a visit, but on ordinary occasions, is shown by 
 many passages, especially those wliich describe 
 the omission of it as a sign of mourning (l)eui. 
 xxviii. 40; Ruth iii. 3; 2 Sam. xiv. 2; Dan. 
 X. 3; Amos vi. 6; Mic. vi. 16; E.stli. ii. 12; 
 Ps. civ. 1.5; Isa. Ixi. 3; Eccles. ix. S: Cant, 
 i. 3; iv. 10; also Judith x. 3; Sua. 17; Ecclus. 
 xxxix. 26; Wisd. ii. 7). One of ihese jiussage-s 
 (Ps. civ. 15, ' oil that maketh the face to shine') 
 shows very clearly that not only the hair but 
 the skin was anointed. In our northern cli- 
 mates this usage may not strike us as a j'leasant 
 one, but as the peculiar usaj,'e3 of most nations 
 are found, on strict examination, to be in accord- 
 ance v/ith the peculiarities of their clima'e and 
 condition, we may be assured that this Oriental 
 predilection for external unctiim must have arisen 
 from a belief that it contributed materially to 
 health and cleanliness. Niebulir stales that 'in 
 Yemen the anointing of the body is believed to 
 strengthen and ])rotect it from the heat of the 
 sun, by which the inhabitants of this jirovince, as 
 they wear but little clothing, are very liable to 
 sutler. Oil, by closing up the jxires of the skin, 
 is sup])osed to prevent that too copious trans])ira- 
 tion which enfeebles the frame ; perhaps, too, 
 these Arabians think a gUstonmj skin a beauty. 
 When the intense heat comes in, they always 
 anoint their bodies with oil.' 
 
 Anointing the Sick. — The Orientals are indeed 
 strongly persuaded of the sanative jiroperties <;f 
 oil ; and it was under this impression that tiie 
 Jews anointed the sick, and aiijilied oil to 
 wounds (Ps. cix. 18; Isa. i. (> ; Maik vi. 13; 
 Luke x. 31 ; James v. 11 ). Anointing was used in 
 sundry disorders, as well as to jiromote the general 
 health of the body. It was hence, as a salutary 
 and approved medicament, that the seventy dis- 
 ciples were directed to ' anoint the sick ' (Mark 
 vi. 13); and hence also the sick man is directed 
 by St. James to send for the elders of the chmch, 
 who were ' to pray ibr him, anointing him with 
 oil in the name of the Lord.' The Talmudical 
 citations of Lightfoot on Matt. vi. 16, show 
 that the later Jews connected charms and super- 
 stitious mutterings with such anointings, and 
 he is therefore probably right in understanding 
 this text to mean — ' It is customary for the unbe- 
 lieving Jews to use anointing of tlie sick joined 
 with a magical and enchanting muttering; but 
 how infinitely better is it to join the jiious prayers 
 of the eldei-s of the church to the anointing of the 
 sick." Niebuhr assures us that at Sana (and 
 doubtless in other parts of Arabia) the Jews, as 
 well as many of the Moslen.s, have their bodies 
 anointed whenever they feel themselves indis))osed. 
 Anointing the Dead. — The jjractice of anoint- 
 ing the bodies of the ilead is intimated in Mark 
 xiv. 8, and Luke xxiii. 50. This ceremony was 
 performed alter the body was washed, and was 
 designed to check the progress of corruptiuo.
 
 154 
 
 ANT. 
 
 Althoiig-l;, frf.m tlie mode of application, if is 
 called anointing, (lio substance cni])loye<l ap])eais 
 to have Itecn a solution of oddrili'inus (iiu;,'s. 
 This (toi,'etiier with tiie laying of the body in 
 spices) was the oidy kind of enil)a]inent in use 
 among llic Jews [LJuuiai,. KjiBAi.MiNa]. 
 
 rhe coir;]iosition of the Jewish ointments and 
 perfumes is i)ofice<l elsewhere [Hkkkumes]. 
 
 ANT (hVj^J; S-^'pt- Mvp/xij^; \' n]g. Formica ; 
 (ifth order of insects ; Hymcnopfera, Linn. ; oc- 
 curs Pr(pv. vi. (5 ; xxx. 25). Ants have only lal- 
 Icrly be('i>me the stdijects of accurate observation. 
 The investiLjations of Latreille, Gould, Geer, 
 Iluber, and Kirby and Spence, iiave dissipated 
 many erronewis notions respecting them, and re- 
 vealed imich interesting information concerning 
 tlieir domestic polity, language, migrations, ailec- 
 fions, passions, virtues, wars, diversions, &c. 
 Tiie following facts are selected as relevant to 
 Scriptural illustration. Ants dwell together in 
 societies; and although they have * no guide, 
 overseer, or ruler," yet they have all one soul, and 
 are animated by one object — tlieir own welfare, 
 and tiie welfare of each other. Each individual 
 strenuously pursues his own peculiar duties ; and 
 regards (exce])t in tlie case of females), and is re- 
 garded by, every otiier member of the republic 
 with equal respect and alfection. They devote 
 the utmost attention to tlieir young. The egg is 
 cleaned and licke<l, and gradually expands 
 under tltis treatment, till the worm is hatched, 
 which 4s then tended and fed with the most 
 all'ectionate care. They continue their assiduity 
 to the pupa, or chrj'salis, which is the third 
 transformation. They heap up the pupa.', which 
 greatly resemble so many grains of wheat, or 
 rather rice. I)y hundreds in tlieir spacious lodges, 
 watch them in .an attitude of defence, carry them 
 out to enjoy the radiance of the sun, and remove 
 them to dilierent situations in the nest, according 
 to the required degree of temperature ; open the 
 pupa, and at the precise moment of the trans- 
 formation, disenthral the new-born insect of its 
 habiliments. 
 
 The most ))revalent and inexcusable error, how- 
 ♦•ver, resjiecting ants, has been the belief that they 
 hoard up grains of corn, chiefly wheat, for their 
 supply during winter, having tirst bitten out the 
 germ to prevent it from growing in their nests. 
 The learned Bochart has collected an immense 
 array of the most eminent authors and naturalists 
 of antiquity (Jewisli, Greek, Roman, and Arabian), 
 who all gravely pioj)ound this assertion. The 
 »ame assertiim is made in a letter jiublished by 
 the French Academy, and at'terw-ards inserted by 
 Mr. Addison in the Guardicm, No. 153. He 
 adds, ' any one may make tlie experiment, and 
 even see that there is no germ in their corn.' 
 Notwithstanding that this notion has been com- 
 pletely ex[)loded during the last hundred years, 
 with regard to Eurojiean ants, the belief of it 
 constitutes, to this hour, one of our ];;ipular errors. 
 Kven Solomon himself, whose renowned attain- 
 inenrs in natinal history included the knowledge 
 .')f insects(l Kingsiv.33), has been inconsiderately 
 8ui)))0sed to have sanctioned the same opinion in 
 the two passages in his writings which refer to the 
 ant. The mistake has no do>ibt arisen from the 
 gnat similarity, both in sliajie, size, and colour, 
 before mentioned, of the ]jupa or chrysalis of the 
 ant to a grain of com, and from the ants being ob- 
 
 ANT 
 
 served to carry them about, and to open llie ctiticl« 
 to let out the enclosed insect. Leeuwenho«>ck 
 wag the first who distinguished, with precision, the 
 preciseforms which the ant assumes in the several 
 stages of its development, from the egg to the 
 larva, iVom the larva to the pujia, and thence 
 to tiie jierfect inset ' Swammerdam renewed 
 the inquiry, and discovered the encasement of 
 all the parts of the future ant, and showed that 
 it appeared in such different forms only from 
 the nature of its envelojies, each of which, at 
 its proper period, is cast off. It is nowals4> 
 asc^'rtained beyond a doul)t that no European 
 ants, hithevfo properly examined, feed on corn,oT 
 any other Kind of grain. Bonnet found that, 
 however long they had been kept without food, 
 they would not touch corn. Nor do they attack 
 the roots or stems of corn, nor any other vegetaiile 
 matter. Nor has any sjiecies of ant been yet 
 found with food of a7iy kind laid up in its nest. 
 The truth is, that ants are chiefly carnivorous, 
 jireying intliscriminately on all the soft parts of 
 other insects, and esj)ecially the viscera ; also 
 ujion worms, whether ileii^\ or alive, and small 
 iiirds or animals. If unalile to drag their booty 
 to tlie nest, they make an aiiuiidant meal ujion 
 it, and, like the bee, disgorge it, upon their return 
 home, for the use of their comi^anions; and they 
 appear able to retain at jileasure the nutritious 
 juices unchanged for a considerable time. Ants 
 are also extremely fond of saccharine malt 
 which they obtain from the exudation of trees, or 
 from ripe fruits, &c. ; but their favourite food is 
 the saccharine exudation from the body of the 
 aphides, or plant-lice. Every one must have ob- 
 served tliese insects on the rose-tree, &c. Each 
 different species of vegetable has its peculiar 
 species of aphis (Reaumur, vi. 5C6). The aphides 
 insert their tube or sucker between the fibres of 
 vegetables, where they find a most substantial 
 nutriment. This nutriment they retain a con- 
 siderable time, if no ant ajiproaches them. Tlie 
 ant has the talent of procuring it from the aphides 
 at pleasure. It approaches the aphis, strikes it 
 gently and repeatedly with it; antenruc, when it 
 instantly discharges the juice by two tubes, easily 
 discerned to be standing out from its body. 
 Tiiese creatures are the milch kine of the ants. 
 By a remarkable coincidence, which M. Huber 
 justly considers too much to be ascrilied to 
 chance, the ajihides ^nd tlie ants become torjiid 
 at the same degree of cold ('21 deg. Fahr.), 
 and revive together at the same degree of warmth. 
 He saj's, ' I am not acquainted with any ants 
 to whom the art of obtaining from the pucerong 
 (aphides) their subsistence is unknown. We 
 might even venture to aflirm that these insects 
 are made for their use' (Huber, Natural Histwy 
 of Ants, p. 210, &c.). 
 
 It is highly probable that the exotic ants sub- 
 sist by similar means. The accounts given us of 
 the termites, or ants, inhabiting the hottest cH- 
 m5.tes, clearly show that they are camivo-ms. 
 Bosnian, in his description of Guinea, says that 
 they will devour a sheep in one night, and tliat a 
 fowl is amusement to them only f r an hour. In 
 these situations living animals often become theii 
 victims. An Italian missionary at Congo leLifea 
 that a cow in a stall had been known to be de- 
 voured by these devastators (^Encyclopedia Bri- 
 taiinica, 7:h ed. art. 'Ant"). In the IntroductUm
 
 ANT. 
 
 ANTEDILUVIANS. 
 
 \M 
 
 t» Entotnnlf <;/y,hy K rby iinil Spence, some diffi- 
 dence is exjiressod (ii. Ki) ies{)€clin;j the inference 
 that 710 PAodc iiiils li ive mui^azines of provisions, 
 till fliei-r iiabits sluill have l)eeii • more accurately 
 explored.' Sfill, are we not in ])osst'ssion of siifli- 
 cient (lata to form a strong presumption in rcfjjard 
 to the ants of Palestine, to which Solomon of 
 coinse allii''e3 in Iiis wiitinirs'? The ants of the 
 Holy Land certainly have to encounter a det;iee 
 of cold quite as severe as ever occurs in Kuijjland 
 (Physical Hist, of Palestine, 210, 216). Is it not 
 highly piol)al)le that the ants at such times l)e- 
 come torpid, and need no magazine of provisions f 
 And since we learn from flie same aiitiiority 
 (p. 31) that tliere are intervals, even in the depth 
 of winter, when tlie sun shines, and there is no 
 wind, wlien it is perfectly warm, sometimes al- 
 most hot, in the open air, may not the ants of 
 Palestine and their food revive together at such 
 times, as is the case in our own country, where 
 ants may often be seen pursuing tlieir avocations 
 over the snow ? With regard to Solomons words 
 respecting the ant, Kirliy and Spence are of 
 opinion ' tliat if they are properly considered it 
 will be found that the inferpretation which seems 
 to favour the ancient error respecting ants lias 
 been fathered u)X)n them rather than fairly 
 deduced from tliem. He does not alKrm that 
 the ant, wliicli he proposes to the sluggard as . 
 an exam])le, laid up in her magazine stores of 
 grain against winter, but that, with considerable 
 prudence and ibresight, she makes use uf proper 
 teasons to collect a sup))ly of provisions sufficient 
 for her jiurposes. Thert; is not a word in tliem 
 implying that she stores up grain or other provi- 
 sions. She prepares her bread and gathers her 
 food (namely, such food as is suited to h^r) in 
 Bummer and harvest (that is, when it "is most 
 
 Slentiful), and thus shows her wisdom and piu- 
 ence by using the advantages otVered to her.' 
 A brief examination of the passages (Prov. vi. 6 ; 
 XXX. 25) with reference to their context, will 
 serve to confirm these observations. In the pre- 
 ceding \erses, Solomon has cautioned liis readers 
 against incurring dangerous responsibilities on 
 l>ehalf of another. Should this have inadvertently 
 been done, he a<lvises the surety to give no sleep 
 to his eyes, nor slumber to his eyelids, till he 
 has delivered tiimself from liis rash engagement. 
 He tlien adds, ' Go to the ant, (!iou shiggard, 
 consider lier-ways, and lie wise : which having no 
 guide, overseer, or ruler, providetli her meat in 
 the summer, and gathereth her food in the harvest.' 
 The sense is thus ably given by Dr. Hammond: 
 '■As in the matter just mentioned the least f/e/ny 
 is pernicious, so in all thhiijs else sliiyc/ishness, or 
 negligeitce of those thing's lohich concern vs most 
 nearly, should ever be avoided ; and if we need 
 any instructor on this head, we may go to one of 
 the least and meanest of creatures.' The moral, 
 then, intended in Solomon's allusion to the ant, 
 it simply to avail oiie''8 self of the favourable time 
 isithout delay. Tlie description wliich follows, 
 of the sluggard sleeping, evidently during the 
 day, the proper season of activity, and of the con- 
 Bequences of his vice, agrees with tiiis i'nterjireta- 
 tion. The other passage (xxx. 25), proi>ably by 
 a ditl'erent writer, also considers the ant simply 
 p« the symbol of diliycnce. 
 
 The peculiar use of the terms summer anil 
 oarvest, among 'he Jevvs, may have contributed 
 
 to the erroneous inler))retation. Tiie Jews had 
 no word to signify spring or autiniin. Tliey sjioke 
 only of suiimier and winter: l)v tlie former tliey 
 designated the whole of the inoi^e genial time (tt 
 the year, and by the latter the whole of tlie lesa 
 favourable. Hence Solomon uses summer anij 
 harvest as synonymous terms (Prov. x. 5; xxvi. I : 
 see also Jer. viii. 2S ; Matt. xxiv. 32). In tlie 
 same way the Romans enijdoyed a-stas and messis, 
 and the Greeks Of pus and 6fp'i(w. — .1. V. D. 
 
 ANTEDILUVIANS, the name given col- 
 lectively to tiie people who lived before tlifl 
 Deluge. The interval from the Creation to that 
 event is not less, even according to the Hebiew 
 text, than 1657 years, Ixjing not more than 
 691 years sliorter than .that between the Deluge 
 and the birth of Christ, and only 167 years less 
 than from the birth vf Chiist to the ))resent lime, 
 and equal to aliout two-sevenths of the whole 
 ])eriod from the Creation. By the Samaritan and 
 Septnagint texts (as adjusted l)y Hales) a muci) 
 greater duration is assigned to the antediluvian 
 period — namely, 2356 years, which nearly equals 
 the Hebrew interval from tiie <leluge to the birth 
 of Christ, and much exceeds the interval from 
 the liiith of Christ to the present time. 
 
 All our autlientic information respecting tliis 
 long and interesting period is contained in 49 
 verses of Genesis (iv. 16, to vi. 8), more than hal* 
 of which are occupied with a list of names and 
 ages, invaluable for chronology, iiut conveying 
 no particulars regarding the jnimeval state of 
 man. The information thus aiVorded, although so 
 limited in extent, is, however, eniinejitly sugges- 
 tive, and large treatises might be, and have lieen, 
 written upon its intimations. Some additional in- 
 formation, though lessdirect,may be safely deduced 
 from the history of Noah and the first men after 
 the Deluge; for it is very evident that society did 
 not begin afresh after that event; but that, through 
 Noah and his sons, the new families of men weie 
 in a condition to inherit, and did inherit, such 
 sciences and arts as existed before the Flood. 
 This enables us to understand how settled and 
 civilized communities weie established, ami large 
 and magnificent works undertaken, within a feiv 
 centuries after the Deluge. 
 
 In the article ' Adam ' it has been shown that 
 the father of men was something more tlian ' I! e 
 noble savage,' or rather the grown-uj) infant, 
 which some have rejiresented him. He was an in- 
 strucled man; — and the immediate descendants 
 of a man so instructed could not be an ignoiant 
 or uncultivate<l [leojile. It is not necessary indeed 
 to suppo-e that they jxissessed at fiist iiioie culti- 
 vation than they required; and for a good while 
 they did not stand in netnl of tliat which results 
 from, or is connected with, the settlement of men 
 in organized communities. Tl)ey ])robably had 
 this liefore the Deluge, and at first were possessed 
 of whatever knowledge or clvillziition their agri- 
 cultural and ])astoral pursuits required. Such 
 were tlieir pursuits from the first ; for it is re- 
 markafjle that of the strictly .savage or hunting 
 condition of life there is not the slightest trace 
 before the Deluge. After that event, Nimroil, 
 although a hunter (Gen. x. 9), was not a savage^ 
 and did not belong to hunting trihes of men. 
 In fact, .savageism is not discoverable l>efoi« 
 the Confusion of Tongues, ami was in all like- 
 liliood a degeneracy from a state of culti\a*ic*
 
 156 
 
 ANTEDILUVIANS. 
 
 rveiituiilly piotluceJ in paiticuhir communities 
 by lliat gicat social convulsion. At leat that 
 a degiw of cultivation was the jiiitnitive con- 
 dition of man, from whicli savagci.-m in {>ar- 
 ticuhiv quarters was a de^^^eneracy, and tliat he has 
 not, as too generally lias lieen supposed, worked 
 himself up from an original savat,'e state to his 
 present position, has heen poweifully arj^iied by 
 Dr. Pliilip Lindsley (Am. Bib. licp.is , iv. 277- 
 298; vi. 1-27), and is strongly corroborated by 
 ttie conclusions of modem ethnographical re- 
 search; from which we leain that, while it is easy 
 for men to degenerate into savages, no example 
 has been found of savages rising into civilization 
 but by an imjjulse from without, administered by 
 a more civilized {leople; and that, even with such 
 impulse, the vis inertia: of ajtablished liabits is 
 with dilliculty overcome. Trie aborigmal tiadi- 
 tions of all civilized nations describe them as re- 
 ceiving tiieir civilization from without — generally 
 through the instrumentallity of foreign colonists: 
 and history affords no example of a case parallel 
 to tliat which must liave occurred if the primitive 
 races of meo, being originally savage, had civi- 
 lized themselves. 
 
 All tliat was peculiar in the circumstances of 
 tiie antediluvian period was eminently favour- 
 able to civilization. The respected contributor 
 [J. P. S.], to whose article [Au.*.m] we have 
 already referred, remarks, in a further communi- 
 cation, that ' Tlie longevity of the earlier seventeen 
 or twenty centuries of human existence is a theme 
 containing many problems. It may be here re- 
 ferred to for the purpose of indicating the advan- 
 tages which must necessarily have therefrom ac- 
 crued to the mechanical arts. In pottery, mining, 
 metallurgy, cloth-making, the applicatiofis of heat 
 and mixtures, &c., it is universally known that 
 there is a tact of manipulation which no instruc- 
 tion can teach, which tlie possessor cannot even 
 describe, yet which renders him powerful and un- 
 failing within his narrow range, to a degree almost 
 incredible ; and when he has reached his limit of 
 life he is coiiHilent that, had he another sixty or 
 seventy years to draw upon, he could carry his 
 art to a perfection hitherto unknown. Something 
 like this must have been acquired by the ante- 
 diluvians; and the paucity of olijects within their 
 grasp would increase the precision and success 
 within the range.' 
 
 By reason of their length of life, the ante- 
 diluvians had also more encouragement in pro- 
 tracted undertakings, and stronger inducements 
 to the erection of sujierior, more costly, more 
 durable, and more ca])acious edifices and monu- 
 ments, public and private, than exist at present. 
 They might reasonably calculate on reaping the 
 benefit of their labour and expenditure. The 
 earth itself was jirobably more equally fertile, 
 and its climate more uniformly healthful, and 
 more ausjiicious to longevity, and consequently 
 to every kind of mental and cor)ioreal exertion 
 and eiiteqirij^c, th.'.n ha^j been the case since the 
 great convulsion which took ](lace at the Deluge. 
 
 But ])robably the greatest advantage enjoyed 
 by \\\v antediluvians, and which must have been 
 in the highest degiee favourable to their advance- 
 ment in the arts of life, was the uniformity of 
 language. Nothing could have tended more 
 powerfully to maintain, equalize, and promote 
 whatev'er advantages were enjoyed, and to prevent 
 
 ANTKDlLtVIANS. 
 
 any portion of the human race from degeiierating 
 into savage life. 
 
 Of the actual state of society and of the arts 
 l>efore the Deluge some notice has occurred in a 
 jirevious article [Adam], and otlier particulars will 
 be found in the articles relating to these subjects. 
 
 The opinion that the old world was acquainted 
 with a.itroiiomy, is chieHy founded on the ages of 
 Seth and his <lesceiiilarils lieing particularly set 
 down (Gen. v. C, sc/q.), and the jiiecise year, 
 month, and day being stated in which Noaii and 
 his family, &c. entered the ark, and niade^ their 
 egress from it (Gen. vii. 11 ; viii. 13). The ilis- 
 tinctions of day and night, and the lunar month, 
 were of course obseived; and the tliiiteentli rotation 
 of the moon, compared with tlie sun's return to 
 his piimary position in the heavens, and tl'.e 
 etl'ects produced on the eaith by his return, would 
 point out the year. The variation between the 
 rotations of the moon and sun easily became dis- 
 coverable from the difl'erence which in a very 
 few years would be exhibited in the seascjns ; and 
 hence it may be supposed th.at, although the cal- 
 culations of time might be by lunar months or 
 revolutions, yet the return of vegetation would 
 dictate the solar year. The longevity of the 
 antediluvian patriarchs, and the sim2jlicity of 
 their employments, favour this conjecture, which 
 . receives additional stjei.igth from the fact that the 
 Hebrew for yeai; njf , implies an iteration, a 
 return to the same point, a repetition ; and it 18 
 also remarkable that the Indians, Ciiinese, Baby- 
 lonians, Egyptians, Greelsjs, and other nations, all 
 deduce their origin from perscnages said to lie 
 versed in astronomy. 
 
 The knowledge of zoology, which Adam pos- 
 sesseil, was doubtless impaited to his cliihlien; 
 and we find that Noah was so minutely informed 
 on the subject as to distinguish between clean and 
 unclean beasts, and that his instructions extended 
 to birds of eveiy kind (Gen. vii. 2-1). A know- 
 ledge of some essential jjrinciples in botany is 
 shown by the fact that Adam knew how to dis- 
 tinguish 'seed-bearing herb' and ' tree in which 
 is a seed-bearing fruit," with 'every green herb' 
 (Gen; i. 29, 30). The trees of life and of know- 
 ledge aie the only ones mentioned before the Fall ; 
 but in the history of Noah the vir;e, the olive, 
 and the wood of which the ark was made (Gen. 
 vi. 11; viii. 11; ix. 20), are spoken of in such 
 a manner as clearly to intimate a knowledge of 
 their qualities. With mineralogy the antedilu- 
 vians were at least so far acquainted as to dis- 
 tinguish metals ; and in the description of the 
 garden of Etlen gold and precious stones are no- 
 ticed (Gen. ii. 12). 
 
 Tliat the antediluvians were acquainted with 
 music is certain ; tor it is expressly .said that 
 Jubal (while Adam was still alive) became ' the 
 father of those who handle the '11J''3 kinnur and 
 the IlJiy huyab.'' The kinnur was evidently a 
 stringed instrument lesembling a lyre; and the 
 kugab was without doubt the jiaiuhean pijie, 
 composed of reeds of different lengtlis joined 
 together. This clearly intimates considerable 
 progress in the science ; for it is not probable that 
 the art of playing on wind and on stringed in- 
 struments was discovered at the same time; wi 
 may rather suppose that the principles of harmony, 
 having been discovered in the one, were by 
 analogy transferred to the other; and t.iat Jubtl)
 
 ANTEDILUVIANS. 
 
 ANTKJJiLUVIANS. 
 
 k57 
 
 by repeated efforts, became the first jjerfonner on 
 tiie har]i ancl tlie pi])e [Music]. 
 
 Our materials are too scanty to allow us to 
 affirtn that the antediluvians jK)ssessecl the means 
 of communicating their ideas hy writing or Ijy 
 hieroglyphics, althotigh tradition, and a hint or 
 hvo in the Scrij tiires. miglit supjwrt the assertion. 
 With respect to poctri/, the story of Lamech and 
 his wives (Gen. iv. 19-2n is evidently in verse, and 
 is most probably the oldest S])ecimen of Hebrew 
 poetiy extant ; but whether it was written before 
 or after the Flood is uncertain, although the jiro- 
 bability is tliat il is one of tiiose previougly 
 existing ilocuments which Moses tran8cril)ed into 
 his writings. 
 
 With regard to arckitechire, it is a singular 
 and imjjortant fact that Cain, when he was driven 
 fi-oix liis first abode built a city in the land to 
 wliicli lie went, and called it Kuocli, after his son. 
 Tliis shows that tlie descentlants of Ailam lived in 
 houses and towns from the lirst, and consequently 
 atlbids another conlirmation of tlie argument for 
 the original cultivation of the human family. 
 What tiiis ' city ' was is not mentioned, except in 
 the term itself; .iml as that term is in the early 
 Scriptures apjilied to almost every collection of 
 human habitutions, we need not atta.cli any very 
 exalted i<lea3 to it in this instance. But if we 
 take into view the requisites necessary to enable 
 Noah to erect so stupendous a fabric as tlie ark 
 must iiave been [.-Vuk, No.\h"s], it will not be 
 difHcult to conceive that the art of building iiad 
 leaciied consideralile advancement before the 
 Deluge; nor can one reflect on the Ijuilding of 
 Babel without a coiuiction that it must have 
 l)een through the great patriarchs who lived in the 
 jld world that so much knowled e was obtained 
 as to lead to tiie attempt of erecting a fabric 
 whose summit was intended to reach the clouds. 
 It is not likely that the builders would, by their 
 own intuitive genius, be equal to a tiisk which 
 they certainly were not ins])ired by Heaven to 
 execute. 
 
 The metallurgy of the antediluvians has been 
 noticed in ' Adam ;' and to what is there said of 
 agrieulhire we shall only atkl a reference to tlie 
 case of Noah, who, immediately after the Flood, 
 became a husbandman, anil planted a vineyard. 
 He also knew the method of fermenting the juice 
 of the gra])e; for it is said he drank of the v.ine, 
 which produced inebriation (Gen. ix. 20, 21). 
 This knowledge he doubtless olitained from his 
 piosrenitors anterior to the destruction of the old 
 world. 
 
 Pasturage appears to have been coeval with 
 husbandry. Abel was a keeper of sheep, while 
 his brother was a tiller of tiie ground (Gen. iv. 2) ; 
 but there is no necessity lor supjiosing that Cain's 
 husbandry excluded tlie care of cattle. Tiie 
 clais of tent-iliveiiiug pastors— tliat is, of those 
 win) live in tents that they may move witli their 
 flocks and lierds from one ))asture-ground to an- 
 other — did not originate till comj)aratively late 
 after the Fall : for Jaljal, the seventh from Adam 
 in the line of Cain, is said to have been the 
 ' father ' or founder of tiiat mode of life (Gen. iv. 
 20 ^. It is doubtful wliether tlie manufacture of 
 clolii is involved in the mention of tents, seeing 
 tliat excellent tent-ccverings are even at this day 
 made of skins; and we know that skins were the 
 fir»t artick's of clothing used by lalK'n man (Gen. 
 
 iii. 21). The same doubt applies to (he garment 
 witli wliich the sons of Noah covered their inebri- 
 ated father (Gen. ix. 2',V). But, upon the whole, 
 there can be little doubt tliat, in the course of so 
 long a period, tlie art of manufacturing cloths of 
 hair and wool, if not of linen or cotton, had been 
 acquired. 
 
 It is imi>ossib1e to sj)eak with any decision 
 res])ecting the form or fonns of gmenmient whii-h 
 prevailed before tlie Deluge. Tlie slight intima- 
 tions to lie found on the suliject seem to favour the 
 notion that the paiticnlar governments were pa- 
 triarciial, subject to a general tlwocratical control 
 — God iiimself iimrjfestly interfering to ujihold. 
 the good and check the wicked. The right of ])!<►- 
 perty was recognised, for Abel and Jabai possessed 
 flocks, and Cain built a city. As ordinances of 
 religion sacrifices ceitainly existed ((ieii. iv. -1), 
 and some tliink that tlie Sabl)ath was »)l)scrve<l ; 
 while some intcrjuet tlie word.s, 'Then men began 
 to call upon the name of the Lord " (Gen. iv. HV, 
 to signil'y that ]iul)lic worship then began to be 
 practised. From Noah's familiarity witli tlie 
 distinction of clean and unclean beasts ((ien. vii. 
 2), it v.o\iid seem tliat the Levifical rules on this 
 saiiject were ))y no njeans new when laid down 
 in the code of Mo.s(!s. •» 
 
 Marriage, and all the relations springing from 
 it, existed from the beginning (Gen. ii. 2'd-2-)j; 
 and although jxilygamy was known among tiie 
 antediluvians (Gen. iv. 19), it was most jirobably 
 unlawful ; for it must have been obvious that, if 
 more than ono wife hail been necessary for a man, 
 tlie Lord would not have confined the first man 
 to one woman. Tlie marriage of the sons of 
 Seth with the daughters of Cain ajipears to have 
 lieen jjirohibited, since the consequence of it was 
 that universal depravity in the family of Seth so 
 fercibly expressed in tliis short passage,','!/^ Ilesh 
 hail corrupted its way ujion I lie earth ' ((ien vii. 
 11). This sin, described Orientally as an inler- 
 maniage of ' the sons of God ' with ' the daug!>- 
 ters of men ' (Gen. vi. 2), appears to have been 
 in its re.sults one of the grand causes of the 
 Deluge ; for if the family of Seth had remained 
 pure and .obedient to God, he would doubtless 
 have spared the world for their sake; as lie winild 
 have spared Sodom and Gomorrah liail ten righte- 
 ous men been found there, and as he wmild have 
 sjjared his own people the Jews, ha<l they not 
 corrupted themselves by intermarriages vvitii the 
 heathen. 
 
 A contributor [J. P. S.] suggests that even fiie 
 longevity of the antedihivians may have contri- 
 buted to this ruinoifs result : — ' Tlieie was al.^o, 
 pri)l»aMy, a great waste of lime. Va.slly more 
 time was uyrnn their hands than was needful for 
 dealing wo.idhmds, draining swamjis, and other 
 laboiious and tedious processes, in addition 'o 
 their ordinary auriculfiire and care of cattle; .so 
 that the temptations to idh ness were likely to be 
 very strong; and the next sti-p would be to li- 
 centious habits and acliish violence. The am]ile 
 liMsuie ])0sses.sed by the children of Ailuiii might 
 have been employed for many excellent ptnnose<« 
 of social life and religious obedience, and uu 
 doul/tedly it was so employed by many ; but rt 
 the larger j)art it becauie a snarp and tin- occasii^ 
 of teni]itations, so that "the wickedness of mar 
 hecatne great, the earth was coirupt before G'jti 
 and was Illh d with violence."'
 
 158 
 
 ANTELOPE. 
 
 ANTELOPE. 
 
 It will be seen that many of tlie to])ics only 
 Kliglitly touched u]ion in this article will C:i.\\ to 
 be Ciinsiilc'ied more largely under otlier heads. 
 i^Cntira Bi/dica, iv. 14-20; P. Lindsley, D.D., 
 Oh the Primitive State of Mankind^ in Am. 
 Bib. Bcpos. iv. 277-298; vi. 1-27 : see also Ant. 
 U. Hist. i. U2-201). 
 
 ANTELOPE ("VV:)^!, Jachmitr ; "M^T^, Theo, 
 Tco; jiCJ'n, DishoH^ ^^ygarg ; ''3V, Tsehi, Dorcas). 
 AltliOHgh this word does not occur in our version 
 ol'llie Scriptures, yet there can he no doubt that 
 in tlie Hebrew tPxt several ruminants to which it 
 is a])iilicable are indicated under tlifferent deno- 
 Erdnations. In scientific nomenclature, tlic term 
 Bntelo])e, at first applied to a single species, lias 
 gradually become generical, and is now the desig- 
 fKition tit' a tribe, or even o{ a family of genera, 
 containing a great many species. According to 
 present usage it embraces sonje species that are of 
 considerable size, so as to be invariably regarded 
 by the natives as having some affinity to caille, 
 and oriiers delicate and rather smalt, that may 
 be comjtaretl wifii 3'oimg deer, to which, in triith, 
 they Itear a general i-esemblance. The origin of 
 (he word is involved in great obscurity. In tlie 
 HexaihHcroii of Eustathiiis, b-shop of Antioch, 
 who wrote in tlie reign of Cunstantine, we first 
 Knd the name ^Ai/OoXo^ applied to an animal, 
 whlcli he describes as ' very swift, and hunted 
 ivitli difficulty. It had long horns in the shape 
 of saws, with wliich it sawed trees of considerable 
 size. When thirsty, it approached the Euphrates, 
 and gamboled along its banks among brambles, 
 wherein it was sometimes entangled, and then 
 could be caught and slain.' 
 
 It may be doubted whether the word aiitholops 
 was, in the beginning of the fourth century of our 
 era, a local Asiatic Greek parajihraise of the Arabic 
 
 /Jlic gazoL, purporting a similar allusion to 
 
 fine or blooming eyes; although the fact, if estab- 
 lislied, would prove tliat the Grecian residents 
 in Asia viewed the greiiter antilopidae of our 
 systems as belonging typically to ihe gazelle 
 family, as we do now. Certain it is, however, 
 that in the Greek and Latin writers of the middle 
 and later ages, we find the same name, but so 
 variously inflected that we are justiKed in con- 
 cluding tliat it was drawn from some other source 
 than the bishop's Hexwemeron ; for it is written 
 mitcthpas^ aHalopos.,aptcdos : inAlbertus Magnus, 
 calopus and paiUiialofjs, which, though evidently 
 Alexandriafi Greek, Bocliart would make the 
 Coptic name for unicor.i. Towards the close 
 of tlie fourteenth caitury English heralds intro- 
 tluceil the name, and ' trickad out ' their anteloije 
 as a sup}»oitef of tlie ai-morial bearings and cog- 
 nizance <»f a j'ounger branch of the Plantagaiet 
 family; and although the figures are monstrous, 
 they fjeaj clear indications of being derived at first 
 fruin the saw-horned, and soon atfer from a I'eal 
 wryx. 
 
 In order to eKplain somewhat tnore fully the 
 station of antelojjes among tlie families of rumi- 
 nants, and jKiint out more strictly the species we 
 tKi\e to notice, as well as the general charactej-s 
 of the order, it may be desiraljle to give a short 
 definition of ruminants, and thereby obviate the 
 uecessity of again recurring to them when other 
 ipecJes uf tills section come und^r ctmsideration. 
 
 Ruminating <ininialsare jKissf-ssed of the sing'ilai 
 faculty of cliewing liieir food a second tin.e, by 
 means o( the jwculiar strucliiro of tlmir stomachs— 
 a structure which enables them to force it back 
 again info the mouth after a first deglutition. Foi 
 tliis jmrpose, all ruminants have four stomachs, 
 Avhereof the three first are so disjiosed that the ali- 
 ments can enter at will into any oii«e ol' them, thg 
 oesojjhagus being placed at the pt)int of their com 
 munication. Tlie first and largest is the paunch, 
 externally aj.pearing as twofold, but internally 
 tlivided into four slight partitions. In this is re- 
 ceived the fodder simply broken by a first masti- 
 cation, in which state it is transmitted into the 
 second stomach, bonnet, or honeycomb bag, the 
 walls of which are internally shaped like the cells 
 of a honeycomb. Here the herbage is imbibed, 
 and compressed, by its globular form, into small 
 masses or balls, whicli are thus jirepared to be 
 forced upwards again into the mouth f()r a second 
 trituration — a process always going on when cattl« 
 lie down, and are seen grindijig their cheek teeth. 
 After this it descends into the tliird stomach 
 {tnanyplics), which is tlie smallest, and is longitu 
 dinally furnished with folds, somewhat resembling 
 the lea\es of a book : fiom thence it passes into 
 tlie fourth (the red), next in size to the jiaunch, 
 and jiear-shaped, the stotnack properly so called, 
 where the process of digestion is accomplished. 
 All ruminants, moreover, are distinguished by 
 cloven feet, by the want of incisor teetir in the 
 upper jaw, and by all the grindei-s being fur- 
 rowed like ridges on millstones. 
 
 This abstract of the characters of ruminating 
 animals is here given because the faculty ol 
 chewing the cud, or rumination, cannot exist 
 without the foregoing apparatus ; because that 
 apparatus is found, without exception, to belong 
 to all the species having bisulcate feet and the 
 modified dentition before noticed, and belongs to 
 no other class or genus of mammalia. The 
 numerous species of the order are distributed into 
 three grand divisions, viz., 1st. those without 
 horns, like the camel ''" and the musk ; 2nd. those 
 with deciduous horns, or such as are shed yearly, 
 and replaced by a riew growth, like the stag; 
 and, 3rd. those which have persistent horns, con- 
 sisting of a bony core, upon whicli a horn)' sheaU'i 
 is fixed, which grows by annual additions of the 
 substance at the base, such as aritelo[;es, goats, 
 sheejo, and oxen or neat cattle. 
 
 The antelopes, considered as a family, may be 
 distinguished from all others by their uniting the 
 light and graceful forms of deer with the jiermanent 
 horns of goats, excepting that in general their 
 horns are round, annulated, and marked withstriae, 
 slender, and variously inflected, according to the 
 subdivision or group they belong to. They have 
 usually large, soft, and beautiful eyes, tear-pits 
 beneath them, and round tails. They are often 
 provided with tufts of hair, or brushes, to ])rotect 
 the fore-knees from injury ; they have inguinal 
 pores ; and are distinguished by very great {jowett 
 of s{)eed. Among the first of the subordinate 
 groups is the subgenus oryx, already named, con- 
 sisting of five or six species, whereof we have to 
 notice at least three. 
 
 * Hha camel, although it has cloven feet par- 
 tially united by a common sole, and is armed 
 with several tahe molars, is still a true rumiiiaQt;
 
 ANTELOPE. 
 
 The Jachmor ("lU^nV Dout. xiv. 5; I Kings 
 IT. 23) is not, ixs ill our .A.ntb Vers., ' the I'allow- 
 deer,' but tlie Ori'.v Ii'iicorux of tlie moderns, the 
 true oryx of the ancients, aiul of Nieliuhr, wiio 
 quotes R. .lona, anil points out (he ChaUlaic 
 yachmura, and Persian kutzkohl (jirolwbly a 
 mistake for naskandn/:'), and descrilies it as a 
 great goat. The eastern Arabs still use the 
 
 ANTELOPE. 
 
 159 
 
 [Tlie .laclimur. Oryx leucoryx.] 
 
 name yazm«r, alth()Ui;h, ac-cording lo tlie usage 
 of Oriental nomoiiclatuie respecting these ani- 
 mals, the terms ahu (father) and bah)' (desert, 
 valley) are generally made parts of generic 
 appellations, which, in the case of the larger 
 antelopes, are commonly associated with c/au or 
 bu (cow or ox), forming the terms gaii-bahrein, 
 bekr-el-toash, el-wa'rus, el-bukncs, abti-harb, abii- 
 bahr; and, particularly west of the Nile, mahatz, 
 targea ; while collectively, bur/gera-el-ahnoor is 
 used. Most of these denominations, albeit they 
 are laxly applied by the Arabs, show that the 
 animals so named are considered to be more 
 nearly allied to the bovine species than to the 
 gazelles of the country, and the fact of their 
 universal application to the great antelopes, from 
 the Ganges to Morocco, is sufficient to establish 
 the general conclusion, that, in the earliest ages, 
 similar notions led tlie Helirews to adopt similar 
 terms ; and that, when tlie Scriptures notice wild 
 oxen, or wild cattle, \we are in reality to under- 
 stand not a bovine, but an antilopiiie animal, 
 and not always the same sjiecies, excepting per- 
 haps in one case, which will be noticed under 
 the word Bui.i,. 
 
 The Oryges are all about the size of the stag 
 of Europe, or larger, with long, annulated, slender 
 horns, rising in continuation o** the plane of the 
 forehead, slightly divergent, r?gularly but not 
 greatly curved, entirely straight or lyrated, and 
 from three feet to three feet eight inches in length. 
 Tiie head is rather clumsy, and more or less pied 
 with black and white; the neck ewed, or arched, 
 like that of tlie camel ; the carcass bulky, com- 
 pared with the legs, which are slender, firm, and 
 capalile of sustaining great action; the tail ex- 
 tends only to the heel, or liough ; the hair on the 
 •houlders and neck is invariably directed for- 
 wards, thus, no douh'; keeping tiie animal cool 
 ai flight. 
 
 The Leucoryr, as the name implio.o, is white, 
 naving a iihutk mark down tlie nose, bhuk clieek* 
 and jowl, the legs, from the elliow and heel to 
 tiie jiastern joints, black, and tiie lower half of 
 the thiglis usually, and olten tlie lower (lank, 
 bright rufous; hence the epithet /ioiiuiku; "IOH 
 (riibere, to redden). Tiie species no.v resides in 
 pairs, in small families, and not niifreqiienlly 
 singly, on the mountain-ranges along the sandy ilis- 
 tricts, in the (leser( of eastern Araliia, and on tiie 
 banks of (he Lower Euphrates; and ni.iy extend 
 as far eastward as (he \ves( liank of (he Indus, 
 feeding on shrubby acacias, such as (oriilis and 
 Ehrc7ibergi. It was, no doubt, formeily, i( not at 
 present, found in Arabia Pelraui, and in (lie eas(eru 
 territories of the peo]ile of Israel ; and from (lie 
 circumstance of the geneiical name of wild cow 
 or bull being common to (his, as to other allied 
 species, it was equally caught witii nets and wi(h 
 the noose, and styled 1X11 {tao, lo, tlieo). To 
 this species may be referred more jiaiticularly 
 some of the notions respecting unicorns, since 
 the forehead being narrow, and the h(.rns long and 
 glender, if one be broken o(V near the root, the re- 
 maining one stands so nearly on the meaial line, 
 that, taken in connection with its white-coloured 
 hair, to uncritical ii spection, a single-horned 
 animal might appear to be really jirescnt. By 
 natni> vicious and menacing, iVoni what may 
 be ii!;served in the I'"i"Aptiaii jiiiintmgs of the 
 iniiustry which iirnxist'iie exercised, we may con- 
 clude that human art, even in early ages, may 
 have contributed to make artificial unicorns; and 
 most probably those seen by some of the earlier 
 European travellers were of this kind. 
 
 [Oryx tao, or Nubian oryx.J 
 
 "l^^n, Deut. xiv. 5; Isa. li. 20, (Oryx tao, fne 
 Nubian oryx. Ham. Smith,) is either a species or 
 a distinct variety of leucorvx. The male, beirif; 
 nearly four feet high at the shoulder, is taller (ban 
 that of the leucoryx; the homs are longer, (he body 
 comparatively lighter, and every limb indicative 
 of vigour and elasticity : on tlie forehead there is 
 a white spot, distinctly marked by (he jiarticular 
 direction of the hair turning downwards before the 
 inner angle of the eye to near the mouth, leaving 
 the nose rufous, and forming a kind of letter A
 
 160 
 
 ANTELOPE, 
 
 Under the eye, towards the chei^k, there is a 
 darkish spot, not very distinct; the limbs, belly, 
 and tail are white; the body mixed white and 
 red, most reddish about the neck and lower 
 hams. It is piissible that the name tao or tea is 
 connected with the white spot on the chatlVon. 
 This species rcsi(h's ciiiorty in the desert west of 
 the Nile, but is most likely not unknown in 
 Arabia ; certain it is, that botli are figured on 
 Ey:yptian monuments, the leucoryx liein^ distin- 
 guished by horns less curved, and by some indi- 
 cation of black on the face, Ileie, then, we have 
 a second wild Itive; but there is still a third re- 
 ferable to the antilojiida;, thou^'h n,)t an oryx, 
 but most likely lnjlciti^jing to the genus damalis 
 and tiie acronotine group of Giitliths Cuvier. It 
 is tlie Anttlopc defassa <!l" Sir J. Wilkinson, which 
 we would place iiy the sitle o'i acroaotiis bubalia, 
 if it be not the same, as mi^ht be inferred from 
 the figures at Beni Hassan,* in whicii the elevated 
 withers are very consjiicu lus, where it is represented 
 actually caught by the noose or lazzo. If the 
 two oryges were not anciently distinguifhed as 
 
 ANTELOPE. 
 
 same structure as the others, hnt is somewnat 
 hi);her at tlie crcap : it has a coarse beard unilot 
 
 fAn^ilope defa^isa of Wilkinson. Acronotus defassa.] 
 
 species, then tao. fheo, would apply to the pre- 
 sent, the name indicating the spinal cross; but 
 in that case, it must have existed in early agc^ 
 as far north at least as the borders of Palestine, 
 which is by no means improbable. Tliis last spe- 
 cies would answer completely to the description 
 of wild bull, while there can be no dotibt that, in 
 the dialects of some pio\inces of tliat country, the 
 oryges of Araliia may still be denominated rcetn, 
 even when bearing both horns ; and all are suffi- 
 ciently vicious, energetic, and capable of mischief, 
 to jusVify the characters assigned to them in 
 peetical phraseology, agreeably to the amplifj^ing 
 spirit of AramiEan nations. 
 
 Orj.r addax may have been known to the 
 Hebrews iiy the name of ]"|1^'''^, dishon. It 
 is three feet seven inches at tlie shoulder, has the 
 
 * Wilkinson's Anc. Egyptians, vol. iii. p. Ifi, 
 cut 327. In cut 3'2'«, No. 3 ajipears to be A. Bu- 
 bidts. and No. I, defassa, distinguished by lunate, 
 r.ow-like horns, and a black cross on the shoulders 
 and spine. A.Bitbalis still comes occasionally 
 to the Nile, and all the ruminants of the wilder- 
 oes* are at times liatile to migrate from famine 
 OBtused by drouglit ir locusts. 
 
 [Oryx addax. Dishon or Pygarg.] 
 
 the gullet, a black scalp and forehead, divided 
 from the eyes and nose by a white baron each side, 
 parsing along the brows and down the face to the 
 cheek, and connected with one another between 
 the eyes. The general colour of the fur is white, 
 with the head, neck, and shoulders more or les« 
 liver-colour grey; but what distinguishes it most 
 from the others are the horns, which in structure 
 and length assimilate with those of the other spe- 
 cies, but in shape assume the spiral flexures of 
 the Indian antelope. The animal is figured on 
 Egyptian monuments, and may be the pygari, 
 or dishon, uniting the characters of a white rump 
 with strepsicerotine horns, and even those which 
 Dr. Shaw ascribes to his ' lidmee.' 
 
 We have now to notice the second group of 
 antilopidae, classified under the subgenus gazella, 
 v/hereof at least one sjiecies, but more probaldy 
 four or five, still inhal)it the uplands and deserfci 
 of Egypt, Arabia, and the eastern and soutlicm 
 boKiers oi Palestine. Tliey are named in t) .«. Ckjeeh 
 
 \T, Ai'i or Dorcas. Ariel or Gaiella Arabic*.] 
 
 Aopf.cti, f^orcffs, and in the Hebrew ''3^' sehi, Kfttt 
 ten<u iK'ing applicaiile to the whole group ; and t.-w 
 Helrew name is by distant nations now used fot
 
 ANTHROPOMORPHISM. 
 
 ANTHROPOMORPHISM. 
 
 161 
 
 aTIioil species which are unknown in Arabia and 
 Syria. Thus the Bechuana Hottentots give tlie 
 name of tsel)i, and the CallVi'S that of li-sl^e, to tlie 
 gazella eiwhorc or s[ii iiigbok of the Cape. Tlie term 
 dorcas was appanntly generalized so as to in- 
 clude the roel)wck of Eurojie, which was certainly 
 not, as in om- translation, tlie AseAt of Scripture. It 
 appears from Hermolans that neither Aristotle nor 
 Dioscorides confounded such distinct genera, and 
 that thej- used the tpnn dorx for the species with 
 j)ersi.s(ent horns, and dorcas for the roebuck, 
 whose homs are annually renewed. This confu- 
 sion, created liy tlie classical grammarians of an- 
 tiquity, was further increased liy schoohiien and 
 sportsmen constantly c-onl'ounding fallow-deer 
 with roclmck till within the sevente. nth century, 
 as is plainly jierceptible in the writings of Gesner, 
 that mine of zoological lore, not sutTiciently con- 
 sulted liy Scriptural commentators. The Bildical 
 species clearly included in the section gazella 
 are Anti/ope dorcas, Linn., Ariel or A. Arabiea, 
 Licht.; more remotely, A. kecella, A. ccrinna, 
 aiictor. ; and for Eastern Arabia, A. cora, Hani. 
 Smith ; while A. siibc/iitturosa, Guldenst., may 
 be claimed for the north-eastern countries, where 
 the species exists both in Asia Minor and Arme- 
 nia, and therefore on the borders of Syria. All 
 these species are nearly allied, the largest not 
 measuring niore tlian two feet in height at the 
 shoulder, and the least, the corinria, not more 
 than about twenty inches. They are gracefid and 
 elegant in form, with limbs exceedingly slender, 
 and have large and soft eyes, lyiated homs, black, 
 wrinkled, and striated — most robust in subf/uitu- 
 rosa and kevella, most slender in corinna, and 
 smallest in cora. Their livery is more or less 
 bufl' and dun, white beneatli, with small tufts 
 of hair or bruslies on the fore-knees : they have 
 all a dark streak passing from each ear through 
 the eyes to the nostrils, and a band of the same 
 colour from t!ie elbow of the fore-leg along the 
 sides to the (lank, excepting the corinna, whose 
 markings are more rufous and general colours 
 lighter. Most, if not all, have a feeble bleating 
 voice, seldom uttered, are unsurpassed in graceful 
 timidity, gregarious in habit, and residents on 
 the open deserts, where they are unceasingly 
 watchful, and prejjared to flee with such speed, 
 that greyhounds are liable to be killed by over 
 exertion in the chace. Of tlie species here enu- 
 merated, all, but more especially A. Arabiea, 
 A. dorcas, and A. cora, must have lieen designated 
 by the terms dxjrcas and tsehi, and the Arabic 
 tsabi; generically, Gazal. Tlie Chaldee tabitha, 
 and Persic zccbegat, may refer more immediately 
 to A. sidigntUirosa, the ahu of Ksempfer, tseiran 
 tA modern Persia, arn^ jairou of the Turks. 
 
 One or other of these, according to geographical 
 localities, occurs in the Authorized Version under 
 tlie name of roe; in Deut. xii. 15, 22; xiv. 5; 
 XV. 22; 1 Kings iv. 23 ; 1 Cluon. xii. 8; 2 Sam. 
 ii. ^ ; Prov. vi- T) ; vii. 3; viii. 14 ; Isa. xiii. 14; 
 dorcas, Eccles. xxvii. 20.— C. H. S. 
 
 ANTHROPOMORPHISM, a term in theo- 
 logy used to denote that (igure whereby words 
 derived from human objects are employed to ex- 
 press something which relates to the Deity. As a 
 flriiie being can have no intuitive knowledge of 
 an infinite, ai no language of rational creatures 
 •an fully express the nature of God and render 
 ^ comprehensible. All fiirf'oer knowledge of 
 
 God must be communicated by words used 'o 
 express ourselves intelligibly concerning human 
 anil other terrestrial objects. Sucii words ai:d 
 phrases have their ioundation in a resemblance, 
 which, according hy our co.icejitioiis, exists be- 
 tween the Deity and mankind. This resem- 
 blance, when eiseiitial, is such as regards the 
 I)ure j)erl"ecti<ins of our minds, that is, such as 
 are unaccompanied with any imperfection, as 
 reason, liberty, power, life, wisdom, and g(Hid- 
 ness. Those ex])ressions alVord an analogical 
 knowledge, from whence arise analogical phrases, 
 which are absolutely nece> ary whenever we 
 speak of God, and would actpiire or conuiiu- 
 nicate some knowledge of his perfections. Such 
 analogical expressions must, how ". er, be under- 
 stood properly, filthough they give no inuiiediate 
 and intuitive, but only a symbolical knowledge 
 of the Deity. In this sense it is tiiat in Gen. 
 ii. 16 ; iii 9; vi. 13 ; xii. I ; xv. ; xvii. ; xviii.; 
 Exod. iii. 4, 5 — speech is immcdiatelij ascriiied 
 to the Deity wliile addressing Adam, Noah. 
 Al)raliam, and Moses. The Deify is also in tiiiij 
 sense said to speak mediately to man, viz. by his 
 messengers. But although the speech here as- 
 cribed to the Deity is to be understood in a dif- 
 ferent manner from the language of men, it is 
 not to be understood in such instances figura- 
 tively, or in the anthropomorpliitic sense, liut 
 really and properly. ' Either,' says St. Au- 
 gustin, ' immutalile truth speaks to man inefl'ably 
 of itself to the minds of rational creatures, or 
 speaks by a mutable creatine, eitiier by spiritual 
 images to our minds, or by cor[ oreal voices to the 
 bodily senses.' But God speaks not properly, 
 but anthropopathioally, when Ills decrees and 
 their execution aie described in human methods, 
 or in the form of dialogues and cotiversations, as 
 in the jilinise (Gen. i. 2) ' Let there be light, aiid 
 there was light." 'This.' .says Maimonides, 'is to 
 be understood i f the will, not ine speech;' and, in 
 like manner, S". Augustin, ' This was peri()riued 
 by the intellectual and eternal, not by the audil)le 
 and tempiiral word' {City of God, ch. vii.). 
 
 .•\ntliropomoiphitic phrases, generally consi 
 dered, are such as ascrilie to the Deity mixed 
 perfections an<l human imjjerfections. These 
 phrases may be divided into three classes, accord- 
 ing to which we ascribe to God : — 
 
 1. Human actions {ai/dpanroTrolricrts). 
 
 2. Human affections, passions, and suffering* 
 (antliropopathy). 
 
 3. Human form, numax organs, human mem- 
 bers (aiiihiopomoi-jihism). 
 
 A rational being, who receives impressions 
 through the senses, can form conceptions of tlie 
 Deity only by a consideration of his own jxiwer* 
 and ])ro))erties. Anthroponiorphitic modes of 
 thought are tlierefore uiiavoidatile in the religion 
 of mankind ; and althou^di they can furnish no 
 other than corjioreal or sensible representations of 
 the Deity, they are nevertheless true and just 
 wljen we guard against transferring to God qua- 
 lities peitaining to the human senses. If is, fir 
 instance, a /jrci/jer expression to as-ert that God 
 /iiioics all tilings ; it is im]>roper, that is, tropical 
 or anthropoinorjihitic, to say that He sets >itl 
 things. Anthro|)omor])hism is thus a sjiecies <>( 
 acconimodti ion (wliidi see), inasmuch as by th°se 
 representations the Deity as if were lowers bi.-o- 
 self to the comprehension of men An i it it
 
 162 
 
 ANTHROPOMORPHISM. 
 
 ANTILEGOMENA. 
 
 all oye liter consonant to his wi9<lom anil Ixrievo- 
 lence in cominunicafing divine revelations to 
 adilress maiikiiul in langua;^e adapted to their 
 inferior capacities. Theietbie it is that this figure 
 is called liy tiie Faihers Divine Ecotiomij (Theo 
 doret, Dialot). ">) and Condescension (Gre^orj- of 
 Nazianziis, Orat. 1). 
 
 'Divinp alVcctions/saysTertullian, 'are ascribed 
 to the Dinty by means of figures borrowed from 
 the human form, not as if he were endued with 
 cor{X)ieal qualities : when eyes are ascribed to 
 him, it is denoted that he sees [viz. knows] all 
 tilings; when ears, that he hears all things: the 
 speech denotes the will ; nostrils, tiie jwrcepfion of 
 prayer ; hands, creation ; ai-ms, power ; feet, im- 
 mensity ; for he has no members, and perfomis 
 no office for which they are required, but executes 
 all things by the sole act of his will. How can 
 he require eyes, who is light itself V or feet, who is 
 omnipresent t How can he require hands, wlio is 
 die silent creator of all things'? or a tongue, to 
 whom to think is to command. Tliose members 
 are necessary to men, but not to God, inasmuch 
 a.s the counsel of men would be inetUcacious un- 
 less his thoughts put his members in motion ; — 
 but not to God, whose operations follow his will 
 without effort.' 
 
 In the same manner human afl'ections, as grief, 
 re]jentance, anger, revenge, jealousy, &c., are 
 ascribed to the Deity. These all'ections are not, 
 pr<)))erly sjie-iking, in the mind of God, who is 
 indiiitely happy and immutable, but are ascril)ed 
 to him antliropopathitally by way of similitude. 
 For instance, when God forgives the penitent 
 what he had denounced against the wicked who 
 continue "in sin, he is said to act as men do in 
 similar cases. Thus St. Augustin observes, ' By 
 rei«;ntarK'e is signified a cliange of events. For 
 as a man when he repents bewails the crime 
 which he had committed, so, when God alters 
 anything unexpectedly, that is, beyond man"s 
 expectation, he, figuratively, is said to have re- 
 pented of the punisliment when man rejjents of 
 tlie sin' (Ps. ex.). Thus also, when ignorance is 
 ascribed to the Deity (Gen. i v. 9), the same Father 
 remarks, ' He inquires, not as if really ignorant, 
 but as a judge interrogates a prisoner;' and 
 Luther, in reference to the passage (Ps. ii. 4) 
 where laughter is ascribeil to the Deity, thus ob- 
 serves, ' Not that God laughed as men do, but to 
 point out the absurdity of men's undertaking 
 impossiliilities ; meaning, that the matter was as 
 ridiculous as it would be for a fool with a long 
 stick to attempt to thrust the sun out of the firnia- 
 ment, and to rejoice as if he had performed his 
 task to admiration ' ( Works, ii. Ep. ps. 37). 
 
 Anthropomorpliiiic phrases are found through- 
 out the whole Scriptmes of the Old and New 
 Testaments. In tlie infancy of mankind coiiceii- 
 tioiis derived from' the human senses were uni- 
 versa', and the Deity is constantly spoken of in 
 anthropomorphitic phrases. We find these ideas 
 more pine after the times of Moses, who forbade 
 tiie making of any lepresentation of the Deity (see 
 Decalogue). Tlie conceptions of men became 
 still less sensuous in the times of the Projiliets, 
 wl'o projKiunde i still clearer notions of the sub- 
 lime (>errections of the Deity. But even under the 
 Clirifitiaii dispensation anthropomorphitic modes 
 ot exiiression were unavoidable; lor alihough 
 GlirLstianiiT imparts purer and more sj)lritual 
 
 sentiments than the former revelations, the in- 
 spired teachers could not express themselves wit** 
 out the aid of images dwived from human 
 objects, if they would make their communications 
 in regard to divine things intelligible to theii 
 he;irers, who were habituated to the anthrojiomor- 
 phitic expressions a( the Old Testament. Such 
 a mode of teaching was therefore indispensable in 
 itself, and fended to jiromofe the instruction and 
 enlightenment of mankind; 'the affention waj 
 more easily kept uji among the sensuous hearers 
 and readers of the sayings and writings of Jesus 
 and his a)X)sfles; the truths, figuratively presented, 
 maile a deeper impression on the mind ; it intro- 
 duced variety into the discourse; the affections 
 were moved, and religious instiuction the more 
 readily i;onimunicated' (seeSeiler's Biblical Her- 
 meneutivs, ))art i. sect. 2, § 54-62, London, 1P35, 
 and (-rlass's Phllologia Sacra^ — \V. W. 
 
 antichrist! Tlie meaning attached \o 
 this word has been gieatly modified by the con- 
 troversies of various churches and sects. In Scrip- 
 ture, however, and the early Christian writers, 
 it has an application sufficiently distinct from 
 partial interpretations. Antichrist, according fo 
 St. John, is the ruling spirit of error, the enemy 
 of tlie truth of the Gospel as it is displayed in 
 the divinity and holiness of Christ. Tliis is the 
 primary meaning of the tenn, and we are led at 
 once to consider it as the proper title of Satan. 
 But the same a]X)stle speaks of the existence of 
 many anticlirists ; whence we leain that it is ap- 
 plicable to any being who opposes Christ In tlie 
 high places of spiritual wickedness. St. Paul 
 sjieaks of ' the man of sin' as not yet revealed, 
 and if is supposed by most iuterjireters that artti- 
 chrint is to be understood as the object alluded to 
 by the apostle ; but if we attend strictly to hi» 
 words, the antichrist of whom he spoke must have 
 been then, and at the time when he was writing, 
 'ojjposing and exalting himself above all that ii 
 called God,' although awaiting some distant 
 season for the open display of^ his )X)wer and 
 wickedness. Justin Martyr, in his Dialogue with 
 Tri/pko, describes him as exercising his wrath 
 against Christians with especial fury in the period 
 immediately preceding the Second Advent. Cyril 
 of Jerusalem rejiresents him as reigning three 
 years and six months preparatory to the entire 
 destruction of his dominion at the second coming 
 of Christ. Tlie same Father says that he will de- 
 ceive both Jews and Gentiles; the former, by rtj- 
 presenting himself as the Messiah ; the latter, by 
 his magical arts and incantations St. Ciirysostoni 
 obser\es, on the passage iif the Second Episile to 
 the Thessalonians, that antichrist will not lead 
 men to idolatry, but will rather aliolish the wor- 
 shi]) of false gods as well as that of the true God, 
 commanding the world fo woiship himself alone 
 as the only Deity. 
 
 These views of the early writers, as well as the 
 expressions of Scripture, have been perverted by 
 many men of warm imaginations to the vrxM 
 puriKises of controversy. The efl'ects of general 
 corrujition have often been charged ii|Kin oflices 
 and indiviiiuals ; and the app.'llation of anti- 
 christ as readily applied to them as if it had 
 actually been coupled in Scripture witli tjieir 
 name and titles. — H. S. 
 
 ANTILEGOMEN.\ i.ai'riXeyofxsva, contm- 
 dieted 01 disputed), an epith< t applied by the earlj^'
 
 AJS'TILKGOMKNA 
 
 A^•T1L^;G0MKNA. 
 
 163 
 
 CJii'istian writers to tlcaote lliose liooks (if tlie New 
 Testament wliicU, altJiougli known to all llio 
 ecclesiastical writers, ami sometimes jiuhlicly 
 .fad in the churches, were not for a considerable 
 time admitted to be genuine, or received intt) the 
 canon ol' Scaipture. Tiiese books are so deno- 
 minated in contradistinction to tlie Ilonwloc/our 
 »«<;««, or universally acknowledged writin;,'s. The 
 following is a catalo^'ue of x\ui Aiitil. yoDiena : — 
 The Second Epistle of St. refer. — The Epistle 
 of St James. — The Epistle of St. Jude. — The 
 Second and Third Epistles oj St. John. — The 
 Apocalypse, or liecclation of St John. — The 
 Epistle to the Hebrews. 
 
 The earliest notice which we have of this distinc- 
 tion is that contained in the Ecclesiastical llistort/ 
 of Eusebius, the learned bislu)p of Ca.'sare.i, who 
 flourished a.d. 270-LiiO. He seems to have funned 
 a triple, or, as it a]){)ears to some, a quadruple di- 
 vision of the books of the New Testament, terming 
 tiiem — 1, the honiologutimeiia (received); 2, tiie 
 «« ^7eyo;Me^^a (controverted); 3, the ?io?Aa (spu- 
 rious) ; and, 4, tliose which he calls the utterly 
 ^triotts, as being not only spurious in the same 
 sense as the former, but also abstird or intjiious. 
 Among tlie spurious he reckons tl>3 Acts of Paul, 
 the Shepherd of Hcrrnas, the Becelation of Peter, 
 the Epistle of Barnahas, and the Instructions of 
 t?i^ Apostles. He speaks doulitfully as to the class 
 to which the Apocalypse belongs, for he himself 
 includes it among the spurious: he then observes 
 diat some reject it, while others reckon it among 
 'he a-^/cnowledyed writings (homologoumena). 
 Among the spinious writings (le also enumerates 
 the Gospel according to the Hebrews. He adds, 
 at the same time, tlmt all these may be classed 
 among the aiitilegoniena. His account is conse- 
 quently confused, not to say contradictory. 
 Among the utterly spurious he reckons such books 
 as the hesetics brought forward under pretence of 
 their being genuine jjroductions of the apostles, 
 gucli as the so-called Gospels of Peter, Thomas, 
 antl Matthias, and the Acts of Andrew, John, 
 and the other apostles. These he distinguishes 
 from tlie antilegomena, as being works whicli net 
 one of the ancient ecclesiastical writers thought 
 worthy of being cited. Their style he considers 
 so remote from that of tlie apostles, and their 
 contents so much at variance with the genuine 
 doctrines of Scripture, as to show them to have 
 been the inventions of heretics, and not worthy 
 of a place even among the spurious writings. 
 These latter he has consequently lieen siijiposed to 
 have considered as the comj^^sitions of orthodox 
 men, written with good intentions, but calculated 
 by their titles to mislead the ignorant, who might 
 be disposed to account them as apostolical pro- 
 ductions, to which honour they liad not even a du- 
 bious claim. (See Eusebius,//MA Eccles. iii. 5, 2r).) 
 
 The same historian has also preserved the testi- 
 mony of Origen, who, in his Commentary on St. 
 John (cited by Eusebius), observes: ' Peter, upon 
 whom the church of Christ is built, against which 
 the gates of hell shall not prevail, lias left one 
 epistle undisputed; it may bt', also, a second, but 
 of this there is some doubt. Wliat siiall we say 
 of him who reclined on the lireast of Jesus, John, 
 vho lias left one Gospel, in which he confesses 
 mat he could write so many that the whole world 
 could not contain them ? He also wrote the 
 Apocal.ypse, >>eing commanded to conceal, and 
 
 not to write, the voices of the seven thunders. He 
 has also left us an epistle consisting of very fev* 
 lines ((TTixoiji ■' '"''>' ^^ '^^^'^ ^ second and third 
 aie from him. but all do not concur in llieir ge- 
 nuineness ; both together do not contain an hun- 
 dred stichi^ (for the signilication of this word, see 
 CJnistian Remembraneer, vol. iii. p. J6-'>, ct seq. ). 
 And again, in his Homilies, ' The epistle with the 
 title " To tlie Hebrews," has not that peculiar 
 style whicli belongs to an apostle who confesses 
 that he is but rude in speech, that i.s, in his 
 phraseology, lint that this epistle is more pure 
 Greek in the composition of its phrases, every one 
 will confess who is able to discern the uilleience 
 of style. Again, it will be obvious that the ideas 
 of the apostle are admirulile, an<l nol inferior to 
 any of the Ixwks acknovvledgtjil to be a])o»tolic. 
 Every on»> x\\\ confess the trutii ol' thi> uhii at- 
 tentively reads the ajjo-tle's writings I 
 
 would say, that tlie tlioughts aie tlie a]:ostle"s, but 
 that the diction and phraseology belong to some 
 one who has recordetl what the apostle has said, 
 and as one who has noted down at his leisure 
 what his master dictated. Yl, then, any church 
 considers this ejjistle as coming I'luni I'aul, let 
 him be commended for this, for neither did ti.ese 
 eminent men deliver it for tliis without cause: 
 but who it was that really wrote the epistle God 
 only knows. The account, however, that has 
 been current before our time is, according to some, 
 that Clement, wl o was bishop of Rome, wrote the 
 epistle; according to others, that it was written 
 by Luke, who wrote the Gospel and the Acts.' 
 (Euseb. Hist. Eccles. vi. 23.) 
 
 Upon other occasions Origen expresses his doubts 
 in regard to the antilegomena, as, where, in his 
 commentary on St. Johns Gospel, he speaks of the 
 reputed {(pepou.iv7)) Epistle of James, and in his 
 commentary on Matthew, where he uses flie 
 phrase, 'If we acknowledge the Epistle of Jude;" 
 and of the Second and Third ICpiitles of John he 
 observes that 'all do not acknowledge them as 
 genuine :' by which epithet, we presume, he means, 
 written by the persons to whom they are ascribed. 
 It is remarkable that Eusebius (ii. 23; iii. 25) 
 classes the Epistle of James, the Acts of Paul, 
 the Shepherd of Hernias, and the Epistle of Bar- 
 nabas, at (Hie time with the spurious, and at 
 another with the antilegomena. By the word 
 spurious, in this instance at least, he can mean 
 no moie than that the genuineness ol' such b(>okg 
 was disputed ; as \\>r instance the Gospel of tl\e 
 Hebrexcs, wliich was received by the Ebioniiee 
 as a giMiuine production of the evangelist Matthew 
 This is the work of which Jerome made a tran- 
 script, as he himself informs us, from the co»v 
 preserved by the zeal of Pampliilus in the Caesa- 
 rean Lilirary. He also informs us that lie trans- 
 lated it into Greek, and that it was consideied liv 
 most pei-sons as the original Gosjicl of St. Matthew 
 (^Dialog, contra Pelag. iii. 2, and Comment, in 
 Matt. xii.). AVliether the Shepherd of Hernias 
 was ever included among the antilegomena seems 
 doubtful. Eusebius informs us that ' it was (iis- 
 piited, aTid consequently not placed among the 
 homologoumena. By others, however, it is judged 
 most necessary, esjiecially to tliose who need an 
 elementary introduction : hence we know that it 
 has been already in public use in our ciiurches, 
 and I have also understood by tradition, thai 
 some of the mo'it accicut writers have made us«
 
 01 
 
 ANTILEGOMKXA. 
 
 »f it ' (iii. 3). Orignn spea^<s of The !<hejihprd as 
 '■commonly used by the chnrcli, but not received 
 as divine by the unanimous consent of all.' 
 He there'bve cites it, not as authority, but 
 simply by way of illustration (lib. x. in Epixt. 
 ail Roman.). 
 
 Eusebiua fuTther infonns us that in his own 
 time tliere were some in the church of Rome 
 who did not regard tlie Epistle to the Hebrews 
 ss the production of the apostle Paul (vi. 25; 
 iii. 3). Indeed, it was through the influence of 
 Jerome that tlie cliincli of Rome, at a much later 
 period, was with much difficulty brouglit to ac- 
 knowledge it as canonical. 'The most ancient 
 Latin <M- Western church di«l not rank it among 
 tlie Minonical writings, though the epistle was 
 well known to tliem, for Clement of Rome has 
 quoted from it many passages. It is true that 
 som.e Latin writers in the fourth century received 
 it, among whom was Jerome himself; yet even 
 in the time of Jerome the Lilin churcli had not 
 placed it among the canonical writings' (Marsh's 
 Michaelis, vol. W. p. 266). ' Tlie reputed Epi.^^le 
 to the Hebrews,' says Jerome, ' is supposed not to 
 be Paul's on account of the difference of style, 
 but it is believed to have been written by Bar- 
 nabas, according to Tertullian, or Ijy Lidce the 
 evangelist ; according to ofliers, by Clement, 
 afterwards bishop of the Roman church, who is 
 said to have reduced to order and emljellished 
 Paul's sentiments in his own language; or at 
 least that Paul, in writing to the Hebrews, had 
 purposely omitted all mention of his name, in 
 consequence of the odium attached to it, and 
 wrote to them elocjuently in Hebrew, as a Hebrew 
 of the Hebrews, and that what he thus eloquently 
 wrote in Hebrew was still more eloquently written 
 in Greek, and that this was the cause of the differ- 
 ence in style' (E.r Catalog.). And again, in his 
 epistle to Dardanus : ' I must acquaint our people 
 that the epistle which is inscribed '■ To tlie He- 
 brews" is acknowledged as the apostle Paul's, not 
 only liy the churches of tlie East, but by all tlie 
 GretJc ecclesiastical writers, although most [of tlie 
 Latins?] conceive it to be either written by Bar- 
 nalias or Clement, and that it matters nothing by 
 whom it was written, as it proceeds from a church- 
 man (ecclesiastici viri), and is celebr-ated by 
 being daily read in the churches. But if the 
 custom of the Latins does not 7-eceive it among 
 the canonical Scriptures, nor the Greek cliurches 
 the Apocalypse of St. John, I, notwithstanding, 
 receive them both, not folloiviiig the custom of the 
 present age, but the authority of ancient writers, 
 not referring to tliem as they are in the habit of 
 doing with respect to apocryphal writings, and 
 citations from classical and profane authors, but 
 OS canonical and ecclesiastical.' ' Peter also,' 
 says Jerome, ' wrote two epistles called Catliolic ; 
 tiie second of wliicli is denied by most, on account 
 of the ditTerence of style {Ex Catalog.). Jude is 
 rejected by most in consequence of the citation 
 from the apocryplial book of Enoch. Notwitli- 
 stanling, it has authority by use and antiquity, 
 and is accounte'l among tlie Holy Scriptures ' 
 (Ibid.); and in his Letter to Paulinus : 'Paul 
 wrote to seven churches, but the Ei)istle to the 
 Hebrews is by most excluded fiom the numlier ;' 
 and in liis commentary on Isaiah, he observes 
 ihat ' the Latin usage does not receive the Epistle 
 Uy the Hebrews among the canonical books." 
 
 ANTILEGC^.ITNA. 
 
 Contcmjioravy with St. Jerome was his anta- 
 gonist RuHinus. wlio reckon? fovr'.ccn epistles ol 
 Paul, two of Peter, one of Jaraes, three of John, 
 and the Apocalypse. 
 
 It seems doubtful wnether, antecedent to th« 
 times of Jerome and RufVinus, any councils, even 
 of single churches, had settled ujwn the canon of 
 Scripture, and decided the question respecting 
 tlie antilegomena, for the removal of doubts among 
 their respective communities ; for it seems eviilent 
 that the general or oecumenical Council of Nice, 
 which met, in the year 32.7, formed no catalogue. 
 The first catalogue, indeed, which has come down 
 to us is that of ivn anonymous writer of the third 
 century. He reckons thirteen epistles of St. Pan), 
 accounts the Epistle to the Hebrews the work 
 of an Alexandrian Marcionite, mentions the 
 Epistle of Jude, two of Jolin, and the Revela- 
 tions of John and Peter, saying with respect tc 
 them, that ' some among us are opposed to their 
 being read in the church' (see Hugg's /w^ror/t^c- 
 tion, sect. xiv.). But soon after the Council of 
 Nice, p-iblic opinion turned gradually in favour 
 of tlie antilegomena, or controverted books ; for 
 we then (ind them tor the first time cited with- 
 out any marks of doubt as to their canonicity. 
 Thus, in the year 343, Cyril of Jerusalem enu- 
 merates fourteen epistles of Paul and seven Ca- 
 tholic epistles. Gregory of Nazianzus, who, ac- 
 cording to Cave (Historia Lileraria), was born 
 about the time of the Nicene Council, and died 
 in 3S9, enumerates all the book* now received, 
 except the Apocalypse. 
 
 Epiiilianius, who was chosen bishop of Con- 
 stantia in a.d. 367 or 36R, and composed liis 
 Catalogue of Ecclesiastical Writers in 3J>2, cites, 
 in his Panarium, tlie different books ol the 
 New Tt'st.imrnt in a manner whicii shows th<it 
 he received all that are in the present canon. 
 Of tlie A])ocalypse he says that it was ' gene- 
 rally or liy most received ;' and, speaking of the 
 Alogians, who rejected all John's writings, Ire 
 observes, ' If they had rejected tlie Apocalypse 
 only, it might have been sup])osed that they liaU 
 acted from a nice critical judgment, as being cir- 
 cumspect in regaril to an apocryj^hal. or myste- 
 rious book ; but to reject all John's writings was 
 a sign of an anti-Ciiiistian spirit.' Amj>hilochius 
 also, bisliop of Iconium, in Lycaonia, who was 
 contemporary with Epiplianius, and is supposed 
 to have died soon after tlie year 391, after citing 
 the fourteen epistles of Paul, in his Iambics, 
 adds, ' But some say the Epistle to the Hebrews 
 is spurious, not s])eaking correctly, for it is a 
 genuine gift. Then the Catliolic Epistles, of 
 which .some receive seven, others only three, one 
 of James, one of Peter, one of John ; wliile others 
 receive three of John, two of Peter, and Jude's. 
 The Revelation of John is approved by some, while 
 many say it is spurious.' 
 
 Tlie eighty-fit'th of the Apostolical Canons, d 
 work falsely ascribed to Clement of Rome, but 
 written at latest in the fourth century, enume» 
 XAXea fourteen Epistle.« of St. Paul, one of Peter, 
 three of Jolin, one of . ai7ies, one of Jude, two oi 
 Clement, and the (so caWed) Apostolical Cansti- 
 tutions, among the canonical books of Scripture. 
 This latter book, adds the pseudo-Clement, it i* 
 not tit to jiublish before all, ' iiecause of the my** 
 teries contained in it.' 
 
 The liiit council .tha< .3 supposed t«» !«»•
 
 ANTILEGOMENA. 
 
 gJver^ a list of the canonical Inwks is the much 
 jigitat.ed Council of Laodicea, supposed to have 
 been held about the year 3fiO or 1561, liy thirty or 
 forty bisliops of Lydia and the nei^iibouriiig 
 parts; but the 59th article, which gives a cata- 
 logue of the canonical books, is not generally 
 held to be genuine. Its genuineness, in<ie^"d, has 
 been questioned by botli Roman Catholic and 
 Protestant histj)riarjs. In his Introduction to the 
 Old Testament, Jahn refers t( this canon as tiie 
 work of ' an anonymous fVamer.' Among the 
 canonical bix)ks included in the jjretended 59th 
 canon of this council are tiie seven Catiiolic 
 e})istles, viz., one of James, two of Peter, three of 
 John, one of Jude, fourteen of Paul, in the fol- 
 lowing order, viz. : Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, 
 Galatians, Epiiesians, Pliilii)pians, Colossians, 
 1 and 2 Thessalonians, Hebrews, 1 and 2 Ti- 
 motiiy, Titus, and Philemon. The Apocalypse is 
 not named. 
 
 We now come to the times of Jerome and 
 Augustin, whose oj)inions had great iulhience in 
 settling tlie canon of Scripture. We have already 
 Been Jerome's sentiments on this subject; and in re- 
 gard to the books of the New Testament Augustin 
 entertained the same views. He was present in the 
 year 393 at the Council of Hip^K), which drew up 
 a catalogue of all the books of Scripture, agreeing 
 in all points, so far as the New Testament was 
 concerned, with the c^non universally received, 
 with the exception perhaps of the Hebrews, for the 
 ancient doubt still apjjears througli tlie woiding 
 of the acts of this council. Tliey commence with 
 enumerating only thirteen epistles of Paul, and 
 then add ' one, by the same author, to the Hebre.vs.' 
 They tlien mention tioo of Peter, tiiree of John, 
 one of James, and the Apocalypse, with a proviso 
 that the cliurches beyond the sea be consulted 
 with resj)ect to this canon. And to the same 
 effect the Council of Carthage, hehl in the year 
 397, having adopted the same catalogue, the 
 bishops assembled in council add : ' Bvit let tliis 
 be known to our brother and fellow-pr:«st (con- 
 gacet'doti) Boniface [bishop of Rome], or to the 
 other bishops of those parts, that we have received 
 those [books] from the Fathers to l)e read in the 
 church.' TFie same catalogue is reix-ated in the 
 Epistle of Innocent I., bishop of Rome, to St. Exu- 
 pere, bi.shop of Toulouse.in tlie year -10 1, '.vliicii, by 
 those who acknowledge its genuineness, is looked 
 upon as a confirmation of the decrees of Flipjjo 
 and Carthage. It was still more formally confirmed 
 in the Roman synod presided over by Pojje Gela- 
 •ius in 491, ' if, indeed,' to use the words of the 
 learned Roman Catholic Jahn^ ' the acts of this 
 ty nod are genuine' (see liis Introduction 1. But, 
 however tliis may lie, tlie contro\ersy had now 
 nearly subside*!, and the antilegomena were lience- 
 forward put on a par with the acknowledged 
 books, and took their place beside them in all 
 copies of the Scriptures. Indeeii, subsequently to 
 the eras of the councils of Hippo ind Carthage, 
 we hear but a solitary voice raised here and 
 there against the genuineness of the antilegomena. 
 Theodore, bishop of Mopsuestia, for instance, the 
 celebrated Syrian commentator and preaciier, who 
 died aliout a.d. 42S, is accused by Leo c*' Byzan- 
 tium of having ' abrogated and anti(piuted the 
 £pist]e of St James, and afterwards other Catholic 
 epistles' (see (Jaiiisii Thesaurus, i. p 577). And 
 Cosmas Indicopleustes, so called from the voyage 
 
 ANTILEGOMENA. 
 
 I OS 
 
 which he made to India alwut the year 53.^ to 517. 
 in his Christian Topography, has the following 
 observations in reference to the autiiority of t!v'*e 
 books: 'I forbear to allege ar^iniients I'loui the 
 Catholic epistles, because from ancient times ihe 
 church has looked ujion them as of doubtful au- 
 thority Eusebius Pamphilus, in liis 
 
 Ecclesiastical History, says that at Ejihesu.-. there 
 are two monuments, one of Jolin the Evangelist, 
 and another of Juhn, an Elder, who wrote two of 
 the Catholic epistles, the second and third ii> 
 sciibed after this n.aiiner, " The Elder to tlie 
 eAect lady," and " The Elder to the t.eloved 
 Gains," and both he and Irena'us say tliat liut 
 two are written by the ajwitles, the Jir.-t of Peter, 
 
 and the first of John Among the Sy liana 
 
 are founil only the three l)efoie nientioiK'd, viz.. 
 the Epistle of James, the Papistic of Peter, and 
 the Ejiistle of John ; tliey have not ti:e r"st. If 
 does not become a jierfect Christian to confiiin 
 anything by doubtl'ul books, when the liDoks in 
 the Testament acknowledged by all (homolo- 
 goumena) riave sulliciently declared all things 
 to be known about the heavens, and the earth, 
 and the elements, and all Christian doctrine.' 
 
 Tiie most ancient Greek manugcriiits which 
 have come down to our times contain the antile- 
 go/nena. From this circumstance it is e.xtiemely 
 pi'obable that the copies from which tliey were 
 transcribed were written after the contro\'ersie.'? 
 respecting their canonicity liad subsideii. The 
 Alexandrian manuscript in the British Museum 
 contains all the books now commonly received, 
 together with some others, with a table of con- 
 tents, in which they are cited in the following 
 order: — 'Seven Catholic ]<jpistles, fourteen of 
 Paul, the Revelation of John, the First ?2pistle of 
 Clement, the Second Ejiistle of Clement, uiid the 
 Psalms of Solomon (which latter liave, howcn ei, 
 been lost from the MS.).' It is observable that 
 Eusebius classes the First Ej)istle of Clement 
 among the Homologouinena, or universally le- 
 ceived books; but by this lie jirobably meant no 
 more than that it was acknowledged by all to be 
 the genuine work of Clement. The .\lexandrian 
 manuscript is now generally believed to have 
 been written either in the fourth or early in the 
 fifth century. Tlie order of all the ejiistles is the 
 same as in our modem Bibles, except that the 
 Epistle to the Hebrews is placed alter the Second 
 Epistle to tiie Thessalonians. In the \'atican 
 manuscript B, which in resjwct of antiquity 
 disputes the preced.'nce with the .-Vlexandrian, 
 the Ajwcalypse is wanting, but it contains the 
 remaining antilegomena. 
 
 Tlie Syrian canon of the New Testanient did 
 not include all t\\e antilegomena. All the mann- 
 script-s of the Syrian version (the Peschito, a woik 
 of the second century) which lia\ e come down to 
 us omit tlie Second Epistle of Peter, the S;'C(ind 
 and Third of John, that of Jude, and the .Apo- 
 calypse. Nor are these books received to this 
 day either liy the Jac.obite or Nestorian C'luis- 
 tians. These are all wanting in the Vatican at.d 
 Medicean copies, written in the years 51S mid 
 5S6, and in the beautiful manusciipt of the Vv- 
 schito, preserved in the British Museum, which ii 
 most accurately described by the Rev. J. Forshall. 
 in the catalogue of the Oriental Manuscriptii, 
 and the writing of which was concluded at iii» 
 monastery of Bethkoki, a.u. 76S. It is nritten
 
 166 
 
 AXTIOCH. 
 
 ANTIOCH. 
 
 *ii 197 eaves of vellum, in the Estrangelo cha- 
 racter. 
 
 In the inquiring age immediately preceding 
 file Refonnation the controversy respecting the 
 antileijomeita was revived, especially by Erasmus 
 and Cardinal Cajetan; by the latter, however, upon 
 principles so questionable as to expose him to the 
 charge of assailing the authority of the Epistle to 
 the Hebrews wit!) the same weapons which (he 
 emjieror Julian liad employed to impugn the 
 autli.jrity of St. Matthew's Gospel. Tlie doubts 
 thus raised were in a great measure silenced by 
 the decree of the Council of Trent, although there 
 i.ave not I seen wan ring learned Roman Catholic 
 divines since this period who have ventured to 
 niicslion at least the Piiuline autliorship of the 
 Epistle to tlie Hebrews. It is well known that 
 Luther, influenced in this instance not so mucli by 
 historico-critical as by dogmatical views, called 
 the Epistle i/f St. James 'an epistle of straw' (Epis- 
 tola straniinea). He also wished tlie aritilegn- 
 menu to be (iistingui.shed from the other books in 
 'lis tianslation of the Bible. In consequence of this, 
 the Epistle fo the Hebre.vs, the Epistles of James 
 and Jtidi-, and the Apocalypse have no numbers 
 atiaclip<l to ihci-i in the German copies of the 
 Bible up ♦o the middle of the seventeenth cen- 
 tury : and it i.s observed by M. Tholuck (Com- 
 mentary on Hebrews, in Biblical Cabinet'), tliat 
 ' the same ])lan should liave been adopted with 
 respect to 2ii<l Peter anc' 2nd and 3rd Jolm, but 
 it did not ses'm proper to detach them tjom Hie 
 IL.imohgounioui vdiich belonged to them. Tlius 
 he wished at the same time to point out wliat 
 were the • ri:,'ht noble chief books of Scripture.' 
 We are informed by Father Paul Sarpi (History 
 of the Council of Trent, book ii. chap, xliii. 
 torn. i. p. 23.5 ; and chap, xlvii. p. 240) that one 
 of the charges collected from the writings of 
 Luther in this council v.'as, 'that no books should 
 be atlmilted into the canon of tlie Old Testa- 
 ment which were not in the canon of the Jews, 
 and tliat from tlie New should l>e excluded tlie 
 Epistle to the Hebrews, the Epistle of James, the 
 Second Epistle of Peter, tlie Second and Tlilrd 
 of John, and the Apocalypse.' M. Tlioluck states 
 tliat the ' Evangelical churches, both Lutheran 
 and Reformed, adopted the same canon uifh re- 
 spect to tl-e New Testament as that of the Coun- 
 cil of Trent' (Comment, on Heb. vol. i. Introd. 
 clui]) i. 6 3, and note S). Some, or all, of the 
 antilegojncna have lieen again impugned in recent 
 times, especially in Germany, as the reader will 
 liiid noticed nnd.'f their several heads. — W. W. 
 ANTI-LIBANUS. [Lebanon.] 
 AXTKXJH ('A^TK^xeia). Two places of this 
 Dame are mentioned in the New Testament. 
 1. A city on the banks of the Orontes, 300 miles 
 iioith 01 Jernsdlem, and about 30 from the Medi- 
 terranean. It was situated in the province of 
 Seleufis, called Tetrapolis (TiTpiiroMs), from 
 containing the four cities, Antioch, Seleucia, 
 Ajamea. and Laod! -.ea : of which tlie first was 
 named after .\ntiochus, the father of the founder; 
 tiie second after himself; the third after his wife 
 Apaniea. and the fourth in honour of his mother. 
 Tlie same appfX-llation (Tetrapolis) was given 
 also to Aiitioch, because it consisted of four tovvn- 
 sliips i)r (juarters, each surrounded by a separate 
 wail, and all four by a coiumon wall. The first 
 va« built by Seleucus Nicator, vvha j)eoj)led it 
 
 witli inhabitants from Antigonja ; the second by 
 the settlers belonging to the first quarter; tiia 
 
 third by Seleucus Callinicns; and the fourth by 
 Antiochus Epiphanes (Strabo, xvi. 2 ; iii. 354). 
 It was the metropolis of Syria (Antiochiam, 
 Syriee caput. Tac. Hist. ii. 79), the residence 
 of the Syrian kings (the Seleucidae) (I Mace, 
 iii. 37 ; vii. 2), and afterwards became the 
 capital of the Roman provinces in Asia. It 
 ranked third, after Rome and Alexandria, among 
 the cities of the emjiire (Joseph. De Bell. Jnd. 
 iii. 2, 5 4), and was little inferior in size and 
 splendour to the latter, or to Seleucia (Strabo, 
 xvi. 2. ; vol. iii. p. 355, ed. Tauch.). Its suburb 
 Daphne was celebrated for its grove ami foun- 
 tains (Strabo, xvi. 2. ; vol. iii. p. 356, etl. Tauch.), 
 its asylum (a(Tv\ov tSttov, '2 Mace. iv. 35^ 
 and temple dedicated to Apollo and Diana. 
 ' The temple and the village were deeply bo- 
 somed in a thick grove of laurels and cypresses 
 which readied as far as a circumference of ten 
 miles, and formed in the most sultry summers a 
 cool and imj/enetrable shade, A thousand stream* 
 of the )iurest water, issuing from every hill, pre- 
 served the verdure of the earth and tlie temjKra- 
 ture of the air' (Gdjbon, ch. xxiii.). Hence An- 
 tioch was called Epidaphnes ('AvTioxei? t^ fTrl 
 ^dcpvri, Joseuh. Anfig. Jiicl. x\ii. 2; Ej>idaphnes 
 cognominata, PI in. Hist. Nat. v. 1^). It was very 
 populous; within 150 years after its erection the 
 Jews slew 100,000 persons in it 'x one day 
 (I Mace. xi. 47). In the time of Ch.y..osfom the 
 population was computed at 2( (0,000, of whom 
 one-half, or even a greater proportion, were j;ro- 
 fessors of Christianity (rh irKiov T?js irjAeojj XP'"" 
 rtav6v, Chrysos. Adv. Jitd. Oral. t. i. p. SS'^ ; Hotn. 
 in S. Ignat. t. ii. p. 597; In Matt. Horn. 85, 
 t. vii. p. SIO). Chrysostom also states that tlia 
 church at Antioch maintained 3000 jxxir, besides 
 occasionally relieving many moie (In .Matt. Horn, 
 t. vii. p. 658). Cicero speaks of the city as distin- 
 guished by men of learning and the cultivation of 
 the arts (Pro ArcJiia, 3). A multitude of Jews 
 resided in it. Seleucus Nicator granted them the 
 righti? of citizf'nship, and jilaced tlirm on a perfect 
 equality with the other inhabitants (Joseph, ^nizy. 
 xii. 3, $ 1). These privileges were continued to 
 them by Vespasian and Titus — an instance ( Jose- 
 ])hus remarks) of the equity and generosity of the 
 Romans, who, in opposition to the wishes of the 
 Alexandrians and Antiocheans, prolectcd tin
 
 ANTIOCH. 
 
 ANTIOllh 
 
 107 
 
 Jtws, nofwitlistandinj,' tho jirovorations tlii-y liail 
 received from tliem in tlieir wars. Tlicy were also 
 (klluwed tn luive an Arilion or Ktliiiarcti of tlieir 
 own (Josej)li. Ih Bell. ,h/d. vii. 3). Aiitior.li is 
 called lilM:ra by Pliny {Hist. Aut. v. IS;, liav ing 
 obtained from Pomjjey fhe j)rivilei;e of being 
 jroverned by its own laws. Tliis fact is coni- 
 meniorated on a coin iK-urini^ flie insciiption, 
 ANTIOXEIiN MHTPOnOA. ATTONOMOT. 
 
 Tlie Christian faith was introduced at an early 
 period into Antioch, and with (^reat success 
 (Acts xi. 19, 21, 24). Tiie name ' ChrUtkins'' 
 was here first aj)plied to its professoi-s (Acts 
 xi. 26). Antioch soon became a cential point 
 for the diU'usion of Christianity amon? the Gen- 
 tiles, and maintained for several centuries a high 
 rank in the Christ'an world. A controversy 
 tt'hich arose between certain Jewisli believers from 
 ■Jerusalem and the Gentile convcrt.s at Antioch 
 respecting the })ermanent oblii^ation of the lite of 
 circumcision was ''ie occasion of the iiist anos- 
 tolic council or convention (Acts xv.). Antioch 
 was tlie scene o( the early labours of the apostle 
 Paul, and tlie place whence he set fortli on his 
 tii-st missionary labours (Acts xi. 2<) ; xiii. 2). 
 Ignatius was the second bislioj) or overseer of the 
 diurch, for about forty years, til) his martyrdom 
 in A.D. 107. In the third century three councils 
 (the last in a.d. 269) were held at Aritioch rela- 
 tive to Paul of Samosata, who was bishop there 
 about A.D. 260 (Neander's Allycmeine Ge^chichte, 
 &c. i. 3, p. 1013; Gieseler's Lehrbuch, i. 212; 
 Moshemii Conunentarii, p. 702). In the course 
 »f the fourth century a new theological school 
 was formed at Antiocli, which aimed at a middle 
 course in Biblical Hermeneutics, between a rigo- 
 rously literal and an allegorical method of inter- 
 pretation. Two of its most distinguished teachers 
 w<!re the presbyters Doiotheus and Lucian, the 
 latter of whom suffered martyrdom in the Diocle- 
 eian persecution, a.d. 312 (Neander's ^%e»^e^/^e 
 Geschichte, i. 3, p. 1237 ; Gieseler's Lehibuch., 
 i. 272; Lardner's Credibility, pt. ii. ch. 35, 5S). 
 Libanius (born a.d. 314), the rhetorician, the 
 friend and jianegyrist of the emperor Julian, was 
 a native of Antioch (Lardner's Testunonies of 
 Am-ieid Heathens, ch. 49 ; Gibbon's Decline and 
 Fall, &c. ch. 24). It had likewise the less equi- 
 vocal honour of being the birthplace of his illus- 
 trious pupil, John Chrysostom (born a.d. 347 ; 
 died a.d. 407) (Lardner's Credibility, pt. ii. 
 ch. IIS; Neander's AUgemeitie Geichichte, ii. 3, 
 pp. 1110-56). 
 
 As the ecclesiastical system became gradually 
 assimilated to the jxilitical, the churches in those 
 cities which held the highest civil rank assumed 
 a corresponding sujieriority in relation to other 
 Christian communities. Such was the case at 
 Rome, Alexandria, and iVntioch, and, in the 
 course of time, at Constantinople and Jeru.salem, 
 where the term Kxarch was applied to the resident 
 bishop but shortly exchanged for that of Pa- 
 triarch (Neaiider, Ally. Gesch. ii. 1, p. 340-51). 
 At the present time there are three ]«elates in 
 Syria who claim the title of patriurclis of An- 
 tioch, namely : (1) the jiatriarch of the Greek 
 cliurch ; (2) of the Syrian MoTiophysites ; (3) of 
 ttie Maronites (Murdocli's Moslieim, edited by 
 Soauics, p. 301-11). 
 
 Few cities have undergone and survived 
 greater vicissitudes and disasttrs than Antioch. 
 
 In A.D. 260 SajMir, the Poi-sian king, surprised 
 and ])il1ageii it, and multitudes </(' tiie inluibiianta 
 were slain or sold ui slaves. It has been fie- 
 (juciitly brought to the verge of utter iiiin l(» 
 earthnuakes (a.u. 3 JO, 391, 396, 45S, .V2«i, 52«)' 
 by that of a.d. 52») no less than 2.'>i'.(HKI (lersoiis 
 were destroyed, tlw po))iilation being swelled liy 
 an influx of strangeis to the fe,stival of the As- 
 cension. The emperor Justinian gave foitv-lixt 
 centenarie.s of gold (^1*- 0,000/ j to le-^toie the citv. 
 Scarcely had it resumed its ancient splendour 
 (a.d. 5 JO) when it was again taken and iieliv«'ied 
 to the llames by Ciiosroes. In a.i>. OJH it was 
 cajituied by the Saracens. Its ' safety wa.s lun- 
 somed with 3(lO,00(( jiiet-es of goi<l, !.;it the throne 
 of the succe.s.sors ol' Alexamler, ii'e seat of the 
 Roman government in the Kii-st, whit;h hail been 
 tlecorafed l)y (Jii'siir with the titles of fice and 
 holy and inviolate, w.is degraded under the yoke 
 of the caliphs to the secondary rank ol a ]iro- 
 vincial town* (Gibbon, ch. 51). In a.d. 975 it 
 was retaken bvNicephoias Phocas. In a.d. lOSO 
 the son of the governor Philaietus betrayed it 
 into the hands of Soliman. Stn eiifeen years after 
 the Duke of Normandy entered it at the head of 
 300,000 Crusaders ; but as the citadel still held 
 out, the victors were in their turn besieged by a 
 fresh host under Kerboga and twenty-eight emiis, 
 which at last gave way to their desjierate valour 
 (Giblwn, ch. 58). In a.d. 1268 Antioch was 
 occupied and ruined by iJoadocbar or Bibais, 
 sultan of Egypt and Syria; this first seat of the 
 Christian name being dispeopled by the slaughter 
 of 17,000 jjersons, and the cajitivity of 100,00(1. 
 About the middle of the fifteenth century th« 
 three patriarchs of Alexandria, Antioch, and Je- 
 rusalem convo'iied a synod, and lenounced all 
 connection with tlie Latin church. 
 
 Antiocli at present belongs to the Pashalic of 
 
 Haleb (Alep|>o), and bears the name of vt, . , *^— Vi-ii * 
 
 Antakia. Tiie inhabitants are said to havt. 
 amounted to twenty thousand before the eaith- 
 quake of 1822, which destroyed four or five thou- 
 sand. On the soutli-west side of tlie town is a 
 precipitous mountain-ridge, on which a consider- 
 able poition of (he ohl Roman wall of Antioch is 
 still standing, from 30 to 50 feet higli and 15 fj-ct 
 in thickness. At short intervals JdO high s(juai€ 
 towers are built up in it, containing a stall (jL^e 
 and two or tiiiee chaml^ers, jirobably for the ii.se 
 of the soldiers on duty. At the east end of tl.e 
 western hill are the remains of a foit>ess, with its 
 turrets, vaults, and cisterns. Toward the moun- 
 tain south-south-west of the city some fiagnients 
 of the aqueducts remain. After heavy laiiis 
 antique maible jiavenients are visible in many 
 parts of the town ; and gem.s, carnelians, cUid rings 
 are frequently found. The jiresent town stands 
 on scarcely one-third of the aiea enclosed by fl* 
 ancient wall, of which the line may lie easily 
 traced ; the entrance to the town from Aleppr) is 
 by one of the old gates, called IJah liiblons, in 
 Paul's gate, not far fr<mi wliich fhe nuinners of 
 the Greek church assenilile for tlieir devotions in 
 a cavern dedicated to St. John (Mailox's Excim- 
 sions, ii. 74; Monro's Summer iianible, ii. 140- 
 143).— J. E. R, 
 
 2. Antioch in (or near) Pixidia ('AvT«J^t.« 
 T^j n«r(5i'ar), being a border city, was considered 
 at diOerent times as belonging to ditl'erent i>i<^
 
 168 
 
 AiVTlO- IIUS. 
 
 ANTIOCHUS. 
 
 vi*ic»«i Ptolemy j)laces it in Piiin;»Iiylia, and 
 Srral)v' 1)1 Pliryi^ia. It was lol^RU^l bv St'lnicus 
 Nicaiu.r, ami it^ lirsf in.:al>if.ui's weie fVoiu Mag- 
 nesia Oh (lie Ma'andi r. After t'le defeat ol' An- 
 liocliiis (111.) tie Gie.it liy tue R*)iii ins. it came 
 into tlie jK>ssessii)ii o) Kiiimiies, kin^^ of Pei'i^a- 
 mos, and was aflcxwaidi ti aiisfeji ed to Amyntas. 
 On \m deiitli tiie llinnans made it the seat t>f 
 a prDfohsular K^^vevnineiit, and in esfetl it witli 
 t ;e privileges (.f a Colomu. Juris J ta / ic i, v/h'jch 
 included a freeiluiii fi\>ni taxes and a miinicijjal 
 constitution similar to tliat of tiif Italian towns 
 (Ulpianus, lil>. 5l( : In Pisidm juris Italici est 
 C'olania Antiockensiutn). When' Paul and Bar- 
 nabas visited this city (Acts xiii. 14), they found 
 a Jtr.visli synago-^ue and a coiisiderat>'e iiuinbei 
 of pioselytes {o'l •po^cr'jij.evoi rhv ©edc. v. 16 ; rwv 
 <rfdoiu.ivcou ■KpuarjXvTCMjv, v. 43 ; tos ffe^o/xfi>as 
 yuvoLKas, v. .iitj, and met with tpeat success 
 among the Gentiles (v. 48), but, tlivough the vio- 
 lent op|xs5tion of the Jews, were obliged to leave 
 the place, which they did in strict acandance 
 with their Lord's injunction (v. 51, compared 
 with Matt. X. 14; Luke ix. 5). 
 
 Till within a very recent period Antioch was 
 stip^iosed to have been situated where the town of 
 Ak-Shekcr now stantls ; but the researches of the 
 Rev. F. Arundell, British chaplain at Smyrna in 
 1833, contirmed by the still later investigations 
 of Mr. Hamilton, secretary of the Geographical 
 Society, have determined its site to be adjoining 
 tlie town of Yalobatch ; and consequently tliat 
 Ak-vSliekei is the ancient Philomelion described 
 by Strabo (xii. 8. 5 vol. iii. p. 72, ed. Tauch.). ' In 
 PhrygiaParoreia is a mountainous ridge stretching 
 from east to west; and under this on either .side lies 
 a great plain, an»l cities near it; to tlie north Philo- 
 milion, and on the other side Antioch, called An- 
 lioch near Pisidia : the one is situatetl altogether 
 on the plain ; the other on an eminence, and has 
 a colony of Romans.' According to Pliny, Antioch 
 was also called Caisarea (Inaident rerticetn Pi- 
 itida, quondam Soli/mi uppeUati, quorum coljynia 
 Ccesarea^ eadem Antiochia, v. 24}. Mr. Arundell 
 obKtrved the remains of several tem]iles and 
 ciiurcbes. besides a theatre and a magniticent aque- 
 duct ; of the lattei- twenty-one arches still re- 
 inaineil in a jjerfect state. Mr. Hamilton cojiied 
 several inscriptions, all, with one exception, in 
 Latin. Of one the only words not entirely 
 efl'acetl were Antiocueae Caesaui. 
 
 Antioch was noted in early times for the wor- 
 ship of Men Arcseus, or Lunns. Numerous 
 slaves and extensive estates were annexed to 
 the service of the temjile ; but it was abolished 
 ai'ter the death of Ainynta.s (Strabo, xii. 8 ; 
 iii. 72). AiundelTs Discoveries in Asia Minor, 
 Londcn. 1834, i. 208-312; Hamiltor»'s Besearches 
 in Asia Minor, Punfim, and Armenia, London, 
 1842, i. 472-174 ; ii. 437-439 ; ' Lal«)rde"s work 
 on Syria and Asia Minor contains a gtKxl view 
 of the aqueduct' — Coins of Antioch. v. Calmet's 
 Plates, vii.— J. E. R. 
 
 ANTIOCHUS. Of the many kings who bore 
 tliis name, Antiochns, called Epiphanes, has the 
 chief claim on our attention in a Bililical Cyclo- 
 piedia, since in the Books of Maccabees and in 
 tiie ])rophecie5 of Daniel his jierson is so promi- 
 nent. Nevertheless, it will be our liusiness to .set 
 f(.rth, nov that which readers of toe B ble can 
 ■»,aJ.iier tor tiieinseli es, but such preliminary and 
 
 collateral information as will tend (o tlirow IJifS} 
 on the position of the Jews towards the Syrian 
 monarchy. 
 
 Tlie name Antioclius may be interpreted he 
 who withstands, or lasts mit ; and ilenotes mili- 
 tary prowess, as do many otiiei- vA' the Greek 
 names. It was \w>tne by one ot' the generals of 
 Phil'i)!, whose son, Selencus, \>y the lielp of lh« 
 first PtoleTny, established himself (b.c. 312) aa 
 ruler of Baliylon. The year 312 is in conse- 
 quence the era from whicfi, under that monarchy, 
 time was computed, as, for instance, in tiie Book* 
 of Maccabees. For eleien years more the contest 
 in Asia continued, while Antigonus (the'owe- 
 f^W^was grasping at univasal supremacy. At 
 lentil, in JiOl, he was defeated and slain in th< 
 decisive battle of Ipsus, in Phrygia. Ptolemy, 
 3^)11 of Lagus, had meanwhile become master o< 
 st)uthein Syria; and Seleucus was too much in- 
 drfited to liiin to betlisposed to eject liim by force 
 from thispossession. In fact, 'he throe first Ptolemies 
 (b.c. 323-222) liwiked on their crxtia-Egyptian 
 jjossessions as their sole guarantee for the safety of 
 Egypt itself ag-ainst their formidable neighlKUir, 
 and succeeded in keeping the mastery, not only 
 of Palestine and Cosle-Syria, and of many towns 
 on that coast, but of Cyrene and other parts 0/ 
 Libya, of Cyprus^ and other islands, with nnme- 
 rous maritime posts all round Asia Minor. A 
 permanent fleet was probably kept up at Samos 
 (Polyb. V. 35, 11), so that their arms reached t» 
 the Hellespont (v. 34, 7) ; and for some time they 
 ruled over Tlirace (xviii. 34, 5). Tlius Syria 
 was dividetl between two great powers, (he north- 
 crw half fallng to Seleucus and his snccessois, 
 the scmthem to the Ptolemies ; and this explain* 
 the titles ' king of the north ' and ' king of th» 
 south,' in the llth chapter of Daniel. Tlie lin« 
 dividing them was drawn somewiiat tw tlie nortl 
 of Damascus, the capital of Coele-Syria. 
 
 Tlie first Selencus built a proiligious number ot 
 cities with Greek institutions, not, like Alexander, 
 from military or commercial policy, but to gratify 
 ostentation, or his love for Greece. Tiiis love^ 
 indeed, led him to fix his cajiital, not at Babylon, 
 where Alexander would have placed it, but in the 
 north of Syria i see Antioch); and in extreme old 
 age his life fell a sacrifice to his romantic jiassion 
 for revisiting his native Mace<lonia. To jieople his 
 new cities was often a dithcult matter ; and thii 
 led to the bestowal of premiums on those who 
 were willing to Ix'come citizens. Hence we may 
 account for the extraordinary jirivileges wiiich 
 the Jews enjoyed in them all, having eqvral rights 
 with Macedonians. At the same time (whether 
 from the example which Alexander had set or 
 from the force of circumstances) that age dis- 
 played remarkable tendencies to religious fusion 
 everywhere ; inswnuch that, — if, with Josejihus, 
 we may trust to the letter' in the 1st book ot 
 Maccal>ees (xii. 21) — even the Lucedwmonians 
 put in their claim to be regardfrl as chiUlien ol 
 Abraham. [See Sp.ikta, on the authenticity of 
 this correspondence.] But there was still another 
 cause which reconimcniled the Jews 10 the Syrian 
 kings. A nation thus diffused through their ill- 
 ctimpacted empire, formed a hiinil most useful to 
 ginl its parts together. To win the hearts of thr 
 JevTs, was to win the allegiance of a brave brother 
 hood, who wouUI be devoted to their jirotector, and 
 wlhi could never make comniuu cause with anj
 
 - ANTIOCHUS. 
 
 Miint «)f If a1 independence. For this reason An- 
 tauchua tlie Great, and douLlless liis predecessuis 
 nlso, put peculiar trust in Jewish j^arrisons. 
 In a letter whicli Joseitlms lias transcrilied 
 {Antiq. xii. 3, 1) lie orders the renioval ol' 2000 
 Jews of Mesopotamia and Bahjlonia, with all 
 Uieir goods, into Lydia and Phrygia, for garrison 
 lerv'ice : and although the authenticity of the 
 letter may be suspicious, it at any rate proves the 
 traditionary belief that the earlier kings of tlie 
 house of Seleucus had trans])oiteil trooj is of Jewish 
 families westward for military purposes. 
 
 ANTIOCHUS. 
 
 l€f 
 
 [Antiochus the Great.] 
 
 Again : through the great revolution of ^Vsia, 
 tne Hebrews of Palestine were now placed nearly 
 on the frontier of two mighty monarchies ; and 
 it would seem that the rival jioweis bid against 
 one another for heir good will — so great were 
 the benefits shovvt ed upon them by the second 
 Ptolemy. Even w ren a war broke out for the 
 possession of Coele-*Jyria, under Antiochus the 
 Great and the fourth Ptolemy (b.c. 21S, 217), 
 though the people of Jndtca, as part of the battle- 
 field and contested poi^ession, were exposed to 
 severe suffering, it was not the worse for their 
 ultimate prospects. Antiochus at least, when at 
 a later period (b.c. 19S) left master of southern 
 Syria, did but take occasion to heap on the Jews 
 and Jerusalem new honours and exemptions 
 (Joseph. Atitiq. xii. 3, 3). In short, in days in 
 which no nation of those jiarts could hope for 
 political indejjendence, tlure was none which 
 seemed so likely as the Hebrew nation to enjoy 
 an honourable social and religious liberty. 
 
 The Syrian empire, as left by Antiochus the 
 Great to his son, was greatly weaker than that 
 which the first Seleucus founded. Scarcely, in- 
 deed, had the second of the line begun to reign 
 (b.c. 280) when four sovereigns in Asia Minor 
 established their complete indepenilence : — the 
 kings of Pontus, Bitliynia, Cajipadocia, and Per- 
 gamus. In tlie next reign— that of Antiochus 
 Theos — the revolt of the Parthians under Arsaces 
 (b.c. 250) was followed speedily by that of the 
 distant province of Bactriana. For thirty years 
 together tlie Parthians continued to grow at the 
 expense of the Syrian monarchy. Tlie great 
 Antiochus passed a life of war (u.c. 22'{-lS7). In 
 his youth he had to contend against his revolted 
 satrap of Media, and afterwards against his kins- 
 man Achaeus, in Asia Minor. We have already 
 noticed his struggles in Coele-Syria against the 
 Ptolemies. Besides this, he was seven years en- 
 gaged in successful campaigns against the Par- 
 thians and the king of Buctriana ; and, finally, 
 met unexpected and staggering reverses in war 
 with the Roman.s, so that his last days were in- 
 glorious and his resources thoroughly broken. Re- 
 ipccting the re gn of his son, Seleucus Philopator 
 
 (B.C. 187-176), we know little, excei I that he left 
 his kingdom tributary to the Romans (Li\y, *iiL 
 (i) [see also SEi.Etcus Phi i.oi'ATou |. In Daniel, 
 xi. 20, he is named a raiser oj taxis, wiiich 
 shows what was the cliief direction of policy in 
 his reign. I)e Wetle renders tiie words ratliet 
 dill'erenlly (' der einen eintreiber die Krone des 
 Reiches [Judiia] durchziehen lasst'), yt t jMrhaps 
 with the same general meaning. Seleucus having 
 been assassinated by one of his courtieis, his bro- 
 ther Antiochus Kpiphaiics hastened to occupy (he 
 vacant throne, altliough the natural heir, JJenie- 
 trius, son of Seleucus, was alive, tint a hostage at 
 Rome. In Daniel, xi. 21, it is indicateil that 
 he gained the kiiigtloiu by Jlattcrics ; and there 
 can be no doubt that a most lavish brilicry \v;is 
 his chief instrument. According to the de,-.crip- 
 tlon in Livy (xii. 20), the magnificence of his 
 largesses had almost the ajipearance of insanity. 
 A prince of such a temper and in such a pi>si 
 tion, whose nominal empire was still extensive, 
 though its real strength and wealth were depart- 
 ing, may naturally have conceived, the first mo- 
 ment that he felt pecuniary need, the design of 
 plundering the Jewish temple, ki such a crisis, 
 the advantage of the deed migiit seem to over- 
 balance the odium incurred : yet, as he would 
 convert every Jew in his emjiire into a deadly 
 enemy, a second step would become necessary — 
 
 [Antiochus Kpiphanes.) 
 
 to crush the power of the Jews, and destroy their 
 national organization. The design, therefore, of 
 prohibiting circumcision and their whole cere- 
 monial, would naturally ally itself to the plan of 
 spoliation, without supposing any previous enmity 
 against tlie nation on his part. Just then, how- 
 ever, a candidate for the high-priesthood gave an 
 impetus to this course of events, by setting the ex- 
 ample of assuming Greek manners in the hojie of 
 gaining the king's favour; as is narrated in the 
 1st book of Maccabees. We iiave written enough 
 to show how surprising to the Jews must have 
 been the sudden and almost incredible change of 
 policy on the part of the rulers of Syria ; and how 
 peculiarly aggravated enmity Antiochus Epijiha- 
 nes must in any case have drawn on himself. 
 Instead of crushing his apparently puny foes, he 
 raised up heroes against himself [AIaccaup:ks], 
 who, helped by the civil wars of his successors, at 
 length achieved the deliverance of their jieople ; 
 so that in the 170th yeiir of the Seleucida; (B.C. 
 143) their indepernlence was formally acknow- 
 ledged, and they began to date from tliis period 
 (1 Mace. xiii. 42) as a new birtii of their nation. 
 Whether Antiochus Epijihanes commitled all tl>e 
 atrocities alleged in tiie second book of Maccabees 
 may be doubted; but having started amiss, with 
 no principle to guide oi restrain him, it is certiua
 
 no 
 
 ANTIOCHUS. 
 
 that he was capable of adding ci-uelty to iniquity, 
 to whatever amount the necessity of the moment 
 might prompt. The intensity ofTacitus's hatred 
 of the Jews is lamentably displayed in his re- 
 marks on this king, Hist. v. 8 : ' Ilex Antiochus, 
 demere sujierstitionem et mores Griecorum dare 
 adnixus, quominus teterrimam gcntem in melius 
 m,Htaret, Parthorum hello ])rohihi(us est.' 
 
 The change of policy, from conciliation to cruel 
 peisecution., which makes the reign of Epiphanes 
 an era in the relation of the Jews to the Syrian 
 monarchy, has })erliaps had great permanent moral 
 results. It is not impossible that perseverance in 
 the conciliating plan might have sapped the energy 
 of Jewish national faith : while it is certain that 
 persecution kindled their zeal and cemented their 
 unity. Jerusalem, by its sufferings, became only 
 the more sacred in the eyes of its absent citizens ; 
 who vied iu replacing tlie wealth which the sacri- 
 le^-ious Epiphanes had ravislied. According to 
 I Maccab. vi. 1-16, this king died shortly after 
 an attempt to plunder a temple at Elymais; and 
 Jbsephus follows that account. Appian (%r. 66) 
 adds that he actually plundered it. Strabo, how- 
 ever (^xvi. 1), and Justin (xxxii. 2) tell the story of 
 Antiochus the Great, and represent him as losing 
 his life in the attempt. Polybius and Diodorus 
 decide nothing, as the fragments which notice the 
 deed ascribe it merely to ' the king Antiochus.' 
 Nevertheless, Josejihus appeals to Polybius as 
 agreeing with him ; and the editors of Polybius 
 so understand the matter. On the whole, it would 
 appear that this attemjjt is rightly assigned to 
 Epiphanes : it is not likely to have lieen two 
 events, though the stories do not agree as to the 
 name of the deity of the temple. We ought, how- 
 ever, to add, that Winer (lieal-Worterbuch) is 
 disposed to believe tliat fatlier and son both ended 
 *i)e!r lives with the same act; and this view of the 
 case is also taken in Dr. W. Smith's Dictionary 
 of Greek and Roman Biography. 
 
 An outline of the deeds of the kings of Syria in 
 war and peace, down to Antiochus Epiphanes, is 
 presented in the 1 1th chapter of Daniel ; in which 
 Epiphanes and his father are the two principal 
 figures. Nothing but ignorance or a heated ima- 
 gination can account for some modern expositors 
 rel'erring that chapter to the events of the eighteenth 
 century after Christ. The wars and treaties of the 
 kings of Syria and Egypt from bo. 2S0 to B.C. 165 
 are described so minutely and so truly, in vv. 6-36, 
 as to force all reasonable and well-informed men 
 to clioose between tlie alternatives, — either that it 
 is a most signal and luminous prediction, or that 
 it was written after the event. 
 
 Besides Antioclius Epii)hanes, the book of Mac- 
 cabees mentions his son, called Antiochus Eupator, 
 and anotlier young Antiochus, son of Alexander 
 Balas, the usurper ; both of whom were murdered 
 at a tender age. In the two last chapters of the 
 book a fourth Antiochus appears, — called by the 
 Greeks Sidetes, from the town of Sida, in Pam- 
 phvlla. This is the last king of that house, whose 
 refutation and power were not unworthy of the 
 great name of Seleucus. In the year b.c. 134 he 
 besieged Jerusalem, and having taken it next year, 
 after a severe siege, he pulled down the walls, and 
 reduced the nation once more ti) subjection, after 
 OJi.'y ten years' independence. His moderation and 
 regard for tlieir religious feelings are contrasted by 
 Josephus with the imuiety of Epiphanes (^Antiq. 
 
 ANTIPATRIS. 
 
 xili. 8, 3-31). It is remarkable thjit, though thi 
 beginning of his qvjarrel with the Jewish high- 
 ])riest is narrated in the first book of Maccabees, 
 the story is cut siiort abruptly. 
 
 The most compact and unbroken account of 
 the kings of this dynasty is to be found in Appian 's 
 book (^l)e Rebus Syrians'), at the end. The datxs 
 of the following table are taken from Clinton'* 
 Fasti Hellenici, vol. iii. Appendix, ch. iii. : — 
 
 1. Seleucus Nicator, b.c. 312 — 2-0. 
 
 2. Antioclius Soter, his son, 280 — 261. 
 
 3. Antiochus Tlieus, his son, 261 — 247. 
 
 4. Seleucus Callinicus, his son, 247 — 226. 
 
 5. (Alexander, or) Seleucus Ceraunus, his son, 
 
 226—223. 
 
 6. Antiochus the Great, his brother, 223—187. 
 
 7. Seleucus Philopator, his son, 187 — 176. 
 
 8. Antiochus Epij)hanes, his brother, 176 — 164. 
 
 9. Antiochus Eupator, his son (a minor), 
 
 164—162. 
 
 10. Demetrius Soter, son of Seleucus Philopator, 
 
 162—150. 
 
 11. Alexander Balas, a usurper, who pretends 
 
 to be son of Antiochus Epiphanes, and is 
 acknowledged by the Romans, 152 — 146. 
 [12. Antiochus Theus, or Alexander (a minor), 
 son of the preceding. He is murdered by 
 the usurper Trypho, who contests the king« 
 dom till 140.] 
 
 12. Demetrius Nicator, son of Demetrius Soter, 
 
 reigns 146 — 141, when he was captured 
 by the Parthians. 
 
 13. Antiochus Sidetes, his brother, 141 — 128.* 
 
 F. W. N. 
 
 ANTIPAS ('ArTiVas), a person named as ' a 
 faithful witness,' or martyr, in Rev. ii. 13. 
 
 2. ANTIPAS, or Herod-Antipas. [Hebo- 
 DiAN Family.] 
 
 ANTIPATER. [Herodian Family.] 
 
 ANTIPATRIS ('AvTiiraTpls), a city built by 
 Herod the Great, on the site of a former place 
 called Caphar-saba (Xa^ap{cij8a or Ka^apcojSa. 
 Joseph. Aiitiq. xiii. 15. 1). The spot was weli 
 watered, and fertile ; a stream flowed round the 
 city, and in its neighbourhood were groves of 
 large trees (Antiq xvi. 5. 2). Caphar-saba was 
 120 stadia from Joppa ; and between the two 
 places Alexander Balas drew a trench, with a 
 wall and wooden towers, as a defence against the 
 approach of Antiochus (Antiq. xiii. 15. 1 ; De 
 Bell. Jud. i. 4. 7). Antipatris also lay between 
 Csesarea an<l Lydia, its distance from the former 
 place being twenty-six Roman miles (Itin. 
 Hieros. p. 600). These circumstances indicate 
 that Antipatris was in the midst of a plain, and 
 not at Arsuf, where the Crusaders supposed they 
 had found it (Will. Tyr. ix. 19 ; xiv. 16 ; Vitra- 
 cus, c. 23; Brocard, c. 10; comp. Reland, 
 Palccst. pp.- 569, 570). On the road from Ram- 
 lah to Nazareth, north of Ras-el Ain, Prokesch 
 (JReise i}is Ileilige Land. Wien, 1831) came to 
 a place called Kafl'r Saba ; and the position 
 which Brighaus assigns to tliis town in his map 
 is almost in exact agreement with the position 
 assigned to Antipatris in tlie Itin. Hieros. l*er- 
 ceiving this. Professor Raumer (Faliistina, )ip. 
 144, 462) hajjpily conjectured that this Kallr 
 
 * Kings of the same family reigned in Aniioct 
 until Pompey ret'.uced Syria to the foiw of i 
 Roman province, b.c. 63
 
 ANTIQUITIES. 
 
 Saba was no otlicr than the reproduced narne of 
 Caphar-saba. which, as in many otlier instances, 
 has again suprjlanted the foreign. arl)itrary, anil 
 later name of Antipatris. This conjecture lias 
 been confirmed by Professor Robinson, who gives 
 Kefr Saba as tlie name of tiie village in question 
 (^Researches, iii. 46-4S). St. Paul was brought 
 I'om Jeiusalem to Antipatris by night, on his 
 route to Cwsarea (.\cts xxiii. 31). 
 
 ANTIQUITIES, a term the meaning of which 
 IS somewhat arbitrary and unsettled, but, as li- 
 mited to the nations and people with whom the 
 Bible has to do, may be considereil as embracing 
 whatever relates to the religious, political, social, 
 domestic, and individual life, not only of the 
 Hebrew race, but also of those kingdoms, tribes, 
 and persons that were connected with, or more or 
 less influenced by, the chosen people. With the 
 exception of history and biograj)hy, tlie science 
 of Biblical antiquities comprises whatever insti- 
 tutions, laws, customs, observances, rite.sand cere- 
 monies — in a word, every influence which tended 
 to give ' form and pressure" to the Israelitish na- 
 tion in the several stages of its development prior 
 to the capture of Jerusalem by the Romans, and 
 to the Christian church during the earlier ages. 
 An accurate knowledge of the subjects embraced 
 under Biblical antiquities is of the greatest im- 
 poitance to a divine, as being indispensable to a 
 correct and complete acquaintance with tiie sub- 
 ject matter, the modes of thought, life, and action 
 presented in those books and writings, which, as 
 an expositor of the divine oracles, lie is called on 
 first to understand himself, and then to expound 
 to others. Godwyn, in the dedication of his work 
 on the subject, well remarks, ' That many have 
 no better acquaintance w ith Clirist and his a])ostles, 
 ia because they are such sti-angers with Moses and 
 Aaron. Were customes antiquated thorowly 
 knovvne, many difficulties in Scripture would ap- 
 pear elegancies, and the places which now through 
 olis -luiiy dishearten the reader would then be- 
 coDif ;;ueet invitements to an unwearied assiduity 
 in ])erusing the sacred oracles.' 
 
 The Scrijjtures themselves are the great source 
 whence a knowledge of Hebrew and Christian 
 antiquities may be drawn ; and whoever wishes 
 to have an accurate and a thorough acquaintance 
 with the suljject must, with this express purpose 
 in view, ma-ke the holy record the object of a 
 careful, sustained, and systematic study. To 
 such an effort it is that scholars owe in the main 
 (he views tliey have formed and the treatises they 
 have written. An intelligent student of the Old 
 and New Testaments may gain no inconsiderable 
 acquaintance with Biblical antiquities, even im- 
 aided by tiie researches of theological scholars. 
 Much of the Old Testament is, in the best sense 
 of the tenn, picture writing ; and the history of 
 the Saviour carries us into the very bosom of do- 
 mestic life. The knowledg« which is acquired 
 from these sources is peculiarly valuable, from the 
 •tamp of trutli which e\ery part of it bears. Few, 
 however, have the disposition, the leisure, or tlie 
 ability for the requisite study ; and therefore the 
 aid of the scholar and divine is desirable, if not 
 indispensable. 
 
 But besides what may be learned from the 
 Bcriptures themselves, much remains to be known 
 ^tiich they do not and cannot teach •, for, like all 
 »tber books relating to ages long bygone, they con- 
 
 ANTIQUITIE.S. 171 
 
 tain allusions, phraseology, mmles )f thought and 
 sjHVch, which can be iinderst(H)d eithw not at all. 
 or but imjR'rfectly, without light derive! from ex- 
 traneous sources ; and that the rather l>ecause flie 
 Hebrews were not a literary j;<;o))!e, and the ain« 
 of the sacred penmen was i'ar higher than to 
 achieve intellectual reputation. 
 
 The heatiien writers afl'ord very scanty mate- 
 rials for illustrating Bildical anti(|ultie8, so igTii>- 
 rant or prejudiced were they on to])i(;s of thai kind. 
 Indirect information and undesigneil festimonii>s 
 may be here and there extracted from their writ- 
 ings, but in general they coinnnnilcate no useful 
 information except on geograiihical and kindred 
 subjects. The least barren of them is the earliest 
 prose-writer extant, Herodotus, who, in his second 
 book and jiart of the tiiiid, furnishes snatches oi 
 information which may be of service, especially 
 in conjunction wltii the light which recent dis- 
 coveries in Egyjitian antiquities have so happily 
 thrown on the Biblical recoids (7'/.e Ei/ypt of 
 Ilei-odotus, by John Kenrick, M.A., 181 1; Man- 
 ners ami Cusioms of tin: Ancient Eyi/ptians, by 
 Sir J. G. Wilkinson. 1S37, 1811). 
 
 The study of Bildical antitpiitles, viewed as an 
 aid in the interpretation of fiie books of the Old 
 Testament, began probably on tiie return from 
 the Babylonish exile, when a lengtiiened past al- 
 ready stretched out to the Israelitish nation as 
 they looked back towards their origin ; and, tVom 
 the new circumstances in whicii they were jilaced, 
 and tlie new modes of thought and action to which 
 they had become haliifuated, they must have Ibund 
 many things in their sacred books which were as 
 diflicult to lie understood as they weie interesting 
 to their feelings. The ideas, views, and observa- 
 tions which thence resulted were held, taugiit. trans- 
 mitted, and from age to age augmented iiv Jewish 
 doctors, whose jirofessed duty was the cxpoinidino' 
 of the law of the Fathers ; and after having jiassed 
 through many generations by oral comnnmication, 
 were at lengtii, in the second and some subsequent 
 centuries of the Christian era, committed to writing 
 [Talmud]. This source of infoiniation, as being 
 traditionary in its origin, and disfigured by igno- 
 rance, prejudice, and superstition, nuist, to lie of 
 any service, be used witii the greatest care and 
 discrimination. It seems, iiowever, to have fallen 
 into .somewhat undue di'preclation, but has been 
 successfully employed by recent writers in deli- 
 neating a jjlctui'c of the age in which our Lord ap- 
 jieared {^Das Juhrhiindert des Ileils, durcii A. F. 
 Gfrorer, Stuttgard, 1838). In the first century 
 Josephus wrote two works of unequal merit, on 
 The Jewish War, and T/te Antiquities ufthe Jeirs, 
 which, notwithstanding some credulity and bad 
 faith on tiie part of the author, aflbid valuable 
 information, particularly In relation ro the man- 
 ners, customs, and ojiinioiis of ins own times. 
 Had another work of which the writer speaks 
 (preface to the Antiquities) come ilown to lhes« 
 days, which appears to have be( n a .sort of philo- 
 sophical treatise on the Mosaic laws and insfitu- 
 tioils, giving probably, after tlie manner of Mi- 
 chaelis in his Mosaisc/ies lieeht, the ratiointle of 
 the several obsirvances enjoined, some c<insider- 
 able light might have been thrown on the a.iti- 
 quities of the nation ; though the known propensity 
 of Josephus to the allegorical method of inter- 
 jiretation diminishes the regret experienced at ita 
 loss. The works of Philo, tJie celebrated Alemu*-
 
 172 
 
 ANTIQUITIES. 
 
 drian teacher, wliicli were also produced in the 
 first century, have their value too much abated 
 by his love of the same allegorical method ; which 
 he was led to pursue mainly by his desire to bring 
 llie mind of the Hebrew nation into harmony with 
 Oriental, and esjiecially Grecian, systems lA' piiilo- 
 sopliy, of wliich Philo was a diligent student and 
 a gieat admirer. 
 
 Little advantage is to be gained by the study 
 Of writers among the modern Jews; for till a very 
 recent period no sound intellectual activity was 
 found among this singular and most interesting 
 race. Inspire<l, however, by the spirit of the 
 eighteentii century, JVIeiidelsso n opened to his 
 fellow-believers a new era, and introduced a man- 
 ner of thinking and writing which prepared the 
 way for many valuable Jewish productions, and 
 gave an impulse to tlie mind of • tlie nation,' tiie 
 best outward results of which are only begirming 
 to be seen. 
 
 The study of classical antiquity, which com- 
 menced at the revival of letters, was not without an 
 influence on Biblical archaeology; but tliis branch 
 of knowledge is chieHy indebted for its most valu- 
 able results to the systematic study of the Bible, 
 and the cultivation of the long-neglected Hebrew 
 language, which the interests of the Reformation 
 both needed and called forth. It was not, how- 
 ever, till within the last century that the intelli- 
 gent spirit whicli had been ap]jlied to the exami- 
 nation of classical antiquity in Germany, so di- 
 rected the attention of Oriental scholars to the 
 true way of prosecuting and developing a know- 
 ledge of Hebrew and Christian antiquities, as to 
 bring forth treatises on the subject which can be 
 regarded as satisfactory in the present advanced 
 state of general scholarship. 
 
 In no one thing has the mental activity of re- 
 cent times contributed more to the science of 
 Bil)lical antiquities than by leading well-informed 
 travellers to [>enetrate into Eastern countries, 
 especial^ Syria, since, by communicating to the 
 world tfi» fruits of their enterprise, they have been 
 enabled to present to no small extent a picture of 
 what these lands and their inhabitants must have 
 been of old, jjcrnianence being one of the chief 
 cliaracteristics of tlie Oriental mind. From Shaw 
 ( Travels in Barbary and the Levant) and Harmer 
 (Observatio?ii on various Passarjes of So'ipture) 
 down to the invaluable work recently published 
 by Professor Robinson (Biblical Researches in 
 Palestine, 1811), a numerous series of publica- 
 tions have been put forth, which have contributed 
 to throw very great light on Jewish and Christian 
 antiquity. 
 
 The earliest treatise in the English language 
 expressly on the subject of Jewish antiquities was 
 T\ntten by Th. Godwyn, B.D. (Moses and Aaron, 
 Civil and Ecclesiastical Rites tised by the Ancient 
 Hebrews observed, &c. 4to. 1614). This work 
 passed through many editions in England ; was 
 translated into Latin by J. H. Reiz (1679): fur- 
 nished with a preface and two dissertations by 
 Witsius (1690); was illustrated, amended, and 
 enlarged by Hottinger (1710); and further anno- 
 tated on by Car))zovius, 1748. Considering the 
 age in which it appeared, Godwyn's work well 
 deserved the reputation which it gained : and for 
 a condensed, but accurate and learned view of 
 the gubiect on which it treats, may be still studied 
 witii adrantage. In 1724-5, Thomas Lewis gave 
 
 ANTIQUITIES. 
 
 to the public his Origines Hebrcea, or Antiqtiitiei 
 of the Hebrew Republic, 4 vols. 8vo., which is a 
 very elaborate and carefully compiled treatise, 
 composed of materials drawn from the best autho- 
 rities, both Jewish and Christian. A work of much 
 value, as allbrding fuller views on some topics, 
 and written in an easy style, is a {losthumoua 
 puf)lication by Dr. Jennings, entitled Jewish Anti- 
 quities, or a Course of Lectures on the three First 
 Books of Godicyns Moses and Aaron, London, 
 1766; edited, with a preface of some value, by 
 Piiilip Furneaux. Fleury's work (Dr. Adam 
 Clarke's edition) on The Manners of the Ancierit 
 Israelites, containing an Accoiuit of the peculiar 
 Customs, Laivs^ Policy, and Religion of th* 
 Israelites, offeis a pleasing and useful introduo 
 tion to the stiuly of the Old Testament Scriptures. 
 A valuable and (for ordinary purposes) comj)let« 
 treatise may be found by the Englisli student in 
 Biblical A?Uiquitics, by John Jahii, D.D., trans- 
 lated by T. C Upiiam ; rejjrinted i'rom the Ame- 
 rican translation, at Oxford in 1S36, and at Lon- 
 don in 1841. Those who wish to enter more fully 
 into the subject may ccjnsult the original, of which 
 the foregoing is an abridgment (Biblisches Ar- 
 chaologie). A carefully compiled and well-written 
 work may be found in Tlie Antiquities of the 
 Jews from authentic Sources, and their Customs 
 illustrated by Modern Travels, by W. Brown, D.D. 
 '2 vols. 8vo. Lond. 1820. Much important matter 
 is presented in Academical Lectures on the Jewish 
 Scriptures a7id Antiquities, by J. G. Palfrey, D.D. 
 LL.D. 2 vols. 8vo. Boston (U. S.), 1840." 
 
 Witliout attempting to enumerate the several 
 works which German scholars have produced on 
 the subject, we may mention as wortliy of special 
 attention, G. L. Bauer's Kurzgefas^tes Lehrbuch 
 der Hebr. Alterthiimer des A. u. N.^T.; the second 
 edition, by E. F. K. Rosenmiiller, Leipsic, 1835, 
 should be obtained; J. Mt. A. Scholz's Handbuch 
 der Bibl. Archaologie, Bonn u. Wien, 1834. De 
 Wette (Lehrbucli d&r Hebr. Jiidisch. Archaologie, 
 Leips. 1830) has also jjublished a work on the sub- 
 ject which has reached a second edition, and pos- 
 sesses no few of the excellencies which characterize 
 the writings of its accomplislied author. 
 
 Helon's Pilgrimage to Jerusalem may serve as 
 a connecting link between Jewish and Christian 
 antiquities, being almost equally useful for both, 
 as it presents a picture of Judaism in the century 
 which preceded the advent of our Saviour. The 
 English translation (by the Rev. Jolin Kenrick, 
 M.A.) from the German original is accompanied 
 by valuable notes and a jjreface, iir which may be 
 found a brief outline of the sources of Bi61ical 
 archaeology. Tlie work is conceived and executed 
 in the form of a story or novel, and possesses no 
 ordinary interest, independently of its high theo- 
 logical value, as affording a living picture of the 
 customs, opinions, and laws of the Jewish peo])le 
 In French there is a somewhat similar work by 
 M. de Montbron, under the unsuitable title of 
 Essais sur la Littii-ature des Ilebreux, 4 tomes, 
 12mo. Paris, 1819, in which a number of short 
 tales illustrative of ancient Hebrew usages and 
 opinions, are prefaced by a large and elaborate 
 Introduction, and folkuved by a great number of 
 learned and curious notes. 
 
 Among the fathers of the Christian church, 
 Jerome, who was long resident in Palestine, iiaj 
 left in various works very imjxjrtant inforniatiou
 
 ANTIQUITIES. 
 
 iwpefting tlic geojjraiihy, nati'i-ul liistory, and 
 customs of the country. Mi».t of the fatliers, 
 indeed, fnrnish, directly or indin-ctly, valuable 
 notices res])ecting Ciiristian antiquity, and in a 
 body constitute tlie source whence for the most 
 part writers and srholai-s of later ajres have (h-awn 
 their materials. The reader m;iy with advantauje 
 consult Some Account of the Writinas and Opi- 
 nions yf Clement of Ah'.randria, hy Joim. Bishoj) 
 of Linci'ln, IR35; also, Some Account of the 
 W)-itin(/s and Opinions of Justin Martyr, by the 
 same, Canibridi^e, IR'29. A usefid comjx'ndium, 
 as giving specimens of tlie writings, anil therein 
 views of the ojjinions, manners, rite^, and observ- 
 ances of the early Ciiristian church, may be foimd 
 in Bibliotheqice Choisie des J'ercs de V Eglisc 
 Grec'jue et Latine, par M. N. S. Gnillon, Paris, 
 1828. 
 
 For a long period after the revival of learning 
 the suljject of Christian antiquities received no 
 specific attention, hut was treated more or less 
 summarily i.i general histories of the Church of 
 Clirist ; as, for instance, in the great Protestant 
 work, Ecclcsiast. Historia per aliquot viros in 
 whe Mar/drburtj, 15.'i9-74 ; and on tlie part of 
 the Catholics, by Baronius, Annalcs Ecclcsiast. a 
 Christo nato ad annum 119S (Rom. 1;)5S). If 
 any excejition is to lie made to tliis general state- 
 inent, it is on behalf of Roman Catholic writers, 
 whose works, howe\-er, are too inaccurate and 
 prejudiced to be of any great value in these times. 
 The first k'^neral treatise on Christian antiquity 
 proceeded irom the pen of an Englisli divine, 
 Jos. Bingham, Origines Ecclcsiastica, or the 
 Antiquities of the Christian Church, London, 
 1708-22, 10 vols. 8vo. ; which was translated into 
 Latin by Grischow (173S), and into German 
 (1778). Th° writer was, from an early period of 
 his life, a diligent student of Christian antiquity, 
 as exhibited in tlie writings of tlie fathers ; and 
 having filled his mind witli the cojiious materials 
 which he there met with, he undertook ' to give 
 such a methodical account of the antiquities of 
 file Christian church, as others have done of the 
 Greek and Roman and Jewish antiquities ; not 
 by writing an historical or continued chronolo- 
 gical account of all transactions as they ha}>- 
 pened in the church, liut by reducing the ancient 
 customs, usages, antl jiractices of the church 
 under certain proper heads. 'I was moved with 
 a sort of emulation to see so many learned men 
 amjiloyed in publishing the antiquities of Greece 
 and Rome, whilst we iiad nothing that could be 
 called a complete collection of the anticjuities of 
 (lie church' (Preface, ed. London. L'.'Jl) The 
 work corresponds in no sliglit degree to the learn- 
 ing, care, and time bestowed ujm)i\ it ; but, besides 
 being somewhat in the rear of the learning of the 
 day, it has its value diminished l)y the High 
 Chinch notions of tlie writer, as well as l)y the 
 strength of his jiiejiidices against tlie Roman Ca- 
 tholics. A useful compendium, written in a 
 liberal spirit, and compiled chiefiy from German 
 sources, has lately bqen published in this country 
 (A Matmnl of Christian Antiquities, by Rev. J. 
 E. Riddle, M.A. London, 1S3!);, in wh'ich (Pre- 
 face, ^ 2, and Appendix 11) may be found a con- 
 cise l)Ut detailed account of the literature of 
 Christian antiquities. A more conii)lete catalogut 
 •( works, embracing each ])articular branch, is 
 ^iven in Winer's valuable liook, Ilaiuibu-ch dcr 
 
 APK. 
 
 178 
 
 Thet.togischcn TAteratur, 2 vols. 8vo. Leipiig 
 1838. .\mong tiie liest Continental treatises on 
 the general subject of ('hrislian anticjnities may be 
 mentioned those of .\ugiistl, Unni/huch d. Ch) istl. 
 Archiiol., Leijisig, lS,)(i-7, 3 vols. Svo. ; Biilimer, 
 Die Christl.-kirchl. Allcrthum M'issrnsr'uift, 
 Bresl. 1830, 8vo. ; Siegel, l^audhuch dcr < hris)'. 
 kirchl. Alterthmer, Liei])sig, l'''36-7. 3 »ols. Svo, 
 
 —J. R. B. 
 
 ANT()NI.-V, a fortress in Jerusalem, on flw; 
 north side of tlie area of the teni])le, ol'tiii men- 
 tioned by Josephus in iiis account of the later 
 wars of the Jews. It was originally luiill by the 
 Maccabees, under the name of Bails, and was 
 al'terwards rebuilt with great strength and sjih n- 
 ilour liy tlie (irsi Ileiod. In a move particular 
 description, Josephus states {Dc Bell. Jud. v. .5. S_) 
 that the fortress stood njion a rock or hill .)0 culiits 
 high, at the nortli-west corner of the teuiple 
 area, above which its wall rose to t]ie height ot 
 40 cubits. Within it had the extent and a))- 
 pearance of a palace, being diviilid into a)>'iit- 
 ments of every kind, with galleries and bath.s, 
 and broad halls or barracks for soldiers ; s« 
 that, as having everything necessary within itseltj 
 it seemed a city, while in magnificei;<e it leseni- 
 bled a ])alace. At each of the four corners was a 
 tower. Three of these were 50 cubits high ; liut 
 the fourth, at the south-east corner, was 70 cubits 
 high, anil overlooked the whole temjile, with \',« 
 courts. The fortress cotinnunicated with tin? 
 northern and western porticoes of the temj)]* 
 area, and had flights of stairs descending intB 
 both, by which the gairison could at any time 
 enter the courts of the Temple, and pievent tu- 
 mults. On the north it was sejiarated from th«; 
 hill Bezetha by a deep trench, lest it should 
 be approachable from that quarter, and llu? depth 
 of the trench ailded much to the ajijiarent dela- 
 tion of the towers {De Bell. Jml. v. 4, 2). 
 
 This Ibrtress is called t/ Trape.u^oArj in the 
 New Testament (.-Vets xxi. 31, 37), anil is \\w. 
 ' castle' into which Paul was carrieil I'rom the 
 temple by the soldiers: from the stairs of which 
 he addressed the jieople collected in the ad- 
 jacent court (Acts xxi. 31-10i. I'rol'essor Rubin- 
 son {Researches, i. 422) conceives that the deep 
 ami otherwise inexplicalile excavation called 
 'the pool of Bethesda " was part of the trench «e- 
 low the north wall of this for'ross; in which casti, 
 as he remarks, its extent must have l)een much 
 more considerable than has usually been sup- 
 posed. 
 
 APE (>)1p koph i Gr. kti-ih, Krjfsoi, tTJ^oj ; 
 whence the Latinized name Ccphia) In tire 
 Hebrew and Semitic cognate tongues, and in the 
 classical languages,these name.s, under various mo- 
 difications, designate the Simiadir, imduding, iki 
 doubt, s])eciesof Cerco])ithecus, Macacns, and V,\- 
 nocepliakis,orGuenons,ape<,and baboons; that m, 
 all the animals of the quadrumaiious order kno\\ n 
 to the Hel)rews, .\rabs, Egy])ti,ins, and the classi<-al 
 writers. Accordingly, we find Pliny and Soliiuis 
 sjieaking of Ethiopian Ceplii exhibited at Ri<n»e : 
 and in the uijjier jtart of the celebrated Pric- 
 nestine mosaic rejiresenting the inundation of t?>p 
 Nile, figures of Simiada; occur in the region wliich 
 indicates Niiljia; among others, one in a tree, 
 with the name KHiriEN beside; it, whicii may 
 be taken for a Cercopithecus of the Giieiioii group. 
 But in the 'riumphal procession of Thothmes 111
 
 YU 
 
 APE. 
 
 APE. 
 
 tfi Tliclies, nations from the interior of Africa, 
 per. 'ably from Nubia, bear curiosities and tribute, 
 ail -ng which the Camelopanlalis or GiralVe and 
 uf. Ejuadrumana may be observed. The smallest 
 
 [Apw fi»,m Rosellini'a Monumenti dell' Kgitto.] 
 
 and m 1st pfTaceil animals may be apes, but the 
 otheis, and in particular the three fissured and 
 coloar9(l fiom'careful drawings, in Plate xxi. of 
 Ros'*llini"s woik, are undoubtedly Macaci or Cy- 
 nocephali, tnat is. species of the i^enus baboon, or 
 baboon-like apes. Naturalists and commentators, 
 not deterred by the intei-minalile list of errors 
 which the practice has occasioned, are often unne- 
 cessaril.v anxious to assign the names of animals 
 noticed in Scripture and in the ancient classics, 
 to species characterized by the moderns; although 
 the original designations are to i)e taken in a 
 familiar sense, and often extend even beyond a 
 generical meaning. In the instance before us 
 we have the futility of tiiis jiractire fully exem- 
 plified; for Buffon presumed his Mona ("Cerco- 
 pithecus Mona') to be *^he Kebos of the Greeks, 
 and not without plausibility, since the western 
 Arabs, It seems, apply thf word Moune to all 
 long-taded ajjes. L'nnaeus referred Cephus to his 
 Sunia Cephus, now Cercopithecus Cephus, or 
 Moustache Giienon, of a dilTerent group ; while 
 Licl'teustein referred it to his Simia, or rather, as 
 now arianged, Cercoyjithecus Diana. But as 
 none of these are known to iuliabit eastern Africa, 
 it is m.ore probable that the Keipen of the Pra?- 
 nestine mosaic is in reality the Cerco])ithecus 
 Giiseovirides, or Grivet of Cuvier, which, with 
 etpial pretensions in regard to fonn, has the ad- 
 lan'age of being a native of Etliiopia and Nu.bia, 
 nnd belongs, with t'ne two last mentioned, to the 
 group whicli has been called Callitrix. 
 
 But these considerations do not serve to point 
 out the Koph of Scripture: for that animal, named 
 only twice (1 Kings x. 22, and 2 Cliron. ix. 21), 
 w m l)ot!) cases associated with D^'Din, Thoukiim, 
 perhafjs errwneously rendered ' peacocks.' Now 
 
 neither peacocks nor pheasants are indigenous ilt 
 Africa : they belong to India and the mountaim 
 of liigh Asia, and therefore the version ' pea« 
 cc cks,' if correct, would decide, without doubt, 
 not only that Koph denotes none of the Simiadse 
 above noticed, but also tiiat tlie fleet of Tarsliisli * 
 visited India or the Australasian islands. Tlum- 
 kiim, apparently meaning crested, indicates birds, 
 perhaps parrots, but cannot refer to the pintado or 
 Guinea hen, the Numidia of naturalists and the 
 Meleagris of the ancients ; nor to the Pterocles or 
 Sandgrouse, both being familiarly known in Upper 
 Egypt, and the last mentioned, in particular, 
 abundant in Arabia and Palestine. The inter- 
 pretation proposed by Hase, which would con- 
 vert Ko]jhim into Succim — dwellers in caves, is 
 inadmissible, such a description being quite in- 
 applicalile to long-tailed monkeys. Like the 
 wliole order of quadrumana, they are constituted 
 not for troglodyte, but arboreal life, or to be 
 dwellers in trees; baboons alone venturing be- 
 yond woody covers in steep rocky situations, and 
 sometimes finding shelter in clefts. For these 
 reasons we conclude that the Hettew koph, and 
 names of the same root, were, by the nations in 
 question, used generically in some instances and 
 specifically in others, though the species were not 
 tliereby defined, nor on that account identical. 
 
 Baboons, we have already shown, were Icnown 
 to the Egyptians, and cannot well have escaped 
 observation among the people of Palestine, since 
 they resided close u|)on the great caravan-routes, 
 which, as is well known, were frequented from 
 the earliest anticjuity by showmen exhibiting 
 wild beasts. In Egypt, however, a baboon was 
 the type of some abstract power in nature or in 
 metaphysics; as such the animal was idolized, 
 and figures of a cynocephalus were invariably 
 placed on the summit of weighing-scales, where 
 they still appear on the monuments. 
 
 [Macacuj Arabicus.] ^ 
 
 If there be truth, as the following authorities 
 show, in the existence of a large ape or baboon in 
 Yemen, and even in Mesopotamia, the untract- 
 al;le and brutal character of the whole genus 
 would be sutHcient 1o sanction the Arabic name 
 Saadan, and tlie Hebrew DHtJ*, Saciim ; which 
 indicate the satyrs of the desert, noticed m Mr. 
 Rich's Memoir on tJie Ruins of Babylon, p. 30, 
 
 * If the voyage exrended to the Spice Islands, 
 then, indeed, both peacocks ahd ourang-outans 
 were at hand.
 
 APE. 
 
 where ihiy are denominated Sied Assad, and 
 described as found in woody places near Seniana, 
 on tlie Euphrates. Thus we liave flio D"'"l''yt^', 
 Saj/rim, or ' hairy ones' ol'-Levit. xvii. 7, in accord- 
 ance with Pliny, who conceived satyrs to be lar^e 
 a]>e«. In the Prsnestine mosaic, before quoted, a 
 baboon is figured whicii, we are assured, liad tiie 
 name Catyi'oc, or Satyrus, by its side.* The 
 only species of ape of llie l)abi>(jn form known in 
 Arabia is the Mocko of Edwards, noticed in our 
 illustrated series of drawinj^s as Macaciis Ara- 
 hicus, a species nearly allied to Cynoceplialus 
 Hamadryas oii the one hand, and to Mac. Silenus 
 on the other — all three jiowerful, fierce, and libi- 
 dinous animals. Mac. Arabicus may ultimately 
 prove to be a true baboon, and the same as Simia 
 cynomolgus of Hassekjuist. It is a remarkable 
 •pecies for stature and aspect, having the dog-like 
 uose and approximating eyes of baboons •, tlie skin 
 of the face of a reddish colour ; tlie snout, lips, and 
 diin black; the foreliead low, and the sides of the 
 head furnished with bushy, long, white hair; tiie 
 breast, arms, and shoulders similarly covered, but 
 the loins and lower extremities of a fine chestnut; 
 tlie tail of the same colour, of no great length, 
 tufted at the end, and all the hands black. It is 
 found from the straits of Bab-el- Mandeb, through 
 Southern Arabia to the Euphrates, and even be- 
 yond the junction of that river with the Tigris. 
 Like other large and formidable Simiadai, it is 
 less solicitous about the vicinity of trees, because 
 it is armed with powerful canines; holds its enemy 
 firmly grasjied, and fights, not singly, but assisted 
 by the whole troop : it frequents scrubby under- 
 wood near water, but becomes more rare eastward 
 ol' Yemen. f Comparing the characlers of this 
 •pecies, we find it by configuration, colours, and 
 manners peculiarly adapted to the jmrposes of 
 idolatry in its grossest and most debasing aspect. 
 The Hebrew people, already familiar with a si- 
 milar worship in Egyj.t, may have cojiied the 
 native tribes in the wilderness, and thus drawn 
 Hjxin themselves the remonstrance in Levit. xvii. 
 7, where the allusion to these animals is very 
 descriptive, as is that in Isa. xiii. 21 ; and again, 
 xxxiv. 14, where the image is perfect, when we 
 picture to ourselves the ' hairy ones' lurking about 
 the river in the juniper and liquorice jungle, as 
 described by Mr. Eich. 
 
 It is not unlikely that the baboon idol may 
 have had goat s horns, since we find the same attri- 
 bute on rams' heads in Egypt ; on lions' heads on 
 coins of Tarsus, and on horses' and elephants' 
 heads on medals of Syrian kings. The Greek 
 mythologists, ignorant of the baboon figure, may 
 have preferred an imaginary comjxiund of man 
 and goat to that of tlie cynoceplialus, which tiiey 
 confounded with the hya?na, or, in their love of 
 ideal beauty, may have considered it too disgust- 
 ing even for an idol. Perhajis the most ancient 
 form of the Arabian Uiolalt was that of a baboon, 
 
 * This name does not occur in the copies in 
 our possession, and, we fear, was lost in the break- 
 ing up of the mosaic, which is now preserved 
 fragmentally in dilTerent museums. 
 
 + See Edwards's GleamtigH, and Pennant's 
 Historif of Qi(adrxipcds, 4t«. vol. i. p. 195. Tlie 
 inlbrm.ition in the text is deri\ed from an officer 
 who WIS in tlie Hopo irable East India Company's 
 Dirve> ing "'vice 
 
 APHEREMA. 
 
 175 
 
 male or female, ttie name apparently having soma 
 reference to red, and to the Indian monkey- 
 worship (see Gesiier, s. v. ' Ilya-na'). Urolalt 
 and nionkey-woisliip are connected with a solju 
 mytlius. - C. H. S. 
 
 APELLES ("ATreAATJj), a Christian at Rom#, 
 whom Paul salutes in his Epistle to the Church 
 there (llom. xvi. 10), and calls -rtiv 56Kifxov iv 
 Xpi(TT(p, ' approved in Clirist,' i. e. an a)iproved 
 Christian. C)rigen doubts wiiether he may not 
 have been the same person with A|)ollos ; but thii 
 is far from likely [Apoi,i,os]. According to the 
 old church traditions Ajielles was one of the 
 seventy disciples, and bishop either of Smyrna or 
 Heracleia (Epiph. Cmit. Hcercs. p. 20 ; Fabrici 
 Lex. E<KingeliL pp. llo, 116, &c.). Tiie name 
 itself is notalile from Horace's ' Credat Ju- 
 dseus Apella, non ego' (.S'«<. i. 5), by which he 
 less probably means a circumcised Jew in ge- 
 neral, as many think, than a particular Jew 
 of that name, well-known at Rome. 
 
 APHARSACHITES or Aphausathchites 
 
 (X.^SPIDS or N^Dnp"}BX ; Sept. 'AcpapcraOa- 
 Xo^oi), the name of the nation to which belonged 
 one portion of the colonists whom the Assyrian 
 king planted in Samaria (Ezra iv. 9; v. 6"!. 
 Schulthess {Farad, p. 362) identifies the ' Ajjhar- 
 sachites' with the Persian, or. rather Median 
 * Paratacene' of the Greek geograpliers (Strabo 
 xi. 522; XV. 732; Plin. xvi. 29). Tiiis con- 
 clusion is strengthened by the fact tliat the A 
 is often prosthetic in Strabo ; as in xv. 764, 
 wiiere the names Mardi and Amardi are inter- 
 changed. 
 
 APHEK (pDK ; Sept. 'A(\>(k) ; tlie name sig- 
 nifies strength; lience a citadel or fortifieii town. 
 There were at least three places so called, viz. : 
 
 1. APHEK, a city in llie tribe of Asher 
 (Josh. xiii. 4 ; xix. 30;, called |TQX in Judg. 
 i. 33, where we also learn that the tribe was 
 unable to gain possession of it. This must Ite 
 the same place with the ''h<pa.Ka. whicii Euse- 
 bius {Constant, iii. 55) and Sozomen (jip. 2, .5) 
 place in Lebanon, on the river Adonis, where 
 there was a famous temjile of Venus. A vilhige 
 called Afka is still found in Lebanon, situated 
 at the bottom of a valley, and may possilily mark 
 the site of this A|)liek (Burckhardt, i. 70 ; Richter, 
 p. 107). 
 
 2. APHEK, a town near which Benhadad was. 
 defeated by the Israelites (1 Kings xx. 26, sq.\ 
 which seems to correspond to the Aphaca of 
 Eusebius (Onoinast. m''A<paKa), situateii to the 
 east of the Sea of Galilee, and which is mentione<l 
 by Burckhardt, Seetzen, and others under tl>€ 
 name of Feik. 
 
 3. APHEK, a city in^the tribe of Issachar 
 not far from Jezreel, wliere the Pliili-;tines twice 
 encamped before battles with the Israelites (I Sam. 
 iv. 1 ; xxix. 1 ; comp. xxviii. 4). Either this 
 or the first Aphek, but most probably this, was 
 tiie Aphek mentioned in Josh. xii. IH, as a royal 
 city of the Canaanites. 
 
 APHEKAH (.ni^DK), a town in the mom. 
 tains of Judah (Jusli. xv. 23). 
 
 APHER]':MA CA<paip(ixa), one of the tlire* 
 toparc'iies added to Judaia by the kings of Syria 
 (1 Mace. xi. 34). This is perhaps the Ef litem 
 or Ei)hraim mentioned in John xi 51.
 
 n« 
 
 APHSES. 
 
 APHSES, liead of tlio eighteenth sacerdotal 
 family of the twenty-four into wliich the priests 
 were divided by David for the service of the 
 temple (I Ghron. xxiv. 15). 
 
 APOCRYPHA {aTr6Kpv(pa, sc. fii^Kla, hid- 
 den^ secreted, mi/sterious\ a term in tlieology, 
 apulied in various senses to denote certain liooks 
 claiming a sacred character. The word occurs 
 Mark iv. 22 : ' There is nothing hid, wiiich shall 
 not be manifested, neither was anytliing kept se- 
 cret {an:6xpv<pov) .but that it should come abroad ;' 
 also Luke viii. 17 ; and Col. ii. 3 : ' In whom 
 are hid (a.n-6Kpvcl>0L) all the treasures of wisdom 
 and knowledge." It is first found, as denoting 
 a certain class of books, in Clem ns Alexandrinus, 
 Stromata, 13, c. -1, l/c rivhs d.KOKpv(puv. 
 
 In tlie early ages of the Christian Church this 
 term was frequently us: d to denote books of an 
 uncertain or anonymous author, or of one who 
 had written under an assumed name. Its a{> 
 plication, however, in this sense is far from 
 being distinct, as, .strictly speaking, it would 
 include canotdcal books whose authors were un- 
 known or uncertain, or even psftudejni/raphal. ' Let 
 us omit,' says St. Augustine, ' those fabulous books 
 of Scripture, which are called apocryphal, be- 
 cause their secret origin was unknown to the fathers. 
 We do not deny that Enoch, the seventii from ' 
 Adam, wrote something, as Jude asserts in his 
 canonical Epistle tliat he did ; but it is not with- 
 out a purpose tliat they are not found in the 
 Jewish canon preserved in the Temple. The 
 books, therefore, which are publislied in his name 
 are riglitly judged by prudent men not to be his, 
 as more recent works were given out as written by 
 apostles, which, however,- liave been separated, 
 upon diligent investigation, from the canon of 
 Scripture, under the name of apocryphal.'' And 
 again : ' From such expressions as " The Book of 
 the Wars of the Lord " men have taken occasion 
 to forge books called apocryphal.'' And in his 
 book against Faustus, he says : ' Apocryjihal books 
 are not such as are of authority, and are kept se- 
 cret: but they are lx)oks whose original is obscure, 
 and which are destitute of proper testimonials, their 
 authors being unknown, and their characters either 
 heretical or suspected.' Origen also, on Matt, 
 xxii. had applied the tei-m apocryphal in a simi- 
 lar way : ' This passage is to be found in no ca- 
 nonical book' (i-egulari, for we liave Origen 's 
 work only in the Latin translation by Rutinui), 
 'but in the apocryphal book of Elias' {secretis 
 EUcb). And, ' This is plain, that many examples 
 have been adduced by the apostles and evangelists, 
 and inserted in the New Testament, which we do 
 not read in the canonical Scriptures which we 
 possess, but wliich are found in the Apocrypha'' 
 f Origen, Praef. in Ccintic). So also Jerome, re- 
 feiring to the words (Eph. v. 14) ' Awake, thou that 
 sleepsst, and arise from the dead,' observes that 
 ' the apostle cited this frosn hidden (reconditis) 
 iirophets, and such as seem to be apocryphal, as 
 he has done in several otlier instances.' Epipha- 
 nius thought that this term was applied to such 
 liooks as were not placed in tlie Ark of the 
 Covenant, hut jnit away in some other place (see 
 Suicer's T/iesaurus for the true reading of the 
 passage in this Father). LTnder the term apocry- 
 phalha.ve been included books of a religious cha- 
 racter, which were in circulation among private 
 Christians, but were not allowed to be read in the 
 
 APOCRYPHA. 
 
 public assemblies; such as 3 and 4 Esdras, and 
 3 and 4 Maccabees. 
 
 In regard to the New Testament, the term iiai 
 been usually applied ft) books invented by here- 
 tics to favour their views, or l>y Catliolics undei 
 fictitious signatures. Of this description were 
 many spurious or apocryphal gospels (wh'.'.h see). 
 It is probably in reference to such that Basil, 
 Cyril of Jerusalem, and Jerome gave cautioni 
 agahist the reading of apocry])hal books; although 
 it is possible, from the context, that the last-named 
 Father alludes to the books which were also called 
 Ecclesiastical, and afterwards Deutero-ccnw7iical. 
 Tlie following passage from his Epistle to Lajta, 
 on the education of her daughter, will serve to illus- 
 trate this part of our subject : — ' Let her first learn 
 the Psalter, and give her hours of leisure to those 
 holy songs. From the Proverbs of Solomon s'ne 
 will gather practical instruction ; Ecclesiastea 
 will teacli her to despise the world; in Job she 
 will find examples of virtue and endurance. Then 
 let her go to the Gospels, and never lay them down. 
 The Acts of the Apostles, with the Ejiistles, mast 
 be imbibed with all the ardour of her heart 
 When her mind is thoroughly s^ed witli thes€ 
 treasures, she may commit the Prophets to her me- 
 mory, together with the Heptateuch, and the books 
 of Kings and Chronicles, with those of Esdras 
 and Esther. 'The Song of Solomon she may 
 read last without danger : if she reads it earlier, 
 she may not discern that a spiritual union is ce- 
 lebrated under carnal words. All apocryphal 
 books sliould be avoided ; but if she ever wishes 
 to read them, not to establish the truth of doc- 
 trines, but with a ri. verential feeling for the 
 truths they signify, she should be told tliat 
 they are not the works of the authors by whose 
 names they are distinguished, that they contain 
 niucli that is faulty, and that it is a task requir- 
 ing great prudence to find gold in the midst of 
 clay. The works of Cj'prian should ever be in 
 her hands. She may run over the epistles of 
 Athanasius, and the books of Hilary, without any 
 danger of stumlding. Let her pleasure be in 
 sucti treatises and writers of such character as 
 most evince the piety of an unwavering faith. 
 All other authors she should read to judge of 
 what they say, not simply to follo^v their instruc- 
 tions.' And to the same effect Pliilastrius : — 
 ' Among whoin are the Manichees, Gnostics [&c.|, 
 wlio, having some apocryphal books under the 
 apostles' names {i. e. some separate Acts), are 
 accustomed to despise the canonical Scriptures ; 
 but these secret Scriptures, that is, apocryphal, 
 though they ought to be read by the perfect fiir 
 their moials, ought not to be read by all, as igno- 
 norant heretics have added and biken away what 
 they wished.' He then proceeds to say that the 
 books to which he refers are tlie^cfs of Andrew, 
 written by ' the disciples who were his followers,' 
 &c. : Quos conscripserunt discipuli time sequente$ 
 apostolum (Heercs. 40). 
 
 In the Bibliothequc Sacree, by the Rev. Domi- 
 nican Fathers Richard and Giiaud (Paris, 1822)^ 
 the tenii is defined to signify — I) anonymous or 
 pseudejiigraphal books ; (2) those which are imjI 
 publicly read, although they may be road with 
 edification in pri ate ; (3) those which do not 
 jmss for authentic and of divine authority, al» 
 though they pass for being comjiosed by a sacifd 
 author or an apostle, a.s the Epistle of Barnabat
 
 APOCRYPHA. 
 
 and ,4) dan^rous books composed by ancient 
 heretics to favour llicir opinions. Tlicy also apply 
 fhe name ' to books wliicli, aller liaving been con- 
 tested, are put into tiie canon by consent of the 
 cliurclies. as Tol)it, &c.' And Jalin apjilies it in it^ 
 most strict sense, and tliat which it 1i;ls boine since 
 the fourth century, to books wiiich, from tlieir in- 
 scription, or the author's name, or the subject, mij^ht 
 easily be taken for inspired books, but are not st> in 
 reality. It lias also been api)lied, l)y Jerome, to 
 certain l)ooks not found in tlie Hebrew canon, but 
 yet publicly read From time immemorial in the 
 Clnisttan cliurcli for cdiflcat'on, allhoaifh not 
 considered of authority in controversies of faith. 
 Tiiese were also teimecl Ecclesiastical books, and 
 ''onsisted of the books of Tobit, Wisdom, Ecclesi- 
 asticus, Baruch, the two (list books of Maccabees, 
 the seven last chapters (accordins; to C.irdinal 
 Hugo's division) of the Ijook of Esther, and those 
 (so called; parts of the book of Daniel whicli are 
 not found in Hebievv, viz. the Soii'^ of the Child- 
 ren, the Speech of Azariali, the History of Su- 
 sannah, and tiie Fable (as Jerome calls it) of 
 Bel and the Dras^on. Tliese have been denomi- 
 nated, for distinction's sake, the dcutero-canonical 
 books, in as niucii as they were not in the original 
 or Hebrew canon. In this sense they arc calied 
 by some the Antilegomena of the Old Testament. 
 ' The uncanonical books,' says .\thanasius, or tiie 
 author of the Si/iiopsis, ' are divided into antiis- 
 ^onena and apocrypha' [Deuteko-canonicai.J. 
 
 Of Spurious and Apocnjphal Books, as distinct 
 from Antilcgomciia or Ecclesiastical. — Among 
 f..is class are doubtless to be considered the 3id 
 and -ith books of Esdras ; and it is no doubt in re- 
 ference to these that, in his letter to V'igilantius, 
 Athariasius speaks of a work oi Esdras which he 
 says that he had never even read. Playing upon 
 (he name of \'igilantius, lie adiis, ' You sleep vigi- 
 lantly (tu vigilans dormis), and write in your 
 sleep; proposing to me an apocryphal book, which 
 is read by you and others like you, under the name 
 ci' JiKclras, wherein it is written tliat no one should 
 he prayed for after his death (See 4 Esdras, viii. 
 
 36-i4) Why take in hand what the Church 
 
 does not receive? Read, if you like, all the 
 feigned revelations of all the patriarchs and pro- 
 phets, and when you liave learned them, sing 
 ;hein in the women's weaving-shops, and propose 
 them to be read in your tavenis, that you may 
 the more readily by them allure the unlelteied 
 i>a4»ble to drink.' 
 
 Of the same chai-acter are also the Book of 
 Enoch, the Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs, 
 the Assumption of Moses, &c. ; which, as well as 
 3 and 4 Esdras, lieing by many considcied as the 
 fictions of Cliristians of the second and third cen- 
 turies, it is doubtful whether they ought (0 be 
 classed in tiie Apocrypha of the Old or of the 
 New Testament. Origen, liov/ever, believed the 
 New Testament to have contained citations 
 from books of this kind written liefoi-e the times 
 of the apostles ; and, in reference to such, ob- 
 »erves, in his preface to the Canticles, 'This, how- 
 ever, is manifest, that many )iassages are cited 
 either by tiie apostles or the evangelists, and in- 
 serted in the New Te.>tament, which we do not 
 read in those Scriptures of the Jews which we call 
 canonical, but whicii are nevertheless f(Hmd in 
 ap<hvyphal books, or are taken from them. But 
 tiu4 will give no autliority to apooypliul writings. 
 
 APOCRYPH.^1. 
 
 177 
 
 for the l)ounds which our fathers have fixed are 
 not to be removed ; anil ^xissibly the a]>.islle.» and 
 evangelists, full of the Holy (jliost, might know 
 what should be taken out of those Scriptures and 
 what not. But we, who have not such a measuru 
 of the Spirit, cannot, without great danger, pr(« 
 sume to act In that manner.' Then, in his Letter to 
 Apiunus, he observes, that there were iiiiny things 
 kept from the knowledge of tiie public, but whi<;h 
 were p.eserved in the hidden or upocryphal book.s, 
 to which he refers 'J.e jKissage (Hib. xi. 37), 
 ' The,\' weic sawn asunder.' Origen ])iobably 
 alluues here to tliat descri])lion of liooks whicii 
 the Jews called D'T-IJH, a word of the same 
 signiKcation with apocrypha, and applied to 
 books laid aside, or not peimiffeil to be jiublicly 
 read, or considered, even when divinely inspired, 
 not (it liir indiscriminate circulation : among the 
 latter were the first chapter of Ge'iesis, the Song of 
 Solomon, and our last eight chapters of tiie jiro- 
 phet Ezekiel. 
 
 Tiie liooks which we have here enumerated, such 
 as the Book of Enoch, &c., which were all known to 
 the ancient Fathers, have descended to our times ; 
 and, although incontestalily spurious, aie of con- 
 siderable value fiom their antiipiity, as throwing 
 light ujion the religious and theological opinions 
 of the liist centuries. The most curious are tiie 
 3id and 4th books of Esdras, and the Book of 
 Enoch, which has been but recently discovered, 
 and has acquired peculiar interest from its con 
 taining the jiassage cited by the apostle Jude 
 [Enoch]. Kor aie tlie a];ocryplial books of 
 the New Testament destitute of interest. Al- 
 thougli the spurious Acts extant lia\ e no longer 
 any defenders of their genuineness, they are not 
 without their value to the liiblical student, and 
 have been applied with success to illustrate t'..e 
 style and language of the genuine books, to which 
 they bear a close analogy. The American trans- 
 lator of Mosheim's Eccksiastical History ferin.i 
 them ' harmless and ingenious fictions, intended 
 eitlicr to gratify the fancy or to silence the ene- 
 mies of Christianity.' 
 
 Some of the ajiocryplial books have not been 
 without their defenders in modem times. The 
 Apostolical Canons and Constitutions, and the 
 various Liturgies ascribed to St. Peter. St. Mark, 
 &c., and published by Fabriciu.s, in his Codex 
 Apocryphits Aovi Testamenti, were considered 
 by the learned and eccentric William \\iiist()n, 
 and the no less learned Gralie, to be of equal 
 authoiity with any of the cunfessedly genuine 
 apostolic comjiositums (see VVhiston's Priinitiie 
 Christianity and Gialfe's Spiciler/itim). 
 
 Tliey are, however, regarded by most as ori- 
 ginally not of an earlier date than the second 
 century, and as containing interpolations which 
 lielray the fouith or fifth : they can, fh. refore, 
 only be consideied as eviilence of the Tiracliee 
 of the Church at the ]ieiiod when ti;ey wei.; 
 written. They have generally been ajipealed In 
 by the learned as having j)ieser\e<l the tiaditionfi 
 of the age immediately succeeding the ajwstolic : 
 and, from tlie lemaikable coincidence which i« 
 observable in the most es.sential [wifs of tiie so- 
 called Apostolic Liturgies, it is by no means im- 
 piobalile that, notwithstanding their iiiterjioia- 
 tions, they contain the lea(iing jK)rtinns of the 
 most ancii.-nt Chii.stian forms <if woisliip. 
 
 Must of the ajHicrypluil Gus^'cL ai»<I Act*
 
 178 
 
 APOCRYPHA. 
 
 noticed by (he fathers, and condemned in the ca- 
 teloffue of (ielasius, which are {generally tliought 
 to have been the fictions of heretics in the 
 second century, have long since fallen into "<bli- 
 vion. Of those which remain, although sc-ne 
 have been considered by learned men as ge- 
 nuine works of tlie apostolic age, yet the greater 
 part aro universally rejected as s])uriou3^ and as 
 written in the second and third centuries. A few 
 are, wilh great ajjpearance of probability, assigned 
 to Leucius C'/larinus, supposed to be the same 
 with Leontius auJ Seleucus, who was notorious 
 for similar forgeries at the end of the thini cen- 
 tury. The autliorship of tlw Epistle of Barnabas 
 is still a matter of dispute ; and there appears 
 tut too much reason to believe that there existed 
 grounds for tlie cluirge made by Celsus against 
 the early Christians, that they had interpolated or 
 fjrged the ancii'Tit Sibylline Oracles. 
 
 In the letter of Pope Innocent I. to St. Exupere, 
 bishop of Toulouse, written about tlie year 405, 
 after giving a catalogue of the l)Ooks forming the 
 canon of Scripture (which includes live books of 
 Solomon, Tol)it, and two books of Maccabees), he 
 observes : — ' But the others, which are written under 
 the name of Mattiiias, or of James the Less, or those 
 which were wriiten by one Leucius under the name 
 of Peter and John, or those under tiie name of 
 .Andrew by Xenocheris ami. Leonidas the philoso- 
 pher, or under the name of Thomas ; or if there 
 be any others, you must know tliat they are not 
 only to be rejected, but condemned.' These sen- 
 timents were ai'terwarls confirmed by the Ro- 
 man Council of seventy bishojjs, held under Pope 
 Gelasius, in 494, in tlie acts of which there is a 
 long list of apocryphal Gospels and Acts, the 
 greater part of which are supposed to have pe- 
 rished. The acts of this coiuicil, however, are 
 not generally considered to be genuine. 
 
 But, whatever authority is to be ascribed to 
 tliese docum^mts, it cannot be denied that the 
 early Church evinced a high degi'ee of discri- 
 mination in the difficult task of distinguishing 
 the genuiiip l':oai the spiuious books. ' It is not 
 so Cosy a rtifiMt^ ^ savs the learned Jeremiah Jones, 
 ' as is c:)t^.ftv>E'y imagined, rightly to settle tlie 
 canon of tlh- Neiv Testament. For my own part, 
 1 declare, wi«h many learned men, that in the 
 whole compais of learning I know no question in- 
 volved with more intricacies and jieiplexing dif- 
 ficulties than this ' (^Kew and Full Method, vol. i. 
 )■>. 1.5). Referring to the same subject, the i)ious 
 Kicha/d Baxter had also observed, ' Few Christians 
 among us, for ought I find, liave any better than the 
 Poplsli implicit faith in this point, nor any better 
 arguments than the Pajjists have to prove the 
 Scripture to be the word of Gel. They have 
 received it by tradition. Godly ministers and 
 Cliristians tell them so : it is impious to doubt 
 
 of it : therefore they believe it It is 
 
 itrange Xo consider how we all abhor that piece of 
 Popery, as most injurious to God of all the rest, 
 which resolves our faith into the authority of the 
 Church, and yet that we do content ourselves 
 with the same kind of faith, only with this dif- 
 ference — the Papists believe Scripture to be the 
 word of God, liecause their Church saith so ; and 
 we, liecfiuse our Church or our leaders say so. . . . 
 Many a thousand do profess Christianity, and 
 Kalously hate the enemies thereof, upon the same 
 grounds, to the same end, and frara the same cor- 
 
 APOCRYPHA. 
 
 rupt principles, as the Jews did hate and V.il' 
 Ciirist. It is the religion of the country, where 
 every man is reproached tliat believes otiierwise. 
 Had they been born and bred in the reli- 
 gion of Mahom."t, tliey wouhl have been ax zea- 
 lous for him.' (Saint's. Jiesl, p. 2.) 'If the 
 question be," says Mr. Jones, ' w)iy Barnabas's 
 K])istle be rejected and Jude's received — why the 
 (rospel of Peter is excluded and the Kjiistle of 
 Peter admitted into the canon as the word ut 
 God, &c., alas ! how little shall we have given ill 
 answer, unless what Baxter says, " We believe 
 as the Church does ! ' " Mr. Jones conceixes that 
 testimony and tradition are the princi))al nrieans 
 of ascertaining wliether a liook be canonical or 
 apocryphal. Inquiries of this kind, however, must 
 of necessity be confined to tlie few ; and it is only 
 to those who have time aiul op]i()rtuiiity that tee 
 foregoing observations can a]i])ly. Tlie niass of 
 Christians, who have neither time nor othei means 
 of satisfying themselves, must conlide, in ques- 
 tions of this kind, either in the judgment of the 
 learned, or the testimony at least, if not the a«- 
 thority, of the Ciiurch ; and it ought to be a 
 matter of much tliaiikfuhiess to the jirivate Chris- 
 tian, that the researches of the most learned and 
 diligent iiKiuirers have consjiired, in rcs])ect ta 
 the chief books of Scripture, in add'iig the weight 
 of their evidence f.) the te.jtiunmv of the Church 
 Univ<'isa1. 
 
 The following are the ])iinci]>a] a{H)cryphal 
 (or spurious) liooks of the Old Testament, which 
 have descended to our times. The greater 
 number of them can scarcely be considered as 
 properly belonging to the Apocrypha of the Old 
 Testament, as they have been most probably 
 written since the Christian era, and not before th-* 
 second century : — Third and fourth Ksdras, the 
 Book of Enoch, the apocry])hal book of Eliiis the 
 Propliet, the third, f.mrth, and lifth books of Mac- 
 cabees (received by the Greek Church), the Ascen- 
 sion of Isaiah, the Assumption of Moses, witii a 
 few others. 
 
 The best accounts of the apocryphal boolts will 
 be found in Fabricii Codex I'seiida/iifjraphus V. T 
 Hamburg and Leip/.tg. 1713 ai.d 1741, and Cof/ea; 
 A/iocryphns .\. T , ll.iniburg, 1713-1722-, Atwta- 
 riurn <'odicin Apocr;/f-Jii A' 7' I'ubficiani, edidit 
 And. Birch, Copei.hagen, 1 '='01. ,-) New and Full 
 Melh'od of Settlint] the Canon of the N. T., by the 
 Rev. Jerfrnlali Joihh, Oxfoitl. 17'.J<j— last edition, 
 Oxford, l'V27. l)n Pin, l>ruli-f/o„>cna,\nist. 1701, 
 and Canon of the Old and !\cw Testaments, Lon- 
 don, 17U0; a!id especially Coder Apoenjphus 
 A'. T., e libris ineditls 7nasinii Gu/licanis, Ger- 
 nianicis, ct Italicis, collec^ns, receusitut:, notisqvs 
 et prolcf/omcnis illtistrain/t, opera et studioT.C 
 Thilo, torn. i. Li))s. 1832, 8\o. : the remaining two 
 volumes are not yet jmblibhed. Vol. i. contains: 
 1. The hist irv of Josejih the (yaiDeiiter, Arali. and 
 Lat. 2. The Gospel of tlie Infancy. 3. The 
 Protevangelion of James, and the (rospel of Tho« 
 mas the Israelite, Gieck and I.at. 4. Ti.e (iot- 
 pel of the Nativity of Mary, r.nd the Ilistor) of 
 the Nativity of Mary and the Saviour, Lat. 5. 
 The Gospel of Maici'i.n. collected by Di. Hahn, 
 from ancient Greek MSS. 6. The Gosjiel of 
 NiccKlemus, Gr. and Lat. 7. Apjirehension and 
 Death of Pilate, Gr. S. The mutilated and al- 
 tered Gospel of St. .lolin, piescrved in the archives 
 of the Templars of St. John of Jerusalem In Pari%
 
 AVULLONL 
 
 APOSTLE. 
 
 \n 
 
 with G-iesl)acli"s text. 9. An Ajiocryplial B<x)k of 
 theAfiostle John. Lat. [Acts, (i(t.->PKiJs, Epistles, 
 and Revelations, Spur.ous]. — W. W. 
 
 APULLONIA a TTo\K(ovla), a city of Mace- 
 donia, in the jiioviiice of Myi^tlunia (Plin. iv. 17), 
 situated between AiDpliiiJoli* and ThcssahMiica, 
 tliiity Roman miles fiuni the former, and tiiirfy- 
 six from the lalter (Itiiier. Anton.). St. Paul 
 {.<assed tliroui^h Ain[)h;]K»lis and ApoUonia in his 
 ■way to Thessaionica (Acts xvii. \). 
 
 APOLLONIUS. Three persons of tliis name 
 occur in the hialory of tlie Maocahees. — 1. Ai>ol- 
 i.ONius, a general whom Antiucluis Epiphanes 
 sent into Judaea, and who tuok Jerusalem, but 
 ■who was eventually defeated and slain by Judas 
 Maccabaeus, bc. 1(56 (1 Mace. iii. 10, 11). — 
 2. Ai'OLLONius, governor of Coele-Syria, and 
 general of Demetrius Nicanor, who was defeated 
 by Jonathan (>n behalf of Alexander Balas, B.C. 
 148 (1 Mace. X. (i\)-16j. — 3. Apollonius, one 
 if the governors left by Lysias in Judaea, after 
 llie treaty between the Jews and Antiochus 
 Kujjatot (2 Mace. xii. 2) [Maccabees]. 
 
 APOLLOS ('AiroWws), a Jew of Alexandria, 
 is described as a learned, or, as some understand 
 it, an eloquent man {a.v)]p \6yios), well veised in 
 the Scrijjtiues and the Jewish religion (Acts 
 xviii. 24). AI)Out a.u. 5(3 he came to Ephesus, 
 where, in the synagogues, ' he spake boldly the 
 things of the Lord, knowing only the baptism 
 of John' (ver. 2.5); by which we are probably 
 to understand that he knew aid taught the 
 doctrine of a Messiah, whose coming John had 
 announced, but knew not that Jesus was the 
 Christ. His fervour, however, attracted the 
 notice of Aquila and Priscilla, whom Paul had 
 left at Ephesus ; and they instructed him in 
 liiij higher doctiine, which he thenceforth taught 
 ii,ini!y, with great zeal and power (ver. 26). 
 Having heard from his new friends, who were 
 much attached to Paul, of that apostle's pro- 
 ceedings in Achaia, and especially at Corinth, 
 he i-esolved to go thither, and was encouraged in 
 this design by the brethren at Ephesus, who fur- 
 nished him witli letters of 'ntroduction. On his 
 ariival there he wa* very useful in watering the 
 seed which Paul liid sown, and was initrumental 
 in gaining many new converts from Judaism. 
 There was j)erha))s no apostle or apostolical man 
 who so much resembled Paul in attainments and 
 character as Apollos. His immediate disciples 
 became so mucli attached to him, as well nigh 
 to have pro(.luced a schism in the Church, some 
 Baying, ' I am of Paul;' others, ' I am of Apollos ;' 
 others, ' I am of Cepha>" (1 Cor. iii. 4-7, 22). There 
 must, probably, have been some ditleience in their 
 ■mode of teaching to occiision this ; and from the 
 First Epistle to ttie Corinthians it would appear 
 that A{X)llos was not prepaied to go so far as 
 Paul in abandoning tlie ligmcnts of Judaism, 
 and insisted less on the (to the Jews) olnioxious 
 ■{i08itiori that the Gospel was open to the Gentiles. 
 There was nothing, however, to prevent these two 
 eminent men fiom being perfectly unite<l in the 
 bonds of Christian alVectit;n and brotherhood. 
 "When Apollos heard that Paul was again at 
 Ejjhesus, he went thither to si-e him ; and as he 
 was there when the first Epistle to the Corin- 
 tiiians was wiit.'en (a.d. 59), there can be no doubt 
 that the apostle received fiom him his information 
 concerning the divisions in that church, which 
 
 he so forcibly reproves. It strongly illustrate! 
 the cluuacfer of Ajx>llos and P.iul, that tlio 
 (<>rmer, doubtless in disgust at those divitiont 
 with which his name iiad lieen a.ssociater', de- 
 clined to return to Coriiith; wiiile tlie alter, 
 with generous confidence, urged him to do so 
 (1 Cor. xvi. 12). Paid again mentions Ajxillos 
 kindly in Tit. iii. 13, and recommends him ani 
 Zenas the lawyer to the attention of Titus 
 knowing that they designed to visit Crete, when- 
 Titus tiieu was. Jerome is of opinion (Com- 
 ment, in loc.) that lie rennined at Crete until he 
 hearil that the di\ isions at (Corinth had lieeri 
 healed by means of St. Paul's letter; and that 
 he then returned to that city, of which he after- 
 wartls became bisho]). This has an air of pio- 
 bal)ilify ; and the authority on which it rests ia 
 better than any we iiave li)r the ditlcrent state 
 meiits which make iiim bishop of Duras, of Co- 
 lophon, of Iconium (in Phrygia), or of Ca;sarea. 
 
 APOSTLE (Gr. 'Att^cttoKos, from anotXTtWu 
 to soul forth). In Attic Greek the term is used 
 to tlenote a Jieet, or naval armament. It occurs 
 only once in the Sept. (1 Kings xiv. 6), and 
 there, as uniformly in the New TesJifnent, it sig- 
 niiies a person sent by another, a rucssenr/er. 
 It has been asserted that the Jews v ere accus- 
 tomed to tenr. the collector of ttie half-shekel, 
 which every Israelite mid annually to the Tem- 
 ple, an apostle ; and we tiave better authority (or 
 asseiting that they used the word to denote one 
 who cariied about encyclical letters from their 
 rulers. CEcumenius states that a.iro(rr6\ovs 5» 
 eiaert Kai vvv tOos i(TT\v^\ov'5aiovs ovoud^eiv rovi 
 f/KVKKia ypd/j./j.ara irapa twv dp)(6yTwy o.vraiv 
 dfaKOfii^ofievovs, ' It is even yet a custom among the 
 Jews to call those who cany al^out circular letters 
 from their rulers by the name of ajwstles.' To this 
 use of the term Pairl has been supposed to i"efer (Gal. 
 i. 1) when he asseits that he was 'an ajwstle, not 
 of men, neither by men' — an a])Ostle, not like 
 those known among the Je-ivs by that name, w1k> 
 derived their authority and received their mission 
 from the chief priests or principal men of tiieir 
 nation. The imjioit of the word is strongly 
 brought out in John xiii. 16, wheie it occurs along 
 with its correlate, 'The servant is not greater tha' 
 his Lord, neither he who is sent (oTrJo-ToAoi 
 greater than he who sent him.' 
 
 The term is generally emj)loyed in the New 
 Testament as the descriptive apjjelhition of a 
 comparatively small class of men, to whom Je.«us> 
 Christ entrusted the organization of his churcl: 
 and the dissemination of his religion among man- 
 kind. At an early period of his ministry 'tie 
 ordained twelve' of his discij)les 'that they should 
 be with liinL' 'These he named aj/ostles.' Some 
 time afterwards 'he gave to Ihein fwwer against 
 unclean spiiits to cast them out, and to heal all 
 maimer of disease;' 'and he sent them to])ieach 
 the kingdom of God ' (Mark iii. 14; M.itt. x. 
 1-5; Mark vi. 7; Luke vi. 13; ix. 1). To them 
 he gave 'tlie keys of the kingdom of God,' an<i 
 constituted them princes over the sj)irirual Israel, 
 that 'people v/hom God was to take fiom auu>ng 
 the Gentiles, ibr his name' (Matt. xvi. 19; xviii. 
 IS; xix. 28; Luke xxii. 30). Previously to liii 
 death he promised to them the Holy Spirit, to fit 
 thi'm to be the founders and governors of tli* 
 Christian church (John xiv; Hi, 17, 2<) ; xv. '26, 
 27; xvi. 7-15). After his revirrection he lo
 
 ISO 
 
 APOSTLE. 
 
 lemnly confirtneil their call, saying, KaOws air- 
 ((TTa\K( /U6 6 noTT)/>, Kayii ireixitd) vjias — ' As the 
 Patiier hath sent me, so scnil I you ;' and gave 
 them a commission to 'preacli tlie gospel to every 
 creature' (John xx. 21-23; Matt, xviii. 18-20). 
 After liis ascension he, on tlie day of Pentecost, 
 communicated to tliem those supernatural gifts 
 'vhich weie necessary t) tlie perlormance of tlie 
 1 h li i'uKctions he liad commissioned them to ex- 
 6 ise ; and in the pxercise of these g.'''s, lliey, in 
 C i Gospel history and in their epistles, witli tlie 
 ..Apocalypse, gave a comj)lete vietv of the will of 
 their Master in reference t») that new oi-der of 
 things of wliich he was the author. Tliey ' had 
 the min<l of Christ." They spoke 'the wisdom of 
 God in a mystery-' That mystery 'God revealed 
 to them by his Spirit," and they spoke it 'not in 
 words which man's wis(h)m teacheth, but which 
 tiie Holy Gl ost teacheth.' Tiiey were 'ambrussa- 
 Uors for Christ, and besought men, ' in Christ's 
 stead, to be reconciled to (rod.' They authorita- 
 tively taught the doctrine and the law of their 
 L )rd ; tliey organized churches, and required 
 them to 'keep the traditions,' i. e. the doctrines 
 and ordinances delivered to them" (Acts ii.; 
 1 Cor. ii. 16; ii. 7, 10, 13; 2 Cor. v. 20; 1 Cor. 
 xi. '2). Of the twelve originally ordained to 
 the a]X)st]eship, one, Judas Iscariot, ' fell from 
 it by transgression,' and Mattiiias, ' who had 
 companied' with the other Apostles 'all the time 
 that the Lord Jesus went out and in among 
 thern,' was by lot substituted in his place (Acts 
 i. 17-26). Saul of Tarsus, afterwards termed 
 Paul, was also miraculously added to the num- 
 ber of these permanent rulers of the Christian 
 society (Acts ix. : xx. 4; xxvi. 1.5-1^'; 1 Tim. 
 i. 12; ii. 7; 2 Tim. i. 11). 
 
 The characteristic features of this highest otlice 
 in the Christian church have been very accu- 
 rately delineated by M'Lean, in his Apostolic 
 Commission. 'It was essential to their office — 
 I. That they should have seen the Lord, and been 
 eye and ear witnesses of what they testified to the 
 world (John xv. 27). This is laid down as an 
 essential requisite in the choice of one to succeed 
 Judas (Acts i. "21, 22). Paul is no exception 
 here ; for, speaking of those who saw Christ after 
 his resurrection, he adds, ' arxd last of all he was 
 seen of me ' ( I Cor. xv. S). And this he elsewhcie 
 mentions as one of his apostolic qualifications: 
 'Ami not an apostle? have I not seen the I^ord :' 
 (I Cor. ix. 1). So that his 'seeing that Just One 
 and hearing the word of his mouth ' was nece.ssary 
 to his being 'a witness of what he thus saw and 
 heard" (Acts xxii. 11, 15). 2. They must have 
 been immediately called and chosen to that otlice 
 by Christ himself. This was the case with every 
 one of them (Luke vi. 13: Gal. i. 1), Matthi;is 
 not excejifed ; for, as he had been a chosen dis- 
 ciple of Christ before, so the Lord, by determining 
 tlie lot, declared his choice, and immediately 
 called him to the ofiice of an apostle (Acts i. 21- 
 26). 3. Infallible inspiration was also essentiallj- 
 neces.sary to that office f John xvi. 13; I Cor. ii. 
 10; Gal. i. 11, 12). They had not only to ex- 
 plain the ti-ue sense and spirit of the Old Testji- 
 Bient (Luke xxiv. 27: Acts xxvi. 22, 23; xxviii. 
 23), which were hid from the Jewish doctors, but 
 als;) to give forth the New Testament revelation 
 to the world, which was to be the unalteralile 
 Standard of faith and practice in all succeeding 
 
 APO.STLK. 
 
 generations (1 Pet. i. 25; 1 John iv. S). It wai 
 
 therefore absolutely necessary that (hey should 
 be secured against ail error and mistake, by the 
 unerring dictates of the spirit of trutii. Acco»i- 
 jngly Christ ])romised and a( tuallj' bestowed on 
 them the Spirit to ' teach them all things,' to 
 ' liring all things to their remembrance whatso- 
 ever he had said to them ' (Julm xiv. 26), to 
 ' guide tliem into all truth,' and to ' show there 
 things to come' (John xvi. 13). Their word 
 therefore must be received, 'not as the word of 
 men, but as it is in truth, the word of God ' 
 (1 Thes. ii. 13), and as that whereliy we are to 
 (listingui.sh ' the sjiirit of trutli from the spirit of 
 error' (1 John i v. 6). 4. Another ajiostolic qua- 
 lification was the jiower of working miracles 
 (Mark xvi. 20 ; Acts ii. 43), such as speaking 
 with divers tongues, curing the lame, liealing the 
 sick, raising the dead, discerning of spirits, con- 
 ferring these gifts upon others, &c. (1 Cor. xii. 
 8-11). These were the credentials of their divine 
 mission. 'Truly,' says Paul, 'the signs of an 
 apostle were wrought among you in all patience, 
 in signs and wonders and mighty deeds ' (2 Cor. 
 xii. 12). Miracles were necessary to confirm 
 their doctrine at its first publication, and to gain 
 credit to it in the world as a revelation from God, 
 and by these 'God bare them witness' (Ileb ii. 
 4). 5. To these characteristics may be added 
 the universality of their mission. Tlieir charge 
 was not confined to any particular visible church, 
 like that of ordinary pastors, but, being the oracles 
 of God to men, they had ' the care of all the 
 churches " (2 Ci)r. xi. 2S). They had a power to 
 settle their faith and order as a model to future 
 ages, to determine all controversies (Acts xvi. 4\ 
 and to exercise the rod of discipline ujwn all 
 olfenders, whether pastors or flock (1 (Jor. v. 3-6 ; 
 2 Cor. X. 8 ; xiii. 10). 
 
 It must be obvious, from this scriptural account 
 of the ajiostolical oflice, that the Apostles had, in 
 the strict sense of the term, no successors. Their 
 qualifications were supernatural, and their work, 
 once performed, remains in the infallible record 
 of the New Testament, for the advantage of the 
 Church and the world in all future ages. They 
 are the only authoritative teachers of Christian 
 doctrine and law. All official men in Christian 
 churches can legitimately claim no higher place 
 than expounders of the doctrines andadministratois 
 of the laws found in their writings. Few things 
 have been more injurious to the cause of Chris- 
 tianity than the as.sumption on the ])art of ordi- 
 nary ollice-heareis in the Cliurcli of the jjeculiai 
 prerogatives of ' the holy apostles of our Lord 
 Jesus." Much that is said of the latter is not at 
 all a])])licable to ihe former; and much thai 
 admits of being ajiplied, can be so, in accordance 
 with truth, only in a very secondary and extenu- 
 ated sense. 
 
 It is the o])inion of the learned Suicer (TVic- 
 saurn-s, art. 'ATrSaroKos) 'hat the apjiellation 
 'apostle' is in the New Testament employed as a 
 general name for Christian ministers <n pastors, 
 who are ^ sent by God,' in a qualified use of that 
 phrase, to ])reach the word of God. But this 
 o])inion does not seem to rest on any solid found- 
 ation. It is trii« indeed that the word is used 
 in this loose sense by the Fathers. Thus we timi 
 Archippu.5, Philemon, Apphia, the seventy dis- 
 ciples (Luke x. 1-17), termed ajxisth-s; and ever
 
 APOSTLE. 
 
 APPKVL. 
 
 181 
 
 Mary Magdalene is said yei-icrOcu tuis diroarSKots 
 ttTTOcrToAos, t»i liecdtue an a]H)stle to tl.e A[K)slles. 
 No salisfar.tory evidence, however, can lie broii;;lit 
 forward ot" the teiin being thus used in tJie New 
 Testament. Andronicus and Jiinia (Rom. xvi. 7) 
 are indeed .said to be iirlcrri/xot 4v tois ci7To<rT6\ois, 
 ' of note among the Apostles ;" but these words by 
 no means n«'i'es.-;arily imply that these persons 
 were apostles; tiie\ niay, and probably ilo, signify 
 merelj' that they were persons well known and 
 much esteemed by the Apostles. Tiie ^.ui/epyoi, 
 tlie fellow-woikers ot" the Ajwstle.s, are by (Jlnysos- 
 tom denominated ^waTr6ffTo\ot. 
 
 The argunient founded on 1 Cor. iv. 9, com- 
 pared with \er. 6, to prove that Ap.illos is termed 
 an apostle, cannot bear a close examination. The 
 only instance in whicii it seems ])robable that the 
 word, as expussive of an oflice in the Christian 
 church, is applieil to an individual whose call to 
 that office is not made the subject of special nar- 
 ration, is to l)e found in Acts xiv. 4, 11, where 
 Barnabas, as well as Paul, is teimed an ajwstle. 
 At the same time it is by no means absolutely 
 ceitain that the term apostles, or messengers, does 
 not in this place refer ratlier to the mission of 
 Paul and Barnabas by the proj)hets and teachers 
 at Antioch, under tlie impulse of the Holy Ghost 
 ^Acts xiii. 1-1), than to tliat direct call to the 
 Christian apostleship which we know Paul re- 
 ceived, and which, if Barnabas had received, we 
 can scarcely persuade ourselves that no trace of so 
 inipoitant an event should have been found in the 
 sacred history, but a passing hint, which admits, 
 ♦o say the least, of being plausibly accounted for 
 in another way. We know that on the occasion 
 referred to, ' I lie prophets and teachers, when they 
 had fasted and piayeii, and laid their hands on 
 Barnabas and Saul {awfkvaav), sent them away ;' 
 BO that, in the sense in which we will inmiedialely 
 find the words occurring, they were dnSaToXot — 
 of the prophets and teachers. 
 
 The \.-i)ril ' apostle ' occurs once in the New Tes- 
 tament (Heb. iii. 1) as a descri])tive designation 
 of Jesus Chi ist : ' The apostle of our professiim,' 
 t. e. the apostle whom we jnofess or acknowledge. 
 The Jews were in the habit of applying the teim 
 
 JT7K', from n^Cy, to send, to the person who pre- 
 sided over the synagogue, and directed all its 
 officMS and all'airs. The Church is represented as 
 ' the house or family of God,', over which he had 
 placed, during the Jewish economy, Moses, as 
 the superintendent, — over which he has placed, 
 under the Christian economy, Christ Jesus. The 
 import of the term apostle, is — divinely-commis- 
 sioned superintendent ; and of the whole phrase, 
 'the apostle oj'uur profession,' the divinely-com- 
 missioned superintetident, whom we Christians 
 tjfflfcnowledge, in contradistinction to thedivinely- 
 •jipointed su].erintendent Moses, whom the Jews 
 acknowledged. 
 
 In 2 Cor. viii. 23, we meet with the phrase 
 Kir6a'ToKoi (KKkr]<niiv, rendered in our version 
 (lie messengers of the churches.' Who these 
 apostles were, and why they received this name, 
 IS obvious from the preceding con*ext. The 
 churches of Macc-donia had made a lii)eral con- 
 tribution for the relief of- the imjKiverished and 
 persecuted saints of Judaea, and had not merely 
 requested the Apostle ' to receive the gilt, md 
 ^ke on lii n tlie fellows'iip of ministering to the 
 
 saints,' but at his suggestion had appointetl soma 
 in<lividuals to accompany him to Jerusalem with 
 their alms. These ' a[K)sttes or messengers of the 
 churches " were those ' who were chosen (>f the 
 churches to travel with the A{K".stle with this grate 
 [trift], which w;is administered by him,' to the 
 glory of their common Lord (2 Cor. viii. 1-4, i9_). 
 Theophylact ex])lains the jihrase thus : ol Orh rwv 
 4KKKr}fftui' ■n(ix<p6(vrts koX xapOTorrjBfirrfs, ' tiiose 
 sent and chosen by the chuuhi-s.' 
 
 \\ ith unich the same meaning and reference 
 Kjwphroditus (Phil. ii. 25) is feimed dniffroKos 
 — a messenger of the Philippian Ciiurch— having 
 been emjiloyed by them to carry pecuniary as- 
 sistance to the Apostle (Phil. iv. 11-lfS). Theo- 
 jhyUicts exposition is as follows: — 'kir6(no\ov 
 v/j.wf — rhv Trap' vjj.wv d.noaTa\€VTa irpus /nt—Si^ 
 aiiTov yap ^,(Tav CTflAavrf^ avrw to. izpos xpi'ia.i'. 
 
 It is scarcely worth while to remark that the 
 Creed, conmionly called the The Apostles', though 
 very ancient, has no claim Id the name, except as 
 it contains apostolical doctrine. A fidl and satis- 
 factory accoimt of it will be found in Lord King's 
 History of the Apostles' Creed, with Critical Ob- 
 servations un its several Articles. The Canons 
 and Constitutions, called apostolical, are gene- 
 rally admitted to be forgeries, probably of the (Iftli 
 century. 
 
 In the early ecclesiastical writers we find the 
 term 6 aTrdffToKos, ' the Apostle,' used as the de- 
 signation of a portion of the canonical books, 
 consisting chiefly of the Pauline Kjjistles. ' The 
 Psalter ' and ' the Apostle ' are often mentioned 
 togedier. It is also not unconmion with these 
 writers to call Paul ' Tiie Apostle,' kot' ^^oxri". — 
 
 J. B. 
 
 APPEAL. The right of appeal to superior 
 tribunals has generally lieen consiilered an essen- 
 tial concomitant of inferior judicatories. When, 
 from the paucity of the population or any other 
 cause, the subjects of litigation are few, justice is 
 usually administered by the first authority in die 
 state, from whose award no ap]ieal can lie. But 
 when the multiplication of causes precludes the 
 continuance of this practice, and one or more 
 inferior courts take cognizance of the less im- 
 portant matters, the riglit of ajipeal to the superior 
 tribunal is allowed, with increasing restrictions 
 iis, in the course of time, sulijects of litigation 
 multiply, and as the people become weaned 
 from the notion tliat the admirustration of justice 
 is the proper function of the chief civil magis- 
 trate. 
 
 In the patriarchal times, as among the Be- 
 douins, the patriarch or head of the tribe, that 
 is to say, the Sheikii, ailmini.>tered justice; and 
 as tlieie was no sujjerior power, there could be no 
 apjieal from his decisions. The ordy case of jiro- 
 cedure against a criminal which occurs during 
 the patriarchal period is that in which Judah 
 commanded the supposed adulterous Tamar H 
 be biiiuglit Ibrth and buint (Gen. xxxviii. 24 ) 
 But heie the woman was his daughter-in-law, 
 and the jwwer which Judah exercised was (hat 
 which a man possessed over the females of hi« 
 own immediate lannly. If the case had lieen 
 between man and man, Judah could have giver 
 no decision, and the matter would, without doubt, 
 have been referred to Jacob. 
 
 In tlie desert Moses at first judged all cun»ei 
 himself; and when, finding his time and strengtb 
 
 /
 
 (82 
 
 APPEAL 
 
 unequal to Ihis duty, ne, at the stigs^estion of 
 Jetliro, established a series of jiulicatories in a 
 numerically asceiidinjj; scale (Exod. xvili. 13-26), 
 lie arranged that cases of dilTiculty sliould be 
 •eferred from the inferior to the su|)erior trilninals, 
 and in the last instance to himself. Althougli not 
 distinctly stated, it appears from various circum- 
 stances that tlie clients liad a right of appeal, 
 similar to that which the courts liad of reference. 
 Wlien the prospective distribution into towns, 
 of the population which liad liitherto remained 
 in one compact body, made other arrangements 
 necessary, it was directed that there sliould be a 
 fc'.milar reference of ditlicult cases to the metro- 
 jtolitan court or cliief magistrate (' the judge that 
 shall be in tliose days') for the time being (Deut. 
 xvi. 18; xvii. 8-12). That there was a con- 
 current right of appeal, apjjears from the use 
 Absalom made of the delay of justice, which 
 arose from tlie great number of cases that came 
 before the king his fatlier (2 Sam. xv. 2-1). 
 These were doubtless appeal cases, according to 
 the above direction; and M.Salvador {Insti- 
 tutions de Mo'se, ii. 53) is scarcely warranted in 
 deilucing from this instance tiiat the clients had 
 the power of bringing their cases directly to the 
 Sajjreme tribunal. 
 
 Of the later practice, before and aftt?r the 
 lime of Christ, we have some clearer knowledge 
 from Jc:jphus and the Talmudists. It seems 
 that a man could cany his case by appeal 
 through all the inferior courts to the Grand San- 
 hedrim at Jerusalem, whose decision was in the 
 higliest degree absolute and final. The Je'.vs 
 themselves trace the origin of these later usages 
 up to the time of Moses : they were at all events 
 based on early principles, and therefore reflect 
 back some light upon the intimations respecting 
 the right of appeal wiiich we find in the sacred 
 books (Mishna, de Synedr. ch. x. ; Talm. Hieros. 
 ch. xviii. ; Talm. Bab. ch. iii. and x. ; Maimon. 
 de Synedr. ch. x. ; Selilen, de Synedr. b. iii. 
 ch. 10 ; Lewis, Origines Hehrteep, b. i. c. 6; Pas- 
 toret, Legislation des Hibretix, ch. x. ; Salvador, 
 Jlisf. dus Iitstitutions de Moise, liv. iv. cii. 2). 
 
 The most remarkable case of ap]>eal in the 
 New Testament belongs to another class. It is 
 the celebrated appeal of St. Paul from tlie tri- 
 bunal of the Roman ^nocurator Festus to that of 
 the emperor ; in consequence of which he was 
 sent as a prisoner to Rome (Acts xxv. 10, 11). 
 Such an appeal having been once lodged, the go- 
 vernor had nothing more to do with the case : he 
 could not even dismiss it, altliough he might he 
 satisfied tiiat the matter was frivolous, and not 
 worth forwarding to Rome. Accordingly, when 
 Paul was again heard by Festus and king 
 Agrippa (merely to obtain materials for a report 
 to the emperor), it was adir:itted that the apostle 
 might have bf;en liberated if he had not a])])ealed 
 (o Caesar (Ar;ts xxvi. 32). Paul might therefore 
 seem tc ha\e taken a false steii in the matter, did 
 we not consiiler the imjxirtant consequences 
 which resulted from his visit to Rome. 
 
 It n-.ay easily be seen that a right of ap- 
 ))eal which, like this, involved a long and ex- 
 pensive journey, was by no means frequently 
 resorted to. In lodging his ajipoal Paul exercised 
 one of the liigh. privileges of Roman citizenship 
 which belonged to him by birth (Acts xxii. 2!s). 
 How the rights of Roman citizensiiip might be 
 
 AQUILA. 
 
 acquired by a Jewish native of C'lliciii will tk 
 explained elsewhere [Citizenship]. Tlie righi 
 of a])peal connected with that [jrivilege originated 
 in the Valerian, Porcian, and Sempronian lawc, 
 l)y which it was enacted that if any magistrate 
 should order flagellation or death to be inflic'^d 
 vyKin a Roman citizen, the accused person might 
 a])])eal to the judgment of the people, and that 
 meanwhile he sliould sulTer nothing at the hands 
 of the magistrate imtil the people had judged his 
 cause. But what was originally (he jirerogative 
 of the people had in Paul's time becorp" that of 
 the emperor, and a])peal therefore was made to 
 him. Hence Pliny (Zyj. x. !)7) mentions that he 
 had sent to Rome some Christians, who were 
 Roman citizens, and had appealed unto Caesar. 
 This privilege could not be disallowed by any 
 magistrate to any person whom the law entitled 
 to it. Indeed, very lieavy penalties were attached 
 to any refusal to grant it, or to furnish the party 
 with facilities for going to Rome. 
 
 APPHIA ('ATr*ia), the name of a woman 
 (Philemon 2) who is supposed by Chrysostorn and 
 Theodoret to have been the wife of Philemon. 
 
 APPII-FORUM {'Airirioxj (popov), a. mari, et- 
 town in Italy, 43 Roman mile? from Rome {Itinf. 
 Ayiton. p. Iu7), on the great load (via Appia) 
 from Rome to Brundusium, constructed by 
 Appius Claudius. The remains of an anci»-:.t 
 town, supposed to be Appii-Forum, are still jre- 
 served at a place called Casarillo di Santa Biaria, 
 on the border of the Pontine marshes, lis vi- 
 cinity to the marshes accounts for the badness s;f 
 the water, as mentioned by Horace (Sat. i. 5, 7). 
 When St. Paul was taken to Italy, some of the 
 Christiiins of Rome, being apprised of his approach, 
 journeyed to meet him as far as ' Appii-Forum 
 and tl;e Three Taverns ' (axp's 'Attttiou (p6pov koI 
 TpiSivTa^iovuiv, Acts xxviii. 15). The ' Three Ta- 
 verns' were eight or ten miles nearer to Rome than 
 Appii-Forum. The probaliility is that some of 
 the Christians remained at the ' Three Taverns,' 
 where it was known the advancing paity would 
 rest, while some others went on as far as Appii- 
 Forum to meet Paul on the road. The 'Ttiree 
 Taverns' was certainly a y)lace for rest and re- 
 freshment (Cic. od Attic, ii. 11, 13), perhaps on 
 account of the bad water at Aiijrii-Forum. It 
 must he understood that Ties Tai-eina; was, in 
 fact, the name of a town ; for in the time of Con- 
 stantine, Felix, bishop of Ties Talierna?, was one 
 of the nineteen bishops who v/ere appointed to 
 decide the controversy betwern Donatus and 
 Cfficilianns {Optat. dc Schism. Doiiat., 1. i. ]i. 26). 
 As to the taberna; themselves, fiom which the 
 jilace took its name, it is pn:bal>le that they 
 were shops for the sale of all kinds of refresh- 
 ments, rather than inns or places of entertainment 
 for travellers. The ruins of this place still exist 
 under the same name. 
 
 APPLE, APPLE-TREE. [Tappuacu.] 
 APPLES OF SODOM. [Sonosi, Appj.esok.] 
 AQUIIA ('AKvAay). a .Jew with whom Paul 
 became ac(juainted on his first visit to Corinth; a 
 native of Pontns, an(i liy occujiation a tent-maker. 
 He and his wife Piiscilla had been obliged to 
 leave Rome in consequence of an edict issued 
 by the Enqieror Claudius, liy which all Jews 
 were banished from Rome {Jtula-os, impulsore 
 Chresto. assidvc. tianiUtuant^'S Homa expidil : — . 
 Sueton. Claud, c. 25; Neander's History of ifia
 
 AQUILA. 
 
 Planting of the Christian Church, vol. i. p. 231; 
 
 Ijaiilner's Testii nouics of Heathen Authors, cli. 
 viii.). Tliis dficroe was made not by tlie senate, 
 but the emj)eior, ami lusted only diuin;^' his liCe, 
 if even so loJiij. V\"lietli<^r Aquila and Priscilla 
 were at tliat time converts to the Cliristian taitJi 
 cannot be positively ilfterinined ; Luke's expres- 
 sion, irpotrriKdei' aiirois, Acts xviii. 2, as Kuinoel 
 observes, rather .implies that Paul sou^^lil ttieir 
 society on groiuids oi" i'riendship, tlum Tor tlie pur- 
 pose of jwrsuading them to embrace Christianity. 
 On tlie oilier h.uid, if we sujjpose that they were 
 already Christians, PauVs 'joining liim elf to 
 them" is hiijhly proljable; while, if they were still 
 adherents to Judaism, tliey would have been less 
 disposed than eveii unconverted Gentiles to form 
 an intimacy with tiie Apostle. At all events, they 
 bad embraced Christianity before Paul left 
 Corinth; for wo are informed that they accom- 
 jvinied lii'm to Ephesus, iuid meeting there with 
 Apollos, who ' knew only the baptism of John,' 
 they ' instructed him in the- way of GoJ more 
 perfectly' (Acts xviii. 2.5, 26). From that time 
 they appeal- tti have t)een zealous promoters of the 
 CUristian cause. Paul styles them his ' helpers 
 in Christ Jesus," and intimates that they had ex- 
 posed themselves to imminent danger on his 
 accoimt (' who have A:," my life laid down 
 their own necks," Rom. xvi. 3, 4), though of 
 the time and j)lace of this transaction we ha\ e 
 no information. AVhen Paul wrote his ejjistle 
 to the Romans they were at Rome ; but some 
 years after they returned to Ephesus, for Paul 
 sends salutations to them in his Second Epistle fo 
 Timothy (2 Tim. iv. 19; Lardner"s Credibility/, 
 pait ii. ch. 11). Their occupation as tent-makers 
 probably rendered it necessary for them to keep a 
 number of workmen constantly resident in their 
 family, and to tliese (to such of them at least as 
 had embraced the Christian faith) may refer the re- 
 markable expression, ' the Church that is in t/ieir 
 house,'' Trjv kut' oIkoi/ avTctiv fKKXrjffiav (see 
 Biscoe, quoted in Lardner's Credibility, part ii. 
 ch. il). Origen's explanation of these words is 
 very similar ; ' Magna enim gratia in hospitali- 
 tatis ofticio non solum apud Deum, sed et ai)ud 
 homines invenitur. Quaj tamen res quoniam 
 non solum in voluntate et proposito dominorum. 
 Bed et grato ac fideli constitit ministerio famu- 
 lonini, idcirco oinnes qui ministerium istud cum 
 ipsis fidcUtcr adimplebant, do>ri£sticarn eoruin 
 nojninuvit Ecclesiani ' (/« Ep. ad Rom. Com- 
 ment, lib. X.; Opera, t. vii. p. 431, ed. Eerol. 
 1837). 
 
 Dr. Neander suggests diat as Aquila would 
 require extensive i)remises for his manufactory, 
 he, jjcrhajjs, set aj)art one room for the use of a 
 section of the Churc^h in whatever place he fixed 
 his residence, and that as his sujjerior Chris- 
 tian knowledge and piety qualified him for tlie 
 effice of a SiScttr/caAos, he gave religious instruc- 
 tion to this small assembly. Tiie salutations 
 to individuals which follow the expression in 
 Rom. xvi. ■O, show that they were not referred to 
 "in it, and are quite inconsistent with the supposi- 
 tion tliat the whole church met in Aquilas house. 
 Nor is it probable that the collective body of 
 Cliristians in Rome or elsewhere would alter their 
 place of meeting on Aquilas return. The same 
 eminent critic brings forward as an illustiation of 
 ''■he expression the examination of Justin Martyr 
 
 ARABAIl 
 
 I8S 
 
 before the Pra-fect Rusticus. ' Wliere do yoo 
 assemble? ■k.jv ffvvepxtaQf ; said the Prefect 
 Justin rej)lied, \Vherever it suits each one • ])re' 
 ference and ability : you take for granted that we 
 all meet in the same jjlace ; l)ut it is not so, for 
 the God of the Christians is not circumscribed by 
 place, but, being invisible, (ills heaven and eartU, 
 and is ever^'wliere worshiiijKMl and gloiilied by 
 the faithful. Ruslicus then said : Tell me where 
 you meet together, or in what place you collect 
 your disciples? Justin saiil : I am staying at tlie 
 house of one Martinns, and I know no other jilace 
 of meeting Ijesides this (/col oil ■yi.vdxrKU oAAV 
 Tiva (ruvfKfvcriy), and if any one wished to come 
 to me, I conmnuiicated to him the words of truth. 
 The pci-s.ms who thus visited Ju.-tin might l)e 
 called T] Kar oIk.o¥ tov 'loutTTiVou iKKhijaia 
 (Neandnr"s .4llijc.metne Geschichta der Chrisili- 
 cfieii Religion und Kircke, I. ii. pj). 402, 503 ; 
 Justini Maityris Opera, Append, pars ii. p. 
 5S6, Parisiis, 1712). 
 
 Tlie Greeks call ,\quila bisho]) and apostle, and 
 honour him on July 12. The festival of Aquila 
 and Priscilla is placed in the Roman Calendar, 
 where he is denoted Kishop of Ileraclea, on July 8, 
 (Calmet).— J. E. R. 
 
 AR ("ly ; Sept, 'Hp), the capital city of tlie 
 M(.ai)ites "(Xum. xxi. 2S ; Deul. ii. 9, IS, 29), 
 near the river Arnon (Deut. ii. IS. 24; Num. 
 xxi. 13-1.5). It appears to have been burnt 
 by King Sihon (Num. xxi. 2^), and Isaiah, m 
 describing the future calamities of the Moabites, 
 says, ' In the night Ar of Moab is laid waste 
 and brought to silence ' (Isa. xv. 1). In his 
 comment on this passage, Jerome states that in 
 his youth there was a great eartlupiakc, by which 
 Ar was destroyed in the iiight-time. This he 
 evidently regards as a fulfilment of the predic- 
 tion, which, however, had probably some less re- 
 mote reference. Latterly the name of the city 
 was Graecised into Arcojioiis. 
 
 This city was also called Ralii)ali or Rabbafli, 
 and, to distinguish it from Rabbath of Amnion, 
 Rabbath-Moab. Ptolemy calls it Ralimathon; 
 Steph. Uvzantinus, Rabathmoma ; and Abulfeda 
 ( Tab. S;/r., p. 90), Rabbath, and also JMab. The 
 site still bears the name of R;il)l)ah. The spot ha<i 
 been visited and described by Sectzen. BurCiChardt, 
 Legh, Macmichael, and Irby and Mangles. It 
 is aljout 17 miles east of the Deaii Sea, 10 niiha 
 south of the Arnon (Moiljeli), and about the same 
 distance noith of Kerek. Tlie ruins of Rabbah 
 are situated on a low hill, which commands the 
 whole ])lain. They present nothing of interest 
 except two old Roman temjjles and some tanks. 
 Irby and RIangles {Letters, p. 4.57) remark, with 
 surprise, (hat the whole circuit ol" (he town tloes 
 not seem to have exceeded a mile. Burckhardt 
 say.s, ' half an hour in circuit," and tl.at no truce 
 of walls could be found : but it is obvious from 
 the descriptions that the city whose ruins they 
 saw was a conqiaiatively modern town, less 
 imjKirtant and extensive than the ancient me 
 trojiolis of Moab. 
 
 ARABAIl (na*^ ; Sept. 'ApajBa), a Hebiew 
 word, signifying in general a desert p'ain, «; 
 sUppe. In the Authorized Version it is tran.s- 
 lated « the jtlain," tmt in the original it a])))eari 
 to be supjdied with the article on puijwse, as the 
 jiroper name (n2"iyn ha-.\rabah, t}>e Aral*h";,
 
 •S4 
 
 ARABIA. 
 
 ARABIA. 
 
 ul' the pioat plain or valley in its wliolo rxtcnf. 
 which is j.artln occupied l)y the Joulan and its 
 hikes, and is jiiolo'n^ed IVom the Dead S«a lo the 
 E. anitic Gulf. The name has come Jown to 
 rtie present day in the same form in Arabic, 
 
 el-Arabah {i^ %^):, but it is now restricted to 
 
 the part between the lake and the gulf. The 
 more extended apjilication of the name ijy the 
 Hebrews is successi'nlly traced l)y P.ofesjor Robin- 
 «jn from Gespnius : ' In connection with the Red 
 Sea and Elath ' (Deut. i. 1 ; ii. R). 'As extend- 
 ing to the lalie of Tiberias ' (Josh. xii. 3; 2 Sam. 
 iv. 7 ; 2 Kings xxv. 4). ' Sea of the Arabah, the 
 Salt Soa' (Josh. iii. 16-, xii. 3; Deut. iv. 49). 
 ' The (irboth (plains) of Jericlio' (Josh. v. 10; 
 2 Kin^s xxv. 5). ' Plains (arbot/i) of Moab,' 
 i. e. opposite Jeiicho, probably pastured by the 
 Moabiles, though not within their projjer territory 
 (Dent. xxiv. 1, 8; Num. xxii. 1) [Arabia; 
 
 JOHDAN, VaI.I.EY Of]. 
 
 ARABIA, an extensive region occupying the 
 south-western extremity of Asia, bervveen 12^ 4.V 
 and 31J^ N. lat., and 321° and 60'^ E. long, from 
 Greenwich ; liaving on the W. the Isthmus of 
 Suez and the Red Sea (called from it the Arabian 
 €rulf'), which separate it from Africa ; on the S. 
 the Indian Ocean ; and on the E. the Persian 
 Gulf and the Euphrdfes. The boundary to the 
 north has never been well defined, for in that di- 
 rection it spreads out into interminable deserts, 
 which meet those of Palestine and Syria on the 
 west, and those of Irdk-Arabi (J. e. Babylonia) 
 and Mesopotamia on the east ; and hence some 
 (fkographers include, that entire wilderness in 
 Arabia. Tlie form of the peninsula is that of a 
 ira})ezoid, whose superficial area is estimated at 
 four times the extent of France. It is one of tlie 
 few countries of the south where the descendants 
 of the aboriginal inhabitants have neither been 
 extirpated nor expelled by northern invaders. 
 
 They have not only retained posgession of thrif 
 ancestral homes, but have sent forth cchwnes ta 
 all the a(ijac( nt regions, and even to more distant 
 lands, both in Africa and Asia. ' There is nc 
 peojiie,' says Ritter (Erdkimde, th. ii. j). 172), 
 ' who are less ciicnmscrii)ed to the territory 
 usually assigned to them than the Arabs ; their 
 range outstrips geograpliical l«>undaries in all 
 directions.' 
 
 With the history of no country save that of 
 Palestine are there ccnnected so many hallowed 
 and impressive associations as with that of Arabia. 
 Here lived and siillered the holy patiiarch Job; 
 here Moses, when ' a stranger and a shepherd,' saw 
 the burning, miconsuming bush ; here Elijah found 
 shelter from the rage of persecution ; here was the 
 scene of all the marvellous displays of divine 
 power and mercy that followed the deliverance of 
 Israel from the Egyjitian yi/ke, and accomjjaniid 
 their joumeyings to the Promised Land ; and 
 here Jehovah manifested himself in visible glory 
 to his peojj.e. From the influence of tJies* asso- 
 ciations, combined with its proximity to Palestine, 
 and the close aflinity in blood, manners, and 
 customs between the northern jx)vtion of its in- 
 habitants and the Jews, Arabia is a region of {»• 
 culiar interest to the student of tiie Bible ; and it 
 is chiefly in it; relation to subjects of Bible study 
 that we are now to consider it. It was well re- 
 marked by Burckhardt (who knew Arab life and 
 ciiaracter better tlian any other European ti-avellei 
 that has yet appeared) that ' the sacred historian 
 of tlie children of Israel will never be thoroughly 
 understood, so long as we are not minutely ac- 
 quainted with everything relating to the Arab 
 Bedouins and the countries in which they move 
 and pasture.' 
 
 In early limes the Hebrews included a part of 
 wh-at we call Arabia among the countries they 
 vaguely designated as i2"Jp Kedem, ' the East,' 
 the inhabitants being numbered airong the '33 
 Dip Bcni- Kedem, ' Sons of the East,' i. e. 
 Orientals. But there is no evidence to sJiow (as 
 is asseited by Winer, Roseiimuller, and other 
 Bible-geographers) tliat tliese phrases are ever ap- 
 plied to the whole of the country known to us as 
 Arabia. Tliey ap])ear to have been commonly 
 used in speaking of those parts which lay due 
 east of Palestine, or on the no'.ih-^ast and south- 
 east ; though occasionally they do seern to point 
 to tracts which lay indeed to the south and soutli- 
 west of that country, but to the east and south- 
 east of Egypt. Hence Joseph Medo (who is 
 followed by Eellerniaun, Haiulbnch d. Bib. Li 
 tirat. th. iii. p. 220) is of ojiinion that the jjhrasf- 
 ology took its rise at the jieriod when the Israelites 
 were in' Egypt, and was retained liy them as a 
 mode of speech aiYer they were settled in Canaan. 
 That conjecture would, doubtless, considerably 
 extend the meaning of the term ; yet e>en tj?en it 
 could scarcely <'Jii-)iace the extreme south of 
 Arab a, a queen in wbicli (on the suppo.sition of 
 Yemen being identical with Sheba) i.s, in tire 
 New Testament, styled not 'a queen of the 
 East,' but BatriX/irtra Notou, ' a queen of the 
 South.' Accordingly we find (hat whenever the 
 expression kedem has obviously a reference to 
 Arabia, it invariably points to its northern diyi- 
 sion only. Thus in Goi. xxv. 6, Abraliam is said 
 to have sent away the sons of Hagar and Keturah 
 to the Erctz- Kedem — Kedemah, i. c. tlie Ka«*
 
 ARABIA. 
 
 tDuiifi y, eastwaid ; iiiid none of tlicni, so far as 
 we knoiv. were lucat< d in jietiinsiihir Arabia; for 
 rtie story wliicli reiircsents islinacl as settliuf,' at 
 Mecca is an unsuppmlucl uutive tradition. The 
 ^Kitriarch Jul) is de-ciilnd (Jol) i. 3) as 'the 
 greatest of all the men of the east," and tiiough 
 opinions differ as to the jjncise loc<ility of the land 
 of Uz, all are agreed that it was in some pait of 
 Arabia, liut certainly not in Araliia I'elix. In 
 tlie BcHik of Judi;es'(v;. 3; vii. 12; viii. 10) 
 among the allies of the Midianitcs and Aina- 
 lekites (liil)es of the north) are mentioned the 
 ' lieiii-Kcdcm,' which Josephus translates by 
 Apa^as, the Arabs. In Isa. xi. li, the parallelism 
 reijuires that by ' sons of the east ' we understand 
 the Nomades of Deseit Arabia, as coirtsponding 
 f;) tlie Philistines ' on the west;' and with these 
 are conjoined the Edomites, Moaliiies, and Am- 
 monites, who were all northern Arabians. The 
 coniniarid was given (Jer. xlix. 2S) to the Bal)y- 
 h.'hians ' to smite the Beni-Kedem,' who are there 
 classed with the Ivedaienes, descendants of Ish- 
 inael (com]). 1 Kin_,'s iv. 30). In more modern 
 tirLes a name of similar imjjort was ap])lied to 
 the Arabs generally ; they were called Saracens 
 (Sharakiyun, i. e. Orientals) fr(<m the word sha)-k, 
 'tlie east,' whence also is deiived the term sirocco, 
 the east wind. The name of Saracens came into 
 use in the west in a vague and undelined sense 
 ailer the Roman conquest of Palestine, but does 
 iot seem to have been adopted as a general desig- 
 nation till about the eighth centuiy. It is to be 
 reniaiked here that tliough in Scripture Kedem 
 most commonly denotes Northern Ai'abia, it is 
 also used of countries faitlier east, e. g. of the 
 native country of Abraham (Isa. xli. 2; comp. 
 Gen. xxix. 1), of Balaam (Num. xxiii. 7), and 
 even of Cyrus (Isa. xlvi. II); and, therefore, 
 though the Magi who came to Jerusalem (Matt. 
 ii. 1) were ano dvaToKwv, ' from the east,' it does 
 not thence follow that they were natives of 
 Arabia. 
 
 We finft the name 3"iy (C_-J«C) Arab, first 
 
 beginning to occur about the time of Solomon. 
 It designated a portion of the country, an in- 
 hal)itant being called Arabi, an Arabian (Isa. xiii. 
 20). or in later Hebrew, Arbi (Nell. ii. 19), the 
 pliiral of which was Arbim (2 Chr. xxi. 16), or 
 Arbiim (Arabians) (2 Chr. xvii. 11). In some 
 places these names seem to be given to the No- 
 madic tribes generally (Isa. xiii. 20 ; Jer. iii. 2) 
 and tiieir country (Isa. xxi. 13). Tlie kings of 
 Arabia from whom Solomon (2 Chr. ix. 14) and 
 Jehosaphat (2 Chr. xvii. 11) received gifts were, 
 piobably. Bedouin chiefs; though in the place 
 paiallel to die foimj'r text (1 Kings x. 15), instead 
 oi" Arab we find Lrcb, rendered in Jer. xxv. 20, 
 'Zl, ' mingled people,' but which Gesenius, fol- 
 lowing the Chaldee, understands to mean ' foreign 
 allies.' It is to be remarked, however, that in 
 all the passages where the woid Arab occurs it 
 designates only a small portion of the teiritory 
 kiiown to us SLi Arabia. Thus in the account 
 given by E-cekiel (xxvii. 21) of the Arai)iar. tribes 
 tliat traded wltl Tyre, mention is sjiecially .made 
 oi' Arab (comp. Jer. xxv. 21). In 2 Clir. xxi. 
 16; xxii. 1; xxvi. 7; Neh. iv. 7, we find the 
 Ai-abians classed witii the Philistines, the Ethi- 
 opians ( i. e. tlic Asiatic Cushites, of whom they 
 are said to have been neighbours), the Mehunims, 
 
 ARABL\- 
 
 189 
 
 the Ammonites, and Ashdodiles. At vhot prriwl 
 this name Arab was exiintled to the wiiole legion 
 it is impossible to ase( rtain. Erom it the Greeks 
 formed the word 'Apa^la, wiiich oeturs twice in 
 the New TestaiiK ni ; in Gal. i. 17, in nferencw 
 probably to the tract adjacent to Dainasceins 
 Syria, and in Gal. iv. 2!), in reference to the 
 peninsula of Mount Sinai, Among llie strangers 
 assembled at Jerusalem at the Pentecost there 
 were "Apafffs, Arabs (Acts ii. 11), tlie singular 
 being 'Apaip. 
 
 .\s to the etymology of the name A^-ab various 
 opinions have been exjiressed. Hezel (Jlib. Beat 
 Lex.) and Bellermann {Ilandbiuh d. Ilib. Liter. 
 th. iii. p. 219) absurdly derive it from a trans- 
 position of letters in the name of Eber, the fallKT 
 ofJoktan; Pococke follows the native writers in 
 tlilnking the name was taken from Araba, a dis- 
 trict of Yemen, so caHed from Yaiab, Joktaii's 
 son ; somesupjiose thatastiiis country was callc<l 
 liy the Israelites Kedem, ' t!ie east,' so liy the 
 Shemitic trilies who dwelt beyond the Euphrates 
 it was teinied ylr«6 in the sense of ' the west;' 
 while others derive it fixmr tlie same word in the 
 sense of ' mixed people," or ' merchants.' But dis- 
 missing these conjectures as groundless and unsa- 
 tisfactory, the most obvious etymology of the name 
 is from HDIi? Arabah, a steppe, i. e. a desert 
 plain or wilderness. That was, in point of fact, 
 the name given by tlie ancient Hebrews to the 
 tract of country extending noithward from Elath, 
 on the Arabian Gulf, to the Dead Sea (Deut. i. 1 ; 
 ii. 8), and even as far as the Lake of Tiberias 
 (Josh. xii. 3). It was called Ha-Aruba/i, com- 
 monly rendered in our version by 'tlie ijlain' 
 (hence the Dead Sea was styled the ' sea of flie 
 Arabah,' Josh. iii. 16); and it included the 
 plains {Arboth) of Jericho and Moab (Jo&h. v, 
 10; Deut. xxxiv. 1, 8). In t!ie list of the cities 
 of judah contained in the book of Joshua we find 
 (xv. 61), ' in the wilderness, Beth-Arabah," in the 
 Hebrew n^lj/il jT'^, i.e. ' the iiouse of the plain.' 
 It iiad been mentioned at v. 6, as on tie northern 
 borders; and hence, at xviii. 22, it ajipears also 
 as a city of Benjamin, one of whose boundaries, 
 it is said at v. IS, ' jiassed over against [the] 
 Arabah northward, and went down into [the] 
 Arabah.' Now it is a remarkable circumstance 
 that the southern part of this great valley is still 
 known by the name of V/udy-el- Ai'abah, and 
 there is no improbability in the conjecture thai 
 this designation, which was ajijilied at .so eaily & 
 period as the days of Moses to one particular dis- 
 trict, was gradually extended to the entire region. 
 No d.esignaticn, indeed, could be more compre- 
 hensive or correct; lor, looking to Arabia as a 
 whole, it may fitly be desciibed as one vast desert 
 of arid and barren plains, intersected by chains 
 of rocky mountains, where the onsca, or ' spots o/ 
 living green' (probably a corrujiticsn of the Arabic 
 word icadij, a valley or watercourse), exist but iii 
 a very small propoition to the steriiitv and deso- 
 lation wliich reign around. 
 
 The modern munc, Jeshirat-el-Arab, i.e. ^iSie 
 peninsula of the Aiabs,' ajjjilies to the southern 
 jiart of tlie region only. Another native ai)pel)a- 
 tion is Beled-eUArab, i. e. ' the land of the Aiabs:' 
 tlic Persians and Turks call it Arabistdn. Mr. 
 Lane informs us that in Egypt the term Arab is 
 now generally limited to the Bcdawees, or jieopU 
 of the desert ; but formerly it was used to desig*
 
 186 
 
 VRABIA. 
 
 ARABIA. 
 
 rwe llie townsiieople and villagers of Arabian 
 wi^in, wjiilc t!u);e of tlie desert were called Aarab 
 wr Aaraliecs : tlip former now call themselves Ow- 
 ii'td-el-Ar(ih, (^n/fins of tl.e Aralis. 
 
 The earl 3- Greek ijeo^raphers, such as Eiato- 
 stht'iies and Strabo, mention only tv,o divisions of 
 tiiis vast re^^ion, Happy and Desert Arabia. 
 But after the city of Petra, in Idumiea, had be- 
 come ceh'brated as the nietrop^lis of a commercial 
 people, the N'al)atliieans, it gave name to a third 
 division, viz. Arabia Petvcea (improperly frans- 
 Ltfed Si!!(V«y Arabia) ; and tliis tlireefold division, 
 which first occurs in the geographer Ptolemy, 
 wlio flourished in the second century, has obtained 
 ttiroujjhout Eurojie ever since. It is unknown, 
 .■*Ovvever, tj native or other Eastern geo^rajjliers, 
 who reclvon Arabia Deserta as chiefly belongin'^ 
 io Syria and to Irak-Arabi, or Babylonia, while 
 they include a great part of what we call Arabia 
 Prttraea in Eg}i;t. 
 
 1. AiiAHi.v Fri.ix (in Gr. 'Apafiia rj El^ai/j.Qji', 
 the Arabia Euda-inon of Pliny), i. e. Happy 
 Arabia. Tlie name has commonly been suji- 
 p;)setl to owe its origin to the variety and richness 
 of the natural proiluctions of this portion of the 
 oountry, compared with those of the other two 
 divisions. Some, lio.vever, regard the epithet 
 'happy' as a translation of its Arabic name 
 
 yU Yemeji, which, though primarily denot- 
 ing tlie land of tlie riyht hand, or so7tfh,* also 
 bears the secondary sense of 'happy, ])rosperous." 
 This j)art of Arabia lies between tlie Red Sea on 
 llie west and the Persian Gulf on the east, the 
 boundary to the nortli being an imaginary line 
 drawn between tlieir respective northern extremi- 
 ties, Akaba and Basra or Bussora. It thus em- 
 braces by far the greater portion of the country 
 known to us as Aral)ia, which, however, is very 
 much a terra, incognita ; for the accessible dis- 
 tricts have been but imperfectly explored, and 
 l)iit little of tlie interior has been as yei visited by 
 any Envoj)ean traveller. 
 
 Arabia may fie described generally as an ele- 
 vated table-land, the mountain ranges of wliich 
 are by some regarded as a continuation of those 
 of Syria, but Ritter (Erdkuiide, th. i. p. 172) 
 views them a? forming <i distinct and independent 
 plateau, jieculiar to tl;e country. In Arabia 
 Felix the riilges, which are very liigh in tlie inte- 
 rior, slope gently on the east towards the Persian 
 Gulf, and on tlie north-east towards the vast 
 plains of the tleserf. On the west the declivities 
 are steeper, and on the north-west the chains are 
 connected with those of Araiiia Petriea. Com- 
 mencing our survey at the north end of the Red 
 Sea. the first province which lies along its shore is 
 the iledjaz, wliicli Niebuhr and others reckon as 
 Ixd.mgin,— h) .-Vrabia Petr»a, l)Ut which the editor 
 of Hurckiiardt's Travels in Arabia has shown to 
 lielong projierly to Arabia Eelix. This was the 
 cradle of Mohammedan superstition, containing 
 both Mecca, wiiere the prophet was born, and 
 
 * This pliraseology may ha\ e originated in the 
 worship of the rising sun at the Kaalia, or ancient 
 tem()le of Mecca, when the worshipper had the 
 east before iiim, the west behind iiim, the south 
 (Ml ids right, and the nortli on his left: hence 
 Svria is called Esh-Sham, the left. Yet the He- 
 brews had 'he same idiom. 
 
 Medina, where he was buried; and iiei ce it be- 
 came the Holy Land of the Moslem, whithtr '>'>y 
 resor' in pilgrimage from all parts of the Ea^t. 
 It is on the whole a barren tract, tonsistiiig 
 chie'ly of rugged mountains and sandy plains. 
 Still more unproductive, iiowever, is the loi.g, 
 flat, dreary lielt, of varying width, called Ta- 
 hdina, v/hich runs along the coast to the south of 
 Hedjaz, and was at no dislant jioiiod covere-l by 
 the sea. But next to this comes Yemen (the. 
 name of a particular province, as well as of the 
 whole country), the tiue Arabia Felix of the 
 ancients, ' .Viaby the Blest" of modern poets, and 
 doubtless the finest portion of the piMiinsula. Yet 
 if it lie dis'inguislied lor feriility and lieauty. it 
 is ciiiefly in the way of contrast, for it is far from 
 coming up to the expectations which travellers 
 had formed of it. Here is Sanaa (suiijiosed to be 
 tlie UmI of Scriptuie), the seat of an imaum ; 
 Mareb, which some idtntify with Sheiiti ; iMoclia, 
 the chief mart for (toffee; and .\den, a plac« 
 rapidly incieasing in impirtance since taken 
 jMissession of liy Britii'n, with a vie.v to secure 
 her navigation of tiie Red Sea. Turning from 
 the west to the south coast of the peninsula, we 
 next come to the extensive piovince of Hhadra- 
 maiit (ihv Hazarmaveth of the Bible), a regii.n 
 not unlike Yemen in its general features, with 
 the exce[ition of tlie tracts called Mahhiah and 
 Sahar, wliich are dreary deserts. The south-east 
 corner of the peninsula, between Hhadramaut 
 and the Persian Gulf, is occupied by the im- 
 portant district of Oman, which has recently 
 become better known to us than most other ])art3 
 of Arabia Felix by Vie travels and researches of 
 Lieut. Wellsted (^Travels in Arabia, London, 
 1S3S, 2 vols. 8vo.). Oman has been in all ages 
 famous for its trade; and the present imaum of 
 Muscat, a politic and enterpirising prince, has 
 greatly extended it, and thereby increased and 
 consolidated his own power by forming commer- 
 cial alliances with Great Britain, the United 
 States, and other foreign nations. Along the 
 Persian Gulf northwaid stretches the ])«)vince of 
 Lah.sa, or rather El Hassa, to wliich belong tli« 
 Bahiein Islands, famous ibr ther ])eails. Tlie 
 districts we have enumerated all lie along the 
 coasts, but beyond them in the south stretches the 
 vast desert of Akhaf, or Rol'a-el -Khali, i.e. 'the 
 empty abode,' a desolate and dreary unexplored 
 w;iste of sand. To the noith of this extends th« 
 great central jirovince of Nedsclied or Nejd. 
 Ritter regards it as fo.ming neaily a half of the 
 entire peninsula. It may be described as having 
 been the great ojficina gentium of the south, as 
 were Scandinavia and Tartary of the north ; for 
 it is the region whence there issued at diirerent 
 periods those countless hordes of Arabs which 
 overran a great jiart of Asia and Africa. Here 
 too was the origin and the seat of the Wahabees 
 (so formidable until subdued in IS18 by Mehemet 
 Ali, pasha of Egypt), their chief town being 
 Dereyeh. 
 
 The geological structure and vwieralogical 
 productions of this jiart of Arabia are in a gieat 
 measure unknown. In the mountains about 
 Mecca and Medina the predominant rocks are of 
 grey and red granite, jjorphyry, and limestone. 
 This is also the case in the great chain that runs 
 southward towards Maskat ; only that in the ridge 
 that rises .diind the T^jhama there is found
 
 ARABIA. 
 
 Vcnistiis anil basalt instead of sTanite. Traces of 
 volcanic aclidn may he perceived around Me- 
 dina, as also at Aden and in manv other jiarts of 
 the jieninsula. Hot-sprin;?* are of fre(jiicnt oc- 
 currence on the Iladjee or pilifiim road to INIccca. 
 Tlie ancients lielieve.l tliat Araliia yielded l)otli 
 gold and precious stones, liut Niehulir doiil)ts if 
 tliis ever was the case. Tiie most valnai)le ore 
 found now is the leail of Oman : wiiat is calleil 
 tiie Moclia stone is a sjiecies of agate liiat comes 
 fioni India. The native iron is coarse and l)rittle; 
 at Loheia and elsewhere there are hills of fossil 
 salt. The b 'tnnij of Yemen was investii^'-ated by 
 Forskul, one of the fellow-travellers of Niehuhr. 
 Aral)ia Felix has always been famous for I'rank- 
 incense, mynh, aloes, balsam, gnms, cassia, &c. ; 
 but it is doubtful wlifther the last-mentioned and 
 Other articles sn])posed to be indi,i,'enous were not 
 imported iVom Irdia. Here are found all the 
 fruits of tempera (e and warm climates, among 
 which flie date, t le fruit of ttie palm-tree, is tiie 
 most common, and is, along- witii (lie species of 
 grain called aAowrz-rt, the stajile article of food. 
 But tlie most valual)le vegetable jmxlucfion is 
 coffee (Arab, kahwch, an old term for wiTie, the 
 fruit l)eing called bunn) ; for Yemen, if not its 
 native country, is ti-e halitat where it lias 
 reached tlie greatest state of perfection. Culti- 
 vation here is not conKned to tlie plains, but is 
 carried up the sides of flie mountains, which are 
 laid out in terraces and supplied with water by 
 means of artificial reservoirs. In the animal 
 kingdom Arabia possesses, in common with tlie 
 adjacent regions, the camel (the ' living ship of 
 t!ie desert'), panthers, lynxes, hyjenas, jackals, 
 gazelles, asses (wild and tame), monkeys, &c. 
 But the glory of Arabia is its horse. As in no 
 Other country is that animal so much esteemed, 
 *o in no other are its noble qualities of swiftness, 
 endurance, temjier. attachment to man, so finely 
 developed. Of the insect tribe--, the locust, both 
 from its numbers and its destructiveness, is the 
 most formidable scourge to vegetation. The 
 Arabian seas swarm with fish, sea-fowl, and 
 shells; coral abounils in the Red Sea, and jjearls 
 in the Persian Gulf. 
 
 2. AiiABiA Deserta, called by (he Greeks 
 "SiKriviris 'Apa0ia, or r) "'E.p-qfj.os ^Apa^la, and by 
 
 the Aialis ^ jult El-BucUah, i. e. tlie Desert. 
 
 This takes in tiiat portion of the country which 
 lies norrli of Arabia Felix, and is bounded on the 
 north-east l)y the Euphrates, on the north-west by 
 Syria, and on the west liy Palestine and Arabia 
 Petrrea. Tiie Arabs divide this 'great wilderne-ss' 
 into three parts, so ca'led from their jiroxiniity to 
 the respective countrii^, viz. lUidinli c-sh Sham 
 (Syria), Bailinh cl Jes/i^'ah (the ])eniiisula, i e. 
 Arabia), and Badiah el /) 'ik (lij.\>y]oii]ii). From 
 tliis word Badiali comes the name of the nomadic 
 tribes l)y whom it is trave.-sed, viz. Bcdairees 
 Abetter known to us by the Fiitich conujition of 
 Bedouins), who are no', liowevei^ confined to this 
 portion of Arabia, but range throuj^hout the entire 
 region. So far as it has yet been eXj ^ored, Desert 
 A.rabia appears to be one contiimous elevated, 
 interminable stej;/;(?, occasionally intem;c(ed by 
 tanges of hills. Sand and salt are the o\ief e\e- 
 ments of the Sviil, which in many places is t''tirely 
 bare, lut elsewhere jdelds stinted and tt irny 
 ilirubs 01 thinly-scattered saline plants. \ '■'at 
 
 ARABIA. 
 
 Ml 
 
 part of the wilderness called El Tlhf.mmnd l»ei 
 on the Syrian frontier, extemling from the Hainan 
 to the Kupbrates, and is one immense dfad and 
 dreary level, very scantily 8uj>plied with water, 
 except near the banks of the river, where the fields 
 are irrigated by wheels and otlier artiKcial con- 
 trivances. 
 
 Tlie sky in these deserts is generally cloudless, 
 but the burning heat of the sun is miMlerateil l<y 
 cooling winds, wlii<'h, however, rai.se fearful 
 tempests of sand and du^t. Here. tiM), as in 
 other regions of the Fast, occasionally prevails 
 the burning, suflocating south-east wijid, called 
 by the Aral)s El llharur (the Hot), but more 
 commonly Sawiim, and iiy the Tmks Samyeli 
 (l)oth words meaning 'the Poisonous'), ihe effects 
 of which, however, have by some travellers lieen 
 greatly cxaggera ed. This is probably ' the east 
 wind' anil the 'wind from the desert ' spoken of 
 in Scri])iure. .Another phenomenon, which is 
 not peculiar, indeeil, to Desert Araliia, liut is 
 seen tlieie in greatest frequency and peifection, 
 is what the French call fiie mirar/e, the delusive 
 apjiearr.nce of an expanse of water, created by 
 the tremulous, undulatory movement of the va- 
 pours raised by the excessive heat vf a meridian 
 sun. It is called in Arabic serab, and is no 
 doubt the Hebrew sarab of Isa. xxxv. 7, which 
 our translatois liave rendered 'tlie jiarclied ground.' 
 
 3. Akabia Pet;i.i;a (Gr. HiTpaia) aj'jiears to 
 have derived its name from its chief town Petra 
 (^ e. a rock i. in Heh. Selah; alfhongh (;is is !•©• 
 markeil by Burckhardt) the e])ithet is also appro- 
 priate on account of the rocky moiintaiiis and 
 stony plains which compose its surface. It em 
 braces all the north-western portion of the conn- 
 try ; being bounded on the east by Desert and 
 Happy Arabia (for we have included the Iledjaa 
 in the latter), on the north by Palestine and the 
 Mediterranean, on the west liy Kgyjit, and on the 
 south by the Red Sea. This division of Avabra 
 lias lieen of late years visited by a great many 
 travellers from Europe, .and is consequently mucfe 
 better known than tlie other ji.^rtions of the coun- 
 try. Confining ourselves at jiresent to a general 
 outline, we refer for details to the articles Si>-ai 
 E.-^ouus, EuoM, MoAii, &c. Beginning at tl>e 
 northern frontier, there meets the elevated plain 
 of Belka, to the east of the Dead .Sea, the district 
 of Kerak (Kir), the ancient territory of tl>« 
 Moaliites, their kinsmen of Annnori having set- 
 tled to the noith of this, in Arabia Deserta. Th« 
 noith bordiT of Moab was the Ijrook Anion, now 
 the \Vady-el-M(>jib ; to tlie south of Moab, sepa- 
 rated from it by the \Yady-el-.\h3y, lay Mount 
 Seir, the dominion of the Kdomites, or Idumeea, 
 reaching as far as to Elatli on the Red Sea. 
 The great valley which runs frnni the Dead Sea 
 to that ])oint consists, first, of El-Ghor, which is 
 comparatively low, liut gradually rises liy a suc- 
 cession of limestone dilfs into the more elevated 
 plain of 7;/-^-l)'airt/j, formerly mentioned. 'We 
 were now,' says Professor Rubinson (Bihl cnl lie- 
 searches, vol. ii. ]). .'502), ' ujion the ]ilain, or 
 rather the rolling desert, of tlie Arahah ; tiie sur- 
 face was in general loo>e gravel and stones, 
 everywhere furrowed and torn with the f'eds ol 
 torrents. A more frightful desert it iiad tiaidlj 
 been our lot to behold. The mountains iieyond 
 ])resented a most uninviting .and hiileons aspect; 
 precijiices and naked conical ]>eaks of chalkv
 
 188 
 
 ARABIA. 
 
 and gravelly fiirmation rising one aliove another 
 without a s\^!i ol" life or vegetation.' It was 
 ODce lielievefi t'.uit througli t'lis great valley >tlie 
 Jiiidan anciently flowed, before tlie catastroiilie 
 of the cities of 'the plain (Arahali);" hut from 
 the tle'iressed level of the Dead Sea (recently 
 found l)y Lieut. Symonds to he no less tlian 1337 
 feet helow tliat of the Mediteiraneaii), from the 
 great elevation of the Arahah, the long descent 
 noithward, and the run of tlie watei courses in 
 tlie same direction, the hypothesis is found to be 
 no longer tenable.* The structure of the moun- 
 taiiij of Edom on the east of the Arahah is 
 thus desciibed liy Robinson (vol. ii. p. 5^}l) : 'At 
 fe.e ha.je low hills of lime--.tt>ne or argillaceous 
 •socks ; then the lofty masses of jwrpliyry, consti- 
 tuting the body of the nuiuntain : above the^e 
 sandstone brokeu up intp irregular ridges and 
 grotesque groups of clitts; and again, faither 
 l)ack and higlier thaii all, long elevated ridges of 
 limestone without precipices. East of all these 
 stretches otJ' indefinitely tlie high ])lateau of tlie 
 great eastern desert. The chara'ter of these 
 mountains is quite difTerent from those on the 
 west of the Arabah. The latter, wliich seemed 
 to be not more than two-thirds as high, are wholly 
 desert and sterile ; while these on the east appear 
 to enjoy a sufficiency of rain, and are covered 
 with tufto of heihs and occasional trees.' Tiiis 
 mountainous region is divided into two districts : 
 that to tlie nortli is called Jebdl (i. e. mountains, 
 the Geljal of Ps. Ixxxiii. 7); that to the south 
 Esh-Sherah, wliich has erroneously been supposed 
 to be allied to the Hebrew 'Seir;' whereas the 
 latter (written with a J?) means ' hairy,' the former 
 denotes 'a tract or region.' To the district of 
 Esh-Sherah belongs Mount Hor, the burial-jjlace 
 of Aaron, towering above tiie VVady Mousa (val- 
 ley of Moses), where. are the celebrated ruins of 
 Petia (the ancient capital of the Nabathaeo- 
 Idiunaeans), l>rought to light by Seetzen and 
 Busckhardt, and now familiar to ]*2nglish readers 
 by the illustrations of liby and JIangles, La- 
 borde, &c. As for the mountainous tract imme- 
 diately west of the Arabah, Dr. Robinson de- 
 scribes it as a desert limestone region, full of 
 precipitous ridges, through which no travelkd 
 road lias ever passed. 
 
 To the west of Idumaea extends the ' great and 
 terrible wilderness" of Et-T'ih, i. e ' the VVantler- 
 ing,' so called from being the scene of the wan- 
 derings of the children oi' Israel. It consists of 
 vast interminable plains, a hard gravelly soil, 
 and irregular ridges of limestone hills The le- 
 scarches of Iloliinson and Smith furnish new and 
 important information resjiecting tlie geography 
 of this part of Arabia and the adjacent peninsula 
 of Sinai. It appears tliat the middle of this 
 desert is occupied by a long central liasin, ex- 
 tending from Jebel-et-Tih (»'. e. the mountain of 
 (he wandeiirvg, a chain pretty far south) to the 
 shores of the IVleditei ranean. This basin descends 
 towards the north with a rajiid slope, and is 
 drained tliiougli all its length by Wady-el-Arlsh, 
 
 * Yet Mr. Beek, in a paper read to the Geo- 
 graphical Society (May 9, 1S42), thinks the pro- 
 gress of the Jordan to the Red Sea was arrested 
 by volcanic eruptions, which, while they formed 
 6he chasm now tilled by the Dead Sea, upraised 
 ec« ridije called El Sate. 
 
 ARABIA. 
 
 whicli enters the sea near the pl.xce of the samt 
 name, on the l>,.rtlers of Egy))t. ' West of thi« 
 liasin other wa<l_v« run by themselves down to lh« 
 sea. On th; east of the same central basin is 
 another similar and parallel one between it anil 
 the Arabah (the two being separated by tl t chain 
 El-Ojmeh and its continuation), drained through- 
 out by the Wady-el-Jeiafeh, which, liaung its 
 head in or near the Tih, falls into the Arabah not 
 far from El-Mukrah. Nortli of this last basin 
 the tract between the Arabah and the basin of 
 the Aiiih is filled up by ranges or clusters of 
 mountains, from which, on the east, shoit wadys 
 run to the Arabali, and on the west longer oties to 
 Wady-el-Arisli, until, faither noith, these lattei 
 continue by themselves to the sea nearer Gaza.' 
 
 This description of the formation of the north- 
 ern desert will enable us to form a more distinct 
 conception of the general features of the penin- 
 sula of Sinai, wliich lies south of it, being formed 
 by the two arms of the Red Sea, tlie Gulfi of 
 Akaba and Suez. If the parallel of the noith 
 coast of EgyiJ* be extended eastward to the greati 
 Wady-el-Arabah, it appears that the desert, south 
 of this parallel, rises giadually towards the south, 
 until on the summit of the ridge Et-Tih, between 
 the two gulfs, it attains, according to Russegger, 
 the elevation of 4322 feet. The waters of all 
 this great tract flow oflf northward either to the 
 Mediterranean or the Dead Sea. The Tih forms 
 a sort of otl'set, and along its southern base the 
 surface sinks at once to the height of only about 
 3000 feet, forming the sandy jilain which extends 
 nearly across the peninsula. After this the moun- 
 tains of the peninsula proper commence, and rise 
 rapidly through the formations of sandstone, griin- 
 stein, ))orphyry, and granite, int.) the lofty masses 
 of St. Catherine and U;n Shaumer, the former of 
 which, according to Russegger, has an elevation 
 of 816S Paris feet, or nearly double that of the 
 Tih. Here the waters all run eastward or west- 
 ward tci the Gulfs of Akaba and Suez. 
 
 The soil of the Sinaitic peninsula is in general 
 very unjiroductive, yielding only palm-trees, aca- 
 cias, tamarisks (fVorn which exudes the gum called 
 maiina), coh/tpiintida, and dwarfish, thorny 
 shrubs. Among the animals may be mentioned 
 the mountain-goat (the beden of the Aiabs), ga- 
 zelles, leopards, a kind of marmot called wcber, 
 the sheeb, sup})osed by Col. Hamilton Smith U* 
 be a species of wild wolf-dog, &c. : of birds there 
 are eagles, partritlges, pigeons, the katta, a species 
 of quail, &c. There are serpents, as in ancient 
 times (Num. xxi. 4, 6), and travellers speak of a 
 large lizard called dhob, common in tlie deseit, 
 but of unusually frequent occurrence here. The 
 peninsula is inhabited by Bedouin Arabs, aiod 
 its entire population was estimated by Burckhardt 
 at not more than 4000 souls. 
 
 Though this part of Aiabia must ever be me- 
 morable as the scene of the journeying <if the 
 Israelites from Egypt to the Promised Lajid, yet 
 very few of the spots mentioned in Scripture can 
 now be identified ; nor after the lapse of so many 
 centuries ought that to be occasion of surpri.se. 
 According to Niebuhr, Robinson, &c. they crossed 
 the Red Sea near Suez, but the tradition iil' the 
 country fixes the point of transit eight ir ttn 
 miles south of Suez, o]iposite the place calle'i 
 Ayoun Mousa, i. e. the Fountains of Mc ses, where 
 Robinson recently found seven welL* some oJ
 
 ARAblA. 
 
 irhich, nowever, were mere excavations in the 
 •and. About lo.j hom-s (3.3 geoccvajjliical miles) 
 80ut;l)-east of" that is the VVell of Hiiwaruh, the 
 Marnh of Sciijjtnre, wliose l)itter water is ])ro- 
 nounced hv the Arabs to be the worst in these 
 regions. Two or three hours smith of Ilawarah 
 the traveller cotries to the \Vaily (Thruuiulel, 
 supposed t,) be the EH/n ol' Mose*. From the 
 plain of El-Kaa, v.liich Ui>l)ins.)n fakes to be the 
 desert of Sin (not to be confixindej with that of 
 Zin, whicli beh>ii,'ed to the <?reat desert of Ka- 
 des!i), they woidil enter tlie Sinaitic range ])ro- 
 bablv aloii^ the upper part of VVady Feiran and 
 through ihe VV'ady-csh-Slieikh, one of the prin- 
 cipal valleys of the peninsula. Tlie Arabs call 
 tiiis whole cluster of mountains Jvbvl-et-Ti'tr ; 
 the Christians g -neially designate it as ' Sinai,' 
 and give tiie name of //ore6 to a ])aiticular moun- 
 tain, wliereas in Scriptm-e the names are used 
 intercliangeably. To whicli of the lofty peaks 
 Moses ascended tli t he might receive the I<aw 
 and thence p'll)!?^', it to the people, can only be 
 matter of conjeciure. Tradition fixed on the 
 Jebel Mjiisa. i.e. 'the mountain of Moses,' at 
 flie foot of wiiich is the convent of Mount Sinai, 
 and opposite to it stands Mount .St. Catharine, 
 which is a thousand feet higher, and has on tint 
 account by some been taken for the true Sinai. 
 Professor Robinson is inclined to identify the ve- 
 nerated spot with the Rus Es-Siifsufch, the highest 
 peak on rlie imrthein braw of Horel). which ' raises 
 its b.ild and aivful front in frowning majesty' 
 above tlie extensive plain of Er-Raliah, where 
 there was ample room for the encampment of tlie 
 'many thousands of Israel.' Otlieis have thouglit 
 of the Jehel Scrbul, a magnificent mountain, nine 
 or ten hours north-west of the convent, and sup- 
 posed by Burckliai\at to be the highest of all the 
 peaks, but since asceitained by Riippell ty be 
 1700 feet lower than St. Catharine. 
 
 Having now taken a rapid survey of this ex- 
 tensive region in its three divisions, let us advert 
 to the people by whom it was at first settled, and 
 by whose descendants it is still inhabited. There 
 is a prevalent notion that the Arabs, both of the 
 south and norjli, are descended from Ishmael ; 
 and the passage in Gen. xvi. 12, ' he (Ishmael) 
 shall dwell in the presence of all liis bretlnen,' 
 is often cited as if it were a prediction of tliat 
 national independence which, upon the whole, the 
 Arabs have maintained more than any other 
 people. But this supposition (in so far as the 
 true meaning of the text quoted is concerned) is 
 founded on a misconception of the original He- 
 brew, which runs literally, ' he shall dwell brfore 
 the faces of all liis bretlnen,' i.e. (according to 
 the iditmi above exjdjined, in which ' before the 
 face' denotes tlw east), the habitation of liis ))03- 
 terity shall be ' to the east' of the settlements of 
 Al)raham's other descendants. This seems also 
 to be the import of Gen. xxv. 18, where, in 
 reference to Ishmael, it is said in our version, 
 ' lie died in the jjresence of all his brethren ;" 
 but the true sense is, ' tlie lot of his inlieritance 
 fell to him before the faces {i.e. to the east) of 
 all his brethren.' These proplieeies found their 
 Bccotnjilishment in the fact of tlie sons of Ishmael 
 being located, generally speaking, to the east of 
 the otiier descendants of Al>iali«t.m, whether by 
 Sarah CI by Keturah. 
 
 ARABIA. 
 
 lf» 
 
 But the idea of the southern Arabs t)oing ot 
 the jMisferity of Ishmael is entirely witiiout foun- 
 dation, and seems to have originated in the tra- 
 dition invented by Arab vanity, that they, iis 
 well as the .lews, are of the seed of Alirahum — 
 a vanity which, iK'iides disfiguring and falsifying 
 the whole history of the ]>;itriarch and his son 
 Ishmael, ha.<> transferred the scene of it from 
 Palestine to Mecca. If we po to the most 
 autlientic source of ancient ethnogra])hy, the 
 boo.k of Genesis, we *here find that the vast 
 tracts of country known to us under the name 
 of Arabia gradually became jieopled Ijy a variety 
 ol" trilies of ditVerent lineage, though it is noif 
 impossible lo determine the precise liniits within 
 which they fixed their permanent or nomadi« 
 abode. We shall here exhibit a tabidar view of 
 thes<; races in chronological order, i. e. according 
 lo the successive a>ras of their resjK'ctive pri>- 
 genitors ; — 
 
 I. H.\MiTE8, ». e. the posterity of Cta/i, Ham's 
 eldest son, whose descendants appear to have 
 settled in tlie south of Aral)ia. and to have sent 
 colonies across the Red Sea to the o))jx)sile coast 
 of Africa ; and hence Cash iK'came a general 
 name for ' the south,' and specially for Arabian 
 and Al"rican Etliio])ia. Tlie sons of Cush (Gen. 
 X. 7) were Seba, Ilavilal), Sabtah, Raamah or 
 Riigma (his sons, Sheba and Dedan), and Sab- 
 theca. 
 
 II. Shbmitbs, including the following : 
 
 A. Joktarutes, i. e. the descenilants of Joktan 
 (called by the Aralxs KachtanX the second son of 
 Eber. Sliem"s great-grandson \Gen. x. %'>, 2(5). 
 According to Arab tradition Kachtan (w!iom 
 they also regard as a son of Eber), after the con- 
 fusion of tongues and (iisper>ion at Babel, settled 
 in Yemen, where he reigned as king, l^toleniy 
 speaks of an Arab tribe called Kataniles, who 
 may have derived their name fnmi hivn ; anil the 
 richest Bedouins of the soutliern plains are the 
 Kahtan tribe on the frontiers of Yemen. Joktan 
 had thirteen sons, some of whose names may l)e 
 obscurely traced in the designations of certain 
 districts in Arabia Felix. Tlieir names were 
 Almodad, Shalepl), Hhazarmavetli (preserved in 
 the name of tlie ])rovince of Ilhadramaut, the 
 Hebrew and Aral)ic letters being tiie same), 
 Jaracli, Hadoram, Uaal (believed by the Arala 
 to have been the founder of Sanaa in Yemeni, 
 Dikla, Obal, Abimael, Slielm (father of trie 
 Sabajans, whose chief town was Mariaba or 
 Maiebj their (pieen Balkis suj)jx)seil to l)e tlic 
 queen who visited Solomon*), (^phir (who gave 
 name to the district that became so famous t<)i 
 it.s gold), Havilah, and Jobab. 
 
 B. Abrahamites, divided into — 
 
 (a) Ilar/arenes or llagnritcs, so called from 
 Hagar the mother; otherwise termed JshmneUfea 
 friim lier son ; and yet in course of time these 
 names ajijK'ar to have been ajijilied to dilVeient 
 tribes, for in Psalm Ixxxiii. (>, the Ilngaienes are 
 
 * Tlie honour of being the cotmlry of the 
 queen of Sheba is also clainie<l l)y Abyssinia, 
 but if (a? Bruce ijifi)ms us) there was ilso a 
 Sal)a in .African Ethiopia, and if Ihe.e ojipositc 
 coasts of the Red Sea formed at times l,ut out 
 Uinijdom, the two opiniims uie not ineconcil'iblo.
 
 \90 
 
 ARABIA. 
 
 expressly disting lished from the Ishmaelites 
 (&)mii. 1 Chiori, V. 10, 19, 22, and the ajjoci yjihal 
 t>o;)k iirBai-uch i. lij ; iii. 23). The twelve sons 
 oif 1-iimiael (Gen. xxv. 13-l-J), who gave names 
 to se[)iiiate tiibe,i, were Nebaiotii (the Nabatliaeaiis 
 in Arabia Petrasa), Kedar (the Kedarenes, some- 
 times also used as a designation of the Bedouins 
 genetally, and h«ice the Jewisli rabbins call the 
 Arabic langiia^^e ' the Kedarene' ), Abdeel, ]Mib- 
 sam, Mislima, Dumali, Massa, Iladad or Hadar, 
 Tnen-iii, Jeuir, Naphish (the Itursean-; and Na- 
 phishteatH near the tribe of Gad : 1 Chron. v. 10, 
 '2')), and Kedmah. They appear to have been 
 fur the most part located near to Palestine on the 
 east and south-east, 
 
 (0) Kctiu-ahites, i. e. the descendants of Abra- 
 bain and Ids concubine Keturah, by whom he 
 had si.\: son? (Gen. xxv. 2) : Simram, Jokshan 
 (who, like Raiimah, sou of Gush, was aho the 
 father of two i sons, Sheba and Dedan), Medan, 
 Midian, Jishbak, and Shuach. Among tliese, the 
 • vHterily of Midian became the best known. 
 Their principal seat appears to have been in the 
 ni'i^hb'>urhood of the Moabites, but a branch of 
 tiiem must have settled in the peninsula of 
 ^inai, for Jethro, the fatiier-in-law of Moses, was 
 a priest of Midian (Exod. iii. 1 ; xviii. 5 ; Num. 
 X. 29). To the posterity of Shuach belonged 
 Bildad, one of the friends of Job. 
 
 (y) EdoiKites, i. e. the descendants of Esau, 
 who possessed i«Ioant Seir and the adjacent 
 region, called from them Idumaea. They and 
 the Nabathseans formed in later times a flouri-sh- 
 jng commercial state, the capital of which was 
 the remaikable city called Petra. 
 
 C. Nahorites, the descendants of Nahor, 
 Abraham's brother, who seem to have peojjled 
 the land of Uz, the country of Job, and of Buz, 
 the country of his friend Elihu the Buzite, these 
 being the names of Nahor's sons (Gen. xxii. 21). 
 
 D. Lotites, viz. : 
 
 (a) Moabites, who occupied the northern poilion 
 «>f Araltia Petraea, as above described ; and their 
 kinsmen, the — ■ 
 
 (;3) Ammonites, who lived north of them, in 
 Arabia Deserta. 
 
 Besides these, the Bible mentions various other 
 tribes who resided within the bounds of Arabia, 
 but whose descent is unknown, e. _(/. the Amale- 
 kites, the Keiiites, the Horites, the inhabitants of 
 Maou, liaz^H-, Vedan, and Javan-Meusal (Ezek. 
 xxvii. 19), where the Englisli version has, ' Dan 
 als:) and Javan going to and fro.' 
 
 In process of time some of these tribes were 
 pei-haps wholly extirpated (as seems to have been 
 che case with the Amalekites), but the rest 
 were more or less mingled together by inter- 
 aianiages, by military conquests, political revo- 
 lutions, and other causes of which history has 
 preserved no record ; and thus amalgamated, they 
 became known to the rest of the world as the 
 ' AttAKs,' a people whose physical and mental 
 characteristics are very strongly and distinctly 
 marked. In both resi)ects they rank very liigh 
 among the nations ; so much so, that some have 
 regarded them as fumisiiin? the prototype — the 
 primitive model form — the slandard figure of the 
 miman species. Ttiis was the opinion of the 
 &MI»>U3 BaxoD de Larrey, surgeon-general of 
 
 ARABIA. 
 
 Napoleon's army in Egypt, who, in speakmg <A 
 tlie Arabs on the east side of tlie Red Sea, say» 
 (in a Memoir for the Use of the Scicntijic Com- 
 mission to Alr/ierSy Paris, i83S) ' They have a 
 physiognomy and character wiiich are quite pe- 
 culiar, and which distinguish them generally 
 from all (hose which appear in other regions of 
 the globe.' In his dissections he found ' their 
 physical structure in all respects more perfect 
 than that of Europeans ; their organs of sense 
 exquisitelj' acute; ilieir size above the aveiage ot 
 men in general ; their ligure robust and elegant 
 (the colour brown) ; their intelligence propor- 
 tionate to that pli.ysical j)erfection, and, witliout 
 doubt, superior, other tidngs being equal, to that 
 of other nations.' 
 
 The inliabitants of Arabia have, from remot* 
 antiquity, been divided into two great classes, 
 viz. the ioivnsmen (including villagers), and the 
 men of the desert, sucli being, as we remarked, 
 the meaning of the word ' Bedawecs'' or Be- 
 douins, the designalion given to the 'dwellers 
 in the wilderness.' From the nature of their 
 country, the latter are necessitated to lead the life 
 of noniades, or wandering sliepherds ; and since 
 the days of the patriarchs (who were themselves 
 of that occupation) the extensive steppes, which 
 form so large a portion of Arabia, have been tra- 
 versed by a pastoral but wavlike people, wiio, in 
 their mode of life, their food, their dress, their 
 dwellings, their manners, customs, and govern 
 ment, have always continued, and still continue, 
 almost unalterably the same. They consist of 
 a great many separate tribes, who are collected 
 into ditl'erent encampments disj)ersed tiirough 
 the territory which they claim as their own ; and 
 they move from one spot to another (commonly 
 in the neighbourhood of pools or wells) as soon 
 as the stinted pasture is exhausted by their cattle. 
 It is only iiere and there that tlie ground is sus- 
 ceptible of cultivation, and the tillage of it is 
 commonly lei't to peasants, who are often the 
 vassals of the Bedawees, and wiiom (as well as 
 all ' townsmen') they regard with contempt as an 
 inferior race. Having constantly to shift their 
 residence, they live in movable tents (comp. 
 Isa. xiii. 20; Jer. xlix. 29), from which circum- 
 stance they receivetl from the Greeks the name of 
 'S.KTjviTai, I. e. dweWeis in tents (Strabo, xvi.p. 747; 
 Diod. Sic. p. 254 ; Ammian. Marcell. xxiii. 6). 
 The tents are of an oblong figure, not ruiiie than 
 six or eight feet higli, twenty to thirty long, and 
 ten broad ^ they are made of goat's or camel's 
 hair, and are of a brown or black colour (such 
 were the tents of Kedar, Cant. i. 5), dilVering in 
 this respect from those of the Turcoman-;, which 
 are white. Each tent is divided by a cuitain or 
 carpet into two apartments, one of which is a{)- 
 propriated to the women, who are not, however, 
 subject to so much restraint and seclusion as 
 among other Mohammedans. The tents are 
 arranged in an inegular circle, (he space vithin 
 serving as a fold to the cattle at niglit. The 
 heads of tribes are called sheik/is, a word of 
 various import, but used in this case as a title of 
 honour ; the government is hereditary in the 
 family of each sheikh, but elective as to the 
 particular individual appointed. Thtir allegi- 
 ance, however, consists more in following hia 
 example as a leadei than in obeying his com- 
 mands ; and, if dissatisfied with his govenuncui^
 
 ARABIA 
 
 they will depose or abandon him. As the inde- 
 peiiiient Kuds ul" tlieir uwn de^ortj-, the Bediiuces 
 have <'i\)iii time imiiiomoiiiil dcmaiultd tiiL'uto or 
 presents i'wm all travellers or caravans (Isa. 
 xxi. 13) passing,' throui^h tiieir country ; the tran- 
 sition IVoiii which to robbery is so natural, that 
 tliey attach to the Utter no (iisi;;race, plundering 
 without mercy all who are unable to resist them, 
 or wii'j have nut secured the jirotection of their 
 tribe. Their wutcliinj; for travellers ' in the 
 \«ays,' i. c. the tVeqwented routes through the 
 desert, is alluded to Jer. iii. 2; Ezra viii. 31 ; 
 and the lleetness of their horses in carrying them 
 into the ' dejitiis of tlie wilderness,' beyond the 
 reach of their pursuers, seems what is refeired to 
 in Isa. Ixiii. 13, 14. Their warlike incuisions 
 into more settled districts are often noticed (e. ff. 
 Job i. 15; 2 Chron. xxi. 16; xxvi. 7). The 
 acuteneos of their bodily senses is very remark- 
 able, and is exemplified in their astonishing 
 sagacity in tracing and distinguishing the foot- 
 steps of men and cattle, a faculty which is known 
 by the name of (tt/tr. The law of thar, or blood- 
 revenge, s>)Ws the seeds of perjietual feuds ; and 
 what was predicted (Gen. xvi. 12j of the posteiity 
 of Ishmael, the ' wild-as, man" (a term most gra- 
 phically descriptive of a lieilawee), holds tiuo of 
 the who'c pe )ple. Ye', the veiy dread of the cone- 
 ip-icnces of shedding ti'ood prevents t.ieir IVeipunt 
 c.jntlict.5 fiom being very sanguinary : they sliow 
 braveiy in lepel ing a j,ubiic enemy, but when 
 they fight f.ir [)lundei, tuey behave like cowaids. 
 Their bodily fiume is spare, but athletic and 
 active, inured to fatigue and capable of under- 
 going great plications: their miiids are acute and 
 inquisitive; a^id tliough their manners are some- 
 what grave and foimal, they are of a lively and 
 social disposition. Of their moral viitues it is 
 necessary to speak with caution. They were long 
 held up as models of good faith, incorruptible 
 integrity, and the most generous hospitality to 
 «ti-angers ; but many recent travellers deny them 
 the possession of these qualities ; and it is certain 
 tliat whatever they may have been once, the 
 Bedawees, like all the unsophisticated ' children 
 of nature," have been much corrupted by the 
 influx of foreigners, and the national character is 
 in every point of view lowest where they are most 
 exposed to the continual passage of strangers. 
 It is, however, no j)ait of our present design 
 to enter on a more minute account of this 
 singular and interesting people ; information re- 
 garding many of their peculiarities which throw 
 light on Scripture will be found under other 
 heads. Let every oire who wishes to study Arab 
 life in the deseit coirsult the romance of -4 w/nr, 
 translated by Hamilton, and Burckhardt's Notes 
 on the Bedouiitx ; and with respect to the manners 
 and customs of the more settled inhabitants, 
 many curious details will be found in Lane's 
 Modern Egyptians, and in tlie notes to his new 
 Translation of the Thousmid and One Nights ; 
 for since the downfal of the Arab empire of 
 Bagdad, Cairo has been the chief of Arabian 
 cities, and there Arab manners exist in their most 
 refined form. The population of the entire pe- 
 ninsula of Arabia has been estimated at from 
 eleven to twelve millions, but the data are pre- 
 •ttrious. 
 
 The jrrincipal source of the wealth of ancient 
 i\xaiiia wa.s its cammerce. Sc early as the days 
 
 AILVBIA. 
 
 191 
 
 of Jacob (Gen. xxxvii. 2S) we read of a n:ixed 
 caravan of Arab merchants (Ishniae ites aii«l 
 Midianites) who were engaged in (lie cunveyance 
 of various foreign articles to Egypt, and mads 
 no scruple to add .loseph, ' a slave," t.i ilieir olhei 
 purchases. The Arabs were, doubtles;, the liist 
 navigators of their own seas, and the gieat car- 
 riers of llie ])roduce of India, ,M)ys»inia, and 
 other remote countries to \Vesti'in Asia and 
 Egypt. Various Indian jnoductions tiius ol)- 
 tained were common among the IU'l)iews at an 
 early period of their history (ICxod. xxx. 23, 2°>), 
 The tratlic of the Red Sea was to S.domon a 
 source of gnat piolit ; and the extensive com- 
 merce of Sabcpa (Shel)a, now Yemen j is men- 
 tioned by jrrofane writers as well as alluded to 
 in Scrifiture (1 Kings x. 10-15). In the de- 
 scription of the foreign trade of Tyre (Ezi-k. 
 xxvii. 19-24) various Aral) tiilrcs aie introduced 
 (comp. Isa. Ix. (5; Jer. vi. 20; 2 (^iiron. ix. 11). 
 Tiie Nabatha;o-Iduma;ans became a gr at tiading 
 people, their ca))ital lieing Petra. The transit- 
 trade from India continued to eniicli Aiabia 
 until the discovery of tiie passage to India by 
 the Cape of Good Ho])e; but tbe invention of 
 steam-navigation lias now re-.tA)rcd the ancient 
 route for travellers by the Rod Sea. 
 
 The settlers in Aiabia are by native writers 
 divided into two classes: tl'.e old tiibes (who 
 belonged to the fabulous period of history, and 
 are long since extinct) ; and the piesent inhal>it- 
 ant.5. The latter aie classed either ainong the 
 ' pure or genuine,' or the Mostarabi, the mixed or 
 naturalized Arabs. A ' })ure" Arab boasts of 
 being descended from Kachtan (the Joklan of 
 Scripture, Gen. x. 29), and calls himself al 
 Arab al Araba, ' an Arab of the Arabs,' a phrase 
 of similar emphasis with St. Paul's ' Hebrew of 
 the Hebrews' (Poil. iii. 5). The mixed Arabs 
 are supposed to be descended from Ishmael l)y a 
 daughter of Modad, king of Hedjaz, the district 
 where the Ismaelites chiefly settled. The Kach- 
 tanites, on the other hand, occupied the southern 
 part of the pieninsula, for Kachtarr's great-grand- 
 soir Saba gave name to a kingdom, one of whose 
 queens (called by the Arabians Balkisj visited 
 Solomon (1 Kings x. 1). A son of Saba was 
 Ilimyar, who gave name to the famous dynasty 
 of the Ilimyaritcs (imjnoperly writterr Honierites), 
 that seem to have reigned lor many centuries 
 over Sahara and part of Ilhadramaid. In the 
 latter province Lieut. Wellsted recently dis- 
 covered ruins called Nakab-el-Hajar (' the exca- 
 vatioir iir the rock'), consisting of a massive wall, 
 thirty to forty feet Idgh, Hanked with square 
 towers. Widiin the entrance on the face of the 
 building he found an inscription in chaiacteis 
 eight inches long, which Gesenius supposes to lie 
 the ancient Himyaritic wiiting. Aral)ia, in 
 ancient times, generally jrieserved its independ- 
 ence, unalVecled by those great events which 
 changed the destiny of the surrounding nations; 
 and in the sixth century of our a;ra, the decline 
 of the Roman empiie and the corruptions and 
 distractions of the Eaitein church favouied the 
 impulse given by a wild and warlike fanaticism. 
 Mahomet arose, and succeeded in gathering 
 around his standard die nomadic tribes of central 
 Arabia; and in less than fifty years that stan- 
 dard waved triumjihant ' from the straits oj 
 Gibraltar to tiie hrtherto unconquere<i rejjioiu
 
 193 
 
 ARABIC LANGUAGE. 
 
 beyond tlie Oxus.' Tlie khalils transferred the 
 seat of gov'crnmtnt successively to Damascus, 
 Kufa, and Kagdud; but amid the distractions of 
 their fmrign wars, the chiefs of the interior of 
 Arabia ij;radually shook oil' their feeble allegiance, 
 and resumed their ancient habits of independ- 
 ence, which, ndtvvithstanding the revolutions that 
 have since occurred, they for t'le most part retain. 
 At present, indeed, the authority of Mehenict 
 Ali, the Pasha of K^ypt, is acknowled,'ed over a 
 great poition of tlie northern ])art of Arabia, 
 . while in fiie soutlt the Imam of Maskat exer- 
 cises dominiojj over a much greater extent of 
 country tiian did ariv of his predecessors. — N. M. 
 
 ARABIC LANGUAGE. That important 
 family of languages, of which the .\vabic is the 
 most culiivatcd and most widely-extended branch, 
 has long wanted an ap])ro])riate common name. 
 Tlie term OrietUal languages, which was exclu- 
 sively ajiplied to it from (he time of Jeronie down 
 to the end of the last century, and which is even 
 now not entirely abandoned, must always have 
 beeji an unscientiiic one, inasmuch as the coun- 
 tries in which these languages prevailed are only 
 the east in respect to "Kiivope ; and when Sanscrit, 
 Chinese, and other idioms of the remover East 
 were brougiit within the reach of our research, it 
 became jialpabiy incoiTecr. Uniler a sense of 
 this impropriety, Eichhorn was the first, as he 
 says liimself {Allg. Bibl. Biblioth. vi. 772), to 
 introduce the name Sc.'idiic languages, which 
 was soon generally adopted, and wliich is the 
 most usual one at the present day. Nevertheless, 
 Stange (in his Tiieolog. Symmikta) justly objected 
 to this name Ji,s violating the statements of the 
 very Mosaic account (Creri. x.) on which the 
 propriety of its use professed to be based. For, 
 according to that geiiealogical table, some nations, 
 which in all probability did not sjmak a lan- 
 gnage belonging to this iamily, are descended 
 from She«i ; and others, wliich did speak such a 
 language, are derived from Ham. Tluis 'Klam 
 and Asshr.r are deduced from Shem (ver. 22) ; 
 and the descendants of Ciish in Arabia and 
 Ethiopia, as well as all the Canaanites, from 
 Ham (ver. 7, sq.). In modern times, however, 
 the very appropriate designation Syro- Arabian 
 languages has t>een proposed by Dr. Prichard, in 
 bis Phifsical History of Man. This term, besides 
 being e.semjit from all the above-mentioned ob- 
 ject ions on the score either of latitude or inade- 
 quacy, has the advantage of forming an exact 
 counterpait to the name by wliich the only other 
 great family of languages with which we are 
 likely to bring the Syro- Arabian into relations o( 
 contrast or accordance, is now uriiversally known 
 — the l»do- Germanic. Like it, by taking up 
 cul}' the two extreme members of a whole sister- 
 liood accorciirig to tlieir geogra[)hical position 
 when in tlieir native seats, it embraces all tiie 
 inteiinediate branches under a common band; 
 ttnd, like it, it constitutes a name which is not 
 only at once intelligible, but one which in itself 
 conveys a notion (A' that an^inity between the 
 sister dialects, wliich it is one of the objects of 
 comparative philology to demonstrate and to 
 apjily. 
 
 Of this family, then, the Arabic forms, together 
 with the Et'iiopir^ the southern branch. In it 
 we lind the full and adult development of the 
 Keuiiu of the Syro-Arabian langua^jes. In tlie 
 
 ARABIC LANGUAGE. 
 
 abvindance of its roots, in the manifold variety 
 of its formations, in the syntactical rlelicacies of 
 it^ construction, it stands pre-eminent n» a lan- 
 guage among all its sisters. Every class of com- 
 position also : the wild and yet nolile lyrics of 
 the son of the desert, who had ' nothing to glory 
 in but his sword, his gue^t, anil his fervid tongue;' 
 the impassioned and often sublime a])p(!als of the 
 Quran; the sentimrntal poefj-y of a .Muianabbi ; 
 the artless simjilicity of their usual narrative 
 style, and the philosojihic disquisitiori of an Ibn 
 ClialdGn ; the subtleties of the grammarian and 
 scholiast; medicine, natural history, and (ho 
 metaphysical speculations of the Aristotelian 
 school — all have found the Arabic language a 
 fitting exponent of their feeling and thought. 
 And, although confined within the bounds of the 
 Peninsula by circumstances to which we owe the 
 preservation of its pure antique form, yet 7s?am 
 maile it tiie written and sjxjken language of the 
 whole of Western Asia, of Eastern and Northern 
 Africa, of Spain, and of some of the islands of 
 the Meiliterranean ; and the ecclesiastical lan- 
 guage of Persia, Turkey, and all other lands 
 which receive the Mohammedan faith; in all 
 which places it has left sensible traces of its 
 former occupanc}% and in many of which it is 
 still the living or the learned idiom. Such is the 
 Aiabic language; so important its lelatioris to 
 the literary and civil history of a large portion of 
 the human race ; the more important also to us 
 as bridging over that wide chasm which inter- 
 venes between the extinction of classical lite- 
 rature and the revival of that spirit to which the 
 literature of all modem languages owes its origin. 
 Into these general views i.f the Arabic language, 
 however, it is nv;t i ,e pi.nince of tiiis work to 
 enter; an able aitic'e in the I'cnni/ Cyclopcedia, 
 by the late lamented })i\ Rosen, will satisfy 
 those who desire such infurmation. Our object 
 here is to show the mode and the impoitance of 
 its bearings upon Biblical philology. 
 
 The close affinity, and consequently the incal- 
 culable philological use, of the Arabic witli 
 regard to the Hebrew language and its other 
 sisters, may be considered partly as a question of 
 theory, and partly as one of fact. The former 
 would regard the concurrent records which the 
 Old Testament and their own traditions have 
 preserved of the several links by which the Arabs 
 were connected with difiisient generations of the 
 Helaew line, and the evidences which Scripture 
 oti'eis of persons speaking Arabic being intelli- 
 gible to tlie Hebrews ; the latter would oliserve 
 the demonstiable identity between them in the 
 main features of a language, and the more 
 subtle, but no less convincing traces of resem- 
 blance e\'en in the points in which tlieir diversity 
 is most appaien*. 
 
 Tlie following are the theoretical grounds : — 
 first, the Arabs of Jemen aie derived from 
 Qahtan, the Joktan of Gen. x. 25, whom the 
 Arabs make the son of 'El>er (Pococke's Specirten 
 Hist. Arab. p. 39, S}.). Tliese form the -pure 
 Arabs. Then Ishniael intermarried with a de- 
 scendant of the line oi Qahtan, and became th« 
 progenitor of the trilies oH Higaz. Tlie.se are th« 
 in-ntitious Arabs. These two roots of the nation 
 coricspond with the two givat dialects into which 
 the language was once divided : th.it of Jemen, 
 under the name of the Himjarite, of whicli all
 
 ARABIC LANGUAGE. 
 
 fnat has come down to ns (i^xreiit whaf inny liave 
 been preserved in the Ethiopic) is a few iii- 
 icripfions; mid fliat of HigTiz, imitpr tliat of (lie 
 di;'lert of Mmiiiar. or. descciidiii;^ a few peiie- 
 ration? in the satrc line, of (^maisli — the dialect 
 cf the Quran and of all their literat\ne. Then, 
 Ahrahani sent away his sons hy Ketiuah, and 
 tliey also became the founders of Arabic tribes. 
 Lastly, the circumstance of Ksau's settling in 
 Mount Seir, wlu-ie (he I(l\nii?caris descended fioni 
 his loins, may be considered as a still later 
 medium by whicii the idioms of Palestine and 
 Arabia preserved their harmony. Secondly, Olaus 
 Celsius (in his Hist. Ling, et Erudit. Arab.) cites 
 the fact of tlie sons of Jacob conversing witii the 
 Ishmaelite caravan (Gen. xxxvii. 2S), and that 
 of Moses with his fitiier-iri-law tlie Midianite 
 (Exod. iv. IS). To these, however, Schelling (in 
 his Abhandl. v. d. Gebrauch dir Arab. Sprache, 
 p. 14) objects that they are not conclusive, as the 
 Ishmaelites, being merchants, might have ac- 
 quired tlie idiom of the nations they traded with, 
 and as Moses niiglit owe an Scrpiaintance with 
 Arabic to his residence in Egypt. Neveitheless, 
 one of Celsius's inferences derives consideralile 
 probability from the only instance of mutual in- 
 telligibilit}' which J. 1). Jlichaelis has adduced 
 (in his Bcurtheilung der Mittcl dip ausgesforbene 
 ITehr. SpracfiP zv vcrstehcn. p. l-'i'i), namely, tliat 
 Gideon and liis servant went down I))- niglit to 
 the camp of ' Midian, Amalek, and all the 
 Bene Qedem," to overhear tlieir conversation with 
 each other, and understood what tliey heard 
 (Judg. viii. 9-14). Lastly. Schultens (Oratio de 
 Reg. Sahceor., in his Opi). Minora) labours to 
 ?how thai the visit of tlie (pieeii of Slielia to 
 Solomon is a strong proof of the degree of ]irox- 
 imity in which the two dialects then stood to 
 each other. These late traces of resemblance, 
 moreover, ai-e rendered more striking by the 
 notice of the early diversity between Hebrew and 
 Arainaic (Gen. xxxi. 47). The instance of the 
 K'hiopian chamlieilain in Acts viii. 2S, may not 
 be considered an evidence, if Heinrichs, in his 
 note a<l loc. in Nov. Te.st. edit. Kopp., is right 
 in asserting that he was reading the Septuagint 
 version, and that Philip the deacon was a Hel- 
 lenist. 
 
 Thus springing from the same root as the 
 Hebrew, and ])r)sscssing such traces of affinity to 
 so late a period as the time of Solomon, this 
 dialect was further enabled, by several circum- 
 stances in th» social state of the nation, to retain 
 its native resemblance of type mitil the date of 
 the earliest extant written do.-uments. These 
 'circumstances were, the almost insular position of 
 the countr^■, whicli prevented concpiest or com- 
 merce from debasing the language of its inhabit- 
 ants ; the fact that si) large a portion of the 
 nation adhered to a mode of life in which every 
 impiession was, as it were, .stereotyj)ed, and knew 
 no variation fur ages (a cause to which we may 
 al.so In jjart ascribe the comparatively unim- 
 jxirtant changes whicli the language has !Uider- 
 jone dining the 110() years in v/hich we can 
 follt)w its history) ; and the great and just pride 
 wiiicJi they felt in the purity of their language, 
 •which, according to a valuable testimony of 
 Burckhardt, a com])etent judge of the learned ;i8 
 well as the living idiom, is still a characteristic 
 •jf t)»e Bedouins (Notes on the Iledouiiui, p. 21 1). 
 
 ARABIC LANGUAGE. 
 
 199 
 
 Tlicse caiises preserved the language froni foreign 
 induences at a time when, as the Qurnti niul a 
 national literature had not yet given it its full 
 stature, such inlluences would liine Iwen tTiost 
 able to destroy its integrity. During this interval, 
 nevertheless, the language received a i.eculiaily 
 ample development in a ccitain direction. The 
 limited incidents of a deseit life still allowed 
 valour, love, generosity, and satire to oci-iuiy 
 the keen .sensibilities of tiie chivalious He<!oniii. 
 These feelings found tlieir vent in ready vei^e 
 and eloquent ])iose; and thus, when Islam (iist 
 called tlie Arabs into the more varied aclivitj 
 and more perilous collisiin witli foieign nation.s 
 which resulted from the union of their tribe.* 
 under a common interest to hold the same fiith 
 and to propagate it by the sword, the langua>;e 
 had already received all the (ie\ elo|)iiie7it which 
 it could derive from the pre-eininentty creative 
 and reduing impulses iS poetry and elo(]ueiice. 
 
 However gieat may be tlie amount of ie.<enj- 
 blance between Arabic nml Hebrew which a due 
 estimate of all the thei/ietical grounds for ;he 
 affinity, and for the diversity, between iheni 
 would entitle us to assume, if is certain liiat a' 
 comparison of the actual state of both in their 
 pmest form eviu'-es a degree of proximity wliich 
 exceeds expectation. Not only may two-thirds of 
 the Hebrew roots (to fake the asseition of .^nri 
 villins, in his Di.ssertationes. p. 11, ed. J. J>. 
 Michael is) be found in .\raliic under the same 
 letters, and either in the same or a very kindred 
 sense, provided we know tiiat tlie last radical of 
 the n? roots in Hebrew is Waw or Jn in Arabic.-, 
 and that those wi ise firit radical is .hid in 
 Hebrew i« Waw in Araliic ; and that the letters 
 
 y L2 VI n n correspond to cL^ i\S^i', and that 
 
 either when the latter have a diacritical jtoint 
 or not ; but, if we allow for the changes of 3 
 
 info C^ 1 into H and ^_c^ T into jk, '' into • 
 D and b' into w, f '"*'^' ^, '""1 t^' into im 
 and L_->, we shall be able to discover nearly 
 
 nine-tenths of the Hebrew roots in Arabic. To 
 this great fundamental agreement in the vocaliu- 
 lary (the wonder of which is somewliat diminished 
 by a right estimate of the immense dispropoitien 
 between tlie two languages as to the number of 
 root?) are to be added those lesemblances whi.-h 
 relate to the mode of inflexion anfl construction. 
 Thus, in the verb, its two wide tenses, the mode 
 by which the jiersons are denoted at the end in 
 the Perfect, and at the beginning (with the ac- 
 cessory distinctions at the i iid) in tiie Iniju^rfect, 
 its capability of exjnessing the gender in the 
 second and third ])ersons, and the system on 
 which the conjugations are formed ; and in the 
 noun, the coiTesjiondence in formations, in the use 
 of the two genders, and in all the essential chiv- 
 racterisfics of construction ; the possession of the 
 definite article; the inde]«'ndent and allixed )iro- 
 nouiis; and the same system of separable and 
 attached j^articles — all these form so broad a basis 
 of community and harmony Ix-twecn the two 
 dialect.s, as could hardly l)e anticipated, when w« 
 consider the many ctntiiries which seuarate tha 
 earliest written extant documents of each. 
 
 The Hiversitifts between them, whicd cotuiit
 
 191 
 
 ARABIC LANGUAGE. 
 
 a''»ost entirely of fuller developments on tlie side 
 r>f the Arabic, may be sunmed up under the fol- 
 lowing licads : — A much more extensive system of 
 conjuf^ations in the verb, the dual in botli tenses, 
 and four forms of the Imperfect (tliree of which, 
 liowever, exist potentially in the ordinary impei feet, 
 tlie jussive, and the cohortative of the Hebrew : see 
 Ewald's Hebr. Gram, h '290, 293) ; the full series 
 of inlinitives;- the use of auxiliary verbs; in the 
 noun, tlie formations of the plural called brokm 
 or internal plurals, and the flexion by means of 
 terminations analogous to tluee of our causes; and 
 a i)erfcctly detineil system of metre. Tiie most 
 ini[)ortant of these dilTerences consists in that final 
 vowel after tlie liist radical, by which some of the 
 forms of the imperfect and the several cases in 
 the noun are indicated ; and it is a matter of 
 Some moment to determine wlietlrer tiiey are to 
 be ascribed to the genuine natural expansion of 
 the language, or aie only an attempt of the 
 grammarians to introduce Greek inflexions into 
 Arabic. The latter opinion has been seriously 
 propounded by Hasse, in a paper In his Magazin 
 fiir Btblisch-Orkntalisclte Litteratur, i. 230; 
 ■ and even Ge enius has expressed himself to the 
 same eflfct (Gench. d. Hebr. Spr. p. 95). Never- 
 theless, the notion springs from a forgetfalness of 
 the fact that the date of tlie early poems, tlie 
 Hamasa and tlie Mu'allaqat, is much anterior to 
 the period when any such foreign influence as 
 Ha<se alludes to could have liad efl'ect; and from 
 an ignorance of the absolute necessity of all those 
 ttexional vowels to preserve the metre of the 
 fxjetry. If any productions of Arabic •genius are 
 old-^if any are national in the highest sense, both 
 as to substance and form, it is those poems. And 
 so essential a jiart of their form is the metre 
 according lo which they were conceived, that it 
 is incontestable that tlieir metrical dlspositinn and 
 their existence are coeval. When Kiisse, then, 
 ' candidly admits that these terminations of case 
 were in use as early as the second century of tiie 
 Hig'ra,' he merely admits his Ignorance of the 
 fact that the earliest remains of Arabic literature, 
 those whicli are older by centuiies than the 
 Qurin, are composed in a form which is unin- 
 telligible unless read according to the nicest 
 distinctions of this vocalization of the final syl- 
 lables. This error is, moreover, akin to a not 
 uncommon statement, that Al Chalil, who lived 
 in tlie second century of ttie Hig"ra (Freytag's 
 Darstcllung d. Arab. Versk^mst, p. ISJ, invented 
 the art of Prosody ; which Is as true as that 
 Aristotle in\ented the art of Poetiy, merely be- 
 cause he abstracted the laws of (composition from 
 tlie masterpieces of Greek genius. 
 
 The Arabic alphabet also presents some re- 
 markable differences. As a representation of 
 sounds, it contains all the Hebrew letters ; but in 
 consequence of the greater extent of the nation as 
 a source of dialectual varieties of pronunciation 
 and also in consequence of the more develojjed 
 and refined sra.e of the language, the value of 
 Bome of lUem is not exactly the same, and the 
 characters that correspond to J? tO V T H H are 
 used in a double capacity, and represent both 
 halves of those sounds which exist unseparatetl in 
 tiie Hebiew. The present order of the letters also 
 18 different, although there are eviilences in their 
 numerical \alue, when so u.sed, and in the mtv 
 morial words given in Ewald's G-wnmatka Cri- 
 
 ARABIC LANGUAGE. 
 
 tica Ling. Ai-ab. § 67, that the arrangement wik. 
 once the same In both. In a pala;ogra])hical 
 point of view, the cliaracters have undergoii* 
 many changes. Tlie earliest form was that in th» 
 Himjarite alpliabet. Tlie first specimens of this 
 character (which Arabic writers call al Musnad, 
 \. e. stilted, columnar) were 'given by Seetzen in 
 the Fundgruben des Orients. Since then Professor 
 Rbdiger has produced others, and illustrated them 
 in a valuable ]ya\w:v in the Zvi>Hchrif'. fiir die 
 Kunde des Morgenlandes, i. 332. Tlie letfets of 
 this aljjliabet have a striking resemblance to those 
 of the Ktliiopic, which were derived from them. 
 In Northern Arabia, on the other hand, and not 
 very long before the time of Muhammad, the 
 Syrian character called Estrangtlu became the 
 model on wliich the Arabic alphabet called tlie 
 Ktijic was formed. Tiiis heavy, angular Kufic 
 character was the one in which the early copies 
 of the Quran were written ; and it is also found 
 in the ancient Muhammadan coinage as late as 
 the seventh century of the Hig'ra. From this, at 
 length, was derived the light, neat character 
 called Sisr/il, the one in which the Arabs con- 
 tinue to write at the present day, and which we 
 have endeavoured to represent in our printed 
 books. The introduction of thi> character is 
 ascrilied to Ilm Muqla, who died in the year 327 
 of the Hig'ra. (See the table given in the article 
 Ai.pH.iBET.) Lastly, it is worthy of notice that 
 all the letters of the Arabic alpliabet are only 
 consonants ; that, in an unjjointed text, tiie long 
 vowels are denoted bj' the use of Alif, Waw, aud 
 Ja, as matres lectionis ; and that i\\e slinrt vowels 
 are not denoted at all, but aie left to be su])];lied 
 according to the sense in which the reader takes 
 the words; whereas, in a pointed text, three points 
 only sufiice to represent the whole vocalization; 
 the equi\aleiits to which, accoidiiig to the way in 
 which they are expressed in this work, are «, i, u, 
 pronounced as in Italian. 
 
 The manifjld uses of the Arabic language in Bib- 
 lical philology (exclusive of the advantages it af- 
 fords for compaiing the Arabic versions) n. ay in ) ait 
 be gatheied from the degiee of its aflinity to ihe He- 
 brew ; and. Indeed, chiefly to the Hebrew befoie the 
 exile, after which period the Aramaic is the most 
 fruitful means of illustration (Malm, Darstelhmg 
 der Le.vicographie, p. 391). But tlieie are some 
 peculiarities in the lelative position of the twodia- 
 lects which considerably enhance the value of ilie 
 aid to be deri\ed from the Arabic. The Ilelirew 
 language of the Old Testament has preserved to 
 us but a small fragment of a literature. In the 
 limited number of its roots (some of which even 
 do not occur In the primary sense), in the rarity 
 of some formations, and in the antique rudimentary 
 mode in which some of its consti net ions are de- 
 noted, are containetl those difficulties which can- 
 not receive any other illustration than that which 
 the sister dialects, ami most es])ecially the Arabic, 
 afford For this purjiose, the resemblances lie- 
 tween tliem are as useful as the diversities. Th» 
 foinier enable us to feel certain on points whicL 
 were liable to doulit : they cor.fiim and esta- 
 blish an intelligent conviction that the largei 
 portion of our knowletlge of the meaning of woids> 
 arid of the firce of constructions in Heliiew. is ni^ 
 a sure foundation; liecause we recognise the saine 
 in a kindred form, and in a liteiatme so volu- 
 minous as to afliird us frequent opjjortuu'ties cf
 
 ARABIC VERSIONS. 
 
 •testing our notions liy eveiy vaiiely of PX]ienei)ce, 
 The diversities, on tlie otljer liiuiil (accoi-dini? to a 
 rtiode of oltseivation \ery fi-e<jiieJit in com|iaiative 
 ttnatdiiiy), show us wliat exists |)()t«Hitial!y in tlie 
 ludinKTiiary state, \>y cnal/iiriL:: us t» s<»e liow a 
 language of the same Junius hiis, in tlie fiiitlier 
 prof^ress of itj develo|)inent, Celt the necessity of 
 ilenotiuij extenially those relations of formation 
 and constiiictioii wiiich wreie only dimly jier- 
 ceived in its antique and uncultivated form. 
 Thtis, to adduce a sinf^le illustiation from the 
 Arabic <;a*t',$ in the noun; — Tiie precise lelation 
 of the words mouth and lifa^ in the common He- 
 brew phrases, ' I call my moutli," and ' lie smote 
 him his litis' ( Ewald's Iltbr. Gram. § 4S2), is 
 easily iutelli^ihle to one >> lunn Arabic has fami- 
 liaiisetl with tlie ])erj>e1nal use of the so-called 
 accusative to denote the accessory descriptions of 
 state. Another imjKirtanf adv;uitaL,'e to be de- 
 rived from the study (i( Arabic™ is the o])()ortuiiity 
 of seeing tlie grammar of a Syro-Aiabi.in lauguag« 
 explained by native scholars. .Hebrew grammar 
 has suffejied much injury from the mistaken no- 
 tions of men, who, undeistiuiding the seme o<i the 
 written documents by tlie aid of the veisioJis. have 
 been exempted from obtainiiiii- any imle]:endent 
 and inwaid feeling of the t^euius of t'i« lan,'uage, 
 and have tlKMefoie not hesitated to accommodate 
 it to the grammar of our ludo-Germanic idioms. 
 In Arabic, however, we have a language, every 
 branch of the philoso|ihical study of which has 
 been successfully cultivated l»y the Arabs them- 
 selves. Their own lexicograplieis, giammaiians, 
 and scholiasts (to whom the Jew^s also aie in- 
 delited for teaching tlien» tlie grammatical fieat- 
 inent of Hebrew) have placed tlie language liefoiie 
 us with such elaborate explanation of its entire 
 character, tliat Arabic is jiot only by far the most 
 accessible of die Syro-Arabiau diat«<:1s, but may 
 even challenge comjiaiison, as to the [losses sion of 
 these advantages, with tlie Gi^eek itself. — J. N. 
 
 ARABIC VER.SIONS. As Christianity never 
 attained ally extensive or permanent influence 
 among the Aiabs as a nation, no entire nor 
 publicly sanctioned Arabic version of the Bible 
 has Jx^n discovered. But, as political events at 
 length made the Arabic language the common 
 vehicle of instruction in the East, and tluit to 
 Jews, SainaritUns, and Christians, indejiendcnt 
 versions ol" single books were often uiidcrtaken, 
 according to the zeal of private persons, or the in- 
 terests of small communities. The following is a 
 classified list of only the most ireiwrtant among 
 tbena: — 
 
 I. Araiiic versions formed immediately on tlie 
 original te.vts. 
 
 A. Rabbi SaadjahHaggaTOi,anativeofFaijum, 
 and rector of tlie academy at Sora, who died 
 K.a. 912, is tlie autliorofa version of some jior- 
 tions of tlie Old Testament. Erpeijiiis and 
 I'oc^ck, indeed, ailirm that l»e translated the 
 whole (Walton's iVo/-cyo»t<-«rt, ed. VVrangliam. ii. 
 54()); liut subsequent inquirers have not hitherto 
 been aiile, with any certaitity, to assign to him 
 more th;in a xersion of the Pentateucli, of Isaiah, 
 of Joix, a*id of a jwrtion of Hctsea, 
 
 Tliat of the Pentateuch first appeared, in 
 Hebrew ch<iractet<, in tlie folio Tetraglott Penta- 
 teuch of Constantinople, in the year 1546. The 
 •zact title ol" tJiis exceedingly rAre book is not 
 
 ARABIC VERSIONS. 
 
 19S 
 
 given by "Wolf, by Mascli, nor by He Rossi (it is 
 said to be found in .-Vdlei's JUhlixch-krtU.irh* 
 Jicise, p. 2"21); l>ut, according to the title of il 
 which (). Ct. Tycliseli cites from RaMii .Sliubtai 
 (in Eichhom's lie/ferlofiam-, x. 0(ij, .Saadjah's 
 name is expressly mentioned there as the autliur 
 of that Arabic version. Nearly a century luUt 
 an /Vraliic version of the Pentateuch was jirinK-d 
 in the Polyglott of Paris, fnim a MS. belonging 
 to F. Savfiry de Breves; and tlw text thus <it>- 
 tained was then rejirinted in tin? London J'oiy- 
 glott, with a collection of the various readings tf 
 tlie Constant ino|)olitan text, and of anollier .MS. 
 in the a])[j«'nilix. For it was ailniirti"<l that 
 Saadjah was tlie author of the Con$ti.titiiKtiKilitaa 
 version; and the identity ofttiat text with tiiat 
 of the Paris Polyglott was maintained by Pocock 
 (who nevertheless acknowledged frequent inter- 
 (jolations in the latter), and liad be«'ii c^irifirmed 
 eves by the collation which J. H. Hottingei 
 had instituted to estaldish their diversify. Tl« 
 identity of all the.se texts wa-s thus #onsidefed a 
 settled point, and haig remained .so, until J. 1>. 
 Mi liaelis pul<lished (in his Orient. Jiibt., ix. 
 1.35, *y.) a copy of a Latin note which Jos. Ascari 
 had prefixed to the very MS. of I)e Breve.s, fiom 
 which the Paris Polyglott had deriied its Arabic 
 version. That note ascribed the version to ' .Saidub 
 Fajuinensis, Monachus Coptitcs :" ;uid thus .Saad- 
 jah's claim to be considered the author of tlie 
 version in the Polyglotts was airain liable ♦(» 
 que.s{ion. At lengtli, liowever, Scl.nurnr (ttt hi* 
 Dlsertat. de Petitat. Arab. VolA/fjl. in hi* Ik-iseit. 
 Phihloffico-critictf;) jirinted the Arabic preface of 
 that MS., jiroveU tlvat thei-e was no Ibundation I'or 
 the ' Monachus Cuptites," and endea\oure<J to 
 show that Sa'id was tlie Arabic wjuivalerit t<( flie 
 Helirew Saadjalr, and to re-e.?tabl ish tlie ancient 
 opinion ol the identity of tlie two texts. Tlie 
 results which he obtained apjjear (with the excei>- 
 tion of a leeble attempt vi' O. G. Tychsen to 
 ascribe the version to Abu St'/d, in tlie Heper- 
 toruun) to liave convinced most modem critics; 
 and indeed tliey have received luucli confiiwiation 
 by tlie apjx*arance of tlie version o\' Isaiah. This 
 version of the Pentateuch, which is im honourable 
 monument of the liabbinical Biblical philology 
 of the tenth century, possesses, in the independ- 
 ence <if its tone, and in some jjeculiai'ities of in- 
 terjM-etation, the marks of hai ing been (brnted ob 
 the original text- It leans, of coui-se, to Jewish 
 exegetical authoi-ities generally ; but often follows 
 the Se|}t., aiid as often ap]iears to exjuess views 
 j»culiar to its autliur. Caipzov has given nume- 
 rous examples of its mwle of inteqiivtation in his 
 C'rii. Sacr. p. 646, sq. It is aho m;irke<l by a 
 ceitain loose and paraphrastic style ol' rendering, 
 which Hiakes it n»ore useful in an exegeticai 
 tlian in a critical jK;int of view. It is dilKcult, 
 however, to detennine liow much of this diH'use- 
 nes» is due lo Saadjah himself. For, iwit only is 
 tlie |irinted text of his version more faulty, in tuts 
 respect, tlian a Florentine MS-, some of iIk- read- 
 ings of which Adler has given in Eichlwirn's 
 Euileit. tw» A. 7'., ii. 245: J«it it has sfilVeied a 
 systetnalio interpolation. A cotnpariso:i of tlx 
 Constantin(ip<jlitaQ text witli that of rne Poly- 
 glotts shows that wliere tlie forui^r retains thosr 
 temas of the Hebrew in which action or juMiun is 
 ascribed to Gtnl - the so-called M>^paroird6fimx — 
 the latter has the ' An^? "^ God,' or soj/je utiait
 
 \m 
 
 ARABIC VERSIONS. 
 
 moiJe of evading direct ex]iressions. Tliesp inter- 
 poliitioiis aiv ascribed by Kichhom to a Samaritan 
 iource ; for Morimis and Ilottini^er assert tliat 
 tJie custom of omiftin;^ or evadini^ the anthro- 
 pomorphisms jf the Hebrew text is a charac- 
 teristic of the Samaritan versions. 
 
 A version of Isaiah, which in the original MS. 
 U ascribed to Saadjah, with several extrinsic 
 evidences of trntii, and without liie o))p(>sition of 
 a single critic, ap))eared under the title, R. 
 Saadio! Phrjtnnensis Versio Jesai^g Arabica 
 e MS. Bddlci/. edidit atqve Glossar. instrnxit, 
 II. E. G. Paulus, fasc. ii.. Jena, 1791, Svo. The 
 tex* was copied from a MS. written in Hebrew 
 characters, and the dirticulty of always discover- 
 ing the equivalent Arabic letters into which it 
 was to l>e transposed, has been one source of the 
 inaccuracies observable in the work. Gesenins 
 (in his Jcsaias, i. RS. sq.) has given a. summary 
 view of the characteristics of this version, and has 
 »ho\vn tiie great general agreement between them 
 and those of the veision of the Pentateuch, in a 
 manner altogether conKrmatory of the belief in 
 the identity of the authors of both. 
 
 His veision of Job exists in MS. at Oxford, 
 where Gesenius took a co])y of it (Jesaias, p. x.). 
 
 That of Hosea is only known from the citation 
 of ch. vi. 9, by Kimclii (Pococke's Theolog. 
 Works, ii. 2S0).' 
 
 B. Tlie version of Joshua which is printed in 
 the Paris and Lontlnn Polyglotts, the author and 
 date of which are unknown. 
 
 C. The version of the whole passage from 
 1 Kings xii. to 2 Kings xii. 16, inclusive, which 
 is also found in the same Polyglotts. Professor 
 Rodiger has collected the critical evidences which 
 prove that this whole interval is translatetl from 
 the Hebrew : and ascribes the version to an un- 
 known Damascene Jew of the ele\enth century 
 Likewi.se, the passage in Nehemiah, Jtoih i. t<.) ix. 
 27, inclusive, as it exists in l>oth Polyglotts, v/hich 
 he asserts to be the translation of a Jew (reirrm- 
 bling that of Joshua in style), but with subsequent 
 int^i-polations by a Syrian Christian. (See his 
 work De Origine Arabwa; Librm: V. T. His- 
 toric. Interprefationis, Halle, 4to.) 
 
 D. The very close and almost slavish version 
 of tlie Pentateuch, by some Mauritanian Jew of 
 the thirteenth century, which Erpenios jjublished 
 at Leyden in 1622 — the so-called Arabs Erpenii. 
 
 E. The Samaritan Arabic version of Aim 
 Sa'id. According to the author's preface aflixed 
 to the Paris MS. of this version (No. 4), the 
 •riginal of which is given in EichiioiTi's Bibl. 
 Bihlioth. iii. 6, Abu Sa'id was induced to under- 
 take it, partly by seeing the corrupt state to which 
 ignorant cojjyists had reduced the version then 
 used by tlie Samaritans, and partly by discover- 
 ing that file version which they used, under the 
 belief that it was that of Abn'l Hasan of Tyre, 
 was in reality none other than that of Saadjah 
 Haggann. His national prejudice being thus 
 ••xcited against an accursed Jew, and the ' mani- 
 fej»t impiety ' of some of his interpret;itions, he 
 a])]ilied hin-.self to this translation, and accom- 
 panied it with notes in order to justify his render- 
 ings, to explain dirticulties, and to di.spute with 
 the Jews. His version is characterized by ex- 
 treme fidelity to the Samaritan text (i. e. in other 
 words, to the Hebrew text with the ditfererices 
 whicli distinguish the Samaritan recen«ion of it), 
 
 ARABIC VERSIONS. 
 
 retaining even the order of tlie words, i.nd oftna 
 sacrificing the jjrojirieties of the Arabic idiom xa 
 the preservation of the very terms of the original 
 It is certainly not formed on the Samaritan 
 version, although it sonietwned agrees wirn itj 
 and i*. lias such a resemblance to the version of 
 Saadjah as imjjlies familiarity with it, or a 
 designed use of its assistance-, and it exceeds 
 both these in t!ie constant avoidance of all anttiro- 
 jMiinorjjhic expressions. Its date is unknown, out 
 it nrust have been executeil l)etween the tenth 
 and thirteentii centuries, because it was neces- 
 sarily posterior to Saadjali's veision, and because 
 the Barberini cojiy of it wa» written a.d. 1227, 
 It is to be regretted that this version, although it 
 would be chiefly available in determining tlie 
 readings of the Samaritan Pentateuch, is stil! 
 unpubliihed. It exists in MS. at Oxford (one of 
 the copies there being the one cited iiy Casteil in 
 the Apj>endix to the London Polyglott), at Paris, 
 Leyden, and at Rome, in the celebrated Barberini 
 Triglott (the best description of which is in De 
 Rossi's Speci»ie7i Var. Led. et Chald. Esihcria 
 Additamenta, Tiibingen, 17^3). Portions only 
 have been printed : the earliest by J. H. Hottinger, 
 in iiis Promtuarium, p. 98 ; and the two longest 
 by De Sacy, with an interesting disseitation, in 
 Eichhorn's Bibl. Biblioth. x., and by Van 
 Vloten, in his Spccim. Philuhg. continetis de- 
 scrip, cod. MS. Biblioth Lugd.-Bat. Partemque 
 Vers. Sam. Arab. Pentat., Leida?, 1S03. 
 
 Y. A version of the Gospels, which was first 
 printed at Rome in 159IJ, then in tlie .Arabic 
 Ne.v Testament of Erpeni us in 1616, and after 
 wards in the Paris Polyglott (the text of which 
 last is the one copied in that of London). The 
 first two of these editions are derived from MSS., 
 arm the variations which distinguisii (he tex of 
 Paris from that of Rome are also supposed to have 
 b?en obtained from a MS. Tiie agreement and 
 the diversity of all these texts are equally le- 
 markable. The agreement is so gieat as to pio\e 
 tli-i't they all represent only one and the same 
 version, and that one based immediately on tiie 
 Greek. The diversities (exclusive of errors of 
 copyists) consist in the irregular changes which 
 have been made in every one ol' these MSS., se- 
 parately, tx) adapt it indiscriminately to the 
 Peshito or Coptic versions. This surprising 
 amalgamation is thus accounted for by Hug; 
 When the prevalence of the Arabic language iia<i 
 rendered the Syriac and Coptic obsolete, th«i 
 Syrians and Copts were obliged to use an Arabic 
 version. They therefore took some translation in 
 that language, but tirst adapted it to the Peshito 
 and Memphitic versif>ns resjiectively. As tiie 
 Peshito and Coptic versinne still continued to be 
 read first in their churches, and the Arabic trans- 
 lation immediately al'tcrward.s. as a kind of Tar- 
 gum, it became usual to write their national ver- 
 sions and this amended Arabic version in jiaralltl 
 columns. Tliig mere juxtaposition led to a 
 further adulteration vn each case. Afterwards, 
 two of these MS.S. wliich had thus suffered dilVereni 
 ada])tations, were brought together by some means, 
 and mutually corrupted each otht-r — by v/!iich a 
 third text, the hybrid one of our Arabic version, 
 was produced. The age of the original Arabic 
 text is uncertain ; but the circumstance of itf 
 adojition by the Syrians am\ Copts places it neai 
 the seventh century 'lierthoh't'sA'm/tVi. i.Gy2,«<;.>
 
 ARAD. 
 
 ARAM. 
 
 ly? 
 
 G. Tlie versiort <if the Acts, of tlie Epistles of 
 Paul, of the Catholic Epistles, and of the Apo- 
 calypse, which is found in both the Polyf^Iotts. 
 The author is unknown, but he is sup|)osed to 
 have been a native of Gyrene, and the date to be 
 the eighth or nintli century (Bertholdt, ibid.). 
 
 II. Arabic versions f'juncled on the LXX. 
 
 A. The Polyglott version of tlie Prophets, 
 which is expressly said in the inscription in the 
 Paris MS. to have been made from the Greek by 
 an Alexandrian priest. Its date is probably later 
 than the tenth century. 
 
 B. That of the Psalms (according to the Syrian 
 recension) which is printed in Just'miani's Psalt. 
 (Jctaptum. (itnoa, 1516, and in Liber. I'sulmor. 
 a Gabr. Siunita ei rict. Scialac. Rome, ltil4. 
 
 C. Tiiat version of the Psalms which is in vise 
 by the Malkites, or Orthodox Oriental Christians, 
 made by 'Abdallah ben al Fadhl, before the 
 twelfth century. It has l)een printed at .\leppo in 
 1706, in LuiHion in 1725, and elsewhere. 
 
 D. Tiie version of the Psalms (according to 
 the Egyptian recension) which is found in both 
 the Polyglotts. 
 
 III. Arabic versions formed on the Peshito. 
 
 A. The Polyglott version of Job, of Chronicles, 
 and (according to Rodiger, who ascribes them to 
 Christian translators in the thirt<;entli and four- 
 teenth centuries) that of Judges, Ruth, Samuel, 
 I Kings i. to xi., and 2 Kings xii. 17, to xxv. 
 
 iJ. The version of the Psalms printed at 
 Qashaia, near Mount Lebanon, in 1610. (The 
 Einleituageii of Eicliliorn, Bertholdt, and De 
 W ette contain ample researches, or references, 
 for the farther investigation of this extensive sub- 
 ject) — J. N. 
 
 ARAD, an ancient city on the southernmost 
 borders of Palestine, wliose inhabitants drove 
 back llie Israelites as they attempted to jienetrate 
 from Kadesh into Canaan (Num. xxi. 1, where 
 the Auth. Vers, lias ' King Arad,' instead of 
 'King of Arad ■), but were eventually subdued 
 by Joshua, along with the other southern Ca- 
 naanites (Josh. xii. 14. comp. x. 41 ; also Judg. 
 i. 16). Eusebius and Jerome place Arad twenty 
 Roman miles from Hebron, wiiich would be 
 equal to atiout eight hours witli camels. This 
 accrirds well with the situation of a hill called 
 Tell 'Arad, which Dr. Robinson observed on the 
 road fiiim Petra to Hebron. He describes it as 
 ' a barren-looking eminence rising above the 
 •ountry around.' He did not examine the spot, 
 teit the Araljs said ttiere were no ruins upon or 
 near it, but only a cavern. The name alone 
 IS, however, too decisive to admit a 'loubt that the 
 hill marks tlie site of the ancient Arad. 
 
 ARADUS. [Ahvad.] 
 
 ARAM (Cl"1X, probably from Dl, high, q. d. 
 the Highlands') was the name given liy the 
 Hebrews to the tract of country lying between 
 Phoenicia on the west, Palestine on tne south, 
 Arabia Deserta and the river Tigris on the east, 
 and tlie mountain-range of Taurus on the north. 
 Many parts of this extensive territory have a 
 much lower level than Palestine, but it might 
 ivreivf the designation of ' highland.s,' because it 
 docs rise 1o a greater elei ation than that country 
 at most i)oiiits of imincdiate ('ontact, and espe- 
 cially on the siile of Lebanon Aram, or .A.rama;a, 
 
 seems to have corresponded generally to tin Si/ria 
 and Mesopotamia of the Gieeks and Rmiaitf 
 (see those aiticles). We ibid the following di- 
 visions expressly notice<l in Scripture:— 1. .•Vuam- 
 Daume.sek, \:k^\21 D1K, tlie • Syria of Da- 
 mascus' coimucred by David, 2 Sam. viii. 5, 6, 
 where it denotes only tlie territory around J)a- 
 mascus ; but elsewhere ' Aram,' in connection 
 witli its capital ' Damascus,' apjtears to \>t used 
 in a wider 8en,se for Syria Proper (Isa. vii. 1, 8; 
 xvii. 3 ; Amos i. 5). At a later jA'riou Da- 
 mascus gave name to a district, the Syria Da- 
 viascena o^ Pliny (v. 13). To tlil-> jiaii of Aram 
 the ' land of Hadrach ' seems to liave Indonged 
 (Zech. ix. 1). 2, AitAM-MAACH.ui, n^i'D D"W 
 (1 Clinin. xix. 6), or simply MaarJiali (2 Saio. 
 X. 6, ^'), wnicli, if formed Iroin "]J70, to ' press 
 together,' would describe a country enclostd and 
 hemmed in by mountains, in contiadistinctinn 
 to the next divi.sioii, ' Aram-beth-llechob,' i. i. 
 Syria the wide or broad, H'D l>eiiig used in 
 Syriac for a • distiict of comitry.' Aiam-Muachah 
 was not far from the northern liorder of the Israel- 
 ites on the east of the Joidan (comp. Deut. iii. 
 14, with Josh. xiii. II, 13). In 2 Sam. x. 6, (he 
 text has ' king Maacliah,' but it is to be corrected 
 from the parallel passage in 1 Chron. .\ix. 7, 
 ' king of Maacliah.' 3. Akam-beth-Reciiom, 
 2in"l TV2, DIN, the meaning of which may be 
 that given aliove, but tiie precise locality cannot 
 with certainty he delermiiied. Some connect it 
 with the B<!th-reliob of Judg. xviii. 2S, which 
 Rosenmiiller identifies with the Rehob of Num. 
 xiii. 21, situated • as men come to Hamath," ami 
 suj)[wses the district to be that now known as the 
 Ardh-el-llliule at the foot of Anti-Libanus. near 
 the sources of the Jordan. A jilace called Kehob 
 is also mentioned in Judg. i. 31 ; Josh. xix. '1^, 
 60 ; .\xi. 31 ; but it is doubt I'nl if it be the same. 
 Michaelis thinks of the Recliolioth-ha-Nahar (lit. 
 streets, i.e. the village or town on the river 
 Euphrates) of Gen. xxxvi. 37 ; but still in.ue 
 improbable is the idea of BellciMiann and Ja' n 
 that Al am-beth-Rechob was l)eyond the Tigris in 
 Assyria. 4. Auam-Zobah, HQI^' □'HN, or, in the 
 .Syriac fi,im. KHI^* Zoba (2 Sam x. 6). Jewish 
 tradition has placed Zobaii at Aleppo (see the 
 Itinerary of Benjamin of Tudela), whereas 
 Syrian tradition identifies it with Nisiliis, a city 
 in the noith-east of Mesopotamia. Though the 
 latter opinion long obtained currency under the 
 authority of Michaelis (in his Dissert, de Si/rin 
 Soba-a, to be found in the Conanent. Soc. Hot- 
 ting. 1769), yet the former seems a much neaui 
 approximation to the truth. We may gather 
 from "i Sam. viii. 3, x. 16, tliit the eastern boun- 
 dary of .-Vram-Zobah was the Euphrates, but 
 Nisibis was far beyond that river; besides that 
 in the title ol the sixtieth Psilm (su[)])osing it 
 genuine) Aram-Zobah is cl»'arly distinguislmt 
 from Aram-Nahaiaim, or Mesopotamia. It is 
 true, indeed, that in 2 Sam. x. 16, it is said tiail 
 Hadarezer, king of Zobali, brougiit against Daviil 
 ' Aiamites from beyond the river;' but these we.e 
 auxiliaries, atid not his own subjects. The [X'ople 
 of Zobali are uniformly sjKiken of as near neigli- 
 bours of the Israelites, the Damascene.", and ot.'iei 
 Syrians; and in one ])lace ('I ('hriin. viii. 3'; 
 Hamath is called Hamath-Zobali, as •jiertainini, 
 to that district. We, therefore, conclude inat 
 Aiam-Zobah extemled from the Eupiirates we*»
 
 198 
 
 ARAM. 
 
 ARAMAIC LANGUAGE. 
 
 ffard, perliaps as far nortli as to Aleppo. It was 
 lanj^ tlie most powerful of the ))etty kingdoms of 
 Aram;ta, its princes commonly l>earinij the name 
 ofHadailczer or Ha(iarezer. 5. Aram-Nahauaim, 
 D^tnj D"IK, i. e. Arani of the Tiro Rivers, called 
 in Syriac ' Beth-Nahrin,' i. e. ' the land of the 
 rivers,' following the analo^^y by which the 
 Greeks formed the name Mtaoxorafjiia, ' the 
 country between tlie rivers.' For that Mesopo- 
 .tamia is liere designated is admitted universally, 
 with f'oe ?xo-pti()n only of Mr. Tilston Beke, who, 
 in his OiiryineB Bihficrp, among many other jjara- 
 doxical notions, maintains that ' Aram-Naharaim' 
 is tlie territory of Damascus. The rivers which 
 enclose Mesopotamia are the Euphrates on the 
 west and the Tigris on the east; hut it is doubtful 
 whetlier the Aram-Naharaim of Scriptui^ embraces 
 tlie wliole of that tract or only the northern jKirtion 
 of it (comp. Gen. xxiv. 10; IJeut. xxiii. 4; 
 Judg. iii. S). A part of thi> lerion of Aram 
 is also called Padan-Aram. D")X pD, the plain 
 of Aram (Gen. xxv. 20; xxviii. 2, 6, 7; xxxi. 
 18; xxxiii. 18), and once simjily Padrtn (Gen. 
 xlviii. 1), also Sedch-Aram, D'lN pTTE?, the tield 
 of Aram (Hos. xii. 13), whence the ' Campi 
 Mesopotamiae ' of Quintus Curtius (iii. 2. 3; 
 iii. 8. 1 ; iv. 9. 6). But that the whole of Aram- 
 Naharaim did not belong to the tiat country of 
 Mesopotamia ap^iears from the circumstance that 
 Balaam, who (Deut. xxiii. 4) is called a native 
 of Aram-Naharaim, say^ (Numb, xxiii. 7) that 
 he was boiight ' from Aram, out of the moun- 
 tains of the east.' The Septuagint, in some of 
 these places, has VlecroTroTaixla Svplas, and in 
 others 'Zupia XioTaixSiv, which, the Latins rendered 
 by Syria Interamna 
 
 But though the districts now enumerated be 
 the only ones expressly named in the Bible as 
 belonging to Aram, there is no doubt that many 
 more territories were included in that extensive 
 region, e. (j. Geshur, Hul, Ar])ad, Riblah, Tad- 
 mor, Hainan, Abilene, &c., though some oH them 
 may have formed part of the divisions already 
 specified. A native of Aram was called ^JD"1N 
 Arami, 'an Arameean, used of a Syrian (2 Kings 
 V. 20), and of a Mesopotamian (Gen. xxv. 30). 
 The feminine was Aramiah, an Aramitess 
 {! Cliron. vii. 14), and tlie plural Aramim 
 (2 Kings viii. 29). It appears from tlie ethno- 
 graphic table in the tenth chajiter of Genesis 
 (vers. 22, 23) that Aram was a son of Shem, and 
 that his own sous were Uz, Hnl, Gether, and 
 Mash. If these gave names to districts, Uz was 
 in the north of Arabia Deserta, unless its name 
 was derived rather from Hiiz, son of Nahor, 
 Abraham's brother (Gen. :cxii. 21). Hul was 
 probably Coe!e-Syria; Mash, the Mons Masius 
 north of Nisibis in Mesopotamia; Gether is un- 
 kTiown. Anotlier Aram is mentioned (Gen. 
 xxii. 21) as the grandson of Nahor and son of 
 Kpmiu'l, but he is not to be thought of here. The 
 Jesct'iit oi the Aramaeans from a son of Shem is 
 <:onfirmed by their language, which was one of 
 the blanches of the Semitic family, and neai'ly 
 allied to the Hebrew. Many writers, who have 
 copied without acknowledgment the words of 
 Calmet, maintain that the Aramaeans came from 
 Kir, ap;>ealing to .\mo3 ix. 7; but while that 
 passage is not free from obscurity, it seems evi- 
 dently to point, not to the aboriginal abode of the 
 people, but to the country whence God would 
 
 recover tliem when banished. Tlie prophet ho 
 said (Amos i. .'>) that the people of Aram should 
 go into captivity to Kir (jirobalily the country 
 on the river Kur or Cyrus), a jjredicfion of which 
 we read the accomplishment in 2 Kings xvi. 9; 
 and the allusion here is to their futtne restoration. 
 Hartmann thinks Armwiia obtained its name 
 from Aram. Traces of the name of the Araniieang 
 are to be found in the ''Api^w and 'Apajdoioi of 
 the Greeks (Strabo, xiii. 4. Ci; xvi. 4. 27; comp. 
 Ilomer's/^W, ii. 7^'3) [see Assyuia]. Tlicy wer^ 
 so noted lor idolatry, that in the language of the 
 later Jews ^{^VD'^K was used as synonymous 
 witli heatlicnisni (sec^ the Mishna ol' Siirenhiisius, 
 ii. 401 ; Onkelos on Levit. xxv. 47). C'astell, in his 
 Lexic. lleptfu/lott. col. 229, says the same form of 
 speech prevails in Syriac and Ethiopic. The 
 Hebrew letters "I resh and T dnleth are so alike, 
 that they were often mistaken by transcriliers ; 
 and hence in the Old Testament CW Aram is 
 sometimes found instead of DTN Edoin, and 
 vice versa. Thus in 2 Kings xvi. (i, according 
 to the text, the Aramaeans are spoken of as pos- 
 sessing Elatn on the Red Sea; but the Ma-oretic 
 marginal reading has ' the Edomites.' which is 
 also found in many manuscripts, in the Septua- 
 gint and Vulgate, and it is obviously the cor:-ect 
 reading. — N. M. 
 
 ARAMAIC LANGUAGE (n-'p-Jif 2 Kings 
 xviii. 2<i ; Dan. ii. 4). The Aramaic laugunge — 
 that whole, of which the Chaldee and .Syriac dialects 
 form the parts — constitutes the iioithein and least 
 developed branch of the Syro-.Aral)i;ui finiily. 
 Its cradle was ]irobal(ly on tlie banks of tlis- Cyrus. 
 according to the best iiiteipretatioii of .\mos ix. 7; 
 but Mesopotamia, Babylonia, and .Syria form 
 what may lie considered its home and proper do- 
 main. Political events, however, suli e(pientl_» 
 caused it tu sujiplaiit Hebrew in Palestine; aiu 
 then it became the jnevailing form of s]ieech front 
 the Tigris to the shore of the Meditpiianean, and, 
 in a contrary direction, from .Vniiciiia down to 
 the coiilines of Arabia. Alter obtaining such a 
 wide dominion, it was forced, from the ninth cen- 
 tury onwards, to give way before the encroaching 
 ascendency of Arabic; and it now only .survives, 
 as a living tongue, among the Syrian Christians in 
 the neighliomhood of Mosul. 
 
 According to liistorical records wliich trace the 
 migrations of the Syro-Arabians from the East in 
 the South-west, and also according to the comr)a< 
 rativelv ruder form of the Aramaic language itself, 
 we might snp]x)se that it represents, e\en in the 
 state in which we have it, some image of that aiv 
 original ty])e which the Hebiews and Arabians, 
 under more favourable social and dimatical in- 
 fluences, sui)se(pieiilly devel>)])ed into fulness o* 
 sound and structure. But it is difnciilt for us now 
 to discern the particular vestiges of this arcliaic 
 form; liir, not milv did llie Aramaic not work 
 out its own development of the original elements 
 common to the whole Syro-Arabian sisteiliiiod of 
 languages, but it was pre-eminently exjiosed, both 
 by neiglibourhood and by coiujuest, to harsh col- 
 lision with languages of an utterly dill'erent 
 family. Moreover, it is the only oiie of tlie 
 three great Syro-Arabiau branches which has no 
 fruits of a purely national lireratuie to boast of. 
 We po.ssess no monument whatever of its own ge- 
 nius ; not any work which may be cofisidered tlie
 
 ARAMAIC LANGUAGK. 
 
 product of the politic;il and relii^ious culture of 
 the nation, and char.icttTistic of it — as is sj tin- 
 pliaticully the case hoth with tlie Hebrews and 
 the Arabs. The first time we see the lan^iui^je, it 
 IS used by Jews as the vehicle of Jewish ihoii^lit ; 
 and although, when we next meet it, it is em- 
 ployed by native authors, yel they write under 
 the literai-y impulses of Christianity, and under 
 the Greek intluence on tliought and language 
 which necessarily accompanied that leligion. 
 These two modifications, which constitute and 
 define the so-called Chaldee and Syriac dialects, 
 are the only forms in which the noiTual anil stand- 
 ard Aramaic has been jjrescrved to us. 
 
 It is evident, from these ciicuinstances, that, 
 up to a certain period, the Aramaic language has 
 no other history than that of its relations to. He- 
 'irew. The earliest notice we have of its .separate 
 existence is in Gen. xxxi. -17, where Laban, in 
 giving his own name to the memorial heap, em- 
 ploys words which are gi^iuiirie'Aramaic both in 
 form and use. The next instance is in 2 Kings 
 xviii. 26, where it apjiears that the educated Jews 
 understood Aramaic, but that the common people 
 did not. A striking illustration of its prevalence 
 i.s found in the circumstance that it is employed, 
 aa the language of oflicial communication, in the 
 edict addressed by the Persian court to its sub- 
 jects in Palestine (Kzraiv. 17). The later rela- 
 tions of Aramaic to Hebrew consist entirely of 
 gradual encroachments on the part of the foriner. 
 The Hebrew language was indeed arlways ex- 
 posed, particularly in the north of Palestine, to 
 Aramaic iuHuences; whence the Aramaisms of 
 the book of Judges and of some others are de- 
 rived. It also had always a closer conjunction, 
 both by origin and by intercouKe, with Aramaic 
 tliaii with Arabic. But in later times great political 
 events secuied to Aramaic the complete ascend- 
 ency ; for, on the one hand, after the deportation of 
 the ten tribes, tlie i-epeopliug their country with 
 colonists chiefly of Sj'rian origin generated a. 
 mixed Aramaic and Hebrew dialect (the Samari- 
 tan) in central Palestine ; and on the other, the 
 exile of the remaining two tribes exposed them to 
 .1 considerable, although generally overrated, Ara- 
 maic influence in Babylon, ;uid their restoration, 
 by placing diem in contact with the Samaritans, 
 tended still fVuther to dispossess them of their 
 vernacular Hebrew. The subsequent dominion 
 of the Seleucidae, under which the Jews fomied 
 a portion of a Syrian kingdom, appears to have 
 completed tlie series of events by which the Ara- 
 maic supplanted the Hebrew language entirely. 
 
 The ciiief characteristics in f'oim and flexion 
 which distinguish the Aramaic from the He- 
 brew language aie the following : — As to tlie con- 
 sonants, the great diversity between the forms of the 
 same root as it exists in .both languages, arises 
 principally from the Aramaic liaving a tendency 
 to avoid tlie sibilants. Thus, where T, ^, and i 
 are found in Hebrew. Aramaic often uses H, fl, 
 and tD ; and even ]} for V Letteis of fiie same 
 organ are also frequently interchanged, and gene- 
 rally so tliat the Aramaic, consistently with itg 
 characteristic roughness, prefers the hard/jr sounils. 
 The numfier of vowel-sounds geneially is triuch 
 smaller: the veib is reduced to a monosyllable, as 
 are also the segolate forms of nouns. This ile- 
 prives tlie language of some distinct forms which 
 iue marked in Hebrew ; Lu^ the number and variety 
 
 ARARAT. 
 
 Ifi!) 
 
 of nominal formatiiuis is also in othfi re«|«>cti 
 much more limited. The verb possesses no vesiige 
 of the conjugation Xij//iaf, but forms all its )»«- 
 sives liy the ])retix HN- The third ]iersoii pluiul 
 of the perfect has two tonus, to mark the diflerence 
 of gender. Tlie use of the im|K'i-fect willi vav 
 coiiseqimtivuiii is unknown. There is an ini])era- 
 tive mood in all {\\c pussicvx. Each of tiie active 
 conjugations, Pciel and Ap/icl, possesses two parti- 
 ci|)les, one of which lias a pa.ssive signification. 
 The ]iarticiple is used with the (lersonai ))ronoun 
 to form, a kind .of present tense. Tlie classes of 
 verbs TO and XT', and other weak forms, are al- 
 most iiidistinguishaiih'. In the noiiii, again, a 
 word is rendered dcjinitc iiy appending the vowel 
 u to the end (the so-called stattis cinpliaticus); 
 but thereby the distinction between simple femi- 
 nine and definite masculines is lost in tlie singu- 
 lar. The plural mascidine ends in in. The 
 relation of genitive is most fiequently expre_ssed 
 by the prefix ^, and that of the object by the 
 preposition ?. 
 
 All these peculiarities aie common to both the 
 dialects of AramaiC; aii<» may therefore be consi 
 dered to constitute the fuixlamental character of 
 the language. The statement of the jxiints in 
 which they differ from each other, and an account 
 of their literary remains, of their jialaoograpliical 
 history, and of the subordinate <lialects which 
 have been derived from them, are reserved for 
 other articles [Ch.u.dee Languaqe]. — J. N. 
 
 ARARAT (t2"nt<) occurs nowhere in Scripture 
 as the name of a mountain, but only as the name 
 of a country, upon the ' mountains' of which tiie 
 ark rested during the subsidence of the flood 
 (Gen. viii. 4). In almost every part of the Kast, 
 where there is the tradition of a deluge, the in- 
 habitants connect the resting-place of the ' gioat 
 vessel' with some conspicuous elevation in their 
 own neighliourhood. Thus we are infoimed by 
 the lamented Sir A. Burnes (^Travels to BokJiara, 
 vol. i. p. 117), that on the road to Peshawur 
 and Cabul, the Sufued Koh, or ' White Moun- 
 tain,' rears its crest on one side, and the tjnveiing 
 hill of Noorgill, or Kooner, on the other. Heie 
 the Afghans believe the ark of Noah to have u'sle«I 
 after the Deluge. Another sacred movinfiiin in 
 the East is Adams Peak, in the island of Ceyloi;, 
 and it is a curious circumstance, tliut in Gen. 
 viii. 4, the Samaritan Pentateuch luis ' Sar.inuil>,' 
 the Arabic name of Ceylon. In the Sibylline 
 versos it is said that the mountains of Ararat 
 were in Phrygia ; but Bochart has ingeniou.siy 
 conjectured tiiat the misconception ai'ose from tlie 
 city of Ajiamea there having been called KUndo;; 
 (the Greek word for an ark), because inclosed isi 
 the shape of an ark by three rivets. Shuckfoid, 
 af"ter Sir \Valter Raleigh, would place Araiat 
 far to the east, in jiait of the langc aiicienlly 
 called Caucasus and Imaus., ai)d terminating in 
 the Himmaleh mountains, north of India ; and to 
 this opinion a late writer (Ivirby i in<;lnies in his 
 liridgeicater Treatise (p. 45). Dr. Pye SniiUi 
 also, when advocating the local an<l paitial iia- 
 lure of the Deluge, seeks for a less elevated moun- 
 tain than the Armenian .Vrarat, and lays hold of 
 this among otlier hypotheses {The Itelaliou be- 
 tween Scripture aiul Geological Science, p. 'M2) ; 
 whereas Kirby embraces it for the very opposife 
 reason, viz., because, holding tV* univeisaiity uf
 
 200 
 
 ARARAT. 
 
 the IHi^kI. l.e tliii.ks that mounfain is not high 
 pnimgh to ucc mnt i'ot tiie loiii? peiiod (hat elapsed 
 ^iiiiv.. viii. 5) heloie the utliir uiouiituijis Uecanie 
 visible. Naw it is eviihiit; that lliese and such- 
 like theoiies have tecii fiair.t'd in forget fulness of 
 what tlie Bible has recorded respecting the loca- 
 'ity of Ararat. We may Imj unable to Kx with 
 jwecisi.jn n'iiere that rej^ioii lay, but we can with- 
 out diificuliy decide that it was neither in Af- 
 (ihanistan nor Ceylon, neither in Asia Minor nor 
 in NuTlhern India. 
 
 T.ie only ot.ier passages where 'Ararat' occurs 
 are 2 Kinj^s xi.\. 37 (Isa. xxxvii. 3Sj i\nd Jer. 
 li. 27. In the former it h sjxiken of as the coun- 
 try whither the sons of Bennacherih, king of As- 
 syria, lied, after they had 'nurdere-'. their father. 
 Tiie ajjocryplial book of Tobit (i. 21) says it was 
 (Is TO. ufx)} 'Apapdd, ' to tliemountain; of Ararath.' 
 Tnis ix)int3 to a territory which did not foim 
 part of the immediate dominion of Assyiia, and 
 yet might not be far oH' from it. Tlie description 
 is ([uite applicable to Armenia, anil the tradition* 
 of taat country bears, tliat Sennaclierib's sons 
 were kindly received by king Paroyr, wlio al- 
 lotted them portions of land bordering on As- 
 syria, and tliat in course of time their posterity also 
 established an independent kingdom, called Vas- 
 purakan (Avdall's Traiisl. of Chamich's Hist, 
 of Armenia (vol i. p. 33, 34^. Tlie other Scvip- 
 u>.re text (Jer. li. 27) mentions Ararat, along with 
 Minni and Ashkena/-, as kingdoms summoned to 
 arm themselves against Babylon. In the pa- 
 rallel place in Isa. xiii. 2-4, tlie invaders of Ba- 
 bylonia are described as ' issuing from the moun- 
 tains ;' and if by Minni we understand the Mi- 
 nyas in Annenia, mentioned by Nicholas of Da- 
 mascus (J osephus, Antiq i. 3. 6), and hy Ashkenaz 
 some country on the Euxine Sea, which may have 
 had its original name, Axenos, from Ashkenaz, a 
 son of Gomer, the progenitor of tlie Cimmerians 
 (Gen. X. 2, 3) — then we arrive at the same con- 
 clusion, viz., that Aiarat was a mountainous re- 
 gion noith of Assyria, and in all probability in 
 Armenia. In Ezek. xxxviii. 6, we find To;^-ar- 
 mali, another pai t of Annenia, connected with 
 Gomer, and in Ezek. xxvii. i-1, with Meshech 
 and Tubal, all tribes of the north. With this 
 agree the traditions of the Jewisii and Christian 
 churches, and likewise the accounts of the native 
 Aimenian writers, who inform us that Ararad 
 was the name of one of the ancient jwovinces of 
 their country, siip|X)sed to coiTe^ipond to the 
 modern pashaliks of Kars and Bayazeed, and 
 part of Kurdistan. According to the tradition 
 preserved in Moses of Chorene, the name of Ara- 
 rat was derived from Arai, the eighth of the native 
 princes, who was killed in a battle with the Ba- 
 bylonians, about B.C. 1750 -, in memory of which 
 the whole province was called Aray-iarat, i. e. 
 the ruin of Arai. 
 
 But though it may be concluded with tolerable 
 certainty that the land of Ararat is to be identified 
 with a |3ortion of .\rmenia, we possess no historical 
 data for fixing on any one mv>untain in that country 
 as the resting-place of the ark. Indeed it may be 
 fairly questioned whether the phra?e in Gen. viii. 
 
 * A similar tradition is rej)0ite<l by the Ai> 
 menian historian, Mosei of Chorene, but he dates^ 
 ■jie event in the reign of Skaioid, the fatlier of 
 i'aroyr. 
 
 arakat. 
 
 4, n^inn n^ni, ' and the ark rested,' necessarily 
 means tliat the ark actually rfronnded on the top 
 of a mountain •, it may merely imply that aftei 
 it had l)een dri\ en and tossed to and fro on the 
 waste of waters, it at length settled, i. e. attained 
 a measure of compar'i.ti\e repose, and became 
 
 more stationary over {?]}) the mountains ol 
 
 Ararat, when the waters began to sulfide. That 
 this 7nay be the import of the expiession will be 
 denied by none who are acquainted with the 
 genius of the Hebrew language, and with tlie 
 latitude of meaning attachal>le to the verb m3, 
 which (as is observeil by Taylor in his Vonvord- 
 ance includes whate\'er comes under the idea of 
 ' remaining quietly in a place without being di»' 
 turbed.' A vessel enjoys more real rest when be- 
 calmed, than when she grounds on the top of a 
 submarine mountain in a troJibled sea. What 
 gives plausibility to our con ecture is the tact 
 that wlietrser the ' rest' was obtainetl on the bosom 
 of the now calmer deep, or by coming into con- 
 tact with tlie dry laud, it was nearly three monthi 
 after this Ijefore ' the tojis of the mountains were 
 seen' (Gen. viii. 5}; the same mountains being 
 evidently intended as those sjioken of in the pre- 
 vious verse, viz. the mountains of Ararat. Now, 
 as the waters were all the while abating (V. 3), it . 
 is much easier to leconcile this latter statement 
 with the idea of the ark being still afloat, tlian 
 with the common belief that it lay on a mountain 
 jjeak; besides, that by this interpretation we get 
 rid of otherwise inexplicable difficulties. If our 
 supjjosition be correct, then, for anything that ap- 
 pears ti) the contrary, the ark did mit touch the 
 earth until tils' waters weie abated to a level with 
 the lower valleys at plains, and, consequently, 
 the inmates were not left upon a dreary elevation 
 of 16,00i) or 17,000 feet, never till of late deemed 
 accessible to human footsteps, and their safe de- 
 scent from which, along with all the 'living 
 creatures' committed to their care, would have 
 been a greater miracle than their deliverance 
 from the Hood. By this explanation also we ob- 
 viate the geological olijection against the momi- 
 tain, noiv called Ararat, having been submerged, 
 which would imply a universal deluge, whereas 
 by the ' mountains of Ararat' may be untlerstood 
 some lower chain in Armenia, whose height would 
 not be incompat ble with the notion of a pa-.tial 
 flood. Finally, we on this hyjxithesis solve the 
 question : - If the descendants of Noah settled 
 near the resting-place of the ark in Armenia, how 
 could they be said to approach the plain of 
 Shinar (Gen. xi. 2), or Ba' y lonia, from the East f 
 For, as we read the narrative, the precise rest n r- 
 place of the ark is nowhere mentioned ; and 
 though for a time stationary ' over" the mountains 
 of Ararat, it may, before the final subsidence of 
 the waters, have been carried considerably to the 
 east of them. 
 
 Tlie ancients, however, attached a peculiar sa- 
 credness to the tops of liigh mountains, and iience 
 the belief was early propagated that the ark must 
 have rested on .some .such lofty eminence. The 
 earliest tradition fixed on one of the chain o< 
 mouniains which separate Armenia on the soutli 
 from Mesopitamia, and which, as they also inclose 
 Kurdistan, the land of the Kurds, obtained the 
 name of tlie Kardu, or Carduchian range, cor- 
 rupted into Gordiasan and Cordya?aii. Tiiia
 
 ARARAT. 
 
 opinion prevailed amon;^ the Chaldaeans, if we 
 may r<'ly on tlio testimony of Bcrosiis us q'loted 
 bv 'jost'j)lnis (Antiq. i. '-i. 6) : ' It is said there is 
 Still some part of this ship in Armenia, at the 
 mountain of the Corilya'ans, and that peo])le 
 carry oll'pieces of the hitumen, which they use as 
 amulets.' The same is reporteil by Ahydenus 
 (in Eusel). Pra'p. Evang. ix. 4\ who says they 
 employed the wood of the vessel against diseases. 
 Hence we are jircpared to find (he tradition 
 ado]>ted by the Chaldee paraphrasts, as well as 
 bv the Syriac translators and commentators, and 
 ail the Syrian churches. In the tlirec texts where 
 Ararat' occurs, the 7V(rr7«/« of Oiikelos has "iTIp 
 Kardii ; and, according- to Buxtorf the term 
 'Kardyan' was in Ciialdee synonymous with 
 • Armenian.' At Gen. viii. 4, the Araljic of Er- 
 peoius has Jibal-el-Karud (the Mountain of the 
 
 Kurds), which is likewise found in t!:e ' BchjV of 
 
 Adam" of the Zal)a'ans. Tor other jirools that 
 this was the prevalent ojiiiiion amoni,' the Kastem 
 churches, the reader may consult Eutyrhius, 
 (ylwjjfl/.s.) and Epii)hanius (^a^es. Ifi) It wai 
 no doubt from this source that it wa« boiTowed 
 by Mahomet, who in his Koian (xi. 4(i) says, 
 ' The ark rested on the mountain Al-Judi.' Tiiat 
 name ;va3 )]rol)al)ly a corru])tion ofGionli, i.e. 
 (iordiioan (the desifpiation given to tiie entire 
 range), i)ut afterwards ajiplied to the special lo- 
 cality where the ark was supposed to have rested. 
 This is on a mountain a little to the east of 
 Jexirah ibn Omar (tlie ancient Bezabilt'") on the 
 Tigris. At the foot of the mountain thrve was a 
 village called Karya Thnmiinn, i. e. the Village 
 of the Eighty — that being the numl>er (i^ id not 
 eiglit) saved from the 8ood according to the Mo 
 
 tammedan belief. Tiie historian Elmacin men- 
 lions that the emperor Heraclius went up, and 
 visited (his as 'the place ol' the ark.' Here, or in 
 .ne neighbourhood, was once a famous Nestorian 
 monastery, ' the Monastery of the Ark,' destroyed 
 by lightning in a.d. 776. The credulous Jew, 
 Benjamin of Tudela, says that a mosque was 
 built at Mount Judi, ' of the remains of the ark,' 
 by the Khalif Omar. Macdonald Kiniieir, in 
 describing his journey from Jezirah along the left 
 bank of Hie Tigris to Nahr Van, says, ' We had a 
 chain of mountains running parallel with the 
 road on the left hand This range is called the 
 .(nda Dag (i. e. mountain) by the Turks, and one 
 of the inhabitants of Nahr Van assured me that 
 he had frecpiently seen the remains of Noaii's ark 
 on a lofty peak behind that village." (Comp. 
 Rich's Knrdistan, vol. ii. p. I'^I.) A French 
 lavant, Eugene Bore, who lately visited those 
 parts, says tlie Moiiammedan dervislies still main- 
 tain here a perpetually burning lamp in an ora- 
 
 tory. ( Tievue Franpaise, vol. xii. ; or the Semeut 
 of October 2, 1 839.) 
 
 After the disappearance of the Nestorian mo 
 nastery, the tradition which fixed the site of the 
 ark on Mount Judi appears to have declined in 
 credit, or been chiedy confined to Mahoroe*ans, 
 and gave place (at least among (lie Christians of 
 the West) to that which now obtains, and accord- 
 ing to which the ark rested on a great mountain 
 in the nortli of Armenia — to which (so strongly 
 did the ich'a take hold of tiie poi'ulai beluf) was, 
 in course of time, gixen the very name of Ararat, 
 iis if no doubt could be entertained tliat it wa.s 
 the Ararat of Scripture. We ha\ e seen, however, 
 that in tiie Bilile Ararat is nowhere the name of 
 a mountain, and by the native AiTnenians the 
 mountain in (piestion was never so designated ; it 
 is l)y them called Mdcia, and by the Tuiks 
 Aghnr-daglu i- e. ' Tlie Heavy or Great Moun- 
 tain.* 'I lie VuJyate and Jerome indeed, render 
 Ararat by ' Armenia,' but they do not partico
 
 202 
 
 ARARAT. 
 
 larize any one mountain. Still there is no doubt 
 of tiie anticjuity of the tradition of this being (as 
 it is sometimes termed) the ' Mother of the World.' 
 The Persians call it Kulii Nucli, ' Noah's Moun- 
 tain.' The Armenian etymology of tlie name of 
 tlie city of Nakhchevan (wliich lies east of it) is 
 said to be ' first place of descent or lodging,' 
 being regarded as tlie place where Noah resided 
 after descending from the mount. It is men- 
 tioned Ijy Josepluis under a Greek name of si- 
 milar imjMJrt, viz. 'AvofiaTTipiov, and by Ptolemy 
 as Naxuana. 
 
 Tlie mountain thus known to Eiiro}jeans as 
 Ararat consists of two immense conical eleva- 
 tions (one peak considerably lower than the otlier), 
 towering in massive and majestic grandeur from 
 the valley of tlie Aras, the ancient Araxes. Smith 
 and Dwight giVe its position N. 57^ W. of 
 Nakhchevan, 'and S. 25'-" W. of Eriyan (Re- 
 searches in Armenia, p. 267) ; and remark, in 
 describing it before the recent earthquake, that in 
 no ])art of the world had they seen any mountain 
 whose imposing apjiearance could plead half so 
 powerfully as tliis a claim to the honour of liaving 
 once been the stepping-stone between the old 
 world and the new. ' It appeared,' says Ker 
 Porter, ' as if the hugest mountains of the world 
 had been piled upon each other to form this one 
 sublime immensity of earth and rocks and snow. 
 The icy peaks of its double heads rose majesti- 
 cally into the clear and cloudless heavens ; the 
 sun blazed bright upon them, and the reflection 
 sent fortli a dazzling radiance equal to otlier suns. 
 My eye, not able to rest I'or any length of time 
 upon the blinding glory of its summits, wandered 
 down tlie apparently interminable sides, till I 
 cotild no longer trace their vast lines in the mists 
 of the horizon ; when an irrepressible impulse im- 
 mediately carrying my eye upwards, again re- 
 iixed my gaze upon the awful glare of i\jarat.' 
 To the same ell'ect Moi ier writes : — ' Nothing can 
 be more beautiful than its shape, more awfid than 
 its height. All. the surrounding mountains sink 
 into insignificance when comjiared to it. It is 
 perfect in all its parts ; no hard rugged feature, 
 no unnatural prominences, everything is in har- 
 mony, and all combines to render it one of the 
 sublimest objectjs in nature.' 
 
 Several attempts had been made to reach the 
 top of Ararat, but few persons had got Ijeyoml the 
 limit of perpetual snow. The French traveller 
 Tournefort, in the year 1700, long persevered in 
 the face of many dilliculties, but was foiled in the 
 end. Between thirty and forty years ago the 
 Pasha of Bayazeed undertook the ascent with no 
 better success. The honour was reserved to a 
 German, Dr. Parrot, in the employment of Rus- 
 sia, who, in his Reise zum Ararat (Journey to 
 Ararat) gives tlie following particulars : — ' The 
 summit of the Great Ararat is in 39° 42' north 
 lat., and CI'-' .55' east long, from Ferro. Its per- 
 pendicular height is 1(3,251 Paris feet above the 
 level of the sea, and 13,li50 above the plain of the 
 Araxes. The Little Ararat is 12,2^4 Paris feet 
 a.b.)ve the sea, and 9.5(51 al)ove the plain of the 
 Araxes." After he and his party had failed in 
 two attempts to ascend, the third was successful, 
 and on the 27tli Seplember (o. s.), 1829, they 
 stood on the summit of Moimt Ararat. It was 
 a slightly convex , almost circular platform, abou* 
 SCO P»uis feet in diameter, composed of eternal 
 
 ARCH. 
 
 ice, unbroken by a rock or stone oa account of 
 the immense distances, nothing could be soen 
 distinctly. The mountain was, it is said, after- 
 wards ascended by a Mr. Antonomolf, but tht 
 fact both of his and Parrot's having reached th« 
 top is stoutly denied by the natives, and especially 
 by the inmates of ilie neighbouring convent of 
 Echmiadzin, who have a firm persuasion that in 
 order to jireserve the ark no one is permitted to 
 approach it. This is based on the tradition that 
 a monk, who once made the attempt, was, wKen 
 asleep from exhaustion, unconsciously carried 
 down to the point whence he had started ; but at 
 last, as the reward of his fruitless exertions, an 
 angel was sent to him with a piece of the ark, 
 which is preserved as the most valuable relic in 
 the cathedral of Echmiadzin. 
 
 Since the memorable ascent of Dr. Parrct, 
 Ararat has been the scene of a fearful calamity. 
 An earthquake, wliicli in a iew moments changed 
 the entire aspect of the country, commenced on 
 the 20th of June (o. s.), P'lO, and continued, at 
 intervals, until the 1st of September. Traces of 
 fissures and landslips have been left on the sur- 
 face of the earth, which the eye of the scientific 
 observer will recognise after many ages. The 
 destruction of houses and other property in a wide 
 tract of country around was very great ; fortu- 
 nately, the earthquake having happened during 
 the day, the loss of lives did not exceed fifty. 
 The scene of greatest devastation was in the 
 narrow valley of Akorhi, where the masses of 
 rock, ice, and .snow, detached from the summit of 
 Ararat and its lateral points, were thrown at one 
 single bound from a height of 6000 feet to tho 
 bottom of the valley, where they lay scattered 
 over an extent of several miles. { See Major 
 Voskoboinikof's Report, in the Athenaum for 
 1841, p. 157).— N. M. 
 
 ARAUNAH (njnJil), or Orn.^n (13"1«), 
 a man of the Jebusite nation, which ])ossesseil 
 Jerusalem Ijefore it was taken by the Israelites 
 His thresh ing-Hoor was on Mount Moriah ; and 
 when he understood that it was required for the 
 site of tlie Temple, he liberally ofiered the ground 
 to David as a free gift ; but the king insiste<J 
 on paying the full value for it (2 Sam. xxiv. 18; 
 1 Chron. xxi. 18). 
 
 ARBA. [Hebron.] 
 
 ARBELA. [Beth-Arbei..] 
 
 ARCE, or AuKE, by change of pronunciatior. 
 Rekem ; the same as Petra,the capital of Arabia 
 Petraea [Petra]. 
 
 ARCH. Arches with vaulted cliambers and 
 domed temples figure so consjiicuously in mo- 
 dern Oriental architecture, that, if the arch did 
 not exist among the ancient Jews, their towns 
 and houses could not possibly have otl'eied even 
 a faint resemblance to those which now exist ; 
 and this being the case, a great part of the ana- 
 logical illustrations of Scripture which modera 
 travellers and Bitilical illustrators liave obtained 
 from this source must needs fall to the ground. 
 It is therefoie of impoitance to a-certain whethe 
 the arch did or did not exist in these remote 
 times to which most of the history of at least tlie 
 Old Testament belongs. Novhing against its 
 existence is to be inferred from the tict tlidt no 
 word signifying, an arch can be tbi.nd m the 
 Hebrew Scriptures (for the vyord so rendered i&
 
 ARCH. 
 
 Hzek. xl 16. lias not that meaning). Tlif arclii- 
 tectural notices in the Bible are necessarily lew 
 and general ; and we have af this day histories 
 and other books, larger than the sacred volume, 
 in wliicli no sucli word as ' arch ' occurs. There 
 is certainly no absolute proof that tlie Israelites 
 employed arches in their buildings; but it' it can 
 be shown that arches existed in Kgyjit at a very 
 early period, we may safely infer that so useful 
 an invention could not have been unknown in 
 Palestine. 
 
 ARCH. 
 
 SO0 
 
 Until within these few years it was common to 
 ascribe a comparatively late origin to the arch; 
 hut circumstances have come to light one after 
 another, tending to throw the date more and more 
 backward, until at length it seems to be admitted 
 that in Egypt the arch already existed in the 
 time of Jose])h. The observations of Rosellini 
 and of Sir J. G. Wilkinson led them irresistibly 
 to this conclusion, wliich has also been recently 
 adopted by Mr. Cockerell fLect. iii., in Athenceum 
 for Jan. 2S, 1813) and other arcliitects. 
 
 It is shown by Sir J. G. Wilkinson that the 
 arcii existed in briclt in the reign of Amenoph I., 
 as eaily as b.c 1510; and in stone in the time 
 of the second Psamaticus, B.C. 600. This evi- 
 dence is derived from the ascertained date of 
 arches now actually existing; but the paintings 
 at Beni-Hassan allien! ground for the conclusion 
 that vaulted buildings were constructed in Egypt 
 as early as the reign of Osirtasen I., who is pre- 
 sumed to have been contemporary with Joseph. 
 Indeed, although the evidence from facts does 
 not ascend beyond this, tlie evidence from 
 analogy and jnobability can be carried back 
 tn about B.C. 2020 (Wilkinson's Anr. Egyptians, 
 ii. 116; iii. 316). Sir J. G. Wilkinson suggests 
 the nrobability that the arch owed its invention 
 to t e small quantity of wood in Egypt, and the 
 consequent expense of roofing with timber. The 
 proiifs may be thus arranged in chronological 
 wler : — 
 
 The evidence that arches were known in the 
 
 time of the first Osirtasejj is derived fro:r the 
 drawings at Beni-Iiassaii (Wilkinson, ii. 117). 
 
 In the secluded valley of Dayr el Medeeneh, 
 at Tiiebes, are several tombs of tlie early dale of 
 Amenoph I. Among the most reniarkal'lt of 
 these is one whose cruile brick roof and niche, 
 bearing the name of t.he same Pharaoh, ])ro\e the 
 existence of the arch at the remote period of 
 B.C. 1510 (Wilkinson, Topography of Tlipbes, 
 p. 81). Another tomb of similar construction 
 bears the ovals of Thothmes III., who reigned 
 about the time of the Exode (^Aiic. E'lyptians, 
 iii. 319). At Thebes there is aljj a biick arch 
 bearing the name of this king (Hoskins, Travels 
 in Ethiopia). 
 
 To the same period and dynasty (the 18rh) 
 belong the vaulted chambers and arched door- 
 ways (see cut, tig. '1) which yet remain in tlie 
 crude brick pyramids at Thebes (Wilkinson, 
 Anc. Egyptians, iii. 317). 
 
 In ancient Egyptian houses it apjiears that the 
 roofs were often vaulted, and built, like the rest 
 of the house, of crude brick; and there is reason 
 to believe that some of the chambers in the iia- 
 vilion of Rameses III. (alioiit b.c. 1215), at 
 Medeenet Haboo, were arciied with stone, since 
 the devices in the upper part of the walls show 
 that the fallen roofs had tliis form (see cut. 
 
 The most ancient actvaUy e.cish'ng arches of 
 stone occur at Menujliis, near the modem village 
 of Saqqara. Here tliere is a tomb with two lar"e 
 vaulted chambers, whose rools disjilay in every 
 part the name and sculjrtures of Psamaticus II. 
 (about B.C. 600). The chambers are cut in the 
 limestone rock, and this being of a frialile nature, 
 the roof is secured by being, as il were, lined with 
 an arch, like our modern tunnels. 
 
 To about the same period — that of the lasv 
 <lynasty before the Persian invasion — belong the 
 remarka!)le doorways of the encosnres surround- 
 ing the tombs in the .•Xssaseef, whi-jh are com- 
 posed of two or more concentric semicircles of 
 brick (fig. 2) (Wilkinson, Anc. Egi/ptians, iii. 
 31PV 
 
 Although the oldest stone arch whose age liai 
 been positively ascertained chj^s not date earlier
 
 184 
 
 ARCH, 
 
 ARCHITECTURE. 
 
 than tlie lime of Psamatlcus, we cannot suppose 
 Jiat the use of stone was not adopted by the 
 Egyptians for that style of building previous to 
 UM reign, even if the arches in the pyramids in 
 Et liopia should prove not to be antorior to the 
 game era. 'Nor does the absence of the arch in 
 temnlcs and otlier large buildings excite our sur- 
 prise, when we consider the style of Egyptian mo- 
 numents ; and no one who understands the cha- 
 racter of their ajbhitccture could wish for its 
 introduction. In some of the small temples of 
 the Oasis the Romans attempted this innova- 
 tion, but rhe appearance of the chambers so con- 
 structed fails to please ; and the whimsical ca- 
 price of Osirei (about B.C. li5S5), also introduced 
 an imitation of the arch in a temple at Abydus. 
 In this building the roof is formed of single 
 blocks of stone, reaching from one architrave to 
 the other, which, instead of being placed in the 
 usual manner, stand uj;on their edges, in order 
 to allow room for hollowing out an arch in their 
 thickness ; but it has the etl'ect of inconsistency, 
 
 without the plea of advantage or utility.' Ano- 
 ther imitation of the arch occurs in a building 
 at Tliebes, constructed in the style of a tomb. 
 The chambers lie under a friable roek, and are 
 oased with masonry, to prevent the fall of its 
 crumbling stone ; but, instead of being roofed on 
 ^e principle of the arch, they are covered with a 
 number of large- blocks, jjlaced horizontally, one 
 projecting beyond that immediately below it, till 
 fclie uppermost two meet in the centre, the interior 
 angles being afterwards roundetl off to form the 
 aj)pearance of a vault (tig. 1). The date of this 
 building is about b.c. 1500, and consequently 
 many years after the Egyptians had been ac- 
 quainted with the art of vaulting (Wilkinson, 
 Alio. Egyptians, ii. 321). 
 
 Thus as the temple architecture of the Egyptians 
 "lid not admit of arches, and as the temples are 
 almost tlie only buildings that remain, it is not 
 strange that arches have not oftener been found. 
 The evidence ulfered by the paintings, the tombs, 
 and the pyramids is conclusive for the e.\istence 
 and anticjuity of arches and vaults of brick and 
 Itune ; and if any remains of houses and palaces 
 kad now existed, tliere is little doubt that the arch 
 would have been of frequent occurrence. We 
 ©Lserve that Sir J. G. Wilkinson, in portraying 
 an Egyptian mansion (^Anc. Egyptians, ii. 131), 
 makes the grand entrance an archway. 
 
 Aifter this it seems unreasonable to doubt that 
 the arch was known to the Hebrews also, and was 
 eicployed in their buildings. Palestine was in- 
 deed ijetter wootled tlian Egypt; but still that 
 there was a deficiency of wood suitable for build- 
 ing and for rocfs is shown by tlie fact that large 
 importations of timber from the forests of Lebanon 
 were necessary (2 Sam. vii. 2, 7 ; 1 Kings v. 6 ; 
 I Ciiron. xxii. 4 ; 2 Clu-on. ii. 3 ; Ezra iii. 7 ; 
 C^nt i. 17), and that this imported timber, 
 altiiough of no very high quality, was held in 
 great estimation. 
 
 ARCHELAUS, son of Herod the Great, and 
 his successor in Idunisea, Juda'a, and Sainaric 
 (Matt. ii. 22) [IIerodian Family]. 
 
 ARCHERY. [Arms.] 
 
 ARCHlPPUS {" Kpxm-^os), a Christian mi- 
 nister, whom St. Paul calls his ' fellow-soldier,' 
 in Philem. 2, and whom he exhorts to renewed 
 activity in Col. iv. 17^. Fron< the latter refer- 
 ence it would seem that Archi{)pus had exercised 
 the office of Evangelista sometimes at Ephesus, 
 sometimes elsewhere ; and that he finally resided 
 at Colosse, and there discharged the oflice of pre- 
 siding presi\vter or bisho}) when St. Paul wrote 
 to the Colossian church. The exhortation given 
 to him in this Epistle hiis, without suthcient 
 grounds, been construed into a rebuke for past 
 negligence. 
 
 ARCHISYNAGOGUS (Gr. dpxKrovaywyos, 
 called also dpx^" 'rijs avvaywyris (Luke viii. 
 41), and simply apx'^'' (Mat\. ix. 1*^); Heb. 
 nD33n ki'N"), _clnef or ruler of the synagogue). 
 In large synagogues there appears to have been a 
 college or council of elders (D''3pT = tt/: ec/Si;- 
 Tfpoi, Luke vii. 3) to whom the care of the syna- 
 gogue and the discipline of the congregation were 
 committed, and to all of whom this title was 
 applied (Mark v. 22; Acts xiii. 15; .wiii. 8, 
 compared with v. 17). Their duties were to pre- 
 side in the public services, to direct tlie reading of 
 the Scriptures and the addresses to the congregation 
 (Vitringa, De Synac/oga Vetere, lib. 3, part i. c. 
 7; comp. Acts xiii. 15), to superintend the dis- 
 tribution of alms (Vitr. c. 13), and to punish 
 transgressors either bj' scourging (Vitr. c. 11; 
 compare Matt. x. 17; xxiii. 34; Acts xxii. U>) 
 or by excommunication (V^itr. c. 9). In a more 
 restricted sense the title is sometimes applied to 
 the president of this council, whose office, ac- 
 cording to Grotius (^Annotationcs in Matt. ix. 18 ; 
 Luc. xiii. 14) and many other writers, was dif- 
 ferent from and superior to that of the elders in 
 general. Vitringa (p. 586), on the other hand, 
 maintains that there was no such distinction of 
 office, and that the title thus applied merely de- 
 signates the presiding elder, who acted on behalf 
 of and in the name of the whole. — F. W. O. 
 
 ARCHITECTURE. It was formerly com- 
 mon to claim for the Hebrews the invention of 
 scientific architecture ; and to allege that clas- 
 sical antiquity was indebted to the Temple of 
 Solomon for the principles and many of the de- 
 tails of the art. A statement so strange, and even 
 preposterous, would scarcely seem to demand 
 attention at the present day ; but as it is still 
 occasionally reproduced, and as some respectable 
 old authorities can be cited in its favour, it can- 
 not be passed altogether in silence. The question 
 belongs properly, however, to another iiead 
 [Temple]. It may here suffice to lemark that 
 temples previously existed in Egypt, Babyhm, 
 Syria and Phoenicia, from which the classical 
 ancients were far more likely to bovi-ow the ideas 
 which they embodied in new and beautiful com- 
 binations of their own. But there are few notions, 
 liowever u'.itenable, which have not some apparent 
 foundation in fact. So in the present case, it 
 is shown, first, that a resemblance of plan and 
 detail can be traceil between certain heathen tem- 
 ples and the Temple at Jerusalem; and, secondly, 
 it is alleged that this could not be owing to imii^
 
 ARCHITECTURE. 
 
 ♦ten in the lattei, because the taberttacle (of wliicli 
 the Tenij)le was a sort of imitation) was a divine 
 iU!2;gcstii)ii. being IVanied aciMirdini,' to a j)atreni 
 shown to Moses on the Mount i Exod. xxv. 40 i. 
 This is tlie sole ground on which the claim nade 
 for the Hebrew iirchitecture can be rested. But 
 •a jKittcni ' is not necessarily or probably a new 
 thijig ; in the usual sense it is almost always a 
 new combination or adaptation of existing mate- 
 rials. And it may be shown, not only from his- 
 torical probability, but fiom actual examjjles 
 {Ark], tiiat nothing more than this is here to be 
 understood — nothing more than that Moses was 
 instructed how best to ap])ly tiie materials of 
 existing sacreil arehitecture (more especially that 
 of Egypt) ti> the object in view. Tlie pattern 
 was necessary to make him miderstand how this 
 application was to be made, and to render it clear 
 to him what parts of existing structures shoidd be 
 rejected or letained. Indeed, this is proved by 
 the Si-ripture itself; for David, in his charge to 
 Solomon concerning the Temple, says ' All this 
 the L.ird made me understan<l in writing by his 
 hand upon me, even all the works of this pattern ' 
 (1 Chron xxviii. 19). A'ow, whatever be the 
 meaning of this ( and the authorized translation 
 is purposely retained), it must mean nearly the 
 same thing as in the parallel passage resjjecting 
 the tabernacle. Yet it is on all hands admitted 
 that the Tem]jle, of which this is said, was an a|)- 
 plication and extension of ideas already existing 
 in the tabernacle. This text, therefore, must not 
 be taken in the sense of complete origination. 
 And if we are forbidden to understand the terms 
 as proving the complete originality of the 
 Temple, by what rule of Scripture interjjretation 
 are we compelled to understand precisely similar 
 tei-ms as proving the complete originality of the 
 tabernacle? 
 
 Mr. tA)ckere^l, in one of his recent ' Lectures ' 
 (Athcnceum, Jan 21, IS43), strongly upholds 
 those high claims of Jewish iirchitecture which 
 all Biblical scholars now admit to lie untenable, 
 and wiiich sound historians and antiquarians have 
 long repudiated. It has therefore been deemed 
 necessary thus particularly to refer to the matter, 
 lest Jbe authority of a high name in architec- 
 ture siiould tend to revive pretensions which had 
 almost become obsolete. Yet even Mr. Cock- 
 erell endeavouis to ciyrect one ' common error ' 
 on the subject, which, he states, is ' the attempt 
 to trace tliis resemldance in the styles or the 
 orthographic figure of the parts and orders — 
 the mere vesture of the scheme ; and the failure 
 in straining- the texts and examples (Corintliian 
 
 or Doric) to a peifect correspondence 
 
 but the comparison of the plans makes the taber- 
 nacle the type of the Greek and Roman temple,' 
 
 There lias never in fact been any ])eople forwhom 
 a jeculiar style of architecture could with less pro- 
 bability be claimed than for the Is'-aelites. On 
 leaving Egypt they could only be acquainted 
 with Egypti.in art. On entering Canaan they 
 oecessarily occupied the buildings of which they 
 nad dis[)0ssessed tiie previous inhabitants; and 
 the succeeding generations would naturally erect 
 SiK h buil lings as the country ]ireviously con- 
 tai led. The architecture of Palestine, and as 
 satii.even ually that of tlie Jews, had d on I )t less its 
 own churactejistics, by which i". was sul;e"'. lo the 
 
 AREOPAGUS. 
 
 203 
 
 climate and condition of the country ; ai. { in th«i 
 course of time many imijrovemcnttt would no 
 doubt arise from the c.iuses which usually opurat(> 
 in proilucing ciiange in any j.raclical art. From 
 the want of iiistorical data and from tiie total 
 absence of architectural remains, the decree in 
 which these causes operated in imparting a pe- 
 culiar character to tiie Jewish architecture cannot 
 now be determinetl ; for the oldest ruins in tliu 
 country do not ascenii beyond the j)eriod of tli^ 
 Roman domination. It does, liowever,seem proba- 
 ble that among the Hebrews architecture was al- 
 ways kept within tlie lin.its of a meclianical cralt, 
 and nev er rose to the rank of a line ait. Their usual 
 dwelling-houses dill'eied little I'loni those ofuther 
 Eastern nations, and ue nowheie lind iwiylhing in- 
 dicative of exterior embellishment. Suleuilid edi- 
 fices, such iis the palace of David iind the Temple 
 of Solomon, were completed liy the assist.knce 
 of PhuMiician artists (2 Sam. v 11 ; 1 Kings 
 V. 6, 18; 1 Chion. xiv. 1). After the Buby 
 lonish exile, the assistance of such ijreigners 
 was likewise resorted to for the resioiation of the 
 Temjjle (Ezra iii. 7). From the time (>f the 
 Maccabtean dynasty, the Gieek taste began f» 
 gain ground, especially uinler the Ileiodiau 
 princes (who seem to have been jiossessed with a 
 sort of mania foi building ), and was shown in tiie 
 structure and embellushment of many towJis, 
 baths, colonnades, thi-atres and ca-tlej (Joseph. 
 Antiq. XV. S. 1 ; xv. 19. 4; xv. If). 3; De Bell. 
 Jud. i. 4. 1). The Phoenician style, which seems 
 to have had some affinity witli the E_'yj)tiaii, wiis 
 not, hov/ever, supeiseded by the (iiecian; and 
 even as late as the Mishna ylhna Lathra, iii. 
 6), we read of Tyriaii wimlows, Tyiiaii porches, 
 &c. [House]. 
 
 ^^ ith regard to the instruments used by buiiii- 
 ers — besides the more cominoii, sucii as the axe, 
 saw, &c.. we find incidental mention of tl/C 
 njiriD or compass, the T]JX or plumb-line (.Amos 
 vii. 7), the 1p or mt-asuriiig-line (see the several 
 words). \\ mer's Biblisehes IteaJworterbuch. art. 
 'Baukunst ;' Steigletz's Gesehkht dtr Baukiinxt 
 del- Allen, 1792; Hirt's Gesc.'i. des Bank, bei 
 der Allen; Schmidt's Bibl. Matheniaticua ; 
 Bellennann's Haudbuch, &.c. 
 
 ARCHITRICLINUS CApxtTpiKhivos, maste) 
 of the trklbtitim, or dinner-bed — Acclb.vtion), 
 very properly rendeied in John ii. 8, 9, ' master 
 of the feast,' equivalent to the Roman Magister 
 Convivil. Tlie Greeks also den.'ed *li" same 
 social officer by the title of Si/mpo.i.urch {ffvfiiro- 
 aiapxos). lie was not the giver of the fea.st, but 
 one of tlie guests sjiecially chosen to direct tlie 
 entertaiimient, and promote hurmony and g(H)d 
 fellowship among the comiiany. In the apocryphal 
 Ecclesiasticus (xxxv. 1, 2) ihe duties of this oli.cer 
 among the Jews are indicated. He is tl.eie, luiw- 
 ever, called rjyovfievos : — ' If tluiu be madi' the 
 niJister [of a feast], lifl not thyself up, but bi 
 among them as one of the lest ; take diligeiit caie 
 for them, and so sit down : and when thou hast 
 done all thy office, take thy jilace, that thou 
 mayest be meny with them, and receive a crowu 
 fur thv well oidering of the feast." 
 
 ARKOPA(iUS,'an Anglicized form of the 
 origin. il words (6 "Apfios wdyos), slgnilyir.ff, in 
 reference lo pli»ce, Mars Hill, but, in refere:.v< to 
 persons, the Coun<;il which was he'd on the hill. 
 Tlie Council was also le'iiieil n if \^f)fl<f> *dy^
 
 30« 
 
 AREOPAGUS. 
 
 AREOPAGUS. 
 
 BovA.'f] (or fj ^ouAt} t] iu 'Apeiui Trayiji)), tlie Coun- 
 cil on Mars Hill ; sometimes i) &vco 0ov\-fi, the 
 Upper Council, from the elevated position where 
 it was hehi ; and sometimes simply, but empha- 
 tically, ■^ j8ouXt7, the Council; hut it retained, till 
 a late period, the original designation of Mars 
 Hill, being called by the Latins Scopulus Martis, 
 Ciu-ia Martis (Juvenal, Sat ix. 101), and still 
 more literally, Areum Judicium (Tacit. Annal. 
 • ii. 55). The place and the Council are topics 
 of interest to the Biblical student, chiefly from 
 their being the scene of the interesting narrative 
 and sublime discourse found in Acts xvii., where 
 it appears that the apostle Paul, feeling himself 
 moved, by the evidences of idolatry with which 
 the city of Athens was crowded, to preach Jesus 
 and the resurrection, both in the Jewish syna- 
 gogues and in 'lie market-place, was set upon by 
 certain Epicurean and Stoic philosophers, and 
 (ed to the Areopagus, in order that tliey might 
 learn from him tlie meaning and design of 
 his new doctrine. Whether or not the Apostle 
 was criminally airaigned, as a setter forth of 
 strange gods, before the tribunal which held its 
 sittings on the Ijill, may he considered as unde- 
 termined, tliough the balance of evidence seems 
 to incline to the aflirmative. Whichever view on 
 this point is adopted, the dignihed, temperate, and 
 tiigh-minded liearing of Paul under the peculiar 
 circumstances in which he was placed are worthy 
 of high admiration, and will appear the more 
 striking the more the associations aie known and 
 weiglied which covered and surrounded the s^x)t 
 where he stood. Nor does his eloquent discourse 
 appear to ha\'e been without good ert'ect ; for 
 rliough some mocked, and some procrastinated, 
 yet others believed, among whom was a member 
 of the Council, ' Dionysiiis, the Areopagite.' who 
 has been represented as the first bishop of Athens, 
 and is said to have written books on the ' Celes- 
 tial Hierarchy;' but their authenticity is ques- 
 tioned. 
 
 Tlie accom))anying plan will enable the reader 
 to form an idea of the locality in which the Ajwstle 
 stood, and to conceive in some measure the im- 
 pressive and venerable objects with which he was 
 environed. Nothing, however, but a minute de- 
 scription of the city in tlie days of its pride, com- 
 Tising some details of the several temples, porti- 
 ' oes, and schools of learning which crowded on his 
 STght, and which, whilst they taught him that the 
 citj' was 'wholly given to idolatry,' impressed him 
 a^so with the feeling that he was standing in the 
 midst of the highest civilization, lioth of his own 
 age and of the ages that had elapsed, can give an 
 adequate conception of the position in which 
 Paul was placed, or of the lofty and prudent 
 manner in which he acted. The history in the 
 Acts of the Ajwstles (xvii. 22) states that the 
 speaker stood in the midst of Mars Hill. Having 
 come up from the level parts of the city, where 
 the markets (there were two, tlie old and the new) 
 were, he would probably stand with his face to- 
 wards the north, and would then have imme- 
 diately liehind him the long walls which ran down 
 to the sea, aflbrding protection against a foreign 
 enemy. Near the sea. on one side, was the hai:- 
 bour of Peiiieus, on the other that designated 
 Plmlerum, with their crowded arsenals, their busy 
 woikr.-ien, and their gallant ships. Not far otV in 
 \ie ocean lav the island of Salami? ennobled for 
 
 N. Arch of Itadrian. 
 
 O. StrcK of Tripods. 
 
 P. Monument of Philnpappus. 
 
 Q.Timpli- of Fortune. 
 
 K. PHnRthiuuic Stndium. 
 
 S. Tomb of Hirodr-s. 
 
 T. G.ireof Uiochares. 
 
 U. Gate o( Acharnee. 
 
 V. Dipvlum. 
 
 W. nato calh.d Hippade*. 
 
 X Lycabcltus. 
 
 Y. Peiraic Gate. 
 
 Z. Prytancium 
 
 f. Gate. 
 
 k. Bridge. 
 
 /. Oardons 
 
 m. honian Gate. 
 
 A. The Acropolia. 
 
 B. Areopairu8. 
 
 C. Museiv.m. 
 
 D. HadrianopolJB. 
 
 E. Temple of Jupiter Olympiua. 
 
 F. Theatre of Bacchus. 
 
 G. Odeiumof Kegilla. 
 H. Pnvx. 
 
 I. Temple of Theseus. 
 J. Gvmnas'um of Ptolemy. 
 K. Stoa of Hadrian. 
 L. Gate of New Agora, 
 il. Tower of Andronicus. 
 
 a. Tombs. 
 
 b. To tlie Acadcmia. 
 
 c. Cerameicus Exterior, 
 rf. Mount Anchesmus. 
 <■. Ancient Walls. 
 /. Modern Walls. o. Callirrhoe. 
 
 0. Koail to Marathon. p. Scale of half an Enunu.. 
 
 «. Road to the Mesog;ea. mile. 
 
 ever in historj' as the spot near which Athenian 
 valour chastised Asiatic pride, and achieved the 
 liberty of Greece. The apostle had only to turn 
 towards his right hand to catch a view of a small 
 but celebrated hill rising within the city near 
 that on which he stood, called the Pnyx, where, 
 standing on a block of bare stone, Demo>thcnes 
 and other distinguished orators had addressed the 
 assembled people of Athens, swaying that arro- 
 gant and fickle democracy, and thereby making 
 Philip of Macedon tremble, or working goud or 
 ill for the entire civili/.ed world. Immediately 
 before him iay the crowded city, studded in every 
 part with memorial's sacred to religion or pa- 
 triotism, and exhibiting the highest achievements 
 of art. On his left, somewhat beyond the walls, 
 was beheld the Academy, with its groves of plane 
 and olive-trees, its letiretl walks and cooling foun- 
 tains, its altar to the Muses, its statues of the 
 Graces, its temple of Minerva, and its altars to 
 Prometheus, to Love, and to Hercules, near 
 which Plato had hi« country-seat, and in the 
 midst of which he had taught, as well as his 
 followers a'ter him. But the most impressive 
 spectacle lay on his right hand, for there, on the 
 small and ]ireci])itous hill named the Acro{X)lis, 
 were clustered together monuments of the highest 
 art, and memorials of the national religion, such 
 as no other equal spotof grotnid has ever borne. The 
 AjKistle's eyes, in turning to the right, would fall 
 on the north-west side of the eminence, which was 
 here (and all round) covered and protected by a 
 wall, parts of which were so ancient as to be of 
 Cyclopean origin. The we.'itern side, which alone 
 gave access to whau from its original desiinanon, 
 may be termed the foit, was, during the adminis- 
 tration of Pericles, adorned with a splendid flight 
 of steps, and the beautiful Prop_v!a?a, with it« 
 five entrances and two flanking temples, con- 
 structed by Mnesicles of Pentelican marble, 
 at a cost of 2012 talents. In the timea of fh«
 
 AREOPAGUS 
 
 AREOPAGUS. 
 
 207 
 
 KiitnaQ empeiors there stood before the Propylaea 
 equestrian statues of Augustus and Agrippia. On 
 
 tlie southern wing of the Propylaea was a temple 
 of VVin;r]ess Victory ; on the northern, a Pina- 
 cotheca, or picture gallery. On the liighest part 
 of the platfoiTn of the Acropolis, not more than 
 800 feet from the entrance-buildings just de 
 scribed, stood (and yet stands, tliough shattered 
 and mutilated) the Parthenon, justly celebrated 
 throughout the world, erected of white Pentelican 
 marble, under the direction of Callicrates, Ictinus, 
 and Carpion, and adorned with the Hnest sculp- 
 tures from the hand of Phidias. Northward from 
 the Parthenon was the Erechtheum, a compound 
 building, which contained the temple of JNIinerva 
 Polias, the proijer Erechtiieum (called also the 
 Cecropium), and the Pandroseum. This sanc- 
 tuary contained tlie holy olive-tree sacred to Mi- 
 nerva, the holy salt-spring, the ancient wooden 
 image of Pallas, k.c., and was the scene of the 
 old(^st and most venerated ceremonies and recol- 
 lections of the Athenians. Between tlie Propylaea 
 and tlie Erechtheum was placed the colossal 
 bronze statue of Pallas Promachos, the work of 
 Phidias, which towered so high above the other 
 buildings, that the plume of her helmet and the 
 point of her spear were visible on the sea between 
 Sunium and Athens. Moreover, the Acropolis was 
 occupied by so great a crowd of statues and mo- 
 numents, that the account, as found in Pausanias, 
 excites Uie reader's wonder, and mak<;s it dilhcult 
 for him to understand how so much could liave 
 been crowded into a space which extended trom 
 the south-east corner to tlie south-west only 1150 
 feet, whilst its greatest breadth did not exceed 
 600 feet. On the hill itself where Paul had his 
 station, was, at the eastern end, the temple of the 
 Furies, and other national and commemorative 
 edificejs. The court-house of the council, which 
 was also here, was, according to the simplicity of 
 ancient customs, built of clay. Tliere was an altar 
 consecrated by Orestes to Athene Areia. In the 
 same place were seen two silver stones, on one of 
 which stood the accuser, un tlie other, the accused. 
 Near them stixid two altars erected by Epime- 
 nides, one to Insult ("T^Spe&ir, Cic. Contumelies ), 
 the other to Shamelessness {'AvaiSflas, Cic. I>fi- 
 oiuicmfice). 
 
 Tlie court of Areojiagus was one of the oldest 
 and most honoured, not only in Athens, but in 
 tiie whole of (rreece, and, indeed, in the ancient 
 wr.:ld. ThiDugh a long succession of centuries, 
 h preserved its existence amid changes corre- 
 8|Kinding witli those which the state underwent, 
 411 at lea^t the age of the Casars (Tacitus, Ann. 
 '". 5.') ,. Tlie ancients are full of eulo|{ies on its 
 
 value, equity, and beneficial influence ; in cdO- 
 swjuence of which qualities it was held in ao 
 much res]iect that even foieign states sought its 
 verdict in diflicult cases. Like everylliing hu- 
 man, however, it was liable to decline, and, aftei 
 Greece had submitted to the yoke of Rome, 
 retained probably little of it.s ancient character 
 beyond a certain dignity, which was itself cold 
 and barren ; and however successful it may in 
 earlier times have been in conciliating for its de- 
 terminations the ajipioval of public o])inion, the 
 historian Tacitus {ut supro^ mentions a case in 
 which it was charged with an erroneous, if not a 
 corrupt, decision. 
 
 The origin of the court ascends back into the 
 darkest mythical period. From the first its con- 
 stitution was essentially aristocratic ; a character 
 which to some extent it retained even after tlie 
 democratic refonns which St/ion introduced into 
 the Athenian constitution. By his ajipointment 
 the nine archons became for the remaintler of 
 their lives Areopagites, provided they iatl well 
 discharged the duties of their archonslnp, were 
 blameless in their personal conduct, and had 
 undergone a satisfactory examinatiun. lU jiower 
 and jurisdiction were still furtiier abridged by 
 Pericles, through his instrument Ephialtes. Fol- 
 lowing the political tenilencies of tiie state, the 
 Areopagus became in jirocess of time less and less 
 aristocratical, and paited piecemeal with most of 
 its imjxirtant functions. First its political power 
 was taken away, then its jurisdiction in cases of 
 murder, and even its moial intluence gradually 
 departed. During the sway of the Thirty Tyrants 
 its power, or rather its political existeijce, was de- 
 stroyed. On their overthrow it recovered some 
 consideration, and the oversiglit of the execution 
 of the laws was restored to it by an express de- 
 cree. Isocrates endeavoured by his 'Apeowa- 
 yiriKhs K6yos to revive its ancient influence. 
 The precise time when it ceased to exist can- 
 not be determined ; but evidence is nut wanting 
 to -show that in later periods its members ceasett 
 to be uniformly characterized by blameless 
 morals. 
 
 It is not easy to give a correct summary of its 
 several functions, as the classic writers are r;ot 
 agreed in their statements, and the jurisdiction jf 
 the court varied, as has been seen, witii times and 
 circumstances. Tliey have, however, been di- 
 vided into six general classes {Rtal-Enojvlo- 
 pudie von Pauly, in voc.) : I. Its jjilicial func- 
 tion ; II. Its jiolitical ; 111. Its police function ; 
 IV. Its reliijious ; V. Its educational ; and VI. 
 (only partially) Its financial. In relation to these 
 functions, such details only can be given lieie as 
 bear more ur less inimeiliately on its moral and 
 religious intluence, and may serve to assist the 
 stutlent of the H"ly Scriptures in forming an 
 ojiinion as to the relation in which the subject 
 stands to the Gos])el. and its distinguished mis- 
 sionary, tiie a]io»tle Paul. 
 
 Passing by certain functions, such as acting 
 as a court of appeal, ami of general supervision, 
 which under special circumstances, and when 
 empowered by the peojile, the .-Vreopagus from 
 time txf time discharged, we will say a few words 
 in explanation nf tiie points already named, 
 giving a less restricted s|iace to those which jon- 
 cern its moral and religious iiilluence. Its judi- 
 cial fiuiction embraced irials for murUei and
 
 v» 
 
 AREOPAGUS. 
 
 manslaughter (cpivou S'lKai, tA ipovtK£), and was 
 ti»e oldest antl most peculiar sphere of its activity, 
 Tiie indiclinent was bniuglit by the second or 
 king-archon {iif>xa>v fia.(Ti\evs), whose duties 
 were for the most part of a reliii;ious nature. 
 Then followed the oath (»f both parties, acconri- 
 nanied by solemn appeals to the go<is. AftiU' 
 Jiis the accuser and the accused iiad the option 
 of making a speech (the notion of the proceedings 
 of the Areo]jagu3 l)eing carried on in the darkness 
 of night rests on no sufficient foundation), whicii, 
 however, they were obligeil to keep free from all 
 extraneous matter (e^ai tov Trpdyfj-aTos), as well 
 as from mere rhetorical ornaments. After the 
 first speech, the accused was permitted to go into 
 voluntary banishment, if he had no reason to ex- 
 pect a favouralfle issue. Theft, poisoning, wound- 
 ing, incendiarism, and treason, belonged also to 
 this departmept of jurisdiction in the court of the 
 Areopagus, 
 
 Its ])()litical fuiiction consisted in the constant 
 watch which it kept over the legal condition of 
 the state, acting as overseer and guajdian of the 
 lavTS (fTriffKOTTos Kol (pvXa^ rSiv y6/xci>v). 
 
 Its police function also made it a protector and 
 uphohler of the institutions and laws. In this 
 character the Areopagus had jurisdiction over 
 novelties in religion, in worship, in customs, in 
 everything that departed jrom the traditionary 
 and estaldished -usages and modes of tliought 
 {Traipioii vofi'tfiots), which a regard to their ances- 
 tors endeared to the nation, Tliis was an ancient 
 and w«ll-suj;porteil sphere of activity. The mem- 
 Vkts of the court ha(l a right to take oversight of 
 festive meetings in private liouses. In ancient 
 times they fixed the number of the guests, anil 
 determi aed the style of the entertainment. If a 
 person had no obvious means of subsisting, or was 
 known to live in idleness, he was liable to an 
 action before the Areopagus ; if condemned three 
 times, he was punished with aTtfiia. the loss of 
 his civil rights. In later times the court pos- 
 sessed the right of giving permission to teachers 
 (philosophers and rhetoricians) to establish them- 
 selves and pursue their profession in the city. 
 
 Its strictly religious jurisdiction extended itself 
 over the jwblic creed, worship, and sacrifices, 
 embracing generally everything which could 
 come under the denomination of ra lepa —sa- 
 cred things. It was its special tluty to see that 
 the religion of tlie state was kept pure from all 
 Ibreign elements. The accusation of impiety 
 (ypa<p7i axre^eias) — the vagueness of which ad- 
 mitted almost any charge connected with reli- 
 gious innovations — belonged in a special manner 
 to this tribunal, though the charge was in some 
 cases heard before the court of the Heliastae. 
 The freethinking poet Euripides .stood in fear 
 of, and was restrained by, • the Areopagus 
 (Euseb. Prep. Evang. vi. 14 ; Bayle s. v. 
 Eurip.). Its proceeding in such cases was 
 sometimes rather of an admonitory than punitive 
 characte-. 
 
 Not le-ss influential was its moral and educa- 
 tienal power, Isocrates speaks of the care which 
 it took of gootl manners and good order (tyis 
 ilKWTijias, fvTa^las). Quintilian relates that the 
 Areojiagus condemned a boy for plucking out the 
 eyes of a quail — a proceeding which has been 
 both misunderstood and misrepresentetl (Penny 
 Cpclop. in voc), but wiiich its oiiginal narrator 
 
 ARETAS 
 
 approved, assigning no insufficient reason, namely 
 that the act was a sign of a cruel disposition, likelj 
 in advanceil life to lead to baneful actions : ' Id 
 sigrmm esse perniciosissimae mentis, niul;isqu« 
 malo futura; si adolevisset ' (Quint, v, 9). Tlie 
 coint exercised a salutary influence in general 
 over the Athenian youth, their educators and their 
 education. 
 
 Its financial position is not well understood ; 
 most probal)ly it varied more than any other part 
 of its atlministration with the changes which the 
 constitution of the city underwent. It may suf- 
 fice to mention, on the authority of Plutartih 
 (Themis, c, 10), that in the Persian war t}n 
 Areopagus had the merit of completing the num- 
 ber of men required Ibr the fleet, by paying eight 
 diachniee to each. 
 
 In the following works corroboration of the facts 
 stated in this article, and further details, with 
 discussions on doubtful jioints, may be foun<i : — 
 Meursius, Areopagus., sive de Se7uUu Areopaffitico, 
 in Tkes. Gron. t. v. p, 207 ; Sigonius, De Rep. 
 Ath. iii, 2. p, I56S ; De Can aye, Rcchcrches 
 stir I'Areopage, pp, 273-316; Mhn. de I' Acad, 
 des Inscr. t, x, ; Schede, De Areop. and Schwab 
 Num quod Areop. in plebiscila ant ecmjirmanda 
 aiit rejicicnda Jus exmciierit hgitimnm, Stutt. 
 1818 ; Meier, Von der Blutgcrichtsburkeit des 
 Areopag.; Mattliia, De Jud. .-ith. in Misc. Philol. 
 Krebs, de Ephetis. Notices on the sutjject may 
 also be found in the works of Tiitman, Hefi'ter, 
 Hudtwalcker, Wachsmuth, Pauly, and Winer. — • 
 
 J, R. B. 
 
 AREOPOLIS. [Ar; Aroer,] 
 
 ARETAS ('ApeVay; Arab, v.1^, v. Pocock, 
 
 jSpec. llisl. Arab. p. 58, or, in another form, 
 
 CJjU- - K-hin, Pococke, i. c, 71), 76, 77, 89), 
 
 the common name of several Arabian kings. 
 I, The first of whom we have any notice was a 
 contemporary of tlie Jewish high-jniest Jascii 
 and of Antiochus Epiphanes about b. c, 170 
 (2 Mace, v, 8). ' In the end. therefore, he (Jason ) 
 liatl an unhappy return, being accused before 
 Aretas, the, king of the Arabians' 2. Josephui 
 (Antiq. xiii. l.'i. 3) mentions an Aretas, king ol 
 the Arabians (called Obedas, '0;3e5ay, xiii. 13. 5), 
 contemporary with Alexander Janna;us (died b.c. 
 79) and his sons. After defeating Antioclius 
 Dionysus, he reigned over Coele-Syria, ' being 
 called to the government by those that held 
 Damascus (/c\j}9els els t^v apxhy ^^ tcD;' t^v 
 Aa/nacTKhv ix'^''"'''^^) ^Y ''eason of the hatred they 
 bore to Ptolemy Mennoeus' (Antiq. xiii. 15. 2). 
 He took jiart with Hyrcanus in his contest foi 
 the sovereignty with his brother Aristobulus, and 
 laid siege to Jerusalem, hut, on the approach oi 
 the Roman general Scanrus, he retreated to I'hi- 
 ladelphia (De Bell. Jud. i. 6. 3) Hyrcanus 
 and Aretas were pursued and defeated by Aris- 
 tobulus at a place called Papyron, and lost 
 al)o\e 6000 men. Three or four years after, 
 Scaurus, to whom Pompey had committed the 
 government of Cosle-Syria, invaded Petrasa, but 
 finding it dithcult to obtain provisions for hig 
 ai my, he consented to u itlidraw on the offer ol 
 300 talents from Aretas (Joseph. Antiq. xiv. 5. 1). 
 Havercamp has given an engraving of a denarius 
 intended to commemorate this event, on vvliicD 
 Aretas appears in a su^jplicatiug posture, and
 
 ARG.\Z. 
 
 taking hold of a cameVs bridle witl: liis IcO 
 hard, and with his ri;j;ht hand pi-esenting a 
 branch of the fraid<incerise-ti«e, witli lliis in- 
 scrii.hon, M. SCAVRVS. KX. S. C, and be- 
 neath, REX ARMTAH (Joseph. De Bell. Jud. 
 i. 8. IV 3. Aietas, whose name was origin- 
 
 ARIMATHKA. 
 
 209 
 
 ally yTIr.eas, succeeded Ohodas QOP6^u.s). He 
 was the f'athei-in-law of Herod Antipas. Tlie 
 'after made pniposals of marriage to tlie wife 
 of liis half-brother Herod-Piiilip, Herodias, tlie 
 daughter of Arislobiiliis tlieir brother, and the 
 sister of Agr:p])a the Great. (On the apparent 
 discrepancy between tlie Evangelists and Jose- 
 nliiis, in reference to the name of the liusliand of 
 Herodias, see Lardner's Credibility, die. pt. i. 
 b. ii. ch. 5; Works, ed. IRaf), i. 40S-Jl(i.) In 
 consequence of this, the daughter of Aretas re- 
 turned to her father, and a war (whicli liad ijeen 
 fomented by jiievious uisjnites about the limits 
 of tiieir res])ective countries) ensued between 
 Aretas and Herod. Tlie army of the latter was 
 totally destroyed; and on his sending an account 
 of his disaster to Rome, tiie emperor immediately 
 ordered Vitellius to bring Aretas prisoner alive, 
 or, if dead, to send his head (Joseph. Antiq. xviii. 
 5. ! ). But while Vitellius was on his march 
 to Petra news arrived of the death of Tiberius, 
 ii])on which, after administering the oath of alle- 
 giance to his troops, he dismissed them to winter- 
 quarters and returned to Rome. It must have 
 been at this juncture that Aretas took possession 
 of Damascus, and placed a governor in it {idydp- 
 XV^) ^vith a garrison. For a knowledge of this 
 fact we are indebted to the apostle Paul. ' In 
 Damascus tlie governor under Aretas the king 
 kept the city of the Damascenes with a garrison, 
 desirous to ajijnehend me; and through a window 
 in a basket was I let down by the wall, and 
 escaped his hands' (2 Cor. .\i. 32, compared with 
 Acts ix. 24). We are tlius furnished with a 
 chronological mark in the Apostle's history. From 
 Gal. i. IS, it appears that Paul went up to Jeru- 
 salem from Damascus tliree years after his con- 
 version. The emperor Tiberius died in a.d. 37 ; 
 and as the allaiis of Arabia were settled in the 
 second year of Caligula, Damascus was then most 
 Tir.ibably reoccupied by the Romans. If, then, 
 Paul's flight took place in a.d. 39, his conversion 
 must iiave occurred in a..d. 3() (Neamler's His- 
 torif of the Plantiiig of the Christian Church, 
 I. 107, English trans. ; ' Lardner's Credibility, ^c. 
 Supplement, ch. xi. ; Works, ed. IS35, v. 497). — 
 
 J. E. R 
 ARGAZ (TJ')X ; Sept. e^ixa), the receptacle, 
 called in tiie Authorized Version, a * coti'er' 
 (1 Sam. vi. R, 11, 15), whicli the Philistir.es 
 placed beside the ark when they sent it home, and 
 in which they ilejiosited the golden mice and eme- 
 rods that formed their trespass-odering. Gese- 
 nius and Lee agree in regariling it as the same, 
 
 or nearly the same thing, as the Arabian i\\c^j^ 
 •Hjaza. which Jauhari describes as *a kind of wal- 
 
 let, into which stones care init : it is hung io oii« 
 of the two sides of the haiidaj [a litter borne by a 
 camel or mule] when it inclines towanls the 
 other.' Dr. Lee, however, thinks thai the Hebit'w 
 word denotes the wallet itself; whereas (iesenius 
 is of oi'inioM that it means a ajffer or small box, 
 to which, from its analogous use, llie same name 
 was applif<l. 
 
 ARGOH (ai3'}N ; Sept. 'Apydfi), a district in 
 Bashan, east of the Lake of Gennesareth, which 
 was given jo the hal(-tiibe of Manasseli (Dent. iii. 
 4, 13 ; 1 Kings iv. 13J. The name Argob may 
 be traced in Rayiib or Ragabu, a city of the dis- 
 tiicl (Joseph. Antiq. xiii. 18. 5; Miahiia, tit. AJe- 
 nuclioth, viii. 3), uhicU Eusebius ]ilace.s 15 Roman 
 miles west of Geiasa. Burckliardt supjiosed that 
 he had found the ruins of this city in those of El 
 Hossn, a remarkable but aiiandoned jiosition on 
 tiie east side of the lake (Syria, p. '27d); but Mr. 
 Bankes conceives this El Hossn to have l»een the 
 site of Gamala {Quarterly Itevicw, xxvi. 3^^^ i. 
 
 1. ARIEL (W'nX ; Sejit. 'Api-f,\), a we; d 
 meaning ' lion of God,' and coriectly enough ren- 
 dered by ' lion-like.' in 2 Sam. xxiii. 20 ; I (.'liron. 
 xi. 22. It was ajijilied as an e]iitliet of distinction 
 to liold and warlike persons, as among the Ara- 
 bians, who suinati.ed Ali ' The Lion of God." 
 
 2. ARIEL. The same word is used as a lo- 
 cal ])n)]ier name in Isa. xxix..l, 2, ap];lied to 
 Jerusalem — ' as victorious under (rod " — says Dr. 
 Lee ; and in Ezek. xliii. 15, 16, to the altar of 
 buriit-oH'erings. Here Ge.senius and others, unsa- 
 tisfied with the Hebiew, resort to the Arabic, and 
 
 find the Ari in Sj] Jire-/warth, which, with 7X 
 
 God, supjilies what they consiiler a moie satis- 
 factory signification. It is thus applied, in the 
 first place, to the altar, and then to Jerusalem as 
 containing the altar. 
 
 ARIAIATHEA, the liirth-placeof the wea'thy 
 Jo.se|)li, in whose sepulchre our Lord was l.iid 
 (Matt, xxvii. 57 ; John xix. 3S). Luke (xxiii. 
 51) calls it 'a city of the Jews;" which may be 
 
 exjdaiiied by 1 Mace. xi. 34, where King Deme- 
 trius thus writes — ' We have ralitieil unto them 
 [tlie Jews] the borders of Juda-a, with t.ie three 
 governments of .Viihei-eum, Lydda, and Ruma- 
 thiiim. that are added unto Judaea from the coun- 
 try of Samaria." Eus«l)ius (Onomast. s. v.) nnil 
 Jerome (Epit. Paulce) regard the Arimathea of 
 Joseph as the same iila<e as the Ramailiaim of 
 Samuel, and ]ila(e it near Lydda or Di«)s|)oViii. 
 Hence it luis by some lieen identilied with the ex- 
 isting Riunleh. l,ecau.se 1 f the similarity of the
 
 21U 
 
 AlUMATHEA. 
 
 Alii MATH i: A. 
 
 name Tu that of Ramali (of wLicli R.imatliaim is 
 ihe ilual); and because it ig near I,.yil(la or Dioe- 
 iwjlis. Profossor Roliinson, however, disputes this 
 cosicliisioti on the followiijg grounds — 1. that 
 Al)ulfeda alletfes Ranileh to have been built after 
 th? lime of Moliainmed, or abi/Ut a.m. 716, by 
 Suleiman Abd-al Malik ; 2. that Ramah and 
 Riimleh have not the same si^'nification ; 3. that 
 Ramleli is in a jjlain, while Ramali imjjlies a 
 town on a hill. To this it may be answered, 
 that Abulfeda's statement may mean no more 
 ;han tliat Suleiman rebuilt (lie town, which had 
 previously been in ruins, just as Relioboani and 
 others are said to liave built many towns which 
 had existed lon,,^ before their time ; and that the 
 Moslems seldom t)ui1t towns but on old sites and 
 out of old materials ; «) that tliere is not a town 
 in all Palestine which is with certainty known to 
 Iiave been founde<l by them. In such cases they 
 retained the old names, or others reseml>ling 
 them in sound, if not in signification, which 
 may account tor the dilierence between Riimah 
 and Ramleh. Neiilier can we assume that a 
 place called Ramah could not be in a plain, 
 unless we are ready to {irove tliat Hebrew proper 
 names were always signilicant and appropriate. 
 Tills they probably were njt. They were so in 
 early times, when towns were few ; but not even- 
 tually, when towns were numerous, and took 
 tiieir names arbitrarily IVaiti one another without 
 re,rard to local circumstances. Fmther, if Ari- 
 mathea, by being idenfitieci witii Ramali, was 
 necesjarilv in the mountains, it could not have 
 been ' near Lydda,' from which the mountains are 
 seven miles distant. This matter, however, be- 
 l.)ngs more jiroperly tn another ]ilace [Ramah ; 
 R.VMATKAm-Zoi'HiM] ; ATid it is alluded to 
 here merely to show that Dr. Robinson's fibjec- 
 tions have not entirely destroyed the grounds for 
 fjllo«-ing the usual rourse of describing Ramleh 
 as representing the ancient Arimathea. 
 
 Ramleh is inN.lat 3l-^59',and E.long.35°2S', 
 8 miles S.E. from Joppa,and 24 miles N.VV. by W. 
 from Jerusalem. It lies in the tine undulating 
 iilain of Sharon, uiion the eastern side of a liroad 
 iow swell rising from a fertile though sandy plain. 
 Like Graza and J.'ffa, this town is surrounded by 
 olive-groves and gardens of vegetal)les and deli- 
 cious fruits. Occasional palm-trees are also seen, 
 as well as the kharob and the sycamore. The 
 streets are few • the houses are of stone, and many 
 of them large and well built. There are live 
 rno5ques, two or more of which aie said to have 
 once been Christian churches ; and there is here 
 one of the largest Latin convents in Palestine. 
 The place is supjwsed to contain about 3000 inha- 
 bitants, of wl'om two-thirds are Moslems, and tiie 
 rest Christians, chietly of the Greek chiMch, witii a 
 few Armenians. The inhabitants carry on some 
 trade in cotton and soap. The great caravan- 
 road between Egypt and Damascus, Smyrna, 
 fcnd Constantinople passes through Ramleli, a. 
 well as *he most frequented road for European 
 pilgrims and travellers lietween Joyjpa and Jeru- 
 salem (Robinson, iii. 27 ; Ra.inier, p. 21.5). The 
 tower, of wiiich a figure is here given, is the most 
 conspi'-uous object in or about the city. It 
 «tands a little to the west of the town, on the 
 highest part of tlic swell of land ; and is in tiie 
 miiisf of a large ([uadrangiilar fnclosuie, which 
 •*iL'' much tiie appearance of has iiig once bciii a 
 
 splendid khan. The tower is wholly isolated, 
 whatever luay bave been its original deiitiiiatioD 
 
 It is about 120 feet in heiglit, of Saraceipc 
 architecture, square, and built with well-hewn 
 stone. Tlie windows are of various forms but all 
 have pointed arches. The corners of the towei 
 are supported by tall slender buttresses; while 
 the sides taper upwards by several stories to the 
 top. It is of solid masonry, except a narrow 
 staircase within, winding up to an external gal- 
 lery, whicii is alst) of stone, and is carried quit3 
 round the tower a few feet below the ton (Roljin- 
 son, iii. 32). In the absence of any Historical 
 evidence that the enclosure was a kiian. Dr. R(>- 
 iiinson resorts to the Moslem account of its having 
 belonged to a ruined mosque. Tlie tower it>e!< 
 bears the date 718 a.h. (ad. 1310), and an 
 Arabian autlior (Mf'jr-ed-D!n ) rejj rts the ciun- 
 jiletion at Ramleh, in that year, of a niinaiet unique 
 I'or iti loftiness and grandeur, by tiie sultan :if
 
 ARISTARCHUS. 
 
 ARITHMETIC. 
 
 211 
 
 Egypt, N;uli- Moliamtiicd ibn Kelawan (Robin- 
 loii, iii. aS; also Volnej', ii. 2Sl). Among tlie 
 piatiral ions which sun-ound the tiwn occur, at 
 pvery step, dry ■vvells, cisterns fallen in, and vast 
 vav.lied reservoirs, which sliow that the cit^' must 
 in fanner times have heeii upwards of a league 
 ttTid a half in extent (\ohiey, ii. 2R0) 
 
 Tiie town is tirst mentioned under its pR-sent 
 name by the monk Bernard, ahout a u. 870. 
 About A.D. 1150 the Arabian geographer Ethisi 
 (ed. Jaubert, p. 339) mentions Ranileh and Jeru- 
 salem as tiie two principal cities of Palestine. Tiie 
 first Ciiisaders on their apjiroach found liamleh 
 deserted by its inliabitants ; and with it and 
 Lyd<bi they endowed the first Latin bislio])iic in 
 Palestine, which took its ilenominaiion from the 
 tatter city. From the situatitm of Ranileh be- 
 tween that city and the coast, it was a post of 
 nmch imjxirtance to the Crusaders, and they held 
 jxissession of it generally while Jerusalem was iu 
 their hands, and long afterwaixls. IrvA.o. I'ldG it 
 was finally taken from the Christians by the Sul- 
 tan Bibai's. Subsequently it is often mentioned 
 in the accounts of travellers and pilgiims, most 
 of whom rested theie on their way to Jeiiisalem. 
 It seems to liave declined very fast from the im.e 
 that it came into tJie possession of the Crusaders. 
 Benjamin of Tudela (itiu. p. 79, e<l, Asber), who 
 was there in x.o. 1 173, speaks of it as having l;een 
 formerly a considerable city. Belon {Ohservat. 
 p. 31 1), in I J 17, mentions it as almost deserted, 
 scarcely twelve houses being inliabited, and the 
 fields mostly unfilled. This desertion must have 
 CKcuned after 14S7; for, Le Grant Voyaged^ 
 Ilierasfilem, fol. xiv., sjjeaks of it as a peopled 
 town (though jjartly ruined), and of the ' seig- 
 neur de Rama" as an important jjersonage. By 
 1674 it had somewhat revived, but it was still 
 rather a large unwalled village than a city, with- 
 out any g<wd houses, the governor himself being 
 niiseiaiily lodged (Nau, Voyage A^ouveau, liv. i. 
 cb. 6). A century later it remained much in the 
 same state, tlie governor teing still ill-lodged, 
 and the pojjulation scarcelj' exceeding 200 tiimi- 
 lies (Volnej', ii. 220). Its recent state must, 
 jiierefore, indicate a degree of comjjaiative pro- 
 speritv, the growth of the present century. 
 
 ARISTARCHUS QApl<7Tapxos), a taithful 
 tdherent of St. Paul, whose name i>ejjeatedly oc- 
 curs in the Acts and Epistles (Acts xix. 29; 
 KX. 4; xxvii. 2; Col. iv. 10; Philem. 21). He 
 ivas a native of Thessalonica, arxl became the 
 comjianion of St. Paul, whom be accomjianied to 
 Ephesus, where he was seized and nearly killed 
 in the tumult raised by the silversmiths. He 
 left that city with the Apostle, and accomjianied 
 him in his subsequent journeys, even wiien taken 
 IS a prisoner to Roine : indeed, Arisfarchus was 
 him^elt'sent thither as a prisoner, or became such 
 while there, for Paul calls him his ' lellow- 
 prisoner' (Col. iv. 10). Tiie traditions of the 
 Givek church represent Arisfarchus as bishop of 
 Apaniea in Plirygia, and allege that he continued 
 to accompany Paul after their liberation, and 
 was at length beheaded along with him at Rome 
 in the time of Nero. The Roman martyrologies 
 make liim bishop of Thessalonica. But little 
 reliance is tu iie placed on accounts which make 
 a bishop of almost every one who liapjx'ns to be 
 named in the Acts and Epistles ; and, in the case 
 •f Aristai'chus, it Is little likely tliat one who 
 
 constantly ti-avelled about with St. Paul <xct» 
 ciscd any stationary oflice. 
 
 ARISTOBULL'S {'ApiffriPouKos^, a {x-rson 
 named by I'aul in R"ni. xvi. 10, wlioi-e he send* 
 salutations to liis houscliold. He is not hiinstelf 
 saluted; hence he may not have Ijion a betievei, 
 or lie may iiave been abs«'nt or (b-ad. Nntbir.g 
 certain is known lesjKH^ting him. But tradition 
 has not neglected him : it represents him as bro- 
 ther of Barnabas, and one (.f the seventy <liscipl«, 
 and alleges tliat he was ordainocV a bishop by 
 Barnabas, or by Paul, whom lie foHowe*! in hi* 
 travels; and tliat he was eventually sent into 
 Britain, wiiei>e he laboured with niixcli succeds, 
 and where iie at Ivngth died, 
 
 Aristobulus is a (jreek name, adopted by tue 
 Romans, and in very common use an ong them. 
 It was also adopted by the Jews, and was boitw 
 by several i)ersiins in tlie Maccaha'an an<i He- 
 rodian (amilies — viz. 1. Akis'iohuj.us, son and 
 successor of Jotin Hyrcanus [Maccahkksj. 
 2. Auisioaui.us, second son of .Alexander J an- 
 naeus, and j'ounger brother of Hyicanus, vvith 
 whom he disjiutetl the succession liV aims [M.tc- 
 CABKiias]. 3. AuisroBui.L's, grundsiiu of the pie- 
 ceding, and tlie last of the Maccabwan family, 
 who was murdei-ed by the contrivance o(' Heroil 
 the Great, h.c. 31 [Maccxbeks]. 4. .\itisTO- 
 BUi.us, son of Ileiod the Great by Mariamne 
 [Herodi.vn Famii. :]. 
 
 ARITHMETIC, oi, as the word. derive<l fii.in 
 the Gieek apt^jtiur, signifies, the science of iiuui- 
 liers or reckoning, was unquesti(.nably jHuctised aa 
 an ajt in the dawn of civilization: suice to put 
 things, or their symbols, together (addition i, anil 
 to take one thing from another (subtraction ;, must 
 have been coeval with the eiuliest elVovfs of the 
 human mind ; and what are termed multiplication 
 and division are only abbreviated foims of addi- 
 tion and subtraction. The origin, houever, of the 
 earliest and most necessary of the aits and sciences 
 is lost in the shades of antiquity, since it aiose 
 long before the period when men began to take 
 S)!ecific notice and make some kind of record of 
 their discoveries and pursuits. In the absence ot 
 positive information we seem authorized in reliei- 
 ring tl»e first knowledge of arithmetic to the East. 
 From India, Chaldaea, Phaniicia. and Egypt, the 
 science passe«i to the Greeks, whi. extended its 
 laws, improved its processes, a. id widened its 
 sjihere. To what extent the Orientals carried 
 their acquaintance with arithmetic cannot lie 
 determined. The greatest discovery in this dejiait- 
 ment of the mathematics, namely, the establish- 
 ment of our system of ciphers, or of figures consi- 
 dered as distinct from the letters of the alpliabet, 
 belongs uiuloulitedl y not to Arabia, iis is generally 
 su]i])osed. Iiut to the lemote East, probably India. 
 It is to lie regretted that the name of the di,* 
 coveier is unknown, for the invention must I* 
 reckoned among the greatest of iiunian acliieve- 
 meuts. Our numerals were made known to the.se 
 western [jaits by the Araliians, who, though they 
 were nothing more tli;ui the medium of tnuismis- 
 sion, have enjoyed the lionour of giving them their 
 name. These numerals wcie unknown to tli« 
 Greeks, wlio made use of the lelteis of tlie alplia 
 liet for aiitlimetical purposes. 
 
 The Hebrews were not a scientific, but a reli- 
 gious and practical nation. VVliat they borrowd 
 hoax others of the arts of life they used witluiul
 
 il2 
 
 ARK, NOAH'S. 
 
 KirrDuiuliiig it with theoiy or expanding and 
 fr.iiriiu^^- it iiitii a system. So with arithmetic, by 
 tliem called HJD, I'lom a word signifying to de- 
 teniiiiie, limit, iuid thence to number. Of their 
 knowledge of this science little is known more 
 than may be fairly inferred from the pursuits and 
 trades whicii they carried on, for the successiul 
 prosecution of which some skill at least in its 
 iimpler processes must nave been absolutely ne- 
 cessary ; and the large amounts which ajipear here 
 and there in the sacred books serve to show that 
 fhcir acquaintance with the art of reckoning was 
 C(,nsiderable. Even in fractions they were not 
 inexperienced (Gesenius, Lehrgeb. p. 701). For 
 figures, the Jews, aftir the Babylonish exile, made 
 use of tlie letters (;f tlie alphabet, as appeals from 
 tlie inscriptions on tiie so-called Samaritan coins 
 (Eckhel, Doctr. Num. i. iii. 4GS) ; and it is not 
 unlikely that the ancient Hebrews did the same, 
 as well as the Giee'^s, who borrov/ed their alphabet 
 from the Phuenicians, neighbuujisof the Israelites, 
 and employed it instead of numerals. — J. R. B. 
 
 ARK, NOAH'S {7\-17\ tcbah ; Arab, ti^'^b; 
 
 Sept. Ki^o)r6s, a chest; Jose))h. Xa^vai,, a coffer ; 
 Valg. area, Gen. vi. li). The v/ord here em- 
 ployed is lUlferent from that (JTIN aron) which 
 is applied to the ' ark ' of tlie covenant and other 
 receptacles whicli we know to have been chests 
 or colfers. But it is the same that is applied to 
 the 'aik" in which Moses was hid (Exod. ii. 3), 
 the only other part of Scripture in wliich it oc- 
 curs. In tlie latter passage tiie Sepfuagint renders 
 it 61^7), a ship, in tlie former, Kifiwros, a chest. 
 Tlie truth seems to be, that {nS denotes any kind 
 of cliest or coffer: while the exclusive applica- 
 tion of n^n to the vessels of Noah and of 
 Moses, would suggest the probability that it was 
 restricted to such chests or arks as were intended 
 to float upon the water, of whatever description. 
 Tlie identity of the name with that of the wicker 
 liasket in which Moses was exposed on the Nile, 
 has led some to suppose that the ark of Noali 
 was also of wicker-work, or rather was wattled 
 and smeared over with bitumen (Auth. Vers. 
 ' pitch, ' Gen. vi. 14). This is not impossible, 
 geeing that vessels of considerable burthen are 
 thus constructed at the present day ; but there is 
 Wo suflicient authority for carrying the analogy to 
 this extent. 
 
 Vast la'tA.ur and ingenuity have been employe*! 
 by various writers, in the attempt to determine 
 the form of Noali's ark and the arrangement of its 
 parts. The success has not been equal to the 
 exertion ; for, on comparing the few simple facts 
 in the Scripture narrative, every one feels how 
 slight positive data theie are for the minute de- 
 icnptioTis and elaborate representations which 
 such wi iters have given. That form of the ark 
 which repeate.l pictorial representations have 
 lendered familiar— a kin;l of house in a kind of 
 Soat — has nut only no foundation in Scrijiture, 
 but is contrary to reason. Tiie form thus given 
 to it is fitted for progression and for cutting the 
 waVwS ; whereas the aik of Noah was really des- 
 tined to fioat idly upon the waters, witliout any 
 Ctiier motion than tiial which it received from 
 them. If we examine the j)assage iiiGen. vi. 14-Ki, 
 we can only draw from it tlie conclusion that the 
 ark was not a boat or ship; but, as Professor 
 Mobinson describes it, ' a bui iding in tli« form of a 
 
 ARK, NOAIIS. 
 
 parallelogram, 300 cubits long, 50 cubits broad, 
 and 30 cubits high. Tlie length of the cobit, in 
 the great variety of measures tliat Iwre this name^ 
 it is impossible to ascertain and useless to con- 
 jecture. So far as the natne affords any evi- 
 dence, it also g(.es to show that the ark of Noah 
 was not a regularly-built vessel, but merely in- 
 tended to float at large upon the waters. We 
 may, therefore, probably with justice, regard it aa 
 a large, oblong, floating house, witli a roof eithei 
 flat or only sliglitly inclined. It was con- 
 structed with three stories, and had a door in the 
 side. There is no mention of windows in tlie 
 side, but above, i. e. prol)aljly in tlie flat roof, 
 where Noah was commanded to make them of a 
 cubit in size (Gen. vi. 16). That this is the 
 meaning of the passage seems apparent from Gen. 
 viii. 13, where Noah removes the covering of 
 the ark in order to ascertain whether the ground 
 was dry ; a laboiu- unnecessary surely, had there 
 been windows in the sides of the ark ' (Add; to 
 Calmet'a Diet. a. v. Auk). 
 
 The puipose of this ark was, tb preserve cer- 
 tain persons and animals from the Deluge with 
 whicli God intended to overwhelm the land, in 
 punishment for man's iniquities. The persons 
 weie eight — Noah and his wife, with his three 
 sons and their wives (Gen. vii. 7 ; 2 Pet. ii. 5). 
 The animals were, one pair of every 'unclean' 
 animal, and seven pairs of all that were ' clean.' 
 By ' clean,' we understand tit, and by ' unclean,' 
 unfit for food or for sacrifice. Of birds tliere 
 were seven pairs (Gen. vii. 2, -i). Those who 
 have written professedly and largely on the sub- 
 ject, ha»e been at great pains to provide for all 
 the existing species of animals in the ark of 
 Noah, showing how they might be distributed, 
 fed, and otherwise provided for. But tliey are 
 very far from having cleared the matter of al! 
 itsdifllculties; wliich are much gi eater than they, 
 in their general ignorance of natural history, were 
 aware of. These ditliculties, however, chiefly 
 arise from tlie assiimjition that the species of 
 all the earth were collected in the ark. The 
 number of such species has been vastly underrated 
 by these writers — partly from ignorance, and 
 partly from the desire to limit the number for 
 which they imagined they required to ))rovide,. 
 They have usually satisfied themselves with a 
 provision for three or four hundred species at 
 most. ' But of the existing mammalia consi- 
 derably more than one tliousand species are 
 known ; of birds, fully five thousand •, of reptiles, 
 very few kinds of which can live in water, two 
 thousand ; and tlie researches of travellers and 
 naturalists are making frequent and most inte^ 
 resting additions to the number of these and all 
 other classes. Of insects (using the word in tla* 
 popular .sense) 'he number of species is immense j 
 to say one hundred thousand would hemodeiate : 
 each has its appropriate habitation and food, and 
 these are necessary to its life ; and the larg:ar 
 numiier could not live in water. Also the innu- 
 merable millions upon millions of animalcules 
 most be {)rovidcd for; for they have all their ap- 
 propriate and diversitied places and circunistanceg 
 of existence' (Dr. J. Pye Smith, (hi the Relation 
 betwffn the Holy Scriptures and some Parts oj 
 Geoloffi^nt Science, p. 135). Nor do these num- 
 bers i'orm the only difficulty; for, as the same 
 writer observes ; — ' All land animals have frfi»
 
 ARK, NOAH'S. 
 
 gcugrapliu al regions, to wtiicti their constituiionul 
 natures are curigenial, and many ciiuld not live 
 ill any other situation. VVe cannot represent to 
 ourselves the idea of tiieir being lirought into one 
 small sjK)t, from the (wlar regions, the torrid 
 zone, ami all tiie other climates of Asia, Africa, 
 Euroj)e, America, Australia, and tiie tlioiisands of 
 islands, their preservation and provision, and 
 the final disjiosal of them, without hringing up 
 the idea of miracles more stupendous than any 
 wliich are re< orded in Scripture.' 
 
 Tliese are some of tiie dillicullies wliich arise 
 Ml the supposition tliat all tlie species of animals 
 existing in the worhi were assemhled to<,'ether 
 and contained in tlie ark. And if the object, as 
 usually assumed, was to preserve tiie species of 
 creatuies which the Ueluge would otlierwise have 
 destroyed, tlie provision ibr beasts and birds only, 
 must have beej altogether inadequate. What 
 then would liave become of the countless reptiles, 
 insects, and animalcules to which we liave already 
 referred'? and it is not clear tiiat some provision 
 must not also iiave been necessary for fishes and 
 shell animals, many of wliicli cannot live in fresh 
 water, while others cannot live in salt. 
 
 The difficulty of assembling in one spot, and 
 of providing for in the ailc, the various mammalia 
 and birds' alone, even without including the other- 
 wise essential ))rovision fur reptiles, insects, and 
 fishes, is quite sufHclent to suggest some error in 
 the current belief We are to consider the dif- 
 ferent kinds of accommodation and foo<l which 
 would be required for animals of such diH'erent 
 habits and climates, and the necessary [irovision 
 for ventilation and for cleansing the stables or 
 dene. And if so much ingenuity has been re- 
 quired in devising arrangements (i)r the compa- 
 ratively small number of sjiecies which the writers 
 on the ark have been willing !o admit into it; 
 what provision can be made for the immensely 
 larger number wliieli, under "^he supposed condi- 
 tions, would really have required its shelter? 
 
 There seems no way of meeting these difliculties 
 but by adopting the suggestion of Bishop Stilling- 
 fleet, approved by Matthew Poole.Dr. J. PyeSmith, 
 Le Clerc, Roseimiuller, and others, namely, that, as 
 the oliject of the Deluge was to sweep man from 
 the eaith, it did not extend beyond that region of 
 the earth which man then inhabited, and that only 
 the animals of that region were preserved in the 
 ark. Tlie question, as regards the universality of 
 the Deluge, will be considered elsewhere [De- 
 luge] ; and for the portion of the matter involved 
 in the jnesent inquiry, we must be content to pro- 
 duce the sentiments of BishojD Stillingfleet, who 
 wrote in plain soberness long before geology was 
 known as a science, and when, theiefore, those 
 discoveries were altogether unthought of by whicli, 
 in our day, sucli warm controversies have been 
 excited. Tlie bishop expresses his belief that the 
 Flood was universal as to mankind, and that all 
 men, except those jireserved in the ark, were de- 
 stroyed ; but he sees no ei'idence from Scripture 
 that the whole earth was then inhabited; he does 
 not think that it can ever be proved to have been 
 lo; and he asks, what reason there can be to ex- 
 tend the Flood beyond the occasiiin of it? He 
 grants that, as far as the Flood extended, all 
 the animals were destroyed ; ' but,' he adds, ' I 
 •ee no reason to extend the destruction of these 
 beyond tiie compass of the earth which men 
 
 ARK, NOAHS. 
 
 SIS 
 
 then inhabited; the punishment of the !>«>a»M 
 wiLs occasioned by, and could not but be con- 
 comitant with, the destruction of mankind. But 
 (the occasion of the Deluge being the sin of 
 man, who was punished in the be;ists that we»e 
 destroyed for his sake, as well as in himself^ 
 where the occasion was* not. as where there weue 
 animals and no men, there seems no necessity tiir 
 exteniling the Flood thither " (OW(/i«es Sacrm, 
 h. iii. ch. iv.). The bishop further arg«es that 
 the reason for jjreserving living creatures in the 
 ark was, that there might be a stock of the tame 
 and domesticated animals that snuuld be inmie- 
 diately ' serviceable for man after the lliod : 
 which was ceitainly the main thing looked at in 
 the preservation of them in the ark, that men 
 might have all of them ready for use alter the 
 Flood; which could not have been, had not tlie 
 several kinds been preserved in the ark, although 
 we suppose tiiem not destroyed in all parts of the 
 worltl.' 
 
 As Noah was the progenitor of all the nations 
 of the earth, and as the ark was the second ciadle 
 of the huivan race, we might e\\yeci lo find in all 
 nations trailitions and reports more or less distinct 
 respecting him, the ark in which he was saved, 
 and the Deluge in general. Accordingly no na- 
 tion is known in which such traditions have not 
 been found. They have been very industriously 
 brought together by Banier, Bryant, Faber, and 
 other mythologists [Deluge; Noah]. Our pre- 
 sent concern is only with the aik. And as it a|i- 
 pears tiiat an ark, that is, a boat or client, was 
 carried about with great ceienicny in most ol' the 
 ancient mysteries, and occupied an eminent sta- 
 tion in the liolj' places, it has with mucli lea- 
 son been concluded that this was originally in- 
 tended to represent the aik of Noah, which 
 eventually came tube regarded with suixMstitioua 
 reverence. On this jxiint the historical anil my- 
 thological testimonies (as collected in the autiors 
 to whom we have referre<l) are very clear and 
 conclusive. The tradition of a deluge, by which 
 the race of man was swept from the face of (he 
 earth, has been traced among the Clialdivans. 
 Egyptians, Phtcriicians, Assyrians, Persians, 
 Greeks, Romans, Goths, Druids, Cliini"-c, Hin- 
 doos, Burmese, Mexicans, Peruvians, Bia/ilians, 
 Nicaraguans, the inhabitants of Weslnii Cale- 
 donia, and the islanders of tlie Pacific; and 
 among most of them also the belief has pievailed 
 that certain individuals were preserved in an aik, 
 ship, boat, or raft, to re^ilenish the desolated eartU 
 with inhabitants. Nor are these traditions un- 
 corroborated by coins and monuments of stone. 
 Of the latter there are the sculptures of Egypt 
 and of India ; and, as hinted in a jivevioiw 
 article [Ai.TAit], it is not unlikely that those «f 
 the monuments called Druidical, uliich (war the 
 name of kist-vaens, and in which the stones are 
 
 disposed in the form of a chest or house, were in- 
 tended as memorials of the ark. At least, t hM 
 been shown by Da\is (^Celtic Rescarcfus) that
 
 214 
 
 ARK. NOAH'S. 
 
 ARK OF THE COVENANT. 
 
 ►lie arV. van not only typified among the Celts by 
 rafta ami islands, but by a stone ark or chest, 
 whicb is precisely the meaning of kist (chest) 
 
 Being anxious to touch as lightly as possible 
 u]!(>n the vast and curious subject of Arkite 
 worship, we shall conlinet wr niedallic illus- 
 tiatiofts to the two iamous medals of Apamea. 
 Tljcre were six cities of thi; name, of wliich the 
 most celeljrated was that of Syria; next to if, in 
 ini))i)rfance, was the one in Phiygia, called also 
 KttkoTos, Kibof OS, w\iic\i, as we iiavc seen, means 
 an aik or hollow vessel. This latter city was built 
 on the river Mavsyas; and there seems to have been 
 a no'ion that the aik rested on the adjoining hills 
 of Olseiiae : and the Sibylline oracles, wherever 
 thev were writ ten. alw include these bills under tlie 
 name of Ararat, and mention the same tradition. 
 The medals in question l)elong, the one ti> the elder 
 Philip, and the other to Pertinax. In the former 
 it is extremely interesting to observe that on the 
 front of the ark is the name of Noah, NilE, in 
 
 QreeK characters. The designs on these medals 
 corres))ond remarkably, although tiie legends some- 
 what vary. In both we j)erceive the ark Hoating 
 911 tlie water, containing tlie patriarch and his 
 wife, tlic dove on wing, the olive-branch, and tiie 
 raven per<;heil en the aik. These medals also 
 repiesent Noah and his wife on terra Jir ma, in the 
 attitude of rendering thanks for their safety. On 
 the ])aimel of the ark, in the coin of Perlmax, 
 is trie word NHTX^N, perhaps a provincialism for 
 tirjiTo?. ' ;in island," or Ntco, ' to revive." On the 
 exergue of tliesiiuie medal we read distinctly AriA- 
 MEilN, as we <lo also in tliat of the other, the first 
 syllable terminating the first line. Tiie genume- 
 ness of these medals has bi»r. established beyond 
 all (juesrion by tiie researches of Bryant and the 
 rriiical ins|«otion of Abbe Bartlielemy. There 
 ts anotiier mecial, struck in lioaour of the enijieror 
 Hadrian which bears the inscription AIlAMEflN 
 
 KIBilTOS MAP22IA, 'theark and the maisya* 
 
 of the Apameiuis." The coincidences whici 
 these medals oiler are at least exce«:dingly cu- 
 rious; and they are scarcely less illustrative of 
 the prevailing beliet"to wliich we are referring, if^ 
 as some sup|H>se, the figures rejiresented are those 
 of Deucalion and Pyrrha. 
 
 .'\RK OF THE COVENANT OPS ; Sept 
 and New Test. ki&(ijt6s). The word here useo 
 for ark is, as already ex])laineil, different frorp ' ' 
 that which is ajipliel to the ark of Noah. It is 
 the common name for a chest or cofi'er, whether 
 applie<i to the ark in the taliernacle, to a coflin, 
 to a mummy-chest fGen. 1. 26), or to a cl.est for 
 money (2 Kings xii. 9, 10). Our word ark lias 
 the same meaning, being derived from the Latin 
 area, a chest. The distinction between aron and 
 the present word has already been suggestefl. The 
 sacred chest is distinguished from othei's as 
 
 Wrh^ piwS the ' ark of God ' (1 Sam. iii. 3) : 
 nnnn piX ' ark of the covenant ' (,bish. iii. i\) : 
 and nnyn piX 'ark of the law' i^Exod. xxv. 
 22). This ark was a kind of che.st, i/f an olilong 
 shajie, made of shittim (acacia) wood, a cubit 
 and a half broatl and high, two cubits long, 
 and covered on all sides with the purest gold. 
 It was ornamentetl on its upjier surfice with a 
 border or rim of gold ; and on each of the two 
 sides, at equal distances from the fo]i, were two 
 gold rings, in which were placed (to remain there 
 perpetually ) the gold-covered [loles by which the 
 ark was carried, and which confijnied with if 
 affer it was deposited in the tabernacle. Tlie lid 
 or cover of the aik (.mSD, IXaaTiipiov, ivlOri^o.'} 
 was of the same length and bicadfh, and made oi 
 the purest gold. Over if, at tiie two extremities, 
 were two cherubim, with their fares turnetl towards 
 each other, and inclined a little towards flie lid 
 (otherwise called the mercy-scut). Tiielr wings, 
 which were sjiread out o\ er the top of ttie ark, 
 formed the throne of God, the King of Israel, 
 while the ark itself was his i'ootstool (^Exotl. xxv. 
 10-22; xxxvii. 1-9). 
 
 Tliis ark was the most sacred object among 
 the Israelites : it was dejiosited in the innermost 
 and holiest part of tiie tabernacle, called 'the 
 holy of holies ' (and afterwards in the correspond- 
 ing ajiaifment of the Temjile), where it stood so 
 that one end of each of tl.e ))oles liy which it was 
 carried (which were drawn out so far as to allow 
 the ark to be placed against the back wall), 
 touched the veil which sejiarate<l the two apart- 
 ments of t!ie tabernacle (1 Kings viii. 8). In the 
 ark were de])0sited the tables of the law (Exod. 
 xxv. 16). A quantity of mamia was laid up 
 beside the ark in a vase of gold (Exod. xvi. 32, 
 36; 1 Kings viii. 9); as were also the rod of Aaron 
 (Num. xvii. 10), anil a copy of tiie book of tli^ 
 law (Deut. xxxi. 26). 
 
 Nothing is more aiipareiif throughout the nis- 
 torical Scriptures than the extreme sanctity which 
 attached to the ark, as the material symliol of the 
 Divine ])iesence. During the marclies of the Israel- 
 ites it was covered with a puiple ]iall, and borne 
 by the [iriests, with great reverence and caie, iu 
 e>'!va.;:ce of tiie ho.st (Num. iv. 5, 6; x. 33). It 
 was before the ark, thus in advance, that xht 
 waters of the Jordan separated; aud it remained 
 in tl:e bed of the ilver. with the attendant priestf 
 until the whole host had jiassed over, ind i;
 
 ARK OF THE COVENANT. 
 
 ARK OF THE COVENANT. J! 5 
 
 iooner was it also hrom^lit iij) tliaii the waters 
 resumed tlieir covirse(J()sh. iii.; iv. 7, 10, 11, 17, 
 18). The ark was stiiiilarly '•ons])icnous in tlie 
 graiul procession round Jeiicho (Josh. vi. 4, 6, S, 
 11, 12). It i.'i not wondeifiil theriifore that the 
 neighbouring nations, wlio iuul no notion of spi- 
 ritual worshiji. looked upon it iis the God of tiie 
 laraelites (1 Sairi. iv. 6, 7), a delusion whicli may 
 have been strengthened by the Hgnres of tiie che- 
 rubim on it. After th* settlement of the Jews 
 in Palestine, the ark remained in the tabernacle 
 at Siiiloh, until, in the time of Eii, it w;ls carried 
 along with the army in the war against the Phi- 
 listines, under the siijierstitious notion that it would 
 secure the victory to the Hebiews Tliey wei-e, 
 however, not onlj' tx-aten, but the ark itself was 
 taken by the Philistines (1 Sam. iv. 3-11), whose 
 triumph was, however, very sliort lived, as they 
 were so oppressed by the hand of God, that, after 
 seven months, they were glad to send it back 
 again (1 Sam. v. 7). Alter that it remained 
 apart frotn the tabernack", at Kirjath-jearim (vii. 
 1, 2). where it continued until the time of David, 
 who jiurposed to remove it to Jerusalem; but the 
 old prescribe*! mode of remo\iag it from place 
 to place was so much neglecte<l as to cause the 
 death of TJzzaii, in consequence of which it was 
 .eft in tlie house of Obededom (2 Sam. vi. l-l I) ; 
 but after three months David took courage, aiid 
 succeeded in etliecting its safe removal, in grand 
 procession, to Mount Zion (ver. 12-19). When 
 the Temple of Solomon was completed, t!ie ark 
 was dep(^»jited in tlie sanctuary (1 Kings viii. 6-9). 
 The passage in 2 Chion. xxxv. 3, in which Josiah 
 directs the Levites to restore the ark to tiie holy 
 filace, is understood by some to imply that it tiad 
 eitlier been removed by Amon, who put an idol 
 in its place, which is assumed to ha\e been the 
 ' tresjiass ' of which he is said to have been guilty 
 ("2 Chron. xxxiii. 23); or tliat the jjriests them- 
 selves had withdrawn it during idolatrous times, 
 and preserved it in some secret place, or had re- 
 moved it from one place to another. But it seems 
 more likelv that it had been taken from the holy 
 of holies during the purification and repairs of 
 the Temple by this same Josiah, and tluit he, in 
 this ])assage, merely directs it to be again set 
 in its place. What became of the ark when the 
 Temple was plundered and destroyed by the Ba- 
 bylonians is not known, and all conjecture is 
 useless. The Jews believe that it was concealeil 
 from the spoilers, and account rt among the hidden 
 things which (he Messiah is to reveal. It is cer- 
 tain, however, from the consent of all the ,lewisii 
 writers, ttiat the old ark was not contained in the 
 second temple, and there is no evidence that 
 any new one was made. Indeed the absence of 
 the ark is one of the important particulars in 
 which this temple was held to be inferior to that 
 of Solonnon. The most holy ])lace is therefore 
 generally considered to have been empty in the 
 second temple fas Jose])lnis states. 7> Bell. Jud. v. 
 14) ; or at most (as the Rabbins allege) to have 
 contained only a stone to mark the place wliich 
 the ark should have occupied. The silence of 
 Ezra, Nehemiali, the Maccabees, and Josephus, 
 who repeatedly mention all the other sacred 
 ntensils, but never name the ark, seems conclusive 
 en tiie subject. But notwithstanding this weight 
 of testimony, there are writers, such as Prideaux 
 (Cjnuecti >«, i p. 207"), who contend that the Jews 
 
 could not pi-ojierly carry on their worsliip without 
 an ark, and that if the original ark was not 
 recovered after the Captivity, a new one inugt hav« 
 l)een made. Tliis matter is Cully investigated in 
 Calmet's DLsxertation stir f Arc/w. d' Alliance. 
 
 Wi e now come to consider the design and form 
 of tlie ark, on which it ap|)ears to us that clear 
 and unexjiected light has bi^n tliiown by the 
 discoveries which have of late years been made in 
 Egypt, and which have unfolded to us the rites and 
 mysteries of the old Egy])tians. Ttjesuliject may 
 be opened in the following words, from the two 
 volumes on Xhi-. ReLgioH and Agriculture of the 
 Anfient ICf/i/pfiait.s, which have been published 
 by .Sir J. G. Wilkinson since we first had occa- 
 sion to notice this suiije(;t (see I'ictorial Hist, 
 of I'akstine, pp. 217-2.30) : — ' One of the most 
 imjMutant ceremonies was the " procession of 
 shrines,"' which is mentioned in the Rosetta stone, 
 and frequently occurs on the walls of the tem- 
 ples. The siirines were of two kinds : the one a 
 sort of canopy ; the other an aik or sacred Ijoat, 
 which may lie termed tlie greit shrine. This 
 was carried with grand pomp by the priests, a 
 certain number Iveing selected for that duty, who 
 supported it oii their shoulders by means of long 
 staves, passing through metal rings at the side ot 
 the sledge on which it stood, and brought it into 
 the temple, where it was de])osited upon a stand 
 or table, in oriler that the prescribeil ceremonies 
 might be discharged before it. The stand was 
 also carrieil in procession by another set of priests, 
 following the shrine, l)y means of similar slaves; 
 a method usually adopted for carrying large 
 statues and sac,i«d emblems, too lieavy or ttjo 
 important to he borne by one person. The same 
 is stated to have been the custom of the Jews in 
 some of their religious processions (comp. I Chron. 
 XV. 2, 15; 2 Sam. xv. 'Ik ; and Josh. iii. 12), as 
 in carrying the ark to its place, into tlie oracle 
 of the house, to the triost holy |)lace, wlien the 
 Temjile .vas built by Solomon (I Kings viii. fi).' 
 ....'Some of the arks or boats contained the 
 emblems of Life and Sta.bility, wiiich, wlien the 
 veil was ilrawn aside, were jiartiallv seeti ; and 
 others pi'esented the sacred be<'tle to the sun, over- 
 shadowed by the wings of two figures of the god- 
 dess Thenei, or Truth, which call to niin<l llie 
 cherubim of tlie Jews ' {Atic. Egyptiaiis, v. p|i. 
 271, 27.5). . 
 
 In reading this ])assnge, more points of resem- 
 blance than occurred to Sir J. G. Wilkinson will 
 strike the Biblical student, ;uid will attract ins 
 close attention to the subject. In the above de- 
 scription thi-ee objects are distingui.shed : — 1. The 
 ' stand;' 2. The boat or ' ark ;" 3. The' canopy.' 
 This last is not, as the extract wouhl suggest, an 
 alternative for the second ; but is most generally 
 seen with and in the boat. This is shown in the 
 first cut, which exhibits all the ]>arts togeth..'-, 
 and at rest. 
 
 The points of resemblance to the Jewish ai'i 
 in the second cut are many and conspicuous : aa. 
 in tlie ' stand,' which, in some of its forms, and 
 leaving out the figures represented on the sides, 
 bears so close a resemblanre to th<? written de- 
 scription of tiie Hebrew ark, that it may safely 
 be taken as an authtntic illustration of its form. 
 Then the cherubim of the Hebrew ark (ind ma- 
 nifest representatives m the figures facing each 
 other, with wings spread inwards and meeting
 
 V16 ARK OF TILE COVENANT. 
 
 enc^b other, which we ffiid within a canopy or 
 shrine which sometimes rests immediately iijx>n 
 ^is ' stand,' buf more generaUy in the boat, 
 which itself rests thereon. These are shown in 
 
 ARK OF THE COVENANT. 
 
 in the mixk of carry ii>g it, by means .of poles 
 inserted ij» rings; and it is olwervable th^U^, aa 
 in the Hebrew aik, tl»e.se poles were not with- 
 drawn, but ien>ainetl in their place when th« 
 shrine was at rest in the teni])Ie. ■ Such are th« 
 princii)al reseml, lances. Tlie cliief diil'eiifice i% 
 tlie entirr absence, in the Jewisli aik, oi' tiie Uut, 
 hi wliicli most of the i(h)latroBS objects were as- 
 sembled. Tli«e are, >ud( ed, civcunistances which 
 might suggesl the idea tkit t\«e ' r»ercy-3eat ' wa« 
 not, as commojily stipposed, the lid of the ark, 
 but such a covering or canopy as we see m the 
 Egyptian stkiines. Tlje ground relied upon as 
 showing that it was tlie lid, namely, that, its di- 
 mensions were fl^i same as tlK)se of the ark, ap- 
 plies equally to tiw caiM)]))', the botton" of which 
 is \isnally of the siinie ilimensions as fhe to|i of tlie 
 stand or chest which answers to tlie Jewish ark. 
 Tlie fact, however, tliiit the clx'rubim skwd vpon 
 flie mercy-sea;, seems to show tliat it was the 
 lid, aiid not the canopy ; and the alisence of this 
 niirst therefore be taken as another ditference. 
 To show tlie elVect of these conclnsions. we take 
 the stand, as already represented (in cut 2), ainl 
 we place tlieicou, without alteralioji (but without 
 the canopy}, tlie winged tiguies as they appear i."* 
 
 an Egyptian shrine (the same as in cut 3); aiKi 
 we need not ])oint out that the representation, rhns 
 formed witliotit any alterati.jn of the parts, alllrda 
 a most striking resemlilance to one of the two 
 forms of the ark with tlie cherubino above, which 
 scholars and artists, wholly nnacquahited with 
 Egyptian antiq>iities, have drawn from the de- 
 scriptions of the .Tewish ark which we find ia 
 Exodus, as represented in the annexed cut (9^ 
 
 ft\e annexed cnt (3\ in which the wingetl fignres 
 we, in their position, if not in their form, re- 
 markably analogous. We direct attention also 
 > the hovering wings above, which are very con- 
 opicuous in all su-ch representations. Tljis part 
 «rf" the subject is interesting; but, as if will obtain 
 •eparate attention [C^hkkiibim], we omit parti- 
 cular notice of it here Other analo:ries occnr in 
 ♦lu. j.Tson» wVio ^>ea^ fhe stinne -'he wie^ts ; ai.-d 
 
 ^ 
 
 Again, we take the same ark, aiwl place thereo* 
 the Kgures of another shriae (6} ; and we coiB"
 
 ABK OF THE COVENANT 
 
 ARKITES. 
 
 211 
 
 Skie tl.is with anollier of tlie common forms c( the 
 cwiib ark as drawn from lie description* (7). 
 
 These resemblances and differences appear to us 
 to cast a strong light, not only on the form, but 
 on the puqjose of the Jewish ari<. The 'disco- 
 veries of this sort which have lately been made 
 in Egypt, have added an overwhelming weight 
 of proof to the evidence which previously existed, 
 that the ' tabernacle made with hands,' with its 
 utensils and ministers, bore a designed external 
 jesemblance to the Egyjitian models; but purged 
 of the details and peculiarities which were the 
 most o])en to ^buse and misconstruction. That 
 the Israelites during the latter part of their sojourn 
 ill Egypt followed tlie rites and religion of the 
 country, and were (at least many of them ) gross 
 idolaters, is distiiictly affirmed in Scripture 
 (Josh. xxiv. 14; Ezek. xxiii. 3, S, 19); and is 
 shown by their ready lapse into the worship of 
 the ' golden calf;" and by the striking fact that 
 they actually carried al)out with them one of these 
 Egyptian shrines or tabernacles in the wilderness 
 JAmos V. 26). From their conduct and the whole 
 tone of their sentiments and character it appears 
 that this stiff-necked and rel)ellious peojile were 
 incapable ^'as a nation) of adhering to that simple 
 form of worship and service which is most 
 pleasing to God. 
 
 The parts of the Egyjjtian shrine which are omit- 
 ted in the ark are the boat and the canopy: the boat, 
 probably because it was not only intimately coii- 
 rnSrted by its very form with the Arkite worship, 
 to which die previous iuticle alludes, but because 
 
 it wag the part which was aiisoiutely ciowded 
 with idolatrous images and associations; and tlw 
 canopy, probably liecause it often shrouded tiie 
 image of a god, whereas its absence made it 
 manifest that only the symbolic cherubim rested 
 on tlie ark. The ]iart3 letained were the stan(t or 
 chest, which was not an object of idolatrous re- 
 gard even among the Egyptians, and die winded 
 figures, vviiich were purely symbolical, and rwt 
 idolatrous representations. 
 
 ARKITES (D-i^lK ; Sept. 'ApovKa:os), the in 
 habitants of Aika, mentioned in Gen. x. 17; 
 1 Chron. i. I.*), as (iescended IVoni the Plio'nician 
 or Sidonian branch of tlie great faniilv of Canaan. 
 This, in fact, as well as the other small northern 
 states of Phornicia, was a colony from the great 
 parent state of Sidon. Arka, or Acra, their chief 
 town, lay between Tripolis and Antaradus, at the 
 western base of Lebanon (Joseph. Aniiq. i.fi. 2; 
 Jerome, Qiicpst. in Gen. x. \fi). Josephus {Antiq. 
 yiii. 2. 3) makes Baanah — who in 1 Kings iv. 16, 
 is said to have been superintendent of the tribe of 
 Asher — jrovernor of Akra by the sea ; and if, as 
 commonly supjjosed, the capital of the Arkites is 
 intended, their small state must, in the time of 
 Solomon, have been under the Het)iew yoke. Sub- 
 sequently Akra shared the lot of the otlier small 
 Pha>nician states in that quarter; but in later times 
 it formed part of Herod Agrippa's kingdom. The 
 name and site seem never to have lieen unknown, 
 although for a time it bore the name of Csesarea 
 Lebani from having been the birth-place of Alex- 
 ander Severus (Mannert, p. 391). It is repeatedly 
 mentioned by the Arabian writers (Michaelis, 
 Spicil. pt. ii. p. 23; Schultens, Vita Scihidivi ; 
 Abulieda, Tab. Syria, p. 11). It lay 32 R. 
 miles from Antaradus, IR miles from TrijKili, 
 and, according to Abulfeda, a jiavasang from 
 the sea. In a position corresjionding to these in- 
 timations, Shaw {Ohserrat. p. 270), Hurckhardt 
 (Syria, J). 162), and others noticed the site and 
 ruins. Burckhardt, in travelling fiom the north- 
 east of Lebanon to Tripoli, at the distance of 
 about four miles south of the Nahr-el-kebir (Eleu- 
 therus), came to a hill called Tel-Arka, which, from 
 its regularly flattened conifal form and smnotL 
 sides, appeared to he artificial. He was told 
 that on its top were some ruins of habi;ations and 
 walls. Upon an elevation on its east and south 
 sides, which commands a beautiful view over the 
 plain, the sea, ai;d the Anzeyry mountains, are 
 large and extensive heaps of rubbish, traces of 
 ancient dwellings, blocks of hewn stone, remains 
 of walls, and f>agme'.itsof granite colimiiis. These 
 are no doubt the remains of Arka; and the hill 
 was jirobably the acropolis or citadel, or the site 
 of a temple.
 
 SI 8 
 
 ARM. 
 
 ARM. This word is frequently used in Scrip- 
 ture in a metaphorical sense to denote power. 
 Hence, to 'break the arm ' is to diminish or de- 
 stroy the power (Ps. x. 15; Ezek. xxx. 21 ; Jer. 
 xlviii. 25). It is also employed to denote the in- 
 finite power of God (Ps. Ixxxix. 13 ; xlviii. 2 ; Isa. 
 liii. 1 ; Jolui xii. 38). In a few places the metaphor 
 is, with great force, extended to the action of the 
 arm, as: — ' I will redeem you with a stretched 
 cut ai-m" (Exod. vi. 5), that is, with a power fully 
 exerted. The figure is here taken from the atti- 
 tude of ancient warriors baring and outstretching 
 the arm for tight. Thus in Isa. Hi. 10, ' Jehovah 
 hath made bare his holy arm in the sight of all 
 the nations.' Bisliop Lowth has shown,*from the 
 Sept. and other versions, that in Isa. ix. 20, ' they 
 shall eat every one the flesh of his own arm,' 
 should be ' the flesh of his neighbour ;' similar to 
 Jer. xix. 9, meaning that they should harass and 
 destroy one another. (See Wemyss's Clavis 
 Symbolica, pp. 23, 24.) 
 
 ARMAGEDDON, properly ' the mountain of 
 Megiddo,' a city on the west of the river Jordan, 
 rebuilt by Solomon (1 Kings ix. 15). Both 
 Ahaziah and Josias died there. In the mystical 
 language of prophecy, the word mountain repre- 
 sents the Church, and the events wliich took 
 place at Megiddo are supposed to have had a 
 typical reference to the sorrows and triumphs of 
 the people of God under tlie gospel. ' In that 
 day,' says Zechariah, xii. 11, 'shall there be a 
 great mourning in Jerusalem, as the mourning of 
 Hadadrimmon in the valley of Megiddon ;' re- 
 ferring to the death of Josias.- But the same 
 spot witnessed, at an earlier period, the greatest 
 triumph of Israel, when ' fought the kings of 
 Canaan in Taanacli by the waters of Megiddo ' 
 (Judg. v. 19). ' He gathered them together into 
 a place called in the Hebrew tongue Armaged- 
 don,' is the language of the Ajwcalypse ; and the 
 word has been translated by some as ' the moun- 
 tain of destruction,' by others as ' the mountain of 
 the gospel ;' many ingenious speculations having 
 been employed on tlie passage in which it occurs, 
 but witli little satisfaction to the more sober 
 readers of divine revelation. — H. S. 
 
 ARMENIA, a country of Western Asia, is 
 not mentioned in Scripture under that name, but 
 is supposed to be alluded to in tlie three ibllowing 
 Hebjbw designations, which seem to refer either 
 to the country as a whole, or to particular dis- 
 tricts. I. Ararat tDTlS, the land upon (or over) 
 the mountains of which the ark rested at the 
 Deluge (Gen. viii. 4); whither the sons of Sen- 
 nacherib fled after murdering their father (2 Kings 
 xix. 37 : Isa. xxxvii. 38) •, and one of the ' king- 
 doms ■ summoned, along with Minni and Ash- 
 kenaz, to arm against Babylon (Jer. li. 27). That 
 there was a province of Ararad in ancient Ar- 
 menia, we have the testimony of the native histo- 
 rian, Moses of Chorene. It lay in the centre of 
 the kingdom, was divided intx) twenty circles, 
 and, being the principal province, was commonly 
 the residence of the kings or governors. For other 
 particulars respecting ii", and the celebrated moun- 
 tain which in modern times bears its name, see 
 the article Ararat. II. Minni "'3JD is men- 
 tioned in Jer. li. 27, along with Ararat and Ash- 
 keuaz, as a kingdom called to arm itself against 
 Babylon. The name is by some taken for a con- 
 kactioii of ' Armenia,' and the Chald. in the 
 
 ARMENIA. 
 
 text in Jeremiah has ''yDlin. There appears s 
 trace of the name Minni in a passage quoted bj 
 Josephus (Antiq. i. 3. fi) from Nicolas of Damas- 
 cus, where it is said tliat 'there is a great moun- 
 tain in AiTTienia, vnifi tt;;' MivjaSa, called Daris, 
 upon wiiicii it is reported that many who fled at 
 the time of the Deluge v.-sre saved; and that one 
 who was carried in an ark came on shore upon 
 the top of it ; and that the remains of the timber 
 were a great while preserved. This might be ihe 
 man about whom Moses, the legislator of the Jewg, 
 wrote." Saint-Martin, in his erudite work entitled 
 Memoires sur I'Armenie (vol. i. p. 249), has the 
 not very probable conjecture that the word ' Minni ' 
 may refer to the Manavazians, a distinguished 
 Armenian tribe, descended from Manavaz, a son 
 of Haik, the capital of whose country was Ma- 
 navazagerd, now Melazgerd. In Ps. xlv. 8, where 
 it is said ' out of the ivory palaces whereby they 
 made thee glad,' the Hebrew word rendered 
 'whereby' is minni, and hence some take it for 
 the proper name, and would translate ' palaces 
 of Armenia,' but the interpretation is forced and 
 incongruous. III. Thogarmah nOIJin, in some 
 MSS. Thorgamah, and found with great variety 
 of orthography in the Septuagint and Josephus. 
 In tlie ethnographic table in tiie tenth chapter ol 
 Genesis (ver. 3 ; comp. I Chron. i. 6) Thogannah 
 is introduced as the youngest son of Gomer (son 
 of Japhet), who is supposed to have given name 
 to the Cimmerians on the north coast of the 
 Euxine Sea, his other sons being Ashkenaz and 
 Riphat, both progenitors of northern tribes, among 
 whom also it is natural to seek for the posterity 
 of Thogarmah. The prophet Ezekiel (xxxviii. 6) 
 also classes along with Gomer ' the house of Tho* 
 garmah and the sides of the north ' (in the Eng. 
 Vers. ' of the north quarters '), where, as also sf. 
 Ezek. xxvii. 14, it is placed beside Meshech and 
 Tubal, probably the tribes of the Moschi and 
 Tibareni in the Caucasus. Now, though Josephus 
 and Jerome find Tliogarmah in Phrygia, Bochart 
 in Cappadocia, the Chaldee and the Jewish rab- 
 bins in Geimany, &c. ; yet a comparison of the 
 above passages leads to the conclusion that it is 
 rather to be sought for in Armenia, and this ig 
 the opinion of Euseljius, Theodoret, and others of 
 the fathers. It is strikingly confirmed by the 
 traditions of that and the neighbouring countries. 
 According to Moses of Chorene (Whiston's edi- 
 tion, i. 8, p. 24), and also King Wachtang'g 
 History of Georgia (in Klaproth's Fravels in the 
 Caucasus, vol. ii. p. fil), flie Armenians, Georgians, 
 Lesghians, Mingrelians, and Caucasians are all 
 descended from one common progenitor, called 
 Thargamos, a son of Awanan, son of Japhet, son 
 of Noah (comp. Eusebius, Chron. ii. 12). At'tet 
 the dispersion at Babel, he settled near Ararat, 
 but his posterity spread abroad between the Cas- 
 pian and Euxine seas. A similar account is 
 found in a Geoigian chronicle, quoted by an- 
 other German traveller, Guldenstedt, which states 
 that Targamos was the father of eight sons, the 
 eldest of whom was Aos, the ancestor of tlie Ar- 
 menians. They still call themselves ' the house 
 of Tliorgom," the very phrase used by Ezekiel, 
 nD"13in n"'n, the corresponding Syriac word for 
 ' house " denoting ' land or district." From t!i« 
 house or province of Thogannah the market ol 
 Tyre was supplied with horses and mules fEzek. 
 xxvii. 14) ; and Armenia, we know, was famej
 
 ARMENIA 
 
 tf aid for lis breed of horses. Tlie Satrap of Ar- 
 Bicnia sent yearly to tlie Persian court 20,000 
 foals for the'fedst of Mithras (Slrabo, xi. 13. 9; 
 Xenoph. A7iabas. iv. 5. 21 ; Herod, vii. 40). 
 
 The 'Ap/xevia of the Greeks (soinetinies aspi- 
 rated 'Ap/xfvia) is the Arminiya or Innmiya of 
 Ihe Arabs, the Erme?iistan of tlie Persians. Moses 
 •f Chorene derives the name from Aixnenagh, the 
 ■econd of tlie native princes ; Hartmann draws 
 k from Aram (see that article), a son of Shem, 
 who also gave name to Aramaea or Syria ; but 
 the most probalde etymology is ttiat of Bochart, 
 viz., that it was originally ''31D "IH, Ilar-Minni 
 or Mount Minni, i. e the High-land of Minyas, 
 or, according to Wahl (in his work on Asia, 
 p. 807), the Heavenly Mountain {i. e. Ararat), 
 for mino in Zend, and myiio, myny, in Parsee, 
 signify ' heaven, heavenly.' In the country it- 
 self the name Armenia is unknown ; the people 
 are called Haik, anil the covmtry Hayot/.-zor, tiie 
 Valley of the Haiks— from Haik, the fifth de- 
 scendant of Noah by Japhet, in the traditionary 
 genealogy of the country (coinp. Ritter's Erd- 
 kuncle, th. ii. p. 714). 
 
 The boundaries of Armenia may be described 
 generally as tue southern range of the Caucasus 
 on the north, and a branch of the Taurus on tlie 
 south ; but in all directions, and especially to 
 the east and west, the limits have been very fluc- 
 tuating. It forms an elevated table-land, whence 
 rise mountains which (with the exception of the 
 gigantic Ararat) are of moderate height the 
 plateau gradually sinking towards the plains of 
 Iran on the east, and those of Asia Minor on the 
 west. The climate is generally cold, but salu- 
 brious. The country abounds in romantic forest 
 and mountain scenery, and rich pasture-land, 
 especially in the districts which border upon 
 Persia. Ancient writers notice ihe wealth of Ar- 
 menia in metals and precious .-.t.n.-^. The great 
 rivers Euphrates and Tigris botl. take their rise 
 in this region, as also the Araxes, and the Kur 
 or Cynis. Armenia is commonly divided into 
 G7-eaier and Lesser, the line of sejiaration being 
 the Euphrates ; but the former constitutes by far 
 the larger portion, and indeed the other is often 
 regarded as pertaining rather to Asia Minor. 
 There was anciently a kingdom of Armenia, with 
 its metropolis Artaxata : it was sometimes an 
 independent state, but most commonly tributary 
 to some more powerful neighbour. Indeed at no 
 period *as the whole of this region ever comprised 
 under one government, but Assyria, Media, Syria, 
 and Cappadocia shared the dominion or alle- 
 giance of some portion of it, just as it is now 
 divided among the Persians, Russians, Turks, 
 and Kurds ; for there is no doubt that that jiart 
 of Kurdistan which includes tlie elevated basins 
 of the lakes of Van and Oormiali anciently be- 
 longed to Ai-menia. The unfortunate German 
 traveller Schulz (who was murdered by a Kurd- 
 ish chief) discovered in 1827, near the former 
 lake, the ruins of a very ancient town, whicli tie 
 supposed to be that which is called by Armenian 
 historians Shamiramakert (i. e. the town of Se- 
 mirainis), because believed to have been built by 
 the famous Assyrian queen. The ruins are co- 
 vered with inscriptions in the arrow-headed cha- 
 racter ; in one of them Saint-Martin thought he 
 decipheied the words Khshearsha son ofDareioush 
 '^•rxes son of Darius). In later times Armenia 
 
 ARMENIAN LANGUAGE. »1» 
 
 was the Ixirder-country where the Romans anii 
 Parthians fruitlessly strove for the mastery ; and 
 since then it has been the frequent balt1e-ti*1d of 
 the neighbouring states. Towards the end (if the 
 last war between Russia and Turkey, large bodies 
 of native Armenians ''migrated into liie Russian 
 dominions, so that their number in wiiat is termed 
 Turkish AiTiienia is now -consideralily reduced. 
 By the treaty of Turkomanshee (21st Fell. 1R2S) 
 Persia ceded to Russia tlie Klianats of Erivan 
 and Nakhsliivan. The l)Oundary-line (drawn 
 iVom tiie Turkisti dominions.) passes over the 
 Little Ararat; the line of separation between 
 Persian and Tuikish Armenia also begins at 
 Ararat ; so that this famous mountain is now 
 tiie central boundary -stone of these tliree em- 
 pires. 
 
 Christianity was first established in Armenia 
 in the foui (h century ; the Armenian ch.irch nas 
 a close afiinity to llie Greek church in its forms 
 and |x)lity ; it is described by the American mis- 
 sionaries who are settled in the country as in a 
 state of great corrujition and debasement. Tlie 
 total number of the Armenian nation ihroughont 
 the world is siqiposed not to exceed 2,000,000. 
 Their favourite pursuit is commerce, and tlieir 
 merchants are found in all parts of the East. For 
 the history of the country, see Moses of Ciiorene, 
 Fatlier Chamicli, and the Hist, of Vartan, trans- 
 lated liy Neumann. For the tnpograjihy, Movier, 
 Ker Porter, Smitli and Dwight, Soutligate, &c., 
 and especially tlie vols, of the Journal of the 
 Geographical Society, containing the researches 
 of Monteith, Ainsworth, and others. — N. M. 
 
 ARMENIAN LANGUAGE. The Arme- 
 nian or Haikan language, iii)twithstai)diiig the 
 great antiquity of the nation to which it belongs, 
 possesses no liteiiiry documents prior to the (iftli 
 century of the Christian era. The translation of 
 the Bible, begun liy Miesrob in the year 410, is 
 the earliest monument of the language that has 
 come down to us. The dialect in which this ver- 
 sion is written, and 'ii which it is still publicly 
 read in their churches, is called the old Arme- 
 nian. Tlie dialect now in use — the modern 
 Armenian — in which tliey preach and carry on tlie 
 intercourse of daily life, not oidy de})arts from 
 the elder form by dialectual changes in the native 
 elements of the laiigua'^e itself, but also by the 
 great intermixture of Persian and Tuikish words 
 which has resulted fioni the conquest and subjec- 
 tion of the country. It is, perhaps, this diversity 
 of the ancient and modern idioms which has 
 given rise to the many conllicting ojiinioiis tiiat 
 exist as to the relation in which the .Armenian 
 stands to other languages. Thus Cirbied and 
 Vater both assert that it is an original lair^juage, 
 that is, one so distinct from all others in its fun 
 damental character as not to be classed with any 
 of the great families of languages. Eiclilioin, on 
 the other hand (Sprrwhaiikiinde, p. 349), allirms 
 that the learned idiom of the Armiiiian iindonlit- 
 edly belongs to the Medo-Persian family. 
 Whereas Pott (Unterswhiingen. p. xxxii.) says 
 that, notwithstanding its many points of relation 
 to that family, it cannot strictly be considered to 
 belong to it; and Gatterer at'tually classed it as 
 a living sister of the Basque, Finnish, and Welsh 
 languages. 
 
 As to form, it is said to be rough and full of 
 consonants; to possess ten cases in the noun — a
 
 120 
 
 ARMENIAN VERSION. 
 
 ARMLET. 
 
 .umber which is only exceeded by the Furnish ; 
 to have in) dual ; to have no mode of denoting 
 gender in the noun by change of form, but to be 
 obliged to append t)ie words man and tvuman as 
 the marks of sex — thus, to say prophet-icoinan for 
 prop/ietess (nevertheless, modern writers use the 
 syllable ou/ii to distinguish the feminine; Wahl, 
 Geschichtc d. Morgent. Sprac/ien. p. 100) ; to 
 bear a remarkal)le resemblance to Greek in the 
 use of the partici])le, and in the whole syntactical 
 structure ; and to have adopted the Arabian sys- 
 tem of metre. 
 
 The hislory of its alphabetical character is 
 brieliy tliis : until the thiid century of our era, 
 tte Armenians used either the Persian or Greek 
 alphabet (the letter in Syrian characters, men- 
 tioned by Diodor. xix. 23, is not considered an 
 evidence that they wrote Armenian in Syrian 
 characters, as that letter was probaljly Persian). 
 In the fifth century, however, the hanslation of 
 the Bible created tlie necessity for characters 
 wlucli ivould more adequately lepreseut the pecu- 
 liar sounds of the language. Accordingly', afier 
 a fruitless attempt of a certain Daniel, and after 
 several efforts ou liis own part, Miesrob saw a 
 hand in a dream write the very characters which 
 iiow constitute the Armenian alphabet. The 38 
 letters tlius obtained are chiefly founded ori the 
 Greek, but have partly made out their number 
 by deriving some forms from the Zend alphaiiet. 
 The order of writing is from left to light. 
 Miesrob employed these letters in his translation 
 of the Bible, and thus ensured their universal 
 and permanent adoption by the nation (Gesenius; 
 article Palceographic, in Ersch and Gruber). — 
 
 J. N. 
 
 ARMENIAN VERSION. The Armenian 
 version of the Bible was undertaken in the year 
 410 by Miesrob, with the aid of his pupils Joan- 
 nes Ecelensis and Jo^ejihus Palnensis. It appears 
 that the patriarch Isaac first attempted, in conse- 
 quence of the Persians having destroyed all the co- 
 pies of the Greek \rrsion, to make a translation from 
 thePeshito; that Miesrob became his coadjutor 
 in this work ; and that they actually completed 
 their translation from tire Syriac. But when the 
 above-named pupils, who had been sent to the 
 ecclesiastical council at Ephesus, returned, they 
 brought with them an accurate copy of the Greek 
 Bii)le. Upon this, Miesrob laid aside his trans- 
 lation from the Peshito, and prepared to com- 
 mence anew from a more authentic text. Imper- 
 fect knowledge of the Greek language, however, 
 induced him to send his pupils to Alexandria, to 
 acquire accurate Greek scholarship ; and, on 
 their return, the translation was accomplished. 
 Moses of Chorene, the historian of Armenia, who 
 was also employed, as a disciple of Miesrob, on 
 this version, fixes its comphtion in the year 410; 
 but he is contradicted by the date of the Council 
 of Ephesus, which necessarily makes it subsequent 
 to the year 431. 
 
 In the Old Testament this version adheres ex- 
 ceedingly closely to the LXX. (but, in the book 
 of Daniel, has followed the version of Theodotion). 
 Its most striking characteristic is, that it does not 
 follow any known recension of the LXX. Al- 
 though it more often agrees with the Alexandrine 
 text, in readings which are fjeculiar to the latter, 
 thiui it does with the Aldine or Cotn])'utensian 
 jext ; yet, on the other hand, it also has fol- 
 
 lowed readings which are only found in the ivrt 
 last. Bertholdt accoimfs for this mixed text by 
 assuming that tlie co|)y of the Greek Bible sen< 
 from Ej)liesus contained the Lucian recension, 
 and that the ])npils brought l)ack copies according 
 to the Hesychian recension from Alexanilria, and 
 that the translators made tlie latter their standard, 
 but corrected their version by aid of the forir.sr 
 (Einleit. ii. 560). The version of the New Tes- 
 tament is equally close to the Greek original, and 
 also rej resents a text made up of Alexandrine and 
 Occidental readings. 
 
 This version was afterwards revised and adapted 
 to the Peshito, in the sixth century, on the occa 
 sion of an ecclesiastical union Itetween the Syrians 
 and Armenians. Again, in the thiiteenth cen- 
 tury, an Armenian king Hethom or Haitlio, who 
 was so zealous a Catholic that he turned Francis- 
 can monk, adapted the Aimenian version to the 
 Vulgate, by way of smoothing the way i()r a 
 union of the Roman and Armenian cliurches. 
 Lastly, the bishop Uscan, who printed the first 
 edition of this version at Amsterdam, in the year 
 1666, is also accused of having interpolated the 
 text as it came down to his time, by adding all 
 that he found the Vulgate contained 7nore than 
 the Armenian version. The existence of the verse 
 1 John V. 7, in this version, is ascril)ed to this 
 supplementary labour of Uscan. It is clear from 
 wliat has been said, that the critical uses of this 
 version are limited to determining the readings of 
 tlie LXX. and of the Greek text of the New Tes- 
 tament which it represents, and that it has suffered 
 many alterations which diminish its usefulness in 
 that respect. — J. N. 
 
 ARMLET. Although this word has the same 
 meaning as bracelet, yet the latter is practically 
 so exclusively used to denote the oniameni of 
 the wrist, that it seems proper to distinguish by 
 armlet the similar ornament which is worn on the 
 upjier arm. There is also this diT'erenrs between 
 them, that in the East bracelets ;i e enerally worn 
 by women, and armlets only l;y n en. The ami- 
 let, however, is in use among men only as one o/ 
 the insignia of sovereign power. Tliere are three 
 different words which the Auth. Vers, renders by 
 bracelet. These are, 1. myVN etzaclah, which 
 occurs in Num. xxxi. .50; 2 Sam. i. If); and wliich 
 being used with leference to men only, we take to 
 be the armlet. 2. T^tDV tzamid, which is found 
 in Gen. xxiv. 22; Num. xxxi. 50; Ezak. xvi. 
 11. Where these two words occur together (as in 
 Num. xxxi. 50), the first is rendered l)y ' chain ' 
 and tlie second by ' bracelet.' 3. ^''"1E^' shirijah, 
 which occirrs only in Isa. iii. 19. The first we 
 take to mean armlets woni i)y men ; the second, 
 bracelets worn by women and sometimes by men ^ 
 
 and the third, a peculiar bracelet of chain-worK 
 worn onl} jj women. It is observable that ti»
 
 ARMON. 
 
 tnv hrst occin- in Num. xxxi. 50, wliicli we 
 Bij|i]iose to mean tliat the men otl'eied their own 
 i^inlets ami the bracelets ol" tiieii wives. In the 
 only other jiassaije in wiiich the liist word occurs 
 it denotes the royal omaineiit which tlie Anialekile 
 took from the arm of trie doad Saul, and hrouijiit 
 with the other ie!,Mlia to David'. Tiieie is little 
 question tiiat this was such a distini^ni.shing hand 
 «>f jewelled metal as we still lind woin as a mark 
 of royalty from the Tigris to tiie Ganges. The 
 Egy])tian kings are rejnesented with armlets, 
 vhich were also worn by tlie Egy])tian women. 
 I iiese, however, are not jewelled, but of jilaiii or 
 enamelled metal, as was in all likelihood the 
 uase' among the Hebrews. In modern times the 
 viost celel)rated aimletsare those which form part 
 )f the regalia of the Persian kings, and which 
 'ormerly belonged to the Mogul emperors of 
 India. These ornaments are of dazzling splendour, 
 \nd the jewels in them are of such large size 
 md immense value tliat the pair are reckoned 
 to be worth a million of our money. The ])rin- 
 cipal stone of the left arndet is famous in the East 
 by the name of the Devid-e-nur, or Sea of light. 
 It weighs 1^6 carats, and is considered the dia- 
 mond of finest lustie in the world. The principal 
 jewel of the left arndet, although of somewhat in- 
 feii.ir size (146 carats; an<l va) le, is renowned as 
 Uie 'rdi]-e-nuih, ' Crown of the moon.' The im- 
 pel. .il aimlets, generally set with jewels, may also 
 Ije i>bseived in most of the portraits of the Indian 
 '.inperors [Bracki.et], 
 
 ARMON (flOIJ;; Chaldee, T\h']\ Syriac, 
 
 1 "^ > .0> ; Arabic, ^ ^^ J,N . Sept. TKaTavos ; 
 
 Vulg. platanus ; Lidh. ahorn ; A. V. ' chesttntt- 
 tree ")j a tree, which is named thrice in the 
 Scriptures. It occurs among the 'speckled rods' 
 which Jacob placed in the watering-troughs before 
 the sheep (G»n. xxx. 37) : its grandeur is indi- 
 cated in Ezek. xxxi. 8, as well as in Ecclns. 
 xxiv. 19 : it is noted for its magnificence, shooting 
 
 ARMON. 
 
 811 
 
 ^^% 
 
 
 [Platan us Orien'ali-. — I'lane-tree ] 
 
 feg high Imughs aloft This de8<'ri])tioii agrees 
 wsll with the ]ilane-»-* {l'latan%(S Orienttifis), 
 wkticii is adoiitdl by all tiw. aucient tiaiulu- 
 
 tors, to which the balance of critical jjiiriico 
 inclines, and which actually grows in Pales- 
 fine. Tiie beecii, the maple, and the chestnut 
 have been adopted, in dillerent mo<leiii veisions, 
 as representing llu; Hebiew .Arinon ; Ijut scarcely 
 any one now doubts that it means the plane-!iee. 
 It may lie remaiked that this tiee is in Geiiesii 
 associated with others — the willow and the (niplar 
 — whose habits agree with it; tliey are all trees 
 of the low grounds, and love to grow where the 
 soil is rich and humid. This is strikingly illus- 
 trated by the fact that Rus.sel (X. 11. of Alipf^ , 
 i. IT) expressly names the plane, the willow, and 
 the pojilar (along with the ash), as trees which 
 grow in the same situations near A'epjio. 
 
 lint this c.ongruity would lie lost if f!ie che.sfnut 
 were understood, as that tiee pieteis dry and hilly 
 situations. There is a latent beauty also in the 
 passage iuEzekiel, where, in descriliing the great- 
 ness and glory of Assyria, the pro| het says, • The 
 Armoii-trees were ihit like his bou^^hs, nor any 
 tree in the garden of God like unto him for lieauty." 
 This not only expresses the grandeur of the nee, 
 but is singularly appropriate from the fact that 
 the plane-trees (chenars, as they aie called) in 
 the plains of Assyria are of extraordinary size and 
 beauty, in both res]'ects exceeding even those of 
 Palestine. It consists with our own experience 
 that one may tiavel far in Western Asia without 
 meeting such trees, and so many together, as occur 
 in the chenar-gioves of Assyria and Jledia. 
 
 The Oriental plane-tree tanks in the Lii.na'an 
 class ami order Mo/iacin J'ulyaiidria, a. d in 
 the natural order ariioiig the I'latuna cce. West- 
 ernmost Asia is its native country, although, ac- 
 cording to Piofes.sor Royle, it extends as !a) 
 eastward as Cashmere. The stem is tall, eiecl 
 and covered with, a smooth bark which annuall) 
 falls off. Tlie dowers aie small and scarcely 
 distinguishable: they come out a- little befbi'? 
 the leaves. The wood of the jilane-tiee is line 
 grained, hard, and rather biitlle than tough; when 
 old, it is said to acquire daik veins, and to take 
 tUe appearance of walnut-wood. 
 
 In tliose situations which are favourable to its 
 growth, huge branches spread out in all diiej- 
 tions from the massive trunk, invested with broad 
 deeply-divided, and glossy green leaves. Tin. 
 body of lich foliage, joined to the smoothness of 
 the stem, and the symmetry of the general growth, 
 renders the plane-tree one of the noblest objects in 
 the vegetable kuigdom. It has now, and hail also 
 of old (Plin. Aat. Ilisl. xii. 1), the leputatiou 
 of being tlie tree which most elltctualiy excludes 
 the suns beams in summer, and most leadily 
 admits them in winter — thus atl'ording the bisl 
 shelter from the extremes of both seasons. 
 
 For this reason it was planted near public build- 
 ings and palaces, a jiract ice which the (ireeks and 
 Romans adopted ; and the former delighted to 
 adoin with it theiv academic walks and places o< 
 public exercise. In tl.e East, the plane seems to 
 liave been consideied sacred, as the oak was for- 
 meily in Biitain. This distiiutiuii is in most 
 coiiiitiies awaided to the most magiiilicenl speciM 
 of tree which it produces | Turks. S.\cij Bu]. In 
 • Palestine, for instance, where the jilaiie does not 
 appear to have been very common, the t<i( binth 
 Seems to have possessed pre-eminence [Ei.ah]. 
 No one ia ignorant of the celebrated story M 
 Xerxes arresting; the inarch of li'u grajiU amy
 
 122 
 
 ARMON. 
 
 Wforea noble plane-tree in Lydia, th«t he might 
 lender honour to it, and adorn its boughs with 
 polden chains, bracelets, and other rich ornaments 
 — an action misunderstood, and egregiously mis- 
 ■e])reseiited liy ^lian (Var. Hist. ii. 14). 
 
 Tlie Oriental plane eridures our own climate 
 R'l'll, and grows to a fine tree; but not to the 
 enormous size which it sometimes attains in the 
 Ras''. Several grat-d old jilane-trees have been 
 tnenfioned Pausanias (1. viii. c. 23) notices a 
 noble plane in Arcadia, the planting of which 
 was ascriljcfl, by tradition, to Menelaus ; so that 
 if this tradition were entitled to credit (and it 
 claims little), it must, when he wrote, although in 
 a sound stale, have been above 1300 years old. 
 Pliny, in his curious chajiter on this tree (Nat. 
 Hist. xii. I \ mentions one in Lycia,, in the 
 trunk of which had been gradually formed an 
 immense caveni, eighty feet in circumference. L. 
 Mufianus, thrice consul, and governor of the pro- 
 vince, with eighteen other persons, often dined 
 ■And supped commodiously within it. If nothing 
 more were known of this L. Mutianus, we should 
 like him for the pleasure, not unmingled with 
 re^^ret, with wiiicti he records the satisfaction 
 which he occasionally derived from hearing the 
 rain patter upon the leaves ove'head, widle he 
 and his company sat dry and safe within : it was 
 the music of th«ir feast, Caligula also had a tree 
 of this sort at his villa near Velitrs, the hollow 
 of which accommodated til'teen persons at dinner 
 with a proper suite of attendants. The einperor 
 called it 'his lu-st ;' and it is highly jirc.liable 
 that his friend Heiod At,Tippa may occ.isi. ually 
 have been one of the fifteen l)irds who nestled 
 there along with him. Modern travellers also 
 n.itice similar trees. Belon {Obs. Sine/. 1. ii. 
 p. 105), La Roque (Voy. de Syrie, pp. li)7-199), 
 and otiiers, mention the groves of noljle planes 
 which adorn the jilaiu of Antioch ; and the last- 
 named tiaveller records a niglit's rest which he en- 
 joyed under planes of great beauty in a valley of 
 Lebanon (p. 76). That they are among the prin- 
 cipal trees in the plantations near Aleppo has al- 
 ready been observed, on tiie authority of Russel. 
 
 ARMS, ARMOUR. 
 
 duction of the plane-tree mto England to the great 
 Lord Bacon, wlio planted some wliich were still 
 flourishing at Verulam in 1706. This was, ])er- 
 haps, the first plantation of any note; butitajjpean 
 from Turner's Herbal (published in 1551), that 
 the tree was known and cultivated in this country 
 before the chancellor was boni. (Besides the 
 authorities (juoted, see Hiller, Hierophyticon, cap. 
 43; Celsius, Hierobutanicon, 512-516; and 
 Winer's Realwortcrbuch, in ' Ahorn'). 
 
 ARMS, ARMOUR. In order to give a clear 
 view 01 this subject, we shall endeavour to show 
 succinctly, and from the best authorities now avail* 
 able, what were tlie weapons, both offensive and 
 defensive, used by the ancient Asiatics; and then, 
 under other jnoper heads, ex])lain the composition 
 and tactical condition of their armies ; their sys- 
 tems of fortiKcation ; and, finally, their method of 
 conducting sieges and battles; and their usages of 
 war as regards spoil, captives, &c. 
 
 [Branch of Platanus Orientalis. 
 
 Muekingham names them among the trees which 
 line the Jahbok (Travels in Palestine, ii. 108). 
 Bvelyn (in his Sylva) seems to ascribe the intro- 
 
 1, 8, 3. Clubs. 
 4, 5. Crooked Billets, or 
 throwing-bats. 
 
 6. Mace. 
 
 7. Battle-axe. 
 
 8. Hardwood ."'word. 
 
 9. Sliarks-teeth Sword, 
 ".0. Fl|it Swor<i. 
 
 11. .Sawfish 8\vor'i. 
 
 12, 13. iLgyptian Battle-aaea. 
 
 The instruments at first employed in ttie ch»«'«^ 
 or to repel wild beasts, but converted by Lia 
 wicked to the destniction of their fellow-men, or 
 used by the {)eaceable to oj)pose aggiession. were 
 naturally the most sim]jle. Among these were the 
 dull and the throwing-hat. Tiie first consisted 
 originally of a lieavy ]iiere of wood, variously 
 shaped, made to strike witli, and, according tc it« 
 form, denominated a mace, a bar, a iiammer, oi a 
 maul. Tliis weapon was in use among tlie He-
 
 ARMS, ARMOUR. 
 
 brews; fin; in the time ol" the kings, wooil had 
 iiiready been sujieiseileil by metal ; and tlie 1231^' 
 
 bnS shcret barzel, rotJ of iron (Ps. ii. 9), is sup- 
 posed to mean a mare, or gaveloc1<, or crowbar. 
 It is an mstnunent of great power when used by 
 a strong arm ; as when \'an Amburgli, with one 
 in his hand, compels a tiger's ferocity to submit 
 to his will. (See Wilkinson's Manners and Cvs- 
 toms of the Ancient Lg)jptians, vol. i. p. 327, 
 fig. 3, 4 ; and mace, tig. 1, 2. The ihrowstick 
 or lissan occurs p. 329.) The otlicr was also 
 known, if, as is probable, ]*''D0 mophietz (Prov. 
 XXV. IS) be a maul, a martel, or a war-hammer. 
 It is likely metal was only in general use at a 
 later period, and that a heavy crooked billet con- 
 tinued long to serve botli as a missile and a sword. 
 The throwstick, made of thorn-wood, is the same 
 instrument which we see figured on Egyptian 
 monuments. By the native Arabs it is still called 
 lissan, and was anciently known among us by 
 the name of crooked billet. These instruments, 
 supplied with a sharp edge, would naturally con- 
 stitute a battle-axe, and a kind of sword ; and 
 such in the rudest ages we find them, made with 
 tiints set into a groove, or with sliarks' teeth firmly 
 secured to the staff with twisted sinews. On the 
 earliest monuments of Egypt, for tliese ruder in- 
 struments is already seen substituted a ])iece of 
 metal with a steel or lironze blade fastened into a 
 globe, thus forming a falcliion-axe; and also a 
 lunate-blade, riveted in three jilaces to the handle, 
 foiming a true liattle-axe (Wilkinson.-voi.i.p. 325, 
 320) ; and there were, besides, true bills or axes 
 in form like our own. 
 
 akms, armour. 
 
 223 
 
 pBl£^ 
 
 ■'. Horn Vnm^eT. 
 S, S. Swords. 
 
 4, 5. Tulwar Swords. 
 6. Quarter pike. 
 
 Next came the dick or poniard, which, in the 
 He'iie.v word 3in c/ierrr, may ]xissib]y retain 
 some alHision to the original inslrnment made of 
 the antelope's honi, merely shar))er]ed, which is still 
 used in every part of the East vvliere the material 
 ran l.e'rocured. From existing figures, the dirk 
 apuears lo have been early made of metal in 
 Ea-ypt, and worn stuck in a girdle (Wilkinson, 
 i. ?j]0) ; but, from several texts (1 Sam. xvli. 39 ; 
 3 Sam. XX. f* ; and 1 Kings xx. II). it is evident 
 that tlie real sword was slung in a belt, and tiiat 
 'girding ' and ' loosing the sword ' were svnony- 
 •iMfUs terms for commencing and ending a war. 
 Tde blades were, it seems, alwavs short ('one is 
 
 mentioned of a cidiit's length) ; and tlie <lirk« 
 sword, at least, was always double-edged The 
 sheath was ornamented and jxilished. In Egypt 
 there were larger and lieavier swords, more nearly 
 like moilern tulwars, and of «hi' foim of an English 
 round-))ointed table-knife. ]iut while metal was 
 scarce, there were also swmds which niigiif l>« 
 called quarter-pikes, f)eing com])i)sed of a very 
 short wooden handle, sinmounted by a sjwar-hea 1. 
 Hence the Latin telum and ferrum continueii in 
 later ages to be used for gladius. In NuCift, 
 swords of heavy wood are still in use. 
 
 »<!}3>^ 
 
 '^^^^ii^i^i^i^Aii<i=>tiM&^i£SS:^ 
 
 1, 2. Spear-heads. 3, 4. Datn. 
 
 6. Oryx liorn spearhead. 
 
 The spear, PID"! ramach, was another ofl'ensive 
 weapon common to all the nations of anfitjuitv, 
 and was of various size, weight, and length. 
 Probably the sliepherd Helnews, like nations 
 similarly situated in northern Afri(-a, anciently 
 made use of tlie horn of an oryx, or a leucoryx, 
 above three f^t long, straightened in water, and 
 sheathed ujjon a thorn-wood staff. When sliaiji- 
 ened. this instrument woidil penetrate the hiile of 
 a bull, and, according to Strabo, even of an ele- 
 phant : it was light, very difficult to liieak, resisted 
 the blow of a l)attle-axe, and the animals whicii 
 fmnisiied it were abundant in Arabia and in the 
 desert east of Palestine. At a later ])eriod, the head 
 was of br.iss, and afterwards of iron. Very jondt r- 
 OHS weapons of this kind were often used in Egv] t 
 by the heavy infantry ; and, from various ciu inn- 
 stances, it may le inferred tliat amoTig tiie Helirews 
 and their immediate neighbouis, commanders in 
 pirticular were distingflished by iwavy S])ears. 
 Among these were geneially ranked the most va- 
 liant in light anil the largest in stature; sjicIi as 
 Goliath, 'whose spear was like a weaver's lieiini ' 
 (1 Sam. xvii. 7). and whose spear's head weiglied 
 six hundred shekels of iron : which by some is 
 asserted to be ecjual to twenty-five pounds 
 weiglit. The spear liad a point of metal at the 
 fnif-end to fix it in the ground, ))erlia])S with 
 the same massy glolie above it, whicii is still in 
 use, intended to counteiiialance the ])oint. It 
 was with this ferrel that Abncr slew Asaliel (2 
 Sam. ii. 22, 23). Tlie form of the head a:id 
 length of the siiaft ditVereil at different limes, both 
 ill Egy]it and Syria, and were iiilhienced by the 
 fiusliions set iiy vaiious conipiering nations. 
 
 Tlie javelins, named T\'^IT\ c/nnu-t/i, and p"T3 
 kcdon. n'ay have haii distinct forms: from the 
 context, wlieie chanelh first occurs, it ajijiears to 
 ha\e bren a s^iecies o( dart carried by light 'roo|)a 
 (1 Sam. xiii. 22; Ps. iv.); wliile the keilon which 
 was heavier, was most likely a kind oi' pilum Irt
 
 221 
 
 ARMS, ARMOUR. 
 
 mcst nations of antiquity the infantry, not bear- 
 ing a ejx!ar, carried two darts, those lightly aimed 
 using both for long casts, and the heavy-armed 
 only one for that purpose ; the second, more 
 jionderous than tlie other, being reserved for throw- 
 ing when close to the enemy, or for handling in 
 the manner of a S])ear. Tliis explanation may 
 throw liglit on the fact of the chaneth being 
 named in connection with the fUV tscnna, or 
 larger buckler (1 Chron. xii. 3 1), and may re- 
 concile what is said of the kedon (Job xxxix. 23 ; 
 xli. 2!>, and Josh. viii. 10). While on tlie sui)ject 
 of the javelin, it may l»e remaiked that, by tlie 
 act of casting one at David (1 Sam. xix. 9, lOj, 
 Saul virtually absolved liiui from his allegiance ; 
 for by the customs of ancient Asia, preserved in 
 the usages of the Teutonic and other nations, the 
 Sachseti recht, the custom of the East Franks, 
 &c., to throw a dart at a freedmau, who escaped 
 from it by (light, was the demonstrative token of 
 manumission given by his lord or master; lie was 
 theieby seat out of hand, manumissus, well ex- 
 pressed in the old English phrase ' scot-1'ree.' 
 But for this act of Saul, David might have been 
 viewed as a rebel. 
 
 r 
 
 1,3,3,4. Bows. 5,6. Quivers. 7,8. Arrows. 
 
 But the chief offensive weapon in Egypt, and, 
 from tlie nature of the c<JUntry, it may be inferred, 
 in Palestine also, was the war-bow, rilJIK^p 
 keskiotk, aTid T\iyp kes/ietk, the arrows being de- 
 nominated D^Vn lihitzcm, |*n hhitz. F'rom the sim- 
 ple implements used by the Hrst hunters, consisting 
 ine-ely of an elastic reed, a branch of a tree, or rib 
 of (/aim, the bow became in the course of time very 
 strong and tall, was made of brass, of wooil backed, 
 with horn, or of iiorn entirely, and even of ivory ; 
 some being shaped like tlie common English bow, 
 aiid others, particularly those used by riding na- 
 tions, like the buffalo horn. There were various 
 modes of bending this instrument, by pressure of 
 the knee, or by tlie toot, "^TT-, treading the how, or 
 by setting one end against the foot, drawing the 
 middle with tlie hand of the same side towards 
 the hip, and pushing the upper point Ibrward with, 
 tlie second hand, till the tliumb passed the loop 
 ot" the string beyond the nock. The homed bows 
 of the cavalry, shaped like those of the Chinese, 
 occur on monuments of antiquity. They cannot 
 b« bent from their form of a Roman C to that of 
 
 ARMS, ARMOUR. 
 
 what is termed a Cupid's bow ^_^^v.-^_^, but hf 
 ))lacing one end imder the thigh ; and as they ace 
 short, this operation is performed by Tahtar ridera 
 wliile in the saddle. This was the Parthian bow, as 
 is ])roved by several Persian bas-reliefs, and may 
 have been in use in the time of the Elamites, who 
 were a mounted people. These bows were carried 
 in cases to protect the string, which was composed 
 of deer sinews, from injury, and were slung on the 
 right hip of the rider, except when on the point ot 
 engaging. Then the string was often cast over the 
 head, and the bow hung upon the lueast, with tke 
 two nocks above each shoulder, like a pair of hoiua. 
 The hhitzim, or arrows, were likewise enclosed in 
 a case or quiver, vO tele^ hung sometimes on the 
 shoulder, and at otlier times on tlie left side ; and 
 six or eight tligiit-arrows were commonly stuck 
 in the edge of tiie cap, ready to be pulled out 
 and j)ut to the string. The infantry always 
 carried the arrows in a quiver on the right 
 shoulder, and the bow was kept unbent until the 
 moment of action. On a march it was carried on 
 the shield arm, where there was lie(]uently also 
 a horn bracer secured below the eltiow to receive 
 the shock from tlie string when an arrow was dis- 
 charged. Tlie flight or long-range arrows were 
 commonly of reed, not always feathered, and 
 mostly tipped with Hint p.oints ; but the shot or 
 aimed arrows, used for nearer purposes, were of 
 wood tipped with metal, about 30 inches long, 
 and winged with three lines of feathers, like 
 those in modern use : they varied in length at 
 different periods, and according to the substance 
 of the bows. 
 
 The last missile instrument to be mentioned 
 is the sling, yyp kola (Job xli. 2S), an im- 
 provement upon the simple act of throwing 
 stones. It was the favourite weapon of the Ben- 
 jamites, a small tribe, not making a great mass 
 in an order of battle, but well composed for light 
 troops. They could also boast of using the sling 
 equally well with the left hand as with the right. 
 The sling was made of plaited thongs, somewhat 
 broad in the middle, to lodge the stone or leaden 
 missile, and was twirled two or three times roun I 
 before the stone was allowed to take flight 
 
 [Egyptian Slingers and .Sling.] 
 
 Stones could not be cast above 4C0 feet, tut 
 leaden bullets could be thrown as far as 600 feet. 
 The force as well as precision of aim whiv,h 
 might be attained in the use of this instrumerti 
 was remarkably shown in the case of David; and 
 several nations of antiquity boasted of great skill 
 in the practice of the sling.
 
 ARMS, ARMOUR. 
 
 An (!iese bund-weapons were in uso at (liffprf-nt 
 {.'♦■riods. not only anionj; tlie Hebrews and Kgyj>- 
 tians. lint, likewise in Assyria, Persia, Greece, and 
 Macedonia ; in wliicli last ronntry the sarissa car- 
 ried by tlie iieavy infantry of the ])halanx ditlered 
 from the otheis only in tiie irieat lenjjtli ol' the shaft. 
 The Roman jjiluin was a kind ofdart , distinguish- 
 ed f'roui those oC other nations chielly liy its weight, 
 and the great uroiiortional length oi' the metal or 
 iron part, wiiich constituted one hall'of the whole, 
 or from iwo and a half to three feet, Mncli of this 
 k'i7gth was hollow, and received iieaily twenty 
 inches ol the shaft within it : the jioint was never 
 hooked like that of conuuon darts, because the wea- 
 pon being nearly indestructible, the soldiers always 
 reckoned upon advancini^ in battle and recover- 
 ing it without troidjle wlien thrown; whereas, if 
 it had been hoiiked or hamate, tlie.v coidd not 
 have wrenched it out of hostile shields or brea.st- 
 plates without trouble and delay. 
 
 Defensi .• E Arms. -The most ancient defensive 
 piece was the shield, buckler, roundel, or target, 
 composed of a great variety, of materials, very 
 dJSiftrent in form and size, and therefore in all 
 
 ARMS, ARMOUR. 
 
 33ft 
 
 1. The Tsenni, or Great Shield. 2. Commnn F.f»yptiaii 
 Shield. ;i. Target. 4, •'i. Ancient Shields of un- 
 known tribes. G. Roundel. 
 
 nations bearing a variety of names. The He- 
 brews used the word HJ^ tsentia, for a great shield ; 
 defence, protection Gen. xv. I; Ps. xlvii. 9; 
 Prov. XXX. 5), which is conunonly foimd in con- 
 nection with spear, and was the shelter of hea- 
 vily-armed infantry : pD inaf/in, a lni<-kier, or 
 smaller shield, which, from a similar juxtapo- 
 sition with sword, bow and arrows. ap]K'a.rs to 
 have been the defence of tlie other-armed infan- 
 try and of chiefs ; and niPID sohuirah, txirma. 
 a roundel, which may have been a))i)ro])riate<l 
 to archers and slingers; and there were C'DPtJ' 
 Bhelatim, and ""uVt^' slieUi, synonymous with 
 nuiijin, only dilVerent in omaineiit. In tlie 
 more advanced eras of civilization shields were 
 made of light wood not liable to si)lif. covered 
 with bull-hide of two or more thicknesses and 
 bo*.'dcred with metal : the lighter kinds were made 
 •f wicker-work or (isier, similarly, but less solidly 
 Oftvered; orol dooblu ox-hide cut into a round form. 
 Tliere were others of a single hide, extremely tiiick 
 fr«M having been boiled; tlieir surface presented 
 
 an appearance of many folds, like round w.ivo* 
 i;p and down, which might yield, liut could rarely 
 be penetrated. 
 
 We may infer that at first the Hebrews Jior- 
 rowed the forms in use in Egypt, and that their 
 common shields were a kind of parallelogram, 
 broadest and arched at the lop and cut .square 
 beneath, bordered with metal, the surface Ijeing 
 co\ered with raw hide with the hair on. The 
 li»hter shields may have been soake<l in oil 
 and (hied in tlie shade to make them hard ; no 
 doubt,liippo])otanius, rhinoceros, and elephant skin 
 shields were brought fioni Ethiopia and juirchased 
 in the Phunician markets; but small round 
 hand-bucklers of whale-skin, still used by Ara- 
 fiian swordsmen, came from the Erythrwan sea. 
 During the Assyrian and Persian supremacy the 
 Hebrews may have used the square, oblcng, and 
 round shields of these nations, and may have sub- 
 sequoTitly copied those of Grt,?ce and Rome. Th« 
 princes of Israel had shields of precious metals ; 
 all were m;mageil by awoodin or leathern handle, 
 and often slung by a thong over the ii<;ck. W ilh 
 the larger kinds a testudo could be formed by 
 pressing the ranks close together; antl while the 
 outside men kept their shields before and on the 
 flanks, those within raised theirs above the head, 
 and thus produced a kind of surlace, sometimes 
 as close and fitted together as a pantile roof, and 
 capable of resisting the pressure even of a Ijody of 
 men marching upon it. 
 
 The tsenna was most likely what in the feudal 
 ages would have been called a pari^c, for such 
 occurs on the Egyptian momiinents. This weapon 
 was about five i'eet high, with a j)ointed arch above, 
 and square below, resembling the feudal knights 
 shielil, only that the point was reveised. This 
 kind of largjp-sized shield, however, was best fitted 
 for men witiiout any otlier armour, when combat- 
 ing in open countries, or carrying on sieges; for 
 it may be remaiked in general that the mili- 
 tary buckler of antiquity was large in pro])Oition 
 as other defensive armour was wanting. Shields 
 were hung upon (he battlements of walls, and, as 
 still occurs, chiefly above gates of cities by the 
 watch and ward. In time of peace they weie 
 covered to preserve them from the sun, and in 
 war uncovered ; this sign was jioetically used to 
 denote coming hostilities, as in Isa. xxii. 6, &c. 
 In Euro]ie, wheie the Crusaders could imitate the 
 Saracens, but i">t introduce their cliniuti', sliields 
 were carved in stone upon towers and gates, as 
 at Yoik, &c. The Eastern origin of this practice 
 seems to be attested by the word Zziine, which, 
 in German, still denotes a battlement, something 
 jointed, a summit, and conveys the idea of a 
 javise with ttie jioint u|ipeimost, a shape such as 
 Arabliin battlcmint.s often assume. 
 
 The lIcliKi't was next in consideration, and 
 171 the eaillest ages was made of osier, or rushes, 
 in the form of a beehive, or of a skull-cap. The 
 skins of the heads of animals — of lions, liears, wild 
 Ijoars, bulls, and horses — were likewise aiiojjted, 
 and were adoined with rows of teeth, manes, 
 and bristles, \^'(lcll, linen clotii in many folds, 
 and a kind of fdt, weie also in e.irly use, and 
 helmets of tiiese. matei ials may l)ecliserved worn by 
 the nations of .Asia at war with the conqueror kings 
 of Egypt, e\<ii before the df])ai!uie of Israel. At 
 that time als,i these kings had helmets of metal, 
 of rouriiled or |i<;inted fdins, adorned with a figure
 
 226 
 
 A.RMS, ARMOUR. 
 
 rf llie serpent Kneph ; and an all ieJ natioti, 
 jiernaps the Cariati. repoit.ed to lia\e Hist worn a 
 military cre^t, bears on the skull-cap of their 
 brazen helmets a pair oi" horns with a glohe in the 
 middle — the solar arkite symbol. The nations of 
 
 J. Of Rushes. 
 8 Egyptian. 
 3 4. Western Asia. 
 
 5. Carian ? 
 
 6, 7. Egyptian. 
 
 8. Assyrian. 
 
 9. Greek. 
 
 10. Ionian. 
 
 11. Parthian. 
 
 la, 13. Other Asiatic tribes 
 
 farther Asia, however, used the woollen or braidefl 
 (•,a])s, still retained, and now called kaouk and 
 fez, around which the turban is usually wound. 
 These were almost invariably supplied with long 
 lappets to cover the ears and the back of tlie 
 head, and ]>riiices usually wore a radiated crown 
 on the summit. This was the form of the Syrian, 
 and ])robably of the Assyrian helmets, excepting 
 that the last mentioned were of brass, though they 
 still retained the low cylindrical shape. They212 
 kolia, some lielmet of this kind, was worn by the 
 trained infantry, who were spearmen among tlie 
 Hebrews ; but archers and slingers had round 
 skull-caps of skins, felts, or quilted stuffs, such 
 as are still in use among the Arabs. The form 
 of Greek and Roman helmets, both of leather and 
 of brass, is well known ; they were most likely 
 adopted also by the Hebrews and Egyptians 
 luring their subjection to those nations, but require 
 30 further notice here. 
 
 . 2. Canaan. 
 
 Egypt. 
 
 Body Armour. — The most ancient Persian 
 idols are clad in shagged skins, such as the j^gis 
 of Jupiler and Minerva may have been, the type 
 being taken fr« m a Cyrenaean or African legend, 
 
 ARMS, ARMOUR. 
 
 and the pretended red goat -skin may oe au^jr^^ged 
 to have been that of a speines of gnu f 'Jatohlepa* 
 Gorgon, Ham. Smith), an animal falded to liave 
 killed men by its sight, ami therefoie answering 
 to the condition both of a kind of g(.>;it and al 
 jjroducing death by the sight idone. I/i Kgyjrt 
 cuirasses were mantifactiued of h'atlier, of brass, 
 and of a succession of iron lioop-i, chiefly covering 
 the abdomen and the shoulders ; but a more an* 
 cieiit national form was a kind of thorax, tippet, 
 jV"ltJ' s/iereijoii, or scpiare, with an ojjening in it. 
 for tlie head, the four ])oints covering (he breast, 
 back, and both u])])er arms. This kind in ])ar- 
 ticular was all'ected by the royal band of relatives 
 who surrounded the Pharaoh, were his subordinate 
 commanders, messengers, ai)d body-guur<ls, bear- 
 ing his standards, ensign-fans, anil sun-screens, 
 his portable throne, his bow and arrows. Beneatb 
 this square was anotlier piece, jirotecting tlie trunk 
 of the body, and botli were in general covered 
 with a red-coloured cloth or stuff. On the oldest 
 fictile va-ses a shoulder-piece likewise occurs, 
 worn by Gieek and Etruscan warriors. It covera 
 the i>}3per edge of tlie body armour, is perforated 
 in the mid(ile to allow the head to jiass, but haz^fa 
 
 <^liiii^: 
 
 1. Kgyplian tiyulat'i-vl. a. ^It-sve of rin;^-niail, loniait. 
 
 equal on the breiist and liack. .square on the 
 shoulders, and is_ evidently (tf le.if her. (See tlw 
 figure of MenelaMs discovcr'nif Helen in the 
 sack of Troy. MWUn, Man. iiieiiits.) This piece 
 of armour occurs also on the slioulders of Va- 
 rangi (northmen, wh.) were the body-guards of the 
 Greek emperors}; but they are stuiideil with roun- 
 dels or bosses, as they .ippear tigmed in mosaic or 
 fresco on the walls of the cathedral of Ravenna, 
 dating from the times of Justinian. The late Ro- 
 man legionaries, as puldished by ])u Choul, again 
 wear the tippet armour, liketliat i/f the Egyptiatss, 
 and one or other of the al)Ove foruffi may be found 
 on figures of Danes in illuminated manuscripts 
 of the eleventh century. 
 
 By their use of metal for defensive armour, the 
 Carians appear to have created astonishment 
 amonsr the Egyptians, and therefore may be pre- 
 sumeil to have been the first nation so pro- 
 tected in western Asia; nevertheless, in the 
 tombs of (he kings near Thebes, a tigulated 
 hauberk is represented, composed of sm«]l 
 three-coloured pieces of metal ; one golden, tb« 
 others reddi.sh and green. It is this suit wbifeO
 
 ARMS, ARMOUR. 
 
 ARMS, ARMOUR. 
 
 22r 
 
 Denon re )reseii:s as composed of rings set on edge; to observe, that in pstimating tlio meaning at 
 but tlii'v are all ]iaiallelo,L,'ranis, with tiie lower HebrtvV names for armour of all kinds, they are 
 edge fiirniiiig the sequent of a circle, and each 4 
 
 piece, beside the lastenini,', has a button and a ver- 
 tical slit above it, givini; flexibility by ineans of 
 tlie bult<jn of each square working in the aperture 
 of the piece beneath it. Tiiis kind of armour 
 may be meant by die word t<~inn techcra, the 
 closest interpietation of whicli appears to be de- 
 cussatio, ti(/i<latiO, a tiling. The e-vjjression in 2 
 Chron. x\iii. ^3, may be that Ahab was struck in 
 one of tie grooves or slits in the squares of his 
 techera, or lietween tsvo of Uiem where they do not 
 overlap; or [jeihaps, with more probability, l)etwecn 
 the metal hoops of the trunk of the shereyon before 
 mentioned, vyhere the thorax overlaps the al)domen. 
 The term D'CJ'pu'p kaskasim, 'scales,' in the case 
 of Goliath's armour, denotes the squamous kind, 
 Si-'-st likely that in whicii the pieces were sewed 
 Epon a clotli, and not hinged to each otiier, as in tiie 
 techera. It was tlie defensive armour of Northern 
 
 [Parthian Horseman.] 
 
 and Eastern nations, the Persian Cataphracti, 
 Parthians, and Sartnatians. But of true annular 
 or ringed mail, Denon's figure being incoiTcct, we 
 doubt if there is any positive evidence, excepting 
 where rings were sewn se])arately upon cloth, 
 anterior to the sculpture at Takt-i-Boostan, or 
 the close of the Parthian era. The existence of 
 mail is often incorrectly infeiTed from our trans- 
 lators using the word wherever (lexible armoiu- is 
 to be mentioned. Tiie techera could not well, 
 be worn without an under-garment of some den- 
 sity to resist the friction of metal ; and this may 
 have been a kind of sagnm, the shereyon of the 
 Hebrews, under another form — the dress Saul put 
 upon David before he assumed the breastplate 
 and girdle. The Roman sagnm ofl'ers a parallel 
 instance. Under that name it was worn at first 
 a loricd, then beneath it, and at last again 
 without, but the stulfitseif made into a kind of felt. 
 The Cuirass and Corslet, strictly speaking, were 
 of prepared leather (cerium), but often also com- 
 posed of quilted cloths : tlie former in ancient 
 times generally denoted a suit with leathern a.p- 
 
 tiendages at the bottom and at the shoulder, as used 
 ly the Romans ; the latter, one in which the barrel 
 did not come down below the hips, and usually 
 destitute of leathern vittae, which was nationally 
 Greek. In later ages it aiways designates a breant 
 aiid back piece of steel. It is, however, rtiquisite 
 
 1, 8. E«»ly Greek. 
 3. Greek. 
 
 liable to the same laxity of use which all other 
 languages have manifested ; for in military mat- 
 ters, more perhaps than in any other, a name 
 once adopted remains the same, though the ob- 
 ject may be changed by successive modifications, 
 till there remains but little resemblance to 
 that to which the designation was originally 
 applied. The objects above denominated ap- 
 penilages and vittae (in the feudal ages, lam- 
 brequins), were straps of leather secured to the 
 lower rim of the barrel of a suit of armour, and 
 to the openings for arm-holes : the first were aliont 
 three and a half inches in width ; the second, two 
 and a half. They were ornamented with em- 
 broidery, covered with rich stiilVs and iioldsinithg' 
 work, and made Iravy al the lower extremity, to 
 cause them always to hang down in proper order; 
 but those on the arm-holes had a slight connection, 
 so as to keep them equal when (he ann was lilted. 
 These vitta: were rarely in a single row, iiTit in 
 general formed two or three row«, alternately co- 
 \ cring the o|)enlng between those underneatll, and 
 then protecting the thighs nejirly to the kne«', and 
 half the upper arm. In the Roman service, undei 
 the suit of armour, was the sagnm, made ()( 
 red serge or baize, coming down to file cap of (he 
 knee and folding of tlie arm, so that the vit(;e 
 hung entirely upon it. Other nations h;i(l always 
 an equivalent to this, but not equally long; and 
 in the opinion of some, the Hebrew shercycn 
 served the same purpose. 
 
 The Roman and Greek suits were, with slight 
 difl'erence, similarly laced together on the lelY, or 
 shield side ; and on the shoulders were bands and 
 clasps, comparatively narrow in (hose of (lie Ro- 
 mans, which covered the joinings of (ln' breast and 
 back pieces on the shoulleis, came from behind, 
 and were fas(ened to a button on each breast. A« 
 the throat the suit of armour had alwavi a Wot i>k
 
 228 
 
 ARMS, ARMOUR. 
 
 etlgin;^, oftPii a l)an(l of l)ra';s or silver ; in the Ro- 
 man, and cflen in tlie Greek, adorned with a lion s 
 or a Gorgon's liead. It was here that, in tlit time 
 of Augustus, and prohaldy much earlier, tlie war- 
 riors distinj;uished for particular acts of valour 
 wore insignia; a practice only revived t)y the 
 modems under tlie names of crosses and decora- 
 tions. The Romans, it appears, had phlalfe and 
 phalera- of honour, tei-ms which liave l)een su]i- 
 |)Osed 1o signify bracelets and medals; Ijut all 
 (■pinion on the suLject was only conjectural pre- 
 viously to the discovery, on the borders of the 
 Riiine, of a monumental has-relief, raised l)y the 
 fjeedman of Marcus Caelius Lembo, tril'une of 
 the (xiix ") 18th legion, wlio fell in ihe disastrous 
 
 v/iCii^- 
 
 overthrow of Vanis. The effigy is of three-quarter 
 length, in a full suit of armour, with a lam-el 
 crown on the head, a Gallic twisted torque round 
 the neck; and from the lion-head shoulder-clas])S 
 of the cuircss hang two embossed bracelets, liaving 
 beneath them a label witli three ]ioints, from which 
 are suspended five medals of honour; one large,^ 
 ■m the pit of the stomach, representing a face of 
 Medusa ; and two on each side, one beneath the 
 otner ; and all as fiir as can be seen charged with 
 lions" faces and lions' heads in profile. The mo- 
 nument is now in the museum of the university at 
 Bonn. 
 
 Tne girdle, or more properly the baldric or belt 
 {cxngula or balteus), was used by the Hebrews 
 under the name of 11TJ< izor : it was of leatlier, 
 gmlded with metal plates or bnllBE ; when the 
 armour was sliglit, broad, and capable of being 
 girt upon the Ijips : otherwise it sujiported the 
 sword scarf-wise from tlie shoulder. 
 
 Greaves were likewise known, even so early as 
 the time of David, for Goliah wore them. They 
 consisted of a pair of shin-covers of brass or strong 
 leather, bound by thongs rotmd the calves and 
 aiujve ("he ankles. Tliey reached only to tlie knees, 
 excepting among the Greeks, whose greaves, elastic 
 behind, caught nearly the whole leg, and were 
 raised in front above the knees. The Hebrew 
 word ]XD soin, in Isaiah ix. .5, is supposed to 
 iuean a half-greave, thoiigh the passage is alto- 
 gether obscure. Perhaps the war-lioot may be 
 explained by the war-shoe of Egypt with a metal 
 point : and then the words might be rendered, ' For 
 everv greavp ?f the armed foot is with confused 
 noise and garments rolled in blood,' &c.. instead 
 of ' Every battle of the warrior,' &c. But, after 
 ill, till* i<! not quite aatlsfactory. — C. H. S. 
 
 ARDERi 
 
 ARNON (pi")?? ; Sept. 'Ap, Cp .. a river forny 
 ing the sotithem lioundary of frMis-.Tordanic Pa- 
 lestine, and separating it from the land of Moab 
 (Num. xxi. 13, 26 ; Deut. ii. 21 ; iii. 8, 16 ; 
 Josh. xii. 1; Isa. xvi. 2; Jer. xlviii. 20). 
 Bmckhardt was the first to give a safisfivctory 
 account of this river, under the name of ^^'ady 
 Modjeb, which it now bears. It rises in the 
 miinntaius of Gilead, near Katrane, whence ,t 
 pursues a circuitous course of about eiglity miUs 
 to the Dead Sea. It Hows in a rocky bed, and, at 
 tlie jiart visited by Burckhardt, in a channel so 
 deep and jirecipitaus as to appear inaccessible; yet 
 along tiiis, winding among tinge fragments of rock, 
 lies the most frequented road, and, not being far 
 from Dibon, probably ti;.nf taken by the Israelites. 
 The descent into the valley from the south took 
 Irby and Mangles ( Letters, p. 461) one hour and a 
 half; the descent from the north took Burckhardt 
 (Syria, p. 372) thirty-five minutes. Tlie last-named 
 traveller declares that he had iie\cr felt such suf- 
 focating heat as he experienced in this valley from 
 the concentrated rays of the sun and their reflec- 
 tion from the rocks. The stream is almost dried 
 up in summer ; but huge masses of rock, torn from 
 the banks, and deposited high above ttie usual 
 channel, evince its fulness and impetuosity in the 
 rainy season. Irby and Mangles su])pose that it 
 is this which renders the valley of the Anion less 
 shrubby than that of most other streams in the 
 country. ' There are, however, a few tamarisks, 
 and here and there are oleander growing about it.' 
 Near this place the old Roman road comes down 
 upon the sheam ; and here there remains a single 
 high arch of a bridge, all the others having dis- 
 appeared. 
 
 AROER ("lyiiy; Sejit. 'hpo-hpX a town on 
 the north side of the ri\ er Anion, and therefore on 
 the southern border of the territory conquered fi-om 
 the ,\morites, which was assigned to the tribes of 
 Reuben and Gad (Deut. ii. 36 ; Josh. xii. 2 ; 
 xili. 9). The Amorites had previously dispos- 
 sessed the Ammonites of this teriitory ; and al- 
 though, in the texts cited, the town seems to be 
 given to Reuben, it is mentioned as a Moahitish 
 city by Jeremiah (xlviii. 19). Burckhardt found 
 the ruins of this town under the name of Araayr, 
 on the edge of a precipice overlooking the river 
 ( Travels in Syria, 372). They are merely alluded 
 to by him, and have not been noticed by other tra- 
 vellers. Aroer is always named in conjunction 
 witli 'the city that is in the midst of the river;' 
 whence Dr. Maiisford (Script. Gaz.) conjectures 
 that, like Rabbath Ammon [wliich see], it con- 
 sisted of tvvo parts, or distinct cities; the one on 
 the liaiik of the river, and tlie other in the valley 
 beneath, surrounded, either naturally or artificially, 
 by tlie waters of the r'wex 
 
 2 AROER. one of the towns 'built,' orprobahly 
 rebult, liv the tribe of Gad (Num. xxxii. 34). It 
 is said in Josh. xiii. 25. to be • liefore Ratibah' 
 [of Ammon] ; but, as Raumer well lemarks (Pa- 
 iiistina. p. 240), this could not ])ossibly have 
 been in the topograpliical sen.se of the words (in 
 which before means east of), steing that Aroer, a« 
 a town on the e.asteni border < f Gad, must have 
 been west of Rabbah. But to a person in Palestine 
 Proper, or coming from th.e Joidaii, Aroer would b« 
 before. Rabiiah in the ordniary sense; and it ai> 
 nears to have been tin:? an ilerstood by IkirckhanH
 
 AROER. 
 
 [Syria, 355), wlio, in journeying from Szalt 
 towards Raljba til Anunoii, notices a ruined site, 
 called Ayra, as ' one of the towns built by tiie 
 tribe of Gaii.' Tiiis Ayra, about seven miles 
 Bouth-west from Sz.ilt, !•< probably tlie same with 
 ttie ^n-ay-el-Emir, visiteil by Legh (p. 246), on 
 his way from Ileshbon to Szalt, and which in 
 Berghaus's celebrated map of Palestine is ))laced 
 two (ierman (nine Knglish) miles W.N.W. of 
 Rabbah. Aroer of (iad is a.so mentioned in 
 Judg. xi. 3'?, and 2 Sam. xxiv. 5. • 
 
 3. AROKH, a city in the tribe of Judah (1 
 Sam. XXX. 2'^). 
 
 4. AROER, a city in the south of Judah, to 
 which David sent presents after vecoveiing the 
 spoil of Ziklag (1 Sam. xxx. 26, 2S ). At the 
 distance of tvvenly geographical miles S. by W. 
 from Hebron, Dr Roljiuson came to a broad VVatly 
 where there are many pits for water, which are 
 ••ailed "Ararah, and which gave name to the valley. 
 In the valley and on the western hill are evident 
 traces of an ancient village or town, consisting 
 only of foundations of uniiewn stones, now much 
 scattered, but yet sufficiently distinct to mark them 
 as foundations. Small fragments of jiottery are 
 also everywhere visible.. The identity of name 
 BatisHes the traveller that he had here found the 
 Aroer of Judah. 
 
 ARPHAD, or Arpad (HBIX ; Sept. 'ApcpdB), 
 a Syrian city, having its own king, and in Scrip- 
 ture always associated with Hamatli, the Epi- 
 pllpnia of the Greeks (2 Kings xviii. 34; xix. 
 34; Isa. x. 9; xxv^vi. 19). It luis very com- 
 monly been confuanded witli the Phcenician 
 Arvad or Aradus [Arvad]. Michaelis and 
 others seek Arphad in RaphaufC or Raphaneae of 
 the Greek geographers (Ptolem. v. 15 ; Steph. 
 Byzant. in 'En-i(J)aveio : Joseph. Z>(; i?e^/. Jt«^. vii. 
 1. 3; vii. 5. Ij, which was a day"s journey west 
 of Hamath (Mauueit, vi. p. 431). Some, however, 
 are content to find this Arphad in the Alpha 
 which Josephus {Dc Bell. Jud. iii. 3. 6) mentions 
 as situated on thenortli-eastein frontier of the north- 
 ernmost province of Herod Agrippa's tetraichy. 
 But all these explanations are purely conjectural, 
 and Arphad must still be numbered among un- 
 ascertained Scrijitural sites. 
 
 ARPHAXAD (nC'?P>NI ; Sept. 'Apcpa^dS), 
 the son of Sliein, and father of Salah ; born one 
 year after the Deluge, and died u.c. 1901, aged 
 438 years (Gen. xi. 12, &c.). 
 
 ARROW. This word is frequently used as 
 the symbol of calamity or disease indicted by 
 God {Job, vi. 4; xxxiv. 6; Ps. xxxviii. 2; 
 Deut. xxxii. 23; comp. Ezek. v. 16; Zech. ix. 
 14). The metaphor, thus applied was also in use 
 among the heathen : thus, Ovid — 
 ' Noil mea sunt summa leviter destricta. sagitta 
 Pec'ora : descendit vulnus ad ossa meum.' 
 It derived its propriety and force from the popu- 
 lar belief tliat all diseases were immediate and 
 special iii(licti< ns from Heaven. 
 
 Ligktpi.iHjs aic, by a very tine figure, described 
 as ^iie aiTcnvs of God (Ps. xviii. 14; cxliv. 6; 
 Habak. iii, II; coinji. VVisd. v. 21; 2 Sam. 
 Kxii. \b). 
 
 ' Arrow ' is occasionally used to denote some 
 w dden or inevitable Janger; as in Ps. xci. 5 : — 
 '' The arrow that flitfdi by day.' It is also ligu- 
 
 ARTAXERXES. 
 
 M( 
 
 rative of anything injurious, a? a de<eil.iii to*igue 
 (Ps. cxxix. 4; jer. ix. 7); a bitter word (Ps. 
 Ixiv. 3); a false testimony I'Prov. xxv. \^). As 
 .symi)olical of oral wrong, tlieligme may j-eiliafis 
 have been deiived from the daitiiig ' arrowv 
 tongue ' of serfients. 
 
 The arrow, however, is not always symbolical 
 of evil. In Ps. cxxvii. 4, 5, well-conditioned 
 children are comjiared to ' arrows in the hands of 
 a mighty man;' /. e. instruments of powtr and 
 action. The arrow is also used in a good sense 
 to denote the eilicient and irresistible energy of 
 the word of God in the hands of the IVIessiali 
 (Ps. xlv. 6; Isa. xliv. 2, and Lowth's note 
 thereon)- — Wemyss's Clavis Symbolica, &c. 
 
 ARROW'S. |a»ms.] 
 
 ARROWS, DIVIN.\TION BY. [Divi- 
 nation.] 
 
 ARTAXERXES, Artachsh^.st f KIilD.!;?'i;in-)i< 
 as it is most frecpiently written) ;■« tiie title under 
 whidi more than one Peisiu'.. king is mentioned 
 in the Old Testament. The Hebrew form is a 
 slight corruption of "int^TUTIN. which letters De 
 Sacy has deciphered in the inscriptions of Nakslii 
 Rustam, and which he \o(:ix\\zvs Arta/is/ietr (Afi- 
 tiq. d. I. Perse, p. 100). Gesenius pronounces 
 them Artachsliatr ; and, by assuming the easy 
 change of r into s, and the transjiosition of the s, 
 makes Artachsluist very closely represent its pro- 
 totype. The word is a compound, the first ele- 
 ment of which, artu — found in several Persian 
 names — is generally admitted to mean yreat ; the 
 latter part De Sacy conceived to be the Zend 
 Khshethro. Ki'ig, to which Gesenius and Pott 
 assent. Thus the sense of great warrior, which 
 Herodotus (vi. US) assigned to the Greek form 
 Artaxerxes, accords witn that which etymology 
 discovers in the original Persian title (jjarticu- 
 larly when we consider that, as the king could 
 only be chosen liom the .soldier-caste — from the 
 Kskatriyas — warrior and king are so far cognate 
 terms); although Pott, according to his etymo- 
 logy of Xerxi s. takes Artaxerxes to be more than 
 equivalent to Art.idishatr— to be ' magnus regum 
 rex" {Etym. Fnrsch. i. p. Ixvii.). 
 
 The first AuTACUsuAsiiT (Nrit^'??'nri"lN, and 
 once pointed ArtaclLsltasltta ; Sept. 'AfidaacurBa) 
 is mentioned in Ezia iv. 7-24, iis tlie Persian king 
 who, at the instigation of the adversaries of the 
 Jews, obstructed the rebuilding of the Temple, 
 from his time to that of Darius, king of Persia. 
 According to the arguments adducoil in the art. 
 Ahasueuus, this king is the immediate prede- 
 cessor of Darius Hystaspis, and can be no other 
 than the Magian impostor, Smerdis, who seized 
 on the throne B.C. 521, and was munieied after a 
 usurjiation of less than eight months (^ Herod, iii. 
 61-7S). Profane historians, indeetl, have not 
 mentioned him under the title of .Vrtaxcrxes ; but 
 neither do Herodotus and Justin (the latterof whom 
 calls him Oropasfa, i. 9) agree in his name, sc 
 that this fact is not, of itself, eiwugh to invalidsite 
 any deductions which are in other respects .sound. 
 
 As to the second AuTACHSHAsr (t^l^P^^nJ!)')^ ; 
 Sept. 'ApdaaacrBd), in the seventh year of whose 
 reign Ezra led a second colony of the Jewjsh 
 exiles back to Jerusalem (Ezra vii. 1, sy.), the 
 opinions are divided between Xerxes and his sua 
 Artaxerxes Longimanus. The arguiiienes brought 
 forward by the advocates for Xeixes, among wheal
 
 230 
 
 ARTAXERXES. 
 
 AUTKMlh. 
 
 «e J. D. Micliaelis, .Talin, and De Wette, are 
 briefly as follows : Tluit. as the preceding jwrtJou 
 of the ljo;)k of Ezra lehiles (o Darius Ilystaspis, 
 it is most natural to expect that the next following 
 section should refer to liis successor, Xerxes; that, 
 on the supposition that Artaxerxei is here meant, 
 we not only have to explain how the reign of 
 Xerxes, who had been so favourable to the Jews, 
 is entirely omitted here, Imt also how the narrative 
 can mal'ie .such a tremendous leap as from the 
 sixth year of Darius to the seventh of Artaxerxes, 
 a period of fifty-eight yi ars ; that, on that su])po- 
 »ilion, the interval between the seventh year of his 
 reign, vvhen Ezra set out, allows too short a space 
 for the aflairs of the colony to have reached that 
 state of disorder in which Nohemiali found them 
 on his arrival at Jerusalem, in the twentieth year 
 of his reign; and, lastly, that Jose})hiis calls the 
 king in question Xerxes (Antiq. Jud. xi. 5). 
 
 The supporters of the other alternative-that 
 the king here meant is Ar axerxes Longinianus — ■ 
 among whom are J. H. Michaelis, Eichhom, and 
 Bertholdt, rest on tlie following reasons, as stated 
 chiefly by Bertholdt: That the coherence between 
 the several poiti;)ns ol' the book of Ezra is I'y no 
 means so strict as to make the first argument con- 
 clusive; as, even assuming that Xerxes is the 
 person rel'erred to, there is still a gap of thirty-six 
 years between the end of c!i. vi. and the iieginniug 
 nf ch. vii. ; that the oiijection, that the interval 
 oerween the arrivals of Ezra and Nehemiali in 
 Jerusalem is too shoit (on the supposition that the 
 former lefl Babylon in the reign of Artaxerxes) 
 to account for the confusion in which the latter 
 found the colony, loses its force, if we consider 
 that the progress of the infant state was neces- 
 sarily slow in its diflicult position, and if we also 
 conceive Ezras efforts to have been more directed 
 to reform the religious than the civil state of the 
 Jews ; ihat the ajjpeal to Josephus is of no avail, 
 as lie calls the king in whose reign Nehemiali re- 
 turned Xerxes also, which is decidedly incorrect, 
 since Nehemiali went back to Persia in the thirty- 
 second year of the king (xiii. 6), and Xerxes only 
 reigned twenty-one years ; that the Apocrypiial 
 Esdras, in its version of tliis history, calls the 
 king Artaxerxes; that, in taking our Artachshast 
 to be Artaxerxes Longlmaiius, we have the sup- 
 port of a considerable lesemblance in the two 
 names; and lastly, that (if Xerxes is the Acltash- 
 verosh of the books of Esiher and Ezra) we not 
 only avoid the evil attending the other alternative 
 — the evil of lieing obliged to recognise him under 
 two widely ditl'erent names in almost contempo- 
 raneous books — but also find Aitaxerxes under 
 one and the saine name in the books of Ezra and 
 Nehemii'.h. This last argument proceeds on the 
 dssumption that the Aitachshast of whom Ezra 
 and Nehemiah speak is the same |)eisoii , and, as 
 l']zra anil Nehemiah weie decidedly contemjjo- 
 raries ( Neh. \iii. P), the reasons here adduced 
 may derive some adilitioual force fi'om the argu- 
 ments brought forward below. 
 
 The third Autachshast (the forms in the He- 
 brew and Sept. are the same as in the last rase) 
 is the Persian king v/ho, in tlie twentieth year of 
 his. reign, considerately allowed Neh miah to go 
 to Jerusalem for the fiutheraiiee of ])uiely national 
 ol>jects. invested iiiin with the go\einiiient of his 
 own people, and allowed iiim to remain there for 
 twelve years (Neh. ii. I, sq.; v. 11). It is almost 
 
 unanin -usly agreed that the king here intended it 
 Aitaxerxes Longinianus, who reigned from the 
 year 46 I to 12.) is.c. The date of Nehemiah "» 
 departure is, therefore, the year 411 B.C. Some 
 few have indeed maintained (and it seems prin- 
 C!])ally tor the puipose of reconciling Neh. xiii. 
 2S, with Josephus, ArUiq. xi. 8) that tlie king here 
 referred to is Artaxerxes i\inemon, who reigned 
 from the year ir.c. 404 to 3')9 ; and J. D. Mi- 
 cliaelis (^«>Her/i:.y. rMiyeZ.) admits that he should 
 not know how to refute any one who advocated 
 that opinion. Bertholdt, however (Einleii. iii. 
 1014), endeavours to find a conclusive argument 
 in the fact that Eliashib, who was the high-priest 
 when Nehemiah arrived at Jerusalem (iii. 1), was 
 the grandson of the high-prirst Jeslmi, who ac- 
 companied the first colony under Zerulibabel (xii. 
 1, lU). He argues, namely, that the three gene- 
 rations which elapsed between 'he accession of 
 Cyrus and the arrival of Nehemiah, and which in 
 the ordinary computation amount to ninety-nine 
 years, tall/ so exactly with the ninety-two years 
 which intervene between the fiist year of Cyrus 
 and the tuentiefli year of Aitaxerxes Longimauus, 
 as to render it far more probalile that the latter is 
 the Aitaclishast of the Uook of Nehemiah; where- 
 as, on the su])position that Artaxeixes Mnemon is 
 the person meant, Eliashib and his father and 
 grandfather must have enjoyed the high-priesthood 
 between them for the incredible period of 154 
 years. — J. N. 
 
 ARTEMAS {'ApTefj.as\ This name (which 
 is a contractiorr for Aiteniidorus) occurs only 
 once (Tit. iii. 12), as that of an esteemed dis- 
 ciple whom St. Paul designed to send into Lrett 
 to sujiply the place of Tifus, whom he invite'' to 
 visit him at Nicopolis. When the Epistle was 
 written, the Apostle seems not to have decloled 
 whether he should send Artemas or Tychlcus foi 
 this ])urpose. 
 
 ARTEiMIS C-Vrfyuis, Actsxix. 24), the Diana 
 of the Romans, is a goddess known under variou* 
 mouifications, and with almost inconipatilile 
 attributes. As the tutelary divii.ity of Ephesus, 
 in which character alone she concerns us here, 
 she was undoubtedly a lepie-entative of the same 
 power piesiding o\er conce])tion and birth which 
 was adored in Palestine uiiiler the name of Asii- 
 ToiiKTH. She is therefiire related to all the cog- 
 nate deities of tiiat Asiatic Juno- Venus, and 
 partakes, at least, of their connection with the 
 moon. Creuzer has comliined a number of testi- 
 monies in order to show how her worship was 
 introduced into Ejihesus from the coasts of the 
 Black S a ; and endeavours to point out the 
 several Medo-Persian, Egy))tian, Libyan, Scy- 
 thian, and Cietan elements of which she is coni- 
 pounded (Si/»ibolik, ii. 115, sq.). 
 
 Her earliest image, which was said to have 
 fallen from heaven, was probal>ly very rude, and, 
 to judge from ils rejiresentatii.'U on ancient coins, 
 little more than j head with a stia) eless trunk, 
 su|)])oited liy a staff on each side. There is some 
 disjnite as to the material of wiiich her image was 
 made. Most auihorities s.iy it was of ebony, the 
 black colour being, as Creuzer thinks, symbo- 
 lical. Pliny relates that Mucianus, who had 
 seen it, aff'.irns that it was of the wood of the vine, 
 and that it was so old that i' had sur' ivci .seven 
 icstor:tions of tlie temple {Hist. A'a/. xvi. 79). 
 Accordiu.; to Xeuoplion, it was of gold (^Anaik
 
 ARTICLES. 
 
 ARTIC LES. 
 
 2UI 
 
 r. 5). The later ima<je with the full developmont 
 of attributes, of which we t^ive a lejiresfiitatioii 
 ibelow, is, as Creiuer says, a Pauflieoii of Asiatic 
 and Egyiitiati deities. Even in it, liowevcr, we 
 •ee how little iuHuence Greek art had in modify- 
 ing its antique rudeness. It is si ill more like a 
 aiummythan aGreekstatue. Some of the most si<^- 
 aificaiit attributes in tiiis (idjiire are — The turreted 
 tead, like tiiat of Cyliele ; tlie nimbus l>eliind it 
 representing the moon : tiie zcxliacal signs of the 
 bull, the twins, and the crab on iier bosom ; below 
 them, two garlands, one of flowers and the other 
 ef acorns; the numerous breasts; the lions, stags, 
 and cows in vai ions ])arts ; the bees and flowers 
 on the sides; and others described in Millin's 
 Galetie Mijth:)l. i. 2'6. Her jiriests were called 
 Megabyzi, and were eunuchs. 
 
 The Arabic version of the Acts renders Arte- 
 mis, in the chapter cited, by Az Zuharat, which 
 13 the Araiiic name for the planet Venus. — J. N. 
 
 ARTICLES. In the later develoiiment of lan- 
 guages, logical fulness and accuracy are attained 
 at the expense of conciseness and delicacy ; and, 
 if not before, at least in this .stage tlie small words 
 called articles are uniformly jjroduced. If we 
 coctined our view to the languages whi(;h are de- 
 rived from Latin we might easily l[>elieve that 
 
 Jhe presence > f tlie-e parts of speech is a symptom 
 and proof that the later and logical stage i< 
 already readied : for in French, Italian, Spanish, 
 and Poituguejse, derivatives from the Latin ille 
 and uitus fuUil the part of the Engli.sh tJic and a. 
 Nor is the lesson taught by ll:e (iicck language 
 apparently very difl'ereiit : for in its earliest extant 
 specimens (the |X)eins of Homer), the word 6, r„ fh 
 is far oftener used ;is a denion.slrative or relative 
 pronoun, than as the definite aitlcle. We .seem 
 to be able to trace its growth and establishment 
 in this later function; and we ai-e temjiled to 
 infer from its ajjpearing so much earlier in Greek 
 than in Latin, that this is owing to the earlier 
 development of logical acuteni-ss in the Greek 
 mind. Finally, in modern Greek, the <ild nume- 
 ral (is, kvis, one, has given birth t(» a new indefi- 
 nite article, fuas, perfectly analogous to the Ita- 
 lian uno, French un, and Englisii a. 
 
 We are liere jierhaps in danger of building up a 
 theory too rajiidly. It is true, that in languages 
 generally, the carlj- and poetical style is de/'ective 
 in articles, while the late, prosaic, and logical 
 style is even rc<luiidant with them. Nevertheless, 
 we cannot safely infer a high logical cultivation 
 much less the attainment of tlie secondary stage 
 of development, from the piescnce ol"ai tides in a 
 language. Hebiew has possessed a definite article 
 as long as it can lie traced back ; but it would 
 oe too much to impute it to an unusually strong' 
 and premature argumentative acutci:ess in the 
 nations of Canaan, whose speech the family of 
 Isaac adopted. That there is a germ of truth in 
 this matter, we believe ; but until the relation of 
 the Syro-Arabian to the older languages which 
 they supplanted is better understood, it is hazard- 
 ous to engage in any of these speculations. 
 
 So much can be stated as fact. If a language 
 has as yet no definite article, it will gradually 
 form one out of its demonstrative pronoun, pro- 
 vided that it lie not tied down to a fixed state by 
 imitating classical models. Under the same cir- 
 cumstances, thae is a tendeiu'y to generate an 
 indefinite article out of the numeral one. Closely 
 akin to the la.s.t is the use of the word that pro- 
 perly means single, in the sense of the indelinite 
 article— a change which can be traced in the 
 Bagdad dialect of Arabic. 
 
 In the Hebrew language the defhiite aiticle, as 
 printed in our books, appears under the form i^ 
 (Aa), accompanied by a redoubling of the fol- 
 lowing consonant, if it be such a consonant as 
 Hebrew euphon)' allows to be doubled. It is not 
 to be questioned that the real word, when isolated, 
 
 was ?n (/tal), corresponding to the Arabic ^i 
 
 (<il or el), especially as the final I in the Arabic 
 aiticle also is, in numerous cases, assimilated to 
 the const)nant which follows. Tiie lltbrews have 
 
 one demonstrative form i"17N (elle) these, which 
 approaches rem arloibly near to the Arabic ; and 
 there is some reason for regarding PH as a r'>in- 
 posite, or at least an elongated form, of v;(iicli 
 Kin (/"O ^>c, is the root. To this .ittach liioniselves 
 two dilleient consonants to denote the i''eas of 
 THAT and Tins, i. and dh, which latter l)ecotnf.<i 
 z or D in dill'trent dialects. The dh is found in 
 ))ure Arabic (as, indeed, in English, strange tc 
 think!); but in Ileijicw it is z, in C^lialdee n, ia 
 German n, in Greek t ; though, in these En-
 
 232 
 
 ARTICLES. 
 
 rojM^iii tongues tlie iilca of that jjretlomiiiates 
 over THIS. The i, is lonnd in Latin {ilk, that); 
 anil the old L itiTi words oUi, oltra, are t!ious''> 
 to iiidicite that yon, yonder, is its piimitivt 
 sense. Jnst so, HXpH {hnl'n) for ultra, beyond. 
 As regards tlie/o/vw of tlie Helnew article, it thus 
 api)ears that the loiit ho or hu first took to itself 
 the tertiiiiialini^ I, and then in pronunciation gra- 
 dually rulihc'd if oil' ai^ain. 
 
 The radif-al element of (he Greek article vacil- 
 llates l>el\veen ho and to ; and a general survey of 
 all the kindred lanu^uaL^es makes it prohahle that 
 these are mere varieties of the same root. In 
 Latin and in Zend the h maintains its place 
 throughout ; in Sanscrit tlie Greek ho and to 
 chan^^e iiito,*rt and ta, tliis relation of h to s 
 heing notoriously common. In Lithuanian only 
 la is founrl ; anil the seo, dha, of tlie An^'lo-Saxon, 
 suflioiartly establish the connection of srt with ta ; 
 for the sound th, hy mere lisping, naturally dege- 
 nerates into either s or t, and dh into z or d. 
 We are tlius neaily brought to a conviction that 
 the two elements hit and dha of the Syro- Arabian 
 languages weie, at a much earlier stage, variations 
 of but one rod. Nor is tliis opinion absurd ; so 
 many are the proofs of tlie extieme antiquity of 
 the ma9rial which is so dilTcrently woiked up in 
 extant languages. In fact, the root hu (this) 
 shows itself likewise in (he Welsh tongue. 
 
 nie Chaldee branch of the Syro-Arai)ian lias a 
 peculiarity of its own, in comjrensation for the 
 definite article. This consists in the annexation 
 •jf the vowel N at the end of nouns, to prcjduce 
 what is called the emphatic state; which is ])rac- 
 lically, it seems, equivalent in stns>i to the Eng- 
 lisli the. Whetiier this teiminati(/n has any ety- 
 mological relation to the Hebrew article is 
 uncertain. In Arabic, especially in its modern 
 Syrian dialect, a very similar elongation of nouns 
 is conimiin, with a view of giving s]>ecit)cation or 
 individuality to that which was collective : as 
 
 -L (fin), fig or figs; AiJ? {iina), a fig; 
 ^*-i {semn), butter ; i:,^^^ (semna), a piece of 
 
 butter. This, however, agrees more nearly to the 
 indefinite than to the definite article ; nor does 
 its construct form indicate relationship to the 
 Chaldee termination. 
 
 It belongs to grammars of the special languages 
 to discuss the usi s of (he article, and only a few 
 general remarl;s can find place here. The chief 
 peculiarity in Hebrew occurs wi(h words joined 
 m what is technically called ' regimen" or ' con- 
 struction ;■ iti which case a single aiticle between 
 tlie two iiovms serves to define both of them. 
 Thus, n?^n |3 {hen hal-melU) means, the son 
 of the king. If the Hebrews wish to join two 
 nouns in this relation, so as to define the latter 
 and le.ive the former undefined, they are forced 
 to abandon the. construct form, and to employ 
 the preposition 7, wliich in this case is to he 
 rendered of, not/c;r. Thus, M Psalm o/ David' 
 is "II."!^ "'"'^IP {mizinor li David). Tliis re- 
 mirk, vve believe, was made first by Ewald. 
 
 The imjxirfance which some critics have given to 
 tlie Greek article,:' i regard to the Trinitarian con- 
 •rtversy, is truly extraordinary. Even Mr. Schole- 
 lelJ, a» professor of Greek at Cambridge, did not 
 
 ARVAD. 
 
 lesitate to assert tliat, in E],..e8. v. 5, the vvordi 
 fv Ttj I3a<ri\(ia rov Xptaroii Kal 0eov, should 
 be translated, ' in the kingdom of (iiim who is) 
 Christ and Gwl.'' It seems to have been taken for 
 granted, that, contrary hi the practice of all other 
 nations, the Greeks allowed tliemsehes no latitude 
 as to the use of the article ; and (liis, though proo/ 
 to the contrary is so close at hand, both ir vtie 
 New Testament and in classical writer*. It is 
 uiidoulitedly more j)ers])icuous, wlif«i two nouns 
 are in apposition or immediate connection, (o re- 
 p<'at the article if they refer to different objects; 
 just as we should say, The kinff and ijeyieral, if 
 one person were intended, but the h>n(j and the 
 general, if they were two persons. But such ru^'« 
 often give way, in cases where no ambiguity 
 is apprehended. Thus, Ilebr. ix. 19, t)) afjuu 
 ■TU3V fi.oax'^v KoX Tpdywv, ' (he blood of the calves 
 and goats,' for ' of the calves and the goats.' 
 This is eijually common in the classics ; as in 
 the opening words of Thucydides : ' Thucydides 
 of Athens wrote the history of the war of the 
 Pelojxinnesians and Athenian-;," rhv TrSAfiUov riiv 
 Ue\oiT0vv7](rlwu Kol 'h&riva'nev. Another rule 
 which some have sought to estal)lish is, that when 
 a noun is followed liy another noun in the geni- 
 tive, the latter must take tVie article, if the former 
 has it. But neither is this universally true; for 
 instance, Heb. ix. 13, el yap rh aiyoa ravpcov Ka\ 
 Tpdywp, ' for if the blootl of bulls and gixits,'&c. 
 
 It seems to be a general result of the history i1 
 the article, that in elevated style (here is a ten- 
 dency to drop it, because such style generallv 
 savours of the antique and the poetical. Thus, 
 ovpavhs Koi yri TrapeKivcfrai, ' Heaven ail\1 eavrn 
 shall pass away,' is more elevated than ' T/ie 
 heaven and the eaith," &c. But beside and in 
 contrast to this, every language possesses nu 
 merous familiar formulas or special words, froi» 
 which tlie aiticle is dropped ; and (o become ac- 
 quainted with these is always very difficult. In 
 daily life they abound, not only after prepositions, 
 but as nominative cases : thus, to sit at table ; 
 to travel by ship ; ' No fear lest dinner cool.' A 
 dim perception of tliis fact seems to have led to 
 the universal rule (as st.me have wished to make 
 it), that tlie article may always be omitted after 
 a ])ie;)osition. 
 
 In the above, we have naturally said little ot 
 the iiuh'/nite aiticle, Ijecause it occurs but a few 
 times ir the New Testamf nt (ytiia, oxe, put iov A), 
 and never in the Helirew of (he Old Testament. 
 Otherwise, ihougti of less importance to language, 
 its history ap| ears to lie goveined by tlie same 
 general laws which legulate that of the definit* 
 article. — F. W. N. 
 
 AK\'AD (inK ; "ApaSos, 1 Mace. xv. 23), or, 
 as it might l.e spelt, Auuaj), wIk nee the presem 
 name Ruad. a small island and city on the coast 
 of Syria, called by (he Giei ks Aradus, by whicli 
 name it is mentioned iu 1 Mace. xv. 23. It is 
 a small rocky island, ()])iiosite the mouth of the 
 river Eleutherus, to the noith of Tripoli.s, about 
 one mile in circumference and two miles from the 
 shore. Stralio (xvi. p. '753 i desciil)e3 it as a rock 
 rising in the midst of the waves {Trfrpa ■wipiKXvir- 
 Tos); audmoilern travellers state tlial it is steep on 
 every side. Sirabo also descrif>es the houses <i.s ex- 
 ceedingly lofty, and they were doubtless su built, 
 on account of the scantiness of the site : lieDca
 
 ARVADITES. 
 
 ASCENSION. 
 
 131 
 
 hrUs size, it w is pxcf'ediiigly jiojnilous (Pomp. 
 Mela, l.ii. c. 7). Tliost' uf the Anadites wliDin 
 the ishiiul coiilil not accomiiio(hi(<' t'oiuiil rooin in 
 the town anil district of Antaiadus, on tlie oj)j)o- 
 site coa>t, whi<li also lielon^;ed t( thein. Aivad 
 is vot the same as Aipad or Arphad, as most 
 Ixjoks of Bil'lical (i('iij::iaphy alle^^e. 
 
 ARVADITES (>pnnN ; Sept. 'Apdh, , 5en. 
 X. IS; 1 Ciiron. i. IG), the inhabitants o" tiie 
 island Aradus [Akvau], and douhtless also of 
 the neii^hliourin^ coast. The Arva<lites were de- 
 scended from Avvad, one of tlie .sons of ('anaan 
 (Gen. X. IS). Stralio (x\ i. ]). 731) describes tlie 
 Arvadites as a colony from Sidon. They were 
 noted mariners (K/.ek. xxvii. R, 11 ; Stralio, xvi. 
 p. 754 >, and formed a distinct state, with a king of 
 their own ' Arrian, Expcd.Alex. ii. )). 90 ; yet they 
 appear to liave been in some dependence npon 
 Tyre, for the piopliet represents them as ftiinish- 
 iiig tlieir contingent of mariners to Oiat ci'y 
 (Ezek. xxvii. S, 11). The Aivadiles tovik their 
 full sliare in the maritime tralV.c for wliicii the 
 Plia?nician nation was celebrated, particularly 
 after Tyre and Sidon had fallen under the domi- 
 nion of the Graeco-Syrian kings. They early en- 
 tered into alliance with the Romans, and Aradus 
 is named among the states to which the consul 
 Lucius formally made known the league which 
 had been contracted with Simon Maccabaeus 
 (I Mace. XV. 23). 
 
 ARUBOTH. [Arabah.] 
 
 ARUM AH, otherwise Rum ah, a city near 
 Shecliem, where Abimelech encamped (Jiidg. 
 ix. 41). 
 
 ASA ( NDN, healing or physician ; Sept 
 Atrca), son of Abijah, grandson of Rehoboam, 
 and third king of Judah. He began to reign two 
 years befoie the deatli of Jeroljoam, in Israel, and 
 he reigned forty-one years, from B.C. 9.)5 to 914. 
 As Asa was very young at his accession, the 
 al^'airs of the government were administered by 
 his mother, or, according to some (comp. 1 Kings 
 XV. 1, 10), his grandmotlier Maachah, who is un- 
 derstood t.) have been a granddaughter of Absa- 
 lom [Mvachah]. She gave much encourage- 
 ment to idolatry ; but the young king, on assum- 
 ing tl.e ie:ns of go\einment, zealously rooted out 
 the idolatrous practices whicli had grown up 
 during his minority and under the pieceding 
 leigiis ; and oidy the altars in the 'high places ' 
 were sulTered to remain (1 Kings xv. 11-13; 2 
 Cliron. xiv. 2-5). He neglected no human means 
 of putting liis kingdom in the best possible mili- 
 tary cond tion, for which ample opportunity was 
 alVorded by the peace wliicti he enjoyed in tlie ten 
 first years of his le'gn. And his resources were so 
 well organized, and the population had so increased, 
 that he was eventually in a condition to count 
 on the military services of 580,000 men (2 Chron. 
 xiv. ()-S). In the eknentii year of his reign, rely- 
 ing upon the Divine aid, Asa attacked and de- 
 f«!ated the mimerous host of tiic Cushife king 
 Zcrah, who had ];enetrated tlirough Araliia Pe- 
 traea into the vale of Zepliathah, with an immense 
 .^cst, reckoned at a million of men (which Jose- 
 phus reduces, however, to 90,000 infantry and 
 100,000 cavalry, A7itiq. viii. 12. 1), and 300 
 uhariots (2 Chron. xiv 9-15). As the triumpliant 
 Judahitcs wi^ie returning, laden with s] )il, to 
 Jerusalem, tl ey were met by the prophet A . iriah, 
 
 who declared this spiendid victory to be a cons^ 
 (juence of Asa's conlidence in .leliovah, ami ex- 
 horted him to ]?pisevpiance. Tlius "iicoiiiaged, 
 the king exerted liimseif to extirpate the remains 
 of idolatry, and cavised tiie i)eo],le to renew their 
 covenant with .Jehovah (2 Chron. xv. !-l5). It 
 wiis this clear knowledge ol" his dependeiit poll- 
 fical position, as the vice-geient of .lehovaK 
 which won for ,\sa the iiighest ] raise that couM 
 be given to a Jewish king — that he walked in the 
 steps of his ancestor David ( I Kings xv. 11). 
 
 Nevertheless, towards tiie latter end of his reign 
 the king failed to maintain the character he liad 
 tlius acquiied. When Haasha, king <if Is-ael, 
 liad renewed the war between the two kingdoms, 
 and had taken Ramali, which he wiis pioceeding 
 to fortify as a fiontie/ barrier, Asa, the contjueror 
 of Zerah, was so far wanting to his kingdom and 
 iiis God as to employ the wealth of the IVmjile 
 and of the royal tieasures to induce the king 
 of Syria (Damascus) to make a ili<'er8ion in his 
 lavonr ijy invading the dominions of Baaslia. 
 By this means he recovered Ramah, indeed ; but 
 his treasures were squandered, and he incuned 
 the rebuke of the jirophet Hanani, whom he Ciist 
 into prison, being, as- it seems, both alarmed and 
 enraged at the effect Isis address was calculated 
 to produce upon the peojile. Other peiscns (who 
 had probably manifested their disapprobation) 
 also sullered from his anger ■ 1 Kings xv. 16-22; 
 2 Chron. xvi. 1-10). In the three last years of 
 his life Asa was afflicted with a grievous ' disease 
 in his feet ;' and it is m.enticned to his reproach 
 that he placed too much confidence in his physi- 
 cians. At his death, however, it appeared that 
 his popularity had not been substantially im- 
 paired ; for lie was honoured with a funeial of 
 unusual cost and magnificence (1 Chron. xvi. 
 11-14). He was succeeded by his son Jehosha- 
 phat. 
 
 ASAHEL ('pXn^J!, God's creature; Sept. 
 'A(roi')A.), son of David's sister Zerviiah, and bro- 
 ther of Joab and Abishai. He was noted for his 
 swiftness of foot ; and after tlie battle at Gibeoj. 
 he jnirsued and oveitook Abnei-, who, w itii gical 
 reluctance, in order to preserve his own life, slew 
 him with a backthrust of his sjiear, u.c. 1055 
 [Abneu] (2 Sam. ii. lS-23). 
 
 ASAPH (*]9'^' assetnbler ; Sept. 'Affcup), a 
 Levite, son of Barachias (1 Chron. vi. 39; xv. 
 17), eminent as a musician, and a)tp)inted by 
 David to preside over the sacred choral services 
 which he organizwl. The 'sons of Asaph ' are 
 afterwards mentioned as choristers of the temple 
 (1 Chron. XXV. 1,2; 2 Chron. xx. 11; xxix. 13; 
 Ezra ii. 41 ; iii. 10 ; Neh. vii. 41 ; xi. 22); and 
 thisoflice apjieais to have been m.ide hereditary in 
 his family CI Clirun. xxv. I, 2). Asa])h was cele- 
 brated in after times as a prophet and jioet (2 
 Chron. xxix. 30 ; Neh. xii. Ifi), and the titles 
 of twelve of the Psalms (Ixxiii. to Ixxxiii.) beat 
 his name. Tiie merits of this apjiropiiation ar« 
 elsewhere examined [Psalms]. — There were two 
 other iieisons named Asa])li : one who occupied 
 the distinguished post of mazkir (T'DTDj or ' re- 
 corder" to king Ilezekiah (2 Kings xviii. 18 ; Isa. 
 xxxvi. 3) ; another who was keeper of the roval 
 forests under .\rtaxerxes (Neli. ii. S). 
 
 ASCENSION. The event sjioken of un(M 
 this title is among those which C'hristians of every
 
 234 
 
 ASKNATH. 
 
 age have CiimeTn plated with most profound g;itis- 
 far.tiori. It «as in his ascension that Christ exhi- 
 bhed the {km feet triumph of humanity over every 
 antagonist, whether in itself, or in the civcuni- 
 stances uiiiler wliich it miy he sujipijsed to exist. 
 Tlie aintemiihition of this, the entrance of the 
 Redeemer into ^\my, insp'red the jirophets of old. 
 with the nohlest views of his kln,:^dom. ' Tiiou 
 hait asi-«nded on hi^h ; thou iiast led captivity 
 captive; thou hast received gifts for men; yea, 
 for the reliellious also, tiiat the Lord God might 
 dwell am,)ng tiiein' (Ps. Ixviii. IS); and 'Lift 
 up j'oiu- heads, O ye gates; and be ye lift up, ye 
 everlasting doors, and the king of glory sliall 
 come in" (Ps. xxiv. D). That sometiiing of vast 
 imjwrtaiK-e, in resject to the completion of the 
 gieat scliein;^ of salvation, was involved in this 
 event, apjieari from ihe words of our Lord himself, 
 'Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to 
 my Father: hut go to my hrefliien, and say unto 
 t!iem, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; 
 and to my God and your God' (John xx. 17). 
 Nor was it till tlii.s iiad taken place ihat he poured 
 eut the grace of tlie .S|jirit upon his church, or 
 began the higher exercises of his olhce as a me- 
 diating priest. In the primitive cliurch, the feast 
 .»f the Ascension, called also by St. Clirysostom 
 the Assumption of Cluist, was considered, like 
 the solemn days of the Nativity and flie Fassicn, 
 as of ajwstolic origin. St. Chrysostom, in his 
 homily on the subject, calls it an illustrious and 
 refulgent day, and describes the exaltation of 
 Christ as the grand proof of God's reconciliation 
 to mankind {Opp. t. ii. p. 457).— H. S. 
 
 ASKx\.\TK (ri:pX; Sept. 'Ao-ei/efl), the 
 daughter of Potiplierali, priest of On, whom the 
 king of Kgyiit bestoued in marriage upon Joseph, 
 with the view prohal)ly of strengthening his posi- 
 tion in Kgypt by tiiis high connection. The con- 
 siderations suggested by this mairiage helonsj 
 to another place [Joseph]; atteution is here 
 only requiied to t/ie name, which, in common 
 with other words of foreign oiigin, lias atti acted 
 eoiisideiable notice. No better etymology of 
 A«enath has been proposed than that Ijy Jabhuiski, 
 who [I'anth. E(,iiijt. i. 56, and uptiscul. ii. 2 8) 
 regards the foiins Asenath and 'Ao■6^'f9 ;is repie- 
 sentative of a Co{)t!c compound Ass/ieneit. The 
 latter pait of this word he takes to be the name of 
 Nt'ith, the titular goddess of Sais, the Athene 
 of the (xieeks ; and considers the whole to mean 
 vjors/iipjier of \cith. Gesenins, in his Thesaurus, 
 sviggeststhat the original Coptic form was Asneith, 
 which n\ei\x\?,. who belongs to Neith — qua; Neithie 
 est. That tlie name lefeis to this goddess is the 
 geiierally leceived opinion (in modem times, Von 
 Bohlen alone has, in his Genesis, proposed an un- 
 satisfactoiy Semitic etymology): it is favoured 
 by the f ct that the Egyptians, as Jablonski has 
 shown, were accustomed to clioose names ex- 
 (nessixe of some relation to their gods; and it 
 ajipeais liaMe to to stronger objection than the 
 ioubt, whether the ^'orsliip of Neith existed at so 
 eaily a jeiiod as that of the composition of lae 
 book of Genesis. 
 
 ASII. [Orkn.] 
 
 ASIIDOD in"l"lL''{< ; Sept. "aC^^tos), .he 
 AzoTUs of the Gieeks and Romans, and so 
 eaiie<l in 1 Mace iv. 15; Acts viii. 4(> (see also 
 Plin. Hist. JS'at «. U; Ptolem. v. 1(>) ; a city 
 
 ASIIDOD. 
 
 01" the summi. of a grassy hill, near the Medi« 
 liiranean coast, nearly mid-way lietween Gaza 
 and Joppa, being IS geog. miles N. Iiy E. from 
 the former, and 21 S. from the latter ; and 
 more exactly mid-w;iy between Askelon and 
 ]<lkren, Iming 10 geog. miles N. by E. from iJie 
 foimer, and S. by W . iiom the latter. Asfidod 
 was a city of the Philistines, and the chief t«v/n 
 of one of their live states (Josh. xiii. 3 ; 1 Sarn. 
 \{. 17). It was the seat of the worship of Dagon 
 (I Sam. V. 5 ; 1 Mace. xi. 4), before whose sluiiw 
 in this city it was tliat the captuied ark was de- 
 ])osited and tiiumpbed over the idol (1 Sam. v. 
 1-9). .^shdod was .'issigned to Judah ; but many 
 centuries passed before it and the other Phi- 
 listine towns Here subdued [Pnn.isTiN)is] ; and 
 it appears ne\er to have lieen jieimanently in 
 possession of the J udahites, although it was dis- 
 mantled by Uzziah, who built towns in the teiri 
 tory of Ashd(;d 1 Chron. xxvi. 6). It is mer> 
 tioned to the leproach of the .lews after their return 
 fiom cap ivity, that they mairied wives of Ashdod; 
 the re ult of which was that the cliildren of these 
 marriages spoke a mon^iel dialect, compounded of 
 Heljiew and the S])eech of .Ashdod (Neh. xiii. 2o, 
 24). These facts indicate the ancient importance of 
 Ashdod. It was indeed a place of groat strength; 
 anil being on the usual military route between 
 Syria and Egypt, the possession of it became an 
 oijject of im]M>rtance in the wars between Egypt 
 and the gieat northern powers. Hence it was 
 secured tjj' the Assyrians bef ae invading Egypt 
 (Isa. i. 1, sq.) ; and at a later date it. was taken 
 by Psammetichus, after a siege of twenty-nine 
 years, the longest on record (Herodot. ii. 157). 
 The destruction of Ashdod was foretold by the 
 pro])hets (Jer. xxv. 20 ; Amos i. 8; iii. 9; Zeph. 
 ii. 4; Zach. ix. 6); and was accomplished by 
 the-Maccabees (1 Mace. v. 6S; x. 77-84 ; xi. 4), 
 It is enumerated among the towns whicli Pornpe} 
 joined to the province of Syria (Joseph. Antiq. 
 xiv. 4. 4, De Bell Jud. i. 7. 7), and among the 
 cities ruii:ed in ^he wais, which Gahinius or- 
 dered to be ebuiit (Antii/. xiv. 5. 3). It was 
 included in Herod"s dominion, and was one 
 of the three towns bequeathed by him to his 
 sister Salome (De Bell. Jud. vii. 8. 1). The 
 evangelist Philip was found at Ashdod after he 
 had baptized the Ethio])ian eunuch (Acts viii. 
 4 1). Azotus early became the seat of a hishop- 
 lic; and we (hid a bishop of this city present at 
 the councils of Nice, Chalcedon, a d. 359, Se- 
 leucia, and Jeiusalem, a.d. 536 (Reland, 7^a- 
 lastina, p. 609) 
 
 ."^.shdod subsisted as a small unwalled town 
 in the time of Jeiome. It was in ruins when 
 Benjamin of Tudela visited Palestine {Itin. 
 ed. Asher, i. 79); but we leain fiom Williara 
 of Tyie and V'itriacus that the bishopric was 
 revived by the Latin Christians, at least titu- 
 larly, and made sutl'iagan of Treves. Sandys 
 {Travailes, p. lol) describes it as 'a place of ne 
 leckoning;' and Zuallart (^Voyage, iv. p. 132) 
 s)!eaks of it as an Arab village. And this seems 
 to be its present condition, for Iiliy and Mangles 
 (p. ISO) desciihe it as inhabited. The site i» 
 maiked iiy ancient ruins, such as broken arches, 
 and ])artly buried fragments of marble columns: 
 ther" is also wtiat ajijieared to these travellers to be a 
 veiy ancient khan, the [)iincipal chamlier of which 
 had obvioudy, at some former period, neen used
 
 ASHER. 
 
 ASIITAROTH. 
 
 230 
 
 as a Clii istiati dispel. Tlie lAdce is s 1 tailed 
 ^•tXxSi F.sdud. 
 
 ASIIl'"Ii O^*'?' happiness ; Sejil. 'Aarjp), one 
 ef the sons ol" Jacal> by Zilpah, the Imiidmaid 
 pf Leah (Gen. XXX. 1!J; xxw. 26), and founder 
 of one of tlie twelve tril)e3 (Xnin. xxvi. 11-17). 
 Asher liad four s.ni-i and one danij;htei- (Gen. 
 xlix. 20 ; ])eut. xxxiii. 21). On quittln.,' Ki^y;)t 
 the ntimlier of adult males in the tiihe of Aslier 
 was 41.500, wliich made it the ninth of the tribes 
 (excluding Levi) in nund)ers — Ephraini, Manas 
 seh, and Benjamin only Iwing below it. But be- 
 fore entering; Canaan an inerease of 1 1,;U)0 — an 
 increase exceeded only by Manasseh — raised tiie 
 number to .'33,11)0, and made it the fifth of tiie 
 tribes in j)opulatii<n (com)!. Nmn. i. 40, 41 ; xxvi. 
 47). Tiie inheritance of this tribe lay in a very 
 fruitful country, on the sea-coa-it, witii Lebanon 
 iiorth, Carniel and tiie tribe of Issacliar soutii, and 
 Zebulon and Naplitali east. It is usually stated 
 that ilie uliole of tlie Fhceiiician territories, in- 
 cluding Siilon, were assij^ned to thi.s tribe. But 
 tiiere are various considerations which militale 
 against this conclusion (see the a'gumeuts on 
 both sides in Pictorial Bible, Num. xxvi. 21; 
 Josh. xix. 21 ; Jud„'. i'. 31), and tend to show that 
 iheassiijned front ier-lir.e was drawn out to the sea 
 south ofSuhin. The .stron,.;e3t text for the inclu-iiou 
 of Sidoii (Tyre was not then founded) is that in 
 which it is mentioned to the reproach of tiie 
 Asherites, that they did not drive out the Sido- 
 nians (Judg. i. 31). Tiiis Michaelis is disposed to 
 reject as an interlopaiion ; but J. Kitto {Pict. 
 Bib. in loc.) conceives it to denote that tlie 
 Asherites were unable to exj)el the Sidonians, who 
 by that time had encroached southward into jiarts 
 of the coast actually assigned to the Asherites; and 
 he strengtlieirs tliis by referring to tiie subsequent 
 foundaiion of Tyre, as evincing the disposition 
 of the Sidonians to colonize tlie coast south of 
 their own proper territories. The Asherites were 
 for a long time unable to gain )iossession of the 
 territories actually assigned them, and 'dwelt 
 among the Canaanites, the iiihaliitants of the 
 land " (Judg. i. 32) ; and, 'as it is not usual to 
 say of a larger numlier that it dwells among the 
 8*ialler, the inference is. that tliej' expelled but 
 comparatively lew of ihe Caiuumites, leaving them 
 in fact, a majority of the jiopulatioii' (Bu.'ih, note 
 oil Judg. i. 32). 
 
 ASHES, in the symbolical language of Scrip- 
 ture, denote human fiailty (Gen. xviii. 27). deep 
 hi.niiliation (Estii. iv. 1 ; Jonah iii. 6 ; Matt. xi. 
 21 . Luk,- X. 13; Job xiii. () ; Dan. rx. 3). To 
 Bit in ju^.ies was a roKen of grief and mourning 
 (Job ii. 8; Lam. iii. Ki; E/.ek. xxvii. 31)), as 
 was also strewing tiiem upon the head (2 Sam. 
 xiii. 10; Isa. xli. o) [MouuNiNo]. 'Feeding 
 on ashes," in Ps. cii. 9, appears to express grief, as 
 ofonewitii whose food the ashes with wliich he is 
 covered min^de. But m Isa. xliv. 20, ' feeding 
 an a«lies,' w liicli alTord no nourishment, is judged 
 to danote inelTecfual means, labour to no purpose. 
 (Jompare IIos. xii. 1. 
 
 ASIIDIA (Nn'l:'^?, 2 Kh.gs xvii. 30; Sept. 
 Aai/J-dd : s Mily ome mentione.l in the Old Testa- 
 aaent ;us tiie god of the people of Hamath. Tiie 
 B.diylonian Talmud, in the tre<ati.se ' Sanhei'.vin' 
 [cited 111 Carpzov's Aiynn-utits, p. 516), and the 
 
 majority of Jewish wi iters, a'*sert that Ashinia 
 w;is worshijux'd under the form of a i/ont witiitrut 
 wool; the Talmud of ieriL-wlnn .says, under that 
 of a lamb. Elias Levita, a learned Rabbi of the 
 sixteenth centuiy, assigns the word the .sense of 
 npc; in which he was, in all jirobabilify, de<-ei\ ed 
 by the resemblance in sound to the Latin siniin. 
 Jurieu and Clalmet have pro])oseti other fanciful 
 conjectuies. The opinion, however, that thi.s idol 
 liad the foim of a goat ajipeais to lie the one liest 
 «u))poited by argument.* as well as by authorities. 
 Thus Pfeill'er (in his Dithia Vcxtitn,i\A loc.) sug- 
 gests that ashiina niay l<e brcnight info lelation 
 with the word nOi/'N, which the Samaritan ver- 
 sion uses in the sen.se of some sjiecies of goat, as a 
 translation of the original IpN in Deuf. xiv. 5. 
 On this ground wemiglit conjecture that tiie .vonl 
 ashi'iia actually means a goat without wool, by 
 deriving it from Dt^N, which, though it usually 
 signifies to be f/u/lti/, yet occurs in (he tense of to 
 be laid waste, to be bare, as a cognate of DC* and 
 CDiy : 30 that ashima would mean bare, bald. 
 Besides, as a goat, the Egy);tian god Mendes 
 would atibrd an excellent paiallel to Ashiina; as 
 likewise the Gieek Pan (cf. Lev. xvii. 7). 
 
 It is worlhy of mention that the name of th!» 
 id(d furnished Aben I'^zra with an opportunity of 
 disjilaying the inveterate hatred of tlie Jews 
 against the Samaritans. In his preface to tiie 
 liook of Esther, he asserts that the Samaritan 
 text of Gen. i. 1, begins with tlie words ' In 
 tlie beginning Ashinia cieated." It need hardly 
 be said that there is no trace iif this reading either 
 in the Samaritan text or version. Aben Ezra's 
 own words are cited at length in Hottingcr's Ex- 
 ercit. Antimorin. p. 40. — J. N. 
 
 ASHKENAZ (TJSC'K ; Sept. *A<rxa^aC ; Gen, 
 X. 3); and A.shciienaz (Jer. li. 27), the proper 
 name of a son of Gomer, son of Janhet, and 
 of a tribe of his descendants. In Jeremiah 
 it is placed with Ararat and Minni, ])rovinces of 
 Armenia; whence it is probable that Asiikeiiaz 
 was a province of Armenia; or at least that it lay 
 not far friiin it, near the Caucasus, or towards the 
 Black Sea. The commentators have been all 
 bound to something like this conclusion by tl* 
 jiassage in Jeremiah, and nothing moie snf sfac- 
 tory is now attainable. The various fancil'ul at- 
 tempts to trace the name may be seen in Winer 
 {Bib. Reahr'nrt:, s. v. 'Asketias"). The modem 
 Jews fancy the name denotes tiie Germans. 
 
 ASHPEN.\Z, chief of the eunuchs of king 
 Ne!)uchadnezzar, to whose care Daniel an<l his 
 con>]iaiiions were consigned, and who changed 
 their names n)an. i. 3. 7). 
 
 ASHTAROTH (nnn'JT;; Sept. 'A,Trapci9\ 
 and AsHTAH()TH-C.»uNAiM (D'5"?R nil^trV; 
 Sept. 'AcrrapdO koi Kapya'/V), a town of liashan 
 (l)eut. i. 4 ; Josh. ix. 10) which was inclutle«l in thfi 
 teiiitory of tiic half-tiilie of Manasseh (Josli. xiii. 
 31). and was a.ssigned to the Levites (1 Cliron. 
 vi. 71). It is placed by Eusebiiis 6 nriles from 
 Ediei. the other piincipal town of Bashan, and 
 25 miles from Bostra. The town existed in the 
 time of Abraham ((>en. xiv. 5); and as its name 
 of .Aslitaroth ajipears to be deiived from the wor- 
 slii}) of the moon under that name [see thelollow- 
 ing article], there is little need to look fuither 
 than the ciesreiit of that luminary and it-; syinbo- 
 lioal image for an explanation oflhcaddit'on Cab
 
 236 
 
 ASHTORETII. 
 
 MAIM, or rather Karnaim, 'honied.' ir; 2 Mace, 
 xii. 2'), men! 11)11 is made of the teiiiijle ui' .-Vtergatis 
 (Ashturoth) in CUruioii, which is deicvihed as a 
 Bd-'iigly forti;!cd town of dilKcult access, hut wliicli 
 waa *ak<.'ii by Judas Maccalnpus, who slew 2J,l'O0 
 of the {leople (herein (2 Mace. xii. 21, 2G). A.sta- 
 roth-C.iinaim is now usually identilied with Meza- 
 lei.i. llie situation of which corresponds accurately 
 eni.ugh with the distances given hy Eusebius. 
 Here is the lirst castle on the gieat pil^niin road 
 from J)amascus to Mecca. It was built about 
 3i0 yeais ago by the Sultan Selim, and is a 
 sijuaie structure, about KlO feet on each side, 
 with sijuare towers at tlie an^^les and in the 
 centie i.f each face, the walls bein^' 40 feet high. 
 The interior is an open yaid with ran;^es of ware- 
 houses a,'ainst the castle wall to contain stores of 
 provisions for the pilgriiria. There are no dwell- 
 ings iieyond the castle, and within it only a few 
 mud huts upon the ilat roofs of the warehouses, 
 eccupied hy the [feasants who cultivate the neigh- 
 bouring grounds. Close to this building on the 
 north aiid ea-t side aie a great nundjer of springs, 
 whose waters at a shoit distance collect into a 
 lake or pond about a mile and a half in circumfer- 
 ence. In the midst of this lake is an island, and at 
 an elevated spot at the extremity of a promontory 
 advancing into the lake, stands a sort of chapel, 
 around which are many ruins of ancient build- 
 ings. There are no other ruins. (Buickhardt, p. 
 242; Buckingham's .-^rai Tribes, p. 162.) 
 
 'ASHTORETH (Hlh^y, 1 Kings xi. 5; 
 Sept. 'KfTTapT-i)) is the name of a goddess of the 
 Sidonians (1 Kings xi. 5, 33), and also of the 
 Philistines (1 Sam. xxxi. 10), whose woiship was 
 introduced among tlie Israelites during the ]ieriod 
 of tlie judges (Judg. ii. 13 : I Sam. vil. 4), was ce- 
 lebrated by Solomon iiimself (I Kings xi. 5), and 
 was finally put down liy Josiah (2 Kings xxiii. 
 lo). She is fiequently mentioned in connection 
 witli Baal, as the conesponding female divinity 
 f Judg. ii. 13); and, from the addition of the words, 
 ' ar>d all tlie host of lieaven,' in 2 Kings xxiii. 4 
 ^although Asherah occurs there, and not 'Ashtoieth, 
 whicli will be accounted for below), it is probable 
 that slie represented one of the celestial bodies. 
 There is also reason to believe that siie is meant 
 by the 'queen of heaven,' in Jer. vii. 18; xliv. 
 17; wli(fte worship) is there said to have been so- 
 lenniised by burning incense, jiouring libations, 
 and ottering cakes. Further, by comjiaring the 
 two ])assages, 2 Kings xxiii. 4, and Jer. viii. 2, 
 which last s[3eaks of the 'sun and moon and all 
 the host of heaven, whom they served," we may 
 mmclude that \\:^moon was worsliipjied under the 
 names of queen of heaven and of "Ashtoreth, pro- 
 vided the connection between these titles is esta- 
 blished. This constitutes nearly tlie sum of all 
 the i.Tilications in the Old Test, concerning 'Ash- 
 toreth. 
 
 According to the testimonies of profane writers, 
 the worship of this goihless, under ditVeient names, 
 existed in all countries and colonies of the Syro- 
 .Arabian nations. She was especially the chief 
 female divinity of the Phcenicians and Syrians — 
 tJie Baaltis (i. e. TO]!"^ domina /nea, equivalent 
 ko the Greek addiess, Aicnroival ) to Baal ; 'Acr- 
 rdpTTj 7} jx.eyi(TTr), as Sanchiniiatiion calls her (ed. 
 0.;elli, p. 34). She was known to the Baby'o- 
 aiaiu as Mylitta {i. e. possibly Nm?lD, the 
 
 ASHTORETH. 
 
 emphatic state of the feminine participle active nfi 
 Apliel, genetrix)., Herod, i. 131 ; to the -•^labiaiu 
 iis Alitta, or .\lilat, Herod, iii. W {i. e. according 
 tu Pocock's etymology — Spechn. p. 1 10 — al 11a- 
 hat, the goddcsfi [which may, however, also mean 
 the crescent moon — see Fieytag's Lex. Ar.^ ; ot 
 al Hilfil, the moon ; or, accordinf to Kleuker'g 
 suggestion, al Walld, genetrix. See Bergmann, 
 De lielig. Arab. Anteislaiaicu. Argentor. 1834. 
 
 p. 7). The supposed Punic name Tholath, H^O, 
 
 which Mun'^er, Hamaker, and others considered 
 to mean genetrix, and to belong to this godtless, 
 cannot be adduced here, as Gesenius has lecently 
 shown that the name has arisen fiom a false read- 
 ing of the insciiptiiins (see his Monum. Ling. 
 Phcenic. p. 114). But it is not at all o])en to 
 doubt that this goddess was woishipped at ancient 
 Caithage, and probably under her Piioenician 
 name. 
 
 The classical writers, who usually endeavoured 
 to identify the gods of other nations with the* 
 own, ratlier than to discriminate between them, 
 have recognised several of their own divinities in 
 Ashtoieth. Tims she was considered to be Jmvo 
 (B^A.9is % "Hpa v) 'AcppoSirri, Heavchius ; ' Juno 
 sine dubitatione a Pusnis Astarte vocatur," Au- 
 gustin. Quccst. in Jud. xvi.) ; or Venus, especi- 
 ally Venus Uiania (C'lcex. Nat. Deor. iii. 23; 
 'AardpTri St icTiv 7; irap' ' Y.XKr](riv 'A<ppo5irTj 
 Trpoa-ayopivofj.eur}, Theodoret. in Libr. iii. Reg. 
 Quasi. I.. ; and the numerous insciiptions of Bona 
 Dea Coelestis, Venus Coelesfis, &c., cited in Hun- 
 ter's Religion dcr Karthager, p. 75); or Luna 
 QOvpavlav ^otviK€S 'AcrTpodpxV 6yoiJ.d(ovm, ce- 
 Kiiyr^i/ elyai diXovres, Herodian, v. 13; Lucian 
 De Dea Syra, iv.). 
 
 Tlie fact that theie is a connection between all 
 these divinities cannot escape any student of an- 
 cient religions; but it is not easy to discover the 
 piecise link of tliat connection. \Viner ingenitrosly 
 suggests (Bibl. Realinirrt.) that Ashtoieth was con- 
 founded with Juni), becau-^e she is the female 
 counterpait to Baal, the chief god of the Syrians 
 — their Ju['iter, as it weie; and with \'enus, be- 
 cause the same lascivious lites weie common to her 
 worship, and to that of .\shtoieth and her cognate 
 Mylitta (Cieuzer's Synibolik, ii. 23). But so 
 great is the intermixture and confusion between 
 the gods of pagan religions, ' jiro diversitate no- 
 minis, non ])ro nurninls var'.elate," as Ambrose 
 says, that Miintei further identities Ashfmeth — 
 due allowance being made for difference of 
 time and place — with the female Kabir, Axio- 
 kersa, with the Egyiitian I'jis, with tiie Pajihian 
 Venus, with the Taurian antl Ephesian Diana, 
 with the Bellona of Comaiia, with the Arme- 
 nian Aji-rdiid, and with the Samian, Maltesian, 
 and Lacinian Juno. She has also been considered 
 to be the same as the Hyi'isinjish-deitics [Atek 
 
 GATIS]. 
 
 As for the power of nature, which was worshij)ped 
 under the name of .\shtoieth, Creuzer and Miintef 
 assert that it was the principle of conception and 
 {)arturition — that subordinate power which is fe- 
 cundated by a supeiioT influence, but which i: 
 the agent of all biiths throughout the universe. 
 As such, Miinter maintains, in his Religion der 
 Bahybnier, p. 21, in opposition to the leinaiks of 
 Gesenius in his Jesaias, iii. 337 — that the origi- 
 nal form unde which Ashtoieth was w(isbippiBl
 
 ASHTORKTH. 
 
 ASHTUIiETH. 
 
 an 
 
 iras the moo» ; antl tliat llie transition from that 
 to it e planet Vcniu (which \ie will immeiliately 
 notice) was uncjueitionalily an 'imovation of a 
 later date. It is evident that the moon alone can 
 be {iropeily called the queen of heaven; as also 
 thai the deiicndent relation of tlie moon to the sun 
 makes it a more a])i)ro])viate syinhol of that sex, 
 whose functions as female and mother, throughout 
 the whole extent of animp.teil nature, weie embo- 
 died in A^htoielh [Baai,]. 
 
 Tlie rite^ of htr worship, if we may assume 
 their resemiilinj^ those which profane authors de- 
 sciibe as paid to the cognate j^oddesses, in ])art 
 a^ree with the few ij. ligations in the Old Test., 
 in pait compl?r» the brief notices there into an 
 accordant jiicturj. The cakes meritioneil in 
 Jer. vii. 18, which are called in Hebrew CSI^ 
 Kavronhn. were also known to the Greeks by the 
 name xaiSci; es, anil were by them rnaile in the 
 shape of a sickle, in refeience to tlie new moon. 
 Among animals, the dove, the crab, and, in later 
 times, the lion, were sacied to her; and among 
 fiuits, tlie pomegranate. No blOod was shed on 
 her altar; but male animals, and chiefly kids, 
 were sa-.iih'ced to iier (Tacit. Hist. ii. 3). Hence 
 some suppos-i that the reason why Judah ]iro- 
 mised the harlot a kid, was that she might sacri- 
 fice it to Ashtoreth (see Tuch's note to Gen. 
 xxxviii. 17). The most juominent part of her 
 worship , however, consisted of tiiose libidinous 
 org'es, which Augustine, who was an eye-witness 
 of their horrors in Caithage, de criljes with such 
 indignation {De Civit. Dei, ii. 3). Her ])riests 
 weie eunuchs in women's attiie X*'"* peculiar 
 name of whom is D^K'np, sacri, i. e. cina>di, 
 Galli — 1 Kings xiv. 21). and women (niC/Hp, 
 sacc«, z. e. meiei rices — Hos. iv. 14, wliich teim 
 ought to I.e distinguislied from ordinary har- 
 lots, ni3U , wlio, like the Bayadeies of India, 
 prostituted tliemselves to enii<;li the temple of this 
 goddess. The prohil)ition in Deut. xxiii. 18 ap- 
 pears to allude to the dedication of such funds to 
 such a purpose. 
 
 As for the places consecrated to her worship, al- 
 though the numerous passages in which the autho- 
 rizetl version has eiToneously rendered mS'N by 
 grove, are to be deducted (as is explained lielow), 
 there are yet several occasions on wliich gardc7is 
 and shad;/ trees are mentioned as peculiar seats 
 of (^pn'viiably, her) lascivious rites (Isa. i. 29; 
 Ixy. 3; 1 Kings xiv. 23; Hos. iv. 13; Jer. ii. 
 20; iii. 13). She also had celebrated temples 
 (I Sam. xxxi. 10). 
 
 As to the form and attributes with which Ash- 
 toreth was represented, the oldest known image, 
 that in Pajihos, was a while conical stone, often 
 seen on Plianician remains in the figure which 
 Tacitus describes, /. c. iis ' S mulacrum non 
 ettigie humana ; confinuus orbis latioie initio 
 tenuem inaml)itum, metae modo, exsurgens, et 
 ratio in obscuro." Miinter is unwilling to con- 
 siiler this a Lingam svmbol ; nevertheless, fbeie 
 ap[)ears lo be some rotini f.ir disputing his ojiinion. 
 In Canaan she was prot)ab1y rejiresented as a 
 eow. It is said in the biHik of Tobit i. 5. that 
 the tribes wliich revolted sacrificed rfj BciaA tt; 
 Sa/taAet, wheie the feminine article with BoaA is 
 to l>e remarked. In Phcpnicia, she hail the hea»l 
 of a cow or liuU, as she is seen on coins. San- 
 ohoniathon states that ' Astarte adr.jjted tlie head 
 •fa bull as a symbol of her soveieigr.ty ;' he also 
 
 accounts for the star which is her most usual 
 emblem, by saving that ' when she jjassed through 
 liie earth, she found a fallen star, wiiicli she con- 
 secrated in Tyre ( I. c. p. 34). At length, she was 
 figured with the human form, as Lucian expressly 
 testifies of the Syrian goddess — wliich is sulistan- 
 tially the same as Ashtoreth ; a7id she is .so found 
 on coins of Severus, with her head surrounded with 
 rays, sitting on a lion, and holding a thunderlxdt 
 and a sceptre in either hand. What Kimchi says 
 of her being worshipped under the figure of a 
 sheep is a mere figment of tlie Rabliins, founded 
 on a misap]irelirnsion of Di'ut. vii. 13. As the 
 words ]N!> mtnC'y there occmring may be 
 legitimately taken as the /orcv of the flock ( i'cnerea 
 pecoris), i. e. either the eves or the lambs, tlie 
 whole foundation of that opinion, as well as of the 
 notion that the word means sheep, is unsound. 
 
 The word Ashtoreth cannot lie ])lausil)ly de- 
 rived from any root, or comijination of roots, in 
 the Syro-Aral)ian l.mguages. The liesf etymology, 
 that apjiroved liy Gesenius, deduces it from the 
 Persian siturah, star, with a ]ir.'Sthetic gultinal. 
 The latest etymology is that suggested by Sir W. 
 Betham. ii. his Etniria Celtica, ii. 22, who re- 
 solves Asiarte into the Irish elements : As, out of ; 
 tar, beijimd ; te, deifi/ — the goddess of long voy- 
 ages ! Ashtoreth is feminine as to Ibini ; its jjlural 
 Ashtaroth also occurs (and is sometimes errone- 
 ously taken to be the proper name of the goddess); 
 but it is undeistood to denote a plurality of 
 images (like the Greek 'Tipfxai), or to belong to 
 that usage of the plural which is found in words 
 denoting lord (Ewald"s Hebr. Gram. § 3(51). 
 
 To come now to Asheu.vh 'HTR'N, Judg. 
 vi..25) : Selden was the first v/ho endeavoTirrd to 
 show tiiat this word — wliicii in the LXX. ami 
 Vulgate is generally renderetl grove, in wuichour 
 authorized version has followed them — must in 
 5o»(e )ilaces, for the .sake of the sense, be taken to 
 mean a wooden image of Ashtoreth {T)e Dtia 
 Syiis, ii. 2). Not long after, Sj enc^ made the 
 same assertior. ( Dt Leg. Ueby^-w I., ii. 16). 
 \'itringa then follow-^1 out tlie same argument, in 
 his note to Isa. xvii. S. Gesenius. at length, has 
 treated the wliole question so elai)orat''ly in his 
 'J'hcsaiints, as to leave little lo be desire<l, and 
 has evinced that .\sherah is a ),ame, ai.d also 
 denotes an image ot'lliis goddess. 
 
 Some of the arguments which suj^port this par- 
 tial, or, in Geseniu.s's case, lot.ii r jection ol' il>«» 
 signification <7rore, tin- iTK^'X. aie hi iefly as fol- 
 lows. It is argued that .Asheiah almost ahvay? 
 occurs with words which denote idols nnA 
 statues of idols ; that the veibs whicli aie em- 
 ployed to ex|)res,s the making an .-Vslierdi, ar« 
 incompatible with tlie idtia '.f u grove, as tt;ey an
 
 %S9 
 
 ASIA 
 
 such as to build, to shape, t, erect (except in one 
 l»assage, where, however, Gesenius still maintains 
 that the verb there used means to erect); that the 
 words used to denote the destruction of an Ashe- 
 rah are those of h)-eaki)i(j to pieces, subverting ; 
 that the image of Asheiah is placed in the Tem- 
 ple (2 Kin;,'s xxi. 7) ; and that Asiierah is coupled 
 withlJ lal in precisely thes ime waj^as Ashtoreth is: 
 comp.Judj^. ii. 13; x. fi ; 1 Kings xviii. 19; 2 Kings 
 xxiii. 4; and particularly Judg. iii. 7, and ii. 13, 
 where the plural form of both words is explained 
 as of itself denoting images of this goddess. Be- 
 sides, Selden objects that the signification grove 
 is even incongruous in 2 Kings xvii. 10, where we 
 lead of ' setting up gro\'es under every green tree.'' 
 Moreover, the LXX. has rendered Asherah by 
 Astarte, in 2 Cliron. xv. 16 (and the Vulgate has 
 done the same in Judges iii. 7), and, conversely, 
 Las rendered Ashtaroth by groves, in 1 Sam. 
 vii. 3. 
 
 On the strength of these arguments most modern 
 scliolars assume that Asherah is a name fir Ash- 
 toreth, and that it denotes more especially the 
 relation of that goddess to the planet Venus, as the 
 lesser star of good fortune. ■ It appears, namel)', 
 to be an indisputable fact that both Baal and 
 Ashtort'fli, although their primary relation was to 
 the sun and moon, came in process of time to be 
 connected, in the religious conceptions of the 
 Syro-Arabians, with the planets Jupiter and Venus, 
 as the two stars of good fortune [See the article 
 Meni]. Although the mode of transition from 
 the one to the other is obscure, yet many kindred 
 circumstances illustrate it. For instance, the 
 connection between Artemis and Selene; that be- 
 tween Juno and the jilanet Venus, mentioned in 
 Creuzer ii. 56() ; the fact tliat, in the Zendavesta, 
 Aiialiid is the name of the genius of the same pla- 
 net ; and that KinDN astro (which word is only 
 an Aramaic form of the same sitarah which, as 
 was remarked above, furnisi.es the best derivation 
 for Ashtoreth) is also the name of the same planet 
 in the religious books of the Tsalians (Norberg's 
 Onomast. Cod. Na^ara^i, p. 20). It is in refer- 
 ence to this connection, tx)o, that a star is so often 
 found among the emblems with which Ashtoreth 
 is represented on ancient coins. Lastly, whereas 
 the word Asherah cannot, in the sense of grove, 
 J^e legitimately deduced from the primitive or 
 secondary signification of any Syro- Arabian root 
 ntJ'N, as a name of the goddess of good foitune, 
 it admits of a derivation as natural in a philo- 
 logical point of view, as it is appropriate in sig- 
 nification. The verb "It^K means to prosper; 
 ajid Asheiah is the feminine of an adjective 
 signifying /or<«»ate, happy. — J. N. 
 
 ASI.\. The ancients had no divisions of the 
 world into parts or quarters; and hence the word 
 Asia, in the extended modern sense, does not occur 
 in Scripture. It does not indeed occur at all, in 
 any sense, in the Hebrew Scriptures, but is found 
 in the books of the Maccaliees and in the New 
 Testament. It there applies, in the largest sense, 
 to that peninsular portion of Asia which, since 
 the (ilVh century, f\as been known by the name 
 of Asia Minor; and, n a narro ver sense, to a 
 certain poi-tion thereot which was known as Asia 
 Pro]Ter. Thus, it is now generally agreed, — 
 1. that 'Asia' denotes the whole of Asia Minor, 
 in the texts Acts xix. 26, 27; xx. 4, 16, 18; 
 Exvii. '2, &C. : but, 2, that only Asia PuopBa. 
 
 ASIARCHyE. 
 
 Ihe Roman or Proconsular .\sia, is denoted in 
 Acts ii. 9; vi. 9 ; xix. 10, 22; 2 Tim. i. 15, 
 1 Pet. i. 6; Rev. i. 4, 11. Asia Minoii com- 
 prehended Bithynia, Pontus, T-falatia, Ca«padocia, 
 Cicilia, Pamphylia, Pisidia, Lycaonia, Phrygia, 
 Mysia, Tioas (all of which are mentioned in the 
 New Testament), Lydia, Ionia, ^^olis (whicii are 
 sometimes included under Lydia), Caria, Doris, 
 and Lycia. Asia PitopEii, or Proconsular Asia, 
 comprehended the provinces of Plirygia. Mysia, 
 Caria, and Lydia (Cicero, Pro Flacc. 27 ; Up. 
 Fam. ii. 15). But it is evident that St. Luke 
 uses the term Asia in a sense still more restricted ; 
 for in one place he counts Phrygia (Acts ii. 9, 
 10), and in another Mysia (xvi. 6, 7), as pro- 
 vinces distinct from Asia. Hence it u probable 
 that in many, if not all, of the second set of re- 
 ferences the word Asia denotes only Ionia, or the 
 entire western coast^ of which Ephesus was the 
 capital, and in wliich the seven cimrches were 
 situated. This is called Asia also by Strabo. 
 
 ASIARCHvE ('Aaia.pxa.1, Acts xix. 31; Vulg. 
 Asiee principes ; Tertull. ^/^siVfe* sacerdotales ; 
 Auth. Vers. ' certain of tlie chief of Asia'). These 
 asiarchaD, who derived their appellation from 
 the name of the province over which they pre- 
 sided (as Syriarch, 2 Mace. xii. 2, Lyciarch, 
 Caiiaicli. &c.), were in Proconsular Asia »he 
 chief ])residents of the religious rites, whose 
 office it was to exhibit solemn games in the 
 theatre every year, in honour of the goils and of 
 the Roman emperor. This they did at their own 
 exjjense (like the Roman sedile.s), whence none 
 bat the most opulent persons could bear the office, 
 although only of one year's continuance. The 
 appointment was much as follows : at the begin- 
 ning of every year («. e. about the autumnal equi- 
 nox) each of the cities of Asia held a public 
 assembly, in order to nominate one of their citi- 
 zens as asiarch. A person was then sent to the 
 general council of the province, at some one of 
 tiie principal cities, as Ephesus, Smyrna, Sardis, 
 &c., to announce the name of the individual who 
 had been selected. Of the jjersons thus nomi- 
 nated by the cities tiie council designated ten. 
 As the 'Affiapxai- are repeatedly mentioned in the 
 plural, some suppose that rhe whole ten presided 
 as a college over the sacred rites (comp. Strabo, 
 xiv. p. 649). But in Eusebius (Hist. Eccles. 
 iv. 15) Polycarji is said to have suffered martyr- 
 dom when 'Philip was asiarch and Statins Qua- 
 dratus proconsul of Asia ;' from which and other 
 circumstances it is deemed more probable that, as 
 ill the case of the Irenarc'o, the names of (he ten 
 nominated by the general council were submitted 
 to the jjroconsul, who chose one of the number to 
 be asiarch, Kuinoel (at Acts xix. 31) admits 
 tliat one chosen by the proconsul was pre-emi- 
 nently the asiarch, lait conceives that the other 
 nine acted as his assessors and also bore that title. 
 Others, however, think the plurality of as'archs 
 sufficiently accounted for by su]iposiug tha', .hose 
 who had served the office continued to bear the 
 title, as was the case with the Jewish high-priests; 
 but the other branch of the alternative is usually 
 preferred. Winer judiciously remarks, that in 
 the course of time changes may have been made in 
 the office, which our fraijfnientary information doet 
 not enable us to trace ; and he contends that the 
 solitary testimony of Eusebius amounts to no mon 
 than that one asiarch, Philio, then and there pre
 
 ASKELON. 
 
 ■itied at <1if puhlic ^amrs. but not fliaf the 
 arratigenip.ifs of all (lie ganios w<ie inaile and 
 prov'iilcd by lliat one asi.iicl). (See Kuinoel, 
 Haninioiid. lilooinlitld, &c , on Acts xix. 31 ; and 
 Winer's Bihlisclics Itcahcitrtcrbucli, s. v. ' Asi- 
 avcha",' witli the authoiilies there cited."! 
 
 ASKKLON (p'pp'AS; Sp].t. 'A(tk<L\u>v\ a 
 «ity of the Philistinos, and the seat of one of their 
 five states (Jndg. xiv. 1!) ; 1 Sam. vi. 17 ; 2 Sam. 
 i. 30). It was situated on the Mediterranean 
 coast, between Gaza and Ashdod, twelve geoi,'. 
 miles nortli ol' the foimer, and ten S. by W. 
 from the latter, and thirty-seven W.S.W. iVom 
 Jerusalem. It was the only one of ihe five 
 great Philistine towns that was a maritime port, 
 and stood out close to the shore. Askeion was 
 assigned to the tribe of Judah (Josh. xiii. 13 ; 
 c^jmj). Judg. i. 18); but it was never for any 
 length of time in jiossession of the Israelites. The 
 part of the eounfr}- in ^vhich it stood abounded in 
 aromatic plants, onions, and vines (Plin. xix. 32; 
 Strabo, xvi.p.7.59; Dioscor. i. 121; Colum. xii. Id: 
 Alex. Trail, viii. 3). It was well fortilied (Josejili. 
 De Bell Jttd. iii. 21 ; comp. Mela, i 11), and early 
 became the seat of the worshi]) of Dcceito (Diod. 
 Sic. ii. A). After the time of Alexander it shared 
 the lot of Pha-:Mcia and Judaea, I.einu; tribu- 
 tary .sometimes to Kgypt, and at other times to 
 Syria (1 M.icc. x. ?':(> ; xi.GO; xii. 33; Josejh. 
 Aniiq. xii. 4. 5). The magnificent Heriid was born 
 at Askeion, and although the city did not belong 
 to his dominion, he adoined it with fountains, 
 baths, and co'ontiades {De Bell. Jud. i. 12. 11); 
 and after his death Salome, his sister, resided in a 
 palace at Askeion, which Caesar bestowed upon her 
 (.^n^t^.xvii. 11.5). It sutVered much in the Jewish 
 war with the Romans {De Bell. Jud. ii. IS. 5; 
 iii. 2. 1-3} ; for its inhabitants were noted for their 
 dislike of the Jews, of whom they slew 2500 
 who dwelt there (ii. 18. 5 ; iii. 2. 1). After this 
 Askeion again revived, and in the middle ages was 
 noted not only as a stronghold, but as a wealthy 
 and important town (Will. Tyr. xvii. 21). As 
 a sea-port merely it never could have enjoyed 
 much advantage, the coast being sandy and difK- 
 cult of access. The town bears a prominent part 
 in the history of the Crusades. After being several 
 times dismantled and re-fortified in the times 
 ©f Saladin and Richard, its fortifications were 
 at length totally destroyed by the Sultan Bibars 
 A.D. 1270, and the port filled up with stones, for 
 fear of future attempts on the part of the Cru- 
 saders (Wilkin. (7e.sc/i. der Kreuz. vii. 586). This, 
 no doubt, sealed the ruin of the place. Sandys 
 [Travailes, p. 151, a.d. 1610j describes it as 
 ' now a place of no note, more than that the 
 Turke doth keepe there a garrison." Fifty years 
 after (a. n. 1660), Von Troilo found it still j)ar- 
 tially inhabited. But its desolation has long 
 been complete, and litf'.e now remains of it but 
 the walls, with numerous fragments of granite 
 pillars. The situation is described as strong ; 
 the thick walls, flanked with towers, were built 
 on the top of a ridge of rock that encircles the 
 town, and terminates at each end in the sea. 
 The ground witin'n sinks in the manner of an 
 ao^phitheatre (Richardson, ii. 502-204; Eli Smith, 
 In Misaionary Herald for 1S27, p. 341). The 
 
 place still bears the name f .\skulan ..yJL-ii. 
 
 ASPALATHUS. 
 
 »3fl 
 
 ASMODEUS ' 'Ao-^oSoriy ; Tob. iii. S ., a de- 
 mon or evil spirit, nieniinned in the .-Vjioeryplia; 
 bxik of Tobit as having In'-et Sarah, the dau^htei 
 of Raguel, and killed the seven hu»ban<li whom 
 she had mairMd before Tol-it (Tob. iii. S ; vi. 1 1; 
 viii. 2, 3). The Rabi'ins have a number of ab- 
 surd tradifiuiis resjiecting Asniodeii.s, which may 
 lie seen in the oiiginal edition of C'alniel and in 
 Llghtloot(/A»-. l]chr. ad Luc. xi. 15). They call 
 him,. as well as Beelzebub, 'the jirince of de\ ils,' 
 whence the two names i)ave been su|)])()Std to refti 
 to the same demon. But this title tliey also give 
 to 'tiie angel of death," ius the destroyer of all 
 mankind : hence some deiive the name Asmodeus 
 from the Hebrew IOC slianiad, to exfemiinafe, 
 which identifies it with Ashmod.ii and also 
 Abaddon (.see the word), ihe same as .■Vpollyoii, 
 the angel of death. This is likely, and thus the 
 story in Tobit means no more than that the .seven 
 husbands died successively on their mairiage witli 
 Sarah. 
 
 ASMONEANS. [M.^ccabkks.] 
 
 ASNAPPER ("iSJpX; Sept. 'Afraffa^pdp), 
 the name of the king, or possibly Assyr'an satrap, 
 who sent the Culhean c</]onies into Palestine 
 (Ezra iv. 10). Taking him f(,r king of .\ssyriii, 
 he is i.enerally identilied with Esar-iiaddu!!, al- 
 though some l)e!ieve the name to denote .Sa'nia- 
 nezer. The title Nl^p-'l Xm (Auth. Vers. ' most 
 noble") which is given to him belunged to the 
 satraps. 
 
 ASPALATHUS (arnraAaflor), a word wliich 
 occurs only in Ecclus. xxiv. 15, of the Apo- 
 crypha, where the suiistanee which it indicates 
 is enumerated with other spices and ])erfumes to 
 which wisdom is comjiared. Though this drug is 
 not mentioTieii in the canonical Scriptures, it is pro- 
 bable that it may have been one of the substances 
 comprehended under the general name of spices. 
 It was no doubt one of the substances employeil by 
 the ancients as a })erfume ai.d incense, as it is 
 described by Dioscorides (i. c. 19), as well as enu- 
 merated by TheojJirastus (ix. c. 7), and by both 
 among aromatic substances. It forms one of tlie 
 ingredients of the cyphi, or compound incense 
 made use of liy the Egy])tiaii priests, as related 
 both by Plutarch and Dioscorides. Tiie substance 
 which was etilled as] alathus has nut l)een very 
 clearly asceitained, though several plants have 
 been indicated as yielding it. Lif/num Uhodiutn 
 is sometimes considered to be or-e of the kinds of 
 aspalatiius described by Dioscoiide.s, but this is a 
 produce of the Canaiy Islands and of the jjlant 
 called Convolvulus scojuirius. From it the per- 
 fumers of Paris obtain Vllvile de bois de Bhodea. 
 By others aspalatiius, whicli has been sujiposed to 
 be the same thing as Syrian aloe, or that of 
 Rhodes and of Candia, is tliought lo liave betT 
 yielded by sjecies of the genus which has lieen 
 called Aspalatiius, and esjiecially ly the sjwcies 
 A. creficus, which is now called Anthyllis Ilei- 
 mannia; ; but. there does not seem to lie sufli<ieiil 
 proof of this. Others again have held that 
 aspalatiius was a kind of agallochum [.Vhaj.im], 
 and Dr. Harris (sub. Llgn. — aloe) seems to have 
 thought that he got rid of a dilliculty by sujjgest- 
 iiig that ahaliin, wiiich \vr have siiown to be agal- 
 lochum, should I e tendered Asi'ai.ath.', Arab 
 authors, as Aviccniia and Sera))ion, give Uar-shi- 
 shan aa the Arabic synonyme of aspalatiius. They
 
 110 
 
 ASPHALTUM. 
 
 quote siTnie of tUf ir own countrynion as authorities 
 res{)ectiti,' if, in idditioii to (laleii ami Diosciii ides. 
 Hence it would appear to have lieen a protliict of 
 the East latlter th.in of the Wojt, as for such tliey 
 usuall)' i^'ive only the Greek name or its tiausla- 
 tion, and quote (Mily Greek authorities. Avicenuii, 
 in additivui to his description, says tliat some think 
 it may lie the root of Iiidi lu naiii. Hence it may 
 justly l)e inferred tliat Dar-.s/<i.^fiaiu vrhich the Ara- 
 bians th,>'i,'iit to be aspalathos, must h ive come to 
 them fi>)m India, or tliey wool I n /t have hazarded 
 this snppisition. In India the name Dav-shishan 
 is ap]ii:e I to tl:e bark of a tree wh ch is called 
 kacphid or kypkal. This tree is a native of the 
 HimalaviUj mountains from Nepal to the Siitlej, 
 and has been (i:;nred ;m:l described by Dr. 
 Wallich, in his Teii/atneii Fhr<e Ncpaiensis, p. 
 59, t. 45, by the narr.e Mi/ricii sapidrt. in conse- 
 quence of its fruit, which is somethinjj like, that 
 of the arljutus, bein;r edible The leaves, on 
 liein,:^ rubbed, have a pleasantly aromatic th mgh 
 faint smell. The ba<k forms an article of com- 
 merce from the hills to the plains, being esteetned 
 in the latter as a valuable stimulant medicine, 
 it may be seen meo.tioned liy the name ka-i-phul 
 in Gladwin's translation of the Persian Ul/az-i- 
 Udwie/i^ No. SR4, as a synMiyme of Dar-skeeskait, 
 which is (lescrilied as an aromatic bark, while 
 at No. 137 Dar-fhe-'s/iaii is considered to be a 
 
 synonyme of ^jw *J UiJi' ishtelaijoos, which seems 
 
 to be a cinruption of aspalathos from the errors of 
 transcriliers in the diacritical points. Kaeplml 
 has, moreover, been long celeljrated by Sanscrit 
 author-:, and it may therefore have easily fvirmed 
 ane of the early articles of commerce from the East 
 to the West, together with the Nard. the Costus, 
 and the Lvcium of these mountains. — J. Y. R. 
 
 ASPHALTUM pDn chemar ; Arab, 
 
 cko>nar; Sept. a(Tcpa\ros; Auth. Vers. ' pitch"). 
 Luther, like the modern Rabliins, erroneously 
 b-anslates the Hebrew by ' clay.' The Hebre.v 
 am] Arabic names probaljly reier to the leddish 
 colour of some of the specimens (Dioscorides, 
 i. 99). The Gi'eek name, whence the Latin Asphal- 
 tum, is doubtless derived from the Lake .A.sphal- 
 tites (Dead Sea), whence it was abundantly ob- 
 tained. Usually, however, asphaltum, or com- 
 pact bitumen, is of a shining lilack colour ; it is 
 solid and brittle, with a conchoidal fracture, alto- 
 gether not unlike c;)mmon pitch. Its specific 
 gravity is from I to 1-6, and it consists chiefly 
 of bituminous oil, hydrogen gas, and charcoal. 
 It is i'oand partly as a soliil dry fossil, inter- 
 mixed in layers of plaster, mail, or slate, and 
 partly as liquid tar flowing from cavities in rocks 
 or in the earth, or swimming upon the surface of 
 lakes or natural wells (Burckhardt, i'. 77). To 
 judge from Gen. xiv. 10, mines of asphaltum 
 must have existed formerly on the spot where 
 bubsequently the Dead Sea, or Lake Asphaltites. 
 was furm.'^d, such as Mariti ( 7Varefa, iv. 27) 
 discovered on the western shore of that sea. The 
 Palestine earth-pitch, however, seems to have had 
 the preference- over all the other sorts (Plin. xxviii. 
 23;'Discor. i. p. 100). It was used among the 
 ancients jMirtly for covering boats, paying the 
 bottoms c'f vessels (comp. Niebuhr, ii. p. 336 ; Gfen. 
 v\. 14: Exod. ii. 3; Josejrii. De Bell. Jud. iv. S. 4 ; 
 B<(ckii]f[hain, Mesot^t. p. 346), and pajtly as a 
 
 ASPHALTUM. 
 
 5\il)stitu(e for mortar in buildings; and it ii 
 tiiought that the i)ricks of whidi tbe walls o* 
 Babylon were built (Gen. xi. 3; Strabo, xvi. p. 
 713 ; Herod, i. 179; Plin. xxxv. 51 ; AmmiaL. 
 Marcell. xxlii. fi ; Virtruv. viii. 3 ; comp. Joseph. 
 Antiq. i. 4. 3) had been cemented with hot 
 bitumen, which imparted to them great soliditj'. 
 In ancient Babylon asphaltinn w;is made use of 
 also for fuel, as the environs have from the earliest 
 times been renowned for the aliundanc^e of t!iat 
 substance Diod. Sic. ii. 12; Herod, i. 179; Dion. 
 Cass. Ixviii. 26; Strabo, xiv. 8. 4; Pint. Alex. 
 c. 35; Theodoret, Quccst. in Genes. 59; Ritter, 
 Geogr. ii. 343; Buckingham, Mesopot. p. 346). 
 Neither were the ancient Jews unacquainted with 
 the medicinal jjrojTerties of that mineral (Jo- 
 seph Df. Bell. Jud. ibid.) 
 
 Asphaltum was also used among the ancient 
 Egyptians for embalming the dead. Strabo 
 (xvi.) and many other ancient and modern 
 writers assert, that only the asphalt of the Dead 
 Sea was used for that purpose; f)ut it has in more 
 recent times been proved, from experiments made 
 on mummies, that the Egyptians employed slaggy 
 mineral pitch in embalming (he dead. This 
 operation was performed in thivee ditlerent ways : 
 first with slaggy mineral pitch alone; second 
 with a mixture of this bitumen and a liquor 
 extracted from the cedar, called cedoria ; and 
 third with a similar mixtiue, to which resinous 
 and aromatic sidistances were added (Haiiy. 
 Mineral, ii. p. 315). 
 
 Asphaltum is found in mas.ses on the shore o( 
 the Dead Sea, or floating on the surface of if* 
 waters. Dr. Shaw (^Travels in Barhari/ and the 
 Levant) was told that this bitumen, for wliicii 
 the Dead Sea is so famous, rises at certain times 
 from the bot^om of the sea in large pieces of 
 semigloliular form, which', as soon as they touch 
 the surface, and the external air ofierates upon 
 them, burst asunder in a thousand pieces, with 
 a terrible crash, like the puhis fulminans of 
 the chemists. This, however, he continues, only 
 occurs along the shore ; for in deep water, it 
 is supposed that these eruptions show themselves 
 in large columns of smoke, which are often 
 seen to rise from the lake. The fact of the as- 
 cending smoke has been much questioned by 
 naturalists ; and altliough ajiparently confirmed 
 by the testimonies of various travellers, collected 
 by Biisching, in his Erdbeschreihung, it is not 
 confirmed by the more observant travellers of 
 recent years. Pococke ( Description of the 
 East., &c. ii. ^ 46) presTimes that the thick 
 clumps of asphalt collected at the l)ottom of the 
 lake liave been brought up i)v subterraneous fire, 
 and afterwards melted by the agitation of the 
 waters. Also Strabo (xvi. p. 764) speaks of sub- 
 terraneous fires in those parts (comp. Burckhardt, 
 Si/ria, 394). 
 
 Dr. Robinson, when in the neighbourhood, 
 heard from the natives t.'e same story which had 
 previously been told to Seetzen and Burckhardt 
 namely — that the asphaltum flows down the fac» 
 of a precipice on the eastern shore of the lake, 
 until a large mass is collected, when, from its 
 weight or some sliock, it breaks off and falls intt 
 the sea (Seetzen, in Zaeh's Monatl. Correspond 
 xviii. 441 ; Burckhardt, p. 391; Roliinson, ii, 
 229). This, however, he strongly doulits, £ot 
 assigned reasons, and it is agreed 'hat notLing al
 
 ASS 
 
 tb« kind occuri on llie western shore. Tlie P<o- 
 teaaiir rather nirlines to receive the testimony of 
 ttie local Aral)S wlm affirm that the bitumen 
 only ap|)ears after eaitliquakes. They allege that 
 at\er tlie eartiiqu.ike ol' lSo4 iiuge (}uaiititie< of 
 it were ciist upon the shore, of which the Jehaliii 
 Arabs alone took about 60 kuiitars (each of 
 98 lbs.") to market; and it was corvoboratively 
 recollected by the Rev. Eli Smith, that a large 
 amount had that year l)een pinchased at Beirut 
 by the Frank merchants. There was another 
 earthquake on Januaiy 1, IS37, and soon after a 
 large mass of asphaltum (compared by one person 
 to an island, and by another to a house) was disco- 
 vered floating on the sea, and was driven aground 
 on the western side, neai Usduin. Tlie neigh- 
 bouring Arabs assembled, cut it op with axes, 
 removed it by camels' loads, and sold it at 
 tlie rate of four piasties the rutl, or pound ; the 
 product is said to have been about 3000 dollars. 
 K.vcept during tliese two years, the Shtik of the 
 Jeiialin, a man fifty years old, had never known 
 bitumen appear in the sea, nor heard of it from 
 tiis fathers (Robinson's Bib. Researches., ii. p. 230). 
 This informati-on may serve to illustrate the ac- 
 coinit of Josephus, that ' the sea in many places 
 sends up black masses of asphaltum, which Hoat 
 on the surface, having the'form and size of head- 
 less oxen' {De Bell. Jud. ix. S. 4); and that of 
 Diodorus (ii. 4*^), who states that the bitumen is 
 thrown up in masses, covering sometimes two or 
 three pkthra, and having the appearance of 
 islands. — E. M. 
 
 ASS ("I'lOn chamor), Equus Asinus of Lin- 
 naeus ; by some formed info a subgenus, containing 
 that group of the Equidse which are not striped like 
 Zeliras, and have (orms and characters distinguish- 
 able from true horses, such as a peculiar shape of 
 body and linil>s, long ears, an uprigiit mane, a 
 tail only tufted at the end, a streak along tlie 
 spine, often crossed with another on the shoulders, 
 a biaying voice, &c. 
 
 Besides tlie ordinary term Chamor, the Hebrews 
 likewise used ]inS Athon, Aton, Atim ; CI"!? 
 Olri)n;\Xyii Para; and. '\Y\'^ Orad,Oredia. By 
 these words, no iloubf, though not with the strict 
 precision of science, dilVerent species and distinct 
 races of the group, as well as qualities of sex and 
 age, were indicated ; but the contexts in general 
 afford only slight assistance in discriminating 
 them ; and reliance on cognate languages is often 
 unavailing, since we find that similar words fre- 
 quently point to secondary and not to identical 
 acceptations. 
 
 1 . Chamor we take to be the name of the com- 
 mon working ass of Western Asia ; an animal of 
 small stature, frequently represented on Egyptian 
 iionuments with panniers on ihe back, usually 
 of a reddish colour (the Arabic Hamar and 
 Chamara denoting red), and the same as the 
 Tuikish Hyniaf. It appears to he a domesticated 
 race of the wild ass of Arabia, Mesopotamia, and 
 Southern Persia, wliere it is denominated Gour : 
 'w4 Scripture ii is distinguislieii by the name of 
 *yV\]3 Orud (Job xxxix. 5). and in flie Chaldee of 
 Daniel, Kmy Or.dui (v. 21) ; both terms J>eing 
 most likely derived from the braying voice of tiie 
 animal. 
 
 In its natural state it never seeks woody, but up- 
 'Mid pasture, mountainous and rocky retreats ; and 
 
 ASS. 
 
 til 
 
 it is habituated tc stand on the brink of ])i-ecipic« 
 (a piactice not entirely ol)literated in our own "io- 
 me.^lic races), whence, with pro ruded ears, it su"-- 
 
 [Domestic .\ss of Western Asia.] 
 
 veys the scene below, blowing and at length 
 braying in extreme excitement. This habit ia 
 beautil'ully de]iicted by Jeremiah, when s])eaking 
 of the Para (xvii. fi) and Orud (xlviii.6), where, 
 instead of "lyny Orm; heath, we should read 
 Tliy Orud, wild ass; for there is no heath, erica, 
 in Asia. . 
 
 Dn"'y Ojr, Oirim; in the Chaldee 'b'']} ^l' i 
 Autli. Vers, young ass, colt ; i)ut this rendering 
 does not apjiear on all occasions to lie correct, 
 the word being sometimes used where the Oirim 
 or Ourim carry loads and till the ground, whidi 
 seems to afford evidence of, at least, full growth 
 (Isa. xxx. 6, 24). jIDN Aton, Atunutii, is 
 unsatisfactorily rendeied ' she-ass,' imless we suji- 
 pose it to refer to a bleed of greater beauty and 
 importance than the common, namely, llie silver 
 grey of Africa ; wliich iieing large and indocile, 
 tlie females were anciently .selected in prel'eience 
 for riding, and on tliat account formed a valnalile 
 kind of property. From early ages a while breed of 
 this race was reared at Zobeir, the ancient Bassoia 
 and capital of the Orcheni, from whicii place civil 
 dignitaries still obtain their white asses and white 
 mules. It is now the fashion, as it was dining 
 the Parthian empire, and probably in the time of 
 the Judges, to dapple this bieeil with spots of 
 orange or crimson or of both colours together; 
 and we agree with tlie Editor of tiie Picturial 
 £«6fe (note on Judg. v. 10) that this is the meaning 
 of the word If!^* Tzachor (chequered ?) ; an in- 
 terpretation which is confiimed by the Baliylonian 
 Sanhedrim, who, in answer to King Sapor's oflei 
 of a horse to convey the Jewish Messiah, say : ' non 
 est ti()i equus centimaculus, quali-^ est ejus (Mes- 
 siae) asinus." Horses and asses thus ])ainted occui 
 frequently in Oriental illuminated MSS., and 
 altliough the taste may he jmerile, we conceive that 
 it is the record of remote conquest achieved by a 
 nation of Central Asia mouiited on s])otted or 
 cloudetl horses, and revived by the Parthiaris, w'lo 
 were similarly equi()petl. See Introduction lo 
 Hist, of Horse and ihc Tangwn Horse. Aatu- 
 rnlist's Library., vol. xii. No other primsevat 
 invasion from the east by horsemen on Tzachor 
 animals than that of tlie so-called Centaurs ia 
 recorded : their eia coincide* nearly with that at 
 tlie Judgeg.
 
 242 
 
 ASS. 
 
 By tiie l.iw of Moses the ass was declared un- 
 clean, and therrfoie w;is not used as food, except- 
 infj,ci3 it would ajjpear, in cases of extreme famine. 
 This inference, however, is drawn fmrn aca>e\vhere 
 tlie term ' assVs head' in:iy he exiihiiiied to mean 
 iK't literally the iiead of an ass, Init a certain mea- 
 sure or weight so called, as in 1 Sam. xvi. 20, 
 where it is said that Jesse sent to Saul ' an ass of 
 bread ;' for, in our version, ' laden with ' is an ad- 
 dition to the text. Altliough therefore the famine 
 in Samaria may possibly have compelled the 
 peoj)le to eat asses, raid a head may have \>ee.i 
 very dear, still the expression may denote the 
 measure or weight which bore the same name. 
 The pr.ihibition, however, liad more probably an 
 e<:onomical than a religious purpose: hunting 
 was thus disc )uraged, and no horses being used, 
 it was of importance to augment the number and 
 improve the qualities of the ass. 
 
 As this animal was most serviceable to man, 
 its name was held in respect rather than con- 
 tempt. The slander, therefore, current among the 
 Romans and directed against the Jews, tliat they 
 adoreil the head of an ass in secret, may not have 
 originated in direct malice or misinterpretation, 
 hut have arisen out of some Gnostic fancies, in 
 which the Alexandrian Jews, who had nearly for- 
 saken tJie Scriptures in search of the magical delu- 
 sions of the Cabala, and new semi-Christians in 
 that city, so deejjly indulged during the first cen- 
 t'.yjes of our eia. Hence the Ophite sect figured 
 iM the circles of ' Behemoth, the last genius or 
 Eon (?), under the name of Onoel, shajjed like an 
 ass; and these exists an engraved Abraxa, or talis- 
 jiiaii, of Gentile or Gnostic origin, bearing the 
 whuie-length form of a man in flowing robes with 
 ail ass's head, and holding an open book with the 
 inscript-on, ' Deus Chrisliaiiorum mcnenychites ' 
 It is not likely that mere malice would engrave 
 its sjiite upon amulets, although, if Jablonski be 
 correct, the ass was held ui contempt in Egypt, 
 aJid therefore in Alexandria ; but among the 
 Arabs and Jews we have ' the voice of one crying 
 hi the wilderuess,' a solemn allusion derived 
 from the wild ass, almost the only voice in the 
 desert; and in the distinguishing epithet of Mir- 
 van II., last Ommiad caliph, who was called 
 Hymar-al-Gezerah, or wild ass of Mesopotamia — 
 |»-oofs that no idea of contempt wiis associated wi'^h 
 tlie propliet's metaplior, and tiiat, by such a desig- 
 nation no insult was intended to the person or dig- 
 nity of the prince. In more remote agei Tartak or 
 Tarhak was an ass-god of the Avim, and Yauk was 
 »*»^ Arabian name of another equine divinity, or a 
 aiil'erent name for the same Tartak, whose form 
 may jjossibly be preser\'ed to the present day in 
 the image of the Borak, or mystical camel, which, 
 according to the Koran, bore Mohammed, and is 
 uow carried in processions at tlie Nourous. Ii is 
 ehajied like a iiorse, having a vih'xts body with red 
 legs, a peacock's tail, and a woman's instead of 
 an a^s"s head. 
 
 2. S"li3 Para, rendered likewise ' wild ass,' is a 
 derivative of the same root which in Hebrew has 
 proihiced CHQ Paras, horse, and D''L;nS Parasi/n, 
 horsemen, Persians, and Parthians. Thougii evi- 
 dently a generiral term, theSciipture uses it in a 
 epecitic sense, and seems to intend by it the horse- 
 ass, or wild mule which the Greeks denominated 
 Hem'Kmos. and t'ae moaenis Djiggetai ; though 
 W« lijiuk tlicre still remains sonie commixture in 
 
 ASS. 
 
 tlie descriptions of the species and those of ttM 
 
 Koulan, or wild ass of Northern Asia. Both ai» 
 
 ■-•'v.4v^-^^^;i^i'»3- -^ 
 
 [Wild A«.3 
 
 nearly of the same stature, and not unlike in the 
 general distribution of colours and markings, but 
 the He ' ionos is distinguished from the other by 
 its neighing voice and the deficiency of two teeth 
 ill the jaws. Tlie species is first noticed by Aris- 
 totle, who mentions nine of these animals as l>eiiig 
 brought to Phrygia by Pharnaces the satrap, 
 whereof three were living in the time of his son 
 Pharnabazus. Tiiis was while the Onager still 
 roamed wild in Cappadocia and Syria, and proves 
 that it had until tiien been considered the same 
 species, or that from its rarity it liad escajied dis- 
 crimination ; but no doubt remains tliat it was 
 the Gouikhur, or liorse-ass, whicli is implied liy 
 the name Hemionos. The allusion of Jeremiali, 
 in spe^-king of tlie Pai'a (xiv. (>), most forcibly 
 depicts the scarcity of food when this sp«:;ies, 
 inured to the desert and to want of water, are made 
 the prominent example of sulfering. 
 
 Tney were most likely used in traces to draw 
 cliariots : the animals so iioti;'ed in Isa. xxi. 7 
 and bvHerodotus are the same which P]iny,Stra!> ), 
 and Arnohius make the Caramanians and Scy- 
 thians employ in the same way. We claim the 
 Para, and not tlie Orud, to be this species, hecan.-e 
 the Hemionos, or at least the Gouiklmr, does not 
 bray, as before noticed ; and because, notwithstand- 
 ing its lierceness and velocity, it is actually used 
 at present as a domestic animal at Lnckuiiw, where 
 it was observed by Duvaucel. The Hemionos is 
 little inferior to the wild horse ; in shape it re- 
 sembles a mule, in gracefulness a horse, and in 
 colour it is silvery, witli broad spaces nf flax«i or 
 bright bay on the Ihigii, flank, shoulder, neck, ami 
 head ; ilie ears are wide like the zebra's, and the 
 neck is clothed with a veitical dark mane pro- 
 longed in a stripe to the tuft of the tail. The com- 
 pany of this animal is liked by horses, and, when 
 domesticated, it is gentle : it is now found wild 
 from the deserts of the Oxus and Jaxartes to 
 China and Central Imlia. In Cutch it is never 
 known to drink, and in whole districts which.it 
 frequents water is not to he found : and, though 
 the natives talk of the tine flavour of tlie flesh, and 
 the Gonr in Persia is the food of 'neroes, to an 
 European its smell is abominable. For detailed 
 remarks on all tiie species of Equidie we refer 
 to vol. xii. of the Aaturalisf.'s lAhrary, wlieir, 
 however, tliere are seveial tvfwgraphical errors in 
 the Hebrew names. 
 
 Mui.E (niQ Pared, a slight alteialion froii
 
 ASSHUR. 
 
 ASSYRIA. 
 
 mi 
 
 Paia, before lefcneii to) occurs in 2 S.im. xiii. 
 S9; I Kings i. 33; x. 2j; and in utiier places. 
 
 f Mules- from an Egyotian Painting. — Hiit. Museum,] 
 
 This animal is sufticiently well known to require 
 110 particular description. Where, or at what 
 ■])erii>d, lireedintj mulfs was first commenced is 
 totally unknown, ahhou:xh, from several circum- 
 .stiinces. Western Asia may be regarded as the 
 ■locality ; and the era as coinciding with that of the 
 first i<iiigs of Israel. In the time of David, to be 
 allowed to ride on the kinu:'s own mule was an 
 I'.nderstood concession of great, if not sovereign an- 
 itiority, and several years before the mention of 
 this event all the king's sons already rode upon 
 mules. It does not a]i]Tear that the Hebrew 
 people, at tkis early jieriod at least, bred males; 
 they received them from Armenia, the large 
 Persiiui nice being considered the oll'spring of 
 tlie Onager and mare; but the most beautiful 
 were no doubt brought from the vicinity of Bas- 
 ■soia. as lyeibi'e noticei. The claim of Anah, son 
 •of Zibeon, to the discov'eiy of breeding mules, as 
 asserted in the Talmuds, may lie regarded as an 
 .expression of national vasiity. It rests on Gen. 
 XXX vi. "24, where QC Jemim, or Ha-yimim is ren- 
 dered mules : but it more probably means water. 
 
 ii'ST Reches (Esth. viii. 10, 14; 1 Kings iv. 
 S'^) we take to l>e OI^e of the many names for 
 funning camels; at Hei-at still called Badees ; 
 in Arabia, De4oul, Oo Shaary, and Hedjeens. 
 used to carry expresses.; or post horses, anciently 
 Asiandi or Astaudi, now Chupper or Chuppaw, 
 whicli, According to Xenophon, existed in Persia 
 jn the rime of Cyiiis, and are still iji use under 
 difi'erent ap|)ellati(ms over all Asia- — C. H. S. 
 
 ASSHUR, a son of Shem, who gave bis name 
 to Assyria (-Gen. x. 11-22) [Assyria]. 
 
 ASSID.^ANS CQ"'1''pn chasidhn, 1 Mace, 
 vii. 13, 'AciSaiOi, the pio'is, or righteous') ; a 
 name derived from the root IDH, a wwd used to 
 denote a very good or a very bad action, but more 
 frequently tlie fiwmer. As a description of a par- 
 tici>lai' bvjdy of men it dees not occur in the 
 canonical Scrijrtures, noi' in Josephus 5 but in tlie 
 First B<iok of .Maccabees, as aijove, it is applied *o 
 the bo<ly of nealmis and devoted mcii who rose at 
 the signal for anmed resistance given by Matta- 
 thias, the father <»f the Maccabees, and who, 
 tinder him and ills successors, upheld vvitli the 
 ftword iItc great dactrnie of the unity o^ God, and 
 ■stemmed the advancing tide of Grecian manners 
 and idolatries. 
 
 The Jews at a later period gave the name of 
 Chaaivlim to (liose pio\is persons who devoted them- 
 selves t » a life of austerities and religious exercises, 
 10 tl^e iQp« of kfjtening the coming of the Mes- 
 
 siah, and of making an afonenw'ut for their owa 
 gins and for the sins of others. Tlw name of (.ha- 
 gidiui has also bcai assumed by n Jewish s«'i9 
 which 01 iglnated in J^uland alwMit .i hnndn-d yvrs 
 sinc/'^ and whicJi still subsists. Tliereis un actiinnt 
 of it in die l'<;itny C ijclopa-d i*L, ait. ' Assidiaiis." 
 The ideas connected with this later a]i)iro{n-ia!iou 
 of tlie term have, by an obvious association, f^eii 
 carried back to and couiiccteil wilii the Cliasidim 
 or Assidx'iUis who joineii Matlatiiias, and who 
 liave generally lieen regarded as a sect sub-listing 
 at that time. A'o such sect, however, is mintioned 
 by Josephus in treating od'tliealliiirs of tiiat [x-riod,; 
 and the texts wliich reler to tliewi (1 Mace. ii. 42; 
 vii. 13 ; 2 Mace. xiv. I'') allbrd no sudicinit evi- 
 dence that the Assida-ans Ibmicd a sect distimt 
 from other jiious and faithful Jews. Tiie analogous 
 Helirew term Ciiasidinn occuis in various passages 
 of Scripture apjiellatively for good and jiious Uien 
 (Ps. cxlv. 10; cxlix. I ; Isa. Ivii. 1 ; Mic. \iL 
 2), but is never ajiplied to any sector Ixidy of men. 
 U|)On the wliole, in tlie entire absence of collatt-ial 
 information, it seems the safest coui-se to con.iude 
 that the Assidaians were a body of eminently 
 zealous men, devotsed to the Law, who joined 
 Mattatliias very early, and remaiued-the constam 
 adherents of him and his son Judas — not, like 
 the mass of their supporters, rising occasionally 
 and then relap.sing into tlie ordinary pursuits of 
 life. It is jjossible that, as Jennings conjectui*'s 
 (^Antiq. \u 29S\, tJie name owiSai'tfi, or '-aints, 
 came to lie applied to thejm by liieir enemies as a 
 term of reproacli, like ' Puiitans ' for»ier.ly in this 
 countj-y, and ' saiijts " very olien in the jiiesent 
 day. 
 
 ASSOS ('"AiTtros), a town of Lesser Mysia, 01 
 of Adramyttiiim, opposite the island of Lesbos, 
 or Mitylene. Paul oame hitlier on foot fioui 
 Troas, to meet with his friends, in oi-der to take 
 shipping for Mitylene (Acts xx. 13, 14). It 'is 
 now a miserable village, called Bei<-aKi, built 
 high upon the rocks on tlie side towards tlw land 
 (Richter, p. 4tt5, &q.). 
 
 ASSYRIA. ^Ve must here distinguisfe lietweeE 
 the country ttf Assyria, and tlie Assyrian empire. 
 They are both designated in Hebiew by "j^ti'N 
 Asshitr, the people being also tksciiljed by the 
 same term, only that in the latter sen.?e it is mas- 
 culine, in the former, fenuniue. In the Septua- 
 giiit it is conimonly rendeied by 'Afftroup or 
 'A<T<rvplovs, and in tiie \'ulgate by Assur and 
 Ass^rii. and seldom or never liy ^Aa-ffupia, or .\.s- 
 syria. Let it be noted, that the As,sliuiiui i 'Atrcroii- 
 pifi'jU. i of Gen. XXV. 3, were an Arab tiil>"; and 
 that at Ezek. xxvii. 0, tJ»e word cis/mrim (in our 
 version ' ALshurilvs") is only an abb'eviated fiirm 
 of tccmhiir, box-wood. 
 
 I. AssYRi.\ Pmdi'Eu was a regiiwi ea.s1 of the 
 Tigris, the cajiital of which was Ninevh. It 
 derived its name from tlie progt^nit.ir ufthealio- 
 liginal inhabitants — AssJutr, the second sun o< 
 Sliein (G«ii. X. 22; 1 Chroii. i. 17). a diHeient 
 person I'rom Asshur, son of Hezron, and Calebs 
 grandson (I Cliron. ii. 4; iv. 5^. Its limits iit 
 early times are unknown; but when lis iiif- 
 naichs enlarged their dominions by conqut-st. 
 the name of this m<.1ro)K)litaii province was ex- 
 tended to tlve whole tmpiie. Hence, while Homei 
 calls the iniialiitants of tiie country north of Pa- 
 lestine ArtMUji reviiltn'h' 'lie Aramiiu w Aim-
 
 244 
 
 ASSYRIA. 
 
 tnEEans of tlic Hpl)iews\ the Grpcks of a later 
 period, finding fliem subject to tlie Assyrians, 
 called tlie country Assyria, or (by contraction) 
 Syria, a name wliicli it has pver since boitie. It 
 is on tliis account that, in classical writers, tl)e 
 names Assyria and Syria are so often found inter- 
 chanL'ed ; and a lecenf commentator on Isaiah is 
 of opinion tliat this too is the case in Scripture ; 
 for by ' Assyria,' in Isa. xix. 23-25, he understands 
 the p'ro])het to mean ' Syria' (Henderson on Isaiah, 
 Lond. 1^40. p. \T^). The same conjecture had 
 been liazarded bv Ilitzig {Beyriff d Kritik Alt. 
 Test. Heidell.en,', 1«31, p. 98); but it maybe 
 questioned wliether in Hebrew 'Assliur" and 
 ' Aram' are ever confounded. Tl)e same, liow- 
 ever, cannot be affirmed of those parts of the As- 
 syrian emjiire whicli lay east of the Euphrates, 
 iiut west of tlie Tigris. Tlie Hebrews, as well as 
 the Greeks and Romans, appear to have spoken 
 of them in a loose sense as being in Assyria, 
 because in the Assyrian empire. Tlius Isaiah 
 (\ii. 20) describes the Assyrians as those ' beyond 
 the river,' i. e. east of the Euphrates, which river, 
 and not the Tigris, is introiluced at viii. 7, as an 
 image of their ]iower. In Gen. xxv. 18, the lo- 
 cality of the Ishmaelites is described as being east 
 of Egypt, ' as thou goest to Assyria,' which, how- 
 ever, could only he reached through Mesopotamia 
 or Babylonia; and this idea best reconciles tlie 
 apparent incongruity of the statement in the same 
 book (ii. 1 4), that the Hitklekel, or Tigris, runs 
 ' on the east of Assyria,' i. e. of the Assyrian pro- 
 vinces of Mesopotamia and Babylonia; for there 
 can be no doubt that, not only during the exist- 
 ence of the Assyrian monarcliy, but long after its 
 overthrow, the name of Assyria was given to those 
 provinces, as having once formed so important a 
 port of it. For example, in 2 Kings xxiii. 21*, 
 Nebuchadnezzar is termed the king of Assyria, 
 thougli res dent at Baliylon (comp. Jer. ii. IS; La- 
 ment. V.6; Judith i:7; ii. I); yea, in Ezra vi. 22, 
 Daiius, king of Persia, is called king of Assyria 
 (comp. Piin. Hist. Nat. xix. 19); and, on a similar 
 principle, in 2 Mace. i. 19, the Jews are said to 
 have been cairied captive to Persia, i. e. Baliy- 
 Ionia, because, as it had formerly been subject to 
 the Assyrians, so it was afterwards under the do- 
 minion of Persia. (Comp. Herodotus, i. lOfi, 17S; 
 iii. 5 : vii. 63 ; Straho, ii. 84 ; xvi. 1 ; Arrian, 
 vii.; Ej-pud. Akx. vii. 21. 2; Ammianus Mar- 
 celliiius, xxiii. 20; xxiv. 2; Justin, i. 2. 13.) 
 One writer, Dionysius Periegeta (v. 975), applies 
 the designation of Assyria even to Asia Minor, as 
 far as the Black Sea. 
 
 Vvt, ultimately, this name again became re- 
 stricted to the original provi'^ce east of the Tigris, 
 which was called by the Greeks 'Atrtrupia (Ptolemy, 
 vi. 1). and more commonly 'Aroufi/o (Strabo, xvi. 
 i;. .507), or 'Arupla (D'ou Cassius, Ixviii. 28), the 
 latter being only a dialectic variety of pronuncia- 
 tion, derived from the Aramaean custom of chang- 
 ing s into f. A tiace of the name is supposed to 
 
 lie preserved in that of a very ancient place iyi 
 
 Athnr, on the Tigris, from four to »ix hours N.E. 
 of Mosuj. Rich, in his Residence in Kurdistan 
 (vol. ii. p. 129), des(tiil>rs the ruins as those of the 
 ' city of Ninirod," and states that some of the better 
 info-i'med of the Tuiks at Mosul ' said it was Al 
 Athnr, or Ashiir, from "vliich the whole country 
 WAS denominated. 
 
 ASSYRIA. 
 
 According to Ptolemy, Assyria was in his day 
 bounded on tlie north by Armenia, the GoidiaPrtr 
 fxr (larcbichian mountains, especially by Mount 
 Ni]ihates; on the west by the river Tigris and 
 Me.sojK)tamia ; on the south by Susiana, or Clm- 
 zistan, in Persia, and by Babylonia; and on th* 
 east by a ])ai t of Media, and .nonnts Choathras and 
 Zagros (Ptolemy, vi. 1 ; Pliny, IJist. Nat. v. 13 ; 
 Strabo, xvi. }>. 736). It corresjionded to the mo- 
 dern Kurdistan, or coimtry of the Kurds (at least 
 to its larger and western portion),, with a part of 
 the pashalik of Mosul. ' Assyria,' says Mr. Ains- 
 woith (Hesearc/ies in Assyria, Babylonia., and 
 Chaldcea, Lond. 1^38), ' including Taurus, ii 
 distinguished into throe districts : by \\i structure, 
 into a district of ])lutonic and metamorphic rocks, 
 a district of sedentary formations, and a district 
 of alluvial deposits; by configuration, into a dis- 
 trict of mountains, a district of stony or sandy 
 plains, and a district of low watery jilains ; hxj 
 natxiral productions, into a coimtry of forests and 
 fruit-trees, of olives, wine, corn, and pasturage, oi 
 of I)arr9n rocks ; a country of mulben-y, cotton, 
 maize, tobacco, or of barren clay, sand, pebbly oi 
 rocky plains ; and into a country of date-trees, 
 rice, and pasturage, or a land of .saline 'plants.' 
 The northern part is little else than a mass of 
 mountp.ins, which, near Julamerk, rise to a very 
 gieat height. Mount Jewar being supposed to have 
 an ele\ation of 1.5,000 feet ; in the south it is 
 more level, but the plains are often burnt up with 
 scorching heat, while the traveller, looking north- 
 ward, sees a snowy aljiine ridge hanging like a 
 cloud in mid air. On the west this coinitiy is 
 skirted by the great river Tigris, the Hiddekel of 
 the Hebrews (Gen. ii. 14 ; Dan. x. 4), the DijLit 
 of the Arabs, noted for the impetuosity of its cur- 
 rent. Its banks, once the residence of Kiighty 
 kings, are now desolate, covered, like those of its 
 twin-river the Eujihrates, with relics of ancien,, 
 greatness, in the ruins of forties.ses, mounds, and 
 dams, which had been erected for the defence or 
 irrigation of the country. Js'iebulir descrilies a 
 large stone dam at the casile of Nimrod, eight 
 leagues below Mosul, as a work of great skill and 
 labour, and now venerable for its antiquity ; and 
 some supjHi.se that it was from the circumstance 
 of .so many canals from tiie Ti'gris watering the 
 country, and rendering it fruitful, that that river 
 rereived the Arabic name o\' Nahr-as-salam. ti.t* 
 River of Peace, i. e prosperity. It leaves the 
 high land at .some distance above Tekrit, lusliinj; 
 with great velocity through a pass in the Hannini 
 mountains. In its progress along Assyria, the 
 Tigris receive; from that country, besides other 
 rivers, two ra])id mountaiu-sti earns, the Great and 
 Little Z;ii) {Arab. Dhali, i. e. Wolf), called by 
 the Greeks the Lykos or Wolf, and the Capvtta, 
 or Wild Boar. The greater Zab (called by thf 
 Kurds Zerb), used to lie laid down as a dillvieii' 
 river from the Hakkary, but Dr. Giant found then; 
 to be identical ; and he likewise detected an erioi 
 of Kinneir, in lejiiesenting llie Bitlis-su as tl e 
 game as the Khabfir, whereas they aie ditl'ereij 
 streams. (See Grant's Ncstorians, p. 46.) 
 
 The most leniaikable featuie, says Ainsworth, 
 in the vegetation of Taurus, is the abiuid.i; ce . t 
 trees, shrubs, and ])lants in the northern, and 
 their comparative ab.'^ence in the southern district 
 Besides tlie producti jns above enumerated, Kur 
 distan yields gall-i uts, gu;n-ar.ibic, mastich
 
 ASSYRIA. 
 
 manna (used as suijar), matldtr, castor-oil. and 
 rarioiis kinds of fjrain, pulse, and fruit. An old 
 traveller, Raiiwolf. who passed l)y Mosul in 1574, 
 dwells with admiration on the finely-cultivated 
 fields, on the Tigris, so fruitful in corn, wine, 
 and honey, as to remind him of the .Assyrian Itiil)- 
 sha-keh's description of hi; native country in 2 
 Kings xviii. 32. Rich infon''.is us tliat a gre.it 
 
 3uantity of honey, of tlie finest (juality, is pro- 
 uced ; the i)ees (comp. Isa. vii. IS, ' tlie liee in 
 the laud of Assyria) are kept in hives of mud. 
 The naphtha spnnajs, on the east of tlie Tigris are 
 less prixluctive than those in Mesoijotamia. but 
 they a.re iimch more numerous. The zoology of 
 (lie mLuntain district includes l)ears (black and 
 hrown), panthers, lynxes, wolves, foxes, marmots, 
 dormice, fallow and red deer, roebucks, ante- 
 lo{ies, &o., and likewise goats, but not (as was 
 once supposed) of the Angora breed. In the ])lains 
 »re found lions, tigers, hyaenas, beavers, jei boas, 
 wild boars, cameLs, &c. 
 
 Ptolemy divides Assyria into six provinces. 
 Farthest north lay Arrapachitis, so called, as Ro- 
 senmiiller coiijecture-s, from Arphachsad, Asshur's 
 brother (Gen. x. 22-24 ; but see Vaterow Genesis, 
 i. 151). South of it was Calahine, by Stralio 
 written Calachf.ne ; j)erhaps the Ciialach of 2 Kings 
 Kvii. 6; xviii. 11. Next came Adiabene, so 
 called from tlie above-mentioned ri\ers Dhab or 
 Diab ; it was so impoitant a district of Assyria, 
 is sometimes to give name to the whole coun- 
 try [Adiabene]. In Aramasan it is called 
 Chadyab, or Hadyab. North-east of it lay Arbe- 
 litis, in which was Arbela (now Arbil, of which 
 tee an account in Rich's Kurdistan, vol. ii. p. 14 ; 
 and Appendix, No. i. and ii.), famous for the 
 battle in wliich Alexander triumphed over Darius. 
 South of this lay the two provinces ot Apo/loniatis 
 ind Sittakeii£. The capital of the whole co(uitry 
 was Nineveh, the Nirios of the Greeks i^Herodot. 
 t. 102'., the Heljrew name lieing supposed to de- 
 note ' the abode of Ninos," the founder of the em- 
 Dire. Its site is Ijelieved to have lieen on the 
 '»ast bank of the Tigris, opposite the modern town 
 .' Mosul, where there is now a small town called 
 Nebbi Yunus (i. e. the proj)het Jonah), the ruins 
 around which were ex])lored by Rich, and are 
 described in his work on Kurdistan [Nineveh]. 
 In Gen. x. 11, 12, three other cites are men- 
 tioned along with Nineveh, viz. Rcchoboth Ir, 
 i. e. the city of Rehoboth, the locality of which is 
 unknovn. Calach (in our version Calah), either 
 ii place in the province of Calachene above men- 
 tioned, or the modern Hulwan, called by the 
 Syrians Chalach ; and Resen, ' a great city be- 
 tween Nineveh and Calach,' which Bocliart iden- 
 tifies with the Larissa of Xenophon (--/waiftiM, iii. 
 47), and Michaelis with a place called Ressii. 
 (Rish-Ain, caput fontis f), destroyed by the Arabs 
 A.D 772. Rich notices an old place and convent 
 iffiiatname near Mosul (ii. 81). At the town 
 of Al Kosh, N. of Mosul, tradition places the 
 Oirth and bunal of the prophet Nahiun, and the 
 Jews resort thither in pilgrimage to his tomb. But 
 though he is styled an El-kosliite (Nali. i, 1), his 
 denunciations against Assyria and Nineveh were 
 evidently uttered in Pale-stinr?; and St. Jerome 
 Gsea his bir'h-place at Helkesei, a village in Ga- 
 lilee. Still it is possible that he was the descend- 
 ant of one of the liraelities carried captive by 
 Salmaiiassar, king 1 1 Assyria, ' to Chalacli and to 
 
 ASSYRIA. 
 
 %iA 
 
 Chabor on the river Gozan (or rather to Cliabor a 
 river of Gozan), and to the cities of the Medes' (2 
 Kings xvii. 6; xv. 29 ; xviii. !» ; 1 Cliron. v. 
 26). Of Chalach welia\e already s)iokcn. In 
 Chabor some recognise the mountain-tiact it. 
 Assyria, called by Ptolemy Clhaboras, in which 
 rises the river Kliabfir, wiiich pursues a soutli- 
 western course past Zaku to the Tigris; while 
 others rather iilentify the river Chabor with tlje 
 Khabur of Mesoj/otamia, which, alter a simihu 
 course, joins the Kupinates at Kerkisiyeh, and ig 
 the same as the Chebar (tiiat being the .Syriac 
 form), on the banks of which Ezekiel saw ' visions 
 of God' (Ezek. i. 3). Indeed it may be dcjui.ied 
 Avlietlier any of the localities specified were in As- 
 syria Pi(i|ier, with the exception of Chalach ; 'uid 
 if with some we place it at Hulwan, then if was 
 in Babylonian Irak. Major R;iwlinson lias re- 
 cently endeavoured to show that C'hahich w;u 
 neither at Hulwan nor at the neigl.bouiing town 
 of Zohab, but at a ]ilace caled Sir-«'-Pool-eZohal), 
 eight miles S. of the latter, where lie found not 
 only Sassanian ruins and momids like those of 
 Babylon and Nineveh, luit bas-reiiefs and a royal 
 tomb precisely like those of Persepolis. (See tlie 
 Journal of the Geoyraph. Soc. vol. ix. }>art i. p. 35, 
 Lond. 183i>.) The country of Kir, to wliich the 
 Assyrians transjx»rted the Dama-scene Syrians (2 
 Kingsxvi. 9; .A.m.os i. 5), was prol)al)ly the it- 
 gion about the river Kur (the Cyrus of the Greeks) 
 i. e. H)eria and Georgia. 
 
 The greater jiait of the country which foinied 
 Assyria Profjer is under the nominal sway of the 
 Turks, who compose a considerable proportion of 
 the population of the towns and larger villages, 
 filling nearly all public ollices, and dillering in 
 nothing fiom other Osmanlis. The pasha of 
 Mosul is nominated by the Porte, but is subject 
 to the pasha of Bagdad ; there is also a pasha at 
 Solymaneah and Akra : a bey at Arbd, a mos- 
 sellim at Kiikook, &c. But the atioriginal in- 
 habitants of the country, and of the whole moun- 
 tain-tract that heie diviiles Turkey fnuu Peisi.i, 
 are the Kurds, the Carduchii of the (ireeks ; from 
 them a chain of these mountains were anciently 
 called the Carduchian or Gordya-an, and (ii m 
 them now the country is designated Kurdistan. 
 Klaproth, in his Asia Poli/ijlotta (Paiis, 1^23. 
 4to. p. 75), derives the name from the Pirsian 
 root kurd, i. e. str(,ng. brave. They are still, jis 
 of old, a barbarous and warlike race, occasionally 
 yielding a formal allegiance, on the west, to tiie 
 Turks, and, on the east, to the Persians, but never 
 wholly sulxiued ; iniUed, some of the more power- 
 ful trd)es, such as the Hakkary, have maintained 
 an entire indetx-ndence. Some of tiiem aie sta- 
 tionary in villages, while others roam far and 
 wide, beyond the limits of their own countiy, as 
 nomadic sheplieids; Ijutthey are all, moie oi Itss. 
 addicted to jiredatory habits, and aie regarded 
 with great dread by their more p<'aceful nel^ii- 
 bours. They profess the faith of Islam, and aie 
 of the Soonee sect. .•\11 tia\ tilers have remaiktd 
 many points of resemlJance between their and the 
 ancient Highlanders of Scotland. (See Mr. .Ving- 
 worth's second work. Travels and Hescan/ws in 
 Asia Minor, Mesopotamia. &c. 2 vols. Lond. 
 Ifi42. 
 
 The Christian pojiulatlon is scattered over ibe 
 whole region, but is found chiefly in the north. 
 It includes Chalda-ans, who form that biiuiro a'
 
 U8 
 
 ASSYRIA. 
 
 ASSYRIA. 
 
 ill* Nesturiaiis tliat adheres to the church of 
 Rome, 11 fViv laoMtes. or nioiioijliysife Syrians, 
 Aimeniaiis, & :. But the riost interesting jjortion 
 is the anciei't church of tJie primitive Ncstorians, 
 1 lively intereLit in which has lately been excited 
 in the r('lij,'ions world l)y the pulilications of the 
 American missionaries, esiwcially by a work en- 
 litled The Xestorians, \>y Asahel Grant, M.D. 
 Lond. 1811. Besides the setllemento of this 
 pejj)'e in tiiv plain of Oor>i,;miah lo the east, and 
 in various {mits ol' Kurdistan, where they are in 
 a state of vassalage, then- has lieen for ages an 
 independent cjminunity of Nestoriiuis in the 
 wihlest and most inaccessible part of the country. 
 It lies at nearly eijual distances iVoin the lakes of 
 Van and (Jovoomiali, and the Tigris, and ia 
 hemmed in on every side l:y tiihes of ferocious 
 Kurds: but, entienched in their fastnesses, the 
 Nestorians have defied the storms of revolution 
 and desolation tliat have so often swept over the 
 adjacent legions; and in their character of bold 
 and intvepitl, thovigh rude and (ierce mountaineers, 
 have so entiieiy maintained their independence 
 unto tlie present day, as to bear among their neigh- 
 bours the proud tiile of Ashiret, ' the tributeless.' 
 The .second pait of Dr. Grant's work is taken up 
 with an elaborate attemjit to prove that this in- 
 teresting people are the descendants of the ' lost' 
 ten tribes of Israel. But for a satisfactory refu- 
 tation of this hypothesis, we refer the reader to 
 an able paper by Dr E. Robinson, in the Atner. 
 Bibl. Reposit. for Oct. 1S41, and Jan. 1842. 
 [Israel.] Comp. an article by the Rev. J. Per- 
 kins in the same valuable Miscellany for Jan. 
 1841 ; also his Residence in Persia, New York, 
 1 S43 ; and tlie recent work of Ainsworth. An- ' 
 other jieculiar race that is met witli in this and 
 (he neighbouring countries is tliat of the Y'^ezidees, 
 whom Grant and Ainsworth would likewise con- 
 nect with the ten tribes ; but it seems much more 
 probable that they are an ofl'shoot from the ancient 
 i\Iai lichees, their alleged worship of the Evil 
 Principle amounting to no more than a reveience 
 which keeps them from speaking of him with dis- 
 resj.ect. (See Homes in the Amer. Bibl. Reposit. 
 for April, 1''42.) Beside? the dwellers in towns, 
 and the a^'ricultural population, theie aie a vast 
 nuTnber of wandering hiijes, not only of Kurds, 
 but of Aiabs, Turkoman.s, and other classes of 
 rol^bers, wh.), by keeping the settled inhabitants in 
 constant dread of property ;uid life, check every 
 elVoit at improvement ; and, in consequence of 
 thi.s. and the influence of bad government, many 
 of the finest ])ortions of the country are little better 
 than unjjroductive wastes A copy of a famous 
 history of Kurdistan, entitled Tarikh-al-Akrad 
 (.\kiad being the collective name of the people), 
 was ])rocureil liy Mi. Rich when in the covuitry, 
 iiid is now, along with tlie other valuable Orien- 
 tal MSS. of that lamented traveller, j>reserved in 
 k e British Museum. — N. M. 
 
 2. 1'he Ass-.KiAN Empire. No portion of 
 ancient Iiistory is involved in greater obscurity 
 than that of the empire of Assyria. In attemj)!- 
 i:ig to arrange even the facts deducible from 
 Scripture, a difficulty presents '.tself at the outset, 
 aiising from the ambiguity of the account given 
 of the origin of the earliest Assyrian state in 
 Gen. X. n. After describing Nimrod, son of 
 Cusri. ' as a miglty one in the earth,' the historian 
 ddd* (v<»f 10), ' And the beginning of his king- 
 
 dom (or rather, the first theatre of iiis doiniri'.onj 
 was Babeh, and Erech, and Accad, and Calnelj, 
 in the land of Shinar," i. e. Babi/hmia. Then 
 
 follow the woriis :— "ivc'N N^** Ninn yiNH";?: 
 
 n"l3''3"nN J3M, \vhicli may be rendered as in the 
 Englisli version : ' Out of that land went forth 
 Asshur and builded Nineveh." or (as it is in tiie 
 margin) 'out of that land he (i. e. Nimrod) went 
 out into Assyria and builded Ninexeh.' It is 
 objected to the latter translation, that had the 
 writer meant to say ' to As-syria," he would iiave 
 used a jjreposition, or added the H locale, and 
 written mit^'N. But verbs signifying ' to go to 
 a place' are construed with the noun in the accusa- 
 tive; and Noldius, in his Concordance of llvlrcto 
 Particles (edit. Tymp., j). 223), gives in.stances of 
 the n locale being sonietime-> omitted (comij. in 
 Heb. 2 Sam. x. 2. with 1 Chr. xiii. 13; xix. 2). 
 Looking at the entire conte.xt, and following the 
 natural current of the writer s thoughts, we shall 
 find the Second translation yields the nio.st con- 
 gruous sense. Moses is enumerating tlie descen- 
 dants of Ham, and it is not likely that he would 
 intenujit the details to gi\e an account of Asshur, 
 a son of Shem, whose j)osterity aie not introduced 
 till ver. 21. Besides, in the ciicimistance of 
 Asshur leaving one country to settle in another, 
 there was nothing remarkable, for that was the 
 case with almost all Noah's yrandcliikhen. But 
 it' we understand it of Nimrod, b;.th the connection 
 and the sense will be manifest. Tlie design ob- 
 viou.sly is to repiesent him as a potent monauh 
 and ambitious conqueror. H s bielhien, tlie othei 
 sons of Cush, settle*! in the south, but he. ad- 
 vancing northward, first sei/.ed on Babylonia, 
 and proceeding thence into Assyria (alrea<iy jar- 
 tially colonized by the Asshurites, from whom it 
 took its name) he built Nineveh and the otnev 
 strongholds mentioned, in ordei to secure his con- 
 quests. This view is conliimed by a pa.ssage in 
 Mic. V. 6, where, predicting the ovei throw ol 
 Assyria by the Medes and Babylonians, the Pio- 
 phet says, ' They shall (le\our the land of Asshur 
 with the sword : even the land of Nimrod in the 
 entrances thereof.' (Comp. v. 5.) 
 
 It likewise agrees with the native tradition (if 
 we can de|:end on the repoit of Ctesias), that the 
 founder of the Assyrian monarchy and the builder 
 of Nineveh was one and the same {Jeison, viz 
 Ninus, from whom it derived its name qd. 
 Nins Abode , and in that case the desigiiation 
 of Nimrod (tlie Rebel) was not his piofjer name, 
 but an opjjr. brious apiellatiori imj;osed i ii him 
 by his enemies. Modem tradition likewise con- 
 nects Nimrod with Assyiia ; for while, as we have 
 seen, the memory of Asshm- is pre.served in the 
 locality o( Athur, that place i.s also teimed the 
 ' city of Nimiud," and (as the above-mentioned 
 dam on the Tigiis is styled Ninnod's Castle) 
 Rich informs us that ' tlie inhabitants of the neigh- 
 bouring village of Deraweish ''orisidei him as their 
 founder." He adds, that the vill.ige story tellers 
 have a book they call the ' Kisseh-Nimrud, oi 
 Tales of Nimrod. 
 
 It is true that the. Authoiiyed Version of Gen. 
 X. 11 is countenanced by most of the ancient 
 translators and by Joscphus ; but on the othej 
 hand, the one ue have preiVired is thai of the 
 Targums of Onkelos and Jerusalem, and of St 
 Jerome ; and (among the moderns) of Bochart, 
 Hyde, Marsham, Wells, Fabtr, Ilaies, and many
 
 ASSYRIA. 
 
 <idiera Yet. Ihough Nimrod's 'kiiif^dow' em- 
 braced the lands botli ol" Sliinar and Asslnir, we 
 are left in tlie dark as to whether Bal)yl<)ii or 
 Nineveh became the jA^iniaiicnt seat of jioveiii- 
 ment, and conse(|uently, whcUierhis einjtire sliould 
 be designated tliat of Babyl >nia or that of Assy- 
 ria. No (;eitain tiaf-es of it, indeed, are to [)e 
 found in Scriptiive lor ages after its erection. In 
 the days of Abraham, we hear of a king of Elam 
 (t. e. Elymais, in the soutii of Persia) nained 
 Chedorlaomer, who had held in subjection for 
 twelve years (ive j)etty princes of Palestine ((ien. 
 xiv. 4), and who, in conse<iuence of their rebel- 
 lion, invaded that country along with three other 
 kings, one of whom was ' Amrajjhel, king of 
 Sfti/iar.^ Josephus says ' the Assyrians liad then 
 dominion over Asia ;" and he styles these four 
 kings merely commanders in the Assyrian army. 
 It is ]iossible that Chedorlaomer was an Assyrian 
 viceroy, and the otheis his deputies; for at a later 
 period the Assyrian boasted, ' Are not my princes 
 altogetlier kings?" (Isa. x. S). . Yet some have 
 rather conclniled from the narrative, tliat by this 
 time the monarchy of Nimvod had lieen broken 
 up, or that at least tlie seat of go\'ernment had been 
 transferred to Elam. Be this as it may, tlie name 
 of Assyria as an inde]Ten(lent state does not again 
 ajjpear in Scripture till the closing jjeriod of the 
 age of Moses. Balaam, a seer from the northern 
 part of Mesojiotamia, in the neighlx)urhood of 
 Assyria, a(Ulressing the Kenites, a inOuntain tribe 
 on the east side of the Jordan, ' took up his pa- 
 rable,' t. e. raised his oiacular, proptietic chant, 
 and said, ' Durable is tliy dwelling-place! Yea 
 in a rock puttest thou tliy nest : nevertheless, 
 wasted shall be the Kenite, until Asshur shall 
 lead them captive.' In tliis verse, besides the 
 play upon the word ken (the Hebrew fur a 
 nest), the reader may remark the striking con- 
 trast drawn between the jjcrmanent natiu'e of 
 the abode, and the transient possession of it by 
 the occupants. The prediction found its ful- 
 filment in the Kenites being gradually reduced 
 in strength (comp. 1 Sam. xv. 6), (ill they 
 finally shared the fate of the Trans jordanite 
 tril)es, and were swept away into cajjtivity by the 
 •Assyrians (1 Chr. v. 26; 2 Kings xvi. 9; xix. 
 12, IS; 1 Chr. ii. 65.) But as a counterpart 
 lo this. Balaam next sees a vision of retalia- 
 tory vengeance on their oppressors, and the awful 
 prospect of tlie threatened devastations, though be- 
 held in far distant times, extorts from him the 
 exclamation, ' Ah ! who shall live when Grod 
 doeth Ais? F<;r stiips shall come from the coast 
 of Chiitim, and shall afilict Asshur, and shall 
 afflict Eber, but he also [tlie invader] shall perish 
 for ever.' 
 
 This is not without obs'.urity ; but it has com- 
 monly been supposed to point to the conquest of 
 the regions that once formed the Assyrian emj)ire, 
 first by the Macedonians from Greece, and then 
 by the Romans, both of whose empires were in 
 their turn overthrown. 
 
 In the time of t he J ndges, the people of Israel be- 
 came subject to a king of Mesoiwtainia, Chushan- 
 rishathaim (Judg. iii. 8), who is by Josephus 
 styled King of the Assyrians ; but we are left in 
 the same ignorance as in the case of Chedor- 
 laomer. as to whether he was an independent 
 •overeign or only a vicegerent for another. Tlie 
 ?igbfy-thiid Psalm (ver.9), mentions Ashurasone 
 
 ASSYRIA. 
 
 241 
 
 of the nations leagued against Israel ; liu( em Um 
 date of that coin|xisiiion is unknown, notiiiiig clt- 
 tain ('an be foundetl on it. The lirst kinif of 
 .Assyria alluded to in the Bible, is he \i'lio reigne<l 
 at Nineveh when the ))iopliet Jonah was sent 
 thither (.ron. iii. 6). Hales suppos<^s him to liav# 
 been the father of Pul, the (irst Assyrian luonueli 
 named In Scripture, and dates the coiiniiei»v'. 
 ment of his reign u.c. R21. By that lime the 
 nietrojiolis of the empire had become "an exceed- 
 ing gieat" and populous city, but one jjre emi- 
 nent in wickedness (Jon. i. 2; iii. 3; iv. 11). 
 
 The (irst expressly recorded appearance o( (he 
 Assyrian {Kiwer in (he coundies west of the Ku- 
 jjhrates is in the leign of Menahem, king of Israel, 
 against whom 'tlieGod ol'Israel stiried up ihespint 
 of I'ul {or Phul), king of Assyria" (I Chron. v.2<)J, 
 who invaded the c.iuntry, and exacted a tril)Ute 
 of a thousand talents of silver • that his hand" 
 i. e. his favour, ' might be with him to cunlirm 
 the kingdom in his liand" (2 Kings xv. 19, 2(1). 
 Newton places this event in the year ^.c. 770, 
 in the twentieth year of Pul's reign, the com- 
 mencement of wliicli he (ixes in the yeai u.c. 79ii. 
 As to his name, we find the syllable I'al, I^cl, 
 or Pul entering into the names of several Assy- 
 rian kings (e. g. Pileser. Sardaiia^^a^iis) ; and 
 hence some connect it wiih the Persian '■bala.^ 
 i. e. high, exalted, and think it may have been 
 part of the title which the Assyrian monarchs 
 bore. Hales conjectures that Pul may have been 
 the second £elus of the Greeks, his fame having 
 reached them by liis excursions into Western 
 Asia. About tliis period, we find the prophet 
 Hosea making frequent allusions to the practice 
 both of Israel and Judaea, to throw themselves fur 
 support on the kings of Assyria. In cli. v. 13; 
 X. 6, our version speaks of their specially seek- 
 ing the protection of a ' king .Jareb," but (lie 
 original there is verj' obscure; and (he nex( .Assy- 
 .rian monarclj mentioned l)y name is Tigkuh- 
 pileser. The supposition of Newton is adopted 
 by Hales, that at Pul's death his doniiniiins were 
 divided between his two sons, Tiglath-j>ileser and 
 Naljonassar, the latter being made rulei at Babv- 
 lon, from (he date of whose government or reign 
 the celebrated era of Nabmwssar XouV its rise, 
 corresponding to b c. 747. The name of the 
 other is variously written Tiglaih and Tilgatii, 
 Pileser and Pilieser : the etymology of (lie (irst 
 is unknown (some think it has a reference to (lie 
 rivei Dijlath, i. e. the Tigris). Pileser sigiii(i"q 
 in Persian 'exalted prince.' When Aha/, k'nj» 
 of Juduh, was haul ])iess d liy tlie cmbined 
 forces of Pekah, king of Israel, and Reziii, king 
 of D.imascene-Syria, he ]jinchased Tigluth-pi lo- 
 ser's assistance with a large sum, taken out d!' his 
 own and (he Teinjile (reasury. The Assyrian 
 king accordingly invaded the territories ol bo'h 
 the confederated kings, and annexed a portion of 
 them to his own dominions, carrying captive a 
 number of tl>eir subjects (2 Kings xv. 29; xvi. 
 fj-lO; 1 Chr. V. 26; 2 Chr. xxviii. 16; Isa. vii 
 1-11 ; comp. Amos i. 5 ; ix. ~i ). His succegsol 
 was Shalman (Hos. x. 4), !>h(ilma7ic'ser or ^'a/- 
 manassur, the Knemessar of the apocrvphal book 
 Toblt (ch. i. 2). He made Iloshea, king <>i 
 Israel, his tributary vassal (2 Kings xvii. 3) : but 
 finding liim secretly negotiating with So or So- 
 baco (the Sabakoph of the miinunient.s), king tA 
 Egypt, he laid siege to the laiaelidsh. capital
 
 24S 
 
 ASSYRIA 
 
 Bamaria, l.iok ii aCiiT an iiMcMmrnt of three 
 years (a.c. 719), an.l (ijcu iviluced the country 
 of the tt'!i tiihes to a i)ri»'iiice of his empire, 
 eanyiiig into captivity thekiiii^unil liis p(i>i)le,and 
 ^efllin^' Cuth.i'an^ from Kal)ylonia in rtieir riwm 
 {2 Kings xvii. ,i Ct ; xviii. 9 11). Ilezekiah, 
 kin^' of Jiiil.ili, seems to have Iwen fir a time liij 
 ,'iiss.il I "2 Kiiij;s xviii. 7); anil we learn from tiie 
 Tyrian annaL-i, [)re->erveil l)y Menaniler of Ep!i€- 
 8US 'as cited by Jv>iephui, Anliq. x. 1 1. 2), that Ire 
 subdued the whole of Pliu>nicia, with the excep- 
 tion of insular Tyre, which snccesiliilly resisted 
 a siege of live years. Tlie enjpire of A.ssyrla 
 seems no-v to liave readied its greatest extent, 
 h.iving liad the Mediterranean lor its Ijoinidary 
 on the west, and inclilding witlnn its limits 
 Media and Kir on the nort.i, as well ai Klam on 
 tiie south (2 Kings xvi 9; xvii. 6; Isa xx. 6). 
 In the twentieth chapter of Isaiali i^'ver. 1), tliere is 
 mention of a king of Assyria, San/on, in wiiose 
 reign Tartan besieged and took Aslidod in Phi- 
 listia; and as Tartan is elsewliere spoken of 
 (2 Kings xviii. 17) as a general of Sennacherib, 
 some have supposed that Sargon is but anollier 
 name of that monarch, while others would iden- 
 tify hirn either with Shalmaneser, or with Esar- 
 liaddon, Sennacherib's successor. But the cor- 
 rectness of all these conjectures may fairly be 
 questioned ; and we adhere to the opinion of 
 Gesenius {Comment, on Isa. in loc), that Sar- 
 gon was a king of Assyria, who succeeded Shal- 
 maneser, and had a short reign of two or three 
 years. He thinks the name may be equivalent 
 to Ser-jauneh, ' Prince of the Sun.' Von Bohlen 
 ]nefers the derivation of serffim, ' gold-coloured.' 
 His attack on Egypt may have arisen from the 
 jealousy which the Assyrians entertained of that 
 nation's influence over Palestine ever since tlie 
 negotiation between its king So, and Hoshea, 
 king of Israel. From many incidental expres- 
 sions in the book of Isaiah we can infer that 
 there was at this time a strong Egyptian party 
 among the Jews, for that people are often warned 
 against relying for help on Egypt, instead of 
 simply confiding in Jehovah (Isa xxx. 2; xxxi. 
 1 ; comp. XX. 5, 6). The result of Tartan's expe- 
 dilion against Egypt and Ethiopia was predicted 
 by Isaiah while that general was yet on the 
 Egyptian frontier at Ashdod (Isa. xx. 1-4) ; and 
 rt is not improbable that it is to this Assyrian 
 invasion that the jirophet Nahum refeis when 
 he speaks (iii. 8-10) of the sulijugation of No, 
 i. >;. No-Ammun, or Thebes, the capital of Upjier 
 Egypt, and the captivity of its inhabitants. The 
 occupation of tiie country by the Assyrians, how- 
 ever, must have been very transient, for in the 
 reign of Sargon's successor. Sennacherib, or San- 
 cherib, we find Hezekiah, king of Judah, tlnowing 
 off the .Assyrian yoke, and allying himself with 
 Egypt (2 Kings xviii. 7, 21). This brought 
 against him Sennacherib with a mighty host, 
 which, without (iitWculty, subdued the fenced 
 cities of Judah, and compelled liim to purcliase 
 peace by tile payment of a large tribute. But 
 ' ':lie treaclierous dealer dealt very treacherously ' 
 (Isa. xxxiii. I) ; and, notwithstaniling the agree- 
 ment, proceeded to invest Jerusalem. In answer, 
 however, to the prayers of the • gw)d king" of Ju- 
 dah, the Assyrian was diverted from his purpose, 
 paitly l)y the ■ rumour' (Isa. xxxvii. fi) of the 
 itppioach c'' Tuhakah, king of Eth'opia, and 
 
 ASSYRIA. 
 
 partly hy the sudden and miraculous de»h-ucno« 
 of a gieat jjarl of his army (2 Kings xviii. l«1-37 ; 
 xix.; Isa. xxxvi. and xxxvii.). He himself fted 
 to Nineveh, where, in course of time, when wor- 
 shipping in the temple of liis god Nisroch, he wa» 
 slain l>y hi* sons Adrammelech and Sliarezer, tli* 
 parricides escaping into the land of Armenia — a 
 fact which is preserved in that country's tradi- 
 tionary history [Ararat]. Regarding the jierioJ 
 of Sennacherib's death chronologists differ. Hales, 
 following the apocryphal lx)ok of Tobit (i. 21), 
 jjlaces it fifty-five days aAer his return from hi^ 
 Jewish expedition; but Gesenius (^Comment, or. 
 Isa. p. 999) has rendered it extremely j)robab]e 
 that it did not take place till long after. He 
 founds this opinion chiefly on a curious fragment 
 of Berosus, preserved in the Armenian translatior> 
 of the Chronicle of Eusebius. It states that, after 
 Sennaciierib's brother liad governed Babylon as 
 the Assyrian viceroy, the sovereignty was suc- 
 cessively usurped by Acises, Merodach, or Bero- 
 dacl) Baladan (Isa. xxxix. 1 ; 2 Kings xx. 12), 
 and Elibus or Belibus. But, after three years, 
 Sennacherib regained dominion in Babylonia, 
 and apjxiinted as viceroy his own son Assordan, 
 the Esarhadtlon of Scripture. Tliis statement 
 serves to explain how there was in Hezekiah's 
 time a king at Babylon, though, both before and 
 after, it was subject to Assyria. The only ol>jec- 
 tion to it is, that Isaiah relates the murder ol 
 Sennacherib before Merodach Baladaii's embassy 
 to Jerusalem. But to this Gesenius replies (haJ 
 tliat arrangement is followed by tiie prophet in 
 order to conclude the history of the Assyrian mo- 
 narch, so as not to have to return to it again. 
 Sennacherib is obviously fire king of Arabia and 
 Assyria mentioned by Herodotus under the name 
 of Sanacharibos, of wliom he relates (ii. 14 1 i tiial 
 'he attacked Egypt with a mighty army, but 
 that on his arrival at Pelusium his camp became 
 infested during niglit with so vast a number ol 
 mice, that their quivers and bows, together wit'n 
 what secured their shields to their arms, were 
 gnawed in jiieces ; and finding themselves, in the 
 morning, defenceless, they Ued in confusion, and 
 lost great numViers of their men. There is now 
 to be seen (lie adds) in the temple of Vulcan a 
 marble statue of this king, having a mouse in his 
 hand, and with this inscription, " Whoever lliou 
 art, learn from my fortune to reverence the gods." ' 
 The king of Egy])t was Sethos, or So, priest ol 
 Vulcan. Priiieaux and others suppose that we 
 have here a corrujition of the story of the miracu- 
 lous destruction of the Assyrian army Ijefore Je- 
 rusalem, but the jjoint is open to dovibt. Gese- 
 nius is inclined to identify Sennacherib with the 
 Sardanapaliis to whom Arrian {Exped. of Alex. 
 ii. 5) and Strabo (xiv. 4. 8) ascribe the erection 
 of the cities of Anchiale and Tarsus in Cilicia, 
 after his successful suppression of a revolt of the 
 Greeks there. But there is much confusion in 
 the ancient accounts of Sardana])alus and S"nie 
 have sup])osed tliat the name was a royal title, 
 common to all the Assyrian kings, q. d. Sar-dana- 
 bala, i. e. wise, exalted prince. As to the ety- 
 mology of ' Sennaciierib,' Von Bohlen siiggesti 
 its atlinity to the Persian ' Sangerb,' i. e. • splen- 
 dour of the conqueror.' 
 
 Sennacherib was succeefled by his son Esa - 
 hiddon, or Assarhaddon, who had been his I'ather'a 
 viceroy at Baby'on (2 Kings x;x. 37 ; Isa. xxxvii.
 
 ASSYRIA. 
 
 J*\ He is the Sachenion, or Sarciiedon, of ToLiit 
 (i. 21), and the Asaradiiius of Ptolemy "s Canon. 
 Hales reijaids liim as tlie tiist Saidaiiapalus. The 
 only notice taken of him in Scripture is that he 
 settled some colonisti in Samaria (Ezra iv. 2), 
 ttnd as (at ver. 10 i that colonization is ascribed 
 to tlio * f,-real and noble AsimpjxT,' it is supposed 
 tliat that was anotlier name fur Esarliaddon, lait 
 it may have been one of the great otlicers of his 
 empire. It seems to have been in his reign that 
 tlie cautains of the Assyrian host invaded and 
 r.ivaged Judah, carrying Manassch, the king, cap- 
 tive to Babylon. The suliseqnent iiistory of the 
 empire is involved in almost as nuich obscurity 
 as tiiat of its origin and rise. Tlie Medes had 
 already shaken oil' tlie yoke, and the Chaliheans 
 soon appear (m the scene as the dominant nation 
 of Western Asia ; yet Assyria, though much re- 
 duced in extent, existed as an independent state 
 for a considerable period after Esarliaddon. Hales, 
 following Syncellus, makes him succeeiled by a 
 prince called Ninus (b c. 667), who had for his 
 successor Nebuchodonosor (u.c. 65S), for the 
 transactions of whose reign, including the expe- 
 dition of his general Holofenies into Ju(i;ea. Hales 
 relies on the atJi)C*yj>liai Liook of Judith, the au- 
 thority of which, however, is very questionable. 
 The last monarch was Sarac, or Sardanapalus H. 
 (b.c. 636), in whose reign Cyaxares, king of 
 Media, and Nabopolassar, viceroy of Babylon, 
 combined against Assyria, took Nineveh, and, 
 dividing what remained of the emjiire between 
 them, reduced Assyria Proper to a jirovince of 
 Media (b.c. G06). 
 
 In this brief sketch of the history of the Assy- 
 rian empire, we have mainly followed the writers 
 of tiie Old Testament, from whom alone any 
 consistent account can be derived. The original 
 sources of profane history on this suljject are 
 Herodotus and Ctesias, but every attempt tn re- 
 concile their statements with those of Scripture, 
 or even with each other, has hitherto failed. The 
 former fixes the duration of the Assyrian domi- 
 nion in Upper Asia at 520 years (Herod, i. 95); 
 while the latter again assigns to tlie Assyrian em- 
 yire, from Ninus to Sardanajialus, no less a period 
 than 1305 years (Diodor. Sicul. ii. -I). The 
 authority of Ctesias, however, is very generally 
 discredited (it was so even by Aristotle), though 
 he has recently found a defender in Dr. Russell, 
 in his Connection of Sacred and Profane History. 
 Tiie truth is (as is remarked by the judicious 
 Heeren) that the accounts of botli these historians 
 are little better than mere traditions of ancient 
 heroes and heroines (witness the tallies about 
 Semiramis ';), without any chronological data, 
 and entirely in the style of the East. To detail 
 all tlie fanciful hypotheses which have been pro- 
 poundeti, with the view of forming out of thetn a 
 consistent and coherent narrative, forms no part 
 of our present design. The curious in these spe- 
 culations we refer to the essays of Pezron, Sevin, 
 Freret, and Debrosse, in the Me moires de I'Acad. 
 dcs Inscriptions ; Fourmont, Hifexions Antiques 
 $ur les Hisloires des Anciens I'euples ; Volney, 
 Recherchfs Xouvelles sur V Hist. Ancienne — a 
 rery valuable elucidation of the chronology of 
 Hero<l jtus. 
 
 Tilt jiolitical constitution of the Assyrian em- 
 pire WIS no doubt simila: to that of other ancient 
 ■tales 11 he Eaat sucii as Chald<£a and Persia. 
 
 ASTRONOMY. 
 
 'H9 
 
 The monarch, called ' the great king ' (2 Kin){» 
 xviii. 1!» ; Isa. xxxvi. 4), ruled as a desfKit, sur 
 rounded with his guards, and only accessible tn 
 those wiio were near his ]>erRi>p ''Duid. Sicul. li. 
 21, 23). Under him there were ]irovincial siitraps, 
 called in Isa. x. R, ' prince.s,' of the rank iuid 
 power of ordinary kings. Tiie great oilicers of 
 the hwusehoKl were commonly eunuchs (<(>inp. 
 Gesenius on Isa. xxxvi. 2). The religion «f lh« 
 Assyrians was, in its leading features, tlie same 
 as tha* of the Chaldaeans, viz. the symltolical wm- 
 shiji of the heavenly Ixidies, especially tl»e planets. 
 In Scriptuie there is mention of Nisroch, Adrani- 
 nielech, Anammelech, Nebchaz, Tartak, iic, as 
 the names of idols worshijiped by the n«ure« 
 either of Assyria Proper or of the adjacent coun- 
 tries which they had subdued (see Gesenius On 
 Isaiah, vol. ii. p. 317). The language did not 
 belong to the Semitic, but to the Medo-Persian 
 family. As Aramaic, however, was siniken by a 
 large part of the western population, it was pu)- 
 bably understood by the great otlicers of state, 
 which accounts for ILdishakeh addressing Ile/e- 
 kiairs messengers in Hebrew (2 Kings xviii. 26 i, 
 though the Rabbins explain the circumstance l>y 
 su]ri»smsi that he was an aiKistate Jew. — N. M. 
 
 AST.\RTE. [AsHTOlt KTH.] 
 
 ASTRONOMY (oo-r^p and vS/xos), that 
 science which treats of the laws of the stars, or 
 heavenly bodies, considered in reference to their 
 magnitude, movements, and resjiective induence 
 one upon another. Astronomy may be divided 
 into empirical and scientitic ; the liist being 
 founded on the ajiparent ]ilienomena and move- 
 ments of the heavenly bodies, the second uiion 
 their leal phenomena and movements. The know- 
 ledge of the ancients was limited to the liist ; or 
 if tiiey possessed any tiuths connected with the 
 second, they weie nothing more than liold or for- 
 tunate gues-es, which weie not followed out to 
 their legitimate consequences, nor formed into a 
 systematic whole. 
 
 The ciadle of astronomy is to be found in .\8ia 
 The few and impeifect notices which have come 
 down to these times, give a concurrent testimony 
 in favour of this statement ; antl theiewith agnfes 
 the fact, that the climate, the mode of life, and 
 the occuiiations of the Oriental naticuo mat were 
 first civilized, promiited them to watch and ob 
 serve the starry heavens. The Chaldajans are at • 
 counted to have excelled in astronomical know 
 ledge. 
 
 Pliny, in his celel)rated enumeration (Hist. Xai. 
 vii. 57) of the inventors of the arts, sciences, and 
 conveniences of life, ascribes the disaivery '{ 
 astronomy to Phcenician mariners: ' Sidertm 
 observationem in navigando Phuenices ;" and in 
 the same chapter he speaks of iistronomical olj- 
 servations found on burnt bricks [coctilibui later- 
 cidis) among the Babylonians, which ascend to 
 above 2200 years b.c. Alexander sent to Aris- 
 totle from Babylon a series of astronomi al ob- 
 servations, extending through 1900 years. Tlie 
 astronomical knowledge of the Chinese and In- 
 dians goes up to a still earlier period (Plin. lliit. 
 Nat. vi. 17-2) \ From the remote Ea^t iistro- 
 nomy travelled in i". westerly direction. Th« 
 Egyptians at a very early jieriod had some a»- 
 quaintance with it. To them is to be ascrilied 
 a pietty near determination of llie length of 
 the year, as conaistinjj of 365 days 6 boun
 
 250 
 
 ASTRONOMY. 
 
 (Herodotus, il. 4). The Egyptians we»e the 
 teachers of the Greeks. 
 
 Some portion of the knowledge which prevailed 
 on the subject would no iloubt penetrate to and be- 
 come the inheritance of the Hebrews ; who do not, 
 however, appear to have possessed any views of as- 
 tronomy which raised their knowledge to the rank 
 of a science, or made it ai)proach to a more correct 
 theory of the mechanism of the heavens than that 
 which was generally held. Nor, if the Bible is 
 taken as the witness, do the ancient Israelites ap- 
 pear to have had extensive knowledge in the 
 matter. They possessed such an acquaintance 
 with it as tillers of the ground and herdsmen 
 might be expected to form while pursuing their 
 business, having, as was natural, their minds di- 
 rected to those regions of the lieavens which night 
 after ni^it brought before tlieir eyes : accordingly, 
 the peculiar Oriental names of the constellations 
 are deri\ed from circumstances connected with a 
 nomade people. A peculiarity of tlie greatest im- 
 portance belongs to the knowledge which the 
 Israelites disjjlay of the heavens, namely, that it 
 is thoroughly imbued with a religious character ; 
 nor is it possible to find in any other writings, 
 even at this day, so much pure and elevated piety, 
 in comiCction with observations on the starry Hrma- 
 ment, as may be gathered even in single books of 
 tlie Bible (Amos v. 8 ; Psalm xix.). 
 
 As early as the days of the patriarchs the minds 
 of pious men were attracted and enraptured by 
 the splendour of the skies (Gen. xxxvii. 9) ; and 
 imagery borrowed from the stany world soon fixed 
 itself firmly in human speech. The sun and 
 moon were distinguished from other heavenly 
 bodies, in consequence of tlieir magnitude and 
 their brilliancy, as being the lights of heaven and 
 earth (Gen. i. 16); and fiom the course of the 
 moon time was divided into parts, or months, of 
 which the oldest form of the year, tlie lunar, was 
 made up. Every new moon was greeted with re- 
 ligious festivities. While, however, the sun in his 
 power, the moon walking in briglitness, and all 
 the stars of light consjiired to excite devotion, 
 their influence on the hearts of the ancient Is- 
 raelites, wlio were happily instructed in a know- 
 ledge of the true God, the one Jehovah, the sole 
 Creator of the world, stopped short of that idola- 
 trous feeling, and was free from those idolatrous 
 practices to which, among nations of less religious 
 knowledge — and especially among their own 
 neighbours, the Babylonians, for instance — it is 
 unhappily known to have led. 
 
 As early as the time of the composition of per- 
 haps the oldest book in the Bible, namely, that 
 of Job, the constellations were distinguished one 
 from another, and designated by peculiar and ap- 
 7»t)priate names (Job ix. 9 ; xxxviii. 31). In tlie 
 Bible are found, 1. (^/"Tl) the morning star, the 
 planet Venus (Isa. xiv. 12 ; Rev. ii. 2S) ; 2. nO''3 
 (Job ix. 9 ; xxxviii. 35 ; Amos v. 8), the Pleiades ; 
 3. ^•'•DD, Orion, a large and brilliant constella- 
 tion, which stands in a line with the Pleiades. The 
 Orientals seem to have conceived of Orion as a 
 nuge giant w\io had warred against God, and as 
 bound in chains to the firmament of heaven (Job 
 xxxviii. 31) ; and it has been conjectured that 
 this notion is the foundation of the history of 
 Nioirod (Gesen. Comment, cv, Isaiah, i. 457) ; 
 i. tj^y (Job ix. 9), the Great Bear, which has still 
 
 ASTRONOMY. 
 
 tlie same name among the Arabians (NietAih», 
 b. 113). In the common version No. 4 is ren- 
 dered ' Arcturus,' No. 3 ' Orion,' and No 2 
 ' Pleiades." See Job xxxviii. 32, wliere the sons 
 of Arcturus are the tliiee stius in the tail rf the 
 Bear, whicli stand in a curved line to the left. 
 5. ^n (Job xxvi. 13, ' the crooked serpent '), 
 Draco, between the Great and \he Little Bear ; 
 a constellation which spreads itself in windings 
 across the heavens ; G. Ai6ffKovpui (Acts xxviii. 
 11). Gemini, or the Twins, on the belt of the 
 Zodiac, which is mentioned in 2 Kings xxiii. 5, 
 under the general name of ' the planets ' — JTlPTD ; 
 a word which signifies dwellings, stations in which 
 the sun tarries in his apparent couise through the 
 heavens. (Comjiaie Gen. xxxvii. 9.) The entire 
 body of the stars was called ' the host of heaven ' 
 CDii'n i^nV (Isa. xl. 2(i ; Jer. xxxiii. 22). 
 
 No trace is found in the Old Testament of a 
 division of tlie heavenly bodies into planets, tixei 
 stars, and comets ; but in Jude 13, the ]ihra.s9 
 ' wandering stars ' (^aarepes ■nXavJirai) is em- 
 ployed figuratively. 
 
 After the Babylonish exile, the Jews were 
 compelled, even for the sake of their calendar, to 
 attend at least to the course of the moon, wliich 
 became an object of study, and delineations were 
 made of the shapes that she assumes (Mischna 
 rosch hassh. ii. 8). 
 
 At an early period of the world the worship of 
 the stars arose from that contemplation of them 
 which in every part of the globe, and particularly 
 ill tlie East, has been found a source of deep and 
 tranquil pleasure. ' Men by nature ' ' deemed 
 either fire or wind, or the swift air, or the circle 
 of the stars, or the violent water, or the lights of 
 heaven, to be the gods v/hich govern the world ; 
 ' with whose beauty being delighted, tli<ey tool 
 them to be gods " (Wisdom xiii. 2). Accord 
 ingly, the religion of the Egyptians, of tb» 
 Clialdees, Assyrians, and the ancient Arabians 
 was nothing else tlian star-worship, althougli ir 
 the case of the first Its origin is more thickly 
 veiled. The sun, moon, and seven plar.e's (those, 
 that is, of the fixed stars which shine witli e.special 
 brightness) excited most attention, and won the 
 greatest observance. W^e thus find among the 
 Babylonians Jupiter (Belus, ^J, Isa. Ixv 11), 
 Venus Q'l'O, Isa. Ixv. 11, where tlie first is ren- 
 dered in the common version ' that troop,' tlie 
 second ' that number '). Both these were consi- 
 dered good princijiles. Mercury, honoured as tiie 
 secretary of lieavtii, is also found in Isa. xlvi. 1, 
 'Neb.) stoopeth ;' Saturn (jVD, Amos v. 26); 
 Mars (^J"1J, 2 Kings xvii. 30) : the two last 
 were worshipped as principles of evil. The ciia- 
 racter of this worship was foi-med from the notions 
 which were eiitcitaiiied of tlie good or ill which 
 certain stars occasioned. Astrology tbund its 
 sphere principally in stars connected witii the 
 birth of individuals. Thus Herodotus (ii. 82; 
 states that among the Egyptians every day was 
 under tlie infiuence of some god (some star), and 
 that according to the day on which each person 
 was born, so would be the events lie would meet 
 with, the character he would liear, and the period 
 of his deatli. Astrology concerned itself also with 
 the determination of lucky and unlucky days : so 
 in Job iii. 3, ' Let the day perish wherein I was 
 born ;' and Gal. iv. 10, ' Ye observe days, and
 
 ATAD. 
 
 ^ontl:3, and times, and years.' TIm; Chaldaeans, 
 who siudied the stais a* a very early jieriod, were 
 much given to astroloty, and ueie celebrated for 
 tlieir skill in thai pieteiuled science (Isa. xlvii. 13). 
 In Dain'el ii. 27; v. 11, *he calculators of nati- 
 vities ^pT3) are named. Diodorns Siculns (ii. 
 30, 31) says of the Chalotcans, ' They assert that 
 tlie greatest attention is given to the five stars 
 called planets, whicli tln.'y name intcrjireters ; so 
 called because, while tlie other stars have a fixed 
 fiath, they alone, by forming their own course, 
 ihow what things will come to jiass, thus inter- 
 Oreting to men the will of the gods ; for to tliose 
 v.'ho study them carefully they foretell events, 
 j.iitly by their rising, partly by their setting, and 
 ; i 1 liy tiieir colour. Sometimes they siiow heavy 
 n, at others rains, at others excess of heat. 
 1 e appearance of comets, eclii)ses of the sun, 
 eailhquakes, and. in general, anything extraordi- 
 nary, has in their opinion an injurious or a bene- 
 ficial effect, not only on nations and cnnntries, 
 but Jvings, and even common individuals : and 
 thi;y consider tliat those stars contribute very much 
 of good or of ill in relation to tlie births of men : 
 and in consequence of the nature of these things, 
 and of the stud)' of the stars, tliey think they know 
 accurately tlie events tliat befal mortals.' Comets 
 were for the most ];art considered heralds of evil 
 tidings (Joseph. Dc Bell. Jud. vi. 5. 3). The Ori- 
 entals of the present day hold astrology in honour 
 (Niebuhr, p. 120) ; and stipendiary astrologers 
 form a part of their court (K;im})fer, Amam. 
 p. 57, S2). On the subject of this article may 
 be consulted Hammer, Ucber die Sternbilder der 
 Araber ; Ideler, Untersuchunfjen iiber den TJr- 
 spnmg, S;c. der i>tevnamen, Berlin, 1809; also 
 his Unter. iiber die Astron. beobacht der Alien. 
 Berlin, 1806 ; and Weidler, Hist. Astronom. 
 Viteb. 714.— J. R. B. 
 
 ATAD, tlie person on whose threshing-floor the 
 sons of Jacob and the Egyjitians who accom- 
 panied them |jerformed their final act of solemn 
 mourning for Jacob (Gen. i,. 11); on which ac- 
 count the place was afterwards called Abel-Miz- 
 raim, ' the mourning of the Egyptians.' 
 
 ATAD. [Thoun]. 
 
 ATAROTH (nhCJf). Several places of this 
 name (which means crotcns) occur in the Scrijj- 
 tines. 1. Ataroth-beth-Jonb, in the tribe of Judah 
 '1 C'.liion. ii. 54). 2. Ataroth, on the borders of 
 Enhraim (Josh. xvi. 2, 7), which some identify 
 with^ a,nd others distinguish from, the Afaroth- 
 Addar oftiie same tribe mentioned in .Tosh. xvi. 
 5, xviii. 13. 3. Ataroth, in the tribe of Gad, be- 
 yon' the Jordan (Num. xxxii. 3, 31). 4. Ata- 
 roth-shopltan, in the same tribe (Num. xxxii. 35), 
 which some identify with the preceding ; but it 
 apjicars more likely that the addition was used to 
 distinguish the one from the other. Eusebiusand 
 Jerome (^Onoma.^ticon, s. v. Ataroth, 'ArapdO) 
 mention two places in the tribe of Benjamin called 
 Ataroth ; b it they do not occur in Scripture. 
 The site of one of these a))])ears to have been 
 discovered by Professor Robinson (Bib. Re- 
 searches, ii. 311) under the name of Atara. 
 Another place of the same name (Atara) he found 
 about six miles N. by W. of Bethel, which ap- 
 pears to represent tiie AtaroHi of Epliraim (Josh, 
 xvi. 2, 7). It is now a large village on the sum- 
 iftit of a high hill (Robinson, iii. 8). 
 
 aterc;atis. 
 
 251 
 
 ATBACH (natpX) is not a real word, but a 
 fictitious cabbalistic term, denoting by its very 
 letters the mode of clianging one word inti 
 another by a peculiar commutation of letters. 
 The system on wliich it is founded is this : as 
 all tlie letters have a numerical value, they ar< 
 divided into three classes, in the first of wliicii 
 every pair make< the number ten ; in tlie secunil, 
 a hnndrcd ; and in liie tliird, a thousand. 
 Tlius : n, T3. m. LDX, every jiair making ten. 
 
 DD, y*?. 23, VS „ ahundie<l. 
 
 Dn, \p, ?)"!, I'p, „ a lh;;..sand 
 Thi'ee letters only cannot ent(M' into any of t!ies« 
 numerical coniliinations, H, 3, and ^. The first 
 two are neverlheiess coupled together; and tiio 
 last is sull'ereil to stand without conuiiutation. 
 The commutation then takes place between tlie 
 two letters of every pair; an<l the term Atlanh 
 thus exjiresses that N is taken foi t3, and 3 for H, 
 and conversely. To illustiatc its appli<\iti()n, 
 the obscure word p3D, in Prov. xxix. 21, may 
 be turned liy Atiiach into mriD, tcstiiuumj. 
 Buxtorf, De Ahbrcviahiris. s. v. 
 
 Atiihash (C'liriS) is a similar term for a 
 somewhat difl'erent princijile of commutation. In 
 this, namely, the letters are also mutually inter- 
 changed by pairs; but every ]iair consists of a 
 letter from eacli end of the aljihabet, in regular 
 succession. Thus, as tlie technical teim Atlilursh 
 shows, N and n, and 3 and K^', are interchange- 
 able; and so on throughout the whole series. By 
 writing the Hebrew aljihabet twice in two jiaiallel 
 lines, but the second time in an inveise oidei, the 
 two letters which form every pair will come to 
 stand in a jierpendicular line. This system is 
 also remaikalile on account of Jerome having .so 
 confidently applied it to the word Slieshak, in 
 Jer. XXV. 26. His words aie, ' (^uomodo Babel 
 intelligatur Sesach, non magnopere lalioiabil qui 
 Hebra?se linguae parvam saltem habuerit srien- 
 tiam.' He then propounds tiie same system of 
 commutation as that called Athfeisli (without 
 giving it that name however, and without ad- 
 ducing any higher authority for assuming this 
 mode of commutation, than the fact that it was 
 customary to leain the Gie«k alphabet fiist straight 
 throuL^li, and then, by way of ensuring accurate 
 retention, to rej.eat it by taking a letter fiom each 
 end alternately), and makes "JK'i^ to be the same 
 as 733. (See Roseiiniuller!) Scholia, ad loc.) 
 Hottinger possessed an entire Pentateuch ex- 
 plained on the principle of Athbash {Thesaur. 
 Philol. p. 450). 
 
 There is also another system of less note, called 
 Ai.iiAM (D37N), which is only a modilication o' 
 tlie ]ireceiling. For, in it, the alphabet is divided 
 into halves, and one ]:ortioii jihued over the other 
 in tlie natural order, ;uul tlie ]iairs are formed out 
 of those letters which would then stand i'l a row 
 together. 
 
 All tliese methods belong to that branch ol 
 the Calibala which is called miDn, commti- 
 tntivn. J. N. 
 
 ATERGATIS CKrepyaTf)^, or 'ATapyiris I ii 
 the name of a Syrian goddess, who.se tem|)le 
 ChTipyaTitov) is mentioned in 2 Mace. xii. 26. 
 That temjile ajijiears, by conqiaring I Mace, v 
 43, to have been situated at .A.shtcroth-Karnaim, 
 Her worship also flourished at Malifig (i". e. Ba»
 
 2» 
 
 ATERGATIS. 
 
 hyce, afterwards called Hierapolis) according to 
 Pliiiy {Hist. yat. v. 19). 
 
 There is little doubt that Atevgatis is the same 
 .iivimty as Derketo. Besides internal evidences 
 uf identity, Stiabo incidentally cites Ctesias to 
 that ertect (xvi. p. 1132); and Pliny uses the 
 terms ' Prodigiosa Atergatis, Gra;cis autem Dei 
 ceto dicta' (]. c). We read that Derketo was 
 worsliipped in PhiEuicia and at Ascalon under 
 the form (if a wdman with a fish's tail, or witli a 
 woman's face oidy and the entire body of a fish ; 
 <hat fishes wrre sacred to her, and that the inha- 
 bitants abstained fioni eating them in honour of 
 lier. These facts are found in Lucian (De Dea 
 Syria, xiv.), and, to,;<ether with a mythological 
 account of iheir origin, in Diodorus (ii. 4). Fur- 
 ther, by combining the jjassage in Diodorus with 
 HertKlotns (i. 105), we may legitimately conclude 
 that the Deiketo of the former is the Venus Urania 
 of the latter. Atergatis is thus a name under 
 which they worshipped some modification of the 
 same power which was adored under that of Ash- 
 toreth. That the 'ArepyaTuov of 2 Mace. xii. 26 
 was at Ashteroth-Karnaim. shows also an imme- 
 diate connection with Aslitoreth. Whether, like 
 the latter, she bore any particular relation to the 
 moon, or to the planet Venus, is not evident. 
 Macrobius makes Adargatis to be the earth 
 (which as a symbol is analogous to the moon), 
 and says that her image was distinguished from 
 that of the sun by rays ' sursum versum inclinatis,, 
 monstrando radiorum vi superne missorum enasci 
 quaecunque terra progenerat' (^Saturnal. i. 23). 
 Creuzer maintains that those representations of 
 this goddess which contain parts of a fish are the 
 most ancient ; and endeavours to reconcile 
 Strabo's statement that the Syrian goddess of 
 Hierapolis was Atergatis, with Lucian's express 
 notice that the foriner was represented under the 
 form of an entire woman, by distinguishing be- 
 tween the forms of difl'erent periods {Symbolik, ii. 
 68). Tliis fish-form shows that Atergatis bears 
 some relation, perhaps that of a female counter- 
 part, to Dagon. 
 
 No satisfactory etymology of the word has been 
 discovered. Tliat which assumes that Atergatis is 
 3T "I"'*1X add'ir dag, i. e. magnificent fish, which 
 hiis (,ften been adopted from the time of Selden 
 down to the present day, cannot be taken exactly in 
 that sense. "The syntax of the language requires, as 
 Michaelis has already objected to tiiis etymology 
 {Orient. Biblioth. vi.97), that an adjective placed 
 before its subject in this manner must be the pre- 
 dicate of a proposition. The words therefore 
 would mean ' the fish is magnificent ' (Ewald's 
 Hehr. Gram. § 554). Michaelis himself, as he 
 found that the Syriac name of some idol of 
 Haran was t<nyiri, which might mean ajjerture, 
 a-serts that that is the Syriac form of Derketo, and 
 brings it into connection with the great fissure in 
 the earth, mentioned in Lucian (l. c. xiii.), which 
 Hwallowed up tlie waters of the flood (see his edi- 
 •.i.\- of Castell's Lex. Syr. p. 975). On ilie 
 t,»ier hand, Gesenius (Thesaur. »'dj voce J13T) 
 
 ATHENS. 
 
 prefers considering Derketo tc be tne Sjnria* 
 J<ri3"n, for XniT fish ,■ and it is certain tl »\ 
 such an intrusion of the Resh is not uiicommoo 
 in Aramaic. — J. N. 
 
 ATHALIAH {r\'hnV. or -in^^nj? tohom Je- 
 hov-ah remembered ; Sept. VoBo\ia), daughter of 
 Aliab, king of Israel, doubtless bj his idolatrous 
 v-iife Jezebel. She is also called the daughter o/ 
 Omri (2 Chron. xxii. 2), who was the father .of 
 Ahab ; but by a comparison of texts it would 
 apjiear that she is so called only as being his 
 grand-daughter. Athaliah became the wife of 
 Jehoram, the son of Jehoshaphat, king of Judah. 
 This marriage may fairly be considered the act 
 of the parents ; and it is one of tlie few stains 
 upon tlie character of the good Jehoshaphat that 
 he was so ready, if not anxious, to connect him- 
 self with the idolatrous house of Ahab. Had he 
 not married the heir of his crown to Athaliah, 
 many evils and much bloodshed might have 
 been spared to the royal family and to the king- 
 dom. When Jehoram came to the crown, he, as 
 might be expected, ' walked in the ways of the 
 house of Ahab,' which the sacred writer obviously 
 attributes to this marriage, by adding, 'for ht 
 had the daughter of Ahab to wife ' (2 Chron. 
 xxi. 6). This king died b.c. 885, and was suc- 
 ceeded by his youngest son Ahaziah, who reigned 
 but one year, and whose death arose from his 
 being, by blood and by circumstances, involved 
 in the doom of Ahab's house [Ahaziah]. Before 
 this Athaliah had acquired much influence in 
 public all'airs, and liad used that influence for 
 evil ; and when the tidings of her son's untimely 
 death reached Jerusalem, she resolved to seat her- 
 self upon the throne of David, at whatever cost. 
 To tliis end she caused all the male branches of 
 the royal family to be massacred (2 Kings xi. 1) ; 
 and by thus shedding the blood of her own grand- 
 children, she undesignedly became the instru- 
 ment of giving completion to the doom on her 
 father's house, which Jehu had partially accom- 
 plished, B.C. S84. One infant son of Ahaziah, 
 however, was saved by his aunt Jehosheba, wife 
 of the high-priest Jehoiada, and was concealed 
 within the walls of the temple, and there brought 
 up so secretly that his existence was unsuspected 
 by Athaliah. But in the seventh year (u.c. 878) 
 of her blood-stained and evil reign, the sounds of 
 unwonted commotion and exulting shouts within 
 the Temple courts drew her tliitlier, where she 
 lieheld the young Joash standing as a crowned 
 king by the pillar of inauguration, and acknow- 
 ledged as sovereign by the acclamations of the 
 assembled multitu(ke. Her cries (>f ' Treason ! ' 
 failed to excite any movement i:i her favour, 
 and Jehoiada, the high-priest, who hud organized 
 this bold and successful attempt, without allow- 
 ing time for pause, ordered the Levitical guards to 
 remove her from the sacred precincts to instant 
 death (2 Kings xi. ; 2 Chron. xxi. 6 ; xxii. 10-12; 
 xxiii.). 
 
 ATHENS. This celebrated city, as the birth- 
 place of Plato, and through him so widely in- 
 fluential on Judaism and Christianity, deserves 
 something else tlian a geographical notice heoe. 
 We shall briefly allude to the stages of her history 
 and remark on someof the causesof her pre-eminen' 
 greatness in arms, arts, and intellectual subtlety. 
 
 The earlier and more obscure period of the GJi»
 
 ATHENS. 
 
 eian pDvince named Attica reaches down nearly 
 to the Knal eslal)lishmenl of ileniocracy in it. Vet 
 we know enough to *&' that tlie t'oniKiaiions of her 
 gre;itncs9 were then already laid. Even the un- 
 fertile soil aii<l dry atmosiihcie ol" Attica, in con- 
 neciion with the shiidtT apjietite of the people, 
 have hf-j";: thought as fa\'oural)le to their mental 
 development, as tlie fertility of the neiglihourin;^ 
 B(rotia was injurious to its voracious inhahitaiits. 
 Tiie barrenness of tlie soil, moreover, pre\ented 
 invaders from covetiiii,' it ; so tliat through a course 
 of ages the ])opulatioii remained unchanged, and 
 a nioral union giew up between the several dis- 
 tricts. To a king named Tlieseus (whose deeds 
 aie too much mixed with fable to be nairated as 
 hi-.tory) is ascrilied the credit of uniting all the 
 cicmtiy-towns of Attica into a single state, the 
 c ijiital of which was Athens. This is the tirsc 
 »^itical event that we can trust as historical, 
 
 ATHENS. 
 
 253 
 
 although its date and circumstances are by no 
 me:>ns fiee from obscurity. 
 
 Tlie piijiulation of this province Wiia variously 
 called Pel.i.<igian, Achaian, and Ionian, and j)n>- 
 bably coiTPsponds most n<Mrly to wliat wa-s after- 
 wards called /Ivitian :Prichai(l, I'hijn Hint, of 
 Man. iii. p. 191). Tlie first name cairie.^ the mind 
 back to an extremely ])rimilive ])eriod. When the 
 Dorians, anotiier trilie of Greeks of very dill'erent 
 tenijiei anient, invaded and occiqiied the .southeiii 
 jieiiiiisula, gieat numbeis of its Acliaiaii inha- 
 liitants took refuge in Attica. Siioitly after, the 
 Doiians weieiepulsed in an inroad against Athens, 
 an event which has tiansmitted to le.^endaiy re- 
 nown the name of King Codrus ; and llience- 
 forward Athens w.us looked upon as the Imlwaik 
 of the Ionian tribes against the tiai barons Doiians. 
 Overloaded with poiiula'ion, .\tiica now [xiured 
 forth colonies into Asia ; some of which, a« Mi- 
 
 i:3.^S^:. 
 
 jetus, soon rose to great eminence, and sent otit 
 numerous colonies themselves ; so that Athens was 
 reverenced as a mother of nations, by powerful 
 children scattered along the western and northern 
 coasts of Anatolia. 
 
 Dim tradition shows us isolated jiriesthoods and 
 elective kings in the earliest times of Attica; these 
 however gradually gave way to an ari.stocracy, 
 which in a series of years established themselves 
 as a hereditary ruling caste. 13ut a country 
 ' ever unravaged " (and such was their boast) 
 joulil not fall to inciease in wealth and numbers; 
 and at'ter two or tliiee centuries, while tiie iiighest 
 Kommoners pressed on liie noble<. the lowest 
 oecame overwhelmed with debt Tlie disorders 
 laused by the strife of the former were vainly 
 soughi to be stayed liy tl e institutions of Draco; 
 the siifl'erings of tie hitler weie ended, and the 
 nources of violence dried up, by the enactments 
 of S.ihin. Hencef'oith the Atheniai's xnveied the 
 latrs ofSnl.iii (v(iij.oi) as the groundwork of their 
 whole civil |x>lity, yet they retained by the side 
 of them tht i ■ iinnncex of Driw^ i^Offfftotj in 
 
 many matters pertaining to religion. The «»^ 
 of Solon's relorms was jiroliably B.C. 504. 
 
 The usurpation of Pisistratus and his sons 
 made a jiartial breach In the constitution ; but 
 U]ion their ex]iulsion, a more serious change was 
 elfected by Cleisthenes, iiead of the noble house 
 of the Alcniaeonids (uc. 50^), almost in the 
 same year in which Tarquin was expelled from 
 Rome. An eiitiiely new organisation of the 
 Attic tril/CS was framed, which destroyed whatever 
 remained of the power of the nobles as an okUt, 
 and established among the fieemen a denio'iacy, 
 in fact, as well iis in form. Out of this jiroceeded 
 all the good and all the evil with which the name 
 of Athens is as.sociated ; and tluiugh greatness 
 which shot up so siuldeidy could not be jieima- 
 nent, there can be no dilh<ulty in deciding that 
 the g(M)d greatly ine, onderated. 
 
 Very soon after tlii~ commenced hostilities with 
 Peisia; and liie sell-ilenying, romatitic, successful 
 l)iavery of Athens, with the geneious affability 
 and gieat talents of her statesmen, .scMin laised hei 
 to the head of the uiioh Ionian confeileiacy. Am
 
 *B4 
 
 ATHENS. 
 
 long as Persia was to he feared, Atliens was loved ; 
 but after tasting the sweets of power, her sway 
 degenerated into a desjiotism, and created at 
 l«i<tli, in the war called the Peloponnesian, a 
 coalition of all Dorian and 7?^-nlian Gieece against 
 her (B.C. 431). In spite of a fatal pestilence and 
 the revolt of her Ionian subjects, the naval skill of 
 Athenian seamen and the enterprise of Athenian 
 commanders proved more than a match for the 
 hostile confederacy ; and when Athens at last 
 fell (b.c. 404), she fell by the effects of internal 
 sedition more truly than by Spartan lances or 
 Persian gold, or even by her own rash and over- 
 grasping ambition. The demoralizing effects of 
 this war on all Greece weit- infinitely the worst 
 result of it, and they were transmitted to succeed- 
 ing generations. It was substantially a civil war 
 in every province ; and, as all the inhabitants of 
 Attica were every summer forced to take refuge 
 in the few fortresses they possessed, or in Athens 
 itsplt', the simple countrymen became transformed 
 into a hungry and profligate town rabble. 
 
 From the earliest times the lonians loved the 
 Jyre and the song, and the hymns of poets formed 
 the staple of Athenian edui-ation. The constitu- 
 tion of Solon admitted and demanded in the 
 people a great knowledge of law, with a large 
 share in its daily administration. Thus the acute- 
 ness of the lawyer was grafted on the imagination 
 of tlie poet. Tiiese are tlie two intellectual elements 
 out of jvliich Athenian wisdom w;is developed ; 
 but it was stimulated and enriched by extended 
 political action and political experience. History 
 and Philo3o])hy, as the words arp understDod in 
 modern Eurojie, had their birth in Athens about 
 the time of the Peloponnesian war. Then first, 
 ilso, the Oratory of the bar* and of the popular 
 asseiTibly was systematically cultivated, and the 
 elements of mathematical science were admitted 
 into the education of an accomplished man. 
 This was the ]3erioil of the youth of Plato, whose 
 philosophy was destined to leave so deep an im- 
 press on the Jewish and Christian schools of 
 Alexandria. Its great effort was to unite the con- 
 tem])l,itive mysticism of Eastern sages with the 
 accurate science of Greece; to combine, in short, 
 the two qualities — intellectual and moral, argu- 
 mentative and spiritual — into a single harmo- 
 nious whole : and wliatever opinion may be formed 
 of the success which attended the experiment, it 
 is not wonderful that so magnilicent an aim 
 attracted the desires and riveted the attention of 
 thoughtful and contemplative minds for ages 
 afterwards. 
 
 In tiie imitative arts of Sculpture and Paint- 
 ing, as well as in Arcliitecture, it need hanlly be 
 said that Atliens carried off the palm in Greece: 
 yet, in all these, the Asiatic colonies vied with 
 her. Miletus took the start o!" her in literary com- 
 jx)sition ; and, mider slight conceivable changes, 
 nnight have l»ecome the Atliens of the world. 
 But all tletails on these subjects woidd lie here out 
 Di place. 
 
 That Athens after the Peloponnesian war never 
 recovered the jiolitical place which she previously 
 held, can excite no surpiise — that she rose so high 
 toward it was truly wondeiful. Sparta and Thebes, 
 which successively asiiired to the' leadership " of 
 Gr't'ce, abused their power aa flagrantly as Athens 
 nad done, and. at the same time, more coa'sely. 
 The never-ending -abals, the I reaties made and vio- 
 
 ATONEMENT. 
 
 lated, the coalitions and breaches, the alliances aihi 
 wars, recurring every few j-ears, destroyed all mu- 
 tual confidence, and all possibility of again unit- 
 ing Greece in any permanent form of independ- 
 ence; and, in consequence, tlie whole country was 
 soon swallowed up in the kingdom of Macetlonia. 
 With the loss of civil liberty, Atliens lost her ge- 
 nius, her manly mind, and whatever remained.ol 
 her virtue : she long continued to produce talents, 
 which were too often made tools of iniquity, iian- 
 ders Us power, and petty artificers of false philo- 
 sophy. 
 
 A Christian church existed in Athens soon after 
 the apostolic times ; but as die city had no po- 
 litical importance, the church never assumed any 
 eminent position. — F. W. N. 
 
 ATONEMENT. The Greek word is /caraA.- 
 Xayi], translated, Rom. v. 11, atonement, but in 
 other places, reconciliation (See Rom. xi. 1.) ; 2 
 Cor. V. IS, 19). In ecclesiastical writers, and in 
 the canons of Councils, KaTuWayij is employed 
 to signify the reconciliation of offenders to the 
 Church after a due course of penitence. Of this 
 there are said to have been two kinds : the one 
 consisting merely in tb.e remission of punishment ; 
 the other, in tlie restoration of the ))enitent to all 
 the rights and privileges of communion. For tlie 
 doctrine of Atonement, see articles SACuit'iCK, 
 Redemption. — H. S. 
 
 ATONEMENT, DAY OF ("IIS? QV, day 
 of pardon, Lev. xxiii 27; xxv. 9j. In the Tal- 
 mud this day is called PHJ rfjyri, great fast- 
 infj, or merely NDV, the day ; a circumstance 
 which has suggested to some commentators t'le no- 
 tion that by T]jj.€pa. (Heb. vii. 27) the apostle in- 
 tended this atonement day. Though peihaiis ori- 
 ginally meant a.s a temporary day of expiation for 
 the sin of the ujolden calf (as some would infer fiom 
 Exod. xxxiii.), yet it was jjermanently instituted 
 by Moses as a day of atonement for sins in 
 general ; and this day — the 10th of Tishri (our 
 September) — is indeed the only fast ordained by 
 Moses, though the later Jews, in commemoration 
 of some disastrous events, especially those wisich 
 occurred at and after the destruction of the two 
 temjjles, iii-stituted a few more fast days, which they 
 oliserved with scarcely less ligour and strictness 
 than the one ordained by Moses for the jimjwse 
 of general absolution. This great fast, like all 
 others among the Jews, commenced at sunset of 
 the previous day, and lasted twenty-four iiours, 
 tliat is, from sunset to sunset, or, as the Rabbins 
 will have it, until three stais were visible in the 
 horizon. The ceremonies observed on this occa- 
 sion are minutely described in Leviticus xvi., and 
 were of a very laborious character, especially for 
 the high-priest, who had to prepaie himself during 
 the previous seven days in neaily solitary confine- 
 ment for tlie peculiar services tliat awaited him. 
 and abstain dui ing that period from all thz.t ccidd 
 render him unclean, or disturb his devotio.'iS. The 
 most remarkable ceremony of the day wa« the 
 entrance of the high-priest into the Sar.ctuary, 
 a thing not allowed on any othe- day, and to 
 which Paul alludes, Hel). ix. 7. According to 
 the Talmud {Tract. SDV) and Maimonides 
 
 (DniDDH ar nis'pn, chap. Iv.), the entrant* 
 of the high-priest into the Sanctuary took wlac? 
 four difl'erent times. The fiist time he was pro-
 
 AlONBMENT. 
 
 vidwl with tlie ^'olden censer and the vessel filled 
 with incense, when, iiftei liavini; entered, lie ))liicod 
 the former between the two jioles of the Tahiti niicle, 
 and put tlie incense upon tli* coals. This done, 
 he went out (accordintj lo the Talmml, ibid., 
 backwards, so as not to turn his hack on the 
 Sanctuary). At his second intiance, he took with 
 him the hlood of the hidlock which he had olVeied 
 in expiation for liis own sins and tliose of the other 
 priests, ])]aced himself he! ween th(! poles of the 
 Tal)ernacle, dipjjeil his linfjer in the hlood, and 
 sprinkled it seven times below and once aliove 
 the mercy-seat. This done, he left the bason 
 w irh the bl(X)d l)ehind, and withdrew again. The 
 third time, he enteretl with the blood of the ram 
 which he had oll'ered for the sins of the nation, 
 with which he sprinkled towards the veil of the 
 Tabernacle eiji^ht times ; and having mixed it 
 with the blood of the bullock, he sprinkled 
 again towards the horns of the altar of incense 
 seven times, and once above it towards the east, 
 after which he poured out the whole on the lloor 
 of tlie altar of burnt olVering, having again left 
 the Sanctuary, and taken with him the basons 
 of blood. The fourth time, he entered merely to 
 fetch back the censer and vessel of incense ; and 
 having returned, he^washed his hands ami per- 
 formed the other ceremonies of the day. 
 
 That the high-priest eritered more than once 
 jito the Sanctuary during this solemnity is cer- 
 ainly clear from the various rites which he had to 
 [■eifoim there, as described in Lev. xvi. 12, 14, 15. 
 Nor does the assertion of the Talmud contradict 
 Heb. ix. 7, where the Apostle tells us that the high- 
 pi iest had entered only once on that day, since the 
 expression, oTra^ too tviavrov, may refer to the 
 'Jilt day in the year when such a service alone 
 took place. 
 
 The other duties of the high-priest on that day 
 consisted in frequent washings, changing his clothes, 
 lighting the lamps, burning incense, &c. ; which 
 operations commenced soon after midnight of the 
 10th of tlie seven month (Tishri). Tlie cere- 
 monies of worshi]) peculiar to this tlay alone (be- 
 sides those which were common to it with all 
 other days) were: I. That the high-priest, in his 
 pontilical dress, confessed his own sins and those of 
 his family, for the expiation of which he oft'eied a 
 bullock, on which he laid them ; 2. That two 
 goats weie set aside, one of which was by lot sacri- 
 ficed to Jehovah, while the other (Azazelj, which 
 was determined by lot to lie set at libeity, was 
 sent t(i the desert (jurdened with the sins of the 
 people (Lev. xvi). According to the Talmud, 
 both goat-s were to he alike in colour, stature, and 
 age (at the time of their being set aside for the 
 purposes of that day). For the peculiar cere- 
 monies of the <lay, as rpgards the sacrifices, 
 S; rinkling of the blood, smoking the incense, &c., 
 see Maimonides' DniSSil Dr T\1'\1V {Wor- 
 shij) of the Day of Atinicment'), and D. Danzen's 
 two Disssrtatlones da Functiune Pontijicis Max- 
 imi in Adytc Anniversario. 
 
 On this day also the high-priest gave his bless- 
 ing to the whole nation; and the remainder of the 
 day was spent in prayers and other woiks of 
 pei:an<:e. 
 
 Of the numerous meanings assigned to the word 
 ^'XTJ? (Azazcl), we should \k mclined to prefer 
 i..v;.<E vvhi<:h render it i'xpirssi\e of the destination 
 tf the g"-it, w which deii\e it fior.i tlie Arabic 
 
 ATTITUDES. 
 
 356 
 
 ijlP- (to remove). ?TNTy would tlien I* cqui. 
 valent t( ij'y}^. (solitude, desert); since we find 
 
 a similar form in ""iVI^n from ^^f^. In the 
 Talmud also (Mis/ui.i, tit. Yomnli, iv. 2) tiiis 
 
 scape-goat goes by the name of nTTlCDH "I'JJsJ', 
 the removed or sent-ojf' ijoat, tiiough it is uncertain 
 whether this is meant as a translation of the word 
 Azazel, or is merely an epithet derived from one 
 of the destinations of the goat (V. Ch. Hermanzen, 
 Observai. de nomine Azazel, 1S33). 
 
 Among the pre'sent orthodox Jews, for the sca])e» 
 {?oat of old a cock seems to have lieen suitstitutetl, 
 which they call ri"l2D (pardon, atonement); and 
 which, on the eve of the day of Atonement, they 
 turn three times round their head, each time say- 
 ing (in Hebiew) tliaf the cock is to be sacrificed 
 instead of them, after which it is slaughtered and 
 eaten. Towards evening of the 9th of Tishri, and 
 before they take the last meal for the next twenty- 
 four hours, they rejiair lo the synagogue, and 
 each inflict.s ujxin his neighbour thirty-iiine blows 
 with a piece of leather : this infliction is called 
 ni37D, in expiation of those sins which are pu- 
 nished by the law of Moses with flogging. Moet 
 of the Jews on that day (of atonement) wear a 
 white gown— the same siirouds in which they are 
 buried ; while all of them are obligetl to stanil the 
 whole day without shoes, or even slippers. Fcr 
 many more ceremonies observed among the pre- 
 sent Jews on the day of Atonement, see .B. Picard, 
 Ceremonies et Coxdumcs Rcliyieuses. S;c. t. i. 
 c. 6, p. IS.— E. M. 
 
 ATTALELA. ('ATro^eia), a maritime city of 
 Pamphylia. in Asia Minor, near the mouth of 
 the river Catanhactes. It derived its name from 
 its founder, Attalus Philadelphus, king of Per- 
 gamos (Straho. xiv. p. 667). It was visited by 
 Paul and Barnatas, a.u. 45 (Acts xiv. 25). It 
 still exists rnder the name of Adalia, and ex- 
 tensive and imi)ortant ruins attest the formor 
 consequence of the citv (Leake's Asia Minor, 
 p. 193). 
 
 ATTITUDFS. The allusions in Scripture to 
 attitudes and postures exjiressive of adoration, sup 
 plication, and respect, are very numerous. Fiom 
 these we Icain enough to jierceive that the usages 
 of the Hebrews in this respect were very nearly, if 
 not altogether, the same as tho'e which are still 
 practised in the East, and which the jiaintings 
 and sculptures of Egypt show to have been of old 
 em])loyed in that covjitry. These sources supply 
 ample materials for illustration, which it may be 
 well to arrange under those heads into which 
 such act.*' naturally divide themselves. 
 
 Adok.M'ion .\nu Homagk.— Tlie Moslems in 
 their prayers throw themselves successively, and 
 according to an estahlished routine, into tlie va- 
 rious postures (nine in number) which lliey deem 
 the mo^fapprojiriate to flu- several parts of the ser- 
 vice. For the sake of leferen.-e and com]).u ison, we 
 have introduced them all at theheadof this aiticle; 
 as we have no doul)t that the Hebrews em!ih>yed 
 on one occasion or another nearly all the various 
 postme- which the iMoslems exhibit on one occa- 
 sion. This is the chief dilVer. -.ce. In public anc' 
 common woiship theHelirews i:raye<l standing (\ 
 Kings viii ') I ; Ezra ix. 5 ; Dan. vi. 10 ; 2 ChMori. 
 vi. 13) ; but in tiieir separate and private acts of
 
 ATTITUDES. 
 
 ATTITUDES. 
 
 worship tliey nssnmed the position wlik-li, itocovd- 
 inif to their iiiodt'S of doing liomuge or t-liowiiiLT 
 respei t, setiiieii to tliem tlie most siiital)le ti> thi ir 
 pi-eseiit fetlini^s or objects. It would appeiir, 
 Lowever, iliut some loim of kneeling wus uiiot 
 usual HI private devoiioua. 
 
 Standing in public prayer is still the practice 
 
 of the Jews. This po.stnre was adopted from the 
 syiingogne liy tlie luimiiive Christians; and isslill 
 niiiintained liy the O.ieiilal Churches. Ttiis ap- 
 pears, from tlieirmonuinents,to have beeiithecua- 
 torn also among the ancient Persians and Egj-p- 
 tia.is, ahhongli tlie latter certainly sometimes 
 kneeled before their pods Inthe Moslem worship, 
 four ot t!ie nine positions (I, 2, 4. 8) are standing 
 ones , and that posture which is repeated in three 
 out of these fciiir (r2, 4, 8), may be pointed out as 
 the proper Oriental posture of reverential stand- 
 iuLT, with folded hands It is the posture in which 
 people stand before kings and great men. 
 
 While in th is attitnde of worship.the hands w<re 
 Bomelinies stretched forth towards heaven in sii])- 
 plication or invocation (1 Kings viii. 1*2; 2Cliron, 
 vi. J2, 29, Isa. 15). Tiiis was not perhaps so nimh 
 the coiiveiitioiud posture (1) in the Jloslem series, 
 SIS the more natural jiostiire of standing adoration 
 Mith outspread bauds, which we observe on the 
 Egyptian monuments, Tlie uplifting of oae huud 
 
 (therigtii) only in taking an oath was so common, 
 tbpt to say, • 1 have lifted op my hand,' was 
 Ciniivaleiit to 'I have sworn' (Gen. xiv. 21; 
 cwmp. xH. 44 : Deut. xxxii. 40). This posture 
 
 w&M also common among other ancient nations; 
 UKi we find exain()lp.i of it in the sculptures of 
 Persia (fig. I"* and Rome ("fig. 2). 
 
 Knkki.ino is very often describgiJ as a posture 
 V" u'Orcliip ( I Kings viii. 54; 'Ezra, ix 5; Don. 
 
 vi. 10; 2 Chron. vi. 13; comp. I Kings xix. 18; 
 Luke xxii. 41 ; Acts vii. 60). This is still pa 
 Oriental custom, and three forms of it occur (o, 
 6, O'i in the Moslem devotions. It was also in 
 use, alfhoogh not very I'leqiient, among tlie an- 
 cient Egyptians; who likewise, as well as tljr 
 Hebrews (Kxod. xxxiv. IS; 2 Chron. xxix. 2&; 
 Isa. J. 15) sometimes prostrated themselves upon 
 
 the ground. The usual mode of prostration 
 among tlie Hebrews by which they expressed the 
 most intense humiliation, was by bringing net 
 only the body but the head to the ground 
 
 The ordinary mode of prostration at the ]iresent 
 time, and ])robably anciently, is that shown in one 
 of the postures of Moslem worship (5), in which 
 the body is not thrown fiat upon the ground, 
 but rests upon the knees, arm.s, and head. In 
 order to express devotion, sorrow, compunction or 
 humiliation, the Israelites threw dust ujion their 
 heads (Josh. vii. 6; Job ii. 12; Lam. ii. I((; 
 Ezek. xxiv. 7; Rev. xviii. 19), as was done also 
 by the ancient Egyptians, and is still done by 
 the modern Orientals. Under similar circum- 
 stances it was usual to smite the breast (Luke 
 xviii. 13). This was also a practice amonir "he 
 Egyptians (Herod, ii. S5), and the monuments it 
 
 TTiehes exhibit (lersons engaged in this act whilo 
 they kneel upon one knee.
 
 ATTITUDES. 
 
 In 1 Cliron. xvii. 16 wo are told tliat 'David 
 4k; king c.inie and sat liet'ore the Lord," and in 
 tliat posture t,'av<' utterance to eloquent ])rayer, or 
 fAther thaiiksf^ivin.!;, which tlie soquel of the chap- 
 ter contains. Those unacquainted witii Kasiern 
 manners aie surprised at tliis. But there is a 
 mode of i-itti'i;,' in the East which is higiily re- 
 si)ectlul and ex^-n reverential. It is that which 
 pccurs in tiie Moslem forms of worship (i)). The 
 person first kneels, and tiien sits hack u])on his 
 heels. Attention is aLso ])aid to the position of 
 the hands, which they cross, fold, or iiide in the 
 DlHX)si(e sleeves. Tlie variety of this foitnal sitting 
 which the following figure represents is iiighly 
 
 AITITUDES. 
 
 257 
 
 respectful. The prophet Elijah must have been 
 in this or some other similar posture when he in- 
 clined himself so much forwarci in prayer that his 
 head almost touched his kiiees (I Kings xviii. 
 42). 
 
 Supplication, when addressed externally to 
 man, Ciinnot possifily lie exhibited in any other 
 fmrns than those which are used in sup])lica- 
 tion to God. U])lifted hands, kneeling, prostra- 
 tioD, are common to Loth. On the Egyptian 
 
 hent as before indicated, the Orientals l.ring itipir 
 forehead to the ground, anil liefore resiuninij an 
 erect position cither kiss the eaith, or the feet, ot 
 horder of the garment of the kiiig or prince ite- 
 fore whom they are allowed to apjiear. Th»'i-» 
 
 mooK^ents, suppliant ca])tives, of different na- 
 tions, are represented as kneeling or standing 
 with outspread hands. This also occurs in the 
 sculptures of ancient Persia (Persejiolis). The 
 first of the Egyptian figi\rps is of |)ecu1iar in- 
 terest, as rejiresenlii'g tu inhahitatit of Lebanon. 
 Prostration^ ov faUing lU t/if feet of n jierson, is 
 often mentioned in Scnpttne ;is an act of suppli- 
 catiofi or of reverence, or of hoth (I Sam. xxv. "24 ; 
 2 Kings iv. .'?7 ; Estii. viii. 3; Matt, xviii. 29; 
 xxviii.9: Mark v. 2"2; Luke viii. 41 ; John xi. 31; 
 Acts X. 2.5 1. In the instiuice last refeii-ed to, where 
 Cornelius tlirew himself at tiie I'eet of Peter, it may 
 be asked why the ajiostle forltade an ac,t wliich 
 was not miusual among his own people, alleging 
 as the reason — ' I myself also am a man.' The 
 answer is, that among tiie Unmans, prostration wiis 
 Kxrlusivel^ an act of a<luratiori, iieii(ieied only to 
 the gods, and (liercfore it ha<i in lini a signili- 
 caace whicJi it wiKild not liav<' iiad in an Oriental 
 (Kuinoel, ad Act. x. 2()}. This custom is still 
 very general among tiie t)rier)fals ; hut, as an act 
 of reverence inerely, it is seldom shown except to 
 kings: as ex]iressi\e of alarm oi supplicati<in, it 
 is more frequent. 
 
 Sometimes in ti-Aa posture, oi with tlie knees 
 
 is no doubt that a similar practice existed amon^ 
 the .lews; especially when we refer to the ori- 
 ginal words wiiich desciihe tlie acts and attilud(>4 
 
 of salutation, as n\*'"iX ?D3 to bend diitcn to tlit 
 earthy !1^"1N ninnt^'H to fall prostrate on tU 
 sarth, nVIN D'DX y"l3 to fall ti-ith the ftut 
 to the earth, ami connect them witii allusions tii 
 tlie act of kissing the feet, or the hem of the gar 
 ment (Matt. i.\. 20; Luke vii. 3R, l.i). A'm/«<J 
 the liand of another as a mark of all'cctionate 
 respect, we do not remember as distinctly men- 
 ti<ined in Sciipture. But as the Jews liad the 
 other foims of Oriental salutation, we maj riin- 
 clude that they had this also, althov. ,;1' it do<'s 
 not ha]i})en to have been specially iioticetl. it 
 is observed liy servants or pupils fo masters, bv 
 the wife to her husbaiul, and by children to their 
 father, and sometimes tlieir niotlier. it is also an 
 act of homage jjaid to the a:.^ed by the young, oi 
 to learned and religious men by the less in 
 structed or less devout. Kissing one's own hanil is 
 mentioned as early as the time of Job (xxxi. 27 ■, 
 as an act of homage to the heavenly bodies. It 
 was jnoperly a salutation, and as such an act ol 
 adoration to tlwm. Tlie Romans in like mannei 
 kissed their hands as they passed the temjiles o> 
 statues of their gods LADoit.iTioNj. 
 
 It appears from 1 Sam. x. 1; 1 Kings xix. (S{ 
 Ps. ii. 12, that there was a jieculiar kiss of h- 
 mage, the character of wiiich is not indicated, i". 
 was probably that kiss upon the forehead expif~- 
 sive of bigli respect which was formerly, ^f n. t 
 now, in use among tlie He<l(iuins ( Avtar, ii. 1 1'.' .. 
 
 JiiiwiNO. — In the Scrijitures theie aie dilleicit 
 words desciiptive of vaiious •'iis»'iie., of ies])ectlnl 
 Uiw irig : a.s ^^|? to incline or boir doirn the hcau\ 
 y^^ to bmid uoicn the hod,) very latr. T13 <<> heiid 
 the Alice. a1s<t fo hh:s:s. These t<ims in<licutp h 
 confoimity with the exisiing us;igps of tlie East, t.; 
 wbiclithe uuMleiiof Uiwitig aie etpiall v divei£:lie<l, 
 and, in all likclibootl, the same. TIiPsp «r< —
 
 '258 
 
 AVA. 
 
 S. placing tiie risjlit hand ujmn tlie brpast, with or 
 without an iiiclinatit.n of thu head or of the body ; 
 
 1. touching the lips (is this the kissing of tlie 
 nand noticed above?) and the forehead with 
 the riglit hand, with or without an inclination of 
 tlie head or of the body, and v/itli or without jjre- 
 viously touciiing the ground; 3. bending the 
 body very low, with folded arms; 4. bending the 
 liody and resting the hands on the knees : this is 
 one of the postures of prayer, and is indicative 
 of tlie highest respect in the presence of kings and 
 [ninces. In the Egyptian paintings we see jjer- 
 »ons dro]) their arms towards the ground wiiile 
 bowing to a suj)erior, or standing respectfully 
 with the right liand resting on the left slioulder. 
 
 It is observable that, as before noticed, the word 
 T12, barak, means to bless anil to bend the knee, 
 which suggests i\\e idea that it was usual for a 
 iierson toieceive a blessing in a kneeling posture. 
 We Icnow also that the person who gave the blessing 
 laid his hands upon the head of tlie person blessed 
 (Gen. xlviii. llj. Tliis is exactly the case at the 
 present day in the East, and a picture of the ex- 
 istingcustom would furnish a peil'ect illustration of 
 the patriarchal fonn of blessing. This may be 
 perceived IVoni tlie annexetl engraving, whicii, with 
 some of the other attitudes given in this article, is 
 from Lane's Translation of the Arabian Nic/hts 
 Entertainments — a woik which, in its notes and 
 pictorial illustrations, alTords a more coniplete 
 picture of the persons, manners, and habits of the 
 people of south-western Asia and of Egypt^ than 
 all the books of travels put together. 
 
 AVA (N-jy; Sept. 'Aid, 1 Kings xvii. 24), 
 aho IvAH (n-JV ;*Sept. 'A/3a, 2 Kings xviii. 34 ; 
 xix. 13; Isa. xxxvii. 13), the capital of a small 
 monarchical state conquered hy the Ass nans, and 
 
 Avnr. 
 
 from w'.iich Icing Shalmaneser sent colonies into 
 Samaria. Some fake it ti>r tiie r ver, or ratlieT 
 the town which gave r)ame to tiie river Ahava 
 of Ezra vii'. 21 (Bellermann, Il'andbiwh, iii. 374). 
 Iken ( Dissertt I'hi/ol. T/itolo;/. p. l.'J2) would 
 identify it with thePhmnician town Avatliii, men- 
 tioned in the Notilia Vet. l)i/;nifattim Inipcr. Uom, 
 (l)ut the reading liere is rather doublful : Reland, 
 Palast. ]). 232, sqq.) ; or with tlie town of Alieje, 
 lietween lieirutand Sidon, whicli I'aul Lucas men- 
 tions as the seat of a Druse jirincc. But tliP.>e are 
 mere conjectures. Michael is derives the name frnin 
 
 IQ.^ or ,c%S-i latrare, and siijiposes it to be tlie 
 
 land of the Avites between Tripoli and Beirut, be- 
 cause lliey are described as worslii])] ers of THDJ 
 Nib/iaz(2 Kings xvii. 31), an idol which he com- 
 pares with the gieat stone dog that ioimerly stood in 
 t..al quaiter, on wiiicli account the Lycus obtained 
 its nameof Nahr-el-Kelb, Dogriver (<-()mp. IVIan- 
 «ieit. vi. 1. .380). It is most piobalile, however, 
 that Ava was a Syrian or Meso])otami;;n town, of 
 whicli no trace can now be found either in the 
 ancient writers or in (he Oriental topograjilj^rs. 
 
 A\'EN (JIN ; Sept-'^nr), a i,lain, ' the plain of 
 ♦he sun,' of Damascene Syria (Amos i. 5). It is 
 usually supposed to be the same as the ))lain o* 
 Baalbec, or valley of Baal, wheie there was a 
 magnificent temple dedicated to the sun. Being 
 between Lebanon and Anii-Lebanon, it is sup- 
 posed by RosenmUller anil otiieis to lie tire same 
 jilain or valley tliat is mentioned as ' the valley 
 of Lebanon' in Josli. xi. 17. Sjme, Iwwevcr,^ in- 
 fluenced liy tlie Septuagmt, would rather seek 
 Aven in tlie plain of Un, four leagues from Da- 
 mascus towards the deseit. 
 
 AUGUSTUS {Venerable), the title assumed 
 by Octavius, who, after his adojifion by Julius 
 Caesar, took the name of Octavianus (i. e. Ex- 
 Octavius), according to the Roman fashion ; ami 
 was the first peacefully acknowledged enn>erjr 
 of Rome. lie was eni)>en)r at the birtli and during 
 half the life-time of our Lord ; but his name has 
 no connection with Scriptural events, and occurs 
 only (ince (Luke ii. 1) in the New Testament. Tlie 
 successors of the first .\ugusUis took the same 
 name or title, but it i* sehioni ajiplied to theiri 
 by the Latin writers. In the easteyn part of the 
 empire the Gseck 2f./3acrTbs (which is etjuivalent) 
 seems to have been mure cutniuosi, uird hence is 
 used of Nero (Acts xxv. 21). In later times 
 (after Diocletian) the title ofAugustiis was given 
 to one of the two iieiri-apjiaient of the empire, 
 and (Caesar to tiieir younger colleagues and heirs- 
 apparent. 
 
 AVIM (D''1i;; Seiit.E-Woi). called also AviTEa 
 and Ilivnii-s, a ];eop]e descended from Canaan 
 (Gen. X. 17), who originally »w;cujiieil the south- 
 ernmost portion of that tenitory in Palestine along 
 the Me<literranean coast, which the Caphtortin o^ 
 Philistines afterwards possessed (Deul. ii. '2'6). Aa 
 the teiritory of the Avim is mentioned in Josh, 
 xiii. 3, in addition to the live Philistine states, it 
 would appear that it wiis not included in theirs, and 
 that the ex])ulsion of the Avim was by a Philistine 
 invasion prior to tliat by which the five principa- 
 lities were founded. Tlie ten itovy began at Gaza, 
 and extended southward to ' the river of Egypt ' 
 (l)eut. ii. 23), forming what was the sole Philistin* 
 kingilom of Geiar in the time of Abiaham, wheu w€
 
 AWL. 
 
 4o not liear of any other Philistine sfates. Tliere 
 were then Avim, cji- Hivites, at Shecheni (Gen. 
 xxxiv. 2), and we aftei\vn.r<ls fi.id them also a* 
 Gibeon (Jos'- ix 7). au'' tiey'>ii<l the Jordan, at the 
 foot of Moiitn ileirnon ' jost.. xi. ;J) ; Init we liave 
 JO means of kiuiwinjj; whether tlie^e were original 
 «ettleiTient:s of the Avini, or weie formed out of 
 tlie fragments of tlie nation which the Philistines 
 expelled from soutiiern Palestine. The oiii^'inal 
 country of the Avim is ealknl Ilazerim in Deut. 
 ii. 23 [CxEitAii ; Piiimstines]. 
 AURANITIS. [Hauuan.] 
 
 AWL {V'^ip-, Sept. oTTTirtoy). Tlie Hebrew 
 word, which denotes an awl or other instrument for 
 boring a small hole, occurs in Exod. xxi. 6 ; Deut. 
 XT. 17. Considering that the Israelites had at 
 that time receiitly withdrawn from their long 
 sojourn in Egyjit, there can be no doubt that tlie in- 
 Btiumentj weie the sanifi as thos;- of that country, 
 tlie firms of which, fiom actual specimens in tlie 
 British Museum, are shown in the annexed cut. 
 They are sucli as were used by the sandal-makers 
 and utlier workers in leather. 
 
 AZANIAH. 
 
 «M 
 
 AXE. Several instruments of this description 
 aie s<' discriminated in Scripture as to show that the 
 iiebiewshad them of ditVeient forms and forvarious 
 ;i&ei. 1. |T~I3 f/arze/i, w]nc\i occurs in ]!)eut. xix. 
 & ; XX. 19 ; 1 Kings vi. 7 ; Isa. x. 15. From these 
 
 pas-sages it aj)])cnrs that this kind was employed in 
 felling trees, and in hewing large tinder for build- 
 ing. The ccnjecture of Gesenius, that in 1 Kings 
 V. 7, -.t denotes t'.ie axe of a stonemason is by 
 DO means conclusive. The tirsi text supposes a 
 case of the head slipping from the helve in fell- 
 iag a liee. This would suggest that it was shaped 
 
 likefig. 3, whicri is just the same instrument nsouT 
 common hatchet, and a])pe;irs lo have been ajirlied 
 by the ancient Egyptions to the 8;mie irer.eral use 
 as with us. The iKider will oliserve tiie contri- 
 varire in all the olhois ' wanting in this) of fu'ifei)- 
 ing the head to the halt by thongs. 2. TVyD 
 tnaalzad, which occurs only in Is;i. xliv. 12; and 
 Jer. X. 3. From these ]i;issages it appears lo have 
 beenalighfer implement than thefoimer, oia kind 
 of adze. u.sed for fashioning or carving wood into 
 sliajje; it was, jirobably, therefore, likeligs. 4 lo 7, 
 which the Egyptians em])loye<l for tlils jiurpose. 
 Some texts of Scripture represent liiem aa 
 being employed in carving images — the use to 
 which the ])rophets refer. The diflieiences of form 
 and size, as indicatetl in the liguies, a])pear lohave 
 been determined with reference to light or heavy 
 work : tig. 3 is a Hner carving-tool. 3. DTip 
 gardom ; this is the commonest name for an axe or 
 hatchet. It is tliis of which weread in Judg. ix. 48; 
 Ps. Ixxiv. 5; 1 Sam. xiii. 20, 21 ; Jer. xlvi. 22. 
 It appears to have lK.H'n more exclusively employed 
 than \\\e garzeii for felling tiees, and had therefore 
 probably a heavier head. In one of the Egyptian 
 sculptures the inhabitants of Lebanon aie lepre- 
 sented as felling jiine-trees with axes like fig. 1. 
 As the one us<'d by the Egy])ti;uis for tiie same 
 purpose was also of this shape, tliere is little doubt 
 that it was also in use among the Hebrews. 
 
 Tiie word tendered ' axe ' in 2 Kings vi. 5 is li- 
 terally ' iron ;" but as an axe is ceitainly intended, 
 the jiassage is valuable as showing that the axe- 
 heads among the Helirews were of iion. T'. ose 
 which have been found in Egyjit are of bronze, 
 which was very anciently and generally used for 
 the purjxise. But this does not prove that they 
 had none of iron; it seems rather to suggest that 
 those of iron have been consumed by the coiiosion 
 of three thousand years, while those of bronze have 
 been preser\ed. All our figures are from actual 
 si)ecimens now in the British Museum. 
 
 AZANIAH (n;j?V5 Sept. 'KKtaUros, Vulg. 
 halyeius and /lalia-los, Auth. Vers. ' ospray '), an 
 injclean bird; but there is a ilill'erence of opinion 
 as to the paiticular species intended. Tlie ety- 
 mology of the Hebrew wurd would seem to 
 point to some bird remavkuhly pou-er/u I, fierce, 
 or impiulent. Bochart sujiposes the black eagle 
 to be meant, but reasons upon the mere ccmjccture 
 that by the word neKat-aUros is intended aXiaUros 
 (Hieroz. torn. iii. p. 1R8, &c.). 
 
 The traditional meaning strongly favours the 
 English rcndciing. The following is the line 
 through which it is traced : — The modern sy*- 
 tems of ornithology for the most part retain the 
 names of birds given to tliem by Liniia'us in his 
 i<i/stcma Naturee. ' The system of Willugldty is 
 without doubt the iiasis on which tlie ornithological 
 classification of Linnieus is foundeil' (Neville 
 WoikI's Ornitholoijist's Textbook, yi. 'i). Mr. Ray, 
 giving an account of tlie assistance he rendered 
 Mr. Willughby in t/iaC iindcitaking, says, ' Con- 
 cerning the names of birds we did not mucii 
 tro'ible ourselves, but have for the most j)ar1 fol- 
 lowed Gesner and Aldrovaudus, being unwilling 
 to disturb what is settled, or dispossess names 
 that may, for their use, jilcad jirjcscripiion ' (Pre- 
 face to the Eng. e<l. of \Villughliy's Ornitho- 
 logy) ; and it is well known tiiat Gesner arid 
 Aldrovaudus derived their names and descriu
 
 260 
 
 AZANIAH. 
 
 tions of birds from their pieilecessois, including 
 Aiistotle and P'iny. In the same ])ieface, Mr. 
 Ray observes, ' Gesner and Aidrovandus wrote 
 mere pandects of birds, comprisiiig whatevei- bad 
 before been vxrittenby others.'' Tliis continuation 
 
 [Ospray. Fa'co Halisetus.] 
 of the same names of many at least of the same 
 birds, from Aristotle to the jiresent day, is, in the 
 instance of tliehaliaetos, or ospray, jieculiarly clear 
 and unbroken; and the same striking descrip- 
 tions also of the bird so designaleil accompany its 
 name from the earliest times. 
 
 The following statement places the matter 
 in a clear light: — Aristotle, al)out b.c. 300, 
 describes the aXiaUros as ' a species of eagle 
 dwelling near seas and lakes ; and remarks, it 
 gometimes happens to it, that having seized its 
 prey, and not being able to carry it, it is drowned 
 in the deep' (Hist. A?iimal. ix. c. 32). The 
 word is rendered alietus in the ancient transla- 
 tion, aquila marina and haliaetus by Gaza (Ven. 
 A.D. 1476), and aquila marina, nisus haliaetias, 
 and haliaetus by Scaliger. About the time of 
 Aristotle, the ablest of all the Sejjtuagint trans- 
 lators renders the Hebrew word azaniah by 
 aKiaieros. The same word is found in the writ- 
 ings of Pliny (\.D. 70) witli the following de- 
 scription, ' There rema'ns (to be mentioned) the 
 baliaetos, having the most penetrating vision of all 
 (eagles); soaring (or balancing itself) on higli, 
 and upon ])erceiving a lish in the sea, rushing 
 down headlong, aixl with its breast da^shing aside 
 tiie waters, seizing its prey" (Hist. Aat. \. 3). 
 The same word is adopted by Jerome as answer- 
 ing to the Hebrew azaniah, a.d. 380, and the 
 haliaetuB is described in the very words of Aris- 
 totle and Pliny by Aidrovandus (lib. xii. Bonon. 
 15!)4, p. 191); tl)e transfeience of names into 
 the Linnaean system has already iieen traced (see 
 Systema Naturte, vol. i. p. 129, Holmise, 17()7). 
 The word, according to its etymology, signi- 
 fies sea-eagle, and the traditional English word 
 is ospray The following accounts from modern 
 naturalists are strikingly in accordance with the 
 ancient descriptions ; — 
 
 Species of the haliaetus, or sea-eagle, occur in 
 
 AZARi^it. 
 
 Eurt)pe, Asiu, Afiica, America, and Aiutralia 
 (Selby's British Ornithology). 
 
 Mr. Macgillivray de.scril>es ' its savage scream 
 of anger when any one apjiroaches the neighijour- 
 hood of its nest, its intimidating gestures, and 
 even its attempts to molest individuals who hav« 
 ventuieil among its native ciags.' 
 
 Mr. Selby (Illustratiotis of British Omitho- 
 loyy, 1825) res])ecting the os])ray, observes, ' It is 
 stiictly piscivorous, and is found only in the 
 vicinity of lakes, rivers, or such pools as abound 
 with fish. It is a jMucrfiil bird, often weighing 
 five pounds; the limbs aie vciy tnuscular in pro- 
 poition to its general dimensioris; its feet are 
 admirably adajited for letaining firm hold of its 
 slippery prey.' Mr. Montagu (^Ornithological 
 Dictionary, 1R02, article ' Ospray') remaiks, ' Its 
 princijjal food is fish, which it often catches with 
 great dexterity, by poujicing tipo7i them with vast 
 rapidity, and carryiiig them off in its talons' 
 In the su])|)lement to his woik, Exeler, 1813, 
 many additional facts are related resjecting 
 the ospray, which, together with the foiegoing 
 reasons, serve to identify it with the haliajtus ol 
 the ancients (see also Grandsagne's edition of 
 Pliny, with Notes and Excursus by Cuvier, 
 Parisiis, 1828, p. 215).— J. F. D. 
 
 AZARIAH (npTl?, xchom Jehovah aids, an- 
 swering to the Geiman name Gotthelf; Sept. 
 'A^aplas), a very common name among the He- 
 brews, and hence borne by a considerable number 
 of persons mentioned in Scripture. 
 
 1. AZARIAH, a high-priest (1 Chron. vi. 9), 
 perha])S the same with Amariah, who lived under 
 Jehosiiapliat king of Judah (2 Chron. xix. 11), 
 about B.C. 896. 
 
 2. AZARIAH, son of Johanan, a high-priest 
 (1 Chron. vi. 10), whom some su])])ose the same 
 as Zechariah, son of Jehoiada, who was killed 
 B.C. 840 (2 Chron. xxiv. 20-22). 
 
 3. AZARL'VH, the high-jiriest who opposed 
 king Uzziali in ofl'ering incense to Jehovah (2 
 Chron. xxvi. 17). 
 
 4. AZARIAH, a high-jiriest in tlie time oi 
 Hezekiah (2 Chron. xxxi. 10). 
 
 5. AZARIAH, the father of Seraiah, who was 
 the last high-priest before the Captivity (1 Chron. 
 vi. 14). 
 
 6. AZARIAH, son of the high-priest Zadok , 
 but it is unceitain if he succeeded his father (1 
 Kings iv. 2). 
 
 7. AZARIAH, cajitain of king Solomon's 
 guaids (I Kings iv. 5). 
 
 8. AZARIAH, otherwise called Uzziah, king 
 of Judali [Uzziah] 
 
 9. AZARIAH, a prophet who met king Asa on 
 his return from a gieat victory over the Cushit« 
 king Zerah (2 Cinon. xxiii. 1) [A.sa]. 
 
 10. AZARIAH, a person to wiiom the liigh- 
 jiriest Jehdiaila made known the seciet of (he ex- 
 i.stence (if the young prince Joash, aid wl\o assisted 
 in placing him on ihe throne (2 ('hum. xv. 1). 
 
 11. AZARIAH, one of the two sons of king 
 Jehoshaphat (2 Chron. xxi. 2). 
 
 12. AZARIAH, one of the' jiroud men' who 
 relmked Jeiemiah for advising the })eo])le that re- 
 mained in Palestine, after the exjiatiiation to Ba- 
 bylon, not to letire into Egyjjt ; and who look the 
 prophet himself and Baruch along with theia 
 to that countiy (Jer. xliii. 2-7).
 
 AZARIAH. 
 
 13. AZARIAH. tlie ChaldaBan name of Abod- 
 nego, one of J)aiii»;'i's three iViends who were cast 
 into the fiery fmnace (Dan. i. 7 ; iii. 9). 
 
 AZZAII (.njy), a uukIp of si^elliiis? the Hebrew 
 name which is elsewhere iciulered Gaza. The dif- 
 ference aiises frcm tlie uncevt;iiii power of the first 
 letter y, wliicii, in projier natne^. soiric use as the 
 consonant G: while others le^'ard only the vowel 
 sound connecled whli it, which in this case is A 
 [Ai,i>ha3Et]. The name occurs in this form in 
 D«ut. ii. 23 ; Jer. xxv. 20 ; which last clearly 
 ■hows tliat Gaza is Intended. 
 
 B. 
 
 BA'AL. The word /]}2 baal, as it signifies 
 /<wrf, master, is a generic term for t/od in many 
 of the Syro-Arabian languages. As the idolatrous 
 nations of that race had several gods, this word, 
 by means of some accessory distinction, became 
 applicable as a name to many ilill'crent deities. 
 Tliere is no evidence, however, that the Israelites 
 ever called .lohovah by the name of Baal ; for the 
 passage in Hos. ii. 16, wliicli has been cited as 
 such, only contains the word baal as the sterner, 
 less afiectionate representative oi husband. 
 
 1. Baal (?y3n, with the definite article, Judg. 
 11. 13; Sept. 6 BaaA, but also r] BoaA., Jer. xix. 
 5 ; xxxix. 3.5 ; Rom. xi. 4) is appropriated to the 
 chief male divinity of the Phoenicians, the prin- 
 cijral seat of whose worship was at Tyre. The 
 idolatrous Israelites adojited the worsliip of this 
 god (almost always in conjunction with tliat of 
 Ashforeth) in the ])eriod of the Judges (Judg. ii. 
 13); they continued it in the reigns of .A.haz and 
 Manasseh, kings of Judah (2 Chron. xxviii. 2; 
 2 Kings xxi. 3); and, among the kings of Israel, 
 esj)ecially in tiie reign of Ahab, wlio, jjartlj' 
 through the indutrice of his wile, the daughter 
 of the Sidonian king Etlibaal, apjiears to have 
 made a systematic attempt to su])press the wor- 
 ship of God altogether, and to substitute that of 
 Baal in its stead (I Kings xvi. 31); and in that 
 of Hosliea (2 Kings xvii. Ifi), although Jehu and 
 Jehoiada once severally destroyed the temples and 
 priesthood of the idol (2 Kings x. IS, .si^. ; xi. 18). 
 
 We read of altars, images, and temples erected 
 to Baal (1 Kings xvi. 32; 2 Kings iii. 2). The 
 altars were generally on heights, as the sunimits 
 of hills or tile rcK)fs of houses (Jer. xi.x. 5; xxxii. 
 29). His iiriestliot)d, the proper term for which 
 seems to be CIDS, weie a very numerous boily 
 (1 Kings xviii. 19j, and were divided into the 
 two classes of ])rophets and of jjriests (unless tlie 
 term ' servant^,' which comes between those words, 
 may denote a third cfrder — a kind of Levifes; 
 2 Kings X. 19). As to the rites by which he was 
 worsiiip[)ed, tlicre is most freijuent mention of 
 incense being ollered to him (2 Kings xxiii. 5), 
 but also of bullcjcks being sacrificed (1 Kings 
 xviii. 26), and even of cliildren, as to Moloch 
 (Jer. xix. 5). According to the description in 
 1 Kings xviii., tiie priests, during the sacrifice, 
 danced (or, in the sarcastic expr ^ssioii of the ori- 
 ginal, limped) about the altar, irid, when their 
 prayers weie not answered, cut themselves with 
 Knives until the blood flowed, like the priests 
 of Beliona (Lu'ian. Pharsal. i. 565 ; Tertull. 
 
 BAAL. 
 
 281 
 
 Apologet. ix. ; Lactant. Div. Instit, i. 21). We 
 also read of homage paid to him by lK)wing the 
 knee, and by kissing iiis image (1 Kings xix. IS; 
 comp. Cicero, In Verran, iv. 43), and that hit 
 worsbij)])ers used to swear bv his name (Jer. xii. 
 16). 
 
 As to the ])ower (jI na'ure which was adored 
 under the foru) of the Tyrian H.ial, m.iuy of tije 
 ])assages al>ove citeil show evidently that it was 
 one of the heavenly bodies; or, if we admit that 
 resemidance between the Babylonian and Persian 
 religions wliich Miinter assumes, not one of the 
 heavenly bodies really, but the astral spirit re- 
 siding in one of them ; and the same line of in- 
 duction ;us that which is )>ursucd in the case of 
 Ashtoreth, his tV-male counterpart, leads to the 
 conclusion that it was the sun. N evert heles*, the 
 same di'Ieience of opinion between Gesenius and 
 Miinter as that on the subject of Ashtoreth meets 
 us here in the case of Baal, and of (he Baliylonian 
 Bel, which we shall, in what follows, regard as 
 being essentially the same god. The former — 
 who has stated hi> arguments in his Thesaurus, 
 in his Jesaias, and at some length in the All(je- 
 meine Encijclopcedie, vols. viii. & xvi. — main- 
 tains that the idolatry of Babylon was astrolo- 
 gical, and that, from the connection between 
 Aramaean and Pha-nician religious ideas, Baal 
 and Bel were representatives of the planet Ju- 
 piter, as the greater star of gcmd fortune. He 
 builds much on the facts, that the Arabian idol- 
 aters worshipped this jilanet under the name of 
 Mushteri, and sacrificed a sucking-child to him 
 on a Thursd.iy {dies Jovis), and tliat his temjile 
 was pyramidal (see N(irherg"s Onomast. Cod. 
 Nas. p. 2''); that Bel is also the name of this 
 planet in the Tsabian liooks ; and that the Ro- 
 mans called the Babylonian Bid by the name of 
 Jupiter. He asserts that the words 'to Baal, to 
 the sun,' in 2 Kings xxiii. ."J, so far from proving 
 the idendity of Baal and the sun, rather directly 
 oppose it ; and, as it is impossible to deny that 
 the sun was worshipped by the Phoenicians, he 
 evades the force of the jiassage from Sanchonia- 
 thon, cited below, by arguing that, even allowing 
 that the sun was the chief Tyrian god according 
 to the entire religious system, it does not follow 
 that he was necessarily the Baal /car' f^ox'fiv, the 
 most worshipped god of Tyre or Babylon ; just 
 as, in the middle ages, the excessive worsliip of 
 patron saints and of the Virgin Mary was com- 
 patible with a theoretical acknowledgment of tlie 
 Su])rcme Being. 
 
 Miinter, on the other hand, in his Riligion der 
 Babijlonier, does not deny the astrological cha- 
 racter of the Babylonian religion, but niftintains 
 that, together v/ith anil besides that, there existed 
 in very early times a cosmogonical idea of the 
 primitive poorer of nature, as seen in the two 
 functions ol generation anil iA' conception or par- 
 turition ; that this idea is most evident in the 
 Kabiric religion, but that it exisfs all over the 
 East ; and that the sun and moon were the fittest 
 representatives of these two powers. He iloes not 
 admit that the Tsabian books or Efraem Syrus, 
 are any authority for the religious notions of th* 
 baliylonians at a iieriod so remote from their owb 
 time, and especially when they are opjiosed by 
 belter and older testimonies. Among these, he 
 relies much on the statement of Sanehoniathon 
 (p. 14, ed. Orelli), tliat tlie Phoenicians uinsideMd
 
 263 
 
 BAAL. 
 
 the sun to be ' (xSvos ohpavov Kvptoi,' calling liini 
 ' Beelsamen, which is tlie Zeus of the Greeks.' 
 
 Balsamen (i. e |''Dti' 7^3 lord of t/ie heavens) 
 also occurs in Plaufus (Perttttl. act. v. s. 2. 67), 
 where Bellermann, Lindemann, and Gesenius 
 recognise it to he tlie same name. Isidorus 
 Hispalensis h;i3 the words, ' Apud Assyrios Bel 
 I'ocatnr, quadatn sacrorum siiorum ratione, et 
 Satiirniis et Sul ' {Orig. viii. 11). We moreover 
 
 find {on byS (I e. deus Solaris, from HOn, the 
 nm, Jol) XXX. 28, with the adjective ending an; 
 see Ewald's Heb>: Gram. ^ 311) in several Car- 
 thaginian inscriptions (in Gesen. Mon. Ling. 
 Phan. p. 164), which is an evidence that the 
 Carthaginians woreliipped tlie sun. 
 
 As to Gesenius's assertion that 2 Kings xxiii. 5 
 is ojjposed to the identity of Baal and tlis sun, a 
 consideval ion of the whole passage would seem to 
 show he has judged hastily. The words are, 
 ' wliich biii-nt incense to Baal, to the sun, and to 
 (he moon, and to the zoiliacal signs, and to all 
 the host of the jjeavens.' Now tiie omission of 
 llie and before the sun apjjears decidedly to 
 favour the notion that the sun is an ajjposilion to 
 Baal, and not a distinct member of the same co- 
 ordinate series. This view miglit, perhajH, re- 
 commend itself to those who appreciate the pe- 
 culiar uje of and in the Hebrew syntax. Besides, 
 solar images (as he himself interprets CiOH) 
 are mentioned in 2 Chron. xxxiv. 4, as being 
 placed on the altars of the Ba<ils ; which is not 
 well reconcilable with any other theory than that 
 of tlie identity of Baal and the sun. 
 
 In a certain sense, every argument which goes 
 to show that Ashtoreth was tl)e moon is also, on 
 account of the close conjunction between her and 
 Baal, as valid a reason for Baal being the sun ; 
 for the two gods are such exact correlates, that 
 the discovery of the true meaning of the one 
 would lead, by the force of analogy, to that of 
 tlie otlier. Ne\ertheless, as has been already ob- 
 served in the article Asiitoketh, it must be 
 admitted that the astrological view did subse- 
 quently prevail, and tliat t!;e planets Jupiter and 
 Venus became mysteriously connected with some 
 mtxiittcations of the same powers which were pri- 
 rnarily worshipped under the cosmogonical ideas 
 of Bei and Mylitta, sun and moon. This rela- 
 tion between Baal and the planet Jupiter is 
 noticed in the article Gad. For the relation be- 
 tv/een Baal and Moloch, and that between Baal 
 and Melkartli, tlie Tynan Hercules, see Moi.och 
 and Heucli.es. . 
 
 • 2. Baau Beuith (n^13 Sya, covenant-lord ; 
 Sept Vat. Baa.\fispi6 ; Alexand. BaaA Sia^TJ/crjs; 
 JiiUg. ix. 4) is the name of a god worshipped by 
 the jieo])le of Shechem (Juilg. viii 33 ; ix. 4, 46), 
 who, on account of the signification of the name, 
 has been compared to tlie Zevs "OpK.os of the 
 Greeks, and the Latin Dcus Fidvis. Bochavt 
 and Creuzer thJhk that this name means • God 
 ef Berytus; " hut, as the name of that town is 
 probably to be recognised in the nm~13 of Ezek. 
 xlvii. 16, there is hardly any ground for tl:eir 
 epinion. _ . 
 
 3. Baai, Peor (lii'C TJyS, or sometimes 
 only "liyS, respectively r<'))resented in tlie Sept. 
 by BaKcpiyiiip, and ^oyoip) apiiears to have Ijeen 
 properly the idol of the Moabites (Num. xxv. 
 1-y. Deut. iv. 3; Jos. xxii. 17; Ps. cvi. 28; 
 
 BAAL. 
 
 Hos. ix. 10); but also of the Midianita (Num 
 xxsi. 15, 16). 
 
 It is the common o])inion that this god wa* 
 worshipped iiy obscene rites ; and, from the lime 
 of Jerome downwards, it has Ix^en usual tc com- 
 jiare him to Piiiipus. Seidell and J. Owen (ZJc 
 Diis Syris, i. 5 ; Theologoumena, v. 4) seem to 
 be the only jiersons who have disputed whether 
 any of the passages in which this god is named 
 really warrant such a conclusion. The utmost 
 that those p;issages exjiress is the fact that the 
 Israelites received tliis idolatry from the womeu 
 of Moab, and were leil away to eat of their sacri- 
 fices (cf. Ps. cvi. 2S) ; but it is very possible for 
 that sex to have been the means of seducing 
 them into the adojition of their worship, without 
 tlie idolatry itself being of an obscene kind. It 
 is also remarkable (hat so few authors are agreed 
 even as to the general character of these rites 
 Most Jewish authorities (except the Targnm of 
 Jonathan on Num. xxv.) represent his worship to 
 have consisted of rites which are filthy in the ex- 
 treme, but not lascivious (see Biaunius, iJe Vcstit. 
 Sacerd. i. p. 7, for one of the fullest collections 
 of Jewish testimonies on this subject). If, how- 
 ever, it could be shown that this god was wor- 
 shipped by libidinous rites, it would be one more 
 confirmation of the relation bet.veen Baal and 
 the Sim ; as, then, Baal Peor would be a mascu- 
 line pliasis of the same worship as that of which 
 Myiitta is, both in name au(l rites, the female 
 representative. The sense assigned by the Rab- 
 bins to the verb "IJ/Q is now generally consiilered 
 untenable. Peor (^hiatus) is sujiposed to have 
 been the original name of the mountain ; and 
 Baal Peor to be the designation of the god wot- 
 shipped there. The verb 1DV3, fo be bound, 
 coupled, which is only used in the Old Testament 
 to denote being joined to Baal Peor, has been 
 supposed to ex])ress either some obscene lite, or 
 some mere syi»j»ol of initiation in the worship of 
 this god. The Sept. renders it by frtXtaO-qcray ; 
 and J. D. Michael is lirst tried to reconcile flie 
 primitive sense of binding with the notion of ini- 
 tiation, by taking it to mean biinling-on _^//( ^s. 
 Gesenius, jiowever, jioints to the same veib in 
 Ethiopic, in the sense of to serve, to loorship ; 
 and maintains that that is its force here. Never- 
 theless, Hitzig, in his note to IIos. ix. 10, still 
 tries to show that the verb may mean to wear a 
 band, ;is symbol of initiation ; and argue.s that 
 1")Tj\' there used, as contrasted with the appro- 
 ])riate word nO^'N implies the coriespothience 
 between the "ITJ and the 'V'D'i (cf. 2 Sam. i. 10). 
 Some identify this gwl with Ciiemosh. 
 
 4. Baai.zebub rnnr ^yn, lly-lord; Sept 
 rS BaaK /xviav BeSv, always; where more than 
 one emendation a))))ears neces.sary) occurs in 
 2 Kings i. 2-16, as the god of the Philistines at 
 Ekion, whose oracle Ahaziah sent to consult. 
 There is much diversity of o]iinion as to the sig- 
 iiilicatii'ii of this name, according as authors con- 
 sidei- the title to be one vf honour, as used fiy hit 
 worsliippeis, or one of contemjit. The former 
 class lind a parallel to him in the Zeus 'A-jroixutos 
 of Klis, and suppose that he v/as regarded as the 
 god who deliveieil his worsliijipers from the an- 
 noyance of flies. We aie unable, however, to 
 discern tlie ajipositeness of this parallel. The 
 name I'lg-lurd appears ratJier to mean the god
 
 BAAL. 
 
 <f flies, cfjin the averter and destroyer of flies. As 
 Shis name is the oiu- tised liy Ahaziali iiiniself, it 
 is dillicult to sujijiose tiiat it was not the proper 
 and reverential title of the f^tnl ; and the inoie so, 
 as Beelzelnil, in Matt. x. "i"), seems to lie the coii- 
 feniptuous comiption of it. Any explanation, 
 Therefore, of tiie symlxilical sense in uiiich flies 
 may have lieen rej,'arded in ancient religions, and 
 l)j which we aiuld conceive how his worshipjieis 
 cuuld honour him as the tyorf f;/"7?(«, would ap- 
 pear to us nnich more compatihle witii his name 
 than the only sense which can he derived from 
 the Greek parallel. Tiiis receives some confirm- 
 atitm, j:)€rhai)s. from the words of Josephus (Atitiq. 
 ix. 2), who says, ' .■Vluuiah sent to the god I'll/, 
 for that is the name of tlie god' (tS 6(S). 
 
 The analogy of classical idolatry would lead 
 us to conclude that all these Baals are only the 
 satrve god under various modifications of attri- 
 butes and emhlems; hut the scanty notices to 
 which we owe all our knowledge of Syro- Arabian 
 idolatry do not furnisli data for any decided opi- 
 nion on this suhjecf.— J. N. 
 
 BAAL is often found as tlie first element of 
 ct>mpouud names of places. In this case, Gese- 
 nius thinks that it seldom, if ever, has any 
 refeience to the god of that name ; but that it 
 denotes tiie place which possesses, wliicli is the 
 abode of the thing signified by the latter half of 
 the compound — as if it was a synonyme of Jl^D. 
 The best support of this opinion is the fact that 
 baal and beth are used intercliangeably of the 
 same place; as Baalshalisha and Baaltamar are 
 culled by Eusebius Bethshalisha and Bethtamar. 
 
 J.N. 
 
 BAALAH, Baale-Jodah, Kirjath-Baai. 
 
 [KlRJATH JeAUIu]. 
 
 BAALAH {rhy.}, Josh. xv. 29), Balah 
 (n73, Josh. xix. 3), Bii.hah (nnpS, 1 Chron. 
 iv. 29), a town in the tribe of Simeon, usually 
 confounded with Biialath ; but, as the latter was 
 in Dan and this in Simeon, they would appear to 
 have been distiifct. 
 
 BAALATH {rhv^ ; Sejjt. refieeXdif), a town 
 in the tribe of Dan (Josh. xix. 44), appa- 
 rently the same that was alterwards rebuilt by 
 Solomon (1 Kings ix. IS). Many have conjectured 
 this Baalath to be the same as Baalbek ; but in 
 that case it must have lain in nortliernmost Dan, 
 whereas the ])c>s..,ession of it is a.scril)ed to that 
 trilve when its territory was wholly in the south 
 v)f Judah, and many years before tlie migration 
 (recorded in Judg. xviii.) which gave Dan a 
 northern territory. Correspondingly, Josephus 
 places tiie BaaliU h of Solomon (which he calls 
 Baleth) in the southern jiait of Palestine, near to 
 Gazara (Antiq. viii. 2), within the territory 
 which would have belonged to Dan, had it ac- 
 quired possession of the lands originally assigned 
 to it. The Talmud affiims that Baalath lay so 
 near the lino of separation between Dan and Ju- 
 «lah, that the fields only were in the former tribe, 
 the buildings being in the latter. 
 
 BAALATH-BKER (-)N3 rhv2 ; Sept. Bai- 
 Keit), probably the same as the Baal of 1 Chron. 
 iv. 33 — a city of Simeon; called also Ramath- 
 Negeb, or Southern Ramath (Josh. xix. 8; comn. 
 I Sam. XXX. 27). 
 
 BAAL-^AD. 
 
 aAs 
 
 BAAL-GAD (13 ^J?? ; Sept. BaKayiS), m 
 rity ' in the valley of Lebanon under Mount 
 Ilermmr (Josh. xi. 17; xii. 7). We are also in- 
 I'oimed that among th<isp paits of Palestine which 
 were unsubdued by the Hebrews at thi- death of 
 Joshua, was ' all Lebanon towards vhe sun-risin;^, 
 from Baal-gad, under Mount Hermon, unto tlie 
 entering into Hamath ' (Josh, xii i. .5). This po- 
 sition of Baal-gad is not unfavourable to the con- 
 clusion which some have reached, tliat it is no 
 other than the j^lacc which, from a temple conse- 
 crated to the sun, that stood there, was called 
 by the Greeks Uellopolis, i. e. city of tlie sun ; 
 and which the natives called and still call Baal- 
 bek, a word a])parently of the same meaning. 
 The honour of being identified with Bajilbek 
 has also been claimed for the Baalath which 
 Solomon built or fortified : ()ut this claim has 
 already been <lisposed of [Baai.ath ] ; and n* 
 weight is to be attached to the local traditions 
 which claim Solomon as tlie lounder of Biialbek, 
 seeing that it is the ]jractice of tlie natives to 
 ascrilje to that great king every grand ancient 
 woik of unknown date which the country contains. 
 It is also to be observed that those who contend 
 for Bitalath admit its possible identity with 
 Baal-ga(i, and hence there are no conflicting 
 claims to adjust. Even those who supjxise the 
 Kaal-hanion of the Canticles (viii. 11) to be 
 Biialliek, conceive that to be a later name for 
 Baal-gad; and hence the only question that re- 
 mains is, whether Baal-gad be not the more 
 ancient name of the place afterwards known as 
 Heliopolis and Baalbek. 
 
 Baalbek, in the Syrian language, signifies 
 the city of Baal, or of the sun ; and, as the 
 Syrians never borrowed names from the Greeks, 
 or translated Greek names, it is certain that 
 when the Greeks came into Syria they found 
 the place bearing this name or some other 
 signifying ' city of the sun,' since they termed 
 it Heliopolis, whiqh is doubtless a translation 
 of the native designation. AVe entertain no dovdit 
 that it was then called Baalbek by the natives. 
 Now the question is, whether tills word has the 
 same meaning as Haal-gad, and if not, whether 
 any circumstances can be pointed out as likely 
 to occasion the change of name. If we take Baal 
 for the name of the idol, then, as in the case of 
 Baalbek, the last menilier of the uonl nuist !« 
 taken as a modifying ap)»ellatioii, not as in itself 
 a projier name ; and as Gad means a troop, a 
 multitude, or a press of peopk, Baal-gad will 
 mean Baal's crowd, whether applied (o the in- 
 habitants, or to the place as a resort of pilgrims. 
 The syllable bek has preci.sely the same meaniu); 
 in the Arabic. 
 
 If this should not seem satisfactory, we may 
 conclude that Baal was so ccninion an element 
 in the com]K)sition of proi)er names, that it is 
 not sufficiently distinctive to l>ear the stress ot 
 such an inteijiretation ; and may rather take it 
 to signify (as Gesenius says it always does in 
 geogsaphical combinations) the )ilace wheie u 
 thing is found. According to this \ iew B.ial-gad 
 would mean the pla^e of Gad. Now (Jad was 
 an idol (Isa. Ixv. 11), supposinl to have iieen 
 'he god or goddess of g^iod fortune (comji. Sei»r. 
 Ti'XV '} Vulg. I'orti'7ui\ and identified bj tile 
 Jewish commentators with the planet Jupitm
 
 204 
 
 BAAL-GAD. 
 
 BAAL-GAD. 
 
 [Gab]. But it is well knuwn tliat Baal wa» iden- 
 tified with .lujiitor aa well as with the sini ; and 
 it ij not (lillifult to connect Biuilhek witli tiie wor- 
 ship ol" .kipiter. John of Aiitioch atliini;) tliat the 
 ?a'at temple at Ba;il!>ek was dedicated to ,In- 
 pilcr; and in the ctl('l)iated pasjaj^e of Macio- 
 hius (Satunuil. i. 2;?), in which he ie|:oits tliat 
 the worsliip of the snn was bvonght liy Kg'vji- 
 lian priests to Heliojxdis in Syria, lie exjjiessly 
 states that they introduced it under the name of 
 Jupiter Tsuh nomine Jovis). This implies that 
 the worship of Jiijjiter was already estahlisljed 
 and ]Hipnlar at the place, and tliat heliolatiy 
 previously was not ; and therefore we should 
 rather expect the town to have home some name 
 referring to Jup'iter than to the sim ; and may l>e 
 sure tliat a name indicative of heliolatry must 
 have l)een jwsferior to the introduction of tliat 
 worship by tlie Ei^yptians ; and, as we have no 
 prouiid for siip|X)sing that this took place before 
 "»- t;:i i-.>ng after tire age of Josiiua, it could not 
 
 then be called by any name correspondiiKj ts 
 
 Helio)x)lis. 
 
 We have tDucheil nytm this matter becaiwe 
 it presents tlie subject in its Biblical relation*, 
 which receive comparatively little attention in 
 works of j^eueial leference. To stich works, aa 
 well as to the travels nameil at the end of this 
 article, we may r< Tct for ample descriptions of the 
 ruini, Ike , which rapiire liut slight notice here, 
 seeing tliat it is barely proltable that the site ia 
 even nametl in the Scriptures. 
 
 Baalbek is jil'f'asantly situated on the lowest 
 declivity of Anti-Libanus, at the ojxjning of a 
 small valley into the jilain Kl-Bekaa. Through 
 this valley runs a small stieam, divided into 
 numberless rills for iriigation. Ttie jilace is in 
 N. lat. 34^ 1' 30", and E. long. 3G^ 11', distant 
 10!t geog. miles from Palmyra, and 3Sf fiom 
 Tri]X>li. 
 
 Its origin appears to be lost in the most remote 
 antiquity, and the historical ixrfices of it are 
 
 Terv scanty ; the silence of the classical writers 
 resjiecting it would alone seem to imply that it 
 had previously existed under another name. In 
 flie absence of more positive information we can 
 unly conjectuie that its situation on the high-road 
 of commerce between Tyre, Palmyra, and the 
 fartlier East, must have contributed largely to 
 the wealth and magnificence w''ich it mani- 
 testly attained. It is mentioned uniU^r the name 
 of Heliopolis tiy .losephus (Antiq. xiv. 3 4), and 
 also by Pliny {Hist. Nat. v. 22). Two Roman 
 inscriptions of the time of .\ntoninus Pius give 
 sanction to the statement of John of Antioch, 
 who allegej tliat this emperor built a great temjjle 
 to Jupiter at Heliojiolis, which was one of the 
 wonders of the world {Hist. Chron. lib. xi.). From 
 the reverses of Roman coins we learn that Helio- 
 polis was constituted a colony by Julius Caesar; 
 that it was the seat of a Roman garrison in the 
 
 time of Augustus •, and obtained the Jus JtaHcum 
 
 from Severus. Some of the coins of late? date 
 contain curious repi esenrarions of the temple, 
 
 Aftei- the age of Constantine the splentlid tera- 
 ]iles of Baalbek wae i)rol)al)ly consigiie<l to neg- 
 lect and decay, unless intleeil, as someapjieaiances 
 in<iicate, tl e)' were then consecTated to Chrfsliaii 
 worship. From the accounts of Oiienlal writers 
 Baalbek seems to have contiimed a ))lace of im- 
 jjortance down tj the time of tl.e Moslem invasion 
 of Syria. Tlie^' deiciibe it as one of the most 
 splendid of Syrian cities, eniiched with stately 
 palaces, adoined with mono metits of ancient times, 
 and abounding with Uca. f)unfains, and what- 
 ever contriiiutes to hixiuious aijoyiximl. On tl«? 
 advance of the Moslems, it was ie|:oiteti to tlie 
 emj)erur Ileraclius as jirotecfeil by a citadel of 
 great strength, and well able to sustain a siege. 
 After the ca.pture of Damascus it was regularlj
 
 BAAL-GAD. 
 
 BAAL-GUR. 
 
 26ft 
 
 i.i. vested Ly flie Moslems, and — confainiiiij; an over- 
 rtuwiiig ]K>-pnliifii)ii, ;itii])lv suiiplieil with ])iovi- 
 sions aiui niilitaiy stiller— -it made a couiaj^eous 
 ilelence, Imt ;it lfiiu;tli caiJitulated. Its iinpoitance 
 at tluit ])eriud is attested liy the ransom exacted 
 by the ooiuiueiois, consist iiiLf of 2000 ounces of 
 ^old, ItXIO oiin.'es of silver, 2000 silk vests, and 
 1000 swords, to;4;ctluM- witli the arms of the gar- 
 rison. It afterwards became the mart for the 
 ricli pillai^e of Syria : lait its ])ros|ievity soon re- 
 ceived a fatal blow from tiie khal if of Damascus, 
 by whom it was sacketl and dismantled, and tiie 
 principal inhabitants put to the sword (a.u. 71S). 
 Durinij; the Crusades, bein;^ incapable of mak- 
 ing any lesistance, it seems to have quietly sub- 
 milted to the strongest. In the year 1 .'00 it was 
 jjillagod by Timour Heg, in his jirogress to Da- 
 mascus, after he iiad taken Aleppo. Afterwards 
 it fell into the hands of the Metaweli— a bar- 
 (*arous predatory tribe, who weie neaily exteimi- 
 nated when Djezzar Pasha ]iermanently subjected 
 the whole district to Turkish supremacy. 
 
 The ruins of Heliopolis lie on an eastern bran( h 
 
 "*«rJ«f}WS?*?^^ 
 
 U' tie mountain, and are called, by way of emi- 
 nence, tiie Castle. Tlie most ];rominent objects 
 visible from the plain aie a lofty portico of six 
 I r.lunms, part of the great tem])le, and the walls 
 and columns of another smaller temple a little 
 iieluw, surinimded liy gieen trees. There is also 
 1 -lingulai- aiid uiii(iue circular tem])le, if it may 
 t so called, ol' wliicli we give a figure. These, 
 with a curious column on the highest jioint 
 witliin tlie walls (which m y possibly have been a 
 clepsydia, or watei-dial), form the only erect por- 
 tions of the ruins. .These ruins have been so often 
 a!id so minutely described by scores of travellers, 
 as v/ell as in many woiks of geneial reference, that, 
 «ince their identification as a Scriptural site is 
 imccrtain, a tew additi(4ial observations only may 
 gijfHce. Tiie ruins at Baalbek in tlie mass are 
 apparently of three successive eras: first, the gi- 
 gantic hewn .stoiRs, in tlie face of the ])lalfortn or 
 basement on which the temple stands, and which 
 appear to be remains of older buildings, iierhajis 
 of the more ancient temjile which occupied the site. 
 Among these are at le;isi twenty standing upon a 
 basement of rough s'ones, which would be called 
 enormous anywhere but here. These celebrated 
 
 blocks, which in fact form the great wonder of 
 tiie place, vary from 30 to 10 feel in length ; bat 
 there are tliiw, forming an upper course "M feet 
 from tlie ground, which togethei mr.i^ine 190 feet, 
 being seveially of the etioimous dimensions of 63 
 and Gi feet in length, iiy 12 in liieadlli and thick- 
 ness (Addison's Danwsrus ami I'tilnii/rii, ii. 55^. 
 'They aie," says Richter (// a^'/"^"'''") P- 281), 
 'the largest stoiies I have ever -ei-n, and might of 
 themselves have easily given lise to the popular 
 opinion that Baalliek was built by angels at the 
 command of Solomon. The wholi» wall, indeed, 
 is comjMised of immense stones, and its lesem 
 blance to the lemains of the Temple of Solomon, 
 which aie still shown in the foundations of the 
 mos(iue Es-Sakkaia on ]\Iount Moiiah, cannot fail 
 to be observed.' This was also ]iointed out by 
 Dr. Richardson. In the neighbouring quarries, 
 from which they vveie cut, one stone, hewn out 
 but not cairie I away, is of uuich larger dimen- 
 sions than any of those which have been men- 
 tioned. To the second and third eras lielong the 
 Roman temples, which, being of and about the 
 time of Antoninu* Pius, iiiesent some of the finest 
 specimens of Corinthian aichitecture in exislaice, 
 and ])Ossess a wonderful giandeur and majesty 
 from their lofty and imposing situation (AddisoU) 
 ii. 57). 
 
 Among the ornaments of these buildings Richter 
 finds confirmation of the following statetnent of 
 Macrobius — ' Isis and Horus often unequivocally 
 appear. The winged globes siurounded with ser- 
 pents show that the priests of Baalliek received their 
 ideas of divinity from On, the Heliopolis of Kgypt,' 
 Speaking generally of these remains, Burckhardl 
 says, 'The entire view of the luins of Palmyra, 
 when seen at a ceitain distance, is infinitely moie 
 striking than those of Baalbel;, Ijut t!i."ie is not 
 any oije s];ot in the ruins of Tailmor so imjiosing 
 as the interior view of the temple of Baalbek' 
 (Si/ria, ]). 13). He adils thai the arch.iiecfiue of 
 Baalbek is richer than that ofTadmor. Mr. Addi- 
 son lemaiks that ' the ruins, though so striking and 
 magnificent, are yet, however, quite second-rate 
 when i;ompared with the Athenian luins, ai.wi ois° 
 jjlay in their decoration none of the bold ciuioei)- 
 tions and the genius which characteiize the Athe- 
 nian architecture.' 
 
 Thejnesent Baalbek is a small village to tlie east 
 of llieruins,inasadstateof wretcliwlnessand decay. 
 It is little more than a heap of nilibish. the houses 
 being built of mnd and sun-diied inicks. The 
 pojiulation of 5000, which the ]ilace is said to have 
 contained in 17.51, is now reduced to barely 2000 
 persons; the two handsome mosques and tine serai 
 of the Emir, mentioned by Buickhardt, are no 
 longer distinguishable; and travellers may now 
 intjuire in vain for the grapes, the jioniegianates, 
 and the fruits which weie formerly so abinidant 
 (Iken. Disaert. de Baal-IIamuti ol Baal-Gud, in 
 Disscrtt. Philologicu-Tlicolog. tom. i. p. 136; 
 ^Vood and Dawkins, Ihiins of lUialliec, Lond. 
 1757 ; Pococke, Description oj t/ie East ; Maun- , 
 iheU, Jotmtei/ J'rom Alippo to Damascus ; tlie | 
 Travels of Volney, Burckhardt, Richardson, Hogg, 
 Addison, Lord Lindsay; Richter, H allfahrten 
 ein Murgeulande ; Schubeit, licise in das MoT' 
 (7«iZ«nrf, Erlangen, 1R41 ; see also RosenniiJller, 
 Biblical GcoqrapJnj, ii. ])p. 252-257). 
 
 BAAL-GUR, or Cou-Baai.. We read in 
 2 Cliron. xxvi. 7, tliat ' tJie Lord a.ssisled Ua-
 
 S66 BAALIIAMON. 
 
 ziah against the Pliilistiiies, aiul (D'''':i"lVn"7yi 
 ^ynnin •D^nti^rnj against tlie Aral.ians tliat 
 dwelt in (iui-B.ial." The Septuagint renders this 
 by Ka\ i-irl Tolis "Apa^as Tovs KOLTOiKOvvras enX 
 rijs rifVpas -' and the Aiahiaiis tiiat dwelt above 
 Pefra.' It wa.s doubtless some town of Aiabia- 
 Petia-a. 
 
 BAAMIAMON (pDH 7y2 ; Sept. BeeA- 
 ttAuic), a place where Sulomon is said to have 
 liad a vineyard (Cant. viii. 11). RosenmLiller 
 conceive* that if thii Baal-IIamon was the name 
 of a place that actually existed, it may be reason- 
 ably supposed identical with Baal-Gad or He- 
 lioiiolis; tor H imon may have lieen a corruption 
 of Amjn, the Helirew way of pronouncing the 
 Amnion of the Egyptians (see Nah. iii. S), whom 
 the Gieeks identi.'ied witli Jupiter {Bib. Geoff. 
 ii. p. 2-53). We are not inclined to lay much stress 
 on this conjecture. There wa.s a place called 
 Hamon. in the tribe of Asher (Joslr. xix. 28), 
 which K.vald thinks was the same as Baal- 
 Hamon. Tlie book of Judith (viii. 3) places a 
 Balamon (Ba.Kaix-J>i') or Belamon (B(\afj.u>v) in 
 central Palestine, which suggeJts another alter- 
 native. 
 
 BAAT^HAZOR (11^11 hv2 ; Sejit. BeXaadp), 
 the place where Absalom kept his llotks, and held 
 his sheep-shearing feast (2 Sam. xiii. 2'^). The 
 Targum makes it ' the plain of Hazor." It is 
 said to have been ' beside E[)hraim,' not in the 
 tribe of that name, but near the city called 
 Ephraim which was in the tribe of Judah, and 
 is mentioned in 2 Cliron. xiii. 19; John xi. 51. 
 Tills Ejihraim is jilated by Eusebius eight miles 
 from Jerusah'iTi on the road to Jericho ; and is 
 supposed by Reland to have been between Bethel 
 and Jericho {Falcestina, i. 377). 
 
 BAAL-HERMON (pDlil "py?). The Sep- 
 tuagint makes two names of this in 1 Chron. 
 V. 2;3, BaaA, 'Ep/icor ; and in Judg. iii. 3, where 
 the original has ' \I.)unt Baal-Hermon," it has 
 upous rov 'i'tpfxwv IMonnt Hennon. It seems to 
 have been a place in or near Monnt Ilermon, and 
 not far froin Biuil-gad, if it was not, as some 
 suppose, the same place. 
 
 BAAL-MEON (jiyp 7^3; Sept. BtiXixedu ; 
 Num. xxxii. 38; 1 Chron v. '5; otherwise Beth- 
 Meon, Jer. xlviii. 23, and Bktii-Baai.-Meon, 
 Josh. xiii. 17), a town in the iiilie of Reuben 
 beyond the Jordan, but which w;ls in the posse.ssion 
 of the Moabites in the time of Ezekiel (xxv. 9). 
 At the distance of two miles south-east of Hesh- 
 bon^ Burckiiarilt found the ruins of a place called 
 Myoim, or (as Dr. Robinson corrects it i Mdi'n, 
 which is doubtless the same, although Eusebius 
 makes the distance greater. 
 
 BAAL-PERAZIM (D"'i")? "py? ; Sept. Bad\ 
 4>apa(riv'). This name, meaning ' place of breaches,' 
 which David imposed upon a place in .or near 
 the valley of Rephaim, where he defeated the 
 Philistines (2 Sam. v. 20 ; comp. 1 Chron. X!7. 
 11; Isa. xxviii. 21), is imjjoitant as being the 
 only one with the prefix Baal of which we know 
 the circumstances under which it was imposed ; 
 and we are thus enabled to determine that the 
 word was sometimes at least used appellatively 
 wittiout any reference to the name of the idol 
 bcai or t'l his woiTjhip. 
 
 BABEL, TO.VER OF. 
 
 baal-siialisha {n^''h'c} bv^ bcu9» 
 
 piad, Cod. Alex. Baidffapiffdd, 2 Kings iv. 42), 
 a ])lace in the district of Shalisha (I Sam. ix. 4). 
 Eusebius and Jerome desciilie it as a city Hflcen 
 Roman miles north from Diospolis. near iVIotint 
 Ephraim. 
 
 B.AAL-TAMAR ("IDFl ^y? ; Sept. BaciA 
 Qafxdp), a place near Giljeah, in the tribe of Ben- 
 jamin, where the otlier tribes fought with tli« 
 Benjamites (Judg. xx. 33). Eusebius calls it 
 Bethainar, thus alVording an in.'sfance of that 
 interchange of Betk and Baal which is also 
 exempliKed in tlie preceding article and ii> 
 Baal-Meon. 
 
 BAAL-ZEPHON (llbV ^i?? ; Sq,t. BceA- 
 (r^v(poi>v), a town belonging to Egyjit, on the 
 border of the Red Sea (Exod. xiv. 2 ; Num. 
 xxxiii. 7). Forster ' Epi'f. iid J D. Michaelem, 
 p. 28) beliei es it to have lieen tlie same ])lace as 
 Heroopoli? f^'HpdianroKis) on the western gulf of 
 the Red Sea (PI in. Hist. Nat. v. 12; Strain), xvii. 
 ]i. 836 ; Ptolem. iv. 5), where Typhon (which 
 Forsier makes in Coptic AilHTiN ; but, contra 
 see Ro.5enmiiller, Alterthum. iii. 2(il) was wor- 
 shi]))ied. But according to Manetho (Jo.seph. 
 Contra Apion. i. 2(5), the name of Typhon's city 
 was Avails {hvapis). In fact, nothing is known 
 of the situation of Baal-zephon ; and whatevei 
 conjectures may be formed respecting it must be 
 connected with a coiisideration of the route taken 
 by the Israelites in leaving Egypt, for it was 
 ' over against Baal-iephon' that they were en- 
 camped before they passed the Red Sea [Exodus] 
 
 BABEL, TOWER OF. From the accouif 
 given in Genesis xi. 1-9, it appears that the pri 
 mitive fatlieis of mankind having, from the tin> 
 of the Deluge, wandered without fixed abode 
 settled at length in the land of Sliinar, where thej 
 took up a permanent lesideuce. As yet they had 
 remained together without expeiiencing tho.v 
 vicissitudes and changes in their outwaid Ij 
 which encourage the formation of ditVeieiit- msdc 
 of sjjeech, and weie, theiefoie, of one lan^u.gti 
 Arrived however in the land of Shinar^ ai>'l (i-iJ 
 ing mateiials suitable for the coiist-uction v 
 edifices, they jjroceeded to make and hu-n biicky 
 and using 'lie bitumen, in whi.h pails of th^ 
 country abound, tbi- cement, they built a city and 
 a tower of gieat elevation. A -livirie inteifeiinc.e. 
 however, is related to have ;ak-;n jjlicc. In con- 
 sequence, the lar!gu2.ge oi tiie Luilders was con- 
 founded, so that they weie nu longer able to 
 understand each other. They tlieiefoie ' left ofl 
 to build tl'.e city,' e.nd were scattered ' abroad 
 upon the face of all thdea-.th." The narrative auMs 
 that the place toot its iiame of Babel (confusion) 
 from this conf'-.sion of tongues. That the work 
 was subsequently resumed, and in [iiocess ot 
 time completed, is known on the best historical 
 vouchers. 
 
 Versions more or less substantially correct oi 
 this account are found among other nations. Th« 
 Chalda?ans themselves relate (Abydenus, quoteo 
 by Eusebius, Prepar. Evang. i. 14) that ' the 
 first men, lelying on their size and strength, r;:ise<l 
 a tower leaching towards heaven in the place 
 wheie Babylon afterwards stood, but that th« 
 winds assisting the gods Irought the building 
 down on the heads of the builders, out of tlic
 
 BABEL, T0WT:R OF. 
 
 mrM of wtiicli Baliylon itself was built. Before 
 tliis event, inci liail .sjK)keii ll)e same tongue, but 
 dfteiwards, by tlie act of tliegods, tliey were niailc 
 to (lilVer in tlieir speedi.' Plato also ie|ioit3 a 
 •railiiioii tiiat, in tiie goliien age, rnen and animals 
 tiiade use of one common language, liut too am- 
 bitiously aspiiin.;- to immortality, were, as a 
 punishment, confounded in their 3])eecli by jM])it(rr. 
 In the d«>tails of the story of the war of tiie Titans 
 againsr the Gods may also be traceii some tradi- 
 tionary lesemblance to the narrative of the liilile. 
 'The Sibyl," says Joseplius (A)itiq. i. -1) 'also 
 makes mention of this town, and of the confusion 
 of language, when she says thus :—" When all 
 men were of one language, some of them built a 
 high tower as if they would thereby ;iscend up to 
 Leaven, but the gods sent storms of wind, and (>v(m- 
 (jirew tlie 'ower; and gave every one his ])eculiar 
 langua^-e , and for this reason it was that ihe city 
 wa^ callal Babylon." ' 
 
 The s.ime writer assigns as the reason of this 
 overtlirow and confusion, the displeasure of God 
 at seeing them act so madly under the inliuence 
 of Ninnod, ' a bold bad man," who, in oriler to 
 alienate the minds of tlie people from God, and 
 to take revenge for the Deluge which had destroyed 
 their foiefathers, induced them to build a tower too 
 high for tlie waters to be able to reach. Aben 
 Ezra li.Ls given a more probable explanation. 
 ' Those," he says, ' wiio built the Tower of Babel 
 were not so insensate as to imagine they could by 
 any such means reach to heaven: nor diil tiiey 
 fear anotiiev Deluge, since they had the promise of 
 God to the contrary, but they wished for a city 
 which should be a common residence and a 
 general rendezvous, serving in the wide and open 
 
 i)lains of Babylonia to jirevent the traveller from 
 osing his way ; in order that whilst they took 
 measures for their own convenience and advan- 
 tage, they might also make tliemselves a name 
 with future ages.' 
 
 The sacied nanative (Gen. xi. 4) a.ssigns as the 
 re.Lson which prompted men to the undertaking, 
 sim])ly a desire to possess a i)nilding so large and 
 iiigli a-s might be a maik and rallying point in the 
 vast plains wiiere they had settleil, in order to pre- 
 vent their being scatteied abroad, and thus the ties 
 of kindled be rudely siindered, individuals be in- 
 volved ill jieril,and tiieir numliers be prematurely 
 thinned at a time when population was weak and 
 insufficient. The idea of preventing tin ir l>eing 
 sc.itteied abroad by building a lufty tower is 
 npjilicable in the most iemarkal)le manner to the 
 wule .'ind level plains of Babylonia, wheie scarcely 
 one object exists difVerent from another to guide 
 the traveller in hisjonrneying, and whicli. in tiiose 
 e^iiy days, as at present, were a sea of land, the 
 Compiiss being then iinknowi;. 
 
 Such an attempt agrees with the circumstances 
 in which the .sons of Noah were jilaced, and is in 
 itself (if a commendable natuie. But that some 
 ambitious and unworthy motives were blended 
 with tliese feelings is clearly irnjilied in the sacred 
 record, which, however, is e\Mde:;tly conceived and 
 set l"orth in a dramatic manner fver. 6, 7), and may 
 wear around an historical substance somewhat of 
 a poetical dress (Bauer. Mtjthol. i. 1T6). The 
 apostate .Julian has attempteil to turn the narrative 
 mto ridicule; but even if xiewed only a.s an attempt 
 to account fir the origin of diversity of languages, 
 and of the dispersion of tlie human faniil/, it 
 
 BABEL, TOWER OF. 
 
 2«n 
 
 challenges consideration and rc,-<i>ect. Tl e opinion 
 of Ileeren (Asiatic Natio7is, vid. ii. p. 1 1(5) is fai 
 dilleicnt and more correct : 'there is," says he, 'per- 
 haps iiowiicre else to be founil a narrative so ve- 
 neralile for its anti(jnily, or so impirtant ii. the 
 history of civilization, in which we have at once 
 pie.seived the traces of |)i ima-val international com- 
 merce, the first |>olitical associations, ami the lirst 
 erection of secure and ]iernjanent dwe)li)ig.s.' A 
 comparison of this narral°..ve with the absurd oi 
 visionary ]iictures which the Greeks and RomaiM 
 give of the primiti\e coniiition of mankind, will 
 gratify Ihe student of the Bible and conlirm the 
 faith of the (Ihristi.in, by showi;ig the marked 
 diU'erence there is iictween the iiistory contained 
 in (icnesis a:id the fictions of the poet, or the tra- 
 ditions of the mythologist. 
 
 After tlie lapse of so many centuries, and tha 
 occuri^nce in ' the land of Shiiiar" of so many 
 revolutions, it is not to l)€ exj)ected that the 
 identification of the Tower of Babel with any 
 actual ruin should Ije easy, or lead to any very 
 certain result. The majority of o])inioiis, how- 
 ever, among the learned, make it the same as the 
 temple of Belus described by Herodotus, width 
 is found in the dilapidated remains of the Bits 
 Nimrud. 
 
 Herodotus desciiljes the temjile in his own 
 simjile liut giaphic manner (i. ISl). 'In the 
 other division of the city is the temple of the 
 god Belus, with brazen gates, remaining till my 
 own time, (piadrannular, and in all of two 
 sttdia. In tlie middle of the sacreil enclosure 
 theie stands a solid tower of a stadium both 
 in depth and width; upon this tower another 
 tower is raised, ami another iij)on that, to the 
 iiui7iber of eignt towers. An ascent to them has 
 been made on Ihe outside, in a circle extending 
 round all the towers. When you reach aliout 
 halfway you li'id resting places. In the last 
 lower is a huge temple, and in tiie temjile lies a 
 large bed well furnished, and near it stands a 
 golden talile; but there is no im.ige within; nor 
 does any one remain there by niglit, only a native 
 female, one whom the gixl has chosen in prefer- 
 ence to all olliers, as say the Cliald<eans wtto 
 are priests of that god. And these ]>er.sons also 
 say, asserting what 1 do not believe, that the god 
 himself frequents the temple oud reiioseg on thi
 
 ie» 
 
 BABEL, TOWKR OF. 
 
 couch. Atid there beLm^'s to the ti-i.^le in 
 Babyluii aii.)ther sliriiie Lever down, wliAe tliere 
 stands a large g.)lilen iin.ijje nV the gud, ami 
 near it is I'lacetl a laige i,'(iuleii table, and ihe 
 pedestal and thnme are g<»hl, and, ;is the Clial- 
 (heaus say, the^e things weie tnaile for eight 
 hundred talents of gold. And out of the shiiiie 
 is a golden altar; ami theie is another great 
 altar wlieie slieei>-oflering-! are sacrificed, for it 
 is not permitted to sa<Tifice upon the g.ildeti altar, 
 except suckl'nrs only; lint upon the greater 
 altar the ChaKlcLMris ofler every year a thousand 
 talents' worth of frankincense at the time when 
 they celebrate the lestival of the god. And there 
 was at that time in the temple a statue of twelve 
 cubits of sol d gold : but 1 did not see it, and 
 relate merely what was told me by the Ch ihlaeans. 
 Darius Hystaspis wished t^ have this statue, but 
 did not dare to take it, but Xerxes his son tfiok it 
 ari<l sle.v the priest who forliade him to tuAve the 
 statue. Tiius is this sacred place adorned ; and 
 tliere are also in it mauy private oll'eiings.' Ttiese 
 ofterings, made by individuals, consisting of 
 statues, censers, cups, and sacred vessels of massy 
 gold, constituted a ])roperty of immense value. 
 On the top Semivamis (jlaced three golden statues 
 of Jupiter, Juno, and Rhea. Tlie first was 40 
 feet high, and weighed 1000 Babylonish bilents. 
 The statue of Rhea was of the same weight ; the 
 goddess was seated on a golden throne with lions 
 at each knee, and two serpents of silver. The 
 statue o( Juno was erect like that of Jupiter, 
 weighing 800 talents ; she grasped a serpent l)y 
 tlie head with her riglit hand, and held in her left 
 a sceptre enriched with gems. A table of beaten 
 gold was common to these three divinities, weigh- 
 ing 500 talents. On the table were two goblets 
 of 30 taUiits, and two censers of 500 talents each, 
 and three vases of prodigious magnitude. The 
 total value of the precious articles and treasures 
 contained in this proud achievement of idolatry 
 has been computed to exceed one hundred and 
 twenty millions sterling. 
 
 From fiie Holy Scrijitures it a])pears that when 
 Nebuchadnezzar con(|uered Jerusalem and le- 
 \'elled most of the city with the ground, ' he 
 brought away the treasures of the temple, and 
 tlie treasures of the kitig's house, and put them all 
 info the temple of Bel at Babylon.' The laazen 
 and otiier vessels which Solomon had caused (o 
 be made for tlie service of Jehovah are said to 
 have lieen broken up by order of the Assyrian 
 monarch, and formed into the famous gates of 
 brass which so long adorned the superb entrances 
 into the great area of the temple of Belus. 
 
 The purpose's to whicli this sjilendid edifice was 
 ap'propriated may lia\e been partly gathered from 
 the preceijMig srateiuents. These purposes varied 
 in Rome degree with the clianges in opinions and 
 manners which successive ages brought. The 
 signal disappointinent inllicted on its original 
 founders show, that even in its origin there was 
 co'.nected with it s..ir.cthing signally displeasing 
 t't God. It seems, indeed, always to have existed 
 in deiwgalion of the divine glory. Consecrated 
 at the first, as it probably was, to the immoderate 
 ambition of the monotheistic children of the 
 Deluge, it passed to the Sabian religion and thus 
 falling one degree from purity of worshi[), became 
 a temple of the sun and the rest of the host of 
 heaven, till, in the natural progress of corruption, 
 
 BABEL, TOWER G? 
 
 it sank into gross idolatry ; and, as the pa88a)f< 
 from Herodotus shows, was polluted liy tne vice« 
 which gener.iUy accompanied the observances o/ 
 hoalhen sujierstition. In one purpose it un- 
 (h)ubtedly proved of service to mankind. Tiie 
 Babylonians were given to the study of astronomy. 
 Tl;is ennobling pursuit was one (;f tlu ,,t,"culiar 
 functions of the learned men, denominated by 
 Herodotus, Chaldaeans, the priests of Btlus ; and 
 the temple was crowned by an astiononiical 
 observatory, from the elevation of which the start j 
 heavens couh! be most advantageously studied 
 over ])lains so ojien and wide, and in :in atmos- 
 phere so clear and Ijright, as those of liabylonia. 
 
 To Nimrod the first foundations of the tower 
 are ascribed : Semiramis enlarged and lieautilied 
 it, but it a])pears that the temple of Bel, in its 
 most renowned state, was not completed (ill the 
 lime of Nebuchadiiezzin", who, after the accoin 
 plishment of his many conquests, consecrated 
 this superb edifice to the idolatrous object to 
 whom he ascribed his victoiies. Tliat the oli- 
 servatory on the tower was erected in remote 
 times, there is good leason to believe. Prideaux 
 mentions the circumstance tliat when Alexandei 
 made himself master of Babylon, Calisthenes, 
 the philosopher, who attended him thither, found 
 astronomical observations ascending upwards 1900 
 years. 
 
 The appearance of the tower is deeply impres- 
 sive, rising suddenly as it does out of a wide 
 desert plain, with its rent, fragmentary, and fire- 
 blasted pile, masses of vitrified matter lying 
 around, and the whole hill itself on v/hich it 
 sta.nds caked and haidened out of the materials 
 with whicii the temple had been built. Its 
 drc'ary aspect seems to justify the n:ime which 
 the remn;uit of the cajitivity, still abiding 
 amongst the waters of Bat)yloTi, give to the place 
 namely, ' Nebuchadnezzar's Prison ' — an appella- 
 tion which may have been assigned from the ci - 
 cumstance(>f that monarch's being confined theie, 
 under the care of the ])riesthood, dining theperit>d 
 of his madness ; or from the king of Isiaels iiav- 
 iug been incarcerated within its precincts by 
 Nebuchadnezzar, after his last conquest of Je- 
 rusalem (2 Kings xxv.). A very considerable 
 sjiace round the tower, forming a vast court or 
 area, is covered witii ruins, afi'ording aluindant 
 vestiges of former buildings; exhibiting uneven 
 heaps of various sizes, covered with masses o' 
 broken brick, tiles, and vitrified fragments — all 
 liespeaking some signal ovei throw in former days. 
 The towerllke ruin on the summit is a solid mass 
 2S feet broad, constructed of the most beautiful 
 brick masonry. It is rent from tlie top nearly 
 halfway to the bottom. It is perforated in ranges 
 of square openings. At its base lie several im- 
 mense unshapen masses of fine brick work — some 
 changed to a state of the iiardest vitiification, 
 aflbrding evidence of the action of fire whici 
 seems to have been the lightning of heaven. 
 
 The base of the tower, at ])!esenf, measLires 20^2 
 feet in circumferenceo' Haidly half of its former 
 altitude remains. Of the original pyramidal form, 
 the erections of Semiramis and Nelmchadnez/ar 
 appear to have begun at the stage of the formei 
 overthrow. An elevation is subjoined according to 
 the de3cri]ition of the structure given by historians ; 
 the dotted line marks the height of the present re- 
 mains. From its summit, the view in Ihe distance
 
 BABYLON. 
 
 BABYLOJA 
 
 ^fcseiifs to the south an arid desert jilain ; to the 
 west the same trackless waste; towards the north- 
 la*' marks of buried ruins are visible to a vast 
 
 distance. The bricks which comjxjse tlie town are 
 mostly stamjied with several lines of inscnpticjn, 
 in tlic Ciiiu'ifoim or BabjOonian character. Some 
 extend to tour or even seven lines, but the dimen- 
 sions of all are tiie same. Tiie liricks of B.iljylon 
 are of two kinds, siuxbied and lire-bnrnt. The 
 former are lari^er and of a coarser make than the 
 latter; tiieir solidity is equal to that of theliardest 
 stone. They are com])ose(l of clay mixed with 
 (■iio])|)ed straw or broken reeds, in order to increase 
 their compactness. This is the sort of brick 
 wliicli tiie cliildren of Israe' iivide wliile in 
 Ei^yjilian bondage. The unliurnt bricks com- 
 monly form llje intejior or mass of a buildin;^. 
 Tiiis is the case with the great tower, wliile it 
 was faced with the more beautiful fabric made in 
 the furnace or kiln. — J. R. B. 
 
 BABYLON, from the Greek BaPu\wy; the 
 name in Hebrew is 755 Babel, from the confu- 
 sion of toiiLj'ues (Gen. xi. 1-9). Another deriva- 
 tion deduces the word from ?3 SW^i ' '^'''^ court 
 or city of Belus.' In Daniel iv. 27 the jilace is 
 appropriately termed 'Baliylon the Great;" and by 
 Josephusal.so(^ni/5. viii.6. 1),?; ue-yaATj BaPv\wv. 
 This famous city was tlie metropolis of the pro- 
 vince of Baljyloii and of tlie Babylonio-Chaldaean 
 empire. It was situated in a wide plain on the 
 Euphrates, which dividetl it into two nearly equal 
 parts. Accovdin;.^ to the book of Genesis, its 
 foundations weie laid at the same time witii tho.se 
 of the tower of Babel. In the revolutions of cen- 
 tuiies it umU'rweiit many chan^'es, and received 
 successive reparations and additions. Tlie an- 
 cients were not agreed as to tlie authors or times 
 of these, and any attempt to tletermine them now 
 with strict accuracy must be fruitless. Semi- 
 ramis and Nebtichadne/./.ar are thoe to whom the 
 city was iiich-lifed for its greatest auf^mentations 
 and its chief s]iltndour. Its site has Ijeen witli 
 much jiroliability. ascertained to be near Hillali, 
 al)"ut fori/ milts fiom Bagihid. 
 
 Accoiding to Herodotus, the walls of Babylon 
 were sixty miles in ciicumfeience, built of large 
 bricks ceniented toirether witli bitumen, ind raised 
 rotmd the city in the form of an exact sipiare ; 
 I'.cnce they measuied fifteen miles along each face. 
 They we're R7 feet tliick and 350 feet high 
 (Q"inti!S Cintius says four horse-chariots could 
 pass each other on thetr^without danger), jirottc.'ed 
 on the outside liy a vast ilitch lined with the same 
 material, and jirojxjitioned in depth arid width, to 
 tb? elevation of lie walls. The city v.as enteied 
 ty twenty-live gales on each side, mad*; of solrl 
 
 brass, ami addilii.iially strengthened hy 2.'>0 
 towers, so placed that l)etween every two giile* 
 were four lowers, and four additional ones at fiie 
 four corners. Fiom all the gates jiroceeded streets 
 running in straight lines, each street being fifteen 
 mile.< in len;rth, lifty in number, and crossing 
 each other at light angles. Other minor divisions 
 occurred, and the whole city contained 670 
 squares, <»ach two miles and a ((uarter in circiun- 
 ference. The river ran through the city frou' 
 noitli to south ; and on each side was a (juay (/ 
 the same thicknes.s as the walls of the <:ity, ami 
 100 stadia in length. In these (juay.s weie gates 
 of brass, and from each of them stejis desceniiing 
 into the river. A bridge w;ls tlinwii aeioss the 
 river, of gre;it l)eauty and adniiral>le contrivance, 
 a furlong in length and 30 feet in bieadth. As 
 the Kujilirates overllows during the summer 
 months, through the melting of the snows on the 
 mountains of Armenia, two canals were cut to 
 turn the ctiurse of the waters into the Tigiis, and 
 vast artificial embankments were rais«'d on each 
 side of tile river. On the western side of the city 
 an immense lake l"orty miles square was exca- 
 vated to the depth, according to Herodotus, of 3-) 
 feet, and into this lake the river was turned till 
 the work was completed. .'\t each end of the 
 bridge was a jwlace, and these had a sul)terrane- 
 ous communication. 
 
 The account given hy Quintus Curtius (v. 
 1) of the intrajice of Alexaii'ler into liabylon 
 may ser>e to enliven the narrative, and at the 
 same time make the imjiression on the reailer's 
 mind more distinct. 'A great part of the iidia- 
 bitants of Babylon stotxi on the walls, eager to 
 catch a sight of their new monarch; many went 
 fortii to meet him. Among these Bago])hanes. 
 keeper of the citadel and of the royal tieasiue. 
 stiewe<i the entire way before the king with llowers 
 and crowns ; silver altars were als») jilaced on 
 both sides of the road, which were loaded not 
 merely with frankincense, but all kinds of odori- 
 ferous herbs. He brought with him for Alexan- 
 der gifts of various kinds— tlorks of sheep and 
 horses; lions also and jianthers were cariird lie- 
 fore him in their deiis. The Magi came next, 
 singing in their usual manner their ancient 
 hymns. After them came the Chahla-ans, with 
 their musical instruments, who are not only the 
 ]iroj)hets of the Babylonians, but their artists. The 
 (irst are wont to sing the praises of the kings; the 
 Chaldanms teaeli the motions of the flars and the 
 ))eriodic vicissitudes of the tines and seasons. 
 Tlien followed last of all the Babylonian knigl.fs, 
 whose equipment, as well as that of their horses, 
 seemed liesigned more for luxury than magnifi- 
 cence. The king, Alexander, attended by a)niid 
 men, ha\ ing oiiiered tlie crowd of the townspeople 
 to proceed in the rear of his inJ'antry, enl>ied the 
 city in a chariot and repaiied to the jialace. The 
 next day he carefully surveyetl the )iou.seliolil 
 treasure of Darius, and all his money. For il* 
 rest, the beauty of the city anil ii.> age turned the 
 eyes not only of the king, but of e\eiy one, on 
 itself, anil that with good leasi n.' \\ ilhina biief 
 ])eriod after thi.s, Alexander iay a cor] se in the 
 »)ah\<!e. 
 
 The greatest ciiciimferenee ascribe.! by the 
 aticients to the city walls is 4M) stadiiii, the 
 mo't moderate otiO. The .smallest comp-itnti)* 
 s'lpjwses an area for the city f f whicl- wf on
 
 ^n 
 
 BABYLON. 
 
 BOW scarcely form an idea. Its population liow- 
 ever ncay not iiave been in proportion fo its extent. 
 The fJace was [jiolialily what in these days 
 would be considered an enclosed district rather 
 tlian a coinpu^t city. Qiiiritus Cuitius reports that 
 the buildings were not contiiiiious, and th.it within 
 the |)recincts of the city was arable and pasture 
 land sufficient to produce food for tiie population, 
 as a resou»ce against a sie^e. 
 
 One or two additional factjs may aid in convey- 
 ing a full idea of tiiis great and mai^niHcent city. 
 When Cyrus totik Babylon by turning (lie Eu- 
 phrates into a neigiibouring lake, the dwellers in 
 the middle of the place were not for some time 
 aware that their fellow-townsmen who were near 
 the walls had been captured. Tliis, says Herodotus 
 (i. 191), was owing to the magnitude of the city, 
 and to the circumstance that at the time the inha- 
 bitants were engaged in caronSals, it being a festive 
 uccasion. Nor, according to Xenoplion, did the 
 citizens of the opp(tsite quarter learn the event till 
 three hours after sunrise — the city having been 
 taken in the niiiht. Alexander had to employ 
 10,000 men during two months, to remove the ac- 
 cumulated ruins pre ipitated by order of Xerxes 
 nearly 200 years before. From the t'allen towers 
 of Babylon have arisen not only all tlie present 
 cities in its vicinity, but others which, like itself, 
 iiave long since gone down into the dust. Since the 
 days of Alexander four capitals, at least, have 
 been built out of its remains — Seleucia by the 
 Greeks, Ctesiphon by the Partliians, Al Maidan 
 by the Persians, and Kufa by the Caliphs; with 
 towns, villages, and caravansaries winliout num- 
 ber. The necessary fragments and materials were 
 transported along the rivers and the canals. 
 
 The antiquity of the canals of Babylonia dates 
 from the most remote periods of tlie Chaldaeo- 
 Babylonian monarchy. The ancient kings of 
 Assyria and Babylonia well understood the value 
 of canals, and tlieir empire arose upon alluvial 
 plains, amid a system of irrigation and draining 
 which spread like a net-work over the land. It 
 may lie sullicient to specify the Nahr Malikah, or 
 R<iyal Canal, the origin of which has been referred 
 both to Nimrod and Cush. Abydenus, however, 
 attributes it to Nebuchadnezzar. From the ac- 
 count of Herodotus it appears to have been of 
 sullicient breadth and depth to be navigable for 
 merchant vessels. It is not, tlierefore, surprising 
 that some writers have considered it as the ancient 
 bed of the Eupiirates. 
 
 The soil around Babylon is of a light yielding 
 nature, easily wrought lor canals and other pur- 
 poses, whetiier of art or war. Cyrus, tliereibre, 
 would Had no great difliculty in digging a trench 
 about tne city sullicient to contain the waters 
 of the river {Cyrop. vii.). Alexander (Strabo, 
 tri. p. 510), in enlarging one of the canals 
 and forming basins for his fleet, laid open the 
 graves of many buried kings and princes — which 
 ehows Imjw readily the soil yields and gives way 
 before the labours of man. 
 
 Tlte new jxilace biult by Nebuchadnezzar was 
 prodigious in size and sujjerb in embellishments. 
 Its outer wall embraced six miles ; within that 
 circumference weie two other emijattled walls, 
 besides a great tower. Three brazen gates led 
 into the grand area, and every gate of consequence 
 throughout the city was of brass. In accordance 
 with tliis tact are the terms which Isaiah (xlv. 1, 2) 
 
 BABYLON. 
 
 employs when, in the name of Jehovah, he jFO 
 mises Cyrus that the city should fall before hiiUj 
 'I will 0])en iiefore him the two-leaved gates : J 
 will break in [jicccs the gates of brass' — a pix> 
 jihecy which was fuitilled to the letter when Cyrut 
 made himself master of the place in the dead of 
 the night. Having first liy means of its canals 
 turned the river into the great dry lake west o\ 
 Babylon, and then marched through *he emptied 
 channel, he made his way to the outer walls of the 
 fortided palace on its banks; wl)en finding the 
 brazen gates incautiously left open by the royal 
 guards while engaged in carousals, he entered u ith 
 all his train ; 'tlie Lord of Hosts was his leader,' 
 and Babylon, as an empire, was no more. 
 
 The [lalace was splendidly decorated with sta- 
 tues of men and animals, with vessels of gold and 
 silver, and furnislied with luxuries of all kinds 
 brought thither from conquests in Egypt, Palestine, 
 and Tyre. Its greatest boast were the iianging 
 gardens, which acquired even from Grecian 
 writers the appellation of one of the wonders of 
 the world. They are aftiibuted to the gallantry 
 of Nebuchadnezzar, who constructed them in com- 
 pliance with a wish of his queen Amytis to possess 
 elevated groves such as she had enjoyed on the liills 
 around her native Ecbatana. Babylon was all 
 flat; and to accomplish so extravagant a desire an 
 artificial mountain was reared, 400 feet on each 
 side, while terraces one above another rose to a 
 height that overfojiped the walls of the city, that 
 is, above 300 feet in elevation. The ascent from 
 terrace to terrace was made by corresponding flights 
 of steps, while the terraces themselves were reared 
 to their various stages on ranges of regular piers, 
 which, forming a kind of vaulting, rose in succes- 
 sion one over the other to the required height of 
 each terrace, the whole being bound together by a 
 wall of 22 feet in thickness. The level of each 
 terrace or garden was then formed in the following 
 manner ; the top of the piers was first laid over with 
 flat stones, 16 feet in length and 4 feet in width ; 
 on these stones were spread beds of matting, then 
 a tiiick layer of bitumen ; after which came two 
 courses of bricks, which were covered with sheet) 
 of solid lead. The earth was heaped on this plat- 
 form ; and in order to admit the roots of larga 
 trees, piwligious hollow ])iers were built and filled 
 with mould. From the Euphrates, which flowed 
 close to the foundation, water was drawn up by 
 machinery. The whole, says Q. Cuitius (v. 5.}, 
 had, to those who saw it from a distance, the 
 appearance of woods o\'erhanging mountains. 
 Such was the completion of Nebuchadnezzar's 
 work, when he found himself at rest in his house, 
 and flourished in his palace. The king spoke and 
 said, ' Is not this great Babylon tliat 1 have built 
 for the house of the kingdom by the miglit of my 
 power, and the honour of my majesty' (Dan. iv.), 
 a picture which is amply justified by the de- 
 scriptions of heathen writers. Nowhere con.ld the 
 king have taken so comjirehensive a view of the 
 city he had so magtnficently constructed and 
 adorned as when walking on the highest terrace o( 
 the gardens of his palace. 
 
 Tl>e remains of this palace are found in the 
 vast mound or hill callec^by the natives Kasr 
 It is of irregular form, SOO yards in length an'i 
 600 yards in breadth. Its appearance is con« 
 stantly undergoing change from the continual 
 digging which takes place in its inexhaustibly
 
 BAKYLON. 
 
 inarrifs for Jirick of ttie strongest ami finest ina- 
 W u\\. Hence the mass is fun owed into deep 
 
 BABYLON. 
 
 271 
 
 ruvines, crossing and recrossing each other in 
 every direction. Every vestige, however, disco- 
 vered in it de( lures it to have been composed of 
 build-n^^s far su])erior to all the re,st in the Eastern 
 qiiaiter. In this mass Rich found a lion of 
 colossal ilimensions, standing on a peilestal of a 
 C'Kiise kind of j,'rcy gianite and of rude workman- 
 ship; in the month was a ciicular a[ierlure, into 
 which a man might introduce his fist. Hollows 
 
 Ck Bed by excavation occur in the mound, in 
 w. jh persons have lost their lives. Considerable 
 fra^Tnents of wall are still standing; and also de- 
 tacLsd masses, composed of furnace-liurnt Lricks of 
 abcuty and freshness truly admirable. The bricks 
 used in the construction of the j)alace arnwar to 
 have iieen exclusively of tlie burnt kind. Tlie face 
 ol every brick is invariably j)laced downwards. 
 On the north side of the Kasr, amongst the moul- 
 dering fragments, and elevated on a sort of ridge, 
 stands the famous solitary tree, called by the Arabs 
 Athelch; it bears ev( ry mark of antiquity in ap- 
 pearance, situation, and tradition. Its tiimk was 
 originally enormous ; but, worn away liy tlie lapse 
 of ages, it is now but a ruin amid ruins : never 
 tlieless it bears sjireading and ever-green branches, 
 wliich are peculiarly beautiful, being adorned 
 with long tress-like tendrils resembling heron 
 feathers, growing from a central stem. These 
 slender and delicate sprays bending towards the 
 ground give the wiiole the a])pearance of a weep 
 ing willow, while then" gentle waving in the wind 
 whenever a breeze blows, produces a low and melan- 
 Siioly sound. This tiee is revered by the Arabs as 
 ldIj fio'n atradition currentamong them, that tlie 
 
 Almighty himself preserved it licre from theearlietl 
 time, to form a refuge for the Calipii Ali, wlic 
 fainting with fatigue fiom tiie battle of Hillah. 
 found .secuie re]K).-ie umier its siiade. 
 
 In digging in the cxtciwive mounds w!jich 
 constitute the ruins of Habyhin, an endless sue 
 cession of curious object^s is foinid from time to 
 time. One or two may be f.j)eci(i<d : — a lar^ 
 cylinder of baked clay, covered witJi a cuneiibrn* 
 
 inscription ; an agate seal finely cut, representing 
 a i)riest surrounded by various symbols of t!i« 
 Sabian worship; a small dog in bronze, witii a 
 collar of ])ure gold round his neck, about three 
 Indies in height. Small figures, botli in bronze 
 and clay, are frequently picked up all over the 
 ruins of Babylon. One of a larger kind is a 
 fragment seen lying midway between Hillaii and 
 the site o( Seleucia, consisting of the lower lialf 
 of the statue of a man in a sitting jK)3ture; the 
 legs are naked, and closed togetiier in the 
 Egyptian style ; the hands rest on the tliighs. 
 It is cut in a bluish basalt. Tiiat so few cimi- 
 paratively of these relics are now visil)!e is not 
 surprising, since, as Babylon had jilnndered 
 Egypt, Assyria, and JudiEa of their statues, tiuir 
 gold and silver, and even the arciiitectiual orna- 
 ments of their palaces, so in its turn tliis rich 
 treasury of the antiquities of all nations l)ecame 
 the prey of successive conquerors; ind plunderers 
 completed the work of siKilvitio'a. One or twt 
 
 drawings are here given of relics discovered on 
 this site. The first represents a cyliriiler j.re- 
 senting a very remarkable grou]) of persoiiagt-s, 
 and an inscrijrfion in cuneiform characters of a 
 jjeculiar kind. The figures are connected with 
 the rites of tlie lunar deity, who was worshipj«d 
 by the Persians and tiie Chaldieans under th*
 
 272 
 
 BABYLON. 
 
 BABYLON. 
 
 names of Mylitta and Ahytta, or Araites and 
 Aranus. According to MaitrioriichN, this Baliy- 
 lunish deity liad iiuineimis hands of young 
 women devoted to her service; and heie is seen a 
 priestess introducing a viij^in to her tem])le to 
 receive the Ijenediction of the priests. These 
 dedicated ti!tTiales, Herodotus says, sat once in 
 tiieir lives in the shr no of V'eiius, tlieir heads 
 Oound witii <rarliinds and their ho;lies with cords. 
 Thus exi (ised, if any stianijer ihiew goid into her 
 lap, siie was ol»li.;e.l to retiie with him into the 
 temple, when her (.harms hetame the victim of 
 its impuie lites. Tfie money w;is then laid on 
 the altar to he c«nsecrated to die goddess. These 
 outrages seem to he referred to hy Moses in tlie 
 law, wiieri he says, 'Thou shalt not hring the liire 
 of a harlot into the h.uise of the Lord thy God.' 
 Tlie second cut is from a cylinder of white agate. 
 Tlie engr:iving is of g<i(:d woikmanship. The 
 hieroglypliies are the sun, moon, five planets, and 
 the archaspand, or stv.en halls, indicative of ibe 
 seven celestial joweis or intt-lligences, always 
 attendant on the (Jhaldaean and Persian great 
 deity. The figure honeath the sun holds a wreath 
 
 ^i:^ r"" 
 
 ^^^ 
 
 foimed of glohular shajies in his left hand. On 
 his hack ap[)ear to he a how and quiver; balls 
 surmount tiiese weapons. Befoie him springs an 
 ohject sprayed like a flower, and he is preceded, 
 in advancing towards a superior kind of being, 
 by a l»areheiided figure, whose hands are held up 
 as if in the act of addiessing that being which 
 fronts him standing ujx)n the unicorn ball. An 
 etherial [leisonage is seen over the head of the 
 uncovere?l and unadorned figure. Tlie august 
 bearded figure, which the last addresses, hears the 
 symbols of divinity among the Chaldaeans, such 
 as sceptres, axes, and other weajwns. The floating 
 figure in the rays clearly yioiiits out a close 
 affinity between the i-eligious system of the Chal- 
 daeans and the ancient Persians ; showing that 
 they used the same symt)olical representations, an<I 
 also prefigured the same gods and tneir attributes 
 in the siui and moon ; and hence it appears pro- 
 bable tha^t tlie alleged difference Ijetween the two 
 religions cl;ie(iy lay in the one worsliipping the 
 im.aged symbols as gods, while the other restricted 
 itself to adoiing the heavenly host in themselves 
 alone. Tiie two engravings which follow are 
 introduced less with reference to tlieir subjects 
 than fur the sake of the illustrations of Baby- 
 lojiian costume which tliey alTord. The figures 
 have been selected from the engravetl cylinders 
 and gems, and probal>ly convey as much in- 
 iormation on tliis subject as can now be ob- 
 
 Babylon, as the centre of a g^reat kingdom, 
 was the seat of boundless luxury, and its in- 
 habitants were notorious for their addiction to 
 self-indu'igence and effeminacy. Q. Curtius 
 (v. 1) asserts that, ' nothing "could be mar'i 
 corrupt than its morals, nothing more fitted 
 to excite and allure to immoderate pleasures. 
 The rites of hospitality were polluted liy the 
 grossest and most shameless lusts. Money dis- 
 solved every tie, whether of kindred, respect, or 
 esteem. The Babylonians were very greatly 
 given to wine, and the enjoyments which accom- 
 pany inei)riety. Women were present at their 
 convivialities, first with some degree of projiriety, 
 but, growing worse and worse by degrees, tliey 
 ended by throwing ofl' at once their modesty an'.' 
 tlieir clothing.' On the ground of their aw fu! 
 wickedness the Babylonians were threatened wi 
 condign punishment, through the mouths of 
 propliets ; and the tyranny with which the rulen 
 of the city exercised their sway was not without a 
 decided effect in bringing on them the territiv: 
 consequences of the Divine vengeance. Nor ii 
 the wiiole range of literature is there anything to 
 be found approaching to the sublimity, force, and 
 terror with which Isaiah and otliers speak on this 
 pvinful subject (Is. xiv. 11 ; xlvii. 1 ; Jer. li. S&; 
 Dan. v. I). 
 
 Under Nabonnidus, the last king, B.C. 53S or 
 5.39, Babylon was taken by Cyrus, after a s'ege 
 of two yeais. An insurrection, under Darius 
 Hystaspis (b c. 500), the oliject of which was to 
 gain emancipation from Persian bondage, led 
 that prince to punish the Baltj'lonians by tlirow- 
 ing down the walls and gates which had been left 
 by Cyrus, and by expelling them from their 
 homes. Xerxes plundered and destroyed the 
 temple of Belus, which Alexander the Gieaf 
 would ]irobahly, but for his death, have lestoreti. 
 Under Seleucus Nicator the city l«gan to sink 
 sjieedily, alter that monarch built Seleucia on tii* 
 Tigris, and made it his jilace of abode. In t\tt 
 time of Strabo and Diodorus Siculus the plac«
 
 BABYLON. 
 
 BABYLON. 
 
 tli 
 
 cay in ruins. Jerome, in the fourth ceiifury of 
 t'ue Christian era, learnt that tiie site of Bahyloii 
 '.ia.ll hieeti converte.l into a ])arl; or iiuiitini,'-/i'i'i'n<i 
 L>r the recreation ut" the Piis'an iiionaiciis, and 
 tJ^at, in order to I'uaerve the g.inie, the walls ha>i 
 liecn from time t.i time repaired. If the fdilowin^ 
 extiact iVom Rich (p. 30) is cuinjMire 1 with tlie.^e 
 historical facts, the prophecy of l^aiah (xiii. 19j 
 will appear to liave iieoii strikin^^ly I'lilfilleil to tlie 
 letter: ' I had always ima.,niied tlie helief of the 
 existence of satyrs was cjiiliiied to the mythology 
 of the W^est ; but a choadar who was with me 
 when I examined this ruin (the Mujahlibali) 
 mentioned tiiat in this desert an animal is found 
 resembling a man from the head to the waist, but 
 having the thitrlis and ]e;.'s of a s'leeji or gnat : lie 
 also said that the Arabs hunt it witli dugs, and 
 Rat the lower parU, abstaining from the upper, on 
 
 account of their resemblance to tiione of the liu- 
 man specie,.' 
 
 More tliorou.{h destruction than tliat wliich Ku 
 oveitakeii Bahylon cannot well lie coiiceivev!. 
 Ricii waji unalile to disi-oycr any iracis nf iti 
 vast walls, ami eion its site has lioen a sidijoct of 
 dispute. 'On its ruins," says lie, • iheie is not 
 a single tree growiii(<, e.vcept the old one," wliich 
 only serves to make tiie de.solaiiuti more ap|iar«ni». 
 Rums like tliose of UabyKiii. ci.mp.-sed of lub 
 bish iinpie^Miati'd willi nitre, cannot In- cultivated. 
 The ruins of Babyl.m and its vicinity consist in 
 general of mounds of eaith foimecf liy tlie tlecom- 
 ])osition of buililiiiijs, charmeileil and furrowed 
 liy tlie weather,aiid having tlie suif ice strewed with 
 ])ieces of brick, bitumen, and potterv. In addi- 
 tion to the Biis Niinrod and 'he Kirsr. already 
 described, mention may be made ol' the Mujahli- 
 
 [Site of Babylon.J 
 
 j4.h, which lies to the north of the Kasr, five 
 miles from Hillah, and 950 yards from the river 
 bank. Its shape is oidong and its height irre- 
 gular. The sides face tlie cardinal points : ttie 
 northern is 200, the southern 21!t, tiie eastern 1S2, 
 and the western 1^6 yards in length; and tiie 
 elevation of the south-east or highest angle is 141 
 feet. The western face is the most inteicsting, 
 on account of the appearance of building which it 
 presents. Near the summit is a low u all. comjiosed 
 of nnbnrnt biicks, mixed u[) with clioppetl stiaw 
 or reeds, and cemented with c^ay moitai of jjfieat 
 thickness, liaving betwt-eii eveiy layer of bricks a 
 layer of leeds ; and en the north side are also .some 
 vestiges of a similar coristiuctiori. The .south-west 
 angle is crowned liy something like a turret or 
 lantern. All the sides are w in into fiiriow.s, 
 wliidi in some instances are ol'gicat depth. The 
 sunrimit is covered with lie.in-i of rul.tiisli. in whidi 
 'avers of broken burnt bricks cetrented with mi r- 
 tar have been found, and also entire biicks with 
 iTisc.riptiiins. Scattered over the wlio'e aic (iag- 
 nients of potteiy, biick, bitumen, pebble.s, vitrified 
 brick or scoria, and nen shells, bits of glass, and 
 motber-of-pet. I the noithfrn <'ac* near *he 
 
 top, is a niche or recess, high enough for ainau 
 to stand upright in, at the back of which is a lo* 
 aperture, leading to a small cavity, whence a 
 jjassage brandies otf to tlie right, slojiing upwards 
 m a westerly direction, till it loses itself in tlie 
 rubbish. Mr. Rich was informed tliat a human 
 body had been found here, swathed in a tiglit 
 wrapper, partially covered with bitumen, and in- 
 closed in a colV.n of mulberry-wnod. Being in- 
 duced to dig here, he came to a shaft, oi liullow 
 pier, 60 feet square, lined w^th fine Inick laid 'n 
 bitumen, and filled up with earth, in which were 
 found a brass sjiike, some e;irfhen ve,sseis, and n 
 beam of date-tiee wood. This hollow pier cor- 
 respomls with Stuibo's desc ptii n (] , 73S_, of the 
 hollow brick piers \y\i\f\\ suijmiied liie hanginj?- 
 gardeng, and in which tlie hi.-ge tires giew. Ri'di 
 also discovered, in a continuatit.n of the piissage 
 to the ea-stward. a wooden cofKii containiiig a 
 skeleton in good pre-er\a(ion. Unuei the head 
 of the cofifin w is a round pebble; alt.iched to the 
 cnllin, (II the outside, wa^ a inass bird, and insid* 
 an ornament of the same miiterial. wh'ch had 
 apparently been susjH'in'.ed to s me part of tl'^ 
 skeleton. A little farther on the .skeleton of a child
 
 374 
 
 BABYLONIA, 
 
 BABYLJNIA. 
 
 was found, and Rich was of opinicn that the 
 whole passage was occupied in a similar manner. 
 it may tlierefoie lie conjectured that the Mujahli- 
 cah w.as a great hrick pyramid for the dead. It 
 mav a' so have heeii u^ed for an observatory. 
 
 Neitiier the ancient nor tlie modern authorities 
 are in exact af^reement resj ectiiig particular jjlaces 
 and localities, and any attempt to fix them now 
 can he nothing more than an approach to the 
 reality. Instead, therefore, of repeating uncer- 
 tainties, or adding conjectures to conjectures, we 
 judge it better to refer the reader to the works 
 enui.nerated at the foot of the ensuing article. 
 
 In the projihetic writings of the Apocalypse 
 (xiv. S ; xvi. 19 ; xvii. 5 ; xviii. 2) Babylon stands 
 for Rome, symbolizing Heathenism : — ' Babylon 
 is fallen, that great city, liecause she made all 
 nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her 
 fornication.' This reference appears to have been 
 derived from the practice of the Jews, wlio were 
 a<;customed to designate Rome, which they liated, 
 by the opprobrious and not inapjiropriate name 
 of Babylon (Schijttgen, Hor. Hebr. i. p. 1125).— 
 
 J. R. B. 
 
 B.-VBYLONIA (so called from the name of its 
 chief city, termed also Chaldsea, from those who 
 a* a later period inhabited it), a province of 
 Middle Asia, bordered on the nordi by Mesopo- 
 tamia, on the east by the Tigris, on the south by 
 tlie Persian Gulf, and on the west by the Arabian 
 Des^'rt. On tlie north it begins at the point where 
 the Euphrates and Tigris approach each other, 
 and extends to their common outlet in the Per- 
 sian Gulf, pretty nearly comprising the country 
 nosv designated Irak Arabi. The two words, Ba- 
 bylonia and Chaldsea, were nowever sometimes 
 used in another signification : Babylonia, as con- 
 taining in an extended sense Assyria also and 
 Mesopotamia, nearly all the countries which 
 Assyria in its widest meaning embraced ; while 
 Chaldsea indicated, in a narrower signification, 
 the south-western jiart of Babylonia '>etween the 
 Euphrates and Babylon (Strabo, xvi. ; Ptol.). 
 In Hebrew, Babylonia bore the name of lyjC', 
 Shinar, ov ' the land of Shinar ;" while ' Babylon ' 
 (Ps. cxxxvii 1) and ' the land of the Chaldaans ' 
 (Jer. xxiv. 5 ; Ezek. xii. 13) seem to signify the 
 eiTijiire of Babylon. The climate is temperate 
 and salubrious. The country in ancient times 
 was very prolific, especially in com and palms. 
 Timber-trees it did not produce. Many parts 
 had springs of naphtha. As rain is infrequent, 
 even in the winter months, the country owes its 
 fruitfulness to the annual overflow of the Eu- 
 phrates and the Tigris, whose waters are conveyed 
 over the land by means of canals. Quintus Cur- 
 tius (i. 5) declares that the country between the 
 Euphrates and the Tigris was covered with so 
 rich a soil, that the cattle were driven from their 
 pastures lest they should be destroyed by satiety 
 and t'a'ness. 
 
 The alluvial plains of Babylonia, Chaldfra, 
 and Susiana, including all the river, lake, and 
 newer marine de]iosits at the head of the Persian 
 Gulf, occupy an extent of about 32,400 square 
 geographic miles. The rivers are the Eiijihiates and 
 its tributaries, tlie Tigris and its tributaries, the 
 Kerali, tlie Karun and its tributaries, the Jeiahi, 
 wid tl.eldiyaij; constituting, altogether, a vast hy- 
 drograjihical basin of l'^9,■200 geographic square 
 oailes i containing, within i'self, a central de- 
 
 })osit of 32,400 miles of alluvium, almost entirely 
 brought down by the waters of the various rivers, 
 and which have been accumulating from periods 
 long antecedent to all historical lecords. All 
 these rivers present the peculiarity of flowing, fot 
 a great part of their course, througli sujira-creta 
 ce )us formations of a very triable nature, easily 
 disintegrated by the action of the elements, and 
 still more so by that of rurniiiig waters when 
 swollen by floods, and carrying down pebbles. 
 Near Bushiyah, about ten miles lieyond tlie south- 
 east quarter of ancient Babylon, on a level 
 plain, are found a number of san<l-liills, which are 
 constantly shifting their place and number, and 
 yet always occupy the same gei;eral locality. 
 They appear to owe their existence to the jiresence 
 of springs, which moisten the sand and cause its 
 accumulation, at the same time allowing the pr^ 
 valent winds to alter the form and number of the 
 hills, while their bases have a fixed point of at- 
 traction. They are objects of superstition to tli« 
 Arabs, who often Uiok upon them as the sepulchral 
 pall of biethien who have fallen in battle. Tiie ef 
 florescences of nitrate of ]iotassium and of chloride 
 or hydro-clilorate of sodium are common on these 
 plains; the one is most probably derived from tlie 
 decomjiosition of vegetable matters, and, conse- 
 quently, characteristic of alluvium of river or 
 marsliy origin •, the other is indicative of tleposi- 
 tions from seas or bays. The modem accumula- 
 tions of soil in Babylonia from annual inundations 
 is still very great. Several canals, such as the 
 Isa, the Nalir Zimberani-Yah, the Muhawil, &c., 
 convey water at certain seasons of the year from 
 one river and part of the country to another. In 
 general, the alluvium that is brought down by 
 canals and rivulets, and deposited at their mouths, 
 is a fine clay. The great extent of the plain ot 
 Babylonia is everywhere altered by artificial 
 works; mounds rise upon the otherwise uniform 
 level, walls and mud ramparts and dykes inter- 
 sect each other, elevated masses and friable .soil ot 
 pottery aie succeeded Ijy low plains inundated 
 during great part of the year, and the antique 
 beds of canals are visible in every diiection. 
 There is still some cultivation and some irriga- 
 tion. Flocks pasture in meadows of coarse grasses ; 
 the Arabs" dusky encampments are met with heie 
 and there; but, except on the banks of the Eu- 
 phrates, there are few remains of the date-groves, 
 the vineyards, and the gardens which adorned the 
 same land in the days of Artaxerxes ; and still 
 less of the population and labour which must 
 have made a garden of such soil in the time oi 
 Nebuchadnezzar. The vegetation of these tracts 
 is characterized by the usual saline plants, the 
 river banks being fringed by shrubberies of tama- 
 risk and acacia, and occasional groves of a 
 poplar which has been mistaken for a willow , 
 the weeping willow fSalix Baliylonica) is not 
 met with in Babylonia. The solitary tree, ' of a 
 species altogether strange to this country' (Heeren, 
 Asiatic Nations, vol. ii. ]i. 15S), which Rien 
 calls lignum-vitae, and which has been su])poswI 
 to be a last remnant or ofi'sjiring of the sloping or 
 hanging gardens that appeared to Quintus Cur- 
 tius like a foiest, is in reality a tamarisk. No 
 monuments in Babylonia and Chaldsea apjx'a 
 to be more decisive of the antiquity and Assy 
 rian oiigiti of sites than the lofty artificial mounu 
 of which the present degenerate hordes of the teu
 
 BABYLONIA. 
 
 BABYLONI.i 
 
 111 
 
 Mill tlie S{)e;ii- iiaiiate so nuuiy fahulmis tales, 
 out wliicli almost everywhere jireient thonisclves 
 where there are also ot.ier stroiitr groiiiuls ot" pre- 
 suitiptioii of an Assyrian or ChaKlaBo-Haliylotiian 
 origin. Thus at Irkah, at Wasit, at Tciciloii, at 
 fhe Birs Nlninid, the Mujalilihah, El Ileiniar, 
 &c., these colossal piles are found domineering 
 over the dieary waste, to the uniformity of which 
 tiiey oU'er a striking contrast, being visilile at 
 great distances ; and, although thrown hy tiie 
 mirage into strange and contorted shajjcs, yet 
 tJiey always apjiear, when seen upon tlie verge of 
 the horizon, as if possessing colossal dimensions, 
 and produce an ell'ect in point of grandeur 
 wliich cannot easily he surjwssed. Long before 
 the jieriod when man hegiin to erect these feeble 
 iomblances of mountains, a various level of allu- 
 yutn iiad been established in the spaces between 
 ttie rivers, by which in one part the waters of the 
 Euphrates find a higher level than the Tigris, 
 into which ttiey How at tlie high season ; while at 
 another place the Tigris sends its waters to the 
 Euphrates, and restores the Hood by which it had 
 been previously enriched from the ' Great River.' 
 
 The Eupiirates is still a majestic stream, but 
 wandeis through a dreary solitude. Its banks are 
 Itoary with reeds, and the grey osier-willows are 
 yet there on which the captives of Israel hung up 
 tlieir harps, and, while Jerusalem was not, refused 
 to be comforted. At that time its now broken 
 hills w«re palaces; its long luidulating mounds, 
 streets; its vast Bditude was filled with the busy 
 subjects of tlie proud mistress of the East. Now, 
 wasted witli misery,' her habitations are not to 
 be found; and, for herself, ' die worm is spread 
 over her." Stralio makes the Euphrates a stailiunn 
 (500 feet) in breadtli at Babyion ; according to 
 Rennel it is about 191 English feet; D"Anville 
 .reduces it to 330 ; Rich, on the other hand, 
 raises it to 450 feet ; its breadth, however, varies 
 in its passage tJirough tlie ruins. Rich ascertained 
 its dep'.h to tie *2i fathoms, and that the current 
 runs gently at the medium rate of about two 
 knots an hour. The Euphrates is far less rajiid 
 than the Tigris, and rises at an earlier period. 
 Wiien at its height — from the latter end of April 
 to the latter end of June — it overflows the surround- 
 ing country, fills, witiiout the aid of human labf)nr, 
 tlie canals dug for its reception, and facilitates 
 agriculture in a suqnising degi^e. Tlie ruins of 
 Babylon are then so inundated as to render many 
 parts of them inaccessible. The water of the 
 Eui,nrat«s is esteemed more salubrious than that 
 ®f the Tigris. The course of the river tlirough the 
 site of Babylon is iiorth and south. Biicks sind 
 rther fragments of buildings are fiequently found 
 in u by lishennen who ply on its waters. 
 
 During tlie thitfe great empires of the E;ist, no 
 tract of tiie whole ajipears to have lieen so reputed 
 for fertility and riches as the district of Babyhwiia, 
 which arose in the main ficmr the profier niaiiage- 
 jnent of tlie mighty river which flowed throtigh it. 
 Herodotus mentions that, when reduced to the 
 rank of a province, it yielded a revenue to the 
 kings of Persia which comprise*! half their in- 
 «oaie. And tiie terms in wiiich the Scriptures 
 describe its natural as well as its acquire«l su- 
 premacy wlien it was tlie imjierial city, evidence 
 tne same facts. They call it * Babylon, the 
 glory of kingdoms; 'he beauty of the Clialdee 
 ntcellency; tlie ladv <f win)j;dom8, given to ulea- 
 
 sure; tliat dwelleth carelessly, and sayelh iu iier 
 heart, / (tm, and thoe is none else beniile me ' 
 But now, in the expressive and inimitable lan- 
 guage of the same Imly iKHik, may it !«• said — 
 * She sits as a widow on the gniii'id. Theie is no 
 more a tiiiwie for thee, (J <laught.rr of the Ciial- 
 dieaiis ! ' As lor the abundance of the amntry, 
 it has vanished as clean away as if the liesom of 
 desolation' had swejit it from noith to ■-outh ; the 
 whole land, t'rom the out.skirts of Bagdad to the 
 farthest reach of sight, lying a melanclioly waste- 
 In oriler to defend the country against hostile 
 attacks fiom its neiglibouis, northwar<l from »*a- 
 bylon, between the two rivers, a wall was luiilt, 
 which is known under the name of the Median 
 Wall (rh MrjSias Ka\ovft.ivov Tf7xo:, Xcn. Ana^i. 
 ii. 1, 12) The Babvhmiaiis weie faniiins lor the 
 manufacture of cloth and carpets: they also ex- 
 celled in making perfumes, in carving in wcMid, 
 and in working in precious stones. They wcie a 
 commercial as well as a manufacturing pcuplc, 
 and carried on a very extensive trade alike 
 by land and by sea. Buliylon was indeed a 
 commercial deput between the Eastern arid the 
 Western worlds (Ezek. xvii. 4; Is. xliii. 14V 
 Thus favoured by nature ami aideil by ait, Bal/y- 
 lonia became the first abode of social order and 
 the cradle of civilization. Here fiist arose a powei- 
 ful empire — here astronomy was first cultivated — 
 here measures and weights were tiist employed. 
 
 The original inhabitants were without doulit of 
 theShemitic fainily ; and their language l/eh.iiged 
 to the class of tongues spoken iiy tiiat race, parti- 
 cularly to the Aramaic branch, and was indeed a 
 dialect similar to tliat which is now cal led Chaldee. 
 Fioni the account which is found in Gen. x. 8, 
 Nimrod. the son of Gush, apjiears to havetoundctl 
 the kingdom of Babylon, and to have been it.s first 
 sovereign. In the I4th chap, of the same book, 
 Amraphel is cursorily mentioned as kii>g of 
 Shinar. In the reigu of He^ickiali (a.c. 713) — 
 2 Kings XX. 12 — ' Berodach-baladati, the son of 
 Baladan," was ' king of Babylon," and ' sent let- 
 ters and a present unto Hezekiah, lor he had heai-d 
 that Hezekiah had lieen sick." About a bundled 
 years later, Jeremiah and Ilabakkuk syak of the 
 inva.sion of the Babylonians under tlie name of 
 the Clialdajans ; and now Kchiw'uulnezzar aj>- 
 pears in the historical books(2 Kings xxiv. \,sq.; 
 Jer. xxxvi. 9. 27) ;is head of the all-subduing 
 empire of Babylon. EvilmerodcKh (2 Kings xxv, 
 27; Jer. lii. 31), son of the preceding, is also 
 mentioned as 'king of Babylon;" an<l with Bel- 
 sfiazzar (Dan. v. 1, 30), the Nabonedus of Bcro- 
 STis, the line of the Chaldsean kings was closed : 
 he perishetl in the conquest of Biibylon by the 
 Medo-Persians (Dan. v. 31), 'and Darius, the 
 Median, took the kingdom." 
 
 The doniination of the Ghaliheans in Babylon 
 lias given historians some trouble to explain. The 
 Chaldaeans apjiear to have originally U'eii a 
 nomadic tribe in the moTiiitains of Armenia, 
 numbers of whom are thougiit to have .settleil in 
 Babylon as subjects, where, having been ci\ilize<l 
 and grown jxiwerfiil, they seizetl the sujireme jiower 
 and founded a t'hal(lat>-B;diy Ionian empire. 
 
 Herodotus has noticed the Chaldaeans as a trit* 
 of priests (i. 2S) ; Diodorus (i. 2*»). as a separate 
 caste under Beltis, an Egyptian ])riest ; while 'li« 
 book of Datiiel lefers to them us asirohn/Tt, 
 magicians, and toothsayers : but there car. ?c
 
 IIQ 
 
 BACA. 
 
 little doubl, as lid liovvn by Gesonius on Isaiah 
 xxiii. l.'i, lliat it was the name of a distinct 
 naii;)n, if ridt, as Heeien {Mamtal of Anc. Hist. 
 2S) has maintained, the name of the Noithern 
 nomades in ger;-eial. In connection with Eahy- 
 1-onia tlie Chalda^ans are to be regaided as a 
 conijiieijng nation as well as a learned jieople : 
 they introduced a correct method of reckoning 
 titne, and began thvir reign witli Nabonassar, 
 B.C. 717. The brilliant period of the Chaldaeo- 
 Babylonian empire extended to b.c. 538, when 
 the great city, in accordance with the prophecy 
 <><'Dain'el, was sacked and destroyed. 
 
 Bal)y]onia, during this jieriod, was ' the land 
 of the Cliahlaeans,' the same as that into which 
 tiie children of Judah were carried away captive 
 (Jer. xxiv. 5); which contained Baljylon (Jer. 
 1. I; Ezek. xii. 13); was the seat of the king 
 of Babylon -(Jer. xxv. 12), and contained the 
 hon.se of the god of Nebuchadnezzar (Dan. i. 
 1, 2). The jn'ofane historians lend their testi- 
 mony to the same eilect. There is another scrip- 
 tuial reference to (his proud period in the history 
 of the Chaldees, when learned men filled the 
 streets and the temples of Nineveh and Bal>el : — 
 ' Behold tlie land of the Chaldeeans ; this people 
 was not, till the Assyrian founded it for them that 
 dwell in tlie wilderness : they set up the towers 
 thereof, they raised uj) the palaces thereof; and 
 he brought it to ruin" (Isa. xxiii. 13). 
 
 A full descrijition of the actual condition of 
 Babylonia, Babylon, and Babel, w ith illustrations, 
 disquisitions, maps, plans, &c., may lie found in 
 the following works : — Memoir on the Rtmis of 
 Babi/hn, by ( '. J. Rich, 2nd edit. London, 1836 ; 
 Travels in Georgia, J'ernia, Armenia, and An- 
 cient Babylonia, by Sir Sobeit Ker Porter. Lon- 
 don, lS2i; Ainsworth's Researches in Babylonia, 
 London, 1838; Fraser's Travels in Kocrdistan, 
 Mes potamia, l^c. London. 1840 ; Rosenniiiller's 
 Biblische AUerthurnskunde ; Gescniiis in the C'//- 
 clopiidie ol' Erscli and Gruber ; Heeren, lu-ccn, i. 
 4; Wahl, Gcschichte der Morg. Spr. pp. 570; 
 Winer, Bihliaches Bealtoorterbuch — J. R. B. 
 
 BACA (KDIi) and BECAIM (CNSS) occur, 
 the lirst in Ps. Ixxxiv. 6, ' Who passing through 
 the valley of Baca make it a well ; the rain 
 also filleth the pools;" the second in 2 Sam. v. 
 23, 24, and in 1 Chron. xiv. 14, 15, ' And let it 
 be, when tliou hearest the sound of a going in 
 the tops of the mulberry trees, that thou slialt 
 sestir thyself.' 
 
 Neitlier the mulberry nor the pear-tree, con- 
 sidered to lie the haca of the Scri])tures, satis- 
 fies tianslators and commentators, because they 
 do not posses any characters particularly suitable 
 to the above passages. With regard to the mul- 
 beri y, Rosenmiiller justly observes, that this inter- 
 pretat'on is coinitenanced neither by the ancient 
 translators nor by the occurrence of any similar 
 term in the cognate languages. We sliould ex- 
 pect, however, some notice in Scripture of a tree 
 which must have been common, and always 
 esteemed for its fruit [Sykaminos]. Rosenmiiller 
 prefers pear-trees in the preceding passages, as 
 lieing the oldest rendeiing of the woids. But tlie 
 coirectness of this translatii)n is not confirmed by 
 4nv of the cngnate dialects ; nor is the pear-free 
 (k.orc appropriate than the mulberry. 
 
 In consecjuence no doubt of these difficulties, 
 
 BACA. 
 
 other plants have been resorted to; and Celriui 
 quotes Abul Tadli's description of a shrub 
 of .Mecca: ' Baca nota est arlior s. fiutex, in 
 Mecca, et tractibus vicinis. Sinnlis est ry 
 
 Avlj Bascham, nisi quod folia ejus longiora 
 
 sint. Fructnm, periirde uc ilhi, plurimum fert, 
 sed niajorem et rotundiorem. Temjjeramento 
 calida e=t et sicca. Et cuni folium ejus lesecatur, 
 lacryma quaeoani inde di.stillai, a'ba, calida, et 
 acris, virtutis tamen nulliu-i. Probata est me- 
 dicina contra dolorem dentium, si liujus arborig 
 ramis fricentur. Quin et confortat gingivas, el 
 prohibet ne malum renovetui* (Cels. i. 339^. 
 
 The same jilant is probably t:/at lefeired to by 
 Forskal (p. 198; among the ob-cuie plants with- 
 out fructification which he obtained from Djobba^ 
 
 and which he says was called V>J Baka, vel W 
 
 Ebka : 'Arbor foliis obovatis, glabris, integrif- 
 lactescens, venenata.' 
 
 If this be the same as the former, both are still 
 unknown any further, and we caiinol therefore de 
 termine whether they are found in Palestine or not. 
 
 The tree alluded to in Scrijjtuie, whatever it 
 is, must be common in Palestine, must grow 
 in the neighbourhood of water, have its leaves 
 easily moved, and have a name in some of 
 the cognate lan^uDges similar to the Hebrew 
 Baca. The only one with wliich we are ac- 
 '|uainted answering to these conditions is that 
 called bak by the Arabs, or rather shujrat-albak 
 — that is, i\\e Jly or gnat tree. It seems to 
 be so called from its seeds, when loosened liom 
 their capsular covering, filiating about like gnats, 
 in consequence of being co^•eled with light 
 silk-like hairs, as is the case with those of the 
 willow. In Richardson's Arabic Dictionary tiio 
 bak-tree is considered to be . the elm, but to 
 us it appears to be the poplar : for the dirdar 
 of the Arabians seems to be another kind of 
 bak-tree, proliably the arbor at He urn of the Latin 
 translators of Avicenna. Of this tree Plempios 
 says, ' Leguntur in codice Romano piincipio haic, 
 Dicit Dioscorides banc arburcin esse falici simi- 
 lem ; a Syris vocari dirdar, .a Chaldaeis culicum 
 arborem.' As this passage is not found in Dio- 
 scorides, it is curious tiiat it sliould occiu- in 
 an old manuscript. For in (,ioer Aiabic authi.is 
 the dirdar is said to be a kind of ghurb, and 
 the ghurb we have ascertained to be the Lom- 
 bardy poplar (v. lllust. Himul. hot., p 314). The 
 willow and the poplar are well known to have tlie 
 same kind of seed, v.heiice they aie included by 
 botanists in the group of Saliciiie*. 
 
 As it seems to us sufficiently clear that the bak- 
 tree is a kind of poplar, and as the Arabic ' bak' 
 is very similar to the Hebrew ■ iiaca," so A is pro- 
 bable that one of the kinds of piiplar may be in- 
 tended in tlieabove passages oi' Scripture. .Knti i' 
 must be noted that the pi))i]ar i.-, as apjiropriate a.« 
 any tree can be for the elucidatiuii ol the jiassaget 
 in which baca occurs. For the pi.plai is well known 
 to delight in moist situations, and Bishop Hone, 
 in his Conirn. on Psalm Ixxxiv., has infeiied thai 
 in the viilley of Baca the Isiaelites, on their way 
 to Jerusalem, were refreshed by jilentyof water. 
 It is not less ajipropriate in tlie passages in 
 2 Samuel and 1 Chronicles, as no tree is nioK 
 remarkable than the pojilar for the ease with 
 which its l«a\es are lustled by tlie slightwj
 
 BACA. 
 
 ■lovtmentof tlie air; an efl'ect which mi^ht oe 
 CHiismi in a still nii^iit even hy the iiiovenieiit of a 
 body (if men on tlie i;n]iin(l,\vhen attacked in Hank 
 Dr when luijiiepaieil. That poplars are common in 
 Palestine may he proved Irorn Kiilos Palestine, 
 p. Hi ; • Of poplars we only know, with cer- 
 tainty, tliat the lilai-k poplar, the aspen, and tiie 
 Lomiiardy |>«)plar ,'row in Palestine. The asjien, 
 whose long leaf-s^ilks cause the leaves to tremlile 
 witU every hreath of winii, unites with the willow 
 and tlie oak to (i\ershadow the watercourses of 
 the Lower Leh.mon, and, with the oleander and 
 the acacia to adorn the ravines of southern 
 Palestine: .ve do not know that the Lombardy 
 jioplar lias lieen noticed hut liy Lord Lindsay, 
 wlio descriiie-i it as grow in;^ with the walnut-tree 
 and weepiiiif-wil'ow under the deep torrents of 
 the Upjjer Leh,ini):i."— J. V. R. 
 
 BACA, THHTVALLKY OF (Ps. Ixxxiv. 6), 
 oi Valley of \Vecpin4. Some, with our translators, 
 regard this as the name of a (>lace, and l)y such it 
 liiis been usually sou^dit in the Uekiia (el-Bckaa), 
 a valley or plain in which Baalbek is situated. 
 But this spot is fir fioin possessing; the dreariness 
 and drought on which the point ol tiie Psalmist's 
 alliduslon depends. It does not appear neces- 
 sary to understand that there is any reference to 
 au actual valley so called. The Psalmist in 
 e:>Lile, or at least at a distance from Jerusalem, is 
 speaking of the privileges and happiness of those 
 who are permilted lo make the usual pilgrimages 
 to that city, in order to worshij) Jehovah in the 
 Tenqile: 'Tiiey knew tiie ways tliat lead thither 
 yea, though they must ]iass through rough and 
 dreary paths, e\eii a vale of tears ; yet such are 
 their hope and joy cf heart, that all this is to them 
 «5 a ws-U-wateied countiy, a land crowned with 
 jlessings ot the e.uly lain." Dr. Robinson (Add. 
 to Calniet) concludes that something like tiiis is 
 the sense of the jia sa;e. Few versions regard the 
 wonl as a |)ioper name. The Sept. has ets t)/i/ 
 KoiKaJia Tov KKau6jj.u}i/os ; the V ulgate, in valle 
 tacryinaruiti. 
 
 BAD. [Byssl.s.] 
 
 BADGER. This is unquestionably a wrong 
 interpretation of toe word 5^'^^ tac/iash, since tlie 
 badger is not found in Southern Asia, and has not 
 as yet been noticeil out of Europe. The word oc- 
 curs in the (iliual form in Exod. xxv. 5 ; xxvi. 11 ; 
 XXXV. 7, 23 ; xxxvi. 19: xxxix. 34; Num. iv. 6, 
 8, 10, 11, 12, 1 i. 2.1 ; and Ezek. xvi. 10 : and in 
 connection with nij,' orot/i, skins, is used to denote 
 /he co\ering of the Tabemacle. Skins of some 
 animal no doubt aie meant, though any coniiima- 
 tion in favour of tiie badger, derived from the 
 Chaldee version, with or without a prefix, is 
 etjually untenalile, since the sjiecies is likewise 
 unknown in (Jhahhva. A judicious Biblical critic 
 oljserves that it is (pe tionable whether the skin of 
 an unclean animal would have been siilleied to 
 come in contact uitli objects kept so sacred as the 
 Talieiiiacle and ail tliat pertained to it. This con- 
 sideiation was evidently paramount when we find 
 jBins' skins, stained led, einjiloyed in the first co- 
 vering, am' tlie-e. like all the other materials 
 requiied for the jiurpose, were fiee gifVs from the 
 people; r;onseipieiitly the skins for the external 
 covering were likewi-e [ossessed by the pulilic, 
 and tlierefore were used or intended for comnion 
 purposes. 
 
 In tlie present stite of z<K)log'<-al knowledge it 
 
 BAG. 
 
 vn 
 
 is not necessary to refute tlie notions that tuchul, 
 Wiis the name of a mermaid or iiomo niarinus, 
 or of the walrus, a Polar animal, or of (lie dugong 
 or seal, for neitlier of these is known in tlie In- 
 dian, Red, or Persian seas, and iheie is lilll« 
 probability that in remote ages tiiey fiecjiientetl 
 the south-e;ist extremity of the Mediteiianoan, 
 where the current sweeps all things noithwaid ; 
 still less that they nestle<l in the lakes of th« 
 Delta, where crocodiles then abounded. But 
 
 Niebulir's hint resjjecting the name 
 
 ^J*'•J^ 
 
 tachash, given, with some refeience to colours, to 
 a sjiecies of deljjhinus or porpoise, hy the .-Vialis 
 near Cape Mussendum, may deserve consiiU-iation, 
 since the same jieojile still make small lounded 
 bucklers and soles of sandals of the //o«f 4 sKin. 
 which is a cetaceous animal, ]eiliaps identical 
 with Niebulir's. This mateiial might li-uebeen 
 obtained from the caiavan-tra<leis of Yemen, or 
 from the Ismaelires c^f Edom, but does not apjear 
 to have been fitted for orlier purpose-s than {«ick- 
 saddles and sandal-soles : consideiing tachasli. 
 tlieiefore, not to indicate a colour, but the skin of 
 an animal, which may iiave deiived its name f'lom 
 its colour, probably deep grey, ash, or slaty (hijs- 
 ginus), we must look for the object in (juestion to 
 the ziKilogy of the region around, or to places acces- 
 sible by means of the traders and tribute inijxiita- 
 tions of law matciials in Egypt, wheie we actually 
 observe leopard or panther skins and otlieis of a 
 smaller carnivorous animal with a long fox-tail 
 represented in the triumphal pmcession of 
 Tliothmes III. at Thebes (Wilkinson's Atic. 
 EgyptioMS, vol. i. pi. 1). These may liave been of 
 a canine genus, such as the agiiodus, or niegalofis 
 Lalandii, which is actually iron-grey; or of a 
 vivenous species, wheieof theie aie many in Afiica 
 both grey and spotted Still these aie unclean ani- 
 mals, and for this reason we tuin to another view 
 of the case, which may prove the most satisfac- 
 tory that can now be obtained. Negmland and 
 Central and Eastern Afiica contain a number of 
 ruminating animals of the gieat antelope family : 
 they aie known to the natives under vaiioii.s 
 names, such as jiacasse, empaca-se. thacasse, 
 facasse, and tacliaitze, all nioie or less varieties 
 of the word tacliash : they are of consideiabie 
 size; often of slaty antl pur}ile-giey colours, anil 
 might be teimeu stag-g»)ats and ox-goats. Of 
 these one or mor? occur in the hunting-scenes on 
 Egyptian nionunients, and theiefor«» we may con- 
 clude that the skins were accessible in aluiiidance, 
 and may have beeii diessed with the liaii on for 
 5:overings of l)aggage, anil tor boots, such ;is we 
 see worn by the human figuies in the same pio- 
 cessions. Thus we have the gieater number of 
 the conditions of the question surticiently n-ali«.ed 
 to enable us to draw tiie infeieiice that tachas^li 
 refers to a ruminant of the .-Vigoceiine 01 Danialine 
 groups, most likely of an iron-grey or slaty- 
 colouied species. — C H. S. 
 
 BAG, a pur.se or pouch (Dent \xv. 13 : Job 
 xiv. 17; 1 Sam. xvii 40: Luke ..'i. 33). The 
 money deposited iii the treasuues of Eastern 
 princes, or intendid for large jiayments. or to fv 
 sent to a governmiint as taxes or tiibote, is im)!- 
 Iccted in long, narrow bags or purses, each con- 
 taining a ceitain amount of money, and sealed 
 with t'he ollicial seal. As tlie money is counted 
 for this purpose, and sealed with great caic \'f
 
 iis 
 
 hAUURlM. 
 
 BALAAM. 
 
 officer? properly ajipoiuted, the tiajr, or purse, 
 ]>asses current, its lung as the seal reniaiiis iiii- 
 brokeii, r'lr tlie aiudunt marked thereon. In the 
 receipt and payment of large sums, this is a great 
 Rud imjjortant iMinvenience in counfiies where the 
 management of large transactions hy pajier is 
 I'liknow'ii, or where a currency is chieHy or 
 Vfiiolly ot" silver: it saves the great h'ouble of 
 counting or weighin,"- loose money. Tliis usage 
 is so well established, tiiat, at this day, in the 
 Levant, ' a purse" is tiie very name for a certain 
 amount of money (now five ])ounds sterling), and 
 all large payments are stated in ' purses.' The 
 Kitiquity of this custom is attested by the monu- 
 ments of Egypt in which the ambassadors of 
 
 distant nations are represented as bringing their 
 tributes in sealed bags of money to Thofhmes 
 III. ; and we see the same bags deposited intact 
 in file royal treasury. When coined money was 
 not used, the seal must have been considered a 
 voucher not only for the amount, but for the pu- 
 rity of the metal. The money collected in the 
 Temple, in the time of Joash, seems to have been 
 made up into bags of equal value after this 
 fashion; which were probably delivered, sealed, 
 to those who ])aid the workmen (2 Kings ,\ii. 10 ; 
 conip. also 2 Kings v. 23; Tobit ix. 5 ; xi. 16). 
 B.\HURIM, a place not far fropn Jerusalem, 
 beyond tlie Mount of Olives, on the road to the 
 Jordan, where Shimei cursed and threw stones at 
 David (2 Sam. xvi. 5; Joseph. Antiq. vii. 9. 7). 
 
 BAL.\AJVI (Cy^3; Sept. and Philo, BaAaa^; 
 Josephus, BdAauos). The name is ilerived by 
 Vitiinga from ?y3 and DV, lord of the people ; 
 but by Simonis from VQl^ antl Cy, destruction 
 of the people — an allusion to his supposed super- 
 natural powers His father's name "Iiy3 comes 
 likewist from a loot which means to consume or 
 devour. It is deserving of notice that y'73, the 
 fiisl king of the Kdomiies, was also the son of a 
 liyn Beor (Gen. xxxvi. 32). In 2 Peter ii. 15, 
 Bahiam is called tlie Son of Bosor, which Gese- 
 nins attributes to an early corruption of the text, 
 but Dr. Lighifoot considers it to be a Chaldaism, 
 and infers from the Apostle's use of it, that he was 
 thet resident at Baliylon. (Works, vol. vii. p. 
 80 ; Sermon on the way of Balaam.) In the 
 oilier passage of the New Testament (Rev. ii. 
 II, 15 I, the sect of the Nicolaitans is described 
 as following tlie doctrine or teaching of Balaam ; 
 gunJ it ajjpears not improbable that this name is 
 fifriiiloved symbolically, as Nik^Aoos, Nicolaus, 
 is etjuivalent in meaning to Balaam. The first 
 m<iifion of this remarkable ])ers. n is in Numbers 
 xxii. 5, where we are inforiiied- tliat Balak 'sent 
 messengers unto Halaani the son of Beiirto Pethor, 
 wbich is 1)V the river of the land of tlie children 
 of his jieiple.' Twelve Hebrew MSS. examined 
 l»y Dr. Kennicott, two of De Ro,ssi's, the Sama- 
 
 ritan text, with the Syriac and Vulgate vemioM 
 instead of IDy ''32 ' children of his people.' read 
 ]^^V ''32 'children of Annn m.' T'nis is av 
 prnved by Houbigant and Kennicott, but is in- 
 consistent with Deut. xxiii. 4. which informs us 
 that Pethor was in Mesopitamia; for the Am- 
 monites, as Roseiuniiller observes, never exiendeil 
 so far as the Euphrates, which must l:>e the river 
 alludetl to. If the received readin-g be correct, it 
 intimates that Pethor was situated in Balaam's 
 native country, and that he was not a mer<> 
 sojourner in Mesopotamia, as the .Few ish patriarchs 
 were in Canaan. In Jofhua xiii. 22, Halaam ia 
 termed 'the Soothsayer' DDIp, a word which, 
 with its cognates, is used almost without excep- 
 tion .in an nnl'avourable sense. Joseplms calls 
 him fxavris Stpifrros, an eminent diviner (Anfig. 
 iv. 6-6 2); and what is to lie understood by this 
 appellation, may be perhaps best learned from 
 the following description by Philo: — 'There was 
 a man at that time celebrated for divination, who 
 lived in Meso]X)tamia, and was an adept in all the 
 forms of the divining art ; but in no branch was he 
 more admired than in augnry ; to many persons 
 and on many occasi ins he gave great and astuund- 
 iiig jiroofs of his skill. For to some he foretold 
 storms in the height of summer ; to others drought 
 and heat in the depth of winter; to some scarcity 
 succeeding a fruitful year, and then ajain abun- 
 dance after scarcity ; toothers the overHowing and 
 the drying up of rivers; and the remedies of fx-sti- 
 lential diseases, and a vast multitude of other 
 things, each of which he acquired great fame for 
 preilicting' ( Vita Moijsis, ^ 4^). Origen speaks 
 of Balaam as famous for his skill in magic, and 
 the use of noxious incantations, but denies that 
 he had any power to bless, for which he gives 
 the following reason : — ' Ars cnim mnrjica nescH 
 bencdicere quia nee dcemnncs sciunt henefacere ' 
 (In Num. Horn, xiii.) Balak 's language. 'I wot 
 he whom thou hle=;sest is blessed (Numb, xxii 6"*, 
 he considers a^ only designed to flatter Balaam, 
 and render liim compliant with his wishes. 
 
 Of tlie numerous paradoxes which we find in 
 'this strange mixture of a man,' as Bishop New- 
 ton terms him, not the least sti iking is that with 
 the practice of an art exjjiessly forbidden to th* 
 Israelites. (' there shall not be I'mmd among yon 
 one that useth divination (CDDp DD|? Dtut, 
 xviii. 10), for all that dii these tilings are an 
 abominatiot! to the Lord' — ver. 12) he united the 
 knowledge and worship of Jehovah, and was in 
 the habit of receiving intimations of his will : 
 'I will bring you word again as the Lord (Je- 
 hovah) shall speak unt > me' (Num. xxii. 8). 
 The inquiry naturally ari.ses, l>y what means did 
 he become acquainted with the true religion* 
 Dr. Heiigstenberg suggests that he was led to 
 renounce idolatry by the reports that reached 
 him oi' the miracles attending the Exodus; and 
 tiiat having exj)erienced the deceptive nature of 
 the soothsaying art, he hoped by becoming a 
 worshipjier of the God of the Hebrews, to acquire 
 fresh power over nature, ami a (rlearer insight 
 into futurity. Yet the .sacred narrative gives us 
 no reason to svqipose that he had any previous 
 knowledge of the Israelites. In Num. xxii. 11 
 he merely rejieats Balak's mussagp, ' BeholU 
 there is a people come out of Egypt,' &c., with' 
 out intimating that he had heard of the miracla 
 wrought on their behalf The allnsior 'n Num
 
 BALAAM. 
 
 fXlli. 22 miglit be promj fed l)y the divine affla- 
 Vaa wliich he then lelt. And had he been ac- 
 ttiated, in the first instance, by motives of iier- 
 sonal aggrandizement, it seems hardly probable 
 that he would have U'en t'avoured with (hose 
 divine communications with which his language 
 ill Num. xxii. H implies a familiarity. Since, in 
 the case of Simon Magus, the oiler to 'purchase 
 the gift of God with money' (Acts viii. 20) called 
 forth an immediate an'' awful rebuke from the 
 Apostles, wonhl not Balaam's attempt to obtain 
 a similar girt with a direct view to pei-sonal 
 etnolument and fame have met with a similar 
 repulse? — Dr. H. supjKises. indeed, that tiiere 
 was a mixture of a higher order of sentiments, a 
 sense of the wants of his moral nature, which led 
 him to seek Jehovah, and laid a foundation for 
 intercourse w'*'".. him. In the absence of more 
 copious and precise information, may we not 
 reasonably conjecture that Jacob's residence i'or 
 twenty yeai-s in Mesopotamia contributed to 
 maintain some just iileas of religion, though min- 
 gled with niucii superstition V To this source 
 and the existing remains of Patriarchal religion, 
 Balaam was probably indebted for that truth 
 which he unhappily ' held in unrighteousness' 
 (Rom. i. 18). 
 
 On the narrative contained in Numbers xxii. 
 22-3.5 a difl'erence of opinion has long existed, 
 even among those who fully admit its authen- 
 ticity. The advocates for a literal interpretation 
 urge, that in a liistorical work and a narrative 
 bearing the same character, it would be unnatural 
 to regard any of the occurrences as taking place 
 in vision, unless expressly so stated : — that it 
 would be difficult to d^ermine where the vision 
 begins, and where it ends ; — that Jehovali's 
 'opening tVie mouth of tlie ass" (Num. xxii. 28) 
 must liave been an external act; and, finally, that 
 Peter's language is decidedly in favour of the 
 literal sense : inro(^vyioi' ^.tpaivov, iv ayOpd-a-ou 
 puvfi (pOey^a/xei/ov iKoiKvcf ttji/ tov irpoprjTov 
 irapappoyiav — ' The dumb ass, speaking with a 
 man's voice, reproved the madness of the Pro[)!iet' 
 ("2 Peter ii. 16). Those who conceive tliat the 
 speaking of the ass and the apjiearance of the 
 Angel occun-ed in vision to lialaam (among 
 whom are Maimonides, Leibnitz, and Hengs- 
 gtenberg) insist upon the fact that dreams and 
 visions wej-e the ordinary methods by wliich God 
 made himself known to the Prophets (Num. xii. 
 6) ; they remark that Balaam, in the introduc- 
 tion to his third and fourth prophecies (xxiv. 3, 
 4, 15), speaks of himself as 'tlie man who bad 
 his eyes shut" (QDl^ =: DflK' and DriD, v. Lam. 
 iii. 8), and who, on filling down in prophetic 
 exstasy, had his eyes opened ; — that he expressed 
 no surprise on hearing the ass speak ; and that 
 neither his servants nor the Moabitish princes who 
 accf»»wpanied hinn appear to have been cognizant 
 at any sujK^marural appearance. Dr. Jortin su]>- 
 poses that the Angel of the Lord suffered himself 
 '.o Ih! seen by the beast, but not by the Prophet ; 
 triat the beast was terrified, and Balaam smote 
 ner, and then fell into a trance, and in tliat state 
 conversed fir,t with the beast and then with the 
 Angel. The Angel presented these objects to his 
 imagination as strong'.y as if they had been before 
 his eyes, so that tliis was still a miraculous or 
 preternatural operation. In dreaming, many 
 singular incongruities oc:ur without e:(citing our 
 
 BALDNESS 
 
 27* 
 
 astonishment; it is therefore not wonderful if tiia 
 Prophet conversed witli his beast in vision, with- 
 out being startled at such a jihenouicnon (i). Jor- 
 tin's 'Dissertation on Bahuuu,' pp. 190 191). 
 
 The limits of this article will not allow i.f a/i 
 examination of Bahiani s magirilicent propbecieK, 
 wliich. as Herder remarks ( Gcist (kr Ebruischen 
 1^0 sic, ii. 221), 'are distinguished for dignity, 
 comjiiession, vividness, and fulness of imagery : 
 there is scarcely anytliing equal to thetii in rh« 
 later Prophets, and (^he adds, what few readein. 
 probably, of Deuf. xxxii. xxxiii. will be di-uosed 
 to adniitj ' ncjthing in the discourses of Moses.' 
 We must refer on this suljject to Bishop Newton 
 and Dr. Hengsteuberg. Tlie latter writer has 
 abl\ discussed the doubts raised by Dr. de Wette 
 and of er German critics, i-e.s|K'cting the autirjuity 
 and genuineness of this jiortion of the Pentateudi 
 (Dr. Jortin's .Six Dissertations. Lond. 1 7.").'), pp. 
 171-191 : Bishop liutlers Sermo/is at t/ie Rolls' 
 Chapel, Ser.n. vii. Bishop Newton On t)te J'ro- 
 p/iecics, vol. i. ch. .5. Discours Historiques, &c , 
 par M. Saurin, Amst. 1720. tome li. Disc. 
 64. Die Ccschichte Bileams und seine fi'ei»- 
 sagungtn erldittcrt, von E. W. Hengsfenberg 
 1842. Origcnis Opera, Berl. 1840, torn. x. pp. 
 168-258.)— J. E. R. 
 
 BALADAN. [Merodach-Bai.adan.] 
 
 BALAK (P^S. etnply ; Sept. BoAci/c), son 
 of Zippor, and king of the Moaljifes (Num. 
 xxii. 2, 4), who w;is so terrified at the ai)pioach 
 of tlie victorious army of the Israelites, who in 
 their passage through tiie desert iiad encamj>ed 
 near tlie confines of his territory, 'mat he applied 
 to Balaam, who was then reputed to possess great 
 influence with the higher spirits, to curse them. 
 The result of this application is related under 
 another head [Balaam]. From Judg. siv. 2.5, it 
 is clear that Balak was so certain of tiie fullilment 
 of Balaam's blessing, ' blessed is he that ble.sseth 
 thee, and cursed is he that cur.seth tliee' (Num. 
 xxiv. 9), that he never afterwaids made the least 
 military attempt to opjwse the Israelites (comp. 
 Mic. vi. 5 ; Rev. ii. 14).— E. M. 
 BALANCE. [VVeiguing.] 
 
 BALDNESS (Hnp) may lie artificial or na- 
 tural. Arti(ici.\l baldness, caused liy cutting 
 or shaving otf the hair of the head, a cu..,toni 
 among all the ancient and Eastern nations, in 
 toki;n of mourning for the deatii of a near 
 relative (Jer. xvi. 6; Amos viii. 10; Micali i. 
 16), Moses forbade to the Israelites (Deut. xiv. 
 1), jirobably for the very iea>on of its being a 
 heatheti custom ; for a leading object of \\:i 
 policy was to remove tlie Jews as far as pos- 
 sible from the ways and customs of t'le sur- 
 rounding nations. Natural baldness, though Moses 
 did not consider it as a symptom of le|Mosy, 
 and declared the man alllicted with it to be cleaji 
 and sound (Lev. xiii. 40, sq.), yet was alway* 
 treated among the Israelites with contempt (/A/a.), 
 and a balil man was not tinfVeijuently ex])osed t > 
 the ridicule of the mob (2 Kings ii. o ; I.sa. iii. 17 ; 
 comp. vSuet Cws. 45; Domit. IS); iKrhaps fiom 
 the suspicion of being under some leprous taint, a« 
 the Hebrew word n"\p originally implied an ulcer, 
 or an ulcered person. The pulilic preju<lice (hug 
 entertained against a bald-headed man was |)er- 
 haps tlie main reason why he was dec'<ired unfit
 
 i-^ii i;.'..\Qi !:ts. 
 
 for file ])vi slly .)l..tc Lci \xi. iO , Miskn. tit. 
 hechorot/i, >ii. V;.-K. Al. 
 
 BAN(^l.'KrS'. T.ie enieitainments sjA)ken of 
 '.n Sii-iptiire, on Imwever iar^e a scale, anil oi 
 'iDwevei s imptivKH a c .aracte!, were uU jM'ovideil 
 at tJie ex|n'USH c!' iMic iiiiiviiiiial ; tlie epaifos i)f 
 liie Greeks, to whicit eieiv guest pieseiit cimtii- 
 liufeil rils |,r.)iMitii(ii, bein^ a|)|i.iiviitiy unknown 
 t>) the Jews, or nt least jnadisi^il unly Ijy tiie 
 huinl)ler classes, as siuie supjjo e I hat an instance 
 of it occurs in the feast given ti) inir Lmd, shortly 
 beKire his j-'a^sion, dy hi% friends in Bethany 
 (JVI itt. xx.vi. 2; Maik xiv. I : coinp. with John 
 jtii. 2). Fejlive meetings of this kind were held 
 (Wily towards the cl>>se of tlie <lay, as it was not 
 tril business was over that the Je.vs freely in- 
 dujgevi in tiie nieasmesot tlie tab'e ; and airiiough 
 ill t.ie davs of Christ tisese meals were, after the 
 Itiinian fasiiion, called irc/.-zJers, they conespuiuled 
 exaclly to the dinners of modern tiiue^, tiie hoiir 
 iiied lor them varying from Hve to six o'clock 
 P.M., or sometimes later. 
 
 On occasions of ceremony the company were 
 invited a considerable time previous to the cele- 
 bration of the feast ; and on the day and at the 
 hour appoint eil, an express by one or more ser- 
 vants, according to the number an I distance of 
 the ex.pected guests, was despatched to announce 
 'hat the preparations were completed, and that 
 their jnesence was looked for immediately (Matt. 
 xx'i. 8; Luke xiv. 17). (Grotius, in loj. ; 
 .ilso Moiier's Journei/, p. 73.) This austum 
 obtains in the East at the present day : and the 
 second invitation, which is always verbal, is de- 
 livered by the messenger in his masler's name, 
 and frequently in the very language of Scripture : 
 'Behold i have prepared my dinner; my oxen 
 and fallings are kille<l, and all things are ready ' 
 (Matt. xxii. 4). It is observable, however, that 
 tliis after-jummons is sent to none but such as 
 have l)een already invited, and have declared 
 their iiccentance ; and, as in these circumstances, 
 people are bound by every feeling of honour and 
 )r,)priety to postpone all other engagements to the 
 luty of waiting upon their entertainer, it is mani- 
 Vst tiiat tiie vehement resentment of the grandee 
 in the jiarable of the great supper, where each of 
 the guests is described as offering to the bearer of 
 the express some frivolous apologies for absence, 
 was, so far from l)eing harsh and unreasonable, as 
 inlidels have characterized it, fully -.varr.mted and 
 most natural according to the manners of the age 
 and country. By accepting his invitiition they 
 oad given a pledge of their presence, the violation 
 of which on such trivial grounds, and especially 
 after the liberal preparations made for their eater- 
 taininent, could be viewed in no other light than 
 as a gross and deliberate insult. 
 
 At tlie small entrance door a servant was sta- 
 tioned t p receive the tatdets or cards of those who 
 »ere expected ; and as curiosity usuaMy cellecte<l 
 a crowd of troublesome sjiectatcrs, anxious to 
 press forward into tlie scene of gaiety, the gate 
 was opened only so far as was necessary for the 
 ailuiission of a single person at a time, who, on 
 {iiesenting his invitation ticket, was conducted 
 through a long and narrow passage into the re- 
 ceiving-room ; and then, alYer the whole company 
 were assembled, the master of the house shut the 
 Jocr with 1 is own hands — a signal to the ser- 
 vant to alli w himself to be prevailed on neither 
 
 BAXgLKTS. 
 
 liy riois<^ nor by im]K)rtuiiities, however loud and 
 long continued, to admit the bystanders. Tt 
 tliis custom tlieie is a manifest reterence in J.,u»« 
 xiii. "2-1, and Matt. xxv. 10 (Morier's Journey ^ 
 p. U2). 
 
 One ol tlie first inaiks of courtesy shown to the 
 guests, after saluting ihe host, was the refreshment 
 of water and tV.igrant oil or perfumes; and henct" 
 we find our Lord complaining ^>)! Simon's omission 
 ol' these cuslomaiy civilities (Luke vii. 41; see also 
 Mark vii. 4) [AnointingJ. But a far higher, 
 though necessarily less freijuent attention paid tu 
 their friends by the great, was the custom of fur- 
 nishing each of the company with a n>agi>ificenl 
 habit of a light and showy colour, and richly em- 
 bioiileied, to he worn during the I'estivity (Kccles. 
 ix. S; Rt'v. iii. 4, 5). The loose and tiuwing 
 style of tnis gorgeous mantle made it equally 
 suitable for all ; and it is almost incredible 
 what a variety of such sumptuous garments liic 
 wardiol>es of some great men could supply to 
 equip a numerous party. In a large company, 
 even of respectable persons, some might apjjear in 
 a plainer and humbler garb than accorded! with 
 the taste of the voluptuous gentry oi' our Lord's 
 time ; and where this arose from necessity or 
 limited means, il would have been harsh and un- 
 reasonalile in the extreme to attach blame, or to 
 command his instant and ignominious expulsion 
 from the banquet-room. But where a well-ap- 
 pointed and sumptuous wardrobe was opened for 
 the use of every guest, — to refuse the gay and 
 splendid costume which the munificence of the 
 ho,t provided, and to j)ersist in appearing in one s 
 own habiliments, implied a contempt liotli for the 
 master of the house and his entertainment, which 
 could not I'ail to jjrovoke resentment — and our 
 Lord therefore spoke in accordance with a well- 
 known custom of his country, when, in the parable 
 of the marriage of the king's son, he descriljes the 
 stern displeasure of the king on discovering one 
 of the gue->ts u ithout a wedding garment, and his 
 instant command to thrust him out (Matt. xxii. 
 11). At private banquets the master of the 
 house of course p.resided, and did the honours of 
 the occasion ; but in large and mixed companies 
 it was anciently customary to elect a go\ erntr of 
 the feast (John ii. 8; see also Eccliis. xxxii. I), 
 wlio should not merely perform the oHice of chair- 
 man, opxiTpiKAivos-, in preserving order and deco- 
 rum, liul take up.-n himself the general manage- 
 ment of the festivities. As this oHice was con- 
 sidered a post of great responsibility and delicacy, 
 as well as honour, the choice which among the 
 Greeks and Romans w;ls left to the decision of dice, 
 was more wisely made by the Jews to fall ujion 
 him who was known fo be }iossessed of tl.e rei.juisite 
 qualities — a ready wit and convivial turn, and 
 at the same time firmness of character and habits 
 of temperance [Auchituici.inusJ. T1 e guests 
 were scrupulously arran,j2d according to their re- 
 spective ranks. This was done eitliev by the host 
 or governor, who, in the case of a family, placed 
 them according to seniority (Gen. xlii. 33), and 
 in llie case of otliers, assigned the most honourable 
 a place near his own jjerson; or it was done by tli€ 
 party themselves, on tlieir successive arrivals, and 
 after surveying the company, taking up the jx)- 
 sition which it ajijieared liltest I'or each according 
 to their respective claims to occupy. It might b« 
 expected tha* among the Orientals, bv whom tbt
 
 BANQUETS. 
 
 iftwi of etiijiieite in thcsp in.itters are sirietly ol> 
 •erved, many absurd and ludicrous (jontests for 
 precedence must take i)lace, from the arro^'ance 
 ot some and the determineil jierseverance of olliers 
 to '.vedge t!i<'mse1ves into the seat tlicy deem tliem- 
 ^i'lies entitled to. A''ei)rdin.;ly Morier, vvlio is 
 well acquainted with the manners of the Persians, 
 iiif)rms us, ' that it is easy to observe l)y tne 
 countenances of those ))re^ent, wlien any one has 
 taken a his/her ))lace than he ouglit." ' On one 
 occasion," he adds. ' when an asseinhly was nearly 
 full, the governor of Kashan, a man of huinhle 
 mien, came in, and had seated himself at the 
 lowest place, wlien the liost, after having testified 
 lijs jiifrticular atten ions to him l)y numerous ex- 
 pre-sions of welcome, po'nted with his hand to an 
 >i]i))er seat, wliich he desired him to take' (Scro>ici 
 Journey). As a counterpart to tliis, Dr. Clarke 
 states that ' at a weddin;j feast lie attended in the 
 house of a rich merchant at St. Jean d'Acre, two 
 persons who had seated themselves at the top were 
 noticed by tlie master of ceremonies, and obliged 
 to move lower down' (see also .loseph. Anii'q. xv. 
 2). Tiie knowledge of these ])eculiarities serves to 
 illustrate several passages of Scripture (Prov. xxv. 
 B. 7 ; Matt, xxiii. fi ; and especially Luke xiv. 7, 
 where we find Jesus making the unseemly ambi- 
 tion of the Pharisees the suliject of severe and 
 merited animadversion). That class were notori- 
 ously eager to occupy tlie chief seats of honour 
 when mingling in society witli their fellow-citizens. 
 Some unecpiivocal symptoms of such contention 
 our Lord had prcrl)al)]y witnessed in the hoTise of 
 t!ie opulent Pharisee with whom he was dining, 
 and if He himself were sitting at the lower part 
 of the talile, tlie rejjroof of theii- pride and foolisli 
 ambition, con\eye(l in tiie parable He delivered on 
 that occasion, would be the more pjinted and 
 severely felt. 
 
 It would be difficidt within a short comjiass 
 lO describe tlie form and arrangements of the table, 
 as tlie enertainments sjioken of in Scripture were 
 not all conducted in a uniform style. In anj:ient 
 Egypt, as in Persia, tlie tables were ranged along 
 the sides of the room, and the guests were placed 
 with tlieir faces towards the walls. Persons of 
 high official station were honoured with a talile 
 apart for themselves at tiie head of the room ; and 
 in these particulars every reaiier of the Bible 
 will trace an exact correspondence to the arrange- 
 mi'nts of Joseph's entertainment to his lirethren. 
 According to Lightfoot {Exercit. on John xiii. 
 23J. the tables of the Jews were either wholly 
 uncovered, or two-thirds were spread with a cloth, 
 while the remaining third was left bare for the 
 9lis!ies antl vegetables. In the day-; of our Lor<l 
 the prevailing form was the triclinium, the mode 
 of reclining at which is descrilied elsewhere 
 [Apcubation]. This elfeminate practice was 
 not introduced until near the close of the Old 
 Testament history, for amongst all its writers 
 piior to the age of Amos ^K". to .vt, is tlie word 
 invariably used to describe the posture at table 
 (3 Sam. xvi., margin, and Ps. cxxviii. 3, im- 
 plying tnat the ancient Israelites sat round a 
 »ow talile, cross-leifsjed, like 'he Orientals of the 
 present dayj, whereas a.vaK\iva>^ signifying a re- 
 cumbent jv)sture, is the word employed in the 
 Giwpel. And whenever the word ' sit' occurs in 
 the New Testunent. it ou,'hf to be translated 'lie,' 
 acccrdi'.g to trie universal practice of tl.j' age. 
 
 BANQUETS. 
 
 2fil 
 
 The convenience of 3)ioons, knives, and forki 
 being unknown in the East, or, where known. 
 bei:ig a modern innovation, the hand is the onlv 
 instilment used in conveying food to the mouth, 
 and the common practice, their fo<id Ijeiiig chirfly 
 prepared in a li(juid form, is to din their thin 
 wafer-like bread in the dish, and Ibldiui; it 
 between their thumf) and two fingers, enclose a 
 jiortion of the contents. It is not uncommor. 
 to see several haiiils plunged into one tlisli at 
 the same time. But where the party is nu- 
 merous, the two jiersons near or opjxisite are 
 commonly joined in one dish; and accordingly, 
 at the last Passover, Judas, lieing close to his 
 master, was pointed out as the fraitxir liy beiiiy; 
 designated as the person ' dip]iing his hand with 
 Jesiis in the dish.' The "xuostle John, «h(i.,e 
 advantageous situation enalili him to hear the 
 minutest parts of the conversai n, has lec.orded 
 the fact of our Loid, in reply to the question, 
 'Who is itV answering it by ' giving a soji to 
 Judas when he had dipped' (John xiii. 27 j; and 
 this lends us to mtntioii it as not the lea-t among 
 the peculiarities of Oiierital manners, that a host 
 otter, dips his hand intu a dish, and lifting a 
 handful of what he considers a dainty, otliers the 
 }pa>/j,iov or sop to one of his frieinls. However 
 the fastidious delicacy of a Eurojsean apnetite 
 might revolt at such an act of hospitality, il i; 
 one of the givatest court-esies that an Oriental 
 can show, and to decline it would be a violation 
 of propriety and good manners (see Jov.itl's 
 Christiati Researches). In earlier ages, a double 
 or a more liberal portion, or a choice piece of 
 cookery, was the form in which a landlortl showed 
 iiis resjiect for the individual he deli.,dited to 
 lionour (Gen. xliii. 31; 1 Sam. i. 1, -x. 23; 
 Prov. xxxi. I'J; see V'oller's (irec. Autiq. •i.3S7; 
 Foibes. Orient. Mem. iii. \^1). 
 
 While tlie guests reclined in the manner ile- 
 sciihed above, their feet, of course, being stretclieil 
 out beiiind. were the most accessible parts of tlieir 
 [jerson, and accoidingly the woman with the 
 alaliastei-box of ointment could pay her grateful 
 and reveiential attentions to Jesus without dis- 
 turbing him in tlie business of the table. Nor 
 can the presence of this woman, uninvited and 
 unknown even as she was to the master of the 
 house, appear at all an incredible or strange cir- 
 cumstance, when we consider that entertainments 
 are often given in gardens, or in the outer courts, 
 where strangers are freely admitted, and that 
 Simon's table was in all likelihood as accessible tc 
 the same promiscuous visitors as are found ho\er- 
 ing about at the banquets and entering into the 
 houses of the most respectable Orientals of the 
 pTescnt day (Foibes, Orient. Mem). In the course 
 of the entertainment servants are freipienfly em- 
 ployed in sprinkling the liead and perso!) of the 
 guests with odoriferous perfumes, which, jnobably 
 to counteract the effects ol' too copious jjerspira- 
 tion, they use in great profusion, and the fragrance 
 of which, though generally too strong for Kiini- 
 jieans, is deemed an agreeable ret'resnment (see 
 Ps. xlv. 8; xxiii. 5; cxxxiii. 2). 
 
 The various items of which an Oriental enter- 
 tainment consists, bread, llesli, fish, fowls, melted 
 butter, lioney, and I'ruits, are in many ]ilacea 
 set on the table at once, in deliance ol all 
 f;iste. They are brought in upon trays — inie, 
 containing several dishes, being assij^neU to a
 
 S82 
 
 BANQUETS. 
 
 group of two, or at most three, persons, and the 
 number and quality of tlie dishes being regulated 
 according to the rank and consideration of the 
 paily seated before it. In ordinary cases four or 
 five dislies constitute the portion allotted to a 
 guest ; but if he be a person of consequence, or 
 one to whotji the host is desirous of showing more 
 than ordinary marks of attention, other viands 
 are successively brought in, until, if every vacant 
 corner of the tray is occupied, the bowls are piled 
 one above another. The object of this rude but 
 liberal hospitality is, not tliat the individual thus 
 honoured is expected to surfeit himself by an 
 excess of indulgence in order to testify his sense 
 of the entertainer's kindness, but that he may 
 enjoy the means of gratifying his palate with 
 greater variety ; and hence we read of Joseph's 
 displaying his partiality for Benjamin by making 
 his ' mess five times so much as any of theirs ' 
 (Gen. xliii. 34). The shoulder of a lamb, roasted, 
 and plentifully besmeared with butter and milk, 
 is re,^arder' as a great delicacy still (Bucking- 
 ham's Tracels, ii. 136), as it was also in the days 
 of Samuel. But according to the favourite 
 cookery of the Orientals, their animal food is for 
 the most part cut into small pieces, stewed, or 
 prepared in a liquid state, such as seems to have 
 been the ' broth" presented by Gideon to the angel 
 (Judg. vi. 19). Tlie made-up dishes are ' savoury 
 meat,' being highly seasoned, and bring to re- 
 membrance the marrow and fatness which were 
 esteemed as the most choice morsels in ancient 
 times. As to drink, when particular attention 
 was intended to be shown to a guest, his cup was 
 filled with wine till it ran over (Ps. xxiii. 5), and 
 it is said that the ancient Persians began their 
 feasts with wine, whence it was called ' a banquet 
 of wine ' (Esther v. 6). 
 
 The hands, for occasionally both were required, 
 besmeared with grease during the process of eating, 
 were anciently cleaned by rubbing them with 
 the soft part of the bread, the crumbs of which, 
 being allowed to fall, became the portion of dogs 
 (Matt. XV. 27; Luke xvi. 21). But the most 
 common way now at the conclusion of a feast is 
 for a servant to go round to each guest with 
 water to wash, a service which is performed by 
 the menial }K)uring a stream over their hands, 
 which is received into a strainer at the bottom of 
 the basin. This humble office Elisha performed 
 to his master (2 Kings iii. 11). 
 
 People of rank and opulence in the East fre- 
 quently give public entertainments to the poor. 
 Tlie rich man in the parable, whose guests dis- 
 appointed him, despatched his servants on the 
 instant to invite those that might be found sitting 
 by the hedges and the highways — a measure 
 wliich, in tl>e circumstances, was absolutely neces- 
 sary, as the heat of the climate would spoil the 
 meats long before they could be consumed by 
 the members of his own household. But many 
 of the great, from benevolence or ostentation, are 
 in trie hab.c of proclaiming set days for giving 
 feasts to the poor ; and then, at the time ap- 
 pointed, may be seen crowds of the blind, the 
 halt, and the maimed bending their steps to the 
 scene of eniertainment. This species of charity 
 claims a venerable antiquity. Our Lord recom- 
 mended his wealthy hearers to practise it rather 
 than spend their fortunes, as they did, on luxu- 
 rious living (Luke x-v 12); and as such iavi- 
 
 BAPTIbM. 
 
 tations to the poor are of necess.ty given by 
 public proclamation, and female meesengers art 
 employed to publish them (Hasselquist saw ten 
 or twelve tlius jjerambulating a town in Egypt^ 
 it is probably to flie same venerable practice thai 
 Solomon alludes in Prov. ix. 3. — R. J. 
 
 BAPTISM. A conviction of the holiness of 
 God excites in man tlie notion that he canr.sl 
 possibly come into any amicable relation wirf* 
 liim before he is cleansed of sin, which sepa- 
 rates him from God. This sentiment found 
 a very widely extended symbolic expression in 
 the lustrations which, formed an essential part of 
 the ceremonial creeds of the ancient nations. 
 These lustrations were prevalent not only among 
 the heathen nations, more especially those of the 
 southern climates, such as the Indians, Egyptians, 
 Greeks, and Romans (comp. Wetstein, Nov. Test. 
 Evang. Matth. iii. 6), but also among the Jews. 
 With these latter they were preparations for divine 
 services of a ditferent nature, and even for private 
 prayer (Judith xii). They formed a part of the 
 offering-service, and more especially of tlie sin- 
 ofl'ering (Lev. xvi.) ; and for that reason they 
 usually established the prayer-houses (irpocrevxciij 
 in the vicinity of running waters (comp. Kuinoel, 
 ad Act. xvi. 13). Josephus (^Antiq. xviii. 1. 5) 
 gives an account of the manifold lustrations of 
 the Essenes. In the language of the propliets, 
 cleansing with water is used as an emljlem 
 of the purification of the heart, which in the 
 Messianic age is to glorify the soul in her in- 
 nermost recesses, and embrace the whole of the 
 theocratic nation (Ezek. xxxvi. 25, sq. ; Zech. 
 xiii. 1). Such declarations gave rise to or nou- 
 rished the expectation that the advent of the 
 Messiah would manifest itself by a preparatory 
 lustration, by which Elijah or some other great 
 prophet would pave the way for him. This sup- 
 position lies evidently at the bottom of the ques- 
 tions which the Jews put to John the Baptist 
 (John i. 25 ; comp. Matt, and Luke, iii. 7), 
 whether he was the Messiah, or Elijah, or somf 
 other prophet 'i and if not, why he undertook tc 
 baptize? (comp. Schneckenberger, Ueber das Al- 
 ter der Jiidischen Proselytentaufe, § 41, sq.) 
 Thus we can completely clear up the histurica 
 derivation of the rite, as used by John and Christ 
 from the general and natural synibid of baptisnv 
 from the Jewish custom in particular, and t'roin 
 the expectation of a Messianic consecration. 
 Danz, Ziegler, and others have, nevertlieless. 
 supposed it to be derived from the Jewish cere- 
 monial of baptizing proselytes ; and Wetstein iia.s 
 traced that rite up to a date earlier than Chris- 
 tianity. But this opinion is not at all tenable : 
 for, as an act which strictly gives validity to the 
 admission of a proselyte, and is no mere «cco/m- 
 paniment to his admission, baptism certainly is 
 not alluded to in the New Testament; while, as 
 to the passages quoted in ]iroof from the classical 
 (profane) writers of that period, they are all open to 
 the most fundamental objections. Nor is the uttei 
 silence of Josephus and Philo on the subject, not- 
 withstanding their various opfwrtunities of touch- 
 ing on it, a less weighty argument against this 
 view. It is true tliat mention is made in the 
 Talmud of that regulation as already existing in 
 the first century A.n.; but such statements lielong 
 onlv to tl e traditiuns of the Gemara. and require 
 careful i'nvestigation befcre they can serve a*
 
 BAPTISM. 
 
 BAPTISM. 
 
 28> 
 
 pre per aatbuvity. This Jewish rite was pro- 
 oaoly o.iginally only a piuifying ce-eniony ; and 
 it was raised to the character of an initiating 
 and indis]H'nsable rite co-ordinate witli that ot 
 tsacritice and circumcision, only after tlie destruc- 
 tion of the Temple, when sacrifices had ceased, 
 and the circumcision of proselytes had, l)y reiison 
 of public edicts, become more and more imprac- 
 ticable (comp. Schneckenb. ib.'). E. G. Bengel 
 (Ueber d. Alter dcr Jvd. Pros. Tatcf. 181 1) sees, 
 in its original establishment only an act of ini- 
 tiation, which, though before the destruction of 
 tlie Tem[)le merely of an accidental character, 
 had thrOigh John and Christ received a peculiar 
 and solid basis. The view of De Wette (De Morte 
 Christ. Expiat.), that this rite was transferred 
 from Christianity to Judaism, Winer {Rcal-icor- 
 terh. art. ' Proselyten') justly rejects as utterly 
 imiirobable. 
 
 Baptism ok John. — It was the principal object 
 of John tlie Baptist to combat the prevailing opi- 
 nion, that the peiformance of external ceremonies 
 was sufficient to secure particii)ation in the Iving- 
 dom of God and his promises ; he required repent- 
 ance, therefore, (^dirTurfxa /j.erai'oias,) as a jirepara- 
 tion for tlie approaching kingdom of the Messiah. 
 That he may possibly have baptized heathens 
 also, seems to follow from his censuring the Pha- 
 risees for confiding in their descent from Abraham, 
 while they had no share in his spirit : yet it 
 sliould not be overlooked that this remark was 
 drawn from liim by tlie course of the argument 
 (Matt. iii. S, 9; Luke iii. 7, 8). Augusti {Denk- 
 wiirdigkeiten aus der Christl. Archdol. vii. 30) 
 it is tioie, advances a few counter-reasons, but they 
 are easily refuted (comp. Schneckenb. 1. i. § 37). 
 We must, on the whole, assume that John consi- 
 dered the existing Judaism as a stepping-stone by 
 wliich the Gentiles were to arrive at the kingdom 
 of God in its Messianic form. 
 
 Tlie relation of the baptism of John to the 
 Christian baptism gave rise to a sharp controversy 
 in the sixteenth century. Zwingle and Calvin 
 were in favour of the essential equality of the two ; 
 while Luther, Melanchthon, and the Catholic 
 church (^Concil. Trident. Sess. vii.) maintained 
 the contrary. The only difference Calvin allowed 
 was, that John baptized in the name of \he future 
 Messiah, while the apostles baptized in that of the 
 Messiah already come. But tiiis difference could 
 he of little moment ; the less so, since a step to- 
 w.irds the manifestation of the Messiah was already 
 made in the appearance of John himself (comp. 
 John i. 31). On the other hand, Calvin considers 
 the most important point of equality between the 
 two to exist in the fact, that botli include repent- 
 ance and jiardon of sin in the name of Clirist. 
 Tiie general jwint of view, however, from whicli 
 John contemplated tire Messiah and his kingdom 
 was that of the Old Testament, though closely 
 bordering on Christianity. He regards, it is true, 
 an alteration in the mind and s])irit as an indis- 
 pensable condition for partaking in the kingdom 
 of the Messiah ; still he looked for its establisliment 
 by means of conflict and external force, with 
 which the Messiah was to be endowed ; and lie ex- 
 ^lected in him a Judge and Avenger, who was to 
 let up outward and visible distinctions. It is, 
 -herefore, by no means a matter of indilference 
 tvhether baptism be administered in the name of 
 that Christ who floated before the mind of John, 
 
 or of the sutTering and glorified One, such as ;h« 
 apetlesknew him ; and whethei it was considered 
 u prejaration for a political, or a consecration into 
 a spiritual theocracy (conij). Dr. Neander's Leben 
 Jesu Christi, ji. 57, s(].). Jo! n was st) far frmn 
 tliis latter view, so far from contemplating a 
 purely sjiiritual develojmient of the kingdom of 
 God, that he even began suiisequently to entertain 
 doid)ts concerning Clirisf (Matt. xi. 2). Tertul- 
 lian distinguishes the essential characteristics of the 
 two ba]itisms in their spirit and nature. To that of 
 John he ascribes the iieyntive character ofrcpetit- 
 ancc, and to the Christian Xhe positive impurtalion 
 of new Vii'e (De liapt . X U); a distinction wliich 
 arises out of the relation of laic and ijospid, and i* 
 given in the words of the Baptist himself, - that he 
 baptizes with water and untii repentance, while tlie 
 greater one who was to come after him would 
 baptize with the Holy Ghost (Matt. iii. 1 1 ; Luke 
 iii. 16 ; John i. 2)). John's baptism hail not 
 the ciiaracter of an immediate, but merely of 
 a preparatory consecration for the glorified theo- 
 cracy (Jolin i. 31). The apostles, therefore, 
 found it necessary to re-baptize the disiTiples of 
 John, who had still adhered to the notions of their 
 master on that head (Acts xix.). To this ixyny- 
 stolic judgment Teitullian appeals, and in his 
 opinion coincide the most eminent teachers of the 
 ancient church, both of the East and the West 
 (comp. Augusti, 1. 1. p. 31).* 
 
 The B.^prisM of Jesus by John (Matt. iii. 
 13, sq. ; Mark i. 9, sq. ; Luke iii. 21, sq. ; comp. 
 John i. 19, sq. ; the latter passage refers to a time 
 after the baptism, and describes, ver. 32, the inci- 
 dental facts attending it). — The baptism of 
 Jesus, as the first act or his ])ublic career, is one 
 of the most important events recorded in evan- 
 gelical history : great difficulty is also involved 
 in reconciling the various accounts given by the 
 evangelists of that" transaction, and the several 
 points conne<-ted with it. To question the fact it- 
 self, not even the negative criticism of Dr. Strauss 
 has dared. This is, however, all that has been 
 concetled by that criticism, viz., the mere and 
 bare fact ' that Christ was baptized by John," while 
 all the circumstances of the event are placed in 
 the region of mytliology or fiction. 
 
 Critical inquiry suggests the following ques- 
 tions : — 
 
 1. In what relation did Jesus stand to John 
 before the baptism ? 
 
 2. What object did Jesus intend to obtain by 
 that baptism ? 
 
 3. In what sense are we to take the miraculous 
 incidents attending that act? 
 
 "With regard to the first point, we might be 
 apt to infer, from Luke ami Matthew, that there 
 had been an acquaintance between Christ and 
 John even prior to the baptism ; and that lience 
 John declines (Matt. iii. 14) to baptize Jesus, 
 
 * Josephus {Aiitiq. xviii. 5. 2) gives a general 
 character of John, tinctured, it is true, with 
 some hellenistic notions, yet not contratlictory to 
 the gospels. He calls him ' a good man, wl.o 
 bade the Jew.s to be virtuous, just and devout, 
 and so to come to Ins baptism ; for in this way it 
 would be accepted of God, if useil, not for tii€ 
 blotting out of certain sins, but for purification of 
 the body, supposing the soul to have been pre- 
 viously purified by rijjhteousneii.'
 
 asst 
 
 BAPTISM. 
 
 Arguing lint, lie needed to be baptized by him. 
 Tills, liov.ever, seenis to be at variance willi Jolin 
 i. 31, .'i.'J. Liiclce {Comment, i. p. 416, sq. 3rd 
 edit.) takes tiie words 'I knew him not' 'in their 
 strict and exclusive sense. John, 1 e says, could 
 not have spoken in this manner if he had at all 
 knovn Jesus ; and had he known hnn, he could 
 not, as a proj^het, have failed to discover, even at 
 an earlier period, the but too evident ' glory ' of the 
 Messiah. In fact, the narrative of the first three 
 Gospels presupposes the same, since, as the herald 
 of tlie Messiah, he could give that refusal (Matt, 
 iii. 14) to the Messiah alone. Liicke considers 
 John as a suie authority ; as for the contra- 
 diction in Luke, he makes less of it, regarding 
 th.e whole narrative of the infancy to have only a 
 secondary liistorical value ; while the contradic- 
 tion in Matthew he thinks ""O remove by giving to 
 veis. 14, 1.5, a different place from that which they 
 now occupy in tlie text; and, after the example of 
 tlie Ebiunitic revision of the Gospel according to 
 the Hebrews, in Epiplianius (Hceres. xxx. 13), he 
 puts tliese words into the mouth of John, only after 
 ('hrist had been revealed to liim to be tlie Messiah 
 by means of the baptism (comp. also Schleier- 
 maciier, Ueher die Schriften des Lucas, p. 44). 
 Tiiat such a compromise is forced, ajipears still 
 more clearly by the remark of Neander (Leben 
 Jesii Christi, p. 67), that the words, ' He forbad 
 him,' and ' Sutler it to be so now,' naturally refer 
 to Christ's descending into the water. Strauss 
 (Leb. Jesu, i. 330, sq.) and De Welte (ad Matth. 
 iii. 14) agree so far with Liicke, in admitting 
 a contradiction between the Gospel of John and 
 the other accovnits. Strauss is of opinion that the 
 three Gospels proceeded from the po})ular point of 
 view, to designate the important relation of the 
 two divine messengers as permanent or of long 
 standing; while John had a difl'erent object in 
 view, to found the acqua'mtance of both upon 
 revelation. We may admit the truth of the 
 latter part of this hypothesis, always bearing in 
 mind that the fact to which John refers is histori- 
 cally true ; but the first part is at variance with the 
 silence which Matthew and Mark observe as to 
 any early acquaintance, while Luke- expressly 
 brings only the mothers, and not the sons, into 
 intercourse. There is more ground in the other ob- 
 jection, viz. Iiow a prophet of John's developed cha- 
 racter could, after the miraculous things that had 
 passed, .-iccording to the accounts of the Gospels, 
 begin to doubt as to the mission of Clirist (Matt. xi. 
 2), especially after so short a period of observation. 
 This difficulty has not escaped the notice of any 
 sober critic ; but in what we have stated at the 
 outset concerning the theocratic views of John 
 may easily be found the reason of his having 
 afterwards entertained some doubts of Jesus. At 
 all events, considering the scanty information we 
 iKissess of John, we are not justified in resorting, 
 like Strauss, to the conclusion, that because the 
 narrati\'es are at \ariance, therefore the accounts 
 of the baptism, having for their object to extol John 
 and Christ, must be a fiction (comp. Liicke). 
 
 Meye.- {ad Matth. iii. 14), Neander (1. c. p. 
 6.5, sq.), and Winer {Bibl. Real-ioorterb., art. 
 'Johannes'), endeavoiu- to ex^ilain the accounts of 
 the baptism in favoiu- of an earlier acquaintance 
 hetween John and .lesus. Neander, for instance, 
 maintains that John's disclaiming all knowledge 
 rt' Jesus refeis merely to his Messianic nhaiacter, 
 
 BAPTISM. 
 
 while his refusal to baptize iiini proceeded merely 
 from the impression of sublime sanctity whick 
 Jesus had made on his mind while he stood befure 
 him and prayed (Luke iii. 21). This view does 
 not, however, remove the following dilliculties : — 
 
 1. Tiiat tlie sunple construction of the word, 
 of John (John i. 31, sq.) speaks more in favour ol 
 Liicke's interpretation. 
 
 2. That Luke's account of the early history of 
 Christ does not receive even by this view its full 
 validity, since, fnim his narrative, we can hardly 
 help coming to the conclusion that John was ac- 
 quainted with all the circumstances attendant on 
 the birth of Clirist, in which the latter was cha- 
 racterized as the Messiah, and that he had even 
 often been in previous intercourse with him, so 
 that there was hardly any fair reason t'or his 
 doubting who the Messiah was ; and, 
 
 3. That the prayer of Jesus (Luke iii. 21) can- 
 not be alleged as a reason for John's declining to 
 bajytize him, since it took place subsequently to 
 the liaptisui. 
 
 With regard to the second point at issue, as to 
 the object of Christ in undergoing baptism, we 
 find, in the first instance, that he ranked this action 
 among those of his Messianic calling. This object 
 is still more delined by John the Baptist (John i. 
 31), which Liicke interprets in the folkiwing 
 words : ' Only by entering into that community 
 which was to be introductory to the Messianic, by 
 attaching himself to the Baptist like any otherman, 
 was it possible for Christ to reveal himself to the 
 Baptist, and through him to others.' Christ, with his 
 never-fiiliug reliance on God, ne\ er for a moment 
 could doubt of his own mission, or of the right 
 period when his character was to be made manifest 
 by God (Paulus, Exeget. Handbuch, i.; Hase, 
 Leben Jesu, § 54) ; but John needed to receive 
 that assurance, in order to be the herald of the Mes- 
 siah who was actually come. For all others wlioi ■ 
 John baptized, either before or after Christ, this act 
 was a mere preparatory consecration to the king- 
 dom of the Messiah ; while for Jesus it was a 
 diiect and immediate conseciation, by means of 
 which he manifested the commencement of his 
 career as the founder of the new theucuicy, which 
 began at the very moment of his baptism, the 
 initiatory character of wliich con tituted its ge- 
 neral principle and tendency. Strauss, however, 
 neglecting this point, only dwells on that which 
 was unsuitable for the Messiah in the baptism ol 
 John, according to the Gospels. Jesus, he says, 
 could not possibly have considered himself as the 
 Messiah, or it would have been simulation in him 
 to take a part in the act of bajitism, which was 
 jierformed for the purpose of initiation into the 
 future Messiah. He probably came, like others, 
 with the intention of becoming a discijde of John, 
 whose notions he first imbibed, but which he after- 
 wards purified, and carried through according to 
 Lis own plan, when the Baptist had already quit- 
 ted the stage of action (comp., against this view, 
 Neander, 1. c. p. 61). 
 
 Another objection raised by Strauss is to be 
 found among the Ebioiiites of the ancient church. 
 Jerome {Dial. adv. Pelag. iii. 2) quotes the 
 following fragment from a gospel of that sect : 
 ' Ecce mater Domini et fratres ejus dicebant ei • 
 Joannes baptista baptizat in remissionem pecca- 
 torum ; eamus et baptizeniur ab co. Dixit uu;:euR 
 iis : quid peccavi ut vad»m et baptiftr ai: eof
 
 BAPTISM 
 
 N!.si forte noc ijisnin qudil dixi ignorantia est.' 
 This is also the Djiiiiion ofStiaiiss, iiaait'ly, that 
 die j'aitiikiiiij of ^aimafjia fxiTavoias j^jit'-supiioses 
 a |»ai!icij)ation in sin. In rei'iitation ot" this, Ne- 
 aniler (1. 1. \\. Gl) argues that it woiilil Le ah- 
 giiiti for Jesus to couie to he b;n;tize(l, hecause 
 conscious of needing pardon of sin, and nevertiie- 
 less al'terwards piofess to ])arih>n sins himself. 
 I)e VVette also thinks that the haptism of Chii-t 
 ni'.ist be founded, if not in real sin, at least in its 
 possibdity. If, by this possibility, he meant a 
 disposition to sin, similar to the ' peccability ' 
 ascribed to !iim by Hasilides, we nuist deny it in 
 the Redeemer ; nor lioes the history of the Tempta- 
 tion, whicli the advocates of this notion try tu 
 connect with it, prove anything in its favour. 
 And if, by that possibility, he meant to imply 
 the free principle which lies at the basis of the 
 free will of man, neither can that constitute the 
 groimd for baptism. 
 
 With res])ect to the miraculotis incidents which 
 iccompanicd the baptism of Jesus, if we take for 
 our startinj;-point the n.arralion of the three Gos- 
 [lels, that the Koly Spirit really and visibly de- 
 scended in the form of a dove, and jnoclaimed 
 Jesus, in an audible voice, to be the Son of God, 
 theie can be no difpculty in bringing it to har- 
 monize with tlie statement in the Gospel of John. 
 This literal sense of tlie text has, indeed, for a long 
 time been the prevailing interpretation, tiiough 
 many doubts res[)ecting it had very early forced 
 themselves on the minds of sober inquireis, traces 
 of which are to be found in Origen (Coiitr. 
 Ceh. i. 4S), and which Strauss (p. o76) has mure 
 elaborately renewed. To the natural . exjjlana- 
 tions belong that of Paulus (Excff. Huiidb.), 
 that the dove was a real one, which had by 
 chance flown neai- the spot at that moment ; 
 that of Meyer, thai it was the (igtire of a miteor 
 which was just then visible in the sky ; and that of 
 Kuinoel (ad Mattli. iii. ), who considers the dove as 
 a rigure i'or lightning, and the voice for that of 
 thunder, which the eye-witnesses, in tiieir extatic 
 feelings, consideied as a divine voice, such as the 
 Jews ca-l'ed a. Ila/h-/co/ [Mi.'yfi). Such inter]ire!:i- 
 tions are not uiiiv inec.nciiable with the evani;e- 
 lical text, but even presuppose a violation of the 
 common order of nature (comp. Strauss, p. 376, 
 »q.), in favour of adherence to which these inter- 
 pretations are advanced : it is not to be won- 
 t.ered at, therefore, that they have met witlr due 
 ridicule from the last-mentioned critic. The 
 conjecture of Schirfthess, who proposes to read ws 
 irepnrTfpdf, is ungrammatical and improbable, 
 and hardly deserves notice. 
 
 A more close investigation of the suliject, how- 
 ever, induci's us to take as a starting-point the ac- 
 coimtof tlie apostle St. John. It is John tlie liajjtist 
 himself who speaks. He was an eye-witness, nay, 
 to judge fiom Matthew and John, the only one 
 present with Jesus, and is cimsequcntly the only 
 source — with or without Christ — of information. 
 Indeeil, if there were more peojile pre.sent^ as w; 
 are almost inclined to infer from Luke, they can- 
 not have perceived ihe miracles attcriiling the 
 tjaptism of Jesus, or John and Chiist would no 
 doubt have apjiealed to their testimony in verili- 
 cation of them. (Comp. Schleiennacher, p. 13.) 
 
 In thus taking ihe statement in St. John for the 
 authentic ba-is of the wiiole history, a lew slight 
 Tints in it may atVoid ue he means of solving the 
 
 BAPTISM. 
 
 285 
 
 difficulties aftendi.ig the literal concenf »n nf *h« 
 text. John thcBajitist knows nothingol ai. eMemiui 
 and audible voice, and when he assures us (i. 33) 
 that he had in theSi'irif received flie jjroniise, tlm'. 
 the Mess ah woiilil be made manifest by tiie.Sjiirit 
 descending upon him, and remainiiuj — be il xpan 
 or ill liim — theie; this very rc/iiaiiiiii;/ a.ssurt^dly 
 j)rerludes any mi.terial appearance in the shape 
 of a bird. The internal probability of the text, 
 therefore, speaks in favour of a sjiirituul vision 
 in the mind of the Baptist; this view is slill 
 more strengthened by *he fact, ihat Luke suj;- 
 jioses there were many more ])resent, who not- 
 withstanding perceived notiiing a! all of -lie 
 miraculous incidents. The reason ('.!.! Jie i?pi;it 
 in the vision fissumed the tigiire <if a dove, 
 we would rather .seek in the peculiar Might and 
 movement of that bird, than, as Stian.ss and J)e 
 Welte think, in its form and shajie. Liicke and 
 Neaiidcr (ind the resemblance in ihe swifl Ijinh*. 
 of the tlo\e ; \\ iner, however (1. c. art. ' Taulje'), 
 in its ra])id and straight mov-enient. Tlie image 
 moreover was suited to the poetic character of the 
 beholder, and it is probalile, though not iiecessarv, 
 that the lecoUection of Gen. i. 2, where the Sjiirit 
 of Ciod is tlesi-ribed as soaring over tlie water.s, 
 might \ta.vc contriljutcd to laisc in the mind of the 
 Baptist that image; neither is \f necessary hvve 
 to bear in mind the speculations of the Rabbins 
 concerning the verse in Gen. (comp. Wetstein. 
 adMatth. iii.; Schottgen, Hw. Ilebr. W since all 
 these are of a later date than the wmus of John, 
 wl-.ose turn of niinil and educati;,a ucre liesides 
 quite opposed to Ralibinism. 
 
 In a similar way is tliis event exphiined, with- 
 out denying the divine ojeialion nixin liie mind 
 of the Baptist, by Origen (1. c.j, Theodoius Mop- 
 suest. (in Liicke, p. 4'2.'}), ' according to a soil of 
 spiritual conteinp'ation . . . .to Joiju alone: — i'or 
 the appearance was a vision, not a reality.' 
 (Liicke; Neander ; comp. also De Witle, ad 
 Malth. iii.). This ii;tei])ietatibn moieover has 
 the advantage of exhibiting the jiiiilosophic con- 
 nection of the incidents, since the Baptist appears 
 more conspicuously as the immediate end of the 
 divine dispensation (Neander). Christ had thus 
 the ihteiition of being introduced by him into the 
 Messianic sj'here of ojieration, while tl e Baptist 
 recognizes this to be his own jieculiar calling : the 
 signs by which he was to know the Messiah had 
 been intimated to him, and now that they had come 
 to piiss, the jivophecy ami his mission were liillilled. 
 Neander, theiefore, considi rs the manifestation as 
 merely sabjcctirc (or in tiie mind of John), while 
 Julius Miiller and Liicke sujipose a real ope- 
 ration at the same time of the Spiiit on Clirist. 
 In process of time tradition cinverfed this vision 
 intd a sensible external ]ihenuiiKnoii. Matthew 
 (com]). De VVette), though he ap) ears (vtr. 17) 
 to consider the fact as external, nevertheless, to 
 judge from the phrase " unto hi/ii' (ver. !(!), 
 whicli most probably refers to tl e Baptist, agrees 
 with John, that the liaptist was the immediate 
 eiul of that revelation. But to the less leilned 
 concejition of Maik ai:d Luke, it was natural 
 to refer tiiat revelation solely trt Jesus as the 
 principal ]iei.sonage. Luke «.iiows himself par- 
 ticularly fiartial to the sensible f.nni {ttufuniKif 
 etSfi) The more the Kbii nitic view oi^scures 
 the tradition, the more does if stray from (be 
 simple exjxwitiia of the (io8j)«) of S'. Jeha.
 
 BAPTISM. 
 
 BAPTISM. 
 
 Juttin Martyr mentions an anecdote {Dial, and manifestation to an already existing ]')eraon. 
 cont. Tryph. § R8) ascritjed to the apostles, Jesus, having- within himself the toyo* as thedtriw* 
 according to which Christ was siirroumled by SMi/ee.<, was therefore capable of receiving the ever- 
 flan c<< '.f fire wiien standing in the Jordan, but lasting communication of tiie Spirit. As man, 
 when he was rising from the water the Holy Spirit subject to human development, he stood in need 
 descended upon him, while a voice uttered, be- of an external excitement and animation by 
 sides the words mentioned in the Gospels, those God, such as took place at his baptism. It waa, 
 of the 7lh verse of the 2nd Psalm. By this as Lucke thinks, one of those leading epochs, at 
 it was intended to establish the spiritual birth of which the ever-continued process of divine com- 
 Christ only from the moment of his baptism, munication with mankind gives rise to Dew ex» 
 contrary to tlie apostolic reports concerning his ternal developments. 
 
 birth. The same report is given in a still more This way of reconciling the t\vo events is con- 
 ])ointed manner in an Ebionitic Fragm. (Epiphan. ceivable. On the other hand, those critics, who, 
 XXX. 1.3), according to which a light shines around like Neander and others, do not at all assume 
 the jiluce, while a voice addresses itself first to that there was any immediate o|jeration of the 
 Jesus and next to the Baptist, who then falls at his Holy Spirit on Christ at the baptism, but consider 
 <eet. The Spirit, also, in the figure of a dove, not all this as a mere development of the divine prin- 
 . only descends (<poM him, but enters also wfe him ciple which was in him, do not need to make 
 (eV ftSei TTipianpas KaTe\9ov(Trjs /tol (IcreAdovcrrjs compromises in trying to reconcile the two events. 
 fh avriy). The notion that Christ was dis- According to their view, the Baptist saw in the 
 tinguished from the prophets in the Old Testa- resting of the Spirit on Christ, nothing but a 
 meiit by the Holy Spirit remaining with him per- necessary union of his own mission with that of 
 manently, while with the former it was merely Jesus; yet even so, we have to confine ourselves 
 jiartial and momentary, is still more distinctly in this particular to the relation of John alone, 
 expressed in a fragment of the Gospels of the since the other three Gospels, in connecting tlie 
 Nazarenes (Jerome, Adv. Pelag. iii. 2) : ' De- baptism of Jesus with the history of his tempta- 
 scendit fons omnis Spiritus sancti et requievit tion, certainly seem to insinuate thereby a more 
 super eum et dixit : Fili mi, in omnibus Prophetis jjowerful operation of the Spirit on Jesus. The 
 exspectabam te ut venires et requiescerem in te. advocates of the latter view may fairly refer to 
 Tu es enim requies mea, tu es filius primigenitus, the fact that the difl'erence that exists in tlie 
 qui regnas in sempitemum.' However disfigured narrative of the baptism between the Three 
 the fact may aj>pear in these Ajwcrypha, the Gospels and that of John, is chiefly owing to 
 general and decided purport of the tradition with tlieir respective views with regard to tlie Messiah, 
 regard to the divine manifestation, assuredly leads The former rest their views of him morp or. 
 back to an iiistorical origin, which can nowhere the Old Testament: he is thei">foit wivn thein 
 be lietfer or more successfully sought than in a king and prophet ^':^;.,- m the i.ame of Gou 
 the depositions of tlie Baptist. by whom he is anointed with the Holy Spirit anf 
 
 Strauss, in his ot)stinate scepticism, refuses, power (Acts x. 37 J, and becomes manifest tlirougn 
 notwithstanding, to accept this view. He re- miracles, and is finally raised to divine majesty, 
 jects the assumption of a mere vision in John Not so the more sublime conception of John 
 i. 31, sq., and sees in 'like a dove' notliing in that matter: he sees in him the incarnated 
 but a \isible phenomenon ; neither indeed does logos, the indejiendent source of his divine mani- 
 it suit his views to assume sucli a vision, since testations, to the execution of whicii he wanted, 
 it would pre-suj)pose a momentary miraculous it is true, such external calls as present them- 
 inspirafion, a thing he is averse to acknowledge, selves in the relations of practical life, but by no 
 But theie is no necessity for taking 'like a means a new communication of tiie Spirit. Tl>e 
 dove' for anything else tlian an embodied symbol, doctrine of St. Paul, ' Son of God after the 
 and more especially as the simile is wanting in Spirit, Son of David after the I esh," may be con- 
 yer. 33 (Luci%e); nor is there, in the momentary sidered as the link between them. 'The ca- 
 2ns[)iration in that instance, anything so extra- nonical Gospels have not gone so far i,i dis- 
 ordinary as to comjiel us to look at the incident crepancy as to come into real conflict. The tliree 
 as a mere fiction : on the contrary, we consider first speak plainly of the superhuman generation 
 tiie state of piojihetic ecstasy, which is so common of Christ; and all that can be imputed to them 
 to tlie prophets in the Old Testament, to be quite is that they do not lay so much stress on it a.« 
 in unison with the prophetic character of John. John does, and are not fully aware of its import.' 
 
 Strauss maintains, moreover, that the imparting Only the partial view of the Ebionites renders 
 of tlie Spirit at his baptism, and the superhuijian the subject quite irreconcilable, 
 generation of Jesus, are two facts altogether at Christian Baptism. — Jesus, having under- 
 variance with each other. De Wetle also thinks gone baptism as the founder of the new kingdom, 
 it impossible to understand both in their proper ordainetl it as a legal act by which individuals 
 and full signification, and is of opinion that the were to obtain the rights of citizens therein, 
 fact that Christ was in possession of the Spirit is Tliough he caused many to be baptized by his 
 more certain to the Christian than the manner in disciples (John iv. I, 2), yet all were no* bap- 
 which he received it. Lucke's reply to this (Cow- tized who were converted to him; neithei was it 
 7nent. p. 433, sq.) is of importance. He thinks even necessary after they had obtained ;«artici- 
 tliat John makes a decided di-tinction between the pation in him by his personal choice and for- 
 divine logos in its existence before it was incar- giving of sin. But when he could no longet 
 iiated, and the Spirit. The former is a person, <;f personally and immediately choose and receive 
 whom il may be said ' He was made flesh,' but not members of his kingdom, when at the same lime 
 so of the Spirit, winch stands in contrast to Hesh, all had been accomplished whicli the founder 
 •Jid constitutes the principle of communication thought necessary for its comnletion, be gav*
 
 BAPTISM. 
 
 power to the spiritual comnuinity tc 'ceive, in 
 aiasteail, members l)y baptism (Matt, xxviii. 19 ; 
 Mark xvi. 16). Baptism essentially ileiiotes tiie 
 
 egenerating of him who receives it, his partici- 
 {latiun holh in the divine life of Christ and tlie 
 promises resteti on it, as well iis his recejjtion as 
 a meniher of tiie Cln istiari connnunity. 
 
 Eacii of these momentous jxiints implies all 
 the rest : and the germ of all is contained in 
 the words of Christ (Matt, xxviii. 19; comp. 
 Neander, History of the I'lanting, &c. ii.). The 
 details are variously digested by the Apostles 
 according to their peculiar modes of thinking. 
 Joiin (lAells— in like manner as he docs on the 
 holy conniumion — almost exclusively on tiie in- 
 ternal nature of ba.ptism, tlie immediate mystical 
 «nion of the Spirit with Clirist ; baj)tism is with 
 ■ m, equivalent to ' being born again ' (Joim 
 ..i. 5, 7). Paul gives more explicitly and com- 
 pletely tiie otlier points also. He understands by 
 it not only tlie union of the individual with the 
 Head, by tlie giving one's self up to the Redeemer 
 and the receiving of his life (Gal. iii. 27), but also 
 the union with the other members (ib. 28; 1 Cor. 
 12, 13; Efilies. iv. 5; v. 26). Ht combines the 
 negative and positive points of regeneration, alike 
 with the deatli and resurrection of Clirist, and 
 also with the sinking in and rising up at baptism 
 (Rom. vi. 4, sq. ; Col. ii. 12). 
 
 As regards the relation between the external 
 and the internal, the normal condition of baptism 
 required that the ceremony should be combined 
 with regeneration in him who received it, while 
 he who administered it should have a perfect 
 knowledge of the state of the baptized, and 
 siiouid aim at strengthening and promoting the 
 new life in him. Tliere is no doubt that when 
 Christ himself gave the assurance that he had 
 received some one into his community, whether 
 with or without baptism, such a declaration of 
 ■sis choice was met by the individual with a 
 disposition already prepared to begin the new 
 life. But the Church is not in a state of perfec- 
 tion, and being deficient both in knowledge and 
 will, she cannot fix tiie moment of regeneration 
 in order to combine with it the act of baptism. 
 She nevertheless places both in a necessary mu- 
 tual relation, and considers baptism only then 
 complete when regeneration takes place ; the 
 Church therefore either delays baptism until after 
 regeneration, or administers it beforehand, con- 
 fiding in the assuraace that the agency of the 
 Church (animated by the spirit of Christ and 
 directed in behalf of an individual who enters 
 into a sort of preliminary connection with the 
 Churcli by this act of baptism) will also produce 
 in him regeneration, provided always that the 
 individual has the will for it. 
 
 In the Apootolic times the Church was in a 
 less mixed state; a comparatively large number, 
 perhaps an actual majority, of the whole body of 
 the liaptized might at that time have passed for con- 
 verts, as the inward and outward conditions if bap- 
 tism were then not so far removed from each other 
 M they afterwards became The necessity of exa- 
 mining the comparative merits of both conditions 
 »e[)arately grew with the growing imjierfection 
 of the community. The Apostles did not yet 
 feel it; lliey considered lioth only in the light of 
 their necessary union with each other, a!* Pa.v.!, 
 for instance, says (Tit. iii. 5 ; comp. Mark xvi. 
 
 BAPTISM. 
 
 2S7 
 
 J 6) of the external svmliol, wliat belongi only t» 
 tlie union of both. Traces of sejiaration, however, 
 were already jK'rceptible in the a])osfolic age. 
 Among tlie symjitonis of the perfect union of the 
 convert with the Redeemer, waa one peculiar to 
 that ]>eriod alone, manifesting the new life exter- 
 nally by the extatic state of tiie individual in 
 whom the Spirit of God had operated. If was 
 usually wrought by the hands laid on the baji- 
 tized to bless, as the concluding act of ba])fism 
 Sometimes, however, that extacy manifested itself 
 indejiendenlly of the external act of bajitism (Acts 
 X. 47); while baptism, on the otlier hand, was 
 sometimes jierformeil without the reipiisite ])ro))er 
 inward sentiments of the baptize*!, and wilhont 
 the * gift of I'he Spirit' (Acts viii. 13, lit). The 
 words of Peter (Acts x. 47) taken in connection 
 with the whole, mean, that the Spirit of G.<d is 
 not bound to external ceremony, but to inward 
 union and fellowship by belief. To ascribe the 
 promises to baptism witliout that inivaid union, 
 would be making it an opus opcraHim and its 
 efficacy a magic power; but, on the otlier hand, 
 since the institution of Christ comprises also the 
 external signs, it cannot be complete without them, 
 and he who would abolish these external signs 
 would deprive the Church of an essential tie of 
 fellowship. The Catholic church rather favours 
 the former doctrine, and a few mystical sects, 
 the Quakers, &c., the latter. 
 
 Infant Baptism was established neither by 
 Christ nor the apostles. In all places where we 
 find the necessity of bajitism notified, either in 
 a dogmatic or historical jxiint of view, it is evi- 
 dent that it was only me<int for those who were 
 capable of comprehending the word preached, and 
 of being converted to Christ by an act of their own 
 will. A pretty sure testimony of its non-existence 
 in the Apostolic age may be interred from 1 Cor. 
 vii. 14, sin r Paul would certainly have referred 
 to the ba;itism of cliildren for their holiness (comp. 
 Neander, UiU. of the Plaiitinf/,kc., i. p. 206). But 
 even in later times, several teachers of the clmrcli, 
 such as Tertullian {De Bapt. IS) and others, reject 
 this custom; indeed, his churcli in general (that 
 of North Africa) adhered longer than others to 
 the primitive regulations. Kven when ba]itism 
 of Cliildren wasalready theoretically derived fioni 
 the apostles, its practice was iie\ ertheless for a 
 long time cmfined to a matiirer age. 
 
 In sujijxirt of the contrary ojiinion, the advo- 
 cates in former ages (now hardly any) used to 
 a])peal to Matt. xix. 11; but their strongest ar- 
 gument in its favour is the legnlation of baptizing 
 all the members of a house and family (1 Cor. 
 xvi. 1.5; Acts xvi. 33; xviii. 8j In none of 
 these instances has it iieen proved that there were 
 little children among them; but, even sup|!(ising 
 that there were, there «a« no necessity for exclud- 
 ing them from baptism in plain woriis, since such 
 exclusion was understood as a matter of course. 
 Many circumstances conspired early to introiluce 
 the practice of infant-bajitizing. The coiifusion 
 between the outward and inward conditions of 
 bajitism, ami the magical elVei^t that was imputed 
 to it ; confusion of tliought about the visible and 
 invisilile church, condenining all those wlio dij 
 not lielong to the former ; the doctrine of the 
 natural corruption of m.ui so closely connected 
 with die jiieceding; and, finally, tiie desire of 
 distinj^uishing Ctiristian children fro'ji tlie Jewish
 
 28S 
 
 BAPTISM. 
 
 BAPTISM. 
 
 and Heatlieij, and of commending tliem more 
 ellectually to the care of the ChiistTan commu- 
 nity — all these circumstances and many more 
 have contiibuted to the introduction of infan' 
 baptism at a very early j)eriod. 
 
 But, on the other hand, the baj)fl3m of children 
 is n<jt at all at variance with the j)rinciple of 
 Christian baptism in general, after what we lia\e 
 observed on the separation of re^^eneration and 
 baptism. For, since it cannot be determincLl 
 when the former begins, the real test of its ex- 
 istence lying only in the holiness continued to the 
 end of man's life, the littest point for baptism is 
 av'^l'^n"-'^- the beginning of life. Nevertheless, the 
 p.olession of faith is still needed to complete it; 
 Conlirmation, or some equivalent observance, is 
 therefore a very important consummation. The 
 fides infantluni is an absurd assum2)tion, of which 
 the ScrijiMires know nothing. On tiie other hand, 
 liie l)aptized child is strongly recommended to 
 the com tmnity and to theSpiiit of God dwelling 
 therein, becoijing the careful object of the edu- 
 cation and holy ii fluence of tiie Church (comp. 
 1 Cor. vii. 11). Natur'.' and experience teach us, 
 tlieiefore, to retain the bapl sm of children, now 
 that it is introduced. 
 
 To be admitted to baptism in i he Apostolic age 
 there needei«l no further development of Christian 
 knowledge than a professed belief that Jesus was 
 (he promised Messiah. To be baptized in his 
 name meant, to recei\e baj)tlsm in the belief that 
 the power and dignity contained in the idea of a 
 Messiah was realised in Jesus. Tlie profession of 
 faitli (1 Pet. iii. 21) probably was such ^s to con- 
 \'ey this idea ; and next also the foimula of bap- 
 ti^-.ii in (he name of Christ, or, according to Matt. 
 xxviii. 19, of the Fatlier, Sun, and Holy Ghost, 
 when the whole body was inunersed in water. 
 Christ did not intend by these words to institute 
 a fixed formula of baptism, but merely meant to 
 iniiicate therel)y the substance of the essential re- 
 lations of bajjtism, since in his life-time jjeople 
 could not yet be bap<^ized in the name of the 
 Holy Ghost, As the Church, however, knew of 
 no better compendiary text for the article of faith, 
 she declared herself early for that formula, v/hich 
 was already in general use at the time of Justin 
 Maityr. To prefice the act of baptism by minute 
 instruction was nnpossible in a time when the 
 preaching of the Gospel was as yet limited to but 
 a very few. A brief sketch of the history of Christ, 
 the central point of which was his death and 
 resmrection, and a reference to the Old Testament, 
 where he had been pre-announced by the prophets, 
 weie deemed sufficient at that time (conip.Neander, 
 Hist, of the^Plant. ; H^st. of the Church, ii ; Acts 
 ii. 19;. The apostles either .hemselves ba])tized, 
 of which there are many instances in the Acts, or 
 charged otliers to do it, and confined themselves 
 to (he ' laying on of hands' on which followed the 
 communication of the Sjjirit. The reason of this 
 limitation is, no doubt, the same which actuated 
 <tlso Christ in not himself baptizing, viz. that 
 they might be less interrupted in the task of 
 preaching the Gospel. Paul had subsequently 
 also anotlier inducement for not doing so, not to be 
 made the leader nf a jiarty (1 Cor. i. 14- IS). 
 
 Kaptism for the Dead. — Paul (1 Cor. xv. 
 20) uses this j hrase. It is difficult, almost im- 
 po9sil'le, to arri\e at a satisfactory and certain 
 re»ult as to his meaninsi. sinoe neither he r.:;r any 
 
 other authorities furnish us with the necessary data 
 Few passages have un<lergone more numerous arid 
 arbitrary emendations than this text. To give, 
 however, some order to the numerous interpreta- 
 tions, we ma^' in the first instance obser^'e, thai 
 they all chielly turn ujion the question, whethei 
 the baptism here n)entioned is the general church- 
 baptism, or some joartictdar one indejjendent o( 
 the former. We shall examine, first — 
 
 A. Those interpretatiotis which take it to be 
 sonic jxirticidar application of baptism. 
 
 From the wording of the sentence, rhe most 
 simple impression certainly is, that Paul speaks 
 of a bajitism which a living man receives in the 
 place of a dead one. This interpretation is par- 
 ticularly adopted by those expounders with whom 
 grammatical constiuction is of paramount im- 
 portance, and the first tlnni^ to be considered. 
 
 Foremost among the older critics is Ambrose (Hi- 
 lar.): 'Intantum natum et stabilem > ult osten- 
 dere resurrectionem mortuorum. ut exemplumdet 
 eorum.qui tam securi erant de futura resurrectione, 
 ut etia-ii pro mortuis baptizarentur, si ijueni forte 
 mors praevenisset, timentes, ne aut male aut non 
 resurgeret, qui baptizatus non luerat ; vivus no- 
 mine mortui linguebatur." Among the moderns are 
 Erasmus, Scaliger, Grotius, Calixtiis; and of the 
 more recent the most considerable are Augusti 
 (ArchtTol. iv.), Meyer (who understands vTr6p, = te 
 the advantage, in favour, which may indeed well 
 be the case), Billroth, and Riickert. who supposes 
 that the Corinthians, convinced of the necessity 
 and benefit of baptism, but erroneously consider- 
 ing it not as a symbol, but as a real means of 
 purifying the lieart itself, had taken it into their 
 heads to give the benefit thereof also to the dead, 
 by administering baptism to them by a substitute, 
 a living person, and thus itnagined that a baptism 
 hy j)roxy was practicable. De VVette considers 
 this the only possible meaning of the w(;ids. 
 
 With regard to this interpretatiim, some douU 
 arises as to the real existence at that time of such 
 a custom, since the only information lesjjecting it 
 would be this passage, though Riickert thinks this 
 is sulKcient evidence. It is true, that they refer to 
 tiie Shepherd of Hei mas (N(/;u7. ix. 16); but all that 
 can be inferred from il is, that they had at that lime 
 alre*dy begun to evince an oveidue and extrava- 
 gant respect I'or outward biiptism. Teitullian 
 {Contr. Murcion. v. 10) seems in a more direct way 
 to spe.ik of the existence of the custom : ' Noli 
 apostolum novum statin auctorcm aut confirma- 
 toiem ejus (institutionis) denotaie, ut fanto magis 
 sisteiet cainis resurrectionem, quanto illi qui vane 
 pro mortuis baptizarentur, fide resuriectionis hoc 
 facerent. Habemus ilium alicubi unius iiaptismi 
 definitorem. Igituret promoituis tingui pro cor- 
 poribus est tingui; moituum inim corpus ostendi- 
 mus' (comp. De Resurrect. Cum. 4S). Teitullian 
 in these words distinguishes a false application of 
 baptism by substitution, from the general one ad- 
 hered to by the apostle; he thirks tiiat the apostle 
 confirms baptism pro tnortuis, not in that erro- 
 neous but in a projier sense, compatible with 
 his other and geneial views of liapfism. Of 
 that eironeous practice, however, Tertnllian, ir. 
 this as in tlie other place, evidently knows no 
 more than what is indicated by Pa\il in tn« 
 above passage; neither does he mention thaJ 
 such a custom had prevailed in his time among 
 the Marcionites ?r any others ''comii. Neand»>r.
 
 BAPTISM. 
 
 BAPTISM. 
 
 at* 
 
 Tfisf. nf the Chirrh, 5. 2, p. 523, sq., 3rr} e<lit.). 
 More cprlain inlbnnation is pivcn l)y Clirysos- 
 tom, who relates of tlie Marcionites (llomil. 
 40, ad 1 Cor.) lluit when a < atechtunen (lie<l 
 amon'^ them, <i li\iii.r per-on used to lay hini- 
 nAf under the bed of the decea<5ed, and answer 
 in his stead the cnstoniary (piestions. after which 
 rt.e deceased was baptize. 1. He says tliat they 
 referred to the ap;)r()\al of St. Paul in the above 
 passage. It is true that this absurd custom 
 M certainly met with anion;^ tlie roui,di and su- 
 versfitious Marcionites of later times, yet is it 
 hif^hly improbable, as Neander (i/f stijira) justly 
 observes, that su('h a custom should ever have 
 emanated from Marcion himself, who had entered 
 viore dee])ly into the spirit of the Pauline ' Faith ' 
 »han any ol'iiis coiitem[)oraries. 
 
 A similar account is !,Mven by Epiphanius 
 [Hceres. xxviii. 7} of the fxTiostir sect of C( rinthus, 
 who were nuich ojiposed to the Marcidnites : ' In 
 this country, — 1 mean, Asia, — and even in Ga- 
 latia. their school flourished eminently; and a 
 traditional tact concerniti;^ ttiem has reached us, 
 that when any of them had died without bajitism, 
 they used to bapt'ze others in their name, lest in 
 the resurrection tiiey shoidd sutler juuiishment as 
 unbuptized.' We are not justilied in denying 
 credence to this statement, thouj^li there is just 
 suspicion ai^ainst Kpiphanius from his total want 
 of critical juilLtnient, and his erroneous supposition 
 that Paul was particularly combating the opinions 
 of Ck'rinthus, a supposition which he applies also to 
 the pjissage before us. In the C'oncil. ('arthagin. 
 A.D. 397, can. fi, and Codex Eccles. Afric. can. IS, 
 it is forbidden to administer l)aptism and the holy 
 communion to the dead : ' cavendum est etiam; 
 ne mortuos baptizari posse fratrum infirm itas 
 credaf, (juum eucharistiam morfuis non dari ani- 
 inud\enerit." Here baptism 6)/ i"""-^y '* ""^ al- 
 luded to, and we must therefore assume that the 
 C'jiuTicils ('ad no ground for its ))rohil)ition, the 
 custom having, as it .seems, not then existed in 
 lho.se paits. Augu.sti (1. 1. vii. ]). 42) refers to the 
 proselyte bajjtism of the Jews, where, lie thinks, 
 paicnts underwent the rite for their children. 
 But all the authorities (pioted in its favour by 
 Lightfoot Tad Math. iii. 6) prove notliing as to 
 substitiition ; and e\ en if they did so. it would 
 still l)ehi;jhly improbable tliat the Gentile churches 
 would have adopted it from them (conip. Schnec- 
 kenljerger, 1. 1. p. 79). 
 
 All therefore we can infer from the above state- 
 ments i.s, that baptism by sid)stitntion bad taken 
 pia'ce among the Marcionites, and jierhaps also 
 among the Ccrinthians and otlier smaller sects 
 towards the end of the fourth ceritmy, a period 
 when the confused views of the Church as to the 
 relations of tlie external to the spiritual might 
 easily have favoured that erroneous custom ; but 
 that if existed between that period and the time 
 wl'.en Paul wrote the above passage is wholly 
 iinsntisfaiitiated. Is it possible to suppose that in 
 the various (piarters of the Church of which we 
 ha'e any inlnrmation, no notice whatever should 
 have been taken either Ijy a synodical decree, or 
 by a contemporary writer within that jx'riod, of a 
 eiLstom, which, the earlier it existed, must have 
 aj p«'are<l only so much the more olVensive. Is it 
 rv I therefore evident that if it is found .300 years 
 rJ'wwards, it wa? by no means a continuation 
 » ^ primitive custom, fjut had arisen inde- 
 
 pendently of the latter, either in imitation of it, 
 or from a mistaken interpretation of the Ai)est)» 
 in oiu- nassage 7 
 
 The idea, then, that sucli a su])erslitions ciistoiB 
 existed in the Corinthian <-ommui!ity is devoid 
 of all hi-tori<'al evi<lence; especially as the ma- 
 gical notions of l)aptism had as yet so litlh" pre- 
 vailed as not even to have given rise to infant l'a]>- 
 tism. Add to this, that the Corinthian church wa« 
 far in advance of most others at tlial period in e<lu- 
 catiou and dilVused knowledi^e, and that, i?i fact, 
 their very striving for spiritual develojjment threat- 
 ened to lead them into oneside<lness, and we nuKst 
 confess that the clearer the sense of the words lie- 
 comes the more obscure becomes the thing itself. 
 
 The difficulties will still more incre;ise, if w^ 
 were to admit, with Olhausen, Riickert, and De 
 AVette, that the .\postle a])proved of the al)surd 
 practice in question, since he would thus be brought 
 into contradiction with his own jirinci] les on the 
 importance of faith and external woiks, which iie 
 devclopes inJiis Epistle to the Galatians. Such a 
 striking error could not have been a mere slip in 
 Paul ; it might therefore certainly gi\e cause to 
 suspect similar superstitions views in him. Even 
 Amiirose 'I.e.) had already correctly judged, when 
 he .said, ' Exemplo hoc non factum illornm jirobat, 
 sed fidem fixam in resurret tione ostendit.' in tl.e 
 words of Paul we discover no opinion of his own 
 concerning the justice or injustice of the rite: i.^ is 
 meiely brought in as an ar;/ nnc'iitum ex conccsso 
 in favour of the object w hichlie pursues through tlie 
 whole chapter (comp. 1 Cur ii. •'>,. However much 
 may be objected against this interpretation, It is liy 
 far more reasonable than the explanations givtn by 
 other critics. The Coiinthian comnuuiity was cer- 
 tainly of a mixed chaiactei, consisting of intlivi- 
 duals of various views, ways of thinking, and dif 
 ferent stages of ediu'ation ; so that theie might slil! 
 have existed a small number among llum cajjable 
 i)f such absurdities. We are not sufficiently ac- 
 qua'tited with all the parti<'ulars of the ca«e to 
 maintain the contrary, while the sim]ile gram- 
 matical sense of the passage is decidedly in fa\ our 
 of the ])ro]iosed interpretation. 
 
 2 Origen (Dial, contr. Marcio7i.'), Luthei, 
 Chemnitz, and Job. Gerhard, inleijcet the words 
 as relating to fiajitism over the graves of il e mem- 
 bers of the community, a favouiite rntetezvout 
 of theeavly Christians. Luther says tluit, in cider 
 to strengthen their faith in tlie resni^vpciion, the 
 Christ'ans baptized over the tombs of tiie dead. 
 In that case inr\p with genit. nnist f)e taken in . » 
 local sense quite an isolated instance in the New 
 Testament (comji. Winer, Grammac. p. 2fi3). 
 The custom alluded to, moreover, dates from a 
 nuicli later jjeriod, when the adoration of the 
 martyrs had begun to sjrcad. 
 
 3. The ;d)ove-quote(l pas.sjige of Euiphaniu.'i 
 mentions also a view, according to wV.ich t'lKro) 
 is not to he translated by c/ead, l)ut ■mortaUt/ 
 ill jiersons, whose baptism was ex]ied»ted by 
 S])riiikling water u])on them on their death-bed, 
 instead of immersing fhitu in the usual way; the 
 rite is known mxler the name of ha]>fis:;ins cli- 
 liini.s. lerttialis. Hut lew of the modern theolo- 
 gians (among whom, however, are Calvin a.iJ 
 Estius) advocate this view, which transgress«'s no? 
 less against the words of the text, than against a' I 
 historical knowledge of the subject. 
 
 B. T/ie intarprc/a/ioim u-hich stippcxe t/iat tkt
 
 200 
 
 BAPTISM. 
 
 text speaks of (jcncral church baptism. To these 
 belongs the oldest opinion we know of, given in 
 Tertiilliiiri (1. c. coinj). J)e Resurrect. Cam. 48): 
 ' Qiml et ips-is l>a})tizari ait, si non qnaB bajitizan- 
 tur coipoia lesuii^iint ?' Accorilin;^ to this view 
 iVfp is here tal<en in the sense of o?i acroiint of, 
 and viKp'xv in that oi dead bodies, they tliemsclves, 
 the ija|)tized, as tlead persons. The notion which 
 lies at the bottom of this version is, that the iiody 
 possesses a f^uaiantee for resurrection in tlie act of 
 baptism, in whicli it also sliares. The sinking 
 under and rising vp is with them a symlxil of bury- 
 ing and resurrection. Some of the Greek Fathers 
 also fiivour this interpretation, and more especially 
 Theodoret, who thus ileveiojies tlie notion : ' He 
 vilio inniergoes baptism is tlierein l)uried with his 
 Lord, that having partaken in his death, lie may 
 bec.dme partaker in his resurrection also. But if 
 the l)(idy is a corpse and rises not, why is it ever 
 liaptized^' Cln-ysoftom : '^Paul said, Unless there 
 is a lesunection, why art thou bajitized for 
 corpses, that is, for mere bodies. For to this end 
 art tliou baptized, for the resurrection of tliy 
 dead body, &!;." The idea thus developed is 
 by itself adinis-ible, and liarmonizes well with 
 the wliole course of ideas jmrsued by Paul from 
 ver. 19. The form of the sentence, however, 
 becomes uncommonly harsh, because of the tran- 
 sition : ' else what shall they do who are baptized 
 on account of the dead T (on, account of them- 
 selves, who are dead)"? Indeed, it is by far more 
 iarring than R(nn. v. 6, which is quoted as a 
 parallel passage. 
 
 2. The woiils of Chrvsostom, just quoted, cer- 
 tainly convey also the same meaning as regards 
 ' the dead,' liut ditfer from the two former in- 
 terpretations with regaid to uTre'p : ' in behijlf of 
 the dead " thus means, ' in the belief of the re-nnec- 
 tioii of the dead.' This ungrammatical version is 
 adopted liy Tlieo[ihy1act : 'Why are men bap- 
 tized at all in behalf of lesurrection, that is, in 
 expectation of resurrection, if the dead rise riofj'* 
 (Isidor. Pelas. ' li' bodies rise not at all, why do 
 we believe diat in baptism they are changed to 
 incorruptibility'?' perhaps with reference to our 
 passage). 
 
 •i. Pelagius, Olearius. Fabricius, are of opi- 
 nion that the phrase, ' on account of the dead.' 
 or ' ot' those who are dead.' altiiough strictly 
 plural, here alludes to an individual, namely, to 
 Christ, ' on account of whom ' we are baptized, 
 alluding, to Rom. vi. 3. Though the plural is 
 in itself admissible (Winer, Gram. p. 163), its 
 use here would nevertheless be rather strange, 
 there being no ground \y'hatever for the use of so 
 }ieculiar a phraseology ; neither can we account 
 for the (act, that the regular construction of 
 fiairTi^cc with ei'j should have t)een converted into 
 the unjirecedented construction with vtr4p. V ater 
 jiistiiies the plural, by including in it John the 
 Baptist i Semler understands it of Christ and 
 those of the Apostles and teachers of the church 
 wlio were already dead at that time; Flatt, by 
 adding, on accovml of Christ, and those who have 
 died ir. him (in the I'elief in iiim) : — all quite in- 
 admissible combinations. 
 
 -1. Among the best interpretations is tliat of 
 Sjianheim and Joh. Christ. ^VoU'. They consider 
 ' tl.e dead" to lie martyrs and other beJievers, who. 
 by tiniuiess and cheerful hope of resurrection, 
 'jave given in death a wortiiy examjile, by ichich 
 
 BA1*TISM. 
 
 (virfp) others were also animated to receive bap- 
 tism. Still this meaning would be almost toe 
 briefly and enigmatically expressed, when no {ar- 
 ticular reason for it is known, while ahso the 
 allusion to the exemjlary death of many Chris- 
 tians could chiefly a|)j)ly to the martyjs alone, of 
 whom there were as yet none at Corinth. 
 
 5. Olhausen's interpretation is of a rather 
 doubtful character. In the first instance he in- 
 terprets virlp -instead of, in favour of ; and the 
 meaning of the ))assage he takes to be, that '-all 
 who are converted to the church are baptised — 
 for the good of the dead, as It requires a certain 
 number (Meyer : or rather th" conversion of all, 
 Rom. xi. 12-25), a "fulness" of believers, liefore 
 the resurrection can take j>lace. Every one 
 therefore >vho is bantized is so for the good of 
 believers collectively, ami of those who have 
 already died in tlie Lord' (l)oth of which, we 
 can hardly suppose vfKpiiiu to embiaoe at once !). 
 Olhausen is himself aware that the Apostle 
 could not have expected that such a ditlicult 
 and remote idea, which he himself calls ' a 
 mystery,' would be understood by his readers 
 without a further exjilanation and develojiment 
 of his doctrine. He therefore proposes an inter- 
 pretation as already suggested by Clericus and 
 Doderlein (Instit. 1.). In this explanation, it 
 is argued, that the miseries and hardships 
 Christians have to struggle against in this life can 
 only be compensated by resuirection. Death 
 causes, as it were, vacancies in the full ranks of 
 the believers, which are again filled uji by other 
 individuals. ' What would it profit those who 
 are bairfized in the place of the dead (to fill up 
 their place in (he community) if there lie no re- 
 surrection ? Tiie tendency of the wlrole con- 
 nection of the text, howevei-, would rather lead us 
 to exj,ect tlie question, ' What would the dead 
 profit by it?" since the tenor of the passage de- 
 cidedly refers to them. To make vTTf p^avri, 
 therefore, is quite unsuitable ; not to mention, that 
 the idea — to enter into the ranks of Christians — 
 must lirst be supposed to be contained in the word 
 ' baptism,' in order to draw from it the figure of 
 substitution. A reference is made, in supjKirt of 
 the o])inion which considers virip — dvrl, to Dionys. 
 Halicar. (Antiq. viii.), where he is treating oi' a 
 new conscrijition, which was to be made to fill up 
 the ranks rendered vacant by the deadi of the 
 .soldiers who had fallen in the war, and the ex- 
 pression there used is - ovtoi tj^Iow virip rOiv a.iTo 
 Bavovrwv crTparitt>TSiv erepovs Karaypdcp^iv. Nor 
 are there wanting other similar passages in pr. of 
 of this ; but we m.ust bear in mind, that in 
 Dionys. the word denotes a literal substitution, 
 while in our passage the substitution is figurative, 
 far-fetchetl, and hard to unriddle. It is not ])ro- 
 bable that the Apostle should not have said uvtI, 
 if he had really wished (" exi)re.s.s that thought. 
 Moreover, the very essence of tlie argument, the 
 notion that resurrection is the coinjiensation for 
 the surt'erings ol litt^, is here not at all given, nor 
 even hinted at except we connect the fwei di- 
 rectly with ver. 19., a thing quite impossible. A 
 somewhat similar ojiinion is expressed l>y F. J. 
 
 Heiniann, tiiat i;Trfp=pia'ter (py. Genes, xxvii. 
 
 9), ' Cur printer eos qui jam niortui sunt, alii 
 quoque baptismuui suscipiunl. et ita initial i leli- 
 gionem Cliristianorum protitentur, si tamet nulla
 
 BAR. 
 
 BARBARIAN. 
 
 Ml 
 
 Kit vesuvrectlo inoituorum nes melioris vita; prse- 
 fninm expectdndum est V In *■ is sense, liowe\er, 
 irjre^ would icquire the accnsa :ve. 
 
 C 0aTrTti^6ij.eyoL, in a Jiijurative sense. 
 
 Some (ii^feiiint!- to tlie words of Chris*, Matt. 
 xXj 22) \;ike it in the sense of tlie bnptism of 
 passion, suffering : tliis is evidently too forced to 
 peqiiiie ivfvitatiou. 
 
 The iiiteipietations of many others who have 
 sllU more transgressed a;4:ainst grammar arul iiis- 
 tory in the process, we have with reason oniitt'\l. 
 They are partly to he found in tlie collection of 
 mterjnctations in Joh. (^lirist. Wolf's Curee Phi- 
 lolooicee, &c. and Keidenreich's Cvmtnent. ad 
 
 y. 'c.—i. 5* 
 
 B.\R ("13). a Hehrew wt>rd meaning son, hut 
 Hsed only poetically in that langoage (Ps. ii. 12; 
 Prov. xxx.i. 2). In Syiiac, Ir.nvever, Bar (^^ 
 Tst h/*> ) answered to the more common Hebrew 
 
 word for sou, i. e. '^ ben ; and heiice in later 
 times, in the New Testament, it takes tlie same 
 place in tire Ibrmation of propei' ujurres which Ban 
 had formerly occupied in the Old Testament. 
 
 BARABBAS (probahly X3N "13, son of Abba, 
 a common name in fheTalniiKl), a person who had 
 forfeited liis life for sedition anci murder (Mark 
 XV. 7 ; l.uke xxiii. 2.5). As a rebel, he was subject 
 to the punishment laid down by the R iman law 
 for such political oil'ences ; wliile, as a murderer, 
 he could not escape death even by the civil code 
 of the Jews. But the latter were so bent on tlie 
 death oi Je.sus, that, of tlie two, they preferred 
 pardoning this double criminal (Matt, xxvii. 
 16-26; Mark XV. 7-15; Luke xxiii. lS-25 ; John 
 xviii. 40). Origen says that in many cojiies 
 Barabbas was also called Jesus. The Armenian 
 Version has the same reatiing : 'Whom will ye 
 that I sliall deliver unto you, Jesus Baralibas, or 
 Jesus that is called Christ?" Griesbach, in his 
 fJoiimettt., considers this as an interpolation ; 
 while Frity.sche lias adopted it in his text. We 
 can certainly conceive that a name afterwards 
 so sacred may have been thrown out of the text 
 by some bigoted transcriber. — E. M. 
 
 * As the topic of baptism seemed to be well 
 exhausted in this country, the Ed' tor thovight that 
 some freshness of efiect miglit be produced liy 
 presenting the suijject to the reader from a Ger- 
 man point of view. The article was, tlieiefore, 
 o.lered to Dr. Neander, the church liistoriaii, 
 and Professor of Theology in the university of 
 Berlin. His multlplie<l pre-engagements, how- 
 <t'i2~, ir.ducetl iiim,- with the Editor's consent, 
 to consign the subject to the Rev. J. Jacobi. of 
 the same university ; and in due time the ]\IS. 
 of the present article .irrived, accompanied by 
 the following note from Dr. Neander, to whose 
 inspectkin ft had j>reviously been submitted by 
 the'a.iith«r : — 
 
 ' As my c<r.er lab'jurs would not permit me to 
 vrork ent tiiearticle (on Baptism) for the " Cyclo- 
 .pwdia of Biblical Literalure," I retpiested a dear 
 friend, J. Jecobi, to undeitake it, who, by his 
 knowledge and critical talents, is fully ((ualified 
 for the task, and whose theological principles are 
 '■3 unison witl my own.- -A, Neander.' 
 
 BARACHIAS CBapaxias^ father of the Z*!ct<i- 
 riah fZacharias) mentioned in Matt, xxiii. VA 
 [Zechakiah]. 
 
 BARAK (p^S, tiijhtiiiiKj ; Sept. Bapajc), fcon <-i 
 Abinoam of Kedesh-Naphtali, a Galilean city c»' 
 refuge in the trilie of Naphtali (Judg. iv. d ; 
 coinp Josh. xix. 37 ; xxi. 32j. He was sur.'.- 
 moned by the prophetess Deliorah to t.ike tl>9 
 Held against the hostile army of the Canaajiitith 
 king Jabin, commanded l)y Siseia, with K'.dOO 
 men from the tribes of Naphtali and Zebulon, an'l 
 to encamp on Mount Taiior, probably Lecaus? 
 the 900 chariots of iron (Judg. iv. 3), in v/hicb 
 the main force of Sisera consiisted. could H'i^ 
 so easily mana'uvre on uneven ground. .AIU.t 
 some hesitation, he resolved to do her bidilin/, {»a 
 condition that she would go with liim, which >h* 
 readily promised. Confiding, theiei'ore, in tl-i- 
 God of Israel, he attacked the hostile army by 
 surprise, put them to (light, and routed tluiu f> 
 the la>t man (Judg. \\ U, 15, 16). In cc-i- 
 jnnction with Deborah, he afterwaids comjxised a 
 song of victory in commeniorafion of that evejit 
 (ibid.). — ¥.. M. 
 
 BARBARIAN (pdpPafos). This term is used 
 in the New Testament, as in classical writers, to 
 denote other nations of the earth in distinction 
 from the Gre(!ks. ' I am debtor botii to the 
 Greeks and Harbariains" — "EWija-i re icai 0ap- 
 0dpois (Rom. i. 11); • der GiieclK'n und der L'n- 
 griechen" — Luther; 'To the Grekcs and folhem 
 which are no Gifkes' — Tyndale, 153J1, and Ge- 
 neva, loS? ; 'To the Gickesand to the UngR'k«s" 
 — Cranmer, 1.'339. In Coloss. iii. 11, 'Greek nor 
 j€w — Barbarian, Scythian" — BiipPapos Siiems to 
 refer to those nations of the Roman empiie who did 
 not speak Greek, and 2Ky6rjj to natiuUj not under 
 the Roman dominion (Dr. Rirbinsoii), In I C'or. 
 xiv. 11 the term is applied to a dill'erence of 
 language: ' If I knovv not the meaning of the 
 voice, 1 shall be uiito him that spe-aketh a bar- 
 barian (' as of another language," Ge/ieva Vers.), 
 and he that speaketh shall be al)arl;arian ('as of 
 another language," Geneva T'ers.) unto me.' Tiius 
 Ovid, ' Barbarus hie ego sum, quia non fntel- 
 ligor ulli,' Trist. v. 10. 37 In Acts xxviii. the 
 inliabitants of Malta are called ^dp^apoi, liecause 
 they were originally a Caithaginian coloJiy, and 
 chieily spoke the Punic language. In the .Sei.- 
 tuagint, fidpfiaoos is used for the Hebrew TV?, 
 • A jiei/ple of strange language" ( Ps. cxiv. 1) ; in 
 the Chaldee jiarapluase 'X1313 NOyO. In Mie 
 Rabbinical writers Ti^? is ajijilied to foreigners 
 in distinction from the Je«s ; anil in the Jeiii- 
 salem Talmud it is explained by jT'JV, i. e. the 
 Greek language; Rabbi Solomon remarks, that 
 whatever is not in the Holy tongue, is :.<lled TJP 
 (Buxtorf, Lex-Talni.). Accoiding to Heio'lo- 
 tus, the Egyptians called all men barbarians 
 who did not sjieak the sah;e language us 
 themselves: ju?; (r<pl<n 6y.oy\cli<T(rovs, ii. I.)S. Cle- 
 ment of Alexandria uses it, resjx'cting the 
 Egyptians and other nations, even when s]i«aKing 
 of their ]>rogress in civilization, as in h's Strom. 
 i. c. JO, ^74. : 0{i fj.6vT)s 5f <f iKo7oplas, aWa Koi 
 naarf-i <Txe5i»' r(xvr}S (itpfrou B6.piia.po:. AiyiT- 
 Ttoi yovv Trpii)Toi a(TTpo\oy'Cw fis avOpoLiroui 
 f^VVfyKav, fijxoiois Sf kou XaKSaioi. — ' Haibariau* 
 have been inventors net only oJ' philosi/pl y, «' »t
 
 292 
 
 BAR-JONA, 
 
 like-,v'is6 of aim ist every art. Tlip E^yi''i.vns, and 
 in like manner the Clialdseans, first infrodnced 
 amnnfj men the kno.vlpdire oi' as(rc>I(\u;y.' In a 
 singular passage (»■*' Justin Martyr's tirst A]K)- 
 logy, tlie term is ayjplied to .M)raham and otiier 
 distingiii-ilied Ilel'rews : 'We have learned and 
 buve hcf'ire explained, that Ciiridt i'* the first lie- 
 gotten f)t'G()(l, being the Word for reason) Aiiyov 
 6vTa, of whicli tlie whole human race partake. 
 And they who live agreeal)ly to the Word (or rea- 
 son o; uiTo, \6yov Priaavres, are Cliristians, even 
 thnugl, esteemeil atheists : such among the Givekg 
 were Socrates. Hcraclitus, and the like; and among 
 the barbarians ('among other nations,' Cheval- 
 lic)''s Trans.') ev 0ap0dpois, Abraham, Ananias, 
 Azarias, Misael, and El ias, and many others.'^ 
 Apol. i. 16. Stral>o (xiv. 2) suggests that the 
 word Bar-bar-OS was originally an in^iitative 
 sound, designed to exjtiess a harsh dissonant 
 language, or sometimes the intlistinct articiilalion 
 of the Gieek hy foreigners, and instances the 
 Carians, who on the latter account he conjectures 
 wt-re termed l)y Homer fiap^api<p<avoi (II. ii. 
 Rfi7). Tlie word appears to have acquired a re- 
 ])roacliful sense during the wars with the Persians; 
 their country vv-as called ^ ^dp^apos {y?i}- (De- 
 vnosth. I'hiiipp. iii.)— ,T. E. R. 
 
 BAR-JESUS {Bapiriaods). [Ei.ymas.] 
 B.VR-JONA {Bh.p 'IcofSj son of Jonas), the 
 ))atronymic apj>ellation of the Apostle Peter (Matt, 
 xvi. 17j. 
 
 BARKKNIM. [Thorns.] 
 B.\RLEY (ITTJr^). This grain is mentioned 
 in Scripture as cultivated and used in Egypt 
 (Exod. ix. 31 ■, and in Palestine cLev. xxvii. 16; 
 Deut. viii. 8; 2 Chron. ii. 10; Ruth ii. 17; 
 2 Sam. xiv. 30 ; Isa. xxviii. 25 ; Jer xli. R ; Joel 
 I. 11). Barley was given to cattle, esjiecially 
 horses (1 Kings iv. 28), and was indeed the only 
 corn grain given to th>?m, as oats a7)d rye were 
 unknown to the Hebrews, and are not now grown 
 in Palestine, although Volney aflirms (ii. 117) 
 that small cpiantities are raiseci in some parts of 
 Syria as food for liorses. Hence barley is men- 
 tioiied in the Mi.hnah {Pesach. fol. 3) as the fiwd 
 of horses and asses. This is still tlie chief use of 
 harley in Western Asia. Bread made of buriey 
 was, liowevei, used by the poorer classes (Judg. 
 vii. 13; 2 Kings iv. 42; John vi. 9, 13; comp. 
 Ezek. iv. 9). In Palestine biirley was for flie 
 most pari sown at the time of the autumnal rains, 
 October— November (Lightfoot, Hor. Hebr. ad 
 Matt. xii. 1 ), and again in early spring, or ralher 
 fts soon as the depth of winter had passed (Mhh. 
 Ber .c/ioCh. p. IH). This later sowing has not 
 iiitheilo been much noticed by writers on this 
 part of Bil)lical illustration, but is confirmed by 
 vaiioiis travellers who observed the sowing uf 
 i)ar]ey at tliis time of the year. Russell says that 
 it conlinues to be sown to the end of February 
 (Nat Hist. Aleppo, i. 74; see his mftining 
 evolved in the Pictorial Palestine, Phys. Hist., 
 p. 21 1 ; comjj. p. 229). Tlie barley of the first 
 crop was ready by tli.'^ time of the Passover, in the 
 month Abib. March— April (R ith i. 22; 2 Sam. 
 xxi. 9; Judith viii. 2); and i:' not ripe at the 
 expiration of a (Hel)rew) ye:v from the last cele- 
 brati.)n, the year w;is intercalated (Lightloot, lit 
 supra) to ]iieserve. that connection between the 
 fex«1 and the liarley-harvesl which the law required 
 
 B kRN-\BAS. 
 
 (Exod. xxiii. 15, 16: Deut. xvi, 16\ Arcoiil 
 
 irigly, travellers concur in showing tliat the barle/ 
 harvest in Palestine is in Ma.ch and .'Vpril — a»i- 
 vuncing into May in the northern and mountain 
 OTIS part^ of the land; lint A^.il is tlie month in 
 which the barley-harvest is chi<'fly gathered in, 
 although it liegiiis earliei' in soin? parts and late? 
 in others {Pict. Palestine, pp. 21 4, 229, 'Z-Kij. \t 
 .Teiusalem, Neibnhr found barley ripe at the end 
 of March, when the latei (autumnal) croii had 
 only been lately sown {Beschrtib. von Arahien, 
 ]). IfiO). 
 
 Tiiejiassage in Isa. xxxii. 20 has been supposed 
 by many to refer to rice, as a mode of culture by 
 submersion of the land after sowing, similar to 
 that of rice, is indicated. Tlie celebrated passage, 
 'Cast thy bread u\yon the waters,' &c (Eccles. 
 xi. 1), has bewi by some su])posed to refer also to 
 such a mode of culture. But it is precarious to 
 Iniild so imjip.-tant a conclusion, as that rice had 
 been so early introduced into the Levant, upt>n 
 such slight indications; and it now appears that 
 l>ar]ev is in some parts subjected to the same sub- 
 mersion after sowing as rice, as was particularly 
 noticed by Major Skinner (i. 320), in the vicinity 
 of J>amascns. In Exod. ix. 31, we are fold that 
 the plague of hail, some time before the Passover, 
 destroyed the barley, which was then in the green 
 ear ; but not the wheat 'or the rye, which were 
 only in the lilade. This is minutely corroborated 
 by the fact that > the barley sown after the inun- 
 dation is reaped, some after ninety days, sonie in 
 the fourth month (Wilkinson's Thebes, p. 395), 
 and that it there rijiens a montli e-arlier than the 
 wheat (Soiinini, p. 395). 
 
 BARNABAS (n^HJ "15; BapvAfias). His 
 name was originally 'iwcrrfs, Joxes, or 'laja-r](p, 
 i/.3se;j/B (Acts iv. 3(5); but he received from ilie 
 Apostles the surname of Barnalias, which signi- 
 fies the Smi of Prophecy. Luke interjireis it by 
 v'lhs TrapaK\ii(Tf<as, i- 6. Son of EjcJioi'tation. The 
 Hebrew term and its cognates are used in the 
 Old Testament with a certain latitude of mean- 
 ing, and are not limited to that of foretelling 
 future events. Thus Abialiam is termed in Gen. 
 XX. 7 N'33, Sept. irpofpiirrjs, as lieing a jierson 
 adnr.itted to intimate communion with the l.>eity, 
 and whose intercession was det-med of suneiior 
 efficacy. In Exixl. vii. I Jehovah declares to 
 Moses, ' I have made thee a go(i to Pharaoh, and 
 Aaron, thy brother, shall be thy prophet," "[N^J33, 
 which Onkelos translates by "|JD3"1inO. tlnj in- 
 terjyreter (Buxtorf, Lex. Talmud.). In like 
 niannei- irpo(p7)T(ia, in the New Testament, 
 means not n^eiely prediction, l)ut 'includes the 
 idea of declarations, exhuitutions. or warnings ut- 
 tered by the prophefs while under divliie influ- 
 ence' (])r. E. Roiiinson). ' He that prophe- 
 sieth (6 TTpo<pri7tvu)v) speaketli unto men, unto 
 eilirtcation, and exlionution (TrapaKAvfriv), aiul 
 comfort' (1 Oir. xiv. 3). Of Silas and Judas it 
 is said, ' being prop-^ets, \hty e.ihorted [irapiKiiKf- 
 tray) the brethren" (Act xv. 32}. It can hardly 
 be doubt eti that this name was given to Josh's tc 
 denote his enjinence as a Clnistian teacher. In 
 Acts xiii. 1 bis name is placed iiiat in the list of 
 prophets and teachers lielonging to the church at 
 Antioch. C'lirysostom, howevei', unilei.stand.< lli« 
 surname in the same way as the Autii. Vers., 
 Son of Con.%olatioii, and sujipo.ses thai it w.m
 
 BARNABAS. 
 
 fiveii (o Barnabas on account of his mild and 
 jentle ui;Vi«;.siiion : ■' Tliis Baiii.itiiis was a iniM 
 ind gcutli' {KML-oii. Ilis name moans Sou of 
 Consdnliun : hnice lie bfcamc a Ciieiid ol" Paul ; 
 ind tiiat he was very kind and easy (if access is 
 proved l)y tlio instance beloie us, and by the 
 case 'jf Julin f Maik)' (In .let. Apost. Horn. xxi.). 
 He is descrilied by Luke as ' a u'tKid man, full 
 3f the Holy Gliost and of faith' ('Acls xi. 21). 
 He was a natiic (jf ('ypuis, but the sun of Jewish 
 parents of the liibe of Levi. From Acts iv. oQ, 
 37 if ajipears that he was possessed of land, but 
 whether in Judaja or Cyprus is not statecb He 
 ^■■enerously disposed of the whole for the benefit of 
 the Christian community, and ' laid the money 
 at the Ajiostles" fi et." .Vs this transaction occmred 
 soon aftfr the day (jf Pentecost, lie must have 
 been an early conveit to the Christian faith. 
 According to Clement of Alexandria (Strom. 
 ii. c. 20, vol. ii. p. 192, ed. Klotz), Euscliius 
 (Hint. E'jcles. i. 12), and Epr-j.hanius (ilcer. xx. 
 4), he was one of the seventy disciples (Luke 
 X. 1). It has Iteen maintained that Barnabas 
 \a identical with Josejih Baisabas, whose name 
 occurs in Acts i. 2'5. Most modern critics, how- 
 ever, emluuce the contrary ojjinion, wliich they 
 conceive is supported i)y the circumstantial man- 
 Qer in which Barnabas is tir^t mentioned. How- 
 ■<ver similar in sound, the meanings of the names 
 tre very dill'e.ont ; and if no fuither notice is 
 aken of Barsabas (a circumstance which UUman 
 irges in favour of his identity witii Barnabas), 
 the same may be affirmed of Matthias. Chry- 
 feostom observer, on Acts iv. ii6, ' This person is 
 not, in my opinion, the same that is mentioned 
 with Mattliias; for he was called Joses and Bar- 
 sabas, and afterwards surnamcd Justus; but this 
 man was .surnamed by the afwstles Barnabas, 
 Son of Cotisolulion ; and the name seems to have 
 been given him from the virtue, inasmuch as he 
 was competent and lit for such a purpose ' (In 
 Act. Apost. Hismil. xi. I). 
 
 When Paul made his first ajjpearance in Jeru- 
 salem after his conversion, Barnabas introdui^ed 
 him to the Aj):'Stles, and attested his sincerity 
 (Acts ix. 27). Tills fact lends some support to 
 an ancient tradition that they had studied toge- 
 ther in the school of Gamaliel — tliat Barnabas 
 tiad often attempted to biin;^ liis companion o\'er 
 to the Christian faith, Ijut liitherto in vain — that 
 meeting witii him at this time in Jeiusalem, not 
 awaie of what had occurred at Damascus, he once 
 more renewed his elllurts, when Paul threw iiim- 
 self weeping at his feet, informed him of ' the 
 iiea\enly vision,' and of the happy transforuiation 
 of tiie persecutor and blasphemer into the obedient 
 and zealous disciple (Acts x;-vi. IC). 
 
 Though the conversion of Cornelius and his 
 househuld, with its attendant circumstances, had 
 given the Jewisli Christians clearer views of the 
 comprehensive character of the new disjiensation, 
 yet the accession of a large rnunber of Gentiles to 
 the church at Antioch was an event so extraor- 
 dinary, that the A])ostles and brethren at Jeruga- 
 l',;tn resolved on de[iuting one of their number to 
 investigate it. Their choice was fixed on B»trnabas. 
 After witnessing the fiourLshing condition of tiie 
 church, and adtling fresh converts liy his j)ersonal 
 exertions, tie visited Tarsus to obtain the assistance 
 ;)f Saul, who returned with him to Antioch, where 
 Juiv laboiu >d lor a whole year (Acts xi. 2o-2iJ). 
 
 BARNAB.AS. 
 
 29S 
 
 In anticipation of tlie famine predicted by Agubtu, 
 the Antiochian Christians made a contiiljulioa fur 
 tiieir jiooier brethren at Jerusalem, anil sent it by 
 the hands of Bj.;nabas and Saul (Actsxi. 2R-oO), 
 who speedily returnL^d, biinging with them John 
 Maik, a nephew of the former. By divine dliec- 
 tion (x\cts xii. 2) they were separated to iheelKce 
 of missionaries, and ;is such visited Cypuis amX 
 some of the jirincipal cities in Asia Minor i^. Vets 
 xiii. 1 1). Soon after their return to Antiocii, the 
 peace if the chuich was tlislurlied i)y ceil.iiii 
 zealots from Judaea, who insisted on the observance 
 of the rite of circumcision by the Gentile coiiveits. 
 To settle the controversy, Paul and Bainalnu 
 weie deputed to consult the Apostles an(t ehlers 
 at Jerusalem (Act.s xv.l, 2 ; they leiurned to com- 
 municate the result of their conference (vtr. 22), 
 accompanied by Juilas liarsabas and Sihis. or 
 Silvanus. On preparing- for a second missiuiiaiy 
 tour, a dispute arose between tliem on account t.f 
 Jolm Maik, which ended in their taking dilli'ierit 
 routes; Paul and Silas went tliiough Syria and 
 Cilicia, while Barnabas and his nephew icvi.iited 
 his native island (Acts xv. I^ii-ii). In let'eieiice 
 to this event, Chrysostom remarks — '■Tiolv, tx9po\ 
 avex'-opriaaif ; ftrj yivoiTO. 'Opas ydp fitrci. rovro 
 Bapva^af -iroWuii' eyKii>fJii<iiv anoKavovra nOfj^L 
 YlavKou iv reus iincTTuKous. napo^u(T,u6i^ (pi)(7iv, 
 (yevfTo, ouK t^Spa ov5e (piKoveiKia :" ' \\ liat 
 then'i' Did they pait as enemies V Far from it. 
 For you see that at'ter this Paul bestows ni his 
 Epistles many conniiendatioiis on Bainalias. 
 There was " a sharp fit of anger" (Doddridge^ he 
 (Luke) says, not enmity, nor love of strife.' . At 
 this [loinf Barnaims disapjiears irom Luke's nar- 
 rative, which to its close is occupied solely with 
 the labouis and sufVerings of Paul. From the 
 Epistles of the latter a few hints (the only aiitlinj- 
 tic sources of inlbimation) may be gleane.l ui.i- 
 tive to his early biend and associate. Fuiti 
 I Cor. ix.5,<3, it would appear that Barnabas was 
 unmarried, and supported liimsclf. like Paul, by 
 some manual occupation. In (ial. ii. I we have 
 an account of the reception given to Paul and 
 Barnabas by the Apostles at Jerusalem, jirolial.ly 
 on the occasion mentioned in Acts xv. In the 
 same chajiter (ver. 13) we aie informed that Bar- 
 naliils so far yielded to the Judaizing zealots at 
 Antiocii, as to .separate himself for a time from 
 conmiunion with the Gentile conveit.s. Tlie date 
 of this occurience has been placed by some ciiiics 
 soon after the Apostolic convention at Jerusalem 
 (about A.u, 52) ; by others, on the retmn .f Paul 
 from liis second missionary journey (a.u. •'».'>;. 
 Dr. Paley thinks ' that there is nothing \o iiiniier 
 us fiom supposing that the dispute at .\ntio< h 
 was jirior to the consultation at .lenisalem. or 
 that Peter, in consequence of this lebuke, might 
 have afterwards maintained firmer sentmients 
 (Horce Paulina; ch. v.). The same view \ui» 
 been taken Ijy Hug and Schneckenbiirgei' ; liit 
 (as Dr. Neander remarks) thouLrh Paul may not 
 follow a strict chronological order, it Is difiicu'*. 
 to believe that he would not place the naiiatixe 
 of an event so closely connected witli tlie conl'er- 
 euce at Jerusalem, at the beginning, iiisteail of 
 letting ii follow as supplementary i History of tlie 
 Plantim) of the Christian Clitocli. vol. i. p."21S, 
 Eng. Tiansl.). It has been infeiied IVor/i 2 Cor. 
 \iii. IS, 19, that Barnabas was not only lecon- 
 ciled ttt Paul after iheir sepaiation (.-Vets xv ■'"^'
 
 J94 
 
 BARNABAS. 
 
 but als > became again his coatljiitor ; tliat he was 
 ' the IjKither \vh(t^e praise 'was in the Gospel 
 diroui^h all the churches." Chiysostom says that 
 80tne su|)[)Ose tlie brother was Luke, aud others 
 Biimahas. Tiie;)(l«ret asserts that it was Bania- 
 Oai, and ajjpcals to Acts xili. 3, wliich ratlier 
 serves to dispro\H his assertion, for it ascribes the 
 appointiimil of Paul and Bavnubas^to an express 
 divine injunclii.Mi, and not to an elective act of the 
 church ; and. besides, the brother alluded to was 
 chosen, not by a siiij^le church, but by several 
 churclies, to travel witli Paul (xeipoTOCTjSels uTrh 
 Twv iKi<\v,(rtd>f ff'jv(Kh-]fxos r)ix<jiv, 2 Cor. viii. 19). 
 In Colos. iv. lO, and Piiiiemon, ver. 21, Paul men- 
 tions Mark as hi^ I'sllovv -labourer : and at a still 
 later jjeiiod, 2 Tim. iv. 11, he lelers with strong 
 approbation to hi services, andiequests Timothy 
 t« iiring him to Rome; but of Barnabas (his re- 
 (alioiiOiip to Maik excepted) nothing is said. 
 riie most prol)al)le infe.ence is, that he vi'as al- 
 ready dead, and that Mark had subsequently as- 
 sociate I himself with Paul. For the latter years 
 of Barnabas we have no better guides than the 
 Acta ct Passio Barnnbtje in Ct/pro, a forgery in 
 tlie name of John Mark, and, from the ac(iuaij!t- 
 anco it discovers with the localities of Cyprus, 
 prolialjly written by a resident in that island ; and 
 the legends of Alexander, a Cyprian monk, and 
 of Theodore, commonly called Lector (diat is, an 
 a.vayvaiffri]s, or reader), of Constantinople : the 
 two latter belong to the sixth centur}'-. Accord- 
 ing to Alexander, Barnabas, after taking leave of 
 I'aui, landed in Cyprus, passed through the whole 
 island, converted numbers to the Christian faith, 
 aud at last arrived at Salamis, where he jneached 
 in the synagogue witli great success. Thither he 
 was follov.ed by some Jews from Syria (the author 
 of the Acta names Barjesus as their leader), who 
 nirred «[) the people against him. Barnabas, in 
 anticipation of his approaching end, celebrated 
 the Eucliarist with his brethren, and bade them 
 farewell. He gave his nephew directions respect- 
 ing tiis inteimen:, and charged him to go after 
 hi.'i decease to the Apostle Paul. He then entered 
 the s\':iagr)gue, and began as usual to preach 
 Ciirist. But the Jews at once laid hands on iiim, 
 shut him up till night, then dragged him forth, 
 and, after stoning him, endeavoureil to burn his 
 mangled l)ody The coipse, ho.\'ever, resisteil the 
 action of the flames ; Mark secretly c.mveyed it 
 to a. cave aboM.t Hve stadia from the city ; he then 
 joined Paul at Ephesus. and al"terwards accom- 
 jianied him to Rome. A violent persecution, con- 
 se.pie'it on the (h'ath of Barnabas, scattered the 
 (Jlnist.ii»ns at Salamis, so that a knowledge of the 
 place ol his inteiment was lost. This account 
 a<iees with tliat of the ])seudo Mark, excepting 
 t'lat. according to the latter, the corpse was reduced 
 t) aeries Under the emperor Zeno (a ». 474-491), 
 Aleviuider goe; on to say, Peter Fullo, a noted 
 M>j:iOjihysite, became patriarch of Constantinople. 
 He aimed at bringing tli« Cyjirian church under 
 his pati iarchate, in which attempt he was sup- 
 jxirted by the emperor. When the Bishop of 
 Salamis, a very worthy man, Imt an indiH'eient 
 dei)ater (oAiyotrrbs 5« -wpis SiaAe^ir), was called 
 upon to defend his rights publicly at Constanti- 
 nople, iie was thrown into the greatest perplexity. 
 But B:iinabas took compassion on his fellow- 
 I'oiuitryrn.m, appeared to him by night no less 
 ttu«n three times, assured him of success, and told 
 
 BARXAB.\S. 
 
 him wheie he might find liis l)ody, with a copy of 
 Matthew's gospel lying i.pon it. Tl.e bishof 
 awoke, assembled the clergy and laity, and found 
 tlie Innly as desciibed. The sequel may be ea>ily 
 conjec'ured. Fullo was expe'led from .-^ntiocli ; 
 the independence of the Cy])riar. church acknow- 
 ledged ; the manusciipt of Matthews ^'ospcl was 
 dejjosited in the palace at ('(jMsiantinople, aud al 
 Easter lessons were puldicly irad from it ; and by 
 the emperor's command a churcli v/as eiected on 
 the spot where tlie corpse ha<l been interred. 
 The e suspicious visioJis of Barnabas aie leimed 
 by ])r. Cave, 'a mere addition tu tlie story, de- 
 signed only to serve a j-.resent turn, to gain cretlif 
 to the cause, and advance it with the emperor.' 
 
 Neither Alexander nor Theodoie is veiy ex- 
 plicit respecting the copy of Matdiev/'s gospel 
 which was found with the coipse of Bainabas. 
 The former repiesents Barnabas as saying to An- 
 tliemius, e/cel jj-Ov rh irav ffui^a. arroK'eTTai, Ka) 
 eiiayyiAiov iSlox^^Pov o i^e\a,Sji' airh yiardaiov — 
 'Theie my whole biidy is deposited, and an aut:>- 
 grapli gos])el which I received from Matthew. 
 Tlieodore says, exov eirl OTTjPorr to Kara Mot- 
 Ooioi' iuayytXiov, iSiuypa<poi-' rod Hapvajia. — 'Hav- 
 ing on his breast the Gospel according to Matthew, 
 an auto f/raph of Barnabas' Tiie jiseudo Maik 
 omits the latter circimistance. If we believe uiat, 
 as Alexander leports, it was read at Constanti- 
 nople, it must have been written not in Hetirew. Iiut 
 in Greek. The year when Barnaltas died cannot 
 l>e determined with certainty ; if ids ne[)liew 
 joined Paul after that event, it must have taken 
 place not later than a d.63 or (M. ' Chrysostoiu,' 
 it has been asserted, ' speaks of Barnabas as alive 
 in A.D. 63.' The exact statement is tliis : in his 
 Eleventh Homily on the Epistle to the ('olossians 
 he remarks, on ch. iv. 10, ' touching whom ye 
 received commandments, if he come luito you 
 receive him' — 'iatos trapd Bapvd^a erroAa? iKajiov 
 — ' pern.ijis they received couun.uids f\oro Bar- 
 nabas.' 
 
 Tiiere is a vague tradition that B.iinabas was 
 the fiist l)ishoj) of tlie church at Milan, but it is st) 
 ill supjiorted as scarcely to deseive r.-.itice. It is 
 enough to say that tlie celelirated Ambro-e (b. a.u. 
 340, d. 397) makes no allusion to Bam dias when 
 speaking of the l)ishops who pieceded himself 
 (v. Hel'eie, Das Scndschreiben dcs Ajwslels Bar- 
 nabas, ])p. 42-17). 
 
 From the incident narrated in Acts xiv. ^-12 
 Chrysostom infeis tliat the jieisonal a]i))e,iiaiice of 
 Barnabas was dignilied aiid coiiiiuanding. AVhcn 
 tlie inhabitants of Lystia, on the curp of the impo- 
 tent man, imagineil that the gods were come down 
 to them in the likeness of men, they called Bir- 
 nabas Zeus (their tutelar deity), and Paui. Heinies, 
 because lie was chief sjieaker ; ffj.ol Soks'l koi arrd 
 Trjs ov/zecos a.^inrpeTrijs eiyai o BapfO/Saj ( /'( Act. 
 Apost. lloiii. xxx). 
 
 BARN.\BAS. GOSPICL OF. A spurious 
 gospel, attributed to Bainibas. exists iti Aiabic, 
 and has been translated into Italian, Spanish, and 
 Engl sh. It was pioliablv forged liy some heietical 
 Chiistiaiis, and iias since been inteipolated liy the 
 Mohammedans, in or'Vr ti)sup];oittlie pietensioiis 
 of their I'lojiliet. l)r VViiite has given copious ex- 
 tracts finm it in his Bampton Lectures. \l°i ; 
 Sermon viii. p. 35^, and Notes, n. 41 -()9 (S«'e 
 also Sale's Koran, Rreli-n. Dissert, sect. 4). It 
 is placed ammg the Apociyplial lu>nks in tlie
 
 BAKNABAS. 
 
 BAUXAliAS. 
 
 •29a 
 
 Sticlwrnefry jnefixed Ity Cotelerius to liis etlitioii 
 of the Ajuetolical C'onstitntions (Lanliier's ('re- 
 dibility, pait ii. cli. 117). It was conileniiied liy 
 Po]>e Gelasius I. (Tilleinont, Menwires, ike. i. 
 \>. 1053). 
 
 Baknabas, Episti.e ov. The title of tliis an- 
 cient coinjiositioii is foiiiul in fiie Slicliouietiies (or 
 catalogues of the sacred books) of the ninth cen- 
 tury ; but from that ]jerii)d 1o the seventeenth cen- 
 tury tlie work itself remained entiiely unknown. 
 Jacob Sirniond, a Jesuit, in cojiying the transcript 
 oi" a Greek manuscript of Polycarp's Epistle to the 
 P/tilippMua, which btloni,'ed to Tur)iaiuis (a 
 inenilier of the same oider), discoveied anoflier 
 piece appended to it, whicii ])roved to I* the Kpislle 
 (so called) of Barnabas. I^ was also found in 
 two manuscrijits of Polycarp, at Rome, which 
 Cresscli js collated. Siiinond sent a copy to the 
 Benedictine, Hugo Menard, wholiad not long be- 
 fore found an ancient Latin tra;islation of the 
 Knistle of Barnabas in tlie Abliey of Corlicy. 
 Aliout the same time Andieas Schottus ^also jv 
 Jesuit) oI)tained a manuscript containing the 
 Epistles of Polycarp and Barnabas; this was 
 transcribed by Claudius Salmasius, and given, 
 with a copy of tlie Corbey version, to Isaac Vossius. 
 Vossius sliortly after jjaid a visit to Archbishop 
 Usher, who was then jireparing for ])ublication an 
 ancient Latin version of the shorter Ignatian Ejiis- 
 tles. It was agreed between them to annex to 
 this work the Epistle of Barnabas. But it had 
 hardly been sent to press when tlie great lire at 
 Oxford occurred (1644), in which the manuscript 
 was destroyed, with all the archbishop's notes, and 
 only a few pages saved which were in the cor- 
 rector's hands. These were alterwards inserted by 
 Bishop Fell, in the Prel'ace to his edition of Bar- 
 nabas, Oxford, 1(585. The first edition of Bar- 
 nal)as appeared at Paris, in 1645 ; it had been 
 prepared by Menard, but, in consequence of liis 
 death, was edited by Luke il'Acherry. In the 
 following year a new and much improved edition 
 was published by Vossius, for whicli he collated 
 ttiree manuscripts ; it was aiijiended to his cditio 
 prviceps of the Ignatian E]iistles. In 1672 Co- 
 teleiius publisheu his magniKcent edition of the 
 A])Ostolic Fathers. Besides tlie Gieek text, and 
 Corbey "s version of Barnabas, it contained a new 
 translation and valuable notes by the editor. The 
 reprint, in 17"24, contained additional notes by 
 Davis and Le Clerc. In 1(585 two additions ap- 
 peared ; Bishop Fell's, already noticed, and one 
 by Stej)hen le Moyne, at Leyden, in the Hrst vo- 
 lume cf his Va{->a Sacra, with copious notes. It 
 is also contained in Russel's edit.oti of the A})os- 
 tolic Fathers, Lond. 17 16, and in the first volume 
 of Galiand's Bibliotheca vetcrum Patrum, \'en. 
 1765. Tiie most recent and convenient edition is 
 that by Dr. C. J. Hefele, in his Patrum Aposto- 
 licorum Opera, Tubingen, 1839 and 1842. Four 
 German translations have appeared, by Arnold 
 (1696), Glusing(Hamb. 1723), Grynoeus(1772), 
 and Most (1774); it was translated into English, 
 by Arciibisho]) \\ iiV.e ('J7ie yoiiiine Epixtl/^ af the 
 ..\postolic Fathers, &c., Lonil. 16S)3 and 1710,; 
 and a French translation iiy Le Gras is inserted 
 in Despiez's Bible, Paris, 1717. On comparing 
 the Corbey version with the Greek text, it apjx'ars 
 that the latter wants four chapters and a half at 
 the lieginning, and the former four chapters at tije 
 end; liius each supplies the deficiencies of ti»e 
 
 other. It is reniarkalile that all ll e (ireek inonu 
 
 sciijjis hilherto ^'ound aie siiuiluiiy tl^-fcclive ; 
 wliich ])lainly shows tiiut tiiey aie all derived 
 from the same source, and form oidy ine family 
 of manuscripts. 
 
 The Ejiistle of Barnal>as consists of twenty-<ine 
 chajifers. The (irst part (i. 17) treats of the 
 alirogation ol' the Mosaic disjiensation, and of tiie 
 ty|)es and proj^iecies relating t(» Christ; tiie last 
 tour cliapters aie composed entirely of practical 
 d«iectioiis and exiiortations. The names and lesi- 
 dence of the [leisoiis to whom it is addiessed aie 
 not mentioned, on whicli account, piobably, it 
 was called l)y Origen a Cathulic Ejiistle (Ori-en, 
 Cuntr. Celt. lib. i. p. 49). But if by this title Im 
 meant an ejiistle addressed to the general body of 
 Christians, the ])ropi iety of it^ application is doubt- 
 ful, for we meet willi t-eveial exjiiessions whicii 
 imply a personal knowledge of the ]iarlies. It iia:* 
 been disjiutinJ whether the jieisons addressed were 
 Jewish or Gentile Christians. Dr. HeCele strenu- 
 ously contends that they weie of the foimer cla.ss. 
 His chief argument aj)]«;ais to lie, that if would lie 
 unnecessary to insist so euriie.-^tly on the abolition 
 of tlic Mosaic economy in writing to Gentile con- 
 veits. But the Epistle of Paul to the Galutians 
 is a proof to what danger Gentile Christians wCie 
 exjxised in the (irst ages from the atlemjits of 
 Judaii:ing teachers ; so that, in the absence of 
 more exact iiiformation, the supposition that the 
 jiersons addressed were of this class, is at least 
 not inconsistent with the train of tliought in tiie 
 Epistle. But more than this : throughout the 
 Epistle we find a distinction maintained between 
 the writer and his friends on the otie hand, and the 
 Jews on the other. Thus in chap, iii., ' (iod 
 spcaketh to iheni (the Jews), concerning these 
 things, '• Ye shall not fast as ye ilo this ilay, ' &.C. ; 
 imt to us lie saith, '• Is not tliij the last that I have 
 chosen';" &c. ; atid at the end of the siinieclia]itti, 
 ' He hath shown these things to ail of tts that \ie 
 should not run as proselytes to the Jewi.>h law' — 
 ' (into osietidit omnibus lubis ut w>n incurramiis 
 tanquam proselyti ad illorum legem.' This 
 would be singular language to addiess to jieisoiis 
 who uere Jews by birth, but jxTfectly siiile<l ;,( 
 Gentile converts. In chap. xiii. he says, ' Ixt us 
 inquire whether the covenant U? with tis vt with 
 theni (the Jews), anil concludes « ith quoting tlie 
 promise to Abraham 'with a slight veriial ditler- 
 ence), ' Behold I have made thee a fatlM'r of tlif 
 nations whicli toithmit circt'mcisitru tielieve n. x'.u 
 Lord,' a piissage which is totally iiielevant to 
 Jeicish Clnistiaiis. For other similar jiiissages, 
 see Jones On the Canon, pait iii. cha]). 39. 
 
 Whether this Epistle w;^s written by BarnuiuLs, 
 the companion of St. Paul, has been a >ubjt'cl ol 
 controversy almost ever since its pubiic:ilion in 
 the seventeenth century. Its lirst etlitois. Ushei 
 and Mciiaid, took the negative, and V"o^sil.s ili,-: 
 allimiative side of the cj^ueslion. Of nuKlcrn cri- 
 tics. Hug, Ullniaji, Neandci, Winer, and Hefele 
 agree with the former, and Uosiiimiillei, (Jieseiet, 
 Bleek, Heuke. and Roidani with the latter. TIm- 
 extcnial evidence for its geiiuim ness, it may U 
 allowed, is considerable: but liesides some con- 
 flicting testimonies, criteiia furnished by the Kpistle 
 itself lead to the opposite conclusion. \\ e siiall 
 present a view of both as succinct Jy as possibly. 
 
 I. The (irst writer who allude-; to this Epi,-.tU 
 is Clement iif Alcxandiia. 1. He quotes a sen
 
 -296 
 
 B-AKNAKAS. 
 
 tpnce Irom the tenth chapter, and adds, • Tliese 
 !.»iiigs saitli Barnabas' (Strom, li. 15. § 67, 
 vol. ii. J). I(j5, ed Klutz, Li,.s. I Sol). 2. A sen- 
 tence IVom cliap. xxi , of wliich he says, ' Bar- 
 iiahas truly sjieaks mystically' (Strom, ii. 18. 
 ^ S4. vol. ii. p. 174). 3. Aijain, (jnoting- ciiap. x., 
 'Barnabas says" (Strom, v. •'^. 52, vt>l. iii. 
 p. 38). 4. Alter (|Uv>tiiij^ two ])assa;res iVoni cliai;. 
 1. and ii., lie calls (lie anther t/fe apostle Bar- 
 nabas (Strom, ii. 6. ^ ;J1, yid. ii. y. ] 12). 5. He 
 cites a passage ixoni cha;). iv. with the words 
 * the apostle Barnal).is says' (Strom, ii. 7. ^ 35, 
 vol. ii. 1 14). (i. He prefaces a p.i>sage from chap. 
 xvi. with ' I need not s.iy mure, wht-n I adduce 
 as a witness the ajxist.dic. Barnabas, who was one 
 of tlie Seventy, and a lellow-laliourfi with Paul' 
 (Stro/n. ii. 20. § 1 H>, vol. ii. \). 192;. 7. He makes 
 two qtiotiiti.ius from chap, vi., which he introduces 
 with these words: ' But Barnalwis also, who iiro- 
 claimed the word with tlje apostle, in his ministry 
 among flie Gentiles" (Strom v. 10. ^ 64, vol. iii. 
 p. 46). The name of Barna tas occurs in anothei- 
 passage (Strum, vi. S. ^ (i4, vol. iii. 136), but 
 prol)al>]y by a lat)se of memory, instead of Cle- 
 mens RuiTiauus. from whose first Epistle to tiie 
 Coriiifhians a sentence is there quoted. Theie is 
 also an evident allusion to the Epistle of Barna- 
 bas in Pcedag. ii. 10. ^ S3, vol. i. p. "2io), and in 
 some other passages, though the author's name is 
 not mentioned. 
 
 H. Orijjen quotes tliis Efjistle twice. 1. The 
 sentence in cl.'^p. v. respecting the apostles, whicli 
 he says ' is wi.'*ten in the Catholic Eijistle of 
 Hiuiiabas' (Cu:'.ti Cels. i. 49). 2. A passage 
 from chap, xviii. • ' To tiie same purpose Bar- 
 nabas spe^vks in lii» .Epistle, when lie says, tliat 
 "there are i^^o ways, iiie of liglit, the other of 
 dar'Kness,'' " &c. (D^ o^j.'wc;;). iii. 2). 
 
 On these testimv-iies :t I:as Iteen remarked, that 
 both tliese AlexandyKMi fatheis havs quoted works 
 unque-itionably spiirK^us witlioat expressing a 
 doubt of their genuineness: thus Clsmtnt refers 
 to Tne Ri'velation of Peft:, and Origcn to the 
 Shepiierd of Hermas, which he believed to be in- 
 spired ;^" quse scriptnra valde miiii utilis videtur, 
 et, ut pnto, diviiiitus in.spirata," hi Ep. ad Rom. 
 Comment . \\h. x.)j and though Clement speaks 
 of the apostolic Barnabas, lie evidently docs not 
 treat this Epistle with the same deference as the 
 CiUioidcal writings, but fieelj' j^ioints out its mis- 
 takes. Tertullian calls all the seventy disciples 
 apostles, and in this inferior and secondary seTise, 
 IS Dr. Lardner observes, Clement terms Biirnabas 
 in ap<>stle. 
 
 III. Ivisebius, in the noted passage of his Ec- 
 ■ihsiastical History (iii.. 25), quoted at lengtli (in 
 the original) hy De Wette, in his Lehrbuch der 
 hlatorisiJi-kritischvn Einleitimg in die Bibel, &c., 
 Beiiin, ISIO, Tiieil. i. § 32. and translated by 
 Lindner, Credibility, pait ii. chap. 72 •, says, 'The 
 Epistle reputed to be written liy Barnabas is to be 
 ranked among the books which are spurious' — kv 
 roLS v6Qols KaraTtTax^OL -'h (pipofxiyr) BapydPa 
 finffTo\T) \ M\i\ eUewhere, 'He (Clement of Alex- 
 andria) makes use of testimonies out of those 
 scriptures that are contradicted (otto ru>v afri- 
 \eyo/xfva>i' •Ypa4><t>v), that called the Wisdom of 
 Solomon, aiici of Jesus the S.iii of Siach, and the 
 Epistle to the Hebie.vs, and that of Baniubas and 
 o: Clement, and of Jude" (Hist. Eccks. vi. 13). 
 Ue also observes of Clement, ' In his liook called 
 
 BARNABAS. 
 
 Hypotypo.ses, he gives short exjilication* of al\ 
 the canonical Sc^iijtures (ndcrris t?]s tvSiaOljKov 
 ypcuprjs),'' not neglecting even the contrurerteti 
 bcx)ks (ras airTiMyotxivas), I mean tiiat of J -de 
 and the other Catholic Epistles, the Epistle of 
 Barniibas, and that called the Revelation o( 
 Peter." 
 
 IV. Jerome, in his woik on illustrious men, ot 
 Caialoyue of Ecclesiastical Writers, thus speaks 
 of Barnavjus ; 'Barnabas of Cyprus, called also 
 Josepli, a Levite, was ordained, with Paul, 'an 
 apistle of the Gentiles: he wrote an Ejjistle for 
 the editication of the church, which is read among 
 the Apocrijphal scriptures' (Catal. Vir. illtiat. 
 cap. vi.) ; and in liis Commentary cm EzcJnei 
 slii. 19, ' Many parts of tiie Scriptures, and 
 esjiecially the Epistle of Bamal>a3, wliich is reck- 
 oned among the apocryphal Scriptures," &c. Ii> 
 another place he quotes, as the woriis of Igriatiirj, 
 the p.issage relative ;o the apostles, v. liich is cited 
 by Origen from the Ejiistle of Barnabas (Lard- 
 iier"s Credibility, pt. ii. ch. 114). 
 
 It is evident, as Valesius (with whom LardiMjr 
 and Hefele agree) htrs remarked, that Eusebius 
 i»ses tiie term voQol, not in the strict st^nse of 
 spurious^ but as synonymous with amAeyoju^ya, 
 i. e. disputed, controverted, and applies it to 
 wiitings which were received by some, but re- 
 jected by others. Tlie term apocryphal also, 
 used by Jerome, v/as applieil both by Jews and 
 Christians to works which (though the authors 
 were known) were not coiisideied canonical. 
 riie use of these terms, therefore, in refeiencc lo 
 the Ejiistle before ns, cannot be deemed a., a'oso- 
 lutely decisive against its genuhieness. The 
 following considerations, however, omitting some 
 "if less weight which have been urgeil by diileieiit 
 writers, will, it is believed, go far to prore tliat 
 Barnabas was not the author of this Epistle. 
 
 1. Though the exact date of the death of 
 Barnabas cannot be ascertained, yet from tiie 
 particulars already stated respecting liis nephe.v, 
 it is iiighly prol>abIe that that event took ]i'ace 
 before the maityrdom of Paul, .i.D. Ii4. But a 
 passage in the Epistle (ch. xvi.) .speaks tif the 
 temple at Jerusalem as already destroyeil : it wa.i 
 consequently written after the year 70. 
 
 2. Several passages liave been adduced to sliow 
 that the writer (as well as the persoiss adtlressed) 
 belonged to the Gentile section of the Ciiuich ; 
 but waiving this point, the whole tone of the 
 Epistle is dilfeient fiom v/liat the knowleilge we 
 possess of the character of Baiuabas would lei,; 1 
 us to expect, il' it proceeded from his pen. From 
 the hints gi\en in the Acts he appe.us to have 
 been a man of strong attachments, keenly alive 
 to the ties of kindred and father-land ; we lii<d 
 that on both his missionary tours his )iative island 
 and the Jewish synagogues claimed his liisl 
 attention. But througliout the Epistle therf Is 
 a total absence of sympathetic regard for tlie 
 Jewish nation : all is cold and distant, i^ not 
 contemjituous. ' It remains yet that I speak to 
 you (the 16th chapter begins) concerning the 
 temple; how thos? miserable men, being deceived, 
 have put their trust in the liouse." How unlike 
 
 * ' Librl canonic! vocantur Iv^iol&tjkoi quia efli- 
 ciunt utriimque Tctamentum (^iaQ-t\KTav Gra-d 
 appellant) vetus scilicet et novaja' (Suioeri 2'ues. 
 
 a. V. iv^M67)KOS.
 
 BAllNABAS 
 
 the friend and fellow-labourer of him who had 
 ' fjreat heaviness and continual sorrow in his 
 leart for iiis hiethien, his kindred according to 
 the flesli ' (Rom. ix. 2). 
 
 3. li.uii.ilias was not only a Jew hv hirth, lint 
 a Le\ ite ; from I. lis circumstance, cumhineil with 
 'vliat is recorded in the Acts, of the active part he 
 took in. the settlement of the jK)ints at issue be- 
 tween the Jewish and tlie Gentile converts, we 
 •might reasonal)ly expect to (ind, in a composition 
 beaiing his name, an accurate acquaintance with 
 the Mosaic ritual — a clear conception of tlie 
 natin-e of the Old Economy, and its relation to 
 tiie New Dispensation, and a freedom from that 
 addiction to allegorical interpretation which 
 marked the Cliristians of the Alexandrian scliool 
 in the second and succeeding centuries. But the 
 following specimens will sulice to show that ex- 
 actly the contrary may Ue ailiinied of tlie writer 
 of tliis Epistle ; that he makes unauthorizetl addi- 
 tions to various parts of the Jewish Cultus; tiiat 
 his views of tlie Old Economy are confused and 
 ei'roneous ; and that he atlopts a mode of inter- 
 pretation countenanced by none of the inspired 
 writers, and at utter variance with every piincijile 
 of sound criticism, being to the last degree puerile 
 and absurd. The inference is unavoidable, that 
 Barnabas, ' the Son of Prnpficci/,'' ' the Man full 
 of the Holy Spirit and of faith," was not the au- 
 thor of this Epistle. 
 
 (I.) He mentions in tw-o i)assages the fact re- 
 corded in Exud. xxxii. 19, of Moses breaking the 
 two tables of stone, and infers that Jehovah's co- 
 venant was thereby annulled. The falsity of 
 this statement need not be pointed out to the 
 Bililical student. He says, ' They (the Jews) 
 have for e\er lost that which Moses received. For 
 thus saith the Scripture : And Moses re- 
 ceived the covenant from tlie Lord, even two 
 tables of stone, &c. But, having turned tlieni- 
 :selves to idols, they lost it ; as the Lord said unto 
 Moses, Go down quickly, &c. And Moses cast 
 the two tables out of his hands, and their cove- 
 nant was broken, that tlie love of Jesus might 
 be sealed in your hearts unto the hope of his faith ' 
 (cli. iv.). The second passage, in ch. xiv., is very 
 similar, and need not be quoted. 
 
 (2.) On the rite of Circumcision (Acts xv. 
 1, 2) we find in this Epistle equal incorrectness. 
 The writer denies that circumcision was a sign 
 of the covenant. ' You will say the Jews were 
 circumcised for a sign, and so are all the Syrians 
 and Arabians, and all the idolatrous priests.' 
 Herodotus (ii. 37), indeed, asseits tliat the Syrians 
 \n Palestine received the practice of circumcision 
 from' the Egyjitians; but Joseplius, both in iiis 
 Antiquities and Treatise against Apiun, remaiks 
 tliat he must have allutled to the Jews, liecause 
 ihey were tJie only nation in Palestine who were 
 circumcised I^Antiq. viii. 10, ^ 3; Cuntr. Apion. 
 I. 22). ' How,' says Hug, ' cjuld Barnabas, who 
 travelled with Paul through the southern pro- 
 vinces of Asia Minor, make such an assertion 
 respecting the iieatljcn priests'" 
 
 (3.) Referring to the goat (chap, vii.), either 
 that menti{,ried in Num. xix. or Lev. xvi., he says, 
 ' All the priests, and they only, shall eat the un- 
 washed entrails with vinegar.' Of this cliiection, 
 i'l itself highly improbable, not a trace can be 
 linind in the Bible, or even in the Talmud. 
 
 '•i.'] In the same chapter, he says of tlie scajie- 
 
 BARNABAS. 
 
 201 
 
 goat, that all the congregation were lonmandwV 
 to spit upon it, and (^lt scarlet wool about iu 
 luyid ; and that the person ap])ointed to convey 
 the goat into the wilderness took away the scarh't 
 wool and ]mt it on a ihorn-liush, wliose youn^ 
 sprouts, when we find them in the lield, we are 
 wont to eat; so the fruit of tiiat thorn only \t 
 sweet. On all lliese particulars the Scrijilures ai"* 
 silent. 
 
 (5.) In chap. viii. our author's fancy fas' M/ 
 Jones remarks) seems to grow mere fruitful and 
 luxuriant. In referring to the led heifer (Nun., 
 xix.), he says that men in whom sins are comt? 
 to jiert'ection {kv ois afxapTlai re\(iat) were lo 
 bring the heifer and kill it; that three youths 
 were to take up the ashes and ])ut iherii in vessels; 
 then to tie a jiiece of scarlet wool and hyssop iijion 
 a stick, and so sprinkle every one of the iieople. 
 'This heifer is Jesus Christ; the wicked men 
 tiiat were to offer it are those sinners who brought 
 him to death; fiie young men signify those to 
 whom the Lord gave authority to jjreach his Gos- 
 jiel, being at the begintijig twelve, because there 
 were twelve tribes of Israel.' But why (he a>ks'; 
 were there three young men aj-pointed to sjirinkle i 
 To denote Aiiiahani, Isaac, and Jacob. And why 
 was wool put upon a stick ? Because the king- 
 dom of Jesus was founded upon the cross, &c. 
 
 (6.) He infeiiirets the distinction of clean and 
 unclean animals in a spiritual sense. ' Is it not 
 C^Apa ouK — t'. Dr. Hefele's \'aluable note, ji. b^) 
 the command of God that they .should not eat 
 lliese things '('—(Yes.) But Moses spoke in spirit 
 (eV TTvev/nari''. He named the swine, in order to 
 say, Thou slialt not jiiin those men who are like 
 swine, who, while they live in jileasure, forget 
 their Lord," kc. He adds — Ncillier shalt thou 
 eat of the liya'na : that is, thou slialt not be an 
 adulterer.' If these were the views cnteitained by 
 Bainabas, how must he have been astonished at 
 the want of siiiritual discernment in the Ajiostle 
 Peter, when he heard from his own lips the ac- 
 count of the symbolic vision at Jopjia, and his 
 rejily to tiie conimand — ' Ai ise, Peter, slay and 
 eat. But I said, N."(i so, Lord, for nothing com- 
 mon or unclean hath at any time entered into my 
 mouth ■ (Acts xi. 8). 
 
 (7.) In ch. ix. he attsrupts to show that Abra- 
 lia»i, in circumcising his servants, hail an espe- 
 cial reference to Cnrist .and his cr'.'cifixion : — 
 ' Leam, my children, that Abraham, who first 
 circumciEeJ in spirit, having a regard to ilic S>in 
 (in Jesum, Lat. Vers.), circumcised, applying the 
 mystic .sense of the three letters {^-jl^kv Tpiwf 
 ypa/j./xdTwy S6yi.Lara — de7i (jeheimen Sinn dn-ier 
 Buehstalien amcendend, Hefele). For tiie Scrip- 
 ture says that Abraham ciicumcised 31S men ol 
 his house. \\ hat then was the deeper insight 
 (yyiixTisj imparted to him ? Mark tiist the IS, 
 and next the 300. The numeral letters of I'J are 
 I (Iota) and H (Eta), 1 = 10, H = 8; here you 
 have Jesus 'IHcrovj' ; and because the cioss in 
 the T (Tail) must express the graee (of our le- 
 demption), he names 300 ; therefore he signified 
 Jesus by two letters, and file cross by one." 
 
 It will Ije observed that the writer liastily as- 
 sumes (from Gen. xiv. 11) that Abraham circum- 
 cised only 3m persons, that lieing the number ot 
 ' the servants born in his own house," whom h« 
 armed against the four kings ; but he circumcisea 
 his household nearly twenty yea "s Liter, iuclu.1
 
 298 
 
 BARRENNESS. 
 
 mg not oiilv those born in liis house witn the 
 addition of Ishmael), but ' all that were Ijoiiyht 
 witn money ' (Gen. xvii. 2.3). The writer evi- 
 dently was unacquainted with fne Hebrew Scri]>- 
 tures, by his committintj tlie blunder of sujiposing 
 that Abraham was familiar with the Greek alpha- 
 bet some centuries before it existed. 
 
 Our limits will not allow us to enter into the 
 question of the integrity of the Epistle in its pre- 
 sent form; but this and several other topics are 
 discussed very fully and with great ability in Dr. 
 Hefele's Treatise, to which, and the other works 
 mentioned below, the reader is referred. 
 
 A new and full Method of settling the Cano- 
 nical Authoriiy of the New TestametU., by the 
 Rev. Jeremiah Jones, Oxford, 1827, vol. ii. part 
 iii. ch. 37-43; Das Sendsckt'eiben des Ajwstcls 
 Barnabas aitfs Neue ^mtersvcht, t'bersetzt, und 
 erkZiirt, von Dr. Carl Josejjh Hefele, Tiii)ingen, 
 ISiO; Patrum Apostolicomni Opera, ediilit C. 
 J. Hefele, Tubingag, 1839; Lardner's Credibi- 
 lity of the Gospel History, part ii. ch. i. ; Nean- 
 iler, Allyemeine Geschichte der Christlichen Re- 
 ligion und Kir che, i. 653, 1100, or, History of 
 the Christian Religion and Church, translated 
 by the Rev. J. H. Rose, 1 84 1, vol. ii. pp. 329- 
 331; Lives of the most eminent Fathers of the 
 CMirch, by William Cave, D.D., Oxford, 1840, 
 vol. i. pp. 90-10.3.— J. E. R. 
 
 BARRENNESS is, in the East, the hardest 
 lot that can befal a woman, and was considered 
 among the Israelites as the heaviest punishment 
 with which the Lord could visit a female (Gen. 
 xvi. 2; XXX. 1-23; 1 Sam. i. 6, 29; Isa. xlvii. 9; 
 xlix. 21 ; Luke i. 25 ; Niebuhr, p. 76 ; Volney, ii. 
 .359). In the Talmud {Yeramoth, vi. 6) a man 
 was boimd, after ten years childless conjugal life, 
 to many anothei- woman (with or witliout repudi- 
 ation of the tiist), and even a third one, if the se- 
 cond ])roved also barren. Nor is it improbable 
 that Moses himself contributed to strengthen the 
 opinion of disgrace by the promises of the Lord 
 of exemption from barrenness as a blessing 
 (Exod. xxiii. 26 : Deut. vii. 14). Instances 
 of childless wives are found in Gen. xi 30 ; 
 XXV. 21 ; xxix. 31 ; Jodg. xiii. 2, 3 ; Luke i. 7, 
 36. Some cases of unlawful marriages, and 
 more especially with a brother's wife, were visited 
 with the punishment of barrenness (Lev. .xx. 20, 
 21); Michaelis, however (Mosa'ischcs Recht, v. 
 290), takes the word Cinj? here in a figurative 
 sense, implying tliat the childien born in such an 
 illicit marriage should not be ascribed to the real 
 father, but to tlie former brother, thus depriving 
 the second husband of the share of patrimonial 
 inheritance ^vhich would otherwise have fallen 
 to his lot if ihe first brother had died childless. 
 
 Tiiis general notion of the disgrace of barrenness 
 in a woman may early have given rise, in the 
 )»atiiarchal age, to the custom among liarren 
 wives of introducing to their husbands their maid- 
 servants, and of regarding the children born in 
 tiiat concubinage as their own, by which they 
 thought to covei' their own disgrace of barrenness 
 (Gen. xvi. 2; xxx. 3). [Children.]— E. M. 
 
 BARSABAS. [Joseph Barsabas ; Judas 
 Bars IB AS.] 
 
 BARTHOLOMEW (BapOoA.i/xaios ''^hn ng, 
 
 i. e. the S071 of Tolmai : "'^'Pfl) is a name that 
 9CCUV8 in the Old Testament (Josh. xv. 14) ; Sept. 
 
 BARTHOLOMEW. 
 
 0o>.O;ul, ©oAjua/' ; Auth. Vers., Talmai; (2 Sam 
 xiii. 37) Sept. OoA^i, @okotj.ai. In Josephus, we 
 find @o\ofj.aios (Antiq. xx. 1.61). The ©oAjualo! 
 in Antiq. xiv. 8. 1 is called TlToKeixaios in Jie/l 
 Jud. i. 9. ^ 3, not improbably by an error of tiit 
 tnmscriber, as anodier person of the latter name 
 is mentioned in tlie same sentence. Bartholomew 
 was one of the twelve Apostles, and is generally 
 supposed to have been the same individual who 
 in Jolm's gosjiel is called Nathanael. Tise 
 reason of this opinion is, that in the three iii'st 
 gospels Philip and Bartholomew are constantly 
 named together, while Nathanael is nowh«-* 
 mentioned; on the contrary, in the fourth gos- 
 pel the names of Philip and Nathanael ar« 
 similarly combined, but nothing is said of Baitho 
 lomew. Natlianael therefore must be considered as 
 his real name, while Bartholomew merely exjjresses 
 his filial relation. He was a native of Cana 
 in Galilee (John xxi. 2). He was introduced 
 by Philip to Jesus, who, on seeing him ap- 
 proach, at once pronounced that eulogy wn liis 
 character which has made his name almost 
 synonymous with sincerity : * Behold an Israelite 
 indeed, in whom there is no guile !' (John i. 47).* 
 He was one of tlie disciples to whom our Loril 
 appeared after his resurrection, at the Sea of 
 Tiberias (Jolm xxi. 2) ; he was also a witness of 
 the Ascension, and returned with the other apostle* 
 to Jerusalem (Acts i. 4, 12, 13). Of his sub 
 sequent history we have little more than vague 
 traditions. According to Eusebius (Hist. Eccles. 
 v. 10), when Pantaenus went on a mission to tlie 
 Indians (towards the close of the second centuiy), 
 he found among them the Gosjjel of Matthew, 
 written in Hel)rew, which had been left there by 
 the apostle Bartholomew. Jerome {De Vir. Ilhtstr. 
 c. 36) gives a similar account, and adds that 
 Panta;nus brought the copy of Matthew's Gospel 
 back to Alexandria with him. But fne title of 
 Indians is applied l)y ancient writers to so many 
 diil'erent nations, that it is difficult to determine die 
 scene of Bartholome 's labours. Mosheim (with 
 whom Neander agrees) is o'" opinion that it was a 
 part of Arabia Felix, inhabited by Jews, to wliom 
 alone a Hebrew gospel could be of any service. 
 Socrates (Hist. Eccles. i. 19) says tiiat it was the 
 India bordering on Ethiopia; and Sophronius 
 reports that Baitholomew preaclied the Gos| el of 
 Christ 'lv5o7s tois KaKou/j.fyots fvSaifj.o(ni/. This 
 apostle is said to have suffered crucifixion at 
 Albanopolis in Armenia, or, according to N ice- 
 phorus, at Urbanopolis in Cilicia. A spurious 
 gospel which bears his name is in the catalogue 
 of apocry])hal books condemned by Pope Gelasius 
 (Fabricius, Cod. Apoc. i. 137 ; Mosheim, Com- 
 mentaries 071 the Affairs of the Christians, 6!C., 
 translated by f'idal, vol. ii. p. 6, 7 ; Tilleniont, 
 Mi-moires, &c., i. 960. 1160 ; Neander, Al/ge- 
 meine Geschichte, i. 113 ; Cave, Lives of the 
 Apostles, Oxford, 1840, pp. 3S7-392).— ,F. E. R. 
 
 * We have thus the highest evidence of the false- 
 hood in one instance (and tlie apostle .(ohn is 
 another), of the assertion of the pseudo- Barnabas 
 'that Jesus sel':;cted for his apostles men laden 
 with the greatest sins {virep iracrap a/xapriaf 
 dvoixdirfpovs) in order to sliow that he came no< 
 to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance 
 (Ep.Barnab.ch. v.: v. Hafele's Das Sendschre*- 
 ben, &c., ]). 160).
 
 BARTlM^Ufe 
 
 BARUCH. 
 
 299 
 
 BARTIM^.US (BapTinaiosj, the blind beggar 
 of Jericlio wlioni Christ restored to sight (Mark 
 X. 46). 
 
 BARUCH G"1"^?' blessed ; Sept. Bapovx), the 
 faithful friend and amanuensis of the jiropliet 
 Jeremiaii, was of a noble family of the tribe of 
 Judah, and generally considered to be the brother 
 of the prophet Seraiah, l)otli being represented as 
 sons of Nwiah ; and to Baruch the jjrophet Jere- 
 miah dictated all his oracles. During the siege 
 of Jerusalem. Baruch was selected as the dejio- 
 sitaryof the deed of purchase which Jcrimiah liad 
 made of tho territory of Hanameel, to whidi 
 deed he had been a witness. In the fourth year 
 of the reign of Jehoiachim, king of Judah (b.c. 
 COS), Baruch was directed t« write all the pro- 
 phecies delivered by Jeremiaii up to tliat period, 
 and to read tiiom to tiie people, uhicli he <lid 
 from a window in tlie Temple ujH.n two solemn 
 occasions. He afterwards read them liefore tiie 
 counsellors of tiie king at a private interview, 
 when Baruch being asked to give an account of 
 tiie manner in wiiich tlie prophecy had been com- 
 posed, gave an exact description of the mode in 
 which he had taken it down from the prophet's 
 dictation. Uj/On this they ordered iiim to leave 
 the roll, advising that he and Jeremiah should 
 conceal tnemselves. They then informed the king 
 of what had taken place, upon which he had the 
 roll read to him ; but, after hearing a part of it, 
 he cut it with a penkiiife, and, notwithstanding 
 the remonstrances of his counsellors, threw it into 
 the fire of his winter parlour, where he was sitting. 
 He then ordered Jeremiah and Baruch to be seized, 
 but tiiey could not be found. The Jews to this 
 day commemorate the burning of this roll by an 
 annual fast. 
 
 Another roll was now written by Baruch from 
 the prophet's dictation, containing all that was in 
 the former, with some additions, the most remark- 
 able oi' which is the prophecy respecting the ruin 
 of Jehoiachim and his house, as the punishment 
 of his impious act. Tliis roll is the prophecy of 
 Jeremiah whicli we now possess. Baruch, being 
 himself terrified at tlie threats contained in the 
 prophetic roll, received the comforting assurance 
 tliat he would hiinself be delivered from the cala- 
 mities which should befal Judah and Jerusalem. 
 In the Iburth year of Zedekiah (b.c. .59.5), Baruch 
 is sujiposetl by some to have accomjianied Seraiah 
 to Babylon, when the latter attended Zede- 
 kiah with the projjhecies contained in Jeremiah, 
 chaps. 1. and li., wliich he was commanded liy 
 Jeremiah to read on the lianks of the Euphrates, 
 and tiien to cast the prophetic roll into the river, 
 with a stone attached to it, to signify the ever- 
 lasting ruin of Bal)ylon (Jer. li. 61). At least, 
 Baruch, in the book which bears his name [Ba- 
 KLCH, Book ok], is said to have read these jiro- 
 phecies at Babyion, in the hearing of king Je- 
 hoiacliim and the captive Jews, in the fifth year 
 of the taking of Jerusalem by the Chaldaeans (see 
 next article), which must have been the same 
 taking of it in whirh Jehoiachim was made pri- 
 wntr. For af>er the other taking of Jerusalem, 
 in the eleventh year of the reign of king Zedekiah, 
 wiien the Jews, after their return from Babylon, 
 Bbstin:itely persis'jd in their determinafion to 
 Bttigrafe to Egypt, against tlie remonstrances of the 
 frophet, both Baruch and Jeremiah accc-mpanied 
 
 tnem to that country, where they remained until 
 the death of Jeremiah, and from whence tluie ii 
 no account in Scripture of Baruch's return. The 
 Rabbins, however, allege that lie died iiiBabyhm, 
 in the twelfth year of tiie exile (see Calmet's7V<' 
 face). Josephus asserts that lie v.as well skilled 
 in tiie Hebrew language ; and tiiat, after the tak- 
 ing of Jerusalem, Nebuzaradaii treated Ba.-uch 
 witii consideration, from lesj.'ect to Jeremiati, 
 whose misfortunes he iiad siiared, and wlioni he 
 had accomjianied to jirison and exile {Anluj. x. 
 11 .-W. W. 
 
 BARUCH, BOOK OF (Apocrypha), follows 
 next after the liook of Jeremiah in tlie Sepiuagint 
 Version. It is the only one ol' the deulerocano- 
 nical bool<8 named in tiie catalogue of the cele- 
 brated til'ty-iiintli canon of llie Council oI'Laodicea. 
 If Baruch, the scribe of Jeremiah, be the author of 
 this book, lie must have removed from Egypt to 
 Babylon immediately alter the death of Jeremiah, 
 inasmuch as the auilior of tiie tiook lived in Ba- 
 bylon in the fifth year after that event, unless we 
 suppose, with Eiclihorn, Arnold, and otluus. tl*t 
 the reference (Baruch i. 1) is to the liftli year iVoiu 
 tlie captivity of Jehoiaclum. Jahii (^Introciuctio 
 in Epitomcn redacta, ^ 217, &c.) considers tiiis 
 latter ojjinion at vaiiance with Barucii i. 1, wli''re 
 the destruction of Jerusalem is s]ioken of as having 
 already taken place. De Wette (Le/irbitch der 
 Eiuleitung in das A.taid N. T.) ingeniously con- 
 jectures tliat Itei (year) is a mistake or cor- 
 rection of some transcriber for fj.T]vi (month); and 
 there is no question that the present reading, 
 which mentions the year, and the dai/ of the 
 month, without naming the month itself, is quite 
 unaccountable. 
 
 If Baruch, the frienil of Jeremiah, was the 
 author of the present wi;rk, it must be a transla- 
 tion from thellebiew orChaldee; and it is by no 
 means impossible that this is the case, as the work 
 abounds in Hebraisms. These Hebraisms, how 
 ever, in the opinion of Jahn (Introduction), might 
 have originated witli a Jew writing Gieek. al- 
 though he leans to the ojiinion that, from tlie use 
 of the word manna, and the frequent Heliraisms, 
 this work not only does not belong to the Greek 
 age of the .lews, but was actually written in 
 Hebrew. This is also the opinion of Cahiiet 
 (^Preface to Baruch), Huet (Demunstratio Evan- 
 gelica), and others; while Grolius, Eiclihorn, and 
 most of the Geiman wrifeis favour the idea o\' a 
 Greek original. They conceive that the writer 
 was some unknown peison in the reign of Ptolemy 
 Lagos, who, wishing to conlhm in tiie true reli- 
 gion the Jews then residing in Egyjit, altril.'jled 
 his own ideas to Baiuch the scrAie. Tlieie ap- 
 pears, howexer, no reason, on this latter hvi;othesis, 
 why the author should speak ot the re« irn from 
 Babylon. Grotiiis conceives tiiat the liook abounds 
 not only in Jev/ish, but even in Christian inter|)0- 
 lations (see Eiclihorn 's Einlcitimg in die Aj>o- 
 hryfe Sckriften). 
 
 Although Cyril of Jerusalem speaks of tlie book 
 of Baruch as canonical, it is not expressly named 
 in any of the ancient catalogues of the canon of 
 Scrijiture, except, as already ol)ser\'ed, that of tiie 
 ("ouncil of Laodicea; and the remarkable cir- 
 cumstance of this being the («i!y deutvrocano- 
 nical book named in the canon of thai C'oiincil 
 has given rise to various conjectures. Dean Pri • 
 deaux, indeed, conceives that the woidg of tii«
 
 SCO 
 
 BARUCII. 
 
 BASAM. 
 
 eanon, ' Jeremiah, with Banich, th'i Lamenta- 
 tions, and the Epistle," were intended to express 
 no more than jereiiniah's Prophecies and La- 
 ment^ons ; that hy the Epistle is meant only tlie 
 epistle in the "i^th cliapter of Jeremiah ; and that 
 ijaruch's name is added only because of the part 
 he bore in collecting them together, and adding 
 the last chapter {Connexion, vol. i. p. 50). But 
 on examining the AleAndrian manuscript in the 
 British Museum, it will be seen that the arrange- 
 ment of these books exactly tallies with the words 
 of the canon. Immediately after Jeremiah follows 
 Baruch, with its title and subscription ; then the 
 Lamentations, with title and subscrijition ; and, 
 last of all, the Epistle, with the title, ' The Epistle 
 of Jeremiah,' and the following subscription, 
 * Jeremiah, Lamentations, and tlie Epistle.' 
 
 Whiston (Authentic Records, vol. i. p. 1, &c.) 
 strongly contends for the canonicil.y of this book, 
 founding liis opinion on Origen's mode of citing 
 it, witli the formula ' It is written,' as well as his 
 testimony, recorded by Eusebius (Hist. Eccles. 
 vi. 2.5), that The EpiMe (Baruch vi.) was owned 
 by the Jew? : in addition to the fact, that it is 
 stated in the Ajiostolical Constitutions that the 
 l(Ook of Banicl), together with the Lamentations, 
 was publicly read in the synagogues on the tenth 
 day of the month Gorpioeus. 
 
 Among the fathers the book of Baruch is cited 
 generally as part of the book of Jeremiah, — by 
 lrenaeu,s, Cy)Hian, Clement of Alexandria, Euse- 
 bius, Ambrose, Augustin, Clnysostom, Basil, Epl- 
 iliaiiius, and others. Augustin, having cited 
 under the name of Jeremiah the passage in our 
 Bibles, Baruch iii. 35-37, observes, ' Some ascribe 
 this saying not to Jeremiah, hut to Baruch, his 
 amanuensis, but it is now known under tiie name 
 of Jeremiah (Citu of God, cli. xxxiii.). The book 
 of Baruch is also cited as part of Jeremiah in the 
 Roman office for the Saturday in Whitsun week. 
 Tliis mode of citing it most probably accounts 
 for the fact of its name being omitted in the 
 ancient catalogues, including those of Hippo and 
 Carthage. It wiis at length cited as a separate 
 t^/ok by the Council of Florence, and afterwards, 
 not without a strugi^le (see Father Paul's history), 
 by the Council of Trent. 
 
 It is at the same time observed by Calmet, that 
 its ' canonicity liad been denied not only by the 
 Protestants, but by several Catholics,' among wliom 
 he instances Driedo, Lyranns, and Dionysius of 
 Carthage. He considers that Jerome treats the 
 y>)ok with harshness when (Preface to Jeremiah) 
 cliat father oliserves, ' I have not thought it worth 
 while to translate the book of Baruch, which is 
 generally joined in the Septuagint version to Jere- 
 miah, and whicii is not found among tlie Hebrews, 
 nor the pseudepigranhal epistle of Jeremiah.' 
 This is tlie epistle forming the sixth chapter of 
 Baruch, the germineness of which is questioned 
 by several who acknowledge that of the former part 
 of the book. Most modern writers of the Roman 
 church, among whom are Du Pin ((Janon oj 
 Scripture), Calmet (OOmmetitary), and Allber 
 (Hermeneutica Generalis), reckon this a genuine 
 epistle of Jeremiahs. Jalin, however, after St. 
 Jerome, maintains its spurious and pseude-pigra- 
 rihal character. This he conceives sufKciently 
 attested by the ditference of style, and its freedom 
 from Hebraisms. He considers it to be an imita- 
 tion of the Epistle of Jeremiah (ch. xxix.). This 
 
 Epistle, however, is confessedly more ancient thatt 
 tlie second book of Maccabees, for it is there ^^^ 
 ferred to (Mace. ii. 2, comp. with Baruch vi 4) 
 as an ancient document. The position of thit 
 letter varies in manuscripts; it sometimes j;«» 
 cedes and sometimes follows Lamentiitions. 
 
 The book of Baruch was marked with obeli in 
 Origen's 7/ei'rt;;/a ; the translation in the 
 Vulgate is older than the time of Jerome. 
 
 The subject of the book is (1) an exhortation 
 tn wisilom and a due oJiservance of the law. 
 
 (2) It then introduces Jerusalem as a widow, 
 comforting her children with the hope of a letuvn. 
 
 (3) An answer fJlows in conliimation of this 
 hope. A prologue is prefixed, stating that Baruch 
 had read his book to Jeremiah and the peoiile in 
 Baity Ion by the river Si id (Euphrates), by which 
 the people were brought to repentance, and sent 
 the book with a letter and presents to Jerusalem. — 
 
 w. w. 
 
 BARZILLAI C^m^ a wealthy oldGileadite 
 of Rogelim, who distinguished himself by his loy- 
 alty when Da"id fled beyond the Jordan from his 
 son Absalom. He sent in a liberal supply of pro- 
 visions, beds, and other conveniences for the use of 
 the king's followers (2 Sam. xvii. 27 ; xix. 32). 
 On the king's triumjihant return, Barziliai at- 
 tended him as far as the Jordan, but declined, by 
 reason of liis advanced age, to proceed to Jeru- 
 salem and receive the favours to whicli he had 
 entitled himself. 
 
 BASAM, or BAAL-SHEMEN (p\^hv2, 
 balsam-tree). The word balm occurs frequently 
 in the authorized version, as in Gen. xxxvii. 
 25; xliii. 11; Jerem. viii. 22; xlvi. 11; li. 8 ; 
 and Ezek. xxviii. 17. In all tiiese passages the 
 Hebrew text has tzeri, translated balm, which 
 is generally understood to be the true balsam, 
 and is considered a produce of Gilead, a moun- 
 tainous district, where the vegetation is that of 
 the Mediterranean region and of Euro])e, with 
 few traces of that of Africa or of Asia. But as 
 it is not certain that tzeri indicates the balsam- 
 tree, we shall confine our attention iiere to the 
 latter, and reserve what we have to say raspecting 
 the former to the article Tzeui. 
 
 The name balsam is no doubt derived from tlie 
 
 Arabic ^wAj balesan, which is probably also 
 
 the origin of the ^aKaa/xov of the Greeks. Forskal 
 informs us that the lialsam-tree of Mecca is there 
 
 called Abosham, i. e. perodora. T!ie word ^Llj 
 
 I • 
 bas-ham, given by him, is the name of a fragrant 
 shrub growing near Mecca, with the branches and 
 tufts of which they clean the teeth, and is su[iposed 
 to refer to the same plant. These names are 
 very similar to words which occur in die Heliiew 
 text of several passages of Scripture, as in the 
 Song of Solomon, v. 1, ' 1 have gathered my 
 myrrh with my spice' (hasam); ver. 13, ' His 
 cheeks aie as a bed of spices' (basam); and in 
 vi. 2, ' gone down into his garden to the beds of 
 spices'' (basam). The same woe<1 is useil m 
 Exod. XXXV. 28, and in 1 Kings x. 10, ' There 
 came no more such great abundance of siiices 
 (basam) as those which the Queen of Sheba gars 
 to King Solomon." In all_ the^e passages basom 
 or bosem Dti'3 and D^'3. though translaleU 
 ' spices," would seem to indicate the ' balsam- trwSi
 
 BASAM 
 
 if we may infer id'-ntify of ])lant or substance 
 fn)ni siiniliiiity in tiic Hebrew ami Arabic names. 
 But tlie word may indicate only a fra'.'rant aro- 
 matic substance in j,'enera1. The passaj^'es in the 
 Song of Sulomon may witii i)roi)riety be umier- 
 ■tood as leferring to a plant cullivated in Juda;a, 
 but not to spices in flic genera! sense of tliat teim. 
 Queen Slieba mii,'iit have brouijlit lialsum or 
 balsam-trees, as well as spices, for both are tlie 
 produce of southern latitudes, though far removed 
 horn each other. 
 
 BASAM. 
 
 301 
 
 The balsam-tree was one of the most celebrated 
 and highly esteemed among the ancients. Pliny 
 (^nist. Nat. xii. 25) says, ' Sed omnibus odoribus 
 praefertur balsamum, nni terrarum Judccse con- 
 cessum. Ostendere arbusculam banc urbi im- 
 peratores Ves))asiiiTii.' Pompey the Great also 
 boasted of having had it borne in triumph. 
 Justin the historian (xxxvi. ■\) says, 'Opes genti 
 Judaicae, ex vecti^alibus opobalsami crevere, 
 quod in his tantum regionibus gv^Tiitur. Est 
 namque vallis, &c. nomine Hienclius dicitur. 
 In ea valle sylva est, et ubeitate, et amoenitate 
 arborum insignis; siqnidem ])almeto et opobal- 
 samo distinguitur.' So Strabo and Diodorus 
 Siculus. Dioscorides states that it is found in one 
 valley of Judaea, and also in Egypt. At a much 
 earlier period Theophrastus was aware of the fact 
 that the balsamum tree was found in a valley 
 of Syria, and that it was cultivated only in two 
 gardens, one of twenty acres, the other much 
 smaller, as is also stated by Pliny. Josephus 
 info'.ms us diat the balsam is produced only in 
 the plains of Jericho. Abdollatif (' Memorabilia 
 of Egypt,' as quoted by Rosenmiiller) .says that he 
 has read in Galenus that the best balsam is pro- ■ 
 duced in Palestine; but now (in Abdollatif s 
 age) lie says, that no more balsam is found in 
 tliat country ; also that he knew of it only as 
 ' carefully reared at Ain-Sliames in Egyjit, in 
 an enclosed piece of ground." Prosjer Alpiiius 
 informs us that Messoner, a eiinucli, g()\einor of 
 Cairo in 1519, caused to be brought fiom Arabia 
 forty plants, which he placed in the gariien of 
 Matareah. Belon, in the early part of the six- 
 l»;entii century, saw the shrubs in the balsam 
 gardens of Matareah, a village near Caiio, and his 
 Jescrimijp of them agrees veiy well with that 
 
 ^iven by Abdollatif. Hence it would apjieai 
 from ancient authors that the plant yiibliii); 
 balsam was never very common in Palegtine — 
 in fad, that it was confined to one locality, 
 where it was found only as a plant iji cultivation, 
 though it may have been, and jtnibably wajj, in- 
 troduced at a \ery early jierioil. Tliat it iiaa 
 long disa])] eareil from theii<;e is evidei;t from the 
 authors we have just quoted, as well us from the 
 testimony of all travellers in Palestine. Tiiat 
 it was a southern plant we may believe from its 
 lieing cultivated in the warm souliiein valley of 
 Jericho, and that it was iiitioduccd into that lo- 
 cality we have the testimony of Jo>e)ihus (Aiiti<f. 
 viii. 6), who says that it was biouglit thither 
 by Queen Sheba. Straiio, moreover, states that 
 niyiih, fr;ink incense, and the balsam-dee were 
 produced in the country of the Sahseans. 
 
 The balsam-tree, or balm of Gilead tree, a.s it is 
 also very generally called, is not a native of that 
 region, nor indeed does itap])ear ever to have been 
 cultivated there. It is probalde, tbeiefore, that 
 some otiier tree producing a balsamic secretJo;i is 
 intended in the above passages, where the woid 
 balm has been considered as the equivalent of 
 tzeri. The true bal.sam, we have seen, was cul- 
 tivated near Jericho, and at a later age in Egypt. 
 From that country it has been tiaced to Arabia. 
 Tlius Gerlacb, as quoted by Bergius, relates that 
 the tree which produces the balsam of Mecca giows 
 near Bederhunin, a village between Mecca and 
 Medina, in a sandy rocky soil, confined to a 
 small tract, aljout a mile in length. Stiabo, we 
 have found, was aware that the Ijalsam-trce grows 
 on tlie coast near Salia, in the ba])py land of the 
 Sabaeans. Bruce identifies this sjxit with that part 
 of the African coast near the stiaits of Babelman- , 
 del, which now bears the name of .Vzali ; and he 
 further states, that among the myrrh-trees behind 
 Azab all along the coast to the strait.s of Babel- 
 mandel is the native C(juntry of the balsam-tiee. 
 It grows to above fouiteen t'eet high, sponta- 
 neously and without culture, like the myirli, the 
 coffee, and frankincense tree, all ecjually the wo(k1 
 of the country, and occasionally cut down and 
 used fi.r fuel. It was no doulif early transplanted 
 into Arabia, tlia* is, into the soulhein part of Aiabia 
 Felix, immediately fionting A/.ab : the liigh 
 country of Araliia was too cold for it, being ail 
 mountainous, and water fieezmg there. The liisl 
 plantation that succeeded seems to have iieen at 
 Petra, the ancient mctroiioli.'' of Arabia, now 
 called Beder, or Beder Iluiiein Bruce has, 
 moreover, given two figures of the balsi,m-tree, — 
 one of the whole tree, the other of a single branch, 
 with the dissection of the fiuit. These, he says, 
 may be depended on, as lieing caiefully drawn, 
 after an exact examination, tiom two very fine 
 trees lirouglit from Betler-Hunein. Salt also 
 found it on the west coast of the Ked Sea, and 
 Mr. Brown, having examined hi sj)ecimen, is 
 sutlicient evidence of its authenticity. 
 
 The balsam-tree, having been seen by Bnice and 
 Salt, and figureil by the foimer ;is well as by Nees 
 von Ksenbeek. aiid introduced info Inilia, ha.s been 
 desciiliC.l by the fijst and by Wi^ht and Arnott, 
 and s now jiretty well known It l"oinis a middle- 
 S'zed tree, with spreading branches an<l a smooth 
 a.sh-coloured tiark, liut which is no doubi rough 
 in the older [larts, as lepresrnted by Brnr.'. The 
 ull-mate braiiche. are slnit, atid thuii:-iik« witb
 
 i02 
 
 BASAM, 
 
 BASHAN. 
 
 Jniall very slioH; abortive branclilets, bearing at 
 tlieir extremities the leaves and Howers. The 
 fruit is pointed, (leshy, with a viscid pnlp ; nut 
 4-angled ; 1 — 2-celled, containing one perfect 
 seed. 
 
 This species is now considered to be iden- 
 tical with the Amyris opobalsamum of Forskal, 
 found by liim in Aral)ia, in the neighbourhood 
 of the caravanserai of Oude, not far from Has, 
 
 where it is called Awsy 1 aboosham, i. e. pero- 
 
 dora ; and the wounded l)ark of which yields opo- 
 italsamum, or balsam of Mecca. It is as liighly 
 esteemed by all Orientals in the present day as 
 it was by the civilized nations of antiquity. An- 
 other species, discovered by Forskal, and called by 
 
 him Amyris Kufal, from its Arabic name ijks i"! 
 
 now also referred to the genus Balsamodendron 
 It is a tree with reddish-coloured wood, and with 
 branches rather spinous. The younger leallets 
 are descrilied as being villous and acute, the old 
 ones sino(»th, often obtuse ; tlie berry compressed, 
 with an elevated ridge on each side, the apex 
 funning a black prominent point. The wood 
 he describes as forming an article of consi- 
 derable commerce, especially to Egypt, where 
 water-vessels are impregnated with its smoke. It 
 is ])robably the twigs of this s])ecies which are 
 taken to India, and there sold under the name of 
 a-jd-i balessan ; that is, the wood of tlie balsam- 
 tree, and tlierefore analogous to the xylobalsamum 
 of the ancients. Carpobalsamam was probably 
 only the fruit oi' one of these species. Opobal- 
 samum, or juice of the balsam, is generally de- 
 scrilied as the finest kind, of a greenish colour, and 
 foimd in the kernel of the fruit. Carpobalsamum 
 is said to have heen made by the expression of tlie 
 fruit wlien in maturity, and xylobalsamum, by 
 tlie expression or decoction of the small new twigs, 
 which are of a reddish colour. But tiie ancients 
 probably employed botli tlie fruit and the wood 
 for macerating in oil, which would exfra(;t the 
 odour. The greatest quantity of balsam, and the 
 host in quality, must in all times have been pro- 
 duced by an incision into tlie baik wlien tlie juice 
 is in its strongest circulation, in July, August, and 
 tiie beginning of Sept«miier. It is then received 
 into a small earthen bottle, and every day's pro- 
 duce IS poiire<l into a larger, which is kept closely 
 coiked. Tlie whole quantity collected is but 
 small. When Sultan Selim conquered Egypt 
 and Arabia in lolfl, three [wunds were wdei-ed 
 to be sent yearly as a trilmte to Constanti- 
 nonle. 
 
 If, then, we compare ancient statements with 
 modern investigations, we find that the latter 
 conlirm the former, as to the i)alsani-tree being a 
 native of southern latitudes, — that is, of Arabia 
 and the opjjosile coast of Africa; to botii of which 
 regions Ijmce supposes the name of Salia to have 
 been apjilieil. Again, if we consider the estima- 
 tion in which the tiee is even now held by Ori- 
 ental nations, we shall have no difiiculty in 
 believing that the ancients may have equally 
 valued it; and if so, the probability is, that it 
 would be noticed in some part of the Old Testa- 
 ment as we find it is, in the above j»assages of ti.e 
 Canticles, Exodus, and Kings; while the Hebrew 
 iin<l .Aiabic names an' too similar to allow us to 
 doubt their being applied to the same plant, 
 
 namely, the far-famed balsam-tree of Arabia and 
 Africa".— J. F. R. 
 
 BASCA, or BASCAMA, a town near Belb- 
 shan, where Jonathan JVIaccabsDus was killea 
 (1 Mace. xiii. 23; Josh, xiii. 1). 
 
 BASHAN, |r2 and p2r\ ; Samaritan Vers 
 pjni; Targ. jmU, Ps.'lxviii. 13, also pHD -, 
 the latter Buxtort' suggests may nave originated 
 in the mistake of a transcriber, yet both are found 
 in Targ. Jon.; Dent, xxxiii. 22; v. Lex. Tabu. 
 col, 370 ; Sept. Baa-du and Bacrai'iTis ; Josephug 
 (ind Eusebius, Baravata. El Bottein is the modem 
 name. Tlie word probably denotes the peculiar 
 fertility of the soil : in the ancient, versions, instead 
 of using it as a proper name, a word meaning 
 frtcitful or fat is adopted. Thus in Ps. xxii. Ui, 
 for Bashan, we find in Sept. iriocei ; Aquila, 
 \nrapoi; Symmachus, criTiffTol; and Vulg. Pin- 
 ffues (Ps. Ixvii. 16), for kiil of Bashan; Sept. 
 upos ttTov ; Jerome (v. Bochart, Hierozoicon, pars 
 i. col. 531), mons pinguis. "The sacred writers 
 ijiclude in Bashan that part of the country east- 
 ward of the Jordan which was given to half the 
 tribe of Manasseh, situated to the north of Gilead. 
 Biichart incorrectly places it between the rivers 
 Jabdk and Amon ; and speaks of it as the allot- 
 ment of the tribes of Reuben and Gad (Num. 
 xxxii. 33), The first notice of this country is in 
 Gen xiv, 5. Cherdorlaomer and his confederates 
 ' smote the Rephaims in Ashtaroth Kamaim,' 
 Now Og, king of Basiian, dwelt in Ashtaroth, 
 and ' was of the remnant of the Re])liaim' ('giants' 
 Auth. Vers.), Joshua xii. 4. Wlien the Israelites 
 invaded tiie Promised Land, Argob, a province of 
 Bashan, contained 'sixty fenced citici, with walls 
 and gates and brazen bars, besides unvvalled towns 
 a great many' (Deut. iii. 4, 5 ; 1 Kings iv, 13). 
 These were all taken by the Israelites, and Og 
 and his p-eojjle utteily destroyed, Golan, one of 
 the cities of refuge, was situated in this country 
 (Deut, iv. 43 ; Josh, xx, 8 ; xxi, 27). Tau\a.iav 
 iv rfj Barayad^i (Joseph. Ant q iv. 7. ^ 4). 
 Solomon appointed twelve oflicers to furnish 
 the monthly supplies for the royal household, 
 and allotted the region of Argob to the son of 
 Geber (1 Kings iv. 13). Towards the close of 
 Jehu's reign, Hazael invacted the land of Israel, 
 and smote the whole eastern territory, 'even 
 Gilead ami Bashan" (2 Kings x. 33; Joseph. 
 Antiq, ix. S. ^ I) ; but after his death the cities he 
 liad taken were recovered by Jehoash (Joash) 
 (2 Kings xiii. 25), who defeated the Syrians in 
 three liattles, as Elisha had predicted (2 Kings 
 xiii. 19; Joseph. Antiq. ix. S. ^ 7). After th» 
 ca])tivity the name Batanaea was applied to cnly 
 a part of the ancient Bashan ; the rest being 
 called Trachonitis, Auranitis, and Gaulanitia 
 (v. Lightfoot's Chorocjraphical Notes u[x)n tli« 
 jilaces mentioned in St. Luke: Works, vol. x. 
 p. 2S2). All these provinces were granted by 
 Augustus to Herod the Great, and on his death 
 Batanaea formed a part of Philip's tetrarchy (Jo 
 se;;jh, De Bell Jud. ii. 6, ^ 3 ; Antiq. xviii. 4. {: fi). 
 At his decease, a.d. 34, it was annexed, by Tibe- 
 rius, to the province of Syria; but in a.u. 37 it 
 was given by Caligula to Herod Agrippa, tlie 
 son of Aristobulus, with the title of l<ing (Ac!.s 
 xii. 1 ; Joseph. .4m<ij. xviii. G. ^ 10). Fiom the time 
 of Agrip]ia"s death, in a.u. J 1, to a.ij. 53, the 
 government again reverted to the Romans, bat it
 
 BASKET. 
 
 wag fnevi restored by Claudius to Af^rijipa II. 
 ^Acts XXV. 13; Joseph. Antiq. xx. 7. ^1). 
 
 The ridinessot' tlie ])astme-laiid of liashan, and 
 tlie consequent suiH-vioiity of its hreed of cattle, 
 ire frequently alludeil to in the Scriptures. We 
 read in Deut. xxxii. I i, of 'rams of the breed 
 (Heb. sons) of Baslian." (K/.ek. xxxix. 18) 
 ' Rams, himbs, bulls, floats, all of them fatlings 
 af Baslian.' The oaks of Ba<lian are mentioned 
 in connection with the cedars of Lebanon (Isa. ii. 
 13; Zech. xi. 2). In Ezekiels descrijjtion of 
 the wealth and mai^nilicence of Tyre it is said, 
 ' Of tlie oaks of Baslian have they made their 
 oars' (xxvii. 6). The ancient connuentators on 
 Amos iv. 1, 'the kine of Baslian," Jerome, Tlieo- 
 iloret, and Cyril, speak in the strongest terms 
 of the exuberant fertility of Baslian (Bochart, 
 Hierozoicon, pars i. col. 30()), and modern tra- 
 vellers corroborate their assertions (v. Burck- 
 liardt's Travels in Sijria and the Holt/ Land, 
 pp. 2Sfi-288 , Buckingliara's Travels in I'alestine, 
 hrougii the countries of Bashan and Gilead, 
 London, 1822, vol. ii. pp. 112-117).— J. E. R. 
 
 BASKET. There are several words in the 
 Hebrew Scriptures by wliich dilVereiit kinds of 
 baskets appear to be indicated : — 
 
 I. in dud, which occurs in 2 Kings x. 7, 
 where the heads of Ahab's sons are sent from Sa- 
 maria to Jezieel in baskets; Jer. xxiv. 2, as con- 
 taining (igs ; and Ps. Ixxxi. 6 (rendered pots), 
 also as containing figs; where, tlipiefore, deliver- 
 ance from the baskets means deliverance from the 
 l/ondage of carrying burdens in baskets. In fact, 
 Tery heavy burdens were thus carried in Egy])t, 
 as corn in very large baskets from the field to the 
 threshing-floor, and from the thresh ing-floor to the 
 granaries. They were carried between two men by 
 a pole resting on their shoidders ; which agrees 
 with the previous clause of the cited text, ' I re- 
 moved his shoulder from the burden.' This labour 
 and form of the basket are often shown in the 
 Egyptian sculptures. 
 
 BASKET. 
 
 SO 3 
 
 which are presented in Hgs. 2 an<l 4 ^whica 
 coiitiiin pomegranates) of the annexed cut. 
 
 i.<^ffmim^^. 
 
 /-r^^* 
 
 [.■Ancient Egyptian.] 
 
 4. TtwO^^, salsilloth, occurs only in Jer. vi. 9, 
 where it obviously denotes baskets in which 
 grapes were deposited as they were gaflified. 
 The form of the l)askets used for this i)nr])Ose is 
 often shown on the Egyptian monuments, and is 
 similar to that represented in fig. 1, cut 3. 
 
 5. In all the other places where the word basket 
 occurs, we are doubtless to understand a basket 
 made of rushes, similar both in form and .ma 
 terial to those u«ed by carpenteis for carrying 
 their tools. This is still the common kind of 
 basket tlirougliout Western Asia ; and its use 
 in ancient Egypt is shown by an actual spe- 
 cimen which was found in a tomb at Thebes, and 
 which is now in the British Museum. It was, 
 in fact, a carpenter's basket, and contained liis 
 tools (fig. 1). 
 
 The specimens of Egyptian baskets in the 
 British Museum, represented in our cut, convey 
 a favourable idea of the basket-woik of ancient 
 times. Some of these are worked ornamentally 
 with colours (figs. 3, 5, cut 2; also the modem 
 examples, figs. 2, 7, cut 3). Ami bes des these the 
 monimients exhibit a large variety of haud-ba-kets, 
 of difl'erent shapes, and so extensively ('niployid 
 as to show the minierous apjilications of basket- 
 work in the remote times to vifhich these represent- 
 ations extend. They are mostly manufactured, the 
 gtronger and larger sorts of the fibres, and the 
 finer of the leaves of the ])alm-tree, and not in- 
 frequently of rushes, liut more stldc~ of reetis. 
 
 2. XltD teba, which occurs in connection with 
 agricultural objects, 'the ba-ket and the store' 
 (Deut. xxvi. 2-4 ; xxviii. 5-17), and would there- 
 fore ap]}ear to have been somewhat similar to the 
 above; atid, in fact, theEgyjitian sculptures show 
 dilVerenf baskets apjilied to this use. 
 
 3. Sl/^ kelub. From the etymology, this ap- 
 pears to have Ijeen an interwoven basket, made of 
 leaves or rushes. In Lev. v. 27, however, it is used 
 for a bird-cage, which must have been of open- 
 work, and ]irobably not imlike our own wicker 
 lird-rages. The name is also ap])lied to I'm t- 
 Wsketi ( Aiiuis v-ii. 1, 2j, Egyjitiaii examples of 
 
 [Mud em Oriental.] 
 
 In tlie ]irecpding cut of examples of triiKlern 
 Orii'ntal baskrits, many are ol" tl e same form, and
 
 801 
 
 BASTARD. 
 
 mostly of tlie same materials as tliose found ".n 
 the E^yi)tian tombs or pictured on their walls. 
 We doubt not tliat tlie three engravings taken 
 togetlier luinisli examples of all the dillerent kinds 
 oj baskets in use among the Israelites. 
 
 BASTARD. By this word tire Auth. Vers, 
 renders the Heln-ew "lT?pP, which occurs only in 
 Deut. xxiii. 2, and Zech. ix. 6. But Michaelis 
 (Alos. Recht, ii. 6 139; reads tlie word with a dif- 
 ferent punctuation, so as to make it a compound 
 cf two words IT D10, meaning stain, defect 
 of a stranger, implying the stain that would 
 be cast upon the nati(m by granting to such a 
 stranger the citizen-right. Some understand by 
 if the offspring of prostitutes lint tliey forget that 
 prostitutes were ex])ressly forbidden to be tole- 
 raieii by the law of Moses (Lev. xix. 29 ; Deut. 
 xxiii. 17). The most prolmble conjecture is that 
 wliich applies tlie term to tlie offspring of lieathen 
 prostitu'-es in the neighbourhood of Palestine : 
 since no provision was made by Moses against 
 their toleri'tion (Potter, Archceol. i. 3.54), and 
 wlio were a sort of priestesses to the Syrian god- 
 d«s Astarte (comp. Num. xxv. 1, sq. ; Gesenius, 
 CGmment. on Isaiah, ii. 339; Hos. iv. 14; 
 1 Kinzs xiv. 24, xv. 12; xxii. 47; 2 Kings 
 xxiii. 7; Herodot. i. 199). 
 
 Tiiat there existed such bastard offspring among 
 tlie Jews, is proved by the iiistory of Jephthaii 
 (Judg. xi. 1-7), who on this account was ex- 
 {lelleti, anil depri\ed of his patrimony. — E. M. 
 
 BAT Cl/^^i? \.tallfph) occurs in Lev. xi. 
 19 ; Deut. xiv. l*^ ; Isa. ii. 20 ; and Baruch vi. 22. 
 In Hebre-." tlie word implies flying in the dark ; 
 which, taken in connection with the sentence 
 * moreover the othela];h and every creeping thing 
 tJiat Jlietk is unclean unto you ; they shall not 
 be eaten,' is so clear, that there cannot be a mis- 
 take re^pecting the order of animals meant ; 
 though to modern zoology neither the s|)ecies, the 
 genus, nor even the family is thereby manifested : 
 the injunction merely ]irohibits eating bats, and 
 may lii;ewise include some tribes of insects. At 
 first sight, animals so diminutive, lean, and repug- 
 nant to tlie senses, must apjicar scarcely to have 
 rfn^uired the legislatqr's attention, but tlie fact evi- 
 dently shows that there were at the time men or 
 tribs; wlio ate animals classed with bats, a prac- 
 tice still in vogue in the great Australasian 
 islands, wheie the fiugivorous Pteropi of the haqiy 
 or goblin family, by our seamen denominated 
 flying-dogs, and enoneously vampyres, are caught 
 and eaten ; but where the insectivorous true bats, 
 such as the genera common in Europe, are re- 
 jected. Some of the species of harpies are of the 
 bulk of a rat, with from three to four feet of ex- 
 rjanse iietween tlie tips of tlie wings ; they have a 
 fi<ttrce dog-lil<e head, and are nearly all marked 
 with a space of rufous hair from the forehead over 
 the neck and along part of the back. 
 
 They reside in tiie most dense tiuliage of large 
 trees, wlience they fly out at night and do consi- 
 derabi*^ damage to the plantations of fruit-trevs. 
 Among them the Pteropus edulis, kalong or 
 «»dible goblin bat, is conspicuous, and not unfre- 
 q.iently found in our museums of natural history. 
 Tlie (list tiilie of them, distinguished by being 
 without tails, is not at present known in Egypt 
 01 Northern Arabia, but of the second, having 
 ceiU, a large sjjecies was discovered by M. Geof- 
 
 BATH KOL. 
 
 •"roy in the pyramids, and a veiy large one <i 
 figured on the oldest monuments. S))ecies ot 
 this or ot' Iwth are likewise common in Madagas- 
 car ; and thence it may be niferred that tliey still 
 exist in Sauthein .Airaliia. It was to one or more 
 S])ecies of this st-ction of Ciieiro])le'a tliat we ttiink 
 the Mosaic ]iro.iil)ition was chiefly directed; and 
 It is likewise to tiicm tliat may be referretl tht 
 foundation of the ancient legends concerning 
 harpies, which, however nmch they may tie dis- 
 torted, have a basis of truth. Indeed. wVien 
 we consider their voice, the faculty they have 
 of feeding with their thumbs, their formidable 
 teeth, their habit of flying in the day durinr 
 dark weather, and their willingness, though thev 
 aie frugivorous, to devour not only insects, but also 
 the blond and flesh of small animals, we may 
 admit that originally they were mure daring m 
 the presence of man; thai their true characters aie 
 but moderately amplified by ]ioetical fancy; *nd 
 that the Mosaic injunction was sliikingiy aj pio- 
 priate. 
 
 In the texts of Scripture, where allusion is ma(Le 
 to caverns and dark ];laces, true V'espertilionida;, 
 cr insect-eating liats, similar to the Eurojiean, are 
 clearly designate. — C. H. S. 
 
 BATAN^.A. [Bashan.] 
 
 BATH KOL {?)p r\2 daughter of the voice). 
 Under this name the Talmud, the later Targums, 
 and the Rabbinical writers, make frequent mention 
 of ix kind of oracular voice, constituting the fomth 
 grade (»f revelation, which, although it was an in- 
 strument of divine communication throughout the 
 early history of the Israelites, was the most pro- 
 minent, because the sole, prophetic manifestation 
 which existed during (and even after) the period 
 of the second Tem(ile. The Midrashim an<l the 
 Gemara, cited in Reland's Antiq. Sacr. pt. ii. cti. 
 ix., severally alV.vni that the Batli Kol is the voice 
 which spoke to Abraham, Moses, David, Nebu- 
 chadnezzar, and others ; and the Targums ol 
 Jonathan and of Jerusalem make the Baih Kol 
 apjicar in Gen xxxviii. 26; Num. xxi. C; and 
 in other places. The treatise Sanhcdrin, cited in 
 Vitringa's Obser. Sacr. ii. 33fi, uses tlie words : - 
 ' From the death of Haggai, Zechariah, and Ma- 
 lachi, the Holy Spirit [t^npn mi, which, ac 
 cording to the Jewish distinction, is only th" 
 second degn* of the prophetical gift] was with- 
 drawn fiom Israel ; but they nevertheless enjoyed 
 the use of the Bath Kol.' 
 
 The Jewish authorities are not agreed as to 
 what the Bath Kol was, nor as to the precise reasop 
 of its designation. It is disputed whether tlu 
 persons hearing the Bath Kol heard the ver^ 
 voice from heaven, or only a daughter of it— al 
 echo of it ; whether, as thunder is often men 
 tioned as a sign of the Divine presence, and a.' 
 the word voice apjx'ars to be used for thunder in 
 Exod. ix. 23; Jer. x. 13 ; Ps. xxix. 3, the Bath 
 Kol may not signify an articulate voice proceed 
 ing out of the thunder; or whether, according to 
 the explanation of Maimonides, ' the Bath Kol is 
 when a man has such a strong imagination thai 
 he believes he hears a voice from .vithoJt him 
 self.' As to the meaning of the name itself, pa»> 
 sages are cited in Buxtorf "s Lex. Talin. s. v. "^j, 
 and in Reland's An'.iq. Sacr. 1. c, which show 
 that the daughter of the voice sometimes meaid 
 the echo ot a scund, ai>d somotiu.es mceb' a pn-
 
 BATH KOL. 
 
 maiy sound ifself. It is certain that t}ie Peshito 
 \\AS sonietiriies iPiulered tlic simple Greek <pwvT) 
 Uy ' diiuj^liter of liie voice,' as in Acts xii. 22; 
 1 Tim. vi. 20; Ileb. iii. 1-). It is aocossaiy, 
 t:owever, tu leiuaik that, according to a luiida- 
 meiitul la>v of all Syro-Ai.iliiaii giaiiiniar, these 
 two words must either starul to each other 
 in the lelatioti of appoxiltoii, or of the state 
 cojistruct. But as apjhj-iition can only take 
 p'ace l)etween e(|uivak'nf and conveitihle (eims, 
 which ' daugiiter " antl 'voice" are not, ac- 
 cordingly, tiie alternative remlering of dauy/Uer 
 voice projwsed hy Prideaux (which Home also 
 nas adopted, hitroduct. iv. [>. 149) violates that 
 rule; liecause, in such an English combina- 
 tion, the word •daughter" has the force of an 
 adjective; and the Ilehiew language, possessing 
 hut few adjectives, would have expressed the 
 sense of d<nujhtcr voice 'if that liad ixxu the sense 
 .ntendetl to he conveyeil hy Bath Kol) liy making 
 Bath the fa.s< word, dependin.^' a.i a genitive on 
 the former. For instancr, uhat wc render the 
 Holy Spirit is literally ' tiie spirit of iioliness" in 
 Hebrew. Thus ' dauyhtcr coicc ' is not an a})po- 
 sition in English, iKir is it the translation of a 
 state consti net according ta the Hebrew order ; 
 hut of a state construct in which Prideaux has 
 taken the liberty of tiansjjusing the dependent 
 word, i.e. of making 'daugiiter (jf the voice' be- 
 come, in etfect, ' \oice of a daughter." Jennings 
 also, in his Jewinh A/diq. p. 229, when he ren- 
 ders Bath Kol by '■Jilice vox., saujilio- vo-is,' only 
 comtnits, in die tirst case, the same error more 
 paljiably; antl is guilty of tjuite as great a vit)la- 
 tion of the tirst |)rinciplt' ol' Hebiew grammar, as 
 lij would be, in tiie case oi' Latin, were he to 
 translate ^/ta vocis by • voice of the dauglitcr.' 
 
 Tlie occasions on which it is alleged that the 
 Batii Kol was heard after the ileath of Malachi are 
 of very various degrees of soleninity orsigniKcance. 
 Supposing the instances nientloned in Josephus 
 (^Antiq. xiii. 10). of the voice which announced 
 lx> Hyrcanus that his sons had conquered Anti- 
 ochus, and (Z?p Bell. Jud. vi. 5) of the awful voice 
 which was heard in the Temple, just before the 
 captuie of Jerusalem, to exclaim, Mera/SaiVcD/xei/ 
 (VTtiiGevl — not to lielong to tiie Bath Kol (as it 
 13 to lie observed that the ])seudo-Josephus ben 
 Gorion has, in these cases, merely used tlie He- 
 brew word for voice), most of the other recorded 
 i;i3tances fall far short of these in dignity; and 
 some apiiear iireconcilable to even very ciedulous 
 notions of the limits of Divine interpositiini. Only 
 a few of them, however, cari be classed witti quite 
 as trivial a sjiecies of diiination as f!ie Soites 
 Virgilianae, wliich is done in the unfair statement 
 of Prideaux {Coniiejc. ii. p. 351). Tlit^fact is, that 
 most Cliristian wi iters who have fieated of the 
 Bath Kol have not been able to divest themselves 
 of an undue desire to <li.sciedit its pieteiisions. in 
 consequence of tlieir feoiing any coni]»aiisoji 
 which might lie instituted between it and the 
 voices from heaven nientioiifd in the New Test. 
 Indeed, Lightf.i.t (in his Uor. Hcbr. ad .\Iatth. 
 iii. 17) considers all cases of Bath Kol to lie 
 either Jewish fables or devices of the devil. In- 
 stances of voices from heaven, on occasions out- 
 wardly very analogous to some among tlw Jews, 
 are i«corded in the history of the caily Cliiistiaii 
 ohurch; as the voice which was instruiuental in 
 iMikiQg Alexaiidci dishop of .leiusaleiu, and that 
 
 BATTLE. 
 
 30d 
 
 wh'ch exhorted Polycarp to be of good courag<« 
 (Kiiseiiii Hist, llcclci. vi. 11 ; iv. 15). 
 
 Two veiy leaiiicd dissertations on the Batk 
 Kol may b« fuiind in Vitiinga.s Obscr. Srtcr. ii 
 pp. 34l-3(j;j; and (by Danz) in MiMischen's .Vov. 
 Teat, ex Tatmudc iUi(.s/ rattan, ]i\>. .0^ I -.'37*^. — J. N. 
 
 BATH-SIIEBA, als,. Bath-sui a, daughter of 
 Elium. grand-daugliier of Ahitojilicl, anil wife of 
 Uriah. She Was seduce<J and bfcainc pregnant by 
 King David during the absence of her iiusband, 
 w lio was then engaged at the siege of Ralibali (2 
 Sam. xi. 4, 5; Ps. Ii. 2). The ciiild thus born in 
 adultery ijecame ill alicl died (2 Sam. xii. 15-1^^. 
 After tlie lapse of the iieriod of mouming for iier 
 husband, who was slain by the contrivance of 
 David (xi. 15), she was legally married to the 
 king (xi. 27), and bore him Salomon (xii. 24 : 
 I Kings i. 11 ; ii. 13). In I Clm.n. iii. 5 she is 
 called Bath-shua instead of Balhsl.eba ; and her 
 father, Amniiel. instead of Eliani (coinp. Matt, 
 i. 6). The other children of Bath-shcba are 
 named in 2 Sam. v. 14 ; I Chron. iii. 5. She is 
 afterwards noticed only ui conseijuence of her 
 good-natuied inteicessii.n for Adunijah; which 
 incidentally dis])'ays the resjiect with which she 
 was tieaied by king Solomon, her son (1 Kings 
 ii. 19). [David, Aoonliah.] 
 
 The Rat)bins describe Bath-sheba as a woman 
 of vast liifoiniation and a highly cultivated mind, 
 to whose education Solumon owed much of iiis 
 wisdom and reputation, and even a great part of 
 the practical philosophy einiiudied in his Pro- 
 veibs.— E. M. 
 
 BATTLE, SYSTEM OF. Though the He- 
 brews in their mode of conducting warlike ope- 
 rations varied somewhat in the couisi; of ages, 
 and are elsewhere shown to have Ijeen swaved by 
 the practice of gieater and moie military nations, 
 still, from the period when the institution of 
 royalty gave rise to an organized system, it was a 
 maxim to spare the soldiers all unnecessary Ca- 
 tigue before an engagement, and to suj)ply theiH 
 liberally with food. Their aims were enjoined to 
 be in the best order, and when diawn up for 
 battle they formed a Ihie of solid squares of a 
 hundred men, each square being ten deeji, and 
 with sufficient interval between to allow of fa- 
 cility in movements, and the slingers to pass 
 through. The aichers may lia\e occupied th« 
 two Hanks, or formed in the rear, according to 
 the intentions of the cumirianiler on tiie occa- 
 sion ; but the slingers were always stationed in 
 the rear until they were ordeied for«ard to im- 
 {lede an hostile apj:ruach, or to commence the 
 engagenii'iit, somew hat in the mannei- of modern 
 skiiuiishers. Meantime, while the trumpets waited 
 to sound the last signal, the king, or his ie[ires'.<;ita- 
 tive, ap]ieared in his sacred dress (the wHp ^ITP 
 hndie. kodesk, lerideied in our v( rsion 'the I eau- 
 ties of holiness"), except when he wisheil to reniaixi 
 unknown, a. at Megiddo (2 Chion. xxxv. 22j. 
 and proceeded to make the final dispositiona 
 in the mi<Ulle of his chosen braves, iitttnuril 
 liy |ii ii'sts who, by llieir exhortations, animated t.'« 
 ranks within heai ing. It was now, we may sup|K.»^, 
 when the enemy was at hand, that the slingei* 
 vvouUl be ordered to pass between the intervals i.< 
 the line of Solid sqtiaies, open their order, an<'. 
 with si. outs, let (Iv their sloiie or leaden mi^silei, 
 until l<y the giadual apiiioacli of the opp'tsing 
 fronts ihiy would lie hemii)>-d ;ii, and be recall«d
 
 306 
 
 BATTLE. 
 
 JJEAKI7. 
 
 ro the rear, or to cover a fliink. Then would came 
 1 lie signal to chars^e, and the ^r«it sliont of battle ; 
 vne heavy infantry, receiving the order to attack, 
 would, under cover of their sliields aild levelled 
 spears, press direct u[)on tiie front of the eneuiy 
 the rear ranks might then, if so aimed, cast 
 tbeir second darts, and tlie archers fiom the rear 
 shoot liigh, so as to pitcli the arrows over their 
 ewn main line of sjiearmen into the dense masses 
 beyond them. If the enemy broke through the in- 
 tervals, we ma/ imagine that a line of charioteers 
 in reserve, breaking from their position, migiit in 
 part charge among the disordered ranks of" the 
 Sue, drive them back, and facilitate the restoration 
 of tlie oppressed masses, or wheeling round a 
 flank, fall upon the enemy, or be encotmtered 
 Uy a similar manoeuvre, and perhaps repulsed. 
 T'tie king, rnt-mwhile, surrounded by his princes, 
 jiosted close to the rear of his line of battle, and 
 inthemiddleof tlie showered missile.s, would watch 
 tiie<;nemy and remedy every disorder. In this 
 position it was tiiat several of the sovereigns of 
 Judah were slain (2 Chron. xviii. 33, and xxxv. 
 23), and that sucli an enormous waste of iiuman 
 life took place; for the shock of two hostile lines 
 of masses, at least ten in depth, advancing under 
 file confidence of breastplate and shield, wiien 
 once engaged hand to hand, had difficulties of no 
 wdinary nature to retreat ; because the hinder- 
 most ranks not feeling personally the first 
 slaughter, would not, and the foremost could 
 ru)t, fall fiack : neither could the commanders 
 disengage the line without a certainty of being 
 tlefeated. The fate of the day was tlierefore no 
 longer within the control of the chief, and nothing 
 but obstinate valour was left to decide the victory. 
 Hence, from the stubborn character of the Jews, 
 battles fought K.mong themselves were particularly 
 sanguinary ; such, for example, as that in which 
 Jeroboam, king of Israel, was defeated by Abijah 
 af Judah (2 Chron. xiii, 3. 17), whereiti, if there 
 3e no error of copyists, there was a greater slaughter 
 Aan in ten such battles as that of Leipzig, al- 
 tliough on that occasion three hundred and fifty 
 thousand combatants were engaged for three suc- 
 cessive days, provided with all the implements of 
 modem destruction in full activity. Under such 
 circumstances defeat led to irretrievable con- 
 fusion ; and where either party possessed supe- 
 riority in cavalry and chariots of war, it would 
 be materially increased : but where the inia/itry 
 alone had principally to pureue a broken enemy, 
 tliat force, laden with shields, and preserving 
 order, could o\'ertake very few who chose to aban- 
 don their defensive armour, unless they were 
 hemmed in by the locality. Sometimes a j)art 
 of the army was posted in ambush, but this ma- 
 noeuvre was most commonly jjractised against the 
 garrisons of cities (Josh. viii. 12 ; Jiidg. xx, 38). 
 In the case of Abraham (Gen. xiv. 16), when he 
 led a small body of his own people suddenly col- 
 lected, and fell upon the guard of the captives, 
 released them, and recovered the booty, it was a 
 surprise, not an ambush ; nor is it necessary that 
 lie should have fallen in with the main army of 
 ♦he enemy. At a later period, there is no iloubt 
 that the Hebrew armies, in imitation of the Ro- 
 mans, formed info more than one line of masses ; 
 but there is ample evidence that they always 
 puse&aed more stubborn valour than discipline. — 
 
 e. H. s. 
 
 BATTLEMENT. [House-I 
 
 BAY-TREE. [Ezuach.] 
 
 BDELLIUM. [Bkdoi.ach.] 
 
 BEAN. [Phu>..] 
 
 BEAR (3n) dob, in Arabic dvb in Persic deei 
 and dob, is noticed in 1 Sam. xvii. 34, 36. 37; 
 2 Sam. xvii. S; 2 Kings ii. 21 ; Prov. x\ii. lij 
 xxviii. 15; Isa. xi. 7 ; Lam. iii. 10; Hos. xiii. 
 8 ; Amos v. 19, &c. Altiiough the moUer'is liave 
 
 [Ursus Syriacus.] 
 
 denied the existence of bears in Syiia and Afrca, 
 there cannot be a doulit of the fact, and of a sue* 
 cies of the genus Ursus ijeitig meant in the He- 
 brew te.xts al)ove noteil. David defended his flock 
 from tlie attacks of a bear (1 Sam. xvii. 31, 35, 
 36), and iieais destioye:! the chihhen who mocked 
 tiie prophet (2 Kings ii. 24). The genus Ursus is 
 the largest of all tlie plantigrade carnassiers, and 
 with the faculty of subsisting on fruit or iioney 
 unites a greater or less jjrojiensity, according to 
 the species, to slaughter and animal food. To 
 a sullen and ferocious disiosition it joins immense 
 strength, little vulneraliility, considerable saga- 
 city, and the power of climbing trees. The br(>w( 
 bear, Ursus arctos, is the most sangtiinary of the 
 species of the Old Cuntinent, and Ursus Syriacus, 
 or the bear of Palestine, is one very nearly allied 
 to it, dilTeiing only in its stature being propor- 
 tionably lower and longer, tlie iiead and tail more 
 prolonged, and the 'o'our a dull buff or light 
 bay, often clouded, like the Pyieiia;a5i variety, 
 with daiker brown. On the back tlieie is a vidge 
 of long semi-erect haiis lunning I'jom tlie neck to 
 the tail. It i.« yet found in tiu- eleiated woody 
 ])arts of Leiianoi.. In the tioie of tlie first cro- 
 sades these lieiists were still nniiie-.ous and of con- 
 siderable ferocity ; for dui ing tht sie„'e of Antioch, 
 Godfrey of lioulllon, accoiding to Math. Parw, 
 slew one in defence of a ])Oor woodcutter, and 
 was himself dangerously wounded in the en- 
 counter. — C. H. S. 
 
 BEARD. The ancient nations in general 
 agreed with the modern inhabitants of tlie. East in 
 attaching a great value to tlie possession of a 
 beard. The total absence of it, or a sparse and 
 stinted sprinkling of hair ujion the chin, is thought 
 by the Orientals to be as great a def nniity to tha 
 features as the want of a nose would apjiear to 
 us ; while, on the contrary, a long and bushy 
 beard, flowing (h)wn in luxuriant jirofusion to the 
 breast, is considered not only a most graceful or- 
 nament to the peisoii, but as cititiibuting in no 
 small degree to respectability and dignity of cha- 
 racter. So much, indeed, is ' he {o^ssessiun of tbii
 
 BEARD. 
 
 venerable b.ul^x! <<«»ociate<l with notions of lionour 
 and importance, , hat it is almost (tonstaiitly ititro- 
 duce(l,.in tliewa. eitliercf allusion oraj)|)eal. into 
 the language of" fi^miliar anil daily Hie. Wlien 
 a man's veracity is clouKtwl, ' Look at this beanl,' 
 he will say, ' tiie very si^iit of it may satisfy you 
 as to tiie truth and pro^itv of its owner.' When 
 censuring a t)ail or (li.-;honest action, ' Shame on 
 your beard' is the oidiiiary style of relmke. 
 VVhen frienils express thel;- mutual good wishes, 
 ' May G()d preserve your l>eard ' is the strongest 
 anil most ardent form of heriediction. When re- 
 questin|T a favour from any one, tiie most earnest 
 terms of supplication are to he^ ' by liis lifeird, or 
 tbe life of liis beard,' that he will grant it; and 
 no higher idea of tlie value of a thing can be 
 given han oy saying, ' It is wortii more than 
 wie's beard.' In short, this iiairy apjiendage o( 
 the chin is most highly prized as tiie attril)ule of 
 manly dignity ; and hcrvce the energy of Eze- 
 kiel's language wien, describing tlie severity of 
 tlie Divine juiigmeiits upon the Jews, lie intimates 
 that, although that peo-ie had been as dear to God 
 and as fondly cheiished l>y him as ttie beard was 
 by them, tbe razor, i. e. the agents of his angry 
 providence, in righteous retribution for tlieir long- 
 continued sins, would destroy tiieii existence as a 
 nation (Ezek. v. 1-5). With this knowledge of 
 the extraordinary respect' and value which have in 
 all ages been attached to tiie beard in tiie East, 
 we are prejjared to expect that a corresponding 
 care would be taken to pieserve and improve its 
 appearance ; and, accordingly, to dress and anoint 
 it with oil and perfume was, witli the better classes 
 at least, an indispensable part of their daily toilet 
 ( Ps. cxxxiii. 2). In many cases it was dyed with 
 variegated colours, by a tedious and troublesome 
 operation, describeil by Morier (Journ. p. 247), 
 wiiicli, in consequence of the action of tlie air, re- 
 quires to be repeated once every fortnight, and 
 which, as that writer informs ua, has been from 
 time immemorial a universal practice in Persia. 
 From the history of Mepliibosheth, it seems pro- 
 bable, that the grandees in ancient Palestine 
 'trimmed their beards ' with the same fastidious 
 care and by the same elaborate process; while tlie 
 allowing these t^i remain in a foul and dishe- 
 velled state, or to cut them oil', was one among 
 the many features of sordid negligence in their 
 personal appearance by which they gave outward 
 indications of deep and overwhelming sorrow (2 
 Sam. xix. 24; Ezra ix. 13; Isa. xv. 2; Jer. xli. .5 ; 
 comp. Herodot. ii. .36 ; Suet. Caligula, ch. v.). 
 
 Nor were they less jealous in guarding the 
 honour of this attribute of manhood, than in setting 
 it off to advantage. Tlie slightest exhibition 
 of contempt, by sneering, spitting at, pulling, or 
 even pressing against it in a rude and careless 
 manner, was resented as an insult, such as would 
 now, among men of the world, be deemed exj)i- 
 able only by a duel (Burckhardt, Trav. m 
 Arabia, p. 61). No one was permitted to touch 
 it except in the way of res{)ectful and afl'ec- 
 tionate salutation, which was done by gently 
 t&king hold of its extremity witli the right hand, 
 and kissing it; but even in that case it was only 
 wnes in approaciiing their husbands, children 
 tlieir jKirents, or tlie nearest and most attached 
 friends, to whom this unusual liberty was grante J 
 (D'Arvieux, CmHumfs dea Arabcs, ch. 7). The 
 act itself l>eing an axpresaion of kind asd cordial 
 
 BEARD. 
 
 yan 
 
 familiarity, its performance by Jonb shows in a 
 flagrant light the base and unnriricipled conduct 
 of that rutldess veteran, when lie took .A.masa bj 
 the beaid with his right hand to kiss him (rathw 
 t^), and then, having assumed this attitude under 
 the m;u>k of the most friendly feelings, smote hil 
 unsuspecting victim under the fifth rib (2 Sam. 
 XX. 9).. 
 
 To be deprived of a beard was, and still 
 is, in some places of the East, the liadge of 
 servil ty — a mark of infamy, that degraded a 
 person from the ranks of men to lho«e of slavfn 
 and women (Niebuhr. Arttbia, ch. •. li.; Volney. 
 ii. p. IIR); while to shave it otV voluntaiily, even 
 for a time, as the former writer mentions he 
 knew was done by some in mere wantonness 
 or a drunken lit, frequently subjects the olfendu 
 to so great odium as to exclude hiiu fVoiii so- 
 ciety. Nay, so great is the disgrace entailed 
 by the appearance of a smooth and naked chin, 
 that D'Arvieux describes the case of an individual 
 who, having sustained a dangerous wound in his 
 jaw, preferred hazarding his life rather than allovr 
 the surgeon to remove his beard. Among people 
 influenced by such ideas, the forcible erasure of 
 a beard must be felt to be the severest punish- 
 ment that the malice of an enemy can inflict; 
 and we can easily conceive how deep and in- 
 tolerable was the afl'ront which tlie young and 
 ill-advi?ed king of the .Vmmonites put u))on the 
 ambassadors of Daviil, when, among other acts of 
 inso4ence, he shaved ott" one-lialf of tlieir beards, 
 and sent them home in that grotesque condition, 
 exposed to the derision of their countrymen (!i 
 Sam. X.). Persons of their high rank, who, in all 
 probability, were fastidious about the orderly state 
 and graceful appearance of their bcavds, would 
 be even more sensitive as to this ignominious 
 treatment than those of an humiilvr condition; 
 and, as the shaving ofl" one-half of the beard was 
 among some ancient nations the ])unislinient of 
 cowardice, these circumstances united will help 
 to account for the spirit of determined revenge 
 which the king and the whole nation of Israel 
 breatlied, on receiving intelli.'^eiice of the national 
 outrage. (See also Herodotus, ii. 121 ; Lane's A/o- 
 dein Egyptians, i. p. 322, note') — R. J. 
 
 From tlie above facts it is dear that the Israel- 
 ites maintained their beard and the iileas con- 
 nected with it, during their abode among t)i« 
 Egyptians, who were a .shaven peojile. This is 
 not unimjiortant as one of the indi<ation3 which 
 evince tliat, whatever they learned of gooil or evil 
 in that country, they pieserveil the appearance 
 and habits of a separate jieople. As the Egyptians 
 shaved their beards oil' entirely, the injunction in 
 Lev. xix. 27 against shav.ng ' the corneis of tli» 
 beard' must have been levelled against the prac- 
 tices of some other bearded nation. Tiie |>ro- 
 liibition is usually understood to apply against 
 rounding the corners of the bearti where it joing 
 the hair; and the reason is sup])oseil to have been 
 to counteract a superstition of certain Ara'iian ■ 
 tribes, who, by shaving otV or rovinding away the j 
 beard where it joined the hair of the head, devoted 
 themselves to a certain deity who held among 
 them the place which Bacchus Jid among the 
 Greeks (Herodot. iii. 8; comp. Jer. ix. 20; 
 XXV. 23; xlix. 32i. The consequence seems la 
 have been altogether to pn-vent tin Jews fmni 
 shaving off the edges of thtir beards. The eflect
 
 308 
 
 BEARD. 
 
 BEASTS. 
 
 of this iiroliibitioi) in e^taWisliing a distinction of 
 the.Ti!ws rioin other nations cannot he iitiderstood, 
 unless wo contemiilute fiie extravag-anf diversity 
 ifl which ihe lieard was and is treate I by tlie 
 DatioDfl of the East. Tlie first cut is very in- 
 
 teresting, being a collection of bearded heads of 
 Foreigners obtained from the Egy])tian monu- 
 ments, and, without doubt, including tlie iiearda, 
 liead-dresses, and physiognomies of most of the 
 nations bordering on Egypt and Palestine. In 
 nearly all of them we see that the u])])er edges of 
 the beard were shaven otl', and apparently the 
 hair of the upjier lip. The second cut, iig. 1, repre- 
 sents the head and beard of the Babylonian (igiue 
 given at full length (on a smaller scale) in the 
 second cut at p. 272 ; fig. 2 is the regal Persian 
 
 beard, curiously curled and tressed; fig. 3 is a 
 Bomewhat similar beard from the recentl y-disr 
 covered sculptures of Xanthus in Asia Minor; 
 and fig. 4 is Graeco-Syrian, from the sculptuies at 
 Palmyra. With these it may be useful to com- 
 pare the jirincipal varieties of the beard among 
 the modern orientals, whose tastes in this mattrr 
 are in general much less fantastic than those of 
 their predecessors. In the following rut the first 
 figure is that of a modem Egyptian (Copt), and 
 the ss'joiid that of a Persian, exhibiting a remaik- 
 able contrast between the amplitude of the one 
 beard and the scantiness of the oiher. The other 
 two figures we offer with pleasure, as presenting, 
 in all probaljility, correct resemblances of such 
 beards as were worn by the ancient Israelites. 
 Fig. 3 is tliat of an Arab sheikh, and fig. 4 that 
 at a Syrian Jew. 
 
 Tlie ancient Egyjifians, although they shaved 
 
 tlieir lieards, had the singular custopi of tying a 
 false beard u])on the chin. This was probably 
 by way of compromise between their love (A 
 cleanliness and their desire to preserve some trace 
 of the distinguishing sign of manhood. It was 
 made of plaited hair, and had a peculiar form 
 according to the rank of the persons by whom 
 they were wom. Private individual*; iiad a 
 small beard, scarcely two inches long', that of a 
 king was of considerable length, and square at 
 the bottom ; and the figures of gods were distin- 
 guished by its turning up at the end (Wilkinson, 
 Atic. EgTjptinns, iii. 3G'i). 
 
 2, 3, 5, n. Gods. 
 
 7, e. 
 
 1, A, fi, 9, 10. Kinf(>. 
 Private persons. 
 
 BEASTS. In the Bible, this word, when usw 
 in contradistinction to man (P<. xxsvi. 6), i»
 
 BEASTS. 
 
 notes bnite cieiiture (^enorally; when in contra- 
 distii ;tion tu creepiiKj things (Lev. xi. '2-7 ; 
 xxvii. 2C), it has lefeience to foui-foofed animals; 
 and wlieii to ivild maminalia, as in Gen. i. 25, it 
 means doniesticateii cattle. 
 
 Tzvjttn, D^'i* (Isa. xiii. 21), denotes wild beasts 
 of the upland wilderness. Ochim, QTMi, len- 
 t?eied 'doleful creatures' anu ' uiarsli animals,' 
 may, we think with more propriety, be considereil 
 »8 ' jwisonous^and otl'errsive reptiles.' 
 
 Se'irim. D^TyK*, shag^'y ones, is a general term 
 for apes — not sat// /•■•<, a pa.,'an poetical creation unlit 
 for Scri|)tural laiu'uage : it includes Sacu/iin as 
 a species, and D^iH, Tannitn, monsters of the 
 deep iuid of the wilderness — boas, serpeiit.s, croco- 
 diles, dulphin^, and sharks. 
 
 The zoolu^y of Scripture may, in a general 
 een.se, be said to embrace the whole range of 
 animated nature ; but after tJie first brief notice 
 of tlie creation of aniina.?s recorded in Genesis, 
 it is limited more particularly to the animals 
 found in Eijypt, Araliia, Palestine, Syria, and 
 the countries eastward, in some cases, to be- 
 yond the Euplirales It comp'rehends mam- 
 malia, l)ird3. reptiles, fi>hes, and invertebrate ani- 
 mals; but in a work like the Bible, written for a 
 far drifVerent purpose, we might naturally expect 
 that only a small part of these would be found 
 described, and that generi"al indications would 
 more frequently occur thair specific character- 
 istics. As the intention of S(;ripture, in its al- 
 lusions to animate or inanimate objects, was not 
 scientiiic descrijjtion. but the illustration of argu- 
 ments and precepts by imai^es drawn from olijects 
 familiar to those to whom it was addressed, it is 
 not to be expected tliat zoology or botany should 
 be treated systematically, or in terms such as 
 modern science has adopted : yet, where we can 
 now fully ascertain the true meaning of the text, 
 tiie imagery dra.vn from natural history is always 
 forcible, correct, and ell'ective, even where it treats 
 tlie subject under the conditions of the contem- 
 jK/iary popular belief; for, had the inspired writers 
 entered into explanations on matters of science 
 not then commonlj' undt-rstond, tlie poetical force 
 of the imagery, and consequently its intt-nded 
 efl'ect, must necessarily have been greatly dimi- 
 nished ; ani.1, where system is appro])riate,.we find 
 a classified general distribution of the creation, 
 simple indeed, but sullicicntly applicable to all 
 the puifjoses for which it was introduced. It 
 re.=e.Tnbles other parts of the ijhilosophy of the 
 earliest nations, in which the physical distribir- 
 tion of mattt-r, excepting so far as man is con- 
 cerned, proceeds by triads. Ijotany is treated 
 under the heads of gr-ass, shrubs, and trees : 
 in animated nature, l)eginning with the lowest 
 organized in the watery element, we have first 
 *'1Ji' Skerefz, 'tlie moving creature that hath 
 life,' animalcula, Crustacea, iusecta, &c. ; second, 
 Ci'^n Tanniniin, fislres and amphibia, including 
 the huge tenants of the waters, whetiier they also 
 frequent the land or not, crocodiles, ])yflion serpents, 
 ar.d perhaps e.eii those whi ;h are now considered as 
 of a more ancient zoology ban the present system, 
 tire great Saui ians of geology ; and third, it ajjpears, 
 binis, t]iy 'Ojih, 'flying creatures" (Gen. 1.20); 
 and still advuncing(cetaceans,pinnafipeds, whales 
 and seals being excluded), we have quadrupeds, 
 fonninij three other d visions or orders : 1st, cattle, 
 HDnS Bnhe'imh, i nbracing the ruminant her- 
 
 BEASTS. 
 
 3M 
 
 bivora, generally gregarious and capable of <li>- 
 mesticity ; 2ndj wild beasts, riTI Cliatjah, car- 
 nivora, including all U-asts of jjrey ; and ihd, 
 re[)tiles, K7D"1 Hemes, niTnor qnadrui)e<ls, such 
 as creeji l)y means of many feet, or glide along 
 tlie surl'ace of tiie soil, .strpents. aiint-lides, &c. ; 
 finally we have man, DTN Adam, sfamling alone 
 in intellectual sujjremacy. The classification oi* 
 Moses, as it may be drawn from Deuteronomy, 
 apfiears to be confined to I'^ei labralu alone, or 
 animals having a spine and ribs, although the 
 fourth cht^s mi_'.it include othei-s. Taking man as 
 one, it forms live classes — 1st, Man ; 2nii, Ueasts ; 
 3d, Birds; 4tli, Reptiles; 5tli, fishes. It is tU 
 same a? that in Leviticus xi., where beasts are 
 further distinguished into those with solid hoofs, 
 the Solipedes of systeniati.sts, and those with 
 cloven feet (Jiisulci ), or Ruminantia. But the 
 passage specially refers to animals tiiat might be 
 lawfully eaten because they were clean, and to 
 others jiiohibited because they were declared un- 
 clean, although some of them, according to the 
 common belief of the time, might ruminate; tot, 
 it may be repeated, that tiie Scriptures were not 
 inteirded to eirrbrace anatomical disquisitions 
 aiming at the advancement of human scienc«, 
 but to convey moral and I'eligious truth, without 
 disturbing the received opinions of the time oq 
 questions having little or no relation to their 
 main object. In like manner, fishes and birda 
 are divided into clean and unclean ; atrd, taken 
 altogether, the classification now described tbrms 
 an excellent series of distiirctions, wiiich, even at 
 the present day, and in countries far distant from 
 the scene where it was ordained, still remains 
 applicable, with few exceptions ; and from its 
 intrinsic projniety will remain iir force, notwith- 
 standing our present knowledge of the maimers 
 and opinioirs of the East aiul of Egypt has 
 rendered many of the earlier commeirta upon it 
 in a great measure useless. 
 
 The Scriptures, as already mentioned, contain 
 no minute details on natural history, and no- 
 tice only a small proportion of the animals in- 
 habiting the regions alluded to. Notwithstanding 
 the suljsequent progress of science, the observatio* 
 of Dr. Adam Clarke is still in a great measure 
 true, that, ' of a few animals and vegetable* 
 we are comjiaratively certain, but of the great 
 majority we know almost nothing. Guessing 
 and conjecture are endless, and they have on thes* 
 subjects lieen already sutliciently employed. 
 What learning — deeji, solid, extensive learning 
 and judgment could do, has already been done 
 by the incomparable Bochart in his Ilierozoicon. 
 The learned reader may coirsult this work, and, 
 while he gains much general information, wil) 
 have to regret that he can a].'])ly so little of it t» 
 the main and grand question." With tJiese facts 
 before him, it is singular that the learned doctor 
 did not suspect the incompetence of mere philo- 
 logists to solve questions in natural liistory, of 
 which the true principles weie so little known in 
 the time of Bochart, and which stiil remain l»ul 
 little investigated by Biblical scholars; for, even 
 now, some appear to believe in the f.iculty of ni- 
 mination ' in a variety of the hare," although sacli 
 a capability would renrove the animal from tUe 
 genus and even from the order of Rodents, and 
 y)lace it in that of the Ruminantia. Nor is phy- 
 sical science sometimes better understuod ; £ui w»
 
 NO 
 
 BEASTS. 
 
 Sad a recent writer objecting to needless miracu- 
 IfXM .i.fei j)osition in the case of the prophet Jonah, 
 by 3Ui)jj.)jing that lie was swallowed by a whale, 
 because, according to him, whales do not exist 
 iu the Mediterranean, and have not swallow 
 sufficiently wide to admit a liuinan body : he 
 tliierefore contends tliat the monster must have 
 b-'ei) a shaik : as if anytliing shoit of a miracle 
 could preserve human life for more tlian ten 
 niiijutes in the swallow of a whale or shark, no 
 matter which. Yet witl) such trilling do books 
 on a subject above all others important, some- 
 times abound, being written by men wlio are 
 believed comjjetent to tlie task, merely on the 
 ground of their extensive Biblical learning. But 
 the acts and laws l)y which it has j)leased the 
 Almighty to vindicate his own incomprehensible 
 power ought not to be trifled with in tliis way ; a 
 more logical spirit is demanded for such in- 
 quiries, and he who undertakes to ex])lain His 
 word must endeavour to comprehend at least 
 the general laws which it has pleased Omnipo- 
 tence to impress upon matter ; laws from which 
 He never tleparts, but on rare and great occa- 
 sions, for ttie accomplishment of His unfathom- 
 ai)le purposes. It is in this spirit tiiat the 
 questions connected with zoological science are 
 intended to be viewed in this work. Care will be 
 taken not to lose siglit of the Hebrew and cognate 
 languages, nor to overlook the ]wssible ir/ftuence 
 of Pelhevi and other dialects of the Sanscrit 
 fiimily, wliich even in Palestine appear to have 
 forrtjed an element in the tongues of the popu- 
 lation anteiior to the great immigration of the 
 people of Israel. Notwithstanding the advance 
 of zoological science in the field in question, 
 where Niebuhi, Forskal, Hasselquist, Bruce, 
 Russell, Hemprich, Ki.ienljerg, Riippell, Wilkin- 
 son, and others illustrious in this field of in- 
 quiry. Irave toiled, we are still obliged to confess 
 that but a small portion of the local zoology 
 is known, and that only a certain number of 
 animals can be identified with complete cer- 
 tainty. Othei-s can never attain more than the 
 consent of acquiescence, because in the Hebrew 
 text ol the sacred writings the names of animals 
 are mostly descriptive of characters apjilicable to 
 several species, and some are more everi than 
 generically vague. Resorting to the roots of the 
 language often increases tlie difficulty ; and be- 
 sides our still scanty knowledge of the present 
 fauna of Western Asia and Egypt, if is only by 
 inference that we can conjecture what cliange^ have 
 taken place in the sjwcies during the course of ages. 
 Anciently the lion, ostrich, and wolf were undeni- 
 ably abundant in these countries; while the hyaena, 
 jackal, domestic horse, bufl'alo, &c. were either 
 unknown or are not indicated with sulliciently 
 distinguishable characters; and where we must 
 rely ujxm an epithet or quality for fixing a name, 
 our increased information supplies us with two or 
 more distinct .species equally entitled to the de- 
 nomination. Thus, for instance, we might refer 
 to the four or tive sjwcies of smaller Canidse, 
 Tiioes, Jackals, and true foxes at present fovmd 
 in Syria and Egypt, and the absence of the real 
 wolf, such as he is so beautifully and distinctly 
 characterized in the jjarables of our Saviour; 
 wliile the hyaena, only known in classical litera- 
 ture by the alisurdities assigned to it, has now not 
 crJy supersedeil tie real wolf in Palestine and 
 
 BEDOLAt n. 
 
 Syria, but has spread northward intoNi *o!ia, 6i>i? 
 may be heard sometimes in Constantinople howl- 
 ing on the eastern side of the Bosphorus. Anothoi 
 dilliculty arises from tlie many dilVerent Hebre\r 
 names gi\en to one species. When this occurs 
 witii reference to the lion, so obviously impoitant 
 in the eyes of a resident }wj)ulat on, we need not 
 wonder ; but the case is dilfurent as regard? tlie 
 ostrich, so liable to tie conlbunded with the 'nus- 
 tard or with the various names that are trans? kted 
 by owl, or where it is mixed witli the epitliets ap- 
 plied to the crane and stoik.* Whether a c^ear 
 indication of an otis can be derived from any of 
 the texts in Scripture we have not yet been able 
 to ascertain satisfactorily, and we own that wher« 
 scholars have had no doubts of their own inter- 
 pretations, but have shown the laxity of others 
 wiio have given a ditlerenl veisiiwi of the same 
 text, sometimes widely departing from the other, 
 it is with no small hesitation we should venture 
 to propose our own. These questions, iiowever, 
 will fall to be discussed under sejiarate heads, as 
 do those also which refer to animals now extinct, 
 or which are ditlerently located from what they 
 were in the earlier ages of the world. — C. H. S. 
 
 BEDAN (ini). In 1 Sam. xii. 11, we wad 
 tliat the Lord sent as deliverers of Israel — Jerub- 
 baal, 2^ef/«rt, .lephtliah, Samuel. Three of these 
 we know to have been judges of Israel, but we 
 nowhere find Bedan among the number. The 
 Targum understands it of Samson, and so Jerome 
 and the generality of interpreters ; but this inter- 
 pretation goes on the supposition tliat ^^!l sliould 
 be rendered in Dan, i. e. one in Dan, or of 
 the tribe of Dan, as Samson was. In tliis sense, 
 as Kimchi observes, it would have the same i'orc« 
 as Ben-Dan, a son of Dan, a Danite. Such an iu 
 termixture of proper names and ajipellatives, how- 
 ever, is very doubtful, and it is to be noted that 
 Bedan is mentioned befoie Jephlhah, whereas 
 Samson was alter him. The Septuagint, Syriac, 
 and Arabic have Barak, whicli many tiiink tli« 
 preferable reading (comp. Heb. xi. 32). A man 
 of the name of Bedan occuis, howe\ er, am' ' •'he 
 ])osteiity of Manas.-.bh (1 Chron. vii. 17), and 
 Junius, followed by some others, tliinks tliat the 
 judge Jair is meant, and that he is here called 
 Bedan to distinguish him from the more ancient 
 Jair, the son of Manasseh. The oider in which 
 the judges are here named is not at variance witli 
 this view (Num. xxxii. 41 ; Judg. x. 3, 4); but 
 suiely if Jair had been really intended, he migi;t 
 have been called by that name without any dangei 
 of his being, in this text (where he is called a de- 
 liverer of Israel, and placed among the judges), 
 confounded with tlie more ancient Jaii. 
 
 BEDOLACH (.nVn?). This word occur* 
 but twice in the Scriptures : in Gen. ii. 12, as a 
 product of the land lit Havilah ; and Num. xi. 7, 
 wheie the manna is likened to it. It has been 
 miicli disputed among critics, lioth ancient and 
 modern. In the Sept it is considered as a pro 
 cious stone, and translated (Gen. ii. 12) by 
 
 * Otis Hobara, Otis Arubica, and several othei 
 species are liirds of the deseit in Egypt and 
 Aral)ia, and occur on the plain of Esdraelon. 
 They are figiued on monuments, and disdn- 
 guishe<l from the young ostricli by tlieir quillr 
 feathers and tJirue-toed feet.
 
 BEDOLACH. 
 
 BEDS. 
 
 311 
 
 ii>S()a\, and ^Num. xi. 7) by KflvaraWoi; wliile 
 Aquila, Syiuinaoiiui, Tltomlotioii, and tlie Vul- 
 gate render it bdeUianu, a transjiarent aromatic 
 gum from a tri« growing in Aral)ia. Of this 
 opinion also is Jos<'j)lius (Aiitiq. iii. L fi), where 
 he describes the luaiitia — o/jloioi/ rri Tiiv iLpw/j-XTuy 
 fiSeWfh i. e. similar to the aioinatic bdellium 
 (Num. xi. 7). In the Syriac \ersii)n it is 
 
 JLaoNo;.::^ brulcho, evidently for )[*a\o«-:^ 
 
 bdutcko, the two letters r and d being so similar 
 — with the exception ut" the dot, which stands in 
 the r over, and in the d under — as to be easily 
 confounded witii one anotlier in transcribing. 
 We find the same translatiim in the Samaritan 
 and Chaldee, while the precious stones given by 
 the Sept. and others bear with tliem a difl'erent 
 
 name, n!?ip2Q or n?1pQ. 
 
 The Jewish Rabbins, however, followed by a host 
 of their Arabian translators, and to whom Bochart 
 (Hieroz. iii. p. 593, sq.), and Gesenius {The- 
 4aur. i. 181), accede, translate bcdohuJi hy pearl, 
 
 tivX consider Haviluh (PlpMn) as the part of 
 Arabia near Catijjha and Bahrein on tlie Persian 
 Gulf, where the pearls are t'ound. 
 
 Those who regard bedolach as some kind of 
 precious stone, rest their argument on the fact 
 that it is placed (Gen. ii. 12) by tlie side of DHK' 
 shohani, which is a precious stone, and occurs 
 several times in the Scriptures, and that tiiey are 
 both mentioned as belonging to the productions 
 of the land Havilah. But tlie least knowledge 
 of Hebrew construction must satisfy us that, if 
 this meaning were intended, the reading ought 
 to be DHIC'ni n'pnnn pS D'^, and not, as it 
 
 actually stands, DHlt^'n ]3N1 n'?n:in DD*, ex- 
 pressly excluding bedolach from the mineral 
 kingdom. 
 
 Those who translate bedolach by * pearl ' refer 
 to the later Jewish and Arabian exjjoiuiders of 
 the Bible, whose authority, if not strengthened 
 by valid arguments, is but of little weight. It 
 ia, moreover, more than probable that t\\e pearl 
 was as yet unknown in the time of Moses, or he 
 would certainly not have excluded it from the 
 castly contributions to the tabernacle, the priestly 
 dresses, or even the Urim and Thummim, while 
 its fellow shoham, though of less value, was va- 
 riously used among the sacred ornaments (Exod. 
 XXV. 7 ; XXXV. 9, 27 ; xxviii. 20 ; x.xxix. 13). 
 Nor do we find any mention of pearl in the times 
 of David and Solomon. It is true that Luther 
 translates D''J''J3 (Prov. iii. 1 o ; viii. II; x. 25 ; 
 xxxi. 10) by peOrls, but this is not borne out by 
 Lament, iv. 7, where it is indicated as having a 
 red colour. The only passage in the Old Testa- 
 ment where the pearl really occurs under its 
 true Arabic name is in Esth. i. 6, IT (dar), 
 
 Arab. «J j and in the New Testament it is very 
 
 frequently mentioned under the Greek name 
 fuxpyapiTTjj. 
 
 It is, therefore, most probable that the Hebrew 
 bedolach is the aromatic gum bdellium, which 
 issues from a tree growing in Arabia, Media, and 
 'he Indies. Dioscorides (i. 80) informs us that 
 .t was calletl ^aSeXKOj/ or fioKx6v, and Pliny- 
 iKii. 19) that it bore the names ol' brochon, mala- 
 cham, and maldaco7i. The frequent interchange 
 
 of the /i C ind the /8 3 brings the form very 
 near to tlu.i of the Hebrew word ; nor is tijc 
 similarity of name in tiie Hebrew arid Greek, in 
 llie case of natuial productions, less ainclunivc 
 of the natui-e of the aiticle, .since tlie Gret-ks 
 probably retained the ancient Oriental names 
 oi productions coming fioi». the East. Pliny's 
 description of the tree from whicii the bdellium 
 is taken makes KjL'mjd'ei's assertion (^Aniacn. 
 Exot. p. 668; higlily probable, that it is the sort 
 of j)alm-tre<? (borassus Jlabcl/ijor/iiis. Linn. ci. 
 6. J, Trigynia) so fiequently niet with on the 
 Persian coast and in Aiabia I'Vlix. The term 
 bdellium, however, is applied to two gummy- 
 resinous substances. One of them is the Jndiau 
 bdellium, or J'alse mt/rr/i (peihaps the bdellium 
 of the Scriptures), whicli is obtained from Amyri* 
 (balsamodendron'?) ('i)i».mi])hura. Dr. Roxburgh 
 (Flor. Ind. ii. 24.i) says that the trunk of the 
 tree is covered witii a liglit-colouieil pellicle, as 
 in the common birch, wliich jieels otV fiom time 
 to time, exposing to view a smooth gieen coat, 
 which in succession supplies other similar ex- 
 foliations. Tiiis tree difluses a grateful t!iagianc«, 
 like tiiat of the (inest myirh, to a considerable 
 distance around. Dr. Royie {lllust. p. 17(5) was 
 inl'ornied tiiat this species yiehied bdellium ; and 
 in cunlirmation of this statement, we may add 
 that many of the specimens of this bdellium in 
 the Britisli Museum have a yellow jiellicle ad- 
 hering to them, precisely like that of the com- 
 mon birch, and that some of the pieces are j)er- 
 forated by spiny branches — another character 
 serving to recognise the origin ol' the bdellium. 
 Indian bdellium has consideiable resemblance to 
 myrrh. Many of the pieces have hairs adhering 
 to them. 
 
 Tlie other kind of bdellium is called African 
 bdellium^ and is obtained from Hetidolotia Afri' 
 cana (Richard and Guillemin, Fl. de Heneijam- 
 bie). It is a natural production of Senegal, 
 and is called by the natives, who make tooth- 
 picks of its sjiines, niottout. It consists of 
 rounded or oval tears, from one to two inchas 
 in diameter, of a dull and waxy fracture, wiiicli, 
 in the course of time, become opatjue, and are 
 covered externally by a white or yellowish du.<st. 
 It has a feeble but jieculiar odour, and a bitter 
 taste. Pellitier (^Ann. de Chi/n. Ixxx. p. 39; 
 found it to consist of ie3in59*0; sohtble gum, 
 9*2; ha-ssoriiiy ^Q'6; volatile oil and loss, 1-2. 
 Resin of bdellium (African bdellium?) consists, 
 according to Johnstone, of carb. 40, hydr. 31, 
 oxyg. 5. — E. M. 
 
 BEDS. The manner of sleeping in warm 
 Eastern climates is necessarily very difl'erent 
 from that which is followed in our colder regions. 
 The present visages appear to lie the same us 
 those of the ancient Jews, and sullicieiitly explain 
 the passages of Scripture which bear on t!ie sub- 
 ject. Beds of leathers are altogether unknown, 
 and the Orientals generally lie exce<'dingly hard. 
 Poor people who have no certain home, or when 
 on a journey, or employed at a distance from their 
 dwellings, sleep on mats, or wia]i])ed in their 
 outer garment, which from its imjMiitance in tiiis 
 respect was forbidden to be retained in pled)^ 
 over night (D'Arvieux, iii. 257 ; Gen. ix 21, 
 23 ; Exod. xxii. 27 ; Deul. xxiii. 13). Under 
 peculiar circumstances a stone covered with some 
 folded cloth or piece of dresii is often used fo» 
 
 \
 
 532 
 
 RFD& 
 
 c pillow (Gen. xxviii. 11). Tlie> more wealthy 
 classes sleep on mattresses stuffed vvifli vvoi)] or 
 cotton, which are often no other than a ijuilt 
 tViickly jjailded, and are used either singly or one 
 &r more placed ii]X)n each other. A similar quilt 
 finer materials tbnn> the coverlet in winter, 
 and in summer a thin l)}ai Iti't suffices; hut some- 
 times tlie convenient outer garment is used i'at 
 tVie latter purjiose, and was so among the .lews, as 
 we learn from 1 Sai.i. x.ix. 3, where Miclial covers 
 with a Tim, cloak or mantle (corresponding to the 
 modern abha or /■yk), the image which was to re)ire- 
 we&W hei- husltand sleeping. The ditVi-rence ul' use 
 her.^ is. that the )»iu)r wrap theniielves up in it, and 
 it t'orms their wliole lied ; whereas the rich employ 
 it as rt coverinc) only. A ])iIlow is ])laced upon 
 them.ittre;?-, and over botli, in good houses, is laid 
 a sheet. The Ijolsters are more valuable than the 
 mattresses, hotlj in respect of tlieir coverings and 
 material : they are usually stuU'ed with cotton or 
 Otlier soft suljstance (Ezek. 19; xviii. 21); hut 
 instead ol' these, skins of goats or sheep ap- 
 pear t:) ha\e been formerly used by the jioarer 
 classes and in the hardier ag'es. These skins 
 were probably sewed up in thenafinal sbtijje, like 
 water-skins, and stuffed with chalV or wool (1 Sam. 
 six. \i\ It is not mdikely that the Israel ires were 
 acquainted with those wooden creicent-sliajjed 
 bolsters of wood, which were common in ar.cient 
 Egypt (see one in the cut of a couch below) j 
 the comfort in the use of which is not very a;>- 
 parent, till one tries the experiment and realizes 
 the com),lete repjse which is obtained by resting 
 the nape of the neck and base of the skull ujx)n 
 some similai' contrivance. 
 
 It has been tloubted whether the couches of the 
 •lews fir repose and for the use of the sick, called 
 7\'0'0 niiUah (Gen. xlvii. 31; 1 Sam. xix. 13; 
 2 Sam. iv. 7; 2 Kings i. 4), nDC;>D nv.ihcab 
 ^Exod. xxi. IS; 2 Sam. xiii. 3; Cant. iii. 1). or 
 BH^ "eres (Job vii. 13; Cant. i. 16, ]iripeily 
 ' bedstead,' comp. Dout. iii. 11), were actually bed- 
 steads of difl'eient .sorts, or simply the standing and 
 fixed divans such as those on which the Western 
 Asiatics commonly make their beds at night. It 
 has been usually thought that the choice must 
 lie between tliese alternatives, because it has not 
 'Deen undei'stond that iu the East there is, in fact, 
 a variety of arrangement in this matter ; but we 
 feel sabsfied that the different Hebrew words 
 answer to and describe similarly ditferent arrange- 
 ments, althougii we may be unable now to assign 
 to the several words their distinctive applications 
 to still subsisting things. 
 
 The divan, or ilais, is a slightly elevated plat- 
 farm at the upper end and often along the sides 
 of the room. On this are laid the mattresses on 
 which the Western Asiatics sit cross-legged in the 
 day-time, with large cusliions against the wall to 
 supjKirt tlie back. At night the light bedding is 
 usually laid out upon this divan and thus beds 
 for many persons are easily formed. The bed- 
 ding is removed in the morning, and deposited in 
 recesses in the room, made for the purjvse. This 
 ia a sort of general sleeping-room for the males 
 of the family and for guest.s, none but the master 
 having access to the inner parts of the iiouse, 
 where alone there are proper and distinct bed- 
 chambers. Iti these the bedding is either laid on 
 the carjjeted fliKir, or placed on a low frame or 
 bedatead This difference Letween tiie public 
 
 BEDS. 
 
 and private sleeping-room, which the arrange- 
 ment of an Eastern household renders necessary 
 seems to esulain the dillictjlties wiiich have pet' 
 plexed rpa<lers of tra\eis. who, finding m«)tion 
 only of the more j)iil>lic dormitory, the diran, 
 have been led to conclude that there was no othej 
 or ditVerent one. 
 
 The most common bedstead in Egypt and 
 Arabia is of this shaj>e, framed rudely of pa^m- 
 
 sticks. It was ns«'d in ancient ?]gypt, and is 
 figured iu the mural paintings. In Palestme, 
 Syiia, and Persia, wlieie the palm-tree is not com- 
 mon, and where timber is more plentiful, a bed- 
 i'rame of similar siiape is niade of boaid*. This 
 kind of liedstead is also used upon the house-tops 
 during the season in whicii people sleep tljere. 
 It is more than likely that Og's bedstead was of 
 this description (Deut. iii. 11). In the times i«i 
 wiiich he Ijveil tiie pah ee was more common 
 in Palestine than at jireseut, and the bedsteads iii. 
 ordinary use weie jjrobably fwmed of palm-sticks. 
 They would theief^yre be incapable of sustaining 
 any undue weiglst without being disjointed and 
 bent awry ; and this would dictate the necessity 
 of making that destined to sustain the vast 
 hulk af Og, rather of rods of iron than of ttie 
 mid-ril>s of tiie palm-fronds. These bedsteads are 
 also of a length seldom move than a lew inclies 
 beyond the aveiage laiman stature (comnwinly 
 6 feet 3 inclies^> ; and hence the propriety with 
 which the lengtli of Og's bedstead is stated, to 
 convey an idea of his stature — a fact wiiich has 
 pei])le\evl tliose who supposed there was no other 
 lieilsiead tlian the divan, seeing tliat tlie length of 
 trie divan i as no deteimir.aSe refeieuce to the sta- 
 tuie of ti.e peisous leposing on it. 
 
 It is not necessary to supiKise that the bedstead* 
 weie a'l ol this sort. Theie are traces of a kind ol' 
 poriatjle couth (1 Sam. xix I3j, which appears 
 to have served as a si/fa f.;r sitting on in the day- 
 lime (1 Sanr. xxviii. 3; E/-ek. xxiii. 41 ; Amos 
 vi. 4) ; and there is now t! e less veasfin to doubt 
 that the ancient Hebrews enjoyed this conve- 
 nience, as we lind such couclies in use among 
 the neighbouiing nations, and figured on theii 
 monuments. Tlie bia,ji>inea example is ivoxa 
 
 ancient Egypt. The elegance of shape in ttU 
 and other sjiHciniens, sho.vs tlie jieifpction to wl.icr 
 'the manufacture of these articles had been brougb! 
 among that jieople. Pers ms are represented sitting
 
 BEE. 
 
 on iiich gct'as in tlse day-time; and that they vie 
 Oftsd liy single poisons for sleeping on al nlgln:, 
 is shown by the wooden jjillow placed llieieon, as 
 well as l;y the stepj I'jr ascent that occur beside 
 some of tlie specimens (as tlie preieni) wiiich stand 
 liiglier tiian tlie otliers. Snc!i couclies were ca- 
 jjable of receiving tiiiise ornanients of ivoiy wiiich 
 aie mentioned in Amos vi. 1 ; wiiich of itself 
 *ii(>ws tliat tiie Hebrews liail sometiiing of tlie kind, 
 forming an ornamental article of furniture. 
 
 T!ie next cut shows another variety of couch- 
 bwl, from the sculptures discovered by Mr. Fel- 
 lows in Asia Minor. 
 
 BEE. 
 
 8ia 
 
 A bed with a tester is mentioned in Judith xvi. 
 23, which, in coimectioii with other indications, 
 and the frequent mention of rich tapestries hung 
 upon and about a bed fur luxuriousness and or- 
 nament, pro\es that such beds (lepresented in tiie 
 annexed cut) as are still used by royal and dis- 
 tinguislied personages were not unknown under 
 tlie Hebrew monaicliy (comp. Esth. i. 6 ; Prov. 
 vii. 16, iej. ; Eztk. xxiii. 41"!. 
 
 ^/f/WVWV^O. ^ '_._ '-■.VWW<A/;j 
 
 'mmMMM 
 
 It is evident that the anci-ent Jews, like the 
 n.odem iniiabitants of their lanil, seldom or never 
 f hanged their dress on going to bed. Most people 
 only divest tlieniselves of their outer garment, and 
 lo<jsen the ligatures of the waist, excepting during 
 llie hottest jiart of the summer, when they sleep 
 almost entirely unclad. 
 
 BEE (occurs in Deut. i. 41; Judg. xiv. 8; 
 P*. cxviii. 2; Isa. vii. i S i. This insect belongs 
 to the family apidce, order hymenoplera, species 
 aipU mMifica, commonly called tiie honey-bee, 
 ^AOBiiSe this species has often yielded honey to 
 
 oiiui. The bee ia one of the most ga.erally 
 dilVused creatures un the globe, being found in 
 every region. Its instincU, its induslr),and the 
 valuable ])roduct of its lal>oui.s have otitained 
 for it universal ailention from tiie remotest times. 
 No nation upon eartii has liail so many histo- 
 rians as this msect. Ti.e naturalist, agricul- 
 turist, and jwlitician have bi'eii led by a legarJ 
 to science or interest to study its lialiits. (Jicero 
 and Pliny refer to one philosojiiier (Ari.-itomaclius) 
 wiio devoted sixty years to it ; and another 
 (Pliiliscus; is said to have retired to the desert to 
 ])uisue his iiitpiiiies, and to have obtained, in 
 consequence, the name of Agrius. 
 
 A prodigious number of l)uoks have been 
 written, periodical pui)lications liave a]>)>eared, 
 and even learned societies have been founded with 
 a view to promote the knowledge of the bee and 
 increase its usefjlness to man. Poets and mo- 
 ralists of every age have derived finm it some of 
 their most beautiful and sti iking illustrations. 
 
 Tiie following is a mere outline of the factA 
 asceitaiued l.'v Swammerilam, Marahli, IteauTpur, 
 Scliiiach, Bonnet, and Hiaber. Its anulumy and 
 phyaiulogy, comprehending the antenna-. .ir tactors, 
 by which it exercises at least all tlie huuian 
 senses, if not moie ; — 
 
 ' Ilerglanceful eye 
 Set with ten thousand lenses,' 
 and studded witli hairs to ward oil' the pollen, at 
 dust of tlowers, and the tliree additional eyes 
 on the top of the lieail, giving a defensive vision 
 upwards from the cu])s of flowers; the double 
 stomach, the upper pei forming the olhce of the 
 crop in birds, and regurgitating the honey, and 
 the lower secreting the \yax into various sacklets ; 
 the baskets on tiie thighs l()r carrying tlie ]«llen; 
 the iiooked feet ; the union of chemical and me- 
 chanical perfeclion in the stintr: its organs of pro- 
 gressive motion ; its imnietise muscular stiengtli . — 
 tlie different sorts of bees inhabiting a hive, and 
 composing the most perfect foim of insect so- 
 ciety, from the stately veneialed queen-regnant, 
 the mother of tl;e whole pojnilation and their 
 leader in niigiations, ihiwn to the drone, each 
 distinguished by its ])eculiar foim and occupa- 
 tions : — the rapidity of theii multiplication; the 
 various transitions liom the egg to the peifect in- 
 sect ; the amazing deviations from the usual 
 laws of the animal economy ; the means by 
 which the loss of a queen is rejtaired, amounting 
 to the literal creation of anoti.er ; their arc/iitec- 
 tu7'e (taught by the great geometi''<;ian, wlio 
 'made all things by number, weight, and mea- 
 sure") upon the ])rinci])h>s of the most retined 
 geometrical problem ; their streets, magazines, 
 royal apartments, houses for the citizens ; their 
 care of the yovny, consultations and irecautions 
 in sending I'orth a new colony ; their military 
 jaroit'esi, fortifications, and iliscipline; therr at- 
 tachment to the hive and the common interest, _\«t 
 patience under private wrongs ; tlie subdiviaunx 
 of labour, by which ihousamis of individuali 
 co-operate witliout confusion in the construction 
 of magnificent public woiks ; the uses they serve, 
 as the promoting of the fiiictilieation of flowers; 
 the amazing numiier anil inecision of liieir in- 
 stincts, and the capability of modifying these 
 by circumstances, so far as to raise a doultt 
 whether they be not endowed with a |H>rtiun ai 
 least of intelligence rot.iubling tliat of man.
 
 114 
 
 BEE. 
 
 In proceeding to notice the principal passages 
 of Scripture in which tlie bee is mentioned, we 
 tirst [Kiusf at Deut. i. 14, whine Moses alludes to 
 the inesistiMe vciiLceance with which bees pursue 
 their enemies : ' Tue Amoiites ciine out aijainst 
 you and ciiaseil yo" as l)ees da, and destroyed 
 you in Se;r unto Morniah.' Tiie jRnveilessness 
 ol'iruin iiiiiler tiic united attacks of the.e insects 
 is well aitt'sted. Pliny relates that bees were so 
 triHililesoiiie in some parts of Crete, that the in- 
 habitants were (-..iinpelled to forsai^e their homes; 
 and yElian leccirds tliat some [jlaces in Scythia 
 were I'oruicrly inaccessible on aiicount of the 
 swarms of liees with vvhich tliey were infested. 
 Mr. Paik {Tiaveh, vol. ii. p. 37) lelates tliat 
 at DoolV.M, some (if tiie ])eople being in search 
 of honey, nnf.irionately distiirlied a swarm of 
 bees, which came nut in great tiundiers, attacked 
 i>oth men and beasts, obliged them to ily in all 
 directions, so that he feaied an end iiad been 
 put to his j.iuiney, and that one ass died the same 
 night, and anotlier the next morning. Even in 
 tliis countiy the stings of two exasjierated hives 
 have been known to kill a horse in a few mi 
 nutes. 
 
 The refeience to the bee contained in Judg. 
 xiv. y, has attractwl the notice of most readers. 
 It is related in the 5th and Gtli verses that Sam- 
 son, aided by supernatural strength, rent a young 
 lion, that warred against him, as he would have 
 rent a kid, and that ' after a time,' as he returned 
 to take his wife, lie tuirieil aside to see the carcass 
 of tlie lion, ' and, behold, there was a swarm of 
 bees and honey in ihe carcass of the lion.' It has 
 been hastily concludeil that <-his narrative favours 
 tiie mistaken notion :.;" the ancients, possibly 
 derived from misunderstanding this very a,ccount, 
 that bees might be engendered in the dead bodies 
 of animals (Virgil, Georg. iv.) ; and ancient 
 authors are quoted to testify to the aversion of 
 'oees to llcsh, unjileasant smells, and (llthy places. 
 But it may readily be perceived that it is not 
 said that the bees were bred in the liody of the 
 lion. Again, the fieiiuently recurring phrase, 
 ' after a time,' liteialiy ' after days," introduced 
 into the text, jirnei that at least sufficient 
 time had ela]ised for all the llesli of the animal 
 to have been removed l)y birds and beasts of 
 prey, ants, &c. Tiie Syriac version translates 
 ' tiie bony carcass.' Tlie learned Bochart remaiks 
 that the Hebrew phrase sometimes signifies a 
 whole year, and in this passage it would seem 
 likely to have this meaning, because such was 
 tlie length of time which usually elapsed between 
 esjiousal and marriage (see ver. 7). He refers to 
 Gen. iv. 3 ; xxiv. 55 ; Lev. xxv. 29, 3!> ; Judg. xi. 
 4 ; comp. with ver. 40 ; I .Sam. i. 3; c irip. with 
 vers. 7, '20 ; and 1 Sam. ii. 19 ; and 1 Sam. xxvii. 
 7. The circunristance tliat ' honetf was found in 
 the carcass as well as bees, shows that sufficient 
 time had elajtsed since their possession of it, for 
 alt the tlesh to be removed. Nor is such an abode 
 for bees, probably in the skull or thorax, more 
 uDjiuitable than a hollow in a rock, or in a tree, 
 or in the ground, in which we know they often 
 reside, or those clay nests whicli they budd for 
 themselves in Brazil. Nor is the fact without 
 parallel. HeroiUitus (v. 1 14) relates that a swarm 
 of l)ees took up their abode in the skull of one 
 tiiliu.s, an anci'ent invader of Cyjiiiis, which they 
 filled with honeycombs, after the inhabitants liad 
 
 BEELZEBUL. 
 
 gnspende it o\er the gate of their city. A simildl 
 story is (Lid by Aldrovandus {l)e hiseciis, iib. i. 
 p. Ill)) of some bees that inhabited and built 
 their combs in a human skeleton in a tomb in it 
 cliurch at Verona. 
 
 Tlie j)hiase in Ps. cxviii. 12, ' They com- 
 p!LS,sed me about like bees," will be readily under- 
 stood l)y tliose who know the manner in which bees 
 attack the object of their fury. 
 
 The only remaining passage has been strangely 
 misunderstood (Isa. vii. 18): 'The Lord shall 
 hiss for the Ily that is in the uttermost parts of 
 the river of Egypt, and for the bee tliat is in tli« 
 land of Assyria." Heie tlie Hy and the bee aie 
 no doubt jiersonilicatioirs of those inveterate 
 enemies of r.5rael, the Egyptians and Assyrians, 
 wl'.om the Lord threatened to excite against his 
 disobedient [.eojile. But the liissing for them has 
 been interpreted, even by modern writers of 
 eminence, as involving 'an allusion to the prac- 
 tice III' calling out the bees from their /lives, by 
 a hissing or whistling sound, to their labour in the 
 fields, and summoning thein to return when the 
 heavens begin to lower, or \\\v sJiadoios of evening 
 to fall ' (Dr Harris's Natural History of the 
 Bible, London, 1825). No one has ofl'ered any 
 proof of the existence of such a custom, and the 
 idea will itself seem sufficiently strange to all 
 who are acquainted with the habits of bees. 
 
 The true reference is, no doubt, to the custom 
 of the people of the East, and even of many parts 
 of Europe, of calling the attention of any one in 
 the street, &c. by a significant hiss or rather hist, 
 as Bishop Lowlh translates the word both here 
 and in Isa. v. 26, but which is generally done in 
 this country by a short significant hem ! or other 
 exclamation. Hissing, or rather lusting, is in use 
 among us for setting a dog on any object. Kenct. 
 the sense of the threatening is, I will direct the 
 hostile attention of the Egyptians and Assyrians 
 against you. It may be remarked that in the 
 Sepfuagint versiim there is an allusion to the be*.-, 
 immediately after that of the ant (Prov. vi. 8), 
 which may be thus rendeied — ' Or go to the liee, 
 and learn how industrious she is, and what a 
 niagniKcent work she produces; whose labouis 
 kings and common people use for their health. 
 And she is desiied and praised by all. And 
 though weak in strength, yet prizing wisdom, she 
 juevails." This passage is not now found in any 
 Hebrew cc^y, and Jerome informs us that it was 
 wanting in liis time. Neither is it contained in 
 any other version excejit the Arabic. It is never- 
 theless quoted by many ancient writers, as Clem. 
 Alex. Strom, lib. i. ; Origen, in Num. Horn. 27, 
 and in Isai. Hum. 2 ; Basil, Hcxameron, Ho7n. 
 8 ; Ambrose, v. 21 ; Jerome, in Ezek. iii. ; Tlieo- 
 doret, De Providentia, Orat. 5 ; Antiochus, Abbas 
 Sabbae, Horn 3(5; and John Damascenus, ii. 89. 
 It would seem probable that it was in the copy 
 used l)y the Greek translators. The ant and 
 the bee are mentioned together by many writers, 
 because of their similar habits of industry and 
 economy. — J. F. D. 
 
 BEEF. [Foou.] 
 
 BEELZEBUL (Bee\fe^ouA) is the name a* 
 signed (Matt. xii. 2i) to the jirince of tlie 
 daemons. There is no doubt that the reading 
 Beelzebul is the one which has the support oJ 
 almost every critical authority; and the BeeU 
 zebuh of the '^eshito (if indeed it is not a corrup
 
 BKER. 
 
 tion, as Midiael s tliinks), and of fhp Viilgrit^, and 
 of some miHif-iii vpi.sioiis, has probalily l)ei"n nc- 
 conimocliitpd ti) 'he name of the Fliilistine god 
 Baalzebub. Some of those wtx) consider thelaMer 
 to have been a leveiential tide for ihat god, be- 
 lieve fliat Heelzcbid is a wilful corruption of it, 
 in order to make if contemptible. It is a fa<;t 
 that the Jews are very fond of tiiiiiini^ words into 
 tidicule, by such changes of letters ;« will con- 
 vert them into woids iif contemptible siijnifica- 
 tion. Of tiiis nsa^'e Li^^htfool j,'ives many in- 
 stances (Hoi-. Hcbr. ad IMatlii. /. c). lieelzebul, 
 then (Be'el beinj; tlie Aramaic pronunciation for 
 Ba'ai), is considered to mean dommus stercorU. 
 In the Hebrew language of the Old Test., however, 
 all the derivations of the root 73T occur solely 
 in the sense of dwcUing ; and it is only the 
 later language of the Talmud which has the 
 sense of stercorare. The very form zebal is not, 
 indeed, fuunil in that later itliom. Neveitheless, 
 if tlje word is only a contemptuous perversion ot 
 zebub, flij, some licence of formation would l)e 
 easily excused. It is evident tVom numerous 
 passages in the Talmud, cited by Ligiitfout, that 
 many derivatives of 72T are used, as terms of the 
 utmost disgust, to denote idolatry. It also appears 
 that zabbel, stercorare, is at the same time a per- 
 version of zabach, to sacrifice, and, as sui-h, is 
 used, with the same consrinction as tlie latter, to 
 mean s;icriHcing to idols. From these combina- 
 tions, it is easy to conceive how the name Beel- 
 zebub might have been formed, and how, as 
 meaning dominus stercoris, It might be considere.-l 
 an appropriate name of the archclofmon of idola- 
 try. 
 
 Some scholars, however, still adhere to the 
 ancient Hebrew sense of dwelling. Among these, 
 J. D. Michaelis (Suppl. ad Lex, p. 205), proposes 
 an astrological interpretation of the name : zebid, 
 according to him, means house, in that sense fii 
 which the heavens are divided into twelve man- 
 sions, in every one of which some planet presides, 
 called the lord of the house. As the planets 
 also were objects of idolatrous worship, he con- 
 ceives lord of tlie house to have become a fitting 
 name for flie author of idolatry. This view, 
 however untenable otherwise, jirodiices a striking 
 antithesis when seen in connection with the rest of 
 the passage : 'If they have called the master of 
 the house Beelzeiiul,' &c. (Matt. x. 25). 
 
 If the reaillng Beelzebub were retained, it 
 might, according to tlie proposal of Storr and 
 Doilerlein, reieive some support from the Syriac 
 Be'eldebobo, lord of hatred, of enmity (which is 
 tfilen used for eneniy)==Std^oKos. Michaelis (in 
 his Lex. Syr.) questions whether debobo l.-y itself 
 means enmi.'y ; although he admits that the 
 compound Beeldcboho .mt-dns enemy. His doubt 
 may, however, be removed ; for, althnugii debolio 
 does not occur in that sense by itself, in Aramaic, 
 ;»et it does in the Samaritan Version (c. g. Gen. 
 iii. 15), and dabnb meixns slaiiderer, in Aiabic. 
 
 It is lemaikable that, amidst all the dajmono- 
 logy of tlie Talmud iind Rabbinical writers, this 
 name should be exclusively confined to the New 
 1'e.stament. — J. N. 
 
 BEER OiiZ, a toell; Sej.t. BaiV), a local 
 [rtojjer name, denoting, whether by itself or in 
 composition, the presence of a well of water. 
 There were two places so called. — 1. A place 
 
 BEERSHEBA. 
 
 SIS 
 
 in the land of Moab, which was one of the eri- 
 campiijents i)f the Israelites (Nimi, xxi. 10). — 
 2. A town in tlie tribe of Judali. It is irientioix-d 
 only once in Scripture (Jiitlg. ix. 21), as tite 
 place to wliich Jotiiam tied. Eiisel)iii.s {Onomasi. 
 »..'. Bopi, Bern) places Beer eiglit R. n>iles north 
 of Eienthero]>oli»; l>ut this is ])rol)alily an eiror. 
 as he also slates that it becomes visible at the 
 seventh R. mile on the road from NicojH>lis to 
 Jerusalem, whicii cannot l>e true of a town situ- 
 ated as he indicates; l)tit is true of a jjlace still 
 l)earing tlie corie^jionding nameof el-Bireli, wliir-h, 
 since Maundrell's tin)e, has Iteeii identified with 
 Beer [JoJirncy, Marcli 25). Euseliiiis prolxibly 
 wrote • Eleutlieropolis' instead of 'Jerusalem;' 
 for the jilace in question is nearly at the ex- 
 presse<l distance, northward, IVoin the latte« 
 city. Bireh is nienti(ine«i, under the name of 
 Bira, by Brocard (c. vii. p. 17^), in whose time 
 it was hekl by the Templars. By the Crusaders 
 and the later ecclesiastics it was erroneously con- 
 founded with the ancient Miciimash. Bir"h is 
 situated on tlie ridge, running from east to west, 
 whicli bounds tlie noithem ]irosi)e<t, as lielield from 
 Jerusalem and its vicinity, and may be seen froru 
 a great di.stance north and south. It is now a 
 large village, with a jxipulation of 700 Moslems 
 The houses are low, and many of them lialf under- 
 ground. Many large stones and various sub- 
 structions evince the anticpiity of tiie site; and 
 there are remains of a fine old i^hurch of the tiin« 
 of the Crusades (Robinson, ii. 131 ; Reland, Pa> 
 leestijui, p. G17 ; Richfer, Wallfahrten,'p. bi'). 
 
 BEEROTH (nnX2), the plural of Beer, and 
 by many taken fur the same jilace. Dr. Robinson 
 thinks that if they were dillerent '^but he believes 
 them the same), the Bireii mentioned in tiie ije- 
 ceding article represents Beeroth ratiier than Beer. 
 Beeroth is mentioned as a city of the (iil)eonites 
 (Josli. ix. 17), and was reckoned in the triiie of 
 Benjamin (2 Sam. iv. 2; Ezra ii. 25). Eusebius 
 distinguishes it from Beer ( Ojtowu.w/. s. v. BripdiO, 
 Beercth), and assigns it a jxisition coincident witli 
 that now occupied by Bireii, /. e. seven R. miles 
 (in fact rather more) north of Jerusalem. 
 
 BEERSHEBA (^nC^' TNa, wtll of the oaih ; 
 Se])t. BTjpcra^ef), a jihiee in the southemmost 
 part of Canaan, celebrated for the sojouin of the 
 patriarciis. It took its name from the well which 
 was dug there liv Abraiiam, and tiie oat! i which 
 confirmed his treaty with Abimelech ((nn. xxi.31). 
 It seems to have been a (uvourite station of that 
 patriarch, and iiere he planted one of those ' groves' 
 which fornifd the temples of those remote times 
 ((jen. xxi. 33). A town of some consequence 
 afterwards arose on tiie spot, and retained the 
 same name. It was first assigned to tiie tribe 
 of Judah f Josh. xv. 28), anil afterwards trans- 
 ferred to S'lmeon (Josh. .\ix. 2i, liut was still 
 popularly ascribed to Judah (2 Sam. xxiv. 7). 
 As it was the southernmost city ol the land, its 
 name is of frequent occuirence, lievjig jiroverliially 
 useil in descriiiing the extent of the country, in the 
 phrase ' from Dan (in the north) to Beershel>a' 
 (in the south;, and reversely, 'from Beershel"* 
 unto Dan" (Judg. xx. 1; 2 Sam. xvii. 11; 
 1 Chron. xxi. 2; 2 Cliron. xxx. 5). Wlien the 
 land was diviiled into two kingiloius, the extent 
 of that of Judah ttas in like manner described 
 by the phrase ' from Beerslieba to Mount Ephraim'
 
 &16 
 
 BEERSIIEBA. 
 
 (2 Clir.ii. xix. i). It was at B«Tslieba flit.t Sitnuel 
 established liis sons us jmli^cs lor the soiitliein- 
 m<(st (listijcts ( ! Sarn. viii. 2): ii wm I'lDiii tliciice 
 that Elijah wandered out Int.) the southern desert 
 (1 Kings xix. 3J : liere was one ol' tiie cliiel' seats 
 3f idolatrous worship in the time of Uzziah 
 (Am,)s V. 5; viii. 14); antl to this place, among 
 others the Jews returned aftei the Ca, ti> ity (Neh. 
 xi 27, 30). This is the la,t time its name occurs 
 in the Old Testament. In tlie New Testament 
 it is not once mentioned ; nor is it referied to, as 
 then existijig, hy any wiiter eailier than Eusehius 
 and Jerome, in the fourth century, who describe 
 it as a large village (Euseb. KiifH] /neytcrTr]; Je- 
 rome, vicus grandis I, and the seat of a Roman 
 ganison. In the centuries bef.iie and after the 
 Moslem conqus'st it is mentioned among the e])is- 
 copal cities of Palestine (Reland, Palofst. i. 35) ; 
 but none of its bishops are anywhere named. The 
 site seems to have been forgotten till the four- 
 teenth century, when Sir John Maundeville, 
 Rudolf de Suchem, and William de Baldensel 
 recognised tiie name at a place wiiicli they passed 
 on their route from Sinai t.i Hebron. It vva; then 
 uninhabited, but some of the churches were still 
 Eianding. From that time till the recent visit of 
 Dr. Robinson, tiie place remained unvisited and 
 unknown, except for the slight notice obtained by 
 Seetzen from the Arabs i Zach's Monatl. Corresp. 
 Kvii. 143). Dr. Robinson gives a clear idea of 
 the southernmost district of Palestine, in which is 
 Beersheba, and witli which the book of Cienesis 
 has connected so many interesting associations. 
 Coming from the south, he emerged from the 
 desert by a long and gradual ascent, overswell- 
 isiu; hills scantily covered with grass. The 
 summit of this ascent att'orded a view over a 
 broad banren tract, bounded on tl.-e horizon by 
 the mcHUitains of Judah south oi' Hebion : ' Ws 
 now felt that the desert was at an end. Descend- 
 ing gradually, we came out upon an open undu- 
 lating country ; the shrubs ceased, or nearly so ; 
 green grass was seen along the lesser watercourses, 
 and almost green sward; while the gentle hills, 
 covered in ordinary seasons with grass and rich 
 pasture, were now burnt over witli drought. In 
 tliree-quarters of an hour we reached Wady es- 
 Leba, a wide watercourse or bed of a torrent, 
 running here W.S W., upon whose northern side, 
 close u])on the bank, are two deep wells, still 
 called Bir-es-Leba, the ancient Beersheba. We 
 had entered the borders of Palestine!' These 
 wells are 55 rods apart. They are circular, and 
 stoned up very neatly with masonry, aj)parently 
 very ancient. Ttie largest of them is \'l\ feet 
 in diameter, and -I i\ feet deep to the surface of 
 the water, 1<5 of which, at the bottom, are ex- 
 cavated in the solid rock. The other well is 5 
 feet in diameter by 12 feet deep. ' Tlie water 
 in both is pure antl sweet, and in great abun 
 dance; the.(inest, indeed, we had found since 
 leaving Sinai. Both wells are surrounded with 
 drinking-froughs of stone for camels and ilocks, 
 siictr as were doubtless used of old by the flocks 
 which were fed on tlie adjacent hills' (Robinson, 
 i. 3«>l). No ruins were at lirst visible ; but, on 
 examination, founilutions of former dwellings were 
 traced, dispersed loosely over the low hills, to the 
 north of the wells, and in the hollows between. 
 They seem to haie been built cliieHy of round 
 stoneii, although some of the stones are squared. 
 
 BEHEMOTH. 
 
 and some hewn suggesting the ioija of a vstA\ 
 straggiing city. The siie of the wells is nearly 
 midway between the .southern end of the Deail Sea 
 and the Mediterranean at Raphaa, or twenty- 
 seven milcj south-east from Gaza, and about the 
 same distance south-by-west from Hebron. Its 
 present Arabic name, Bir-es-Seba, means ' well ol 
 the seven." which soine take to !)« tiie significa- 
 tion also of Beersheba, in allusion to the seven 
 ewe-lambs wliich Abraham gave to Abimelech, 
 in tc.ken of the oatli l)etween them. Tlieie i» no 
 ground for renilcring it by ' seven loeils,' as some 
 have done. 
 
 BEETLE. [Chargoi..] 
 
 BEEVES (1p3 Bakar, in Aral)ic, al-hakar\ 
 
 cattle, herds, ajiplicable to all Ruminantia. the 
 
 camels alone exce]jted ; but more particularly to 
 
 the Bovida; and the genera of the larger antelopes. 
 [ 
 
 Ox or beeve, fjlT^X, aluph, the most important 
 of all clean beasts (Ps. viii. 7; cxliv. 14; Jer. 
 xi. 19). Bull, IVJ', skor ; Chablee,, tnur ; Arabic, 
 al-taur ; Latin, tuurus ; Celtic, tor. Young 
 bull, ~\Q,phar; Belgic, voir (Job xxi. 10; 1 Sam. 
 vi. 7,. 10; Ps. l.xix. 31). Heifer, n""iD, pharah. 
 Calf, 7jV, ^'jcl ; Arabic, idgl ; but theo, "INA, 
 although tlie hunched ox occurs on Egyptian 
 monuments, we take to refer to an oryx, as well 
 as Beker-el-wash, unless it be the Antilone defas.sa 
 of \Vilkinson, a species not yet scientifically de- 
 scribed.— C. H. S. 
 
 BEGGARS. [Alms.] 
 
 BEHEADING. [Puni.shments.] 
 
 BEHEMOTH (niDHa, Job xl. 15; in 
 Coptic, according to Jablonski, Pehemont^ is 
 regarded as the plural of behemah, HtDH^, but 
 commentators are by no means agreed as to its 
 true meaning. A number of learned men, with 
 
 [Hippopotamus.] 
 
 Bocliart and Calmet at their head, understan 1 
 the word in the singular number as a S|)ecii<c 
 name, denoting the hippopotamus, seeking, by 
 somewhat forced inter] retations of the beautifp.l 
 poetical allusions in Job xl. 15-24, to prove the 
 exactness of the description wlien comjiared with 
 the species. In some respects, however, it is more 
 apjilicable to the elephant, while in otheis it is 
 ecjually so to both anim.als. Hence the term 
 behemoth, taken intensively (for in some ])!aces it 
 is admitted to designate cattle in general), may 
 be assumed to be a poetical personification of tJ:e 
 great Pachydermata, or even Herbivoia, wlieieic 
 the idea of hippojiotan.us is jiiedominant. 'Jliia 
 view accounts for the ascri]ition to it of cnara. .ers 
 not truly applicaiile to one species; for instance, 
 tlie tail is liktned to a cedar (provided 337 
 really denotes tlie tail, which tlie cor text nokei
 
 mr (JonUfii' See Zeddel, Bcifr. z. Bihl. 
 Zooloffte). vvhicli is only atlmissible in the rase 
 of the eleijhant ; again, ' tlie niDtintaim tiling 
 hirt: fortii fioil ;" ' l.e tnisteth that he can draw 
 up .ronlaii,' a li'Ver which elepliaiifa alone could 
 reach; 'his no:e pierceth through snaies,' cer- 
 faiiilv tnoie indicative of that aninials jirolMiscis 
 witJi its extiaoidinary delicacy of scent and 
 ixiiich, ever cautiously aijpliel, than ot'tiie ohtu-e 
 [)fi'ce|)tions of the livei-horse. Finally, llu" ele- 
 uh.mt is far tnoip dan^'erons as an enemy than 
 the hi|)pi>])otamu3,\v-hicli nunierons pictorial scul| - 
 tuies on tiie nionvnnents of Kgypt repiesent as 
 fearlessly speared hy a single hunter standing on 
 ids float of log and reeds. Yet althongii the ele- 
 phant is scarcely less fond of water, the descrip- 
 tion referring to manneis, such as lying under 
 the shado of willows, among reed«, in fens, &c.. is 
 more diiectly characteristic of the hippoiiotunnis. 
 Tlie book of Job appears, from many internal 
 indications, to have been written in Asia, and is 
 full of knowledge, although that knowledge is 
 not expressed according to the precise techni- 
 calities of modern science; it oll'trs pictures in 
 magnificent outline, without condescending to 
 minute and laboured details. Considered in this 
 light, the exjjiession in Ps. 1. 10, ' For every beast 
 of the forest is miiie. and the cattle (behemoth) 
 upon a thousand hills,' acquires a grandeur and 
 fi/rce far siu]ias-<ing those furnished by the mere 
 idea of cattle of various kinds. If, then, we take 
 this plural noun in tlie sense here biielly indicated, 
 we may, in like manner, consider the leviathan, 
 its couuter])arf, a similarly geneialized term, with 
 die idea of crocodile most prominent ; and as 
 this name indicates a twisting animal, and, as 
 ap]jears from various texts, evidently includes the 
 great pythons, cetacea, and shaiks nf the sur- 
 rounding seas and <leserfs, it conveys a moie sub- 
 lime conception than if limited to the ciocodile, 
 an animal familiar to every EL'-yjitian, and well 
 known e\en in Palestine. — C. H. S. 
 BKKAH, half a shekel. [Weights.] 
 
 BEL (73, contracted from ?yS, the Aramaic 
 form of 7y5 ■) Se)it. Br/A. and Brj\os), is the 
 name under which the national god of the Baby- 
 lonians is cmsorily mentioned in Isa. xlvi. 1 ; 
 'ev. 1. 2; li. 44. The only passages in the Bible 
 which contain any further notice of this deity 
 are Bar. vi. 40, and the ajKicryjjlial addition to 
 the book of Daniel, in the Sept., xiv. 1, sq., 
 where we read of meat and drink being daily 
 offered to him, according to a usage occuiring in 
 classical idol.itry, and termed Lcctisteniia (Jer. 
 li. 44 'r). We, therefore, turn to the testimonies 
 di' profane writers. A ];articular acc(junt of the 
 pyramidal temple of Bel, at Babylon, is given 
 by Herodotus, i. lSl-lf!3. It is there also stated 
 ttiat the sacrifices of this god consisted of adult 
 cattle (■Kp6l3aTa), of their young, when sucking 
 (which last class were the oidy victims oHererl 
 up on the golden altar), and of incense. The 
 cimtrttn of providing him with Lectisteniia may 
 l>e inferred from the table ])laced beibre the 
 statue, but it is not exjire.ssly mentioned. ])io- 
 d;,>riis (ii. 9) gives a similar account of this 
 temple; hut adds that there were large golden 
 Stutuer, of Zeus, Ileia, and Khea oi! its summit, 
 with a table, common to them aU, lii'foie them. 
 fT««»'niu«, in order to support his own theory, 
 
 BKLI,. 
 
 317 
 
 CTideavotirs to .show that thit ^fafiie if Zeus must 
 have been that of Sdtiini. and that that of Khea 
 represented the son. Ilitzig, however, in his note 
 to Isa. xvii. R, more justly observes U at Hera is 
 the female counteijjait to Zens-Bii, that she i« 
 cal'ed so solely liecause it was the name of the 
 chief Greek goddt's.^, and that she and Bel arc 
 the moon and sun. He refers lor coniiimation to 
 Berosus (]). oO, ed. Richter;, who states that the 
 wife of Bel was called (>)»o)Ta, which means 
 moon; and to Annnian. Marcell. txiii. 3, for a 
 .statement t!)at the niuun was, in l.iler limes, zea- 
 lously worshipi.ed in Mesopof.imia. The clas- 
 sical writers generally call this Babylonian deity 
 by their name-, Zciis and Jti/iiter (Herod, anij 
 Diod. /. c; Plin. Ili.st. Nat. vi. 30); by which 
 (hey assmedly did not mean the planet of that 
 .ame, but merely the chief god o)' their religioiiS 
 system. Cicero, however (/Jc Sat. Dear. iii. 16), 
 recognises Ilcrcultn in the Belus of India, vvLich 
 is a loose term for Babylonia. This favours the 
 identity of Bel and Melkai-tli. 
 
 Tlie (jiu'stion whether the sun or the planet 
 Jupiter v,as the p,)wer of nature adored under 
 the name uf Bei, is discussed under the article 
 Ba.u.. 
 
 The following engraving, taken fiom a Baby- 
 lonian cylinder, represents, according to Miinfer, 
 the sun-god and one of his jjriests. The triangle 
 on the toj) of one of the pillars, tlie star with 
 eight rays, and the half moon, are all si^iiticaut 
 svmbols. — J. N. 
 
 fc 4^ 
 
 BEL and DRAGON. [Daniei, Apochy- 
 PHAi, Additions to.] 
 
 BKL.\. [Zo.AR.] 
 
 BELL. The first bells known in history are 
 those small golden bells which were attache<l to 
 the lower part of the bluerobe(the robeof thee])hodj 
 which formed jiart of the dress of the liigh-]iriest in 
 his sacerdotal miiiistrations (Exod. xxviii. 33, 31 : 
 comp. EccUis. xlv. II). They were there placed 
 alternately with the ))omegranate-.shaped knoh', 
 one of these being between every two of the bells. 
 1 he numb(.r of these liells is not mentioned in 
 Scripture; lint tradition states that there were 
 sixty-six (Clem. Alex. Stiomafn, ji. ^iCtii). We 
 need not seek any other rea-on for this rather sin- 
 gular use of liells than tiiat which is assigned 
 > His sound shall be heard when he goctli into the 
 holy jilace Infore the Lord, and when he come^h 
 out, tliat he die not "(Exod. xx\iii. 3.")) ; hy which 
 we may understand that the sound of the bells 
 manifested that he was jmipeily airayed in the 
 robes of ceremony whi( h lie was reijuiicd to wear 
 when he entered the piesrnce-chainli( r of "'lefrreal 
 King; and that as no riiiniater can mter tlie pre- 
 sence of an earthly p.jteiitate ubruptly and ii».
 
 318 
 
 BELLOWS. 
 
 BEN 
 
 announced, so lie Twliom no human lieing could 
 introduce) was to have liis eiitiauco iuubingereil 
 by the siHiixi of the l)ells he wore. This souml, 
 nearti outside, also notified to the people llie time 
 in wiiicli he was engaged in his sacred ministra- 
 tions, and (luring which they i«mained in prayer 
 (Luke i. 9, lt)> 
 
 ' }>Ki.i»s OK THE Horses ' are mentioned in 
 Zech. XIV. '20, whicli were probably such as were at- 
 tache<l to the bridles or furtl^eads, or to lielts around 
 the necks of horses trained (or war, that tiiey 
 icight thereby be accustonried to noise and tumult, 
 and mit by their alarm exnose the riders to 
 danger in actual warfare. Hence a person who 
 ha<i not lieen tried or trained up Ui anything was 
 by the Greeks called aKotSdirtaToi, ' one not used 
 to the noise of a l)ell,' by a metaphor taken from 
 horses. The mules employed in the funeral 
 pump of Alexander had at each jaw a golden bell. 
 We incline to ihink, however, tiiat the use of 
 bor.se-tieils with which the Jews were most familiar, 
 and which the jirophet had in view, was that 
 which at psesent exists in the East, and in other 
 countries where carriage by jmck-horses and mules 
 is common. The laden animals, being without 
 riders, have bells hung from their necks, that they 
 may be kept together, in traversing by night the 
 open plains and deserts, by paths and roatls un- 
 confined by tences or boundaries ; that tiiey may 
 be cheered by the sound of the bells; and that if 
 any horse strays, its place may be known by the 
 soun(i of its bell, while the general sound from 
 the caravan enaliles the traveller who has strayed 
 or lingered, to find and regain liis party, even in 
 the night. 
 
 That the same motto, Holiness to the Loud, 
 which was upon the mitre of the high-priest, 
 should, in the hapjjy days foretold by the prophet, 
 be inscriited even upon the bells o( the horses, 
 manifestly signifies that all things, from the 
 highest to the lowest, should in those days be sanc- 
 tified to God. 
 
 It is remarkal)le that there is no appearance of 
 bells of any kind in the Egyptian monuments. 
 
 BELLOWS. This word only occurs in Jer. 
 VI. 29, and is there employed with reference to the 
 casting of metal. As fires in the East are always 
 of wood or charcoal, a suflicient heat for ordinary 
 purposes is soon raised by the help of fans, and the 
 use of bellows is confined to the workers in metal. 
 Such was die case anciently ; and in the mural 
 faintings of Egyjjt we observe no bellows but sur'i 
 as itre used for the forge or furnace. They 
 eccur as eaily as the time of Moses, lieing repre- 
 sented in a tomb at Thebes which bears the name 
 of Thothmes IIL Tbev consisted of a leathern 
 
 liag, secured and fitted into a frame, from which 
 t loiig pipe extended for carrying the wind to the 
 ite. They were worked by the feet, the operator 
 
 standing upon them with one under each foot and 
 [Massing them alternately, while lie pulled up 
 each exliausted skin with a string he held in hit 
 hand. In one instance it is observed from th« 
 painting, that when the man left the bellows they 
 were raised as if filled witli air, and this would 
 imply a knowledj^e of the valve (Wilkinson's 
 Aiw. Eayptians, iii. 33S). 
 
 BELLY. Among the Hebrews and most an- 
 cient nations, the belly was regarded as the seat of 
 the carnal aflections, as being, according to their 
 notions, that which first partakes of sensual plea- 
 sures (Tit. i. 2; Phil. iii. 9; Rom. xvi. 18). It 
 is used likewise symbolically for tiie heart, the 
 innermost recesses of the soul (Prov. xviii. 8; 
 XX; 27 ; xxii. 18). The expression etnbitterinp 
 of the belly signifies all the train of evils which 
 may come upon a man (Jer. iv. 19 ; ix. 15 ; comp. 
 Num. xviii. 27). 
 
 BELOMANCY. [Divination.] 
 
 BELSHAZZAR (-\WK''?3 ; Sept. Ba\rd<rap] 
 is ttie name given in the book of Daniel to the last 
 king of the ChaJdees, under whom Babylon was 
 taken by the Medes and Persians. Herodotus calls 
 this king, and also his father, Lahynetus, which is 
 undoubtedly a corruption of ISabonnedus, the 
 name by which he was known to Berosus, in Jo- 
 seph. Contr. Apion.\.'l<). Yet in Joseph. (^ si^iy, 
 x. 11.2) it is stated that Baltasar was called 
 Naboandel by the Baliylonians. Nabonadius in 
 the Canon of Ptolemy, Nabonedii^ in Euseb. 
 Chron. Armeii. i. p. 60 (from Alexantler Poly- 
 histor.), and Nabmundochus in Euseb. Prep. 
 Evan. is. 41 (from Megasthenes), are remarked 
 by Winer as other varieties of his name. Winei 
 {Simon, Lex.) conjectures that in the name Bel- 
 shazzar the element shazzar means ' tlie principle 
 
 of file' jjl-rf. 
 
 Nothing is really known of this king except 
 from the book of Daniel, the authenticity and 
 credibility of which will be treated under the 
 article Daniel.. That which is told of Nabon- 
 nedus by Berosus does not agree with the Scrip- 
 tural account, viz., that losing a pitched battle 
 against Cyrus in the open plain, Nabonnedus was 
 shut up in the city Borsippa on the Euphrates, 
 below Babylon, and soon forced to suirender his 
 ])er-on. Cyrus received him kindly, sent him 
 into Caramania, and settled iiim on an estate, 
 \v4ere he ended his life peaceably. No hypothesis 
 will reconcile this account with the other, since 
 it is certain that Nabonnedus is the last king in 
 the one narrative, as Belshazzar in the other 
 Some of the older critics in vain endeavoured to 
 remove the difficulties, by making Belshazzar the 
 same as Laborosoarchod, who preceded Nabon- 
 nedus. Xenophon {Cyrop. vii. 5, 30) agrees with 
 the book of Daniel as to the fate of Belshazzar. — 
 
 F. W. N. 
 BELTESHAZZAR. [Daniel.] 
 BELUS, TEMPLE OF. [Babel.] 
 BEN (}3, son) is often found as the first ele- 
 ment of proper names ; in which case the word 
 which follows it is always to be considered de 
 pendent on it, in the re.ation of our genitive. 
 The word which follows Ben may either be of 
 itself a proper name, or be an apjiellative or ab- 
 stract, the principle of the connection being essen- 
 tially the same in both cases As for th« fint
 
 BENAIAH. 
 
 BENJAMIN. 
 
 3 ID 
 
 class, as the Syro-AriiMun nations are all jiarti- 
 ojlarly .id<licteil to geri«'ali);;y, and as tliey ])ossess 
 ao siirniiines, nor I'amilv names in our sense, tliey 
 tjave no means ol" attactiini^ a definite desii^nation 
 Vi a person, except by adding some accessory 
 (liecification to liis distinctive, or, as we would 
 term it, C/iristia-ti, name. This explains wliy so 
 oiany persons both in the Old and New Testa- 
 ments, aie distinjfi.ished liy tlie addition of (lie 
 names of their father. Tlie same usage is espe- 
 cially frequent amoni^ the Arabs ; but they have 
 improved its definiteiiess by adding the name of 
 tlie person's child, in case lie has one. In doing 
 (his tliey always observe this arrangement — the 
 name of the child, the person's own name, and 
 the name vf Ins father. Thus the designation of 
 the patriarch Isaac would, in Arabic, run thus — 
 Father of Jacob, Isaac, son of .•\braliam (Abu 
 Ja'qfib, Ishuq, ben Ibiahini). As fur the latter 
 class, there is an easy transition from this strict 
 use of son to its employment in a figurative sense, 
 to denote a peculiar dependence of derivation. 
 Tlie ])rrnciple of such a connection not only ex- 
 plains suc!i proper names as Pen Clicsed (son of 
 incrcy), but ap]ilies to many striking metaphors 
 in other classes of words, as sons of the iiow, a son 
 »f seventeen years (the usual mode of denoting 
 a-je), a hill, the son of oil (Isa. v. 2), and many 
 others, in which our translation ellaces the Ori- 
 ental type of the expression. All proper names 
 which begin with Hen belong to one or the other 
 of these classes. Hen Aiiiiiiadab, Ben Gaber, and 
 Ben Chesed (I Kings iv. 10, II) illustrate all 
 the possibilities of combination noticed above. 
 In these names, Ben would, perhaps, be better not 
 translated, as it is in our version; although the 
 Vulgate has preserved it, as the Sept. also a|> 
 pears to have once done in ver. 8, to judge by the 
 reading there. 
 
 These remarks apjily also in part to Bar, the 
 Aramaic synonyme of Ben, as in the name Bar- 
 Abbas.— J. N. 
 
 BENAIAH Oin'J? or Hjn ; Sept Bayaias), 
 son of Jehoiada, and commander of David's guard 
 ^the Cherethites and Pelethites, 2 Sam. viii. 18). 
 His exploits were celebrated in Israel. He over- 
 came two Moabitish champions (' lions of God'), 
 rfew an Egyptian giant with his own spear, and 
 went down into an exhausted cistern and de- 
 stroyed a lion which had fallen into it when 
 covered with snow (2 Sam. xxifi. 21). Benaiah 
 'doubtless with the guard he commanded) ad- 
 hered to Solomon when Joab and others attempted 
 to set up Adonijah ; and when that attempt failed, 
 he, as belonged to his oflicc, was sent to put Joab 
 to death, after which he was ap])ointed com- 
 mander in chief in his place (1 Kings i. 36; ii. 
 29). Some persons named Benaiah returned from 
 the exile witli Ezra (x. 25, 30, 35, 43). 
 
 BENHADAD (Tin-]3, son of Hadad; Sept. 
 vihs ■'ASt-p), the name of three kings of Damascene- 
 Syria. As to the latter part of this name, 
 Hadad, there is little doubt that it is the name 
 of the Syrian goil Adau. The expression so>i 
 of Hadad, which denotes dependence and obe- 
 dience, not only accords with the analogies of 
 ether heathen names, but is also supjiorted by the 
 existence of such leims as 'sous of God' among 
 tb« Hebrews (cf. Ps. Ixxxii. 6^ 
 
 1. BENHADAD, the k^ng of Syria who w^ 
 subsiilised by Asa kingof Judali Ui imade Isiael, 
 and thereby compel liaasba (wiio had invaded 
 Judah) to retuin to defend his own kingiuim 
 (1 Kings XV. IS). [A.>A.] Tills l;eii-hada«: l.ius 
 with some reason, lieen sujiposc'l Iladad the 
 Edomite who lebelleii against Sulonioii (I Kiuu'S 
 XI. 2r>). 
 
 2. BENHADAD. king of Syiia, son of the 
 preceiling. Ilis eaiber iiisloiy is iiiimIi involved 
 in that of Aliab, witli whi;ni he v\as constaiitiy .it 
 v.'ar [AiiAu]. He owed the signal defeat in 
 wiiicii that war terminated to llie vain notion 
 which assimilated J khovaii to the local deities 
 worshipiied by the nations of Syria, deeming 
 Him ' a God of the hills,' Imt imjiotent to Uefend 
 liis votaries in 'tlie plains' (1 K iii'^s xx. l-3t),. 
 Instead of pursuing his victi^iy, .Ahali concluded 
 a peace with the defeated Heiihadad, which was 
 observed for about twelve yeai-s, when tlie Syrian 
 king declared war against Jehoram tlie son of 
 Aliab, and invaded Israel : but all his [ilans and 
 0])eratioii3 were fiusfiated, lieing made known 
 to Jehoram by tiie projihet Elislia (2 Kings vi. 8, 
 ad Jill.). Alter some years, however, lie renewed 
 the war, anil besieged Jehoram in his capital, 
 Samaria, until the inhal)itants weie reduce'i to 
 the last extiemities and most revolting resouic<« 
 by famine. Tl;o siege was then unexpectedly 
 raised, according to a jirediciion of Elislli^ 
 through a jianic infused into the besiegers, wlio 
 concluding that a noise wiiich they seemed to 
 hear portended the ailvance iijwn them of a foreign 
 host procured by Jelioram, thought only ol" saving 
 themselves by flight. The next year Benhadad, 
 learning that Elisha, through whom so many of 
 his designs had been brought to nought, ha<l 
 arrived at Damascus, sent an otlicer of distinction 
 named Hazael with presents, to consult him as to 
 his recovery from an illness under which he then 
 sufl'ered. The jirojihet answered, that liis diseiise 
 was not mortal, but that he would nevertheless 
 die. This was accomplished a few days after by 
 this very Hazael, wiio smotiiered the sick monarch 
 in his bed, anil mounted the throne in liis stead, 
 B.C. 884 (2 Kings viii. 7-15). [Ei.isha; Ha- 
 zael; Jehoram.] 
 
 3. BENHADAD, king of Syria, son of the 
 Hazael just mentioned. He was thrice defeateii 
 by Jehoash, king of Israel, who recovered from iiim 
 all the territories beyond the Jordan which Ha- 
 zael had rent from the dominion of Israel (2 Kings 
 xiii. 3, 24, 2.5). 
 
 BENJAMIN (W^^^2; Sept. Beria^iV), young 
 est son of Jacob, by liachel (Gen. xxxv. 18). His 
 mother died imm»?diately alter he was born, and 
 with her hist breatii named him 'Jiy p (Ben- 
 Oni, ' Son of ni]/ pain), which the father change<l 
 into Benjamin, a word of nearly the same sound, 
 but {wrtending comfoit and consolation, ' ^wi 
 of my right hand.' probably alluding to the 
 sujiport and protection lie promised liimsilf Irom 
 this, his last child, in his old age. This siij)- 
 position is strengthened when we reflect on the 
 reluctance with which he consented to j)art with 
 him in very trying circumstances, yielding only 
 to the pressuie of famine and ihe most urgent 
 necessity (Gen. xlii.). 
 
 In Gen. hi. 21, sq., the immediate descendants 
 of Benjamir are given to tiie number of tmi,
 
 Ma 
 
 BENJAMIN. 
 
 whe'-as in Num. xxvi, .TS-40, onlj' seven are 
 eiimnenir«l, ;uid someevt-n imtler ditlereiit n.'imes. 
 This ditR-rence ni;iy prohal»lj' be owing to the 
 eircwmstiinre tliat sume of the direct descendants 
 of lienj.imiii h.ifl died either at an eaily jieriod 
 or at least chililless. 
 
 The tiilie of Benjamin, thmis^h the least nu- 
 nicions of [^rael, liecaitte iieveiihele^s a consi- 
 derable race in ]i-o(i'ss of time. In the de.sert it 
 counted :;.'», -tOO waiiiois. all adove twenty yeare 
 of age (Ntini. i. 3(i ; ii. 22); an l.ut llie ontiauce 
 of Israel into Can tan. even as many as 45.()<)0, 
 The portion allotted to this tiiiie was in ])ro- 
 p.jrtion to its small iiimihev, and wa-i encom- 
 passed i)y the di-itricts of Kiihraini, Dan, and 
 Jndah, in central Palestine. In Jitsji. xviii. 1 1-20, 
 the iiorthein and southern boundaiies are mi- 
 nutely descrilied ; from ver. 12 to 1<> is sketched 
 the norfhejM lioundary-line, and (lom 16 to 20, tiie 
 southern. Withi'i the ho indaries descrilied in 
 these eight verses lay a. district rather small, hut 
 liighly-cuhiviifed and naturally feitile (Joseph. 
 Aidiq. V. 1.22; Rehmd, p. Gii? J, containing thiity- 
 six towns (with tiie \illaL;es apijeitaining to tlieni), 
 which are nrmed in Josh, xviii. 21-28 ; and the 
 piincipal of which were Jericho, Betha^la, Bethel, 
 Cril^on, Ramah, and Jehus or Jerusalem. This 
 latter place subsequently hecame the capital of 
 the whole Jewish empiie ; hut was, after the 
 division of the land, still in possession of the 
 Jebusites. The Benjamites had indeed been 
 charged to disi«-issess liiem, arivl occupy that im- 
 portant town ; but (Judg. i. 21j the Benjamites 
 aie reproached with having neglected to drive 
 them from liience, that is, from the upper, well- 
 fortified part of the place Zton, since the lower 
 and less foiliiied {'ait had alieady been taken by 
 Jiidah (Jud^r. i. 8;, who in this matter had 
 almost a common interest with Bciijainin. Ziou 
 was Anally taken from the Jebusites by David 
 (2 Sam. V. 6, srj.). 
 
 In the time of the Judges, the tribe of Benjamin 
 became involved in a civil war with the other 
 eleven tribes, for ha\ ing refused to give up to jus- 
 tice the miscieants of Giheon who had publicly 
 violated and caused the death of a concubine of 
 a man of Ei)lnaim, who had passed with her 
 through Gibe.m. This war terminated in the 
 almost utter extinction of the tribe; leaving no 
 hope for its legeneration from the circumstance, 
 that, not only had neaily all the women of that 
 tiibe been piciously slain liy their fees, but the 
 eleven otl'.er tiilies had engaged themselves by a 
 solemn oath nut to marry their daugliteis to any 
 man belonging to Benjamin. \Mien the thirst 
 of revenge, however, had aliated, tliey found 
 means to evade the letter of the oath, and to 
 revive the tribe again by an alliance with them 
 (Judg. xix. 211, 21 j. This levivai wa<! so rapid, 
 that, in the time of I>ivid, it already numbered 
 59,134 able warriors (1 Chron. vii. 6-12); in 
 that of Asa, 2^0,000 (2 Chron. xiv S) ; and 
 in that of Jeh< shapliat, 200,000 (2 Chron. jcvii. 
 
 This tribe had also the honour of giving the 
 fir-.t king to the Je.vs, Saul l)eing a Berijamite 
 ri Sam. ix. 1, 2). After the death of Saul, the 
 Benjamites, as might have been expectetl. de- 
 chired themselves for his son Ishbosheth (2 Sam. 
 ii. R, sq. ; until, after the assassination of that 
 prince, David became king of ■>11 Israel. David 
 
 BEROSH. 
 
 liaving at last exjielled the Jebusites from Zion, 
 and made it his own lesidence, the close alliance 
 \hdi seems previously to have existed between 
 the tribes of Benjamin and Judah (Judg. i. 8) 
 was cemented by the ciicumstance that, while 
 Jerusalem actually belonged to the ilislrict 
 of Benjamin, tliat of Judali was immediately 
 contiguous to it. Tiius it happened, th^t, at the 
 divisio'.i of the kingdom after liie death of Solo- 
 mon, Etiijamin es]x)used the cause of Judah. and 
 formed, together with i(, a kingih.m by them 
 selves. Indeed, the two tribes stood always in 
 such a close connection, as often to be included 
 under (he single term Judah (I Kings xi. 13; 
 xii. 20). After the exile, also, these two tribes 
 constituted the llower uf the new Jewish colony 
 in Palestine (com]). Kzr. xi. 1 ; x. 9).— E. M. 
 
 BER1{;A (Bi'poia). Acts xvii. 10, a city of 
 Macedonia, which Pliny (Hist. Nat. iv. 10) 
 places in tlie nort'nern part of that province; and 
 Ptolemy (Gcoff. iii. 13) in that jmrt of it called 
 ^luathia. It was on the river AstriEus, not far 
 from Fella, towards the south-west, and near 
 Mount Beimius. It was afterwards called lie- 
 nojjolis, and is now known by the name of Boor. 
 Paul and Silas withdrew to this place frjm Thes- 
 salonica ; and the Jewisli residents are described 
 as more ingenuous, and of a better disposition 
 (not ' more noble,' as in the Authorized Version) 
 ' than those of Thessalonica ' (oZtoi Se f.aay 
 evyevearrfpoi tuv ef @f<TauKoviKr]), in that they 
 diligently searched the Scriptures to asceitain the 
 trutli of tlie doctiines taught by the A))0stle3. 
 
 BERENICE {BtpvLK-n). eldest daughter o, 
 Herod Agripjja I., and sister of the younger 
 Agiip])a (Acts XXV. 13, 23: xxvi. 30). She 
 was married to her uncle Herod, king of Chalcis; 
 and after his death, in onler to avoid the merited 
 suspicion ol' incest with her brother Agrippa, slie 
 became the wife of Polemon, king of Cilicia. 
 This connection l)eing soon dissolved, siie re- 
 turned to her brother, and afterv^ards became 
 the mistiess of V'esjjasian and Titus (Joseph. 
 Antiq. xix. 5. 1; xx. 7 ; 2, 3 ; Tacit. Hist, ii 
 81; Suet. Tit. 7). 
 
 BERODACH-BALADAN. [Mf.kodach-Ba 
 
 I.AUAN.] 
 
 BEROSH (tJ'1"l3) occurs in several passages of 
 Scrijiture, as in 2 Sam. vi. 5 ; 1 Kings v. 8 ; \ i. 
 15 and 3-1 ; ix. 11 ; 2 Kings ix. 23; 2 Chron. 
 ii. 8; iii. 5; Ps. civ. 17; Isa. xiv. 8; xxxvii. 
 21; xli. 19; Iv. 13; Ix. 13; Ezek. xxvii. S; 
 xwi. S; Hos. xiv. 8; Nah. ii. 3; Zech. xi. 2). 
 and BuROTH (ni"13\ which is sai<l to be only 
 tiie Aiani«an pronunciation of the same word, in 
 Cant. i. 17, ' the bearers of our house are cedar, 
 and tiie ral'ters of (ir" (Beroth). So in most of 
 the other passages Eres and Berosh, translated 
 Cedar and Fir in the Auth. Vers., are mentioned 
 together, as 1 Kings v. 8, 'And Hiram sent to 
 Solomon saying, I will do all thy desiie con- 
 cerning timber of cedar, and concerning timl»er of 
 fir;" Isa. xiv. 8, ' Yes, the (ir-trees lejuice at thee, 
 and the ce<lars of Lelwnun.' But Rosenrniiller 
 says, ' In most of the passages where the Hebrew 
 word occurs, it is by the oldest Greek and the 
 Syriac translators rendered Ci//>refis.'' Celsius, on 
 the contraiy, is of opinion that Bernsh indicate! 
 the cedar of Lebanon, atid tliat Eres., whilcli is 
 usually con.sideied to have the same meaning, IR
 
 BEROSH. 
 
 BEROSH. 
 
 321 
 
 the common pine Cpinus sylvesdis). apparently 
 because he conceives Berosli to lie clmiiged fioin 
 s/ierbi/i, the Arabic name of j)ine. Others liave 
 thought that Ik'rosh is tlie Imix. ash. jn.iiiper, Kc 
 
 Tlie word herosh or beroifi is slightly varied in 
 the Syriac and Ghaldee versions, hein;^ written 
 berutha in the lormer, and herath in the latt«'r. 
 All lliese are closely allied to brttta, a name 
 of the Savine plant, which is the fipdOv. Pfxidui/, 
 and fiapadovs ol the Greeks, and which tlie Arabs 
 iuive converted into burasce and huratee. Hy 
 them it is applied to a sjiecies of junijier, whicii 
 they cail ab/itil and arus or onts. It appears 
 to us that many of these terms must lie con- 
 sidered generic, rather than specific in the mo- 
 ileiu sense, when so mucii care is bestowed on 
 tlie accurate disci imination of one Sjjecies from 
 another. Tims anis, applied by the Arabs to a 
 juniper, indicates a pine-tree in Scripture, whether 
 we follow the common acceptation and consider 
 it the cedar, or adopt the ojiinion of Celsius, that 
 the pinus sylvestris is indicated. So buratee may 
 liave been applied by the Arabs, Jtc. not only to the 
 Savine and other species of juniper, but also to 
 plants, such as the cypress, wliich resemlile these. 
 In many of tiiose cases, therefore, wiiere we arc un- 
 able U) discover any absolute identity or similarity 
 of name, we must be guided by the nature of the 
 trees, the uses to whicli lliej' were ajijiliod, and the 
 situations in which they are said to iiave been found. 
 Thus, as we find Eres and Herosh so c. instantly 
 associated in Scripture, the former may indicate 
 the cedar with the wild pine-tree, while (he lattet 
 may comfirehend the juniper and cy|iress trilie. 
 
 liy.i. [Cypress— Ciipres.sus senipcrvirens.] 
 
 The difl'erent sjiecies of juniper have by some 
 botanists been ranked under Cwlrus, the true 
 species lieing distinguislied by the title of Cedrns 
 Iiacrifera, an<l tlie pines by that of f'edrus 
 conifera. Of Junipei-us, the &pKev€os "f the 
 fJreeks ami ahhul of tl.c Aiabs. theie are s<'veral 
 ppecies in Syria. Of these J. communis, the com- 
 mon juniper, is a very witiely ctifused species, 
 Iwing found in Europe and Asia, in the ])1aiD3 
 vX northern and in the m<iuntains of soutiiern 
 latitudes; usually finnin/ a low shrtiii. but in 
 Some situations lieing I') fee', and even .'}0 feet 
 Mgh. J. Oxycedrus, the siiarp or prickly, or 
 
 bro\vn-l)erried juniper, closely allied to the com- 
 moil juniper, is an evergreen shrub, from 10 to 12, 
 but sonietimcs even 20 feet high. It was found 
 by M IJout- on Mount L<'banon. J. drn;)aCea 
 or large-fruited juniper is a si>t'< ies wirtch was 
 introduced into ICurope from the East under the 
 Arabic name liabhd. This name, however, is 
 a]iplied rather t<i all the sjiecies than to any one 
 in jiarticiilar. It is a native of Mount Cassius 
 ami is ihonght to lie the .same as the greater 
 juniper found Ry lielon on Mount Tain us, whlc.h 
 he describes as rising to the height of a cy- 
 press. J. Phu'iiicea. or Pha'iiiciaii junijier, is the 
 great jnnijier of Diosciirides, anil is a native of 
 tlie south of Europe, Russia, anil .Syria. It has 
 imbricated lea\es, bears some resemblance to 
 the cypress, and attains a height of from 20 to .'it) 
 feet. J. Lycia, or Lycian juniper, is a dwaif 
 species, and J. Sabina, or the common Savine,, 
 is usually a low spreading shrub, but some- 
 times rises to liie height of 10 or 12 feet. It 
 is a native of the s<iuth of Eurojie and .Syria. 
 Of these species J. Oxycedrus and J. Phoe- 
 nicea are th:- only sjiecies whicli could have 
 been the Berosh of Scripture. Some are of opi- 
 nion that the wood of J. Oxycedrus, rather tiiar. 
 that of the so-called cedar of Lebanon, is the 
 cedar-wood so famed in ancient times for its 
 dmability, and which w{is therefoie emjiloyed in 
 making statues. It is to the wood of certain 
 sjiecies of junijier that tiie name of cedar-winxl 
 is now sjiecially ajijilied. 
 
 Cujiressus, the Kimapurvos of the Greeks and the 
 siiroo of the Arabs, calleil also by them s/ittjrut-ai- 
 hyat, or tree of life, is the Cupressus sempervirens, 
 or the evergreen cyjiress of botanists. Tiiis tree 
 is well known as being tajiering in form, in conee- 
 quence of its branches growing ujiiigiit and close 
 to the stem, and also that in its general apjiear- 
 ance it resembles the Lombarily jioplar, so that the 
 one is often mistaken for the otiier when seen in 
 Oriental drawings. In southern latitudes it usu- 
 ally grows to a height of 50 or GO feet. Its braiicn- 
 lets are closely covered with veiy small imbricated 
 leaves, which remain on the tree f^r 5 or (i years. 
 Du Hamel states that he has observed on the 
 bark of young cypresses small jiaiticles of a sub- 
 stance resembling gum tragacaiith, and that he has 
 seen bees taking great pains to detach these par- 
 ticles, probably to sujiply some of the matter re- 
 quireil for llirming their combs. This cyjiiess is a 
 native of the (iieciaii .-Vrchijielago, jiaiticularly of 
 Candia(the iincienf Crete) and Cyjirus, and also 
 of .\sia Minor, Syria, and Persia. It may be seer 
 on the coast of Palestine, as well a? in the inteiior, 
 as the Mahi;medans jilant it in (heir cemeteries. 
 That it is found on the mountains of Syria is 
 evident from the f.dlowing fiassage, which with 
 others is <]uoted and translated by CeKius, 7/i>ro- 
 bot. i. ji. 133: Cyrillus Atexandr. in Esuicnn, p. 
 S48 — ' Mons est Phoenices Libanus, cedris. cn- 
 pressis ac jiinis dcnsus, et ijisis thoris fiiiticibus.' 
 So Jerome, Comment, in Ilo.i. xiv. fi — ' C'n-biae 
 hie cresciint cedri. Recta? qiioqiieetelecfipabietes, 
 (Khirifera? ciipressi, sen cyjiarissi, pingues oliva;, 
 jjini, buxi,' &c. The cyjiress being so common, 
 weshouhl exj>eet it t<i be fiecniciitly mentioned in 
 Scripturi": but this does not ajijiear to be the case, 
 if we judge by the .\>ith. Vers., as it occurs there 
 only once, in I a xliv. 1 I. > He liewclh him down 
 ceilaisand t.tketh the cypress and I'lC luik." for tlj«
 
 322 
 
 BESHA. 
 
 jHirpose of making idols. The word liere translated 
 •cypress' is tina, wliich there dops not appear to 
 be anj' other authority for identifying with the cy- 
 uress. But the cypress is expressly mentioned \n tlie 
 A])ocrypha (Kcclus. xxiv. 13), where it is descrilied 
 as growing iijwn the Mountains of Hermon; and 
 it has been observed by Mr. Kitto, that if this 
 be understood of tiie great Hermon. it is illus- 
 trated l)y Pococke, who tells us tliat it is the only 
 tree which grows towards the summit of Lebanon. 
 In Ecclus. 1. 10, the high-priest is compared 
 to a ' cypress towering to the clo\ids,' on account 
 of his tall and noble (igure. ' The wood of (he 
 cypress is hard, fragrant, and of a remarkably tine 
 close gj'rain, very durable, and of a beautiful red- 
 dish hue, which Pliny says it never loses ' As to 
 tJie opinion respecting the durability of the cypress- 
 wood entertained Ity the ancients, it may be sufli- 
 rfient to adduce the authority of Pliny, who says 
 ' that the statue of Jupiter, in the Capitol, which 
 was forme.d of cy])ress, had existed above 600 
 years without showing the slightest symptom of 
 decay, and that the doors of the Temple of Diuna 
 at Kpliesus, which were also of cypress, and were 
 400 years old, had tlie appearance of being quite 
 new.' This wood was used for a variety of pur- 
 |)cses, as for wine-presses, poles, rafters, and joists. 
 Horace says, tliat whatever was thought worriiy 
 of being handed down to remote posterity was 
 preserved in cypress or cedar wood : and Virgil 
 refers to it in tiiese lines {Georg. ii. 442), 
 
 ' dant utile lignum 
 
 Navigiis pinos, domibus cedrumque cupressosque.' 
 In all the passages of Scripture, therefore, the 
 cypress will be found to answer completely to the 
 descriptions and uses of the Berosh ; for it is well 
 adapted for building, is not subject to destruction, 
 and was therefore very likely to be employed in 
 the erection of the Temple, and also for its gates 
 and flooring; for the (leeks of ships, and even 
 for musical instruments and lances. J. E. Faber, 
 as quoted by Roseninuller, conjectures that the 
 Hebrew najne Berosh included three difl'erent 
 trees which resemble each other, \\z. the evergreen 
 cypress, the thyine, and the savine. The last, or 
 Junij)erus Sabina. is so like tiie cypress, that the 
 ancients often calleil it by that name, and the 
 moderns have noticed the resemblance, especially 
 as to the leaves. ' Hence, even a-rxxng the Greeks, 
 botli trees l)ore the old Eastern names of Berosh, 
 Berolh, Brutha, or Bmtliy ' (RosenmliUer, Bof. of 
 Bible, Tram. p. 2fi0)— J. F.'R. 
 
 BERYL. [SiioK.^M.] 
 
 BESH.\ (nK^'5;?3) occurs in the singular form 
 in Job XXX i. 40, ' Let thistles grow instead of 
 wiieat, and cockle (besha) instead of liarley ; ' 
 and in the jjlural form in Isaiah v. 2, 'He (Je- 
 hovah) planted it with the choicest vine, and also 
 made a wine-])ress therein ; and he looked that it 
 Aiiould bring foilli grapes, and it brought forth rvild 
 (frapea' (D''C''{<2 beushirn). So also in verse 4 of 
 the same chapter. It is probable that the same 
 plant ii refened to in these two passages ; but dilli- 
 culties have here, as elsewhere, been experienced 
 in ascertaining the precise plant intended. All, 
 however, are agreed that some useless, if not 
 noxious, herb must be understood in both cases. 
 Some kave supjx)sed that it was a plant with 
 offensive odour, as the word implies a bad smell ; 
 ethers, that it was a thorny plant, a bramble, 
 
 BESHA. 
 
 darnel, &c. In addition to tliesft conjec'urai w« 
 may infer, that, if not a general term for weed*, 
 the word denoted a jjlant which sjnung up in 
 cultivated ground. Celsius seeks in Arabic for 
 the name of some noxious ]>lant similar to besha, 
 and lie Hnds it in the bcsh or hish, which lias 
 long been known as one of the most j)owerful 
 of poisons. Tills name seems to iiave been 
 adopted by the Aral)3 from tlie Hindoos, .imong 
 whom the hish is likewise celebrated as a poi.son, 
 and is pointed mit as a pv(Kluct of the Himalayan 
 mountains. Celsius refeis it to the Hebrew 
 verb {J'XD, but it is no donbt derived from 
 the Sanscrit visha, signifying poison; and the 
 plant is the Aconitiim f'crox of Dr. Wallich 
 {PI. Asiat. Bar. i. 2 41) and Royle (Illustr. 
 Himalayan Bot. p. 4/5). Tlie Latin translators 
 of Avicenna consider the bish Xio lix? the Najiellus, 
 or an Aconite, proving that in some cases a con- 
 siderable approximation to conectness was at- 
 tained in ascertaining the kind o\' plants yield- 
 ing drugs which were formerly in use in medi- 
 cine. Biah having thus been a.scertai»eil (o be 
 an Aconite, and to be the same worii as besha, 
 the latter has in consequence l>een thought to 
 m'\\cn.te Aconitttm album, the only species which 
 appears to be found in Syria, it is not anywhere 
 very common, but is most likely to occur on the 
 sides of hills, the situations usually selected as 
 the sites lor vineyards. 
 
 But as we lia\e seen that bish is pobably de- 
 rived from the Sanscrit visha, the correspondence 
 of the Arabic bish with the Hebrew besha is acci- 
 dental, and does not prove them to be even allied. 
 The Aconite, moreover, is not very likely to have 
 sprung up instead of barle.y in a vin(!yard oi 
 Palestine, and still less so in a more southern 
 latitude, to which the passage in ,Iob must refer, 
 the scene of that book being thouglit to have 
 been Idumaea, a part of Arabia Petraea, on the 
 south-east of the tribe of Judah. Hence other jilants 
 have been sought for ; some being in favour of the 
 SjUTreAo? d.ypia of the Greeks and labrusca of the 
 Romans, which is considered to lie the wild variety 
 of Vitis vinifera. Of this Dioscovides ' genera duo 
 fecit : alterius enim uva non matnvescit, sed Horem 
 tantAim ])rofert oh'dfdTjy nominattim ; altera fruc- 
 tum perticit, ex parvis acinis nigiis subastrin- 
 gentibus.' In the neighbourhood of Trijwli, Rau- 
 wolf fbvmd wilil vines, called hi.hr}iscee, on which 
 nothing appeared, but only the flower (oenatithey. 
 
 Others, not satisfied with this determination, 
 have endeavoured to find st)me plant which, re- 
 sembling the vine in some respects, sliould yet b« 
 strongly contrasted with it in its projjerties. Thus, 
 the Hebrew name of the grape being hancb, therp 
 can be no doubt that it is the >ame word as th« 
 Arabic \mab, which also signifies, the grajie. But 
 in Arabia it is rather used generically than sjwy- 
 cilically, as, besides the common grape, there are 
 also anab-al-salib, or ox's grape, ajid anab-al dub^ 
 or wolf-grape. The former name we have found 
 applied in India to fl»e var. indijmn of Solunum 
 niymni, which is a common weed in Europe, 
 and even in India, esjiecially in the neighbour- 
 hood of cultivated ground. This, which some^ 
 what resembles the giape in the form of its berried 
 fruit, is very difl'erent in its jiiojierties, being 
 narcotic and poisonous. Hasselquist came nearly 
 to the same conclusion, for in reference to the pa* 
 sage of Isaiah, Iw »ays, ' I am inclined to Lelievt
 
 BESOR. 
 
 tbat tlie prophet here m<Miis the hoary nightsliade 
 (^Solanu/ii iucanuiH), liecause it is coi(iiiiut) in 
 Egypt and Palestine. ■ a/iJ. the A:':ibiai) name 
 agrees well with it. The Arahs call it aaib-el- 
 dib, i. e. wolf-giajie. The p-ophet could not have 
 found a plant more ojipo.^itc 'o tiie vine tiiari this, 
 tor it gt )ws much in tin- vineyanls, and is very 
 nernicio is to tiiem, wheicCoie they root it out : it 
 likewise resembles a vine hy its siuiihby stalk ' 
 (Hassrilquist, Travels, p. 289). This plant a]^ 
 pears better entitled than the Aconite to be con- 
 trasted with the grape-vine, and it is not un- 
 worthy of notice that either it or (he Solanum. 
 nigrum will suit the (xissage ot" Job etpjallv well. 
 —J. F. R. 
 
 BESOR ("lib? ; Sept. Boo-cJp), a brook men- 
 Honed in I Sam. xxx. 9. Sanutus derives its 
 course from the interior C'armel, near Hebron, and 
 states that it enters the sea near Gaza (Liber 
 Secretorum, p. 2;>"2). It is without doubt the 
 jame that Richardson crossed on ajiproaching 
 Gaza from the south, and which he calls Oa di 
 Gaza (Wady Gaza). The bed was thirty yards 
 wide, and its stream was, early in April, already 
 exhausted, although some stagnant water re- 
 mained. 
 
 BETH (n^3 house) js often found as the 
 first "ilement of propei- names oi places in the 
 
 BETHANY. 
 
 WJt3 
 
 Bible. It is only necessary to observe tl .it, in all 
 such compounds, <is Bethel, &c., tiie latter part of 
 the word mirst l>e considered, accoiding to our 
 Occidental languages, to deijend on tiie former in 
 the lelation of t.\\e (jcniiive ; so tiiat B«.'thel can 
 only mean ' house of God.' The notion o\' lunue 
 is, of course, capable of a wide application, and 
 is used to mean temple, hal)itation, |i!aci-, ac- 
 cording to the sense of tlie word with wliicn it is 
 coinbinetl.— J/ N. 
 
 liKTIIABARA (B7)fla/3opo) or Bkthiiarah. 
 Tills name nwnns plax-e of thcjurd, i. e. of or over 
 the .Jordan ; and is mentioned in John i. 2S, iig 
 the place where John liapfi/.ed. Tlie best manu 
 scrij)t5 and recent editions, however, have BrjOaiia 
 ( Bethany) : the reading Bi}0a/3af)a a|ipears to 
 have arisen from the cotijectuie of Origeii, who 
 in his day found no such place on the Jordan us 
 Bethany, but knew a' town called Bethabara, 
 where John was said to have liajitizcd, and there- 
 fore took the unwarrantable liberty of changing 
 the reading (Orig. 0pp. ii. p. 130, ed. Huel; 
 Kuinoel, Comment, in Jok. i. 28). 
 
 BETHANY(B7/florra, from the Heb. \yn DS, 
 place of dates). 1. Tiie place near the Jordan 
 where John ba})tized, the exact situation of which 
 is unknown. Some cojiies here read Betiialiara, 
 as stated in the preceding article. 2. BKTHA.vy, a 
 
 164. [Bethany.] 
 
 town or village about fifteen furlongs east-south- 
 east from Jenisalem, beyond the Mount of Olives 
 (John xi. IS), so called, probably, from the 
 number of palm-trees that grew around. It was 
 the residence of Lazarus and his sisters Mary 
 and Martha, and Jesus often went out from 
 Jerusalem to IcKlgc there (Matt. xxi. 17; xxvi. 
 6; Mark xi. 1. II, 12; xiv. .3 ; Luke xix. 29 ; 
 xxiv. 60; John xi. 1, IS; xii. 1) The place 
 Btill subsists in a shallow wady on the eastern 
 %\o\ye of the Monr t of Olives. Dr. Roliinson 
 wached "{ethany is tliree-quajters of an hour from 
 
 the Damascus gate of Jenisalcm ; which gives a 
 distance corresjwriding to the fifteen fnrlongs 
 (stadia) of the evangelist. It is a {K)or villau'e of 
 about twenty families. The only marks of an- 
 tiquity are some hewn stones from more ancient 
 buildings, found in the walls of some of tht 
 houses. The monks, indeed, show the house of 
 Mary and Ma-rtha, and of Simon the leper, .-ind 
 also the sejmlchre of Lazarus, all of wh'ch are con 
 stantly mentioned in the narratives of pilgrimi 
 and travellers. The sepulchre is a <leep vault, 
 lilce a C/ellar, excavated in the limestone rock
 
 S24 
 
 BETH-ARBEL. 
 
 in the middle of the villai^e, to wliic'n tlicre is a 
 descent by twenty-six steps. Dr. Robinson (ii. 
 101; alleges tliaf there is not the sliglitest pro- 
 bability of its ever having been the totnb of 
 Lazarus. The form is nut tliat of (be ancient 
 sepulchres, nor does its situation accord with the 
 narrative of tlie New Testament, which implies 
 that the tomb was not in tiie town (John xvi. 31, 
 3S). The present Aiab name of the village is 
 el-Azirezeh, from el-Azir, the Arabic form of 
 LazLirus. 
 
 BETH-ARBEL (^S^-IN n"-?), a place men- 
 tioned only in Hoi. x. 14; and as it seems to be 
 there implied that it was an impregnalde fortress, 
 the pjobability is ^.-.-erigthened of its being the 
 same as the Arbela of Josephus. This was a vil- 
 lage in Galilee, near which were certain fortified 
 caverns. They are first mentioned in connection 
 with the march of Bacoliides into Juda-a, at 
 whicli time they were occupied by many fugitives, 
 and the Syrian general encamped liiere long 
 enongli to subdue them (Aiitiq. xii. 1 1 . 1 ; 1 Mace, 
 ix. 2). At a later period these caverns formed the 
 retreats of banded robbers, who greatly distressed 
 tiie inhabitants tiiroughout tliat (piarler. Jospplms 
 gives a graphic account of the -means takon by 
 Herod to extirpate (iiem. Tiie caverns weie 
 situated in tlie midst of precipitous clilfs, over- 
 rianging a deep valley, with only a sleej) and 
 narrow path leading to the entrance : the attack 
 was therefore exceeding dillicult. Pailies of sol- 
 diers being at length let down in large boxes, 
 suspended by cliains from above, attacked those 
 who defended the entrance, with fire and sword, 
 or dragged them out with long hooks and dashed 
 fehem down the precipice. In this way the place 
 was at length sul)dued (Josepli. Antiq. xiv. 15. 
 4, 5; De Bell. Jud. i. Ifi. 2-1). These same 
 caverns were afterwards fortified by Joseplius 
 himself against the Romans during liis command 
 in GaJilee. In one place he speaks of them as 
 the caverns of Arbela, and in anotlier as the 
 caverns near the lake of Gennesareth (Joseph. 
 Vita, § 37 ; De Bell. Jud. ii. 20. 6). According 
 to the Talmud, Arbela lay between Sepphoris 
 and Tiberias (Lightfoot, Chorog. Cent. c. 85). 
 These indications leave little doubt that Arbela 
 of Galilee, with its fortified caverns, may be iden- 
 tified with the present Kulat ibn Maan and the 
 adjacent ruins now known as Irbid (probably a 
 corruption of Irbil, the proper Arabic form of 
 Arbela). This latter is the site which Pococke 
 (ii. 5S) supposed to be that of Bethsaida, anil 
 where lie found columns and the ruins of a large 
 church,with a sculptured doorcase of white marlde. 
 The best description of tlie neighljouring caves is 
 that of Burckhardt (p. 331), who calculates tliat 
 they might afford refuge to about 6110 men. 
 
 BETH-AVEN, a nickname for the town of 
 Bethel, applied to it after it tiecame the seat of the 
 worsliip of the golden calves [Bethel"]. There 
 was, however, a town of this name not far from 
 Bethel eastward (Josh. vii. 2; 1 Sam. xiii. 5j, 
 the existence of wlrch, perhaps, occasioned the 
 transfpr of the name to Bethel. The Talmudists 
 confound it with Bethel. There was also a desert 
 of the same name (Josh, xviii. 12). 
 
 BETHEL C^K n"'5 ; Sept. -Bai^K), originally 
 Luz (Tl? ; Sept. Aov^d), an ancient town which 
 Euaebius places 12 R. miles north of Jerusalem, on 
 
 BETHEL. 
 
 the right hand of the ro;i.l toShechem. Jacoh ren^'W? 
 here one niglit on his way to Padan-Arani, a;:d 
 commemorated the vision with which he was fa* 
 voured by erecting and ixmringoil upon the stone 
 which had served him for a pillow, and giving to 
 (he place tlie name of Bethel {place or house o\ 
 God), which eventually su-perseded the more an- 
 cient designation of Luz (Gen. xxviii. 11-19). 
 Under tlmtnaineit is mentioned proleptically with 
 reference to tlie earlier f/wic of Aljraham (Gen. Xii. 
 is ; xiii. 3). After his prosperous return, Bpthel 
 became a favourite station with Jacob : here lie 
 built an altar, buried Deborah, received the name 
 of Israel (for the second time), and promises of 
 Idessing; and liereal-;o he accomplished the vow 
 which he had made on his going forth (Gen. xxxv. 
 1-15; com]), xxxii. 2'*, and xxviii. 20-22). It 
 seems not to have been a town in those early 
 times; but at the conquest oi the laud. Bethel is 
 mentioned as a royal city of the Canaanites 
 (Josli. xii. 16). It became a boundary town of 
 Benjamin to.vard Ephraim (Josh, xviii. 22), and 
 was actually conquered i)y the latter tribe from 
 the Canaanites (Judg. i. 22-26). At this place, 
 already consecrated in the time of the patriarchs, 
 the ark of the covenant was, apparently for a 
 long while, deposited [Akk], and probably tlie 
 tabernacle also (Judg. kx. 26; gomp. 1 Sam; x. 
 3). It was also one of the places at which 
 Samuel held in rotation his court of justice 
 (I Sam. vii. 16). After tlie sejiaration of the 
 kingdoms Bethel was included in that of Israel, 
 which seems to show, that although originally in 
 the formal distribution assigned to Benjamin, it 
 had been actually possessed by Ephraim in right 
 of conquest from the Canaanites — which might 
 ha\e been held by thst somewhat unscrupulous 
 tribe to determine the right of jiossession to a 
 ])lace of importance close on their own frontier. 
 Jeroboam made it the southern seat (Dan being 
 the northern) of the worship of the golden calves; 
 and it seems to have been the cliief seat of that 
 worship (1 Kings xii. 21^-33; xiii. 1). The 
 choice of Bethel was probably determined by the 
 consideration that the spot was already sacred in 
 the estimation of the Israelites, not only from 
 patriarchal consecration, but from the more recent 
 presence of the ark ; which might seem to point 
 it out as a proper seat for an establishment de- 
 signed to rival that of Jerusalem. This appro- 
 priation, however, completely desecrated Bethel in 
 llie estimation of the orthodox Jews; and the 
 jirophets name it with abhorrence and contempt — 
 even applying to it, Ijy a sort of jeu de mot, the 
 name of.Bethaven {house of idols) instead ot 
 Bethel (house of God) (Amos v. 5 ; Hos. iv. 15; 
 V. S ; X. 5, 8). Tlie town was taken Irom Jeroboam 
 iiy Abijah, kingof Judah (2 Chron. xiii. 19); but 
 it again reverted to Israel (2 Kings x. 28). 
 After the Israelites were carried away captive by 
 the Assyrians, all traces of this illegal worship 
 were extir]>;ited '-.y Josiah, kingof Judah, who thus 
 fulfilled a prophecy made to Jeroboam 350 years 
 before (2 Kmgs xiii. 1, 2; xxiii. 15-18). Thw 
 place was still in existence after the Captivitj', and 
 was in the possession of the Benjamites (Ezra ii. 
 28 ; Neh. vii. 32). In the time o( the Maccabees 
 Betiiel was fortified by Bacchides for the king oi 
 Syria (Joseph. Antiq. xiii. 1. 13). It is not 
 named in the New Testament ; but it still ex- 
 isted and was taken by Vesiiasiai. (Joseph. D»
 
 BETIIER. 
 
 BETIlESl^A. 
 
 323 
 
 Bell. Jud. iv. 9. 9). It is described by E\isebiuf 
 aiid "Jerome as a small village {Onomast, s. vv. 
 Aggaianil Lnza); and this is the last notice of it 
 as an intiahilod (ilaee. Hfti.el anil its name 
 were believed to have perished until within these 
 few years ; yet it has been ascertained by the 
 Protestant missionaries at Jeiusalem that the 
 name ami a knowlcdj^e of the site still existed 
 among the ]ieoi)le of the land. 'Hie name was 
 indee*! preser\'ed in the form of Beitin — the 
 Arabic termination in for the Hebrew el lieing 
 not an unusual change. Its identity with Bethel 
 had been recognised by the Oriental Christian 
 [)riests, who endeavoured to bring into use the 
 Arabic form Beitil, as being nearer to the original ; 
 but it had not found currency beyond (lie circle 
 of tneir influence. 
 
 The situation of Beitin corr<s])cnds veryexo.ctly 
 with the intimations allorded l)y Eusebius and 
 others; the distance from .lerusalem, 3^ iiours, 
 being equal to the 12 Roman miles assigned in 
 the Onomasticon. Tiie ruins lie muHi the jwint 
 of a low hill, between the heads of two shallow 
 wadys which unite below, arid run oft' into a 
 deep and rugged valley. The spot is shut in by 
 higher land on every side. The ruins are more 
 considerable than those of a 'large village,' as the 
 place was in the time of Jerome ; and it is there- 
 fore likely that, although unnoticed in history, it 
 afterwards revived, and was enlarged. The 
 ruined churches upon the site and beyond the 
 valley evince that it was a place of importance 
 even down to tlie middle ages. Besides these, 
 there yet remain numerous foundations and half- 
 standing walls of houses and other buildings: on 
 tlie highest part are the ruins of a square tower, 
 and in the western valley are the remains of one 
 i>f the largest reservoirs in the country, being 311 
 feet in length by 217 in breaildi. The bottom is 
 now a green grass plat, having in it two living 
 springs of good water. 
 
 BETHER (1D3> The Mountains of Betlier 
 are only mentioned in Cant. ii. 17 ; viii. 11 ; and 
 no place called Bether occurs elsewhere. Tlie 
 word means, properly, dissection. The mountains 
 of Betlier may therefore be inoimiains of dis- 
 junction, of separation, etc., that is, mountains 
 cut uf), divided by ravines, etc. In the Au- 
 thorized Version the same words that are ren- 
 dered ' mountains of Bi'ther' in Cant. ii. 17, 
 are reiidcred 'mountains of sjiices ' in viii. 1-1. 
 It is an objectionable mode of disposing of two 
 different interpretations, to adopt sometimes the 
 one and sometimes the other. Tiie second inter- 
 pretation is reached by considering that the moun- 
 tains derived their name from the growtli of trees, 
 from inrisiuiis (with refeience to the etymology) 
 in which odorous gums distilled. This is after 
 the Sejjt. — opTj jwv a.pufia.Tui' ; which version also 
 gets the e-vanriple of a dilference in rendering by 
 giving oprj KoiKoiuaTdiv, hollow mountains, in the 
 previous passage. As the word is found nowhere 
 vise as a pioper nauie, it is doubtful if it should 
 be so taken in tiie Cantii-lcs. 
 
 BETH ESI )A (Br)06o-5c^-, from Ileb. X"^pri n? 
 house or place of mercy), a pool (Ko\vfi0r,6pa) at 
 the Sheep-gaie of Jerusalem, built round with 
 porches for the acco nmodation of tlie sick who 
 sought benefit from tV • healing virtues of the 
 •rater, and upon one : whom Christ performed 
 
 tlie healing miracle recorded by St. Joi n (v. 2-0). 
 That which is now, and has long been jiointed out 
 as tlie Pool of Uethesda, is a dry basin or leservoir 
 outside the northern wall of tiie enclosure arouruJ 
 the Temple Mount, of which wall its southern 
 side may be said to form a part. The east enj 
 of it is close to the present gate of St. Sleplien. 
 The pool measures 36(1 feet in length, 13(» feel 
 in breadth, and 7.") in «lepth to the Ijottiiin, be- 
 sides the rubbish which ha.s accumulated in it for 
 ages. Although it has been dry for above two 
 centuries, it was once evidently used as a re- 
 servoir, for tiie sides internally have been case»l 
 over with small stones, and these again covered 
 with jilaster; but the woikmanship of these atidi- 
 tions is coarse, and bears no s]iecial marks of 
 antiquity. The west end is built up like the 
 rest, except at the south-west corner, where two 
 lofty arclied vaults extemled westward, side by 
 side, under the houses that now cover tliis part. 
 
 1 65 . [ Pool . if Betliesda .] 
 Dr. Robinson was able to trace the continnatiou 
 of the work in tjiis direction under one of the.se 
 vaults for 100 feet, and it seemed to extend 
 much fiirther. This gives the whole a length ot 
 160 feet, equal to one-half of the whole extent of 
 the sacred enclosure under which it lies : and 
 how much more is unknown. It would seem ag 
 if tiie deep reservoir formerly extended farther 
 westward in thi.s part ; and that these vaults were 
 built up, in and over it, in order to siipjiort the 
 structures above. Dr. Robinson considers it pro- 
 bable that this excavation was anciently ca ried 
 quite through the ridge of Bezetha, along the 
 northern side of Antonia to its N.W. corner, ihug 
 forming the deep trench ivhich separated the 
 fortress from the adjacent hill (liib licfearches, 
 i. 433, 434). The mere appearance of the place, 
 and its position immediately under the wall of 
 the sacred enclosure, strongly support this ronjec- 
 ture, so that we are still left to seek the Pool of 
 Bethesda, if indeed any trace ol it now ren ains. 
 Dr. Robinson himself, without having ai / de- 
 finite conviction on the subject, asks whether the 
 Pool of Bethesda may not in fact be the • Foni 'ain 
 of (he Virgin'? The question was suggested to \u% 
 mind by llieexceeilingly abrupt and irregular jilan 
 of (liat fountain. He remarks — ' We are told 
 that an angel went down at a certain season into 
 the jiool and troubled the water ;' and then wlw 
 soever first stepjied in was made whole 'John 7 
 2-7). There seems to have been no «[iciial m*-
 
 J26 
 
 BETH-HORON. 
 
 BETH -^ EHKM. 
 
 diciiial virt'ic in the water itself, and only he 
 who iirst stejiped in after the tror.ljling was 
 Jiealtd. Does not this tronblinif of tlie water look 
 like tlie irregular ])lan of this fountain? And as 
 'lie Slieej)-gate sertiis to have been situated not 
 far from tlie Temjjle (Neh. iii. 1, 32), and the 
 wall of tlie ancient Temple probably ran along 
 this valley ; may not that gale have been some- 
 where in this part, and tlie Fountain of the 
 Virgin corresjwnd to Bethosda? the same as the 
 ' King's Pool ' of Nehemiah, and the ' Solomon's 
 Pool' of Josephus f (Bibl. Researches^ i. 508). 
 For an account of the Fountain to which these 
 inquiries relate, we must refer to the article on 
 the Fountain, with which that of tlie Virgin b 
 closely connected [Sii.oam, Pooi, oi']. 
 
 BETH-HORON (jilh n*3 ; Sept.Bai9a»pci;'): 
 two places of this name are distinguished in 
 Scripture as the Upjier and Nether Beth-lioron 
 (Josh. xvi. 3, 5 ; xviii. 13 ; 1 Chron. vii. 21). The 
 Nether Betli-horon lay in the N.W. comer of 
 Benjamin ; and between the two ])lace3 was a 
 pass called both tlie ascent and descent of Beth- 
 horon, leading from the region of Gibeon (el-Jib) 
 down to the western plain (Josli. xviii. 13, 14 ; 
 X. 10, II ; 1 Mace. iii. 16, 24). Down this pass 
 the five kings of the Amorites were driven by 
 Joshua rjosh. x. 11). The upper and lower 
 towns were both tortih'ed by Solomon (1 Kings 
 ix. 17; 2 Clnon. viii. 5). At oneof them Nicanor 
 was attacked by Judas Maccabaeus; and it 
 was afterwaids fortified by Bacchides (1 Mace, 
 vii. 39, seg. ; ix. 50 ; Joseph. Antiq.. xii. 10. 5 ; 
 xiii. 1. 3). Cestius Gallus, the Roman pro- 
 consul of Syria, in his march from Csesarea to 
 Jerusalem, after having burned Lydda, ascended 
 the mountain by Beth-horon and encamped near 
 Gibeon (Joseph. De Bell. Jttd. ii. 19. 1). Dr. 
 Robinson collects from these intimations that in 
 ancient times, as at the present day, the great 
 nud of communication and of heavy transport be- 
 tween Jerusalem and the sea-cpast was by the 
 pass of Beth-horon ( Bibl. Bcsearches, iii. 61). 
 
 In the time of Eusebius and Jerome the two 
 Beth-hovons were small villages ; and, according 
 to tliem, the Upper Beth-horon was 12 Roman 
 miles from Jerusalem ; according to .losephus, 
 it was 100 stadia from thence, and 50 stadia I'rom 
 Gibeon. From the time of Jerome ^he place 
 appears to have been unnotIce<l till 1*^01, when 
 Dr. E. D. Clarke recognised it in the present 
 Beit-'Jr {Travels, vol. i. pt. ii. p. 62S) ; after 
 wliicii it appears to have remained unvisited 
 till 1S3S, when the Rev. .1. Paxton, and, a few 
 days after, Dr. RobiiHon, airived i:t the jilace. 
 The Lower Beit-Ur is upon the tojiof aloiv ridge, 
 which is separated by a wady, ornaiiow valley, 
 from the font of the mountain upon which the 
 Upi)er Beit-Ur stands. Both aie now inhabited 
 villages. T!ie lower is very small, but foundations 
 of large. 9+ sues indicate an ancient site — doubtless 
 that of the Nether Beth-horon. The Upper Beit- 
 Ur is likewise small, but also exhibits traces o\' 
 ancient walls and foundations. In tlie steep ascent 
 to it the rock is in .some parts cut away, and the 
 path formed into st^p-', ir.dicating an ancient 
 rija'l. \'m the first offset or step of the ascent are 
 fiiHudations of huge .stones, the remains pevhaps 
 uf a aistle tliat once guarded the pass. 
 
 It is I emarkable that the places are still dis- 
 
 tinguishe<l as Beit-Ur el-Foka (the Up{ er\ ar;. 
 Beif-Ur el-Tahta (the Lower), and there can i>« 
 no question that they represent tlie Upper and 
 Lower Beth-horon. ' In tlie name,' reiiiaiks Yir. 
 Robinson (iii. p. 59), 'wo find ttie rather unusual 
 change from one harsh Hebrew guttural to one 
 still deeper and more tenacious in Arabic ; in all 
 other respects the name, position, .and other cir« 
 cumstances agree.' 
 
 BETH-LEHEM (DH^ n"-?, house or plfwo 
 
 of bread, i. q. Brca>l-town ; now ^nj LIl^^, 
 
 hotise of flesh ; Sept. BTj6\ef/x), a city of 
 Judah (Juiig. xvii. 7), six miles southward from 
 Jerusalem, on the road to Hebron. It was gene- 
 rally called Bethleliem-Judah, to distinguish it 
 from another Bethlehem in Zebuiun (Josh. xix. 
 15; Judg. xii. 10). It is also called Ephratah 
 (the fruitful), and its inhabitants Epliratiles 
 (Gen. xlviii. 7 ; JVIic. v. 2). Bethlehem is chiefly 
 celebrated as the birth-jilace of David and of 
 Christ, and as the scene of the B(>ok of Ruth. 
 It was forlified by Rehoboam (2 Chron. xi. 6) ; 
 but it does not ajjpear to have been a place 
 of much importance ; for Micah, extolling the 
 moral pre-eminence of Bethlehem, says, ' Thou, 
 Bethlehem Ephratah, thovgh thou he little 
 among the thousands of Judali^ &c. (Mic. v. 2). 
 Matthew quotes this as — ' and thou, Bethlehem of 
 Judah, ari not the least of the cities of Judah," 
 &c. (Matt. ii. 6). which has the appearance of a 
 discrepancy. But it is answered that a city 
 may be little, without being the least ; or that 
 the evangelist may have quoted from memory, 
 and hence the slight ditl'erence in expression, while 
 the sense remains the same. 
 
 There never has been any dispute or doubt 
 about the site of Bethlehem, which has always 
 been an inhabited place, and, from its sacred 
 associations, has been visited by an unbroken 
 series of pilgrims and travellers. It is now a 
 large village, beautifully situated on the brow of 
 a high hill, which commands an extensive view 
 of the surrounding mountainous country, and 
 risks in parterres of vineyards, almond-groves 
 and fig plantations, wateied by gentle rivulets 
 that muimur through the terraces ; and is diver- 
 sified by towers and wine-presses. It is a strag- 
 gling village, with one broad and principal street. 
 The houses have not domed roofs like tho.se ot 
 Jeru.salem and Rumla, they are built for the most 
 part of clay and bricks; and every house is pro- 
 vided with an apiary, the beehives of which are 
 constructed of a series of earthen pots, ranged on 
 the tiouse-tups. The inhabitants are said to be 
 30f>0, and were all native Christians at the time 
 of the most recent visits ; for Ibrahim Pasha, find- 
 ing that the Moslem and Cliristian inhabitanlc 
 were always at strife, caused the former to with- 
 d.'-aw, and left the village in quiet possession ol 
 the latter, whose numbers had always gieatly pre* 
 dominated Wildes Narrative, ii. p. 411). The 
 chief trade and manufacture of the inhabitants 
 consist of beads, crosses, and other relics, which 
 are sold at a great profit. Some of the articles, 
 wrought in mother-of-ptarl, are carved with more 
 skill than one would ex])ect to find in that remote 
 quarter ; and the wurkmansliij) in some instan'-.ea 
 would not discredit tlie aitists of Britain. Th 
 people aie said to be remaikable for their fer(K><
 
 BETHLEHEM. 
 
 and ruleiiess, whicli is iiidefd the common cha- 
 racter of the iubuiiitjints of most of the places 
 Accounted haly in the K.u«t. 
 
 At tiie fartlwst ext4vnii1y of the town is the 
 Latitt convent, c(«>necteil willi wliich is Hie 
 Chuj-cfa of the Niilivity. said to have hceii huilt 
 hy tlie empress Heleii;i. It has suilti-cd niiicli 
 /roTO time, but still }»oais manifest traces oi' its 
 , Grecian origin; and is alle<,'ed to he the most 
 cliaste architectural huikling now remaining 
 in Palestine. It is a siKicious and liandsonie 
 hall, coiisistini; of a cential nave amid aisles 
 separated fuxn each oilier hy rows of tall Corin- 
 thian pillais of iji'ey niarlde. As tlieic is no ceil- 
 ing, the lofty roof is ex[K)sed to view, and although 
 composed of t.lie cedars of Lebanon, is still in 
 good preservaJtion, and aiVoids a tine si)eci men of 
 the aivhrtectiMS of tiiat age- Two spiral stair- 
 cases l«A<i to tlie cave called tlwj ' Grottx) of the 
 Nativity,' which is alKHit 20 fwt below the level 
 of the churcii. This cave is lined with Italian 
 marbles, and lighted by numerous lamps. Here 
 die pilgrim is conducted with due solemnity 
 to a star inlaid in the marble, marking tlie exact 
 6])0t where the Saviour was bom, and cone- 
 6f)onding to tliat in tlie firmament occupied by 
 the metf or which intimated that great event ; he 
 is then led to one of the sides, where, in a kind of 
 recess, a little \>e\o\v the level of the rest of the 
 floor, is a block of white marble, hollowed out in 
 the form of a manger, and said to mark the place 
 of the one in wliicii the infant Jesus was laid. 
 His attention is afterwards directed to the ' Se- 
 pulchre of tlie Innocents ;" to the grotto in which 
 St. Jerome passed the greater portion of his life; 
 and to the chapels dedicated to Joseph and other 
 saiwls. There has Ijeen much controversy respect- 
 ing the claims of this grotto to be regarded as the 
 place \fi which our Lord was born. Tradition is in 
 its favour, but facts and jiiob ibilities are against it- 
 It is useless to deny that tliere is much force in a 
 tradition i-egarding a locality (more than it would 
 have in the case of an historical fact , which can 
 fee traioed up to a |)eriod not remote from that 
 of the event commemixated ; and this event was 
 so impoitant as to make the scene of it a point of 
 such unremitting attention, tiiat (he knowle<lge 
 of the spot was not likely tx» lie lost. This view 
 would be greatly stjoigthened if it c-ould be satis- 
 factorily ^woved tliat Adrian, to cast oilium upon 
 the mysteiies of the Christian religion, not only 
 elected statues of Jujiiter and Venus over the 
 holy sepulchre and on CaUaiy, but placed one 
 of Adonis over the sjiot of (he Nativity at Beth- 
 lehem. This {lart of the evidence is examined 
 under another head [Calvary]. Against tradi- 
 tion, whatever may be its value in the present 
 case, we havelo place the utter improbability that 
 a S'xbterranean cavern like this, with a steep 
 descent, should ever have been used as a stalile 
 for cattle, and, what is more, for the stable of a 
 khan or caravanserai, which doubtless the ' inn ' 
 of Luke ii. 7 was. Although tiierefoi-e it is true 
 that cattle are, and always liave been, stabled in 
 caverns in the Kast ; yet <;eitainly not in such 
 caverns as this, which a))]x>ars to h.ave been origin- 
 ally a tomb. Old empty tnmbs often, it is argued, 
 aflord shelter to man and cattle ; bnt such was 
 Uot the case among the Jews, v^ho held themselves 
 ceremonially dedleil by contact witii sepulchres. 
 Bejides, (he < ir<;iimstance of Christ's having been 
 
 BETHPH.\GE. 
 
 sr 
 
 horn ii a cave woiild not have been less remaiit- 
 alile th.ji iiis lieing laid in a manger, and waj 
 inoie likely to have been noticed by the evangelist, 
 if it liad occuireil : and it is al.^o to be observed 
 tliat the present grotto is at some distance from 
 the town, whineas Christ appears tii have been 
 liorn iti tlie town, and whatever may be the case 
 in the ojien co^mtry, it luis never Id'Cn usual in 
 towns to employ cavenis as stables for cattle. To 
 this we may add tiie suspicion wli ch ari.ses from 
 the fact, that tlie local traditions seem to connect 
 with caverns almost every interesting event re- 
 ciM'ded ill Scripture, as if the ancient Jews had 
 been a nation of troglodytes [Caviu,]. Under all 
 these circumstances, jieihans the most solid interest 
 connected witli the so-called ' Cave of the Na- 
 tivity,' is to be found in the long abude in the 
 convent of so eminent a fatiier as the learned 
 Jerome; and in the fact that there most of hia 
 great and useful works were composed. 
 
 On the north-cast side of the town is a deep 
 valley, alleged to be that in which the angels 
 apix'ared to the shepherds announcing the birth 
 of the Saviour (Luke ii. S). In the sjime valley 
 is a fountain, said to lie that for (he water of 
 which David longed, and which tliree of his 
 niighty men procured for him at the haaird of 
 their lives (2 Sam. xxiii. I.)-1S). Dr. Clarke 
 stopjwd and drank of (he delicious water of this 
 fovintain, and from its rorresjxindence with the 
 intimations of the sacred historian and of Jo- 
 sephus, as well as from the jieimanency of natural 
 fountains, he concludes tliat there can be no doubl 
 of its identity. 
 
 There are accounts of Bethlehem in nearly all 
 books of travels in Palestine. The best of modem 
 date are those of Clarke, Wittnian, Richardson, 
 Buckingham, Hardy, Elliot, AVilde, Robinson, 
 Paxton, Olin, Prokesch, Richter, Schubert (see 
 also Raumer's Palustina, pp. 30T-G13). 
 
 BETH-NIMRA (nnp3 H^n ; Sept. BaivOa- 
 rajSpa; or simply Nimka, iTipj ; Sept. Na/ipa), 
 a town in the tribe of Gad (Num. xxxii. 3, 36 ; 
 Josh. xiii. 27), which Eusebius (who calls it Betli- 
 tiahris, Bi]6fal3pis) places five Roman miles north 
 of Livias. This leaves no doubt of its being the 
 same ruined city called Nimrin, south of Szalt, 
 which Burckhardt mentions (Syria, p. 355) as 
 situated riear the point where the Wady Shoeb 
 joins the Jordan. Dr. Robinson understood that 
 there was here a fountain corresponding to ' the 
 waters of Nimra' (Isa. xv. 6 ; Jer. xlviii. 31). 
 
 BETHPHAGE (Bridpayri; Syr. ^,>^ JLaO ; 
 
 Heb. N35 IT'S, house of Jiffs ; conip. Cant. ii. 
 13), a small village, which our Lord, coming 
 from Jericho, appears to have entered before 
 reaching Bethany (Matt. xxi. 1 ; Luke xix. 29) ; 
 it probably, tljerefore, lay near the latter place, 
 a little below it to the east. The site usually 
 assigned to it beyond Bethany in (he same di- 
 rec(ion, and bttween it and the Mount of Olives, 
 cannot be co:-ert, nor does any trace of Beth- 
 phage now exist (Robinson, ii. 103">. The name 
 occurs often in (he Talmud; and (he Jewish 
 glossarists induced Lightfoot {C/wfor/. Ccut. ch. 
 xli.) and Otte {Lcj:. lUibb. ]>. lOl, ,<;<;;.) to regard 
 it as a dis(rict extending from the foot of th« 
 Mount of Olives to the precincts of Jerusalem, 
 and including tlie village of the same name.
 
 ,J^^ 
 
 BETH-REHOB. [Rehob.] 
 
 BETHS \1DA (BrtecraiSd ; Syr. / j.— . ^ 
 
 FisLuig-Toirn), a (own (irf^Ais, John i. 45 ; Kci/UTj, 
 M.iik viii. 23) in Galilee (John xii. 21;, on the 
 wpsfein side of the sea of Tilx-rius, towards the 
 middle, and not far from Capernaum (Mark vi. 
 •15 ; viii. 22;. It was the native place of Peter, 
 Andrew, and Philip, and the frequent residence 
 of Jcsnj. This gives some notion of the neigh- 
 bouiJiood in wliicli it lay; but the precise site is 
 ■jtteily unknown, and the very name has long 
 
 328 BETHS AI DA. BETH-SIIAN. 
 
 trance of the Jordan into tlie lake (De Bell. J%id. 
 ii. 9. 1 ; iii 10. 7). Il was originally only « 
 village, called Bethsaida, but was rebuilt and 
 enlarged by Philij) tlie Tetrarch not long after 
 the birth of Christ, and received the iiante ol 
 Julias in honour of Julia the daughter of Augus- 
 tus (Luke iii. 1 ; Josepii. Antiq xviii. 2. 1). 
 Pliilip seems to have made it his occasional resi- 
 dence ; and liere he died, and was buried in a 
 costly tumh (^Antiq. xviii. 4. G). At the northern 
 enil of the lake of Gennesaveth, the mountains 
 which form the eastern wall of the valley tluough 
 eluded the search of travellers. The last histori- which the Jordan enters the hike throw outaspur or 
 cal notice of it is by Jerome, but he affords no promontory, which extends for some distance south- 
 more inlI)rmation than may be derived from the ward along the river. Tiiis is known by the 
 intmiafions in the New Testament. It i^ true that people on tlie sjx)t by no other name than el Tell 
 Pococke (li. p. 09; finds Bethsaida at Irbid ; Seet- (the hill). On it are some ruins, which were vi- 
 xen at Khan Mlnyeh (Zach's Monath. Corrcsp. sited by the Rev. Kli Smith, and proved to be tl>e 
 xviii 34S); Nau at Mejdel ( r oyaf^u, p. 57S; Qua- most extensive of any ni the nhiin. The place ia 
 resmius, torn. ii. *?t)6), apparently between Khan regarded as a sort of capital Ijy the Aral>s of tlie 
 Minyeh and Mejdel ; and others at Tabighah — valley (the Ghawarineh), although they have lost 
 all dilVerent points on the western siiore of the its ancient name, and now occupy only a fevt 
 lake. But Dr. Robinson expresses his delibe- houses in it as magazines. The ruins cover a large 
 rate persuasion that these identifications can have portion of the Tell, but consist entirely of uu- 
 no better foundation than the impression of the hewn volcanic stones, without any distinct trace 
 moment. He inquired perseveringly among the ofancientarchitecture(Robinson, SiiW./JesearcAe*, 
 natives along the western border of the lake; iii- 308; Winer, Bibl. liealwurt. s. y. ' Beth- 
 but no Moslem knew of any such name, or any saida'). 
 name that coukl be moulded into a resemblance 
 
 to it. The Christians of Nazareth and Tiberias BETH-SHAN (jXi^ n^3, house of rest, or 
 are indeed acquainted with the name, as well as Hest-'f'oioiiSept. Baiflo-ai/), a city belonging to the 
 tiiat of Capernaum, from the New Testament; half-tribe of Manasseh, west of the Jordan, and 
 and they have learned to apply them to different situated in a valley of tliat river, where it is 
 places according to the opinions of their mou.t.ir'c ''sanded westwai-d by a low chain of tlie Gilboa 
 
 teacher.s, or as may best suit their own co.i. eni- 
 ence in answering the inquiries of travellers. It 
 is thus that Dr. Robinson (KW Researches, .u. 
 295) accounts for the fact that (ia\e]]eis have 
 sometim°s heard the names along the lake. When- 
 ever this has not been the consequence of direct 
 leading questions, which an Arab would always 
 answer alliirnatively, tJie names have tloultless 
 oeen heard fiom the monks of Naz.uvtli, or from 
 the Arabs in a greater or less de^nes; dej)endent 
 upon them. 
 
 2. BETHSAID.\. CIn-st fed the 500 ) ' near 
 o a city called Btthsaida' CLuke ix. 10); but 
 If is evident fiom the parallel passares (Matt. 
 xiv. 13; Mark vi. 32-45), that this event took 
 place not in Galilee, but on the eastern side 
 of the lake. This was held to fje one of the 
 greatest difficulties in sacred geography (Cellar. 
 Notit. Orb. il. 536), till the ingenious Reland 
 afforded materials for a satisfactory solution of it, 
 by distinguishing two Bethsaidas ; one on the 
 western, and the other on the north-eastern border 
 cf the lake (Pula-stina, p. 653). Tiie former was 
 undoubtedly ' the city of Andrew and Peter ;' 
 and, although Reland did not himself think that 
 the other Bethsaida is mentioned in the New Tes- 
 tament, it has been shown by later writers that it is 
 in perfect agreement with the sacred text to con- 
 elude that it was the Bethsaida near which Christ 
 
 iiv/untains. It is on the road from Jerusalem to 
 Damascus, and is about two miles from the Jordan. 
 eighteen from tlie southern end of Lake Gcnnesa- 
 retli, and twenty-three from Nazarelh. It also bore 
 thenameof Scytliopolis, jjerhaps because .Scythians 
 had settled there in the tune of Josiah (b.c. 631), 
 in tl eir passage through Palestine tov/ards Egypt 
 (Herod, i. ".iOa : comp. Pliny, Hist. NiU. v. 16, 
 20; Georg. Syucellus, p. 2H ,. This hyjjothesis 
 is supi)oittul by 2 Mace. xii. .id, where mention 
 is m lite of ■ Je.vs who lived among the Scythians 
 (in Bethsliau'); and liy the St-ptuagint version 
 of Juitg. i. 27; BaiOfrdiJ, 5) etrri 2«u6<iv tt6Kis. In 
 Judith iii. 2, the place i.s also called 'XkvOSii/ 
 Tr6\ts, and so like>vise by Jose|)hus and others. 
 Tlie supposition that these were descendants of 
 the Scythians in Palestine, renders more intel- 
 ligiljle Coloss. iii. 11, where the Scythian is 
 named with tlie Jew and Greek; and it also ex- 
 plains why the ancient Ralibins did not consider 
 Scythopolis as a Jewish town, but as one of an 
 unholy people Huvercanip. Observat. ad Joseph. 
 Antiq. V. 1. 22 I. On colics the place is called 
 Scythopolis and Nysa, with ligmes of Bacchu* 
 and the pantiier (Eckhel, jip. 438-440 ; comp. 
 Reland, p. 993, sq.y As Succoth lay somewhere 
 in the vicinity, east of the Jordan, some would 
 derive Scythopolis from Succnliiopolis (Reland, 
 p. 992. sq. ; Gesenius in Burckhardt, jx 10.53, 
 
 fed the five thousand, and also, probably, where German edit.), it is also not improbably sujjposed 
 
 the blind man was restored to sight. This, and 
 not the western Bethsaida (as our English writers 
 persist in stating), was the Bethsaida of Gaulo- 
 •.•lis, afterwards called Julias, which Pliny {Hist. 
 Nai. XV.) places on the eastern side of the lake 
 ■inii of the J' rdan, and \\\ ich Josephus describes 
 ae »ilua*«d in lowe.' Gaulonitis, just above the en- 
 
 to be the same as Beth-Sitta (Judg. vii. 22). 
 
 Josephus does not account Scythopolis as be- 
 longing to Samaria, in which it geographically 
 lay; but to Decapoiis, wliich was chieHy on th« 
 other side of the river, and of which he calls if tb« 
 largest town {iJe Bell. Jiid. iii. 9. 7). 
 
 Altl ough Bethshan was assigned to Manasset
 
 BETH-SIIEMHSH. 
 
 fjiisl). xvii. II), it wii9 not conquered Ly fliat 
 Iribe (Jml;^. i. 11). Tiie l>i«ly of Saul was fas- 
 tened to the wall of Bcllishaii l)y the Philistines 
 (ISam. xxxi. 10); Alexaiuier Janiiffliis had an in- 
 terview here with Cleopatra (Josej)!i.^l/i^i5 xiii. I'.i. 
 3) ; Poii!{>ey marched through it un his way from 
 Uaniascus to Jerusalem (xiv. 3. 1); ir"d in the 
 Jewish war lu.DOl) Jews were slain hy the Scytho- 
 politans (/>t' Bdl.Jtid. ii. 18. 3). In the middle 
 aj,'es the ])lace had become desolate, aliiiongli 
 it still went hy the name of Metropolis Pahestinie 
 tertia (Will. Tyr. j)|i. 749, 1031; Vilriac.us, 
 p. 1119). We liud Liislio[)s of Scythopolis at the 
 councils of Clhalcedoii, J<'rusa!em (a.u. 536), and 
 others. Duriiit^ the Cru.sades it was an arcii- 
 bishopric, which was afterwards transferred to 
 Nazareth (Riiiir»er's Palastina, pp. 147-149). 
 The ancient native name, as well as the town 
 itself, still exists in the Beisan of the jireseiit day. 
 It stiinds on a rising ground somewhat above the 
 valley of the Jordan, or in the valley of Je/.reel 
 where it opens into tiie Jordan valley. It is a 
 poor place, containing not more than sixty or 
 seventy houses. The inhabitants are Moslems, 
 and are described by Richardson and others as a 
 set of inlios])itable and lawless fanatics. The 
 ruins of the ancient city are of considerable ex- 
 tent. It was built along the banks of the rivulet 
 which waters the town and in the valleys formed 
 by its several l)ranches, and must have lieen nearly 
 ihree miles in circumference. The chief remains 
 ar« large heaps of black hewn stones, with many 
 foundations of houses and fragments of a few co- 
 lumns (Burckhardt, p. 243). The principal ob- 
 ject is the theatre, which is quite distinct, but 
 now completely lilled up with weeds; it measmes 
 across the front about ISO feet, and has the singu- 
 larity of ))ossi'Ssing three oval recesses half-way up 
 the building, which are mentioned by Vitruvius 
 IS being constructed to contain the brass soimding- 
 tubes. Few theatres had such an apparatus even 
 in the time of this author, and they are scarcely 
 ever met with now. The other remains are the 
 tombs, which lie to the north-east of the Acropolis 
 with.mt the walls. The sarcophagi still exist in 
 s<5me of them ; triangular niches for lamps have 
 also been observed in them ; and some of the 
 doors continue hanging on the ancient hinges 
 of stone in remaikalile preservation. Two 
 streams run through the ruins of the city, al- 
 most insulating the Acropolis. There is a fine 
 Roman laidge over the one to the south-west of 
 tie AcKjpolis, and beyond it maybe seen the 
 p.ived way which leil to the ancient Ptolemais, 
 II, )w Acie. The Acrojjolis is a high circular 
 hijl, on the to}) of which are traces of the walls 
 V, ich encompassed it (Irbv and Mangles, Tra- 
 veL-, pp. 301-.303). 
 
 BETIl-SHEMESH (K'O^ fl"?, hozcse of the 
 sun, i. q. Sun-town ; Sept. BaiOffajxis), a sacer- 
 dotal city (Josh. xxi. 16; 1 Sam. vi. 15; 1 
 CLron. vi. 59) iu the trilie of Judali, on the 
 (soutli-east) boider of Dan ( Jo.sh. xv. 10), and the 
 . rd of the Piiili.^tini'S (1 Sam. vi. 12), probably 
 In a low-land jilain (2 Kings xiv. 1); and 
 placed by Euscbias ten Roman miles from Eleu- 
 therojiolis, in the diiection of the road to ^>ico- 
 
 Elis. It belonged at an early date to t!ie Phi- 
 tines, and they had again obtained possession 
 ff it iu the time of Ahaz(l Ki» ,iiv. 9; 2 Cliron. 
 
 BETH U LI A. 
 
 329 
 
 xxviii. Ifi). It was to this place that the aik «rM 
 taken b\ the milch klne tVom tin' land of tin Piiili*. 
 tines, and it was here that, acconling to the jiesent 
 text, ' fifty thousand and thiersroie and ten men' 
 were miraculously slain for irieverently exploring 
 the sacred shrine (1 Sam. vi. 19). This number 
 li;i3 occasioned much discussion. If ay [^•ar^ likely 
 that the text has Ix-en corrupted in transcrii*- 
 tion by an erroneous stdutidii if. an arithmetical 
 sign. The Syriac and .\iabic have 5070 instead 
 
 of 50070 (ny instead of 3y), and this statement 
 agiees with 1 Cod. Kemiicoft (comp Gesenius 
 Gesch. der Ilebr. Sprache, p. 174). Even with 
 this reduction, the number, for a provincial town 
 like Beth-Siiemesh, woultl still l>e great. The 
 fact itself has lieen accounted for on natural prin- 
 ciples by some German writers, in a sj^irit at 
 variance with that of Hebrew antiquity, and in 
 which tlie miraculous part of tlie event has been 
 explained away by ungrammatical interpreta- 
 tions. 
 
 At the distance, and in the vicinity indicated 
 by Eusebius and Jerome, a jJace calhd Ain 
 Sliems \vi\s found by Dr. Robinson, and, with 
 great probability, identified with Beth-Shemesh. 
 The name is applied to the ruins of an Aiab vil- 
 lage constructed of ancient materials To the 
 west of the village, ujion and around the plateau of 
 a low swell or mound, are the vestiges of a former 
 extensive city, consisting of many foundations 
 and the remains of ancient walls of hewn stone. 
 W ith respi'ct to the exchange of Beth lor Ain, 
 Dr. Robinson remarks (lii. 19) :— ' The words Beit 
 (Beth) and Ain are .so very common in the Ara- 
 bic names of Palestine, that it can excite no won- 
 der there should be an exchange, even without 
 an obvious reason. In the same mar.ner the an- 
 cient Beth-Shemesh (Heliopolis, of Egypt) is 
 known in Arabian writers as Ain Shems.' The 
 Ir-Shemesh of Joshua (xix. 4) is sujijiosed to be the 
 same as this Beth-Shemesli. 2. There was ano- 
 ther Beth-Shemesh in Naphtali (Judg. i. 33). 
 3. Another in Issach.ir (Josh. xix. 22). 4. And 
 the Egyptian Beth-Shemesh is named in Jer. 
 xliii. 13 ; although usually called On. 
 
 BETHUEL ('pX-in? ; Sept. BaBovriX), wa ol 
 Abraham's brother Nalior, an<l father of Laban 
 and of Rebecca, whom Isaac married (Gen. xxii. 
 22, 23). His name only ocurs incidentally 
 (Gen. xxi v. 5(3) in the account ol 'he transactions 
 which led to that marriage, in whici Laban takes 
 the leading jiart. This has given occasion to a 
 number of uncertain conjectures. Josephus con- 
 cludes that he was then dead ; and that the B^ 
 thuel here mentioned was a younger brotliei, 
 named after the father (Antiq. i. 16. 1). 
 
 BETHULIA (Berv\ova; Heb. n^VmS), a 
 place mentioned only in the Apocryjihal book of 
 Judith (iv. 5 ; vii. 1, 3), and which a]i]>ears to 
 have lain near the plain of Esdraelon on the south, 
 not far from Dothaim, and to iiave guarded one 
 of the passes towards Jeni.salem. Modern eccliv 
 siastical tradition identifies Bethulia with Safed, 
 near the lake of Gennesaretii. Travelleis jirior to 
 the seventeenth century usually give the name of 
 Bethulia to the Frank Mountain in Jiidxa and 
 to the luins at its foot. Raumer has lat-.dy ufl'ered 
 a conjecture in favour of Sanur (Paliist. p. 149). 
 But Dr. Robinson has intimated Uieinapplicabilitf
 
 S30 
 
 BETH-ZUR. 
 
 of all tl)e?e idontlfications (/?(7>;. Researches, ii. 
 »72; iii. i.''v2, 32')), iiml we must be content to 
 nijraril the site of Belliulia as still iiniletoiniitieil. 
 BKTII-ZUR ("1-i:i n'l ; Sept. H-nea-oip), a 
 tt)wn intlie tiilie of Jiidali (Josli. xv. 5^), twenty 
 Roman miles f'lDin Jeinsalem, on tlie lOiiil to 
 Hebron {Ononiast. s. v. ' Betli-ziir '). and conse- 
 cjuently two miles fiom tlie latter city. It was 
 CoitiKeil liv l{eluJ)oam (2 Cliron. xi. 7). Tlie 
 irilialiitauts iissisted in Imilding the walls of Jeru- 
 salem (Nell. iii. 10). Lysias was defeated in 
 the neigiiliou'hond by Jodas Maccaliaeus, who 
 (brlifieil th<^ ], ;ace as a stronjiliold against Idu- 
 tnaea (1 Mact. iv. 29, 01 ; 2 Mace. xi. 5; comp. 
 1 Mace. vi. 7, 20). It was besieged and taken 
 by Aniiociiiis luipator (I Mace. vi. al, W), and 
 (brtified by Bae.cliides (ix. 52), whose garrison 
 defended theniseUes against Jonathan Macca- 
 bsDus (x. 11) ; but it was taken and fortified by 
 bis brotlier Simon (xi. 65, 66 ; xiv. 7, 3'i). 
 Josephus calls Beth-znr the strongest fortress in 
 Judaea (A/itiq. xiii. 5. 6). Its site has not been 
 ascertained. The tia<litional Beth-zur, near Beth- 
 lehem, where the fountain (of St. Pliilip) at which 
 the Ethiopian eunuch was baptized is jiointed out 
 (Cotovic, p. 2i7 ; Pococke, ii. 67; Maundiell, 
 (I. 116), cannot be the real place : for, as we have 
 seen, Eusebius places it much more to the south, 
 and is in this supported by its history, wliich 
 shows that it lay on what was the southern border 
 of the Jordan, in the time of the Maccabees, when 
 the Idumaeans iiad taken possession of the south- 
 ernmost part of the country and made Hebron their 
 chief town. In those times, indeed, Beth-zur, or 
 Betlisaida, appears to have been the corresponding 
 fortress on the Jewisli side of the fountain to that 
 of Hebron on tlie siile of Iilumaea, standing at a 
 sliort distance, and probably over against it, as 
 many similar fortresses are found to do at the 
 present da v. 
 
 BETROTHING. [Marriage.] 
 BETULIA, anointed stones. [Stones.] 
 
 BETZAL (Vyn, in the plural U''h)i2 betzalim) 
 occurs in Nuriiliers xi. 5, where llie Israelites 
 ' murmur for the leeks, and the omous (he/zalim), 
 and the L'ailii-k" of Egypt. Though the ideuti- 
 ficationcif many Bililicat plants is considered un- 
 certain, fheie can be no doubt that Betzal means 
 (lie ccmmon onion, the Allium Cepa of botanists. 
 Tiiis IS proved by its Araliic name, and its early 
 employment as an article of diet in Egypt. 
 In the present day the onion, distinguished from 
 other species of Allium liy its tistular leaves and 
 welling stalks, is well known to be cultivated 
 in all paits of Eiuu]!e and in most parts of 
 Asia. Its na'ive country is not known ; but it 
 is probalile that some part of the Persian region 
 may have (irst produced it in a wild state, as 
 many s^iecies of Allium are found in the moun- 
 tiinous chain which extends from the Caspian to 
 Cashmere, and likewise in the Himalayan Moun- 
 tain?. It is common in Persia, where it is 
 called p'iiz, and has Ijeen long introduced into 
 India, wiiere it receives the same name. By 
 
 the Arabs it is called (J^^aJ basl or bassal, 
 
 nnder w!/icli name it is described in their woiks 
 (HI Materia Medica, in which the description 
 of Kp6u.fXvov given by Dioseorides (ii. 181) is 
 «»Jopted. The Arabic is too similar to the Ile- 
 
 BEZER. 
 
 brew na e to a.iow us to doubt that both wwf 
 originally the same v/ord. 
 
 Thar the onion has long been cultivated in thf 
 south of Europe and in the noitli of Asia, is evident 
 from the dilVereiit kinils enuiiieiated by Theo- 
 phrastns, which, he states, derived their names 
 chieliy t'roni the places where they were reared. 
 Among these, proliably, some other sjjecies may 
 liave been included ; but no doul)t several wew 
 varieties only of the onion. Pliny {Hist. Nat. 
 xix. 6) also enumerates these, as well as others 
 cultivated in Italy, and notices the siiiieistitioii of 
 the Egyptians in regard to them : ' Where, by the 
 way, I cannot overpasse the Ibolish superstition of 
 the /Egyptians, who use to swear by garlick and 
 onions, calling them to witness in taking their 
 ofhes, as if they were no less than some gods' 
 (Holland's transl.). Juvenal (Sat. xv. 9) in like 
 manner ridicules the Egyptians for their supersti- 
 tious veneration of onions, &c. : 
 ' Porrum et csepe nefas violare et frane;cre morsu. 
 O sanctas genfes, quibus lisec nascuntur in horti« 
 Numina! ' 
 
 This, however, must be an exaggerated state- 
 ment, as it is unlikely that the Israelites should 
 have been allowed to regale themselves upon wlial 
 was considered too sacred for, or forbidden, to theil 
 task-masters. It is probable, as suggested by Dr. 
 Harris, that the priests only retrained fiom what 
 was freely jiartaken of by the rest of the people. 
 This may be observed in the present day among 
 the Brahmins of India. It lias also been sup- 
 posed that some particular kind of onion may 
 have been held sacred, from its utility as a medi- 
 cine, as the sea onion, or squill (Scilla maritima}, 
 which grows in abundance on the sea-coa.st in the 
 neighbourhood of Pelusium, whose inhabitants 
 are said liy Lucian to have especially worship[)ed 
 the onion. But it is evident that the Israelites 
 in the desert did not long for this acrid bulb, aa 
 they did for the melons and cucumbers. 
 
 It may, moreover, be remarked, that the onions 
 of warm dry countries grow to a considerable 
 size, and, insteail of being acrid and pungent 
 in taste, are comparatively bland, and mild 
 and nutritious articles of diet. This is (larticu- 
 laily conspicuous in the Portugal onions, which 
 are largely imported into this country. Other 
 celebrated varieties are those of Spain and Tri- 
 poli ; bur Egypt itself is famed for the pro- 
 duction of tine onions, as stated by Hassel* 
 quist : ' Whoever has tasted onlonS in Egypt, 
 must allow that none can be had better in any 
 ]iart of the universe. Here they are sweet; in 
 other countries they are nauseous and strong. Here 
 they are soft; whereas in the northern and other 
 parts they are hard, and their coats are so com- 
 pact, that they are dltficnlt of digestion. Hence 
 they cannot in any place lie eaten with less pre- 
 judice and more satisfaction than m Egypt."--- 
 
 J. F. R. 
 
 BEZEK ( p]? ; Sept. Be^f k), a city ovrt 
 whicli Adonl-h.ezek was king (Judg. i. 4, sq.), 
 and where Saul mustered his army to march 
 to the relief of Jaliesh-GIlead (1 Sam. xi. 8). 
 Eusebius and Jerome mention two tow^ft of tbii 
 name close together, seventeen miles fr*. , Nea- 
 polis in Shechem, on the road to Betlishan. 
 
 BEZER ("1^5 ; Sept. Bo(T6p}, a city beyond 
 tlie Jordan, In the tribe of Reuben, anl one of th«
 
 BIBLE. 
 
 fix citifs of refuge (])eut. ir. 43; Josb. xx. 8). 
 Tlie site is uiikiunvn. 
 
 BKZKTHA. [Jerusalem.] 
 
 BIBLK, ;3»/3>io, lihclli (tlie small boolis), a 
 name supposed to have been first a[>])liei] in tlie 
 fifth century lo ili-note the collective voluuje of tlie 
 lacreil writings. Tlie word occurs in tlie Prologue 
 to Kcclesiasticus, ' the Iaw, the Prophets, and the 
 rest of the hooks ' {^i0\ia), and 2 Tini. iv. 13, 
 'and the Ixwks ' (^il3\la). Before the adoption of 
 this name the more usual teiins in the Christian 
 Church by which the sacred hooks were denomi- 
 nated were, the Scripture or writing (ypcufrl]), the 
 Scriptures {ypa<pai), the sacred writings (ypa<pai 
 iyii..), and the sacred letters (lepa. ypi/j-nara.). 
 Tliese names are thus frequently ajiplied to the 
 sacre<.i b(x)ks of the Old Testament by Josepluis 
 and Philo, as well as by tiio writers of tlie New 
 Testament (2 Pet. i. 21) ; Matt. xxii. 29 ; Rom. 
 i. 2; 2 Tim. iii. 15). Jeriime substitutes for 
 these expn'ssions the term Bibliotkeca Divina (see 
 Hieronymi Opera, ed. Martianay, vol. i. Priileg.), 
 a phrase which this learned father probably bor- 
 rowed from 2 Maccabees, ii. 13, where Nehemiah 
 is said, in ' founding a library " (^ip\io6rii(j)), to 
 have ' gathered togetlier the acts of the kings, and 
 tlie prophets, and of David, and the epistles of the 
 kings concerning the holy gifts.' But althou^li 
 it was usual to denominate the separate books in 
 Greek b)' the term Biblia, which is frequently so 
 applied by Josephus, we fiint linil it simply aj> 
 ]ilied U) the entire .collection by St. Chrysostoni 
 in his Second Homily, ' Tiie Jews liave the boo/iS 
 (/SijSAia), but we have the treasure of the books ; 
 they have the letters (ypa/xfiaTo), but we have both 
 spirit and letter.' And again Iloyn. ix. in Epist. 
 ad Coloss., 'Provide yourselves with books (^ij3- 
 Aio), the medicine of the soul, liut if you desire 
 no other, at least procuie the new (^kcuvt]), the 
 Apostolos, the Acts, the Go;pels.' He also adds 
 to the word ^ijiKla the epithet divine in his Tenth 
 Homily on Genesis: 'Taking before and after 
 meals the divine books" (to fie?o 0t^\ia), or, as we 
 should now express it, the Holy Bible. This 
 name, in the course of time, supeisede<l all others 
 both in the Eastern and Western Church, and is 
 now every wheie the popular apjiellafion. The 
 sacred liooks were denominated by the Jews the 
 tcritiiig (clietib or mikra), a name of the same 
 c'"iracter as that ai)])lied l)y the Mahometans 
 ~i\.,--iwn) to denote their sacred volume. 
 
 The Bible is divided into the Old and New 
 Te-itamf'nt.s, ri TroAoic, Koi t> Kairy] Sia6-nK7). The 
 I ame Old Te.-.tanieiit is applied to the books of 
 Moses by St. l^aul (2 Cor. iii. 14), inasmuch as 
 ':;•- foiiner covenant comprised the whole scheme 
 of the Mosaic revelation, and the histoiy of tliis 
 i.> lontaiiifd in fhtm. This ])liras(', ' liook of the 
 covenant," taken jiriilKihly from Kxod. xxiv. 7 ; 
 1 Mace. i. 57 (/Sj/SAi'ov 5ia6r)Kr]s), was transferred 
 in the course of time by a metonymy to .signify 
 the writngs themselves. The word SiaO-ijKTi, 
 which we now tianslate testament, si^j;iuiies eithei 
 » testament or a covenant, but the translators ot 
 the old Liitin \ersion have by a (iiecism always 
 ♦endered it, even when it was used as a trans- 
 ation of the Ilebiew Berith (covenant), by the 
 word Teslanientnm. Tiie names given to the 
 Old Testament were, the Scriptures (Matt. xxi. 
 42^, Scripture (2 Pet. i. 20), the }Iuly S( ripture* 
 ^Kuin. i. 2^, tlie sacred Itttei-s i2Tim. iii. 15), 
 
 BIRD-CAGES. 
 
 tfl 
 
 the jly bcxiks (Sarihed. xci. 2), the law (Joha 
 xii 34), the law, the pro|>l>et.s, and tl>e p.salma 
 (Luke xxiv. 44), ll»e law and the projihet.s (Matt. 
 V. 17), the law, ti.e prophets, and the oilier books 
 (Prol. Ecclus.), the Ixxiks of tl>e old covenant 
 (iSeh. viii. 8), the binik of the coveiMUit (1 
 Mace. i. 57; 2 Kings xxiii. 2). 
 
 The other books (not in the canon) were called 
 apocryphal, ecclesiastical, and deuterocanouical. 
 The teim New Testament has been in common 
 use since the third ceniuiy, and is employed by 
 Kusebius in the sanre sense in which it is now 
 commonly ajijjlied {Hist Ecclcs. iii. 23). Tertul- 
 lian employs tlie same phrase, and al.so that ol 
 • the Divine Instrument ' in the .same signilicaliuii. 
 l''oi detailed information on subjects connected 
 with BiBLii, see .Scuiftuuk, Hoi.1(. — \V. W. 
 
 BIER. IBuKi.u..] 
 
 BIGTIIAN (in33), an eunncl) in the court 
 of king Ahasuerus, whose conspiracy against that 
 monarch was iVustrated through the disclosures g^ 
 Mordecai (Esth. ii. 21). 
 
 BILDAD (T1^3 ; Sept. BaA5a5),the Slmhite, 
 
 oneof the fiiends of Job, and the secotid of hisoppf 
 nents in the disputation (Job ii. 11 ; viii. 1 ; xviii, 
 1; XXV. I). The Shuah, of which the Septuaginl 
 make? Bihlad the jirince, or jiatriarch (BoASaS & 
 2,avxi<ov Tvpavvos), was probalily the district as- 
 signed to Shuah, the sixth son of Abraham by 
 Keturah, and called by his name. Thi* was 
 doubtless in .Aiabia Petraea, if .Shuah settled in the 
 same quarter as his brothers, of which there can be 
 little doubt ; and to this region we are to refer the 
 town and district to which he gave his name, and 
 in which Bililad was doubtless a person of conse- 
 quence, if not the chief [ShuauJ. Wemy.ss {Job 
 and Ais Times, p. Ill) remarks: — ' Bildad at- 
 tacks the p4X)r siifl'erer with more keenness than 
 Elijiha/, but with less acerbity than Zojihar. He 
 renews the charge which Eliphai had advanced, 
 but with less eloquence and less dfelicacy. His 
 second address is full of imagery, and wiought up 
 to a high jjitch of terror. He is filled with re- 
 sctitnieiit against Job, merely liocause the lattei 
 deli'uds hiinaelf from their criminations ; and he 
 uses provoking and taunting expressions. His de- 
 nunciations are furious and awfid ; yet he is 
 rather elevated than .sublime, and more piissionate 
 than energetic' 
 
 BILHAH (nn^3; Sept. BaAAo), the liand- 
 maid whom the childle,ss iiachel bestov/ed upon 
 her husband Jacob, that through her she might 
 have childien. Bilhah liecanie the nrotlier oJ 
 Dj.ii and Naphtali (Gen. xxx. 1-8). 
 
 BlRD-CA(iES are named in Jer. v. 27 ; Rev. 
 xviii. 2 ; and are ]iethaps inn>lie<l in Job xli. 5 
 uheie ' jilaying with a t'ird " is nxentioued. This 
 just suthees to show that lire aiicieni lsiaeliteske]>t 
 biiils in cages; but we have no furtiier informa- 
 tion on the subject, nor ?aiy allusions to the siu^ 
 
 ^^ 
 
 sng of bin s so kept. The cages were probitbly 
 of Uie Same forms which we still olKHTve in tbt
 
 3-33 
 
 BIRDS. 
 
 ]£as1, and wliich aie shown i-i r!ie annexed en- 
 graving. It is ieinarkiJ)k' thai theie is no a])|jeai- 
 aiice of" hird-cages in any of the donie-itic scenes 
 which aie pjitiayed on tlie niiiial tahlets ol" the 
 Egvplians. 
 
 BIRD-CATCHING. [Fowling. J 
 
 BIRDS may he defined oviparous xertehiated 
 anitnals, organized for fliglit The common 
 name TIE if tsippor is used of small hirds gene- 
 rally, and of the sparrow in parti(;ular; C]'|JJ 'oph, 
 tranislatt'd 'fowl' (Gen. i. 21), projicrly means 
 (Iyer ; X^V «<'■. a l''»<l oi prey ; AET02, an eagle ; 
 in Gen. xv. 11, Joh xxviii. 7, and Isa. xviii. 6, 
 rendeied ' fowls;' in Jer. xii. 9, ' bird;' and in 
 Isa. xlvi. 11, and Ezek xxxix. 4, 'ravenous 
 I)irds.' D^I^IIl barburim denotes fatted gallina- 
 cea ; it occurs only in 1 Kings iv. 23, and is there 
 translated ' fowls,' though it may lie questioned 
 wlietiier domestic fowls are mentioned in any ])art 
 of the Hebrew bible [Cock]. Gesenius applies 
 the word to geese. 
 
 In the Mosaic law birds wei-e distinguished 
 as clean and unclean : the first being allowed for 
 the tal;le, because they iied on grain, seeds, and 
 vegetables; and the second forbidden, l)ecause 
 they subsisted on flesh and carrion. Tlie birds 
 most anciently used in sacrifice were, it seems, 
 turtle-doves and pigeons. In Kitto's Physical 
 Hintory of Palestine there is a more comijlefe 
 notice than exists elsewhere of the actual orni- 
 thology of the Holy Land.— C. H.S. 
 
 BIRDS-NIiSTS. The law in Deut. xxii. 6, 
 7, directs that if one falls in with a bird's-nest 
 with eggs or young, he shall allow the dam to 
 escape, and not take her as well as the nest Tlie 
 reason Maimonides {More NevocJdm) gives for 
 this is, ' The eggs on which the dam is sitting, or 
 the young ones which liave need of her, aie not, in 
 general, jiermitted to be eaten ; and wlien the 
 dam is allowexl to escape, she is not distressed J)y 
 seeing her young one^i carried off. It thus fre- 
 quently hapjjens that all are untouched, liecause 
 tliLat wliich might be taken may not be lawfully 
 eaten.' He adds, ' If the law then be thuscaieful 
 to pi event birds and Iteasts (for he had been al- 
 luding to tlie instances of this humanity of the 
 law) from suflering pain and griefj how much 
 more mankind ! ' 
 
 BIRTH. In Eastern countries child-birth is 
 usually attended with much less pain and difii- 
 culty lh;in in our northern regions; although 
 Oriaitai females are not to be regarded as exempt 
 from the common doom of woman, ' in sorrow 
 shalt thou bring forth children" (Gen. iii. 16). It 
 is however unceitain whether the diflerence arise 
 from the ell'ect of climate or from the circum- 
 stances, attending advanced civilization ; peihaps 
 both causes ojierate, to a certain degiee, in jiro- 
 ducing tlie effect. CI imate must have soniee{\ecX ; 
 but it is observed tliat the difliculty of child-biitk, 
 urwler any climate, incieases with the advance of 
 civilization, and that in any climate the class on 
 which the advanced aindition of society most 
 Ofierates (inds the pangs of ciiild-liirth the most 
 "jevere. Such consideration may prol)ably account 
 for the fact that tlie Hebrew women, after they 
 had long tieen under tlie inlluenceof the Egyptian 
 »:limate, passed through the child-birth {langs 
 *ith mucii more facility than the women of Egypt, 
 whose habits of life were more refined and self-in- 
 dnij/ent (Eaod. i. 19). There w»re, however. 
 
 BIRTH-DAYS. 
 
 alu'ady recognised Hebrew midwi\es while the 
 Israelites weie in Egypt ; and their olMce ap))€ar» 
 to have originated in tlie hai>it of calliug in some 
 matron of exjici ience in such matfeis (o assist in 
 cases of difliculty. A leniaikable circumstance 
 in the tiansaction which has allorded these illus- 
 trations (Exod. i. 16) has been explained undei 
 
 AliNAIlI. 
 
 The child was no sooner born than it was 
 washed in a bath and rubbed with salt (Ezek. 
 xvi. 4) ; it was then ti^^htly swalhed or bandaged 
 to pievent those disloitions to which the tender 
 frame of an infant is so much exposed during the 
 first days of life (Job xxxviii. 9; Ezek. xvi. 4; 
 Luke ii. 7, 11). This custom of bainlaging or 
 swathing the new - born inlant is general in 
 Eastern countries. It was also a matter of much 
 attention with the Greeks antl Romans (see the 
 citations in VVetstein, at Luke ii. 7), and even 
 in our own country was not abandoned till the last 
 century, when the rejieated remonstrances of the 
 physicians seem to have led to its discontinuance. 
 
 It wajs the custom at a very ancient period for 
 the father, while music celebrated tlie event, to 
 clasp the new-born child to his bosom, and by 
 this ceremony he was understood to declare it to 
 be his own (Gen. 1. 23 ; Job. iii. 3; Ps. xxii. 11). 
 This practice was imitated by those wives who 
 adopted the children of their handmaids (Gen. xvi. 
 2; XXX. 3-5). The messenger who brought to 
 the father the first news that a son was born unto 
 him was received with pleasure and rewarded 
 with presents (Job iii. 3; Jer. xx. IT)), as is still 
 the custom in Persia and other Eastern countries. 
 The birth of a daughter was less noticed, the dis- 
 appointment at its not being a son, subduing for 
 tlie time the satisfaction which the birth of any 
 child naturally occasions. 
 
 Among the Israelites, the mother, after the 
 birth (,f ason, continued unclean seven days ; and 
 she remained at home during the thiity-thiee days 
 succeeding the seven of uncleanness, foiming alto- 
 gether forty days of seclusion. Alter the birth of 
 a daughter the numlier of the days of uncle2ui- 
 ness anil seclusion at home was doubled. At the 
 expiration of this jieriod she went ijito the taber- 
 nacle or temple, and presented a yearling lamb, 
 or, if she was jxjor, two tuitle dove; and two 
 young pigeons, as a sacrifice of puiification (Lev. 
 xii. 1-S ; Luke ii. 22) [Chii.duen]. 
 
 BIRTH -DAYS, llie observance of birth- 
 days may be traced to a very ancient date 5 and 
 the iiirth-day of the first-born son seems in paiti- 
 cular to have been celebrated with a degree of 
 festivity proportioned to the joy which the event of 
 his actual biith occasioned (Job i. 4, 13, IS). The 
 birth-days of the Egyptian kings were celebrated 
 with great jiomp as eaily as the time of Joseph 
 (Gen. xl. 20). The^e days weie in Egypt looked 
 upon as holy; no business was done upon them, 
 and all parties indidged in festivities suitable to 
 the occasion. Every Egyptian attached much 
 imjioitance to the day, and even to the hour of 
 his birth; and it is probable that, as in Persia 
 (Herodot. i. 133; Xenopli. Cyrop. i. 3. 9), each 
 inilividual kept his biith-day with great rejoicings, 
 welcoming his fi lends with all the amusements ol 
 society, and a more than usual profusion of deli- 
 cacies of the table (Wilkinson, v. p. 2l!0), In the 
 Bible theie is no instance of bir(h-day celebra- 
 tions among tire Jews themselves. The examplt
 
 BIRTH-RIOIIT. 
 
 of Herod tlip fetr.ucli (Matt. xiv. fi), tlic celeLra- 
 fion (if whose hiitli-ilay (U)sf John t!ie Baptist his 
 .iCe, Ciui si^arcely I'C ies.ii(K-il as such, the family 
 to « .lich he helony nl heiiij,' notorious for its adop- 
 tion of iiealheii cusloms. In fart, the later Jews 
 at least reifarded birth-day celel>rafion9 as juufs of 
 idolatrous worsliin ( Lijj;lifri)ot, Ilor. Ucbr.ndMntt. 
 xiv. 6); and this prohal)ly on account of the idol 
 atrous rites wit!) whicii tliey were olvserved in 
 Honour of those who were re:^arded as tlie patron 
 gods of the day on which ijje j)arty was Iwrn. 
 
 BIRTH-RIGHT (Hnn? ; Sept. it pwr or 6k io). 
 This term denotes the rights or pri\ ileges ijeloug- 
 m^ to the lirst-horn among the Heluews. The 
 jwrticular advantages which these conferred were 
 the following : — 
 
 1. A right to the priesthood. The first-bom 
 Iwcame the priest in virtue of liis priority of 
 descent, jirovided no blemisli or defect attached 
 to him Reuben was the (irst-born of ihe twelve 
 patriarchs, and iherefore the honour of the priest- 
 liooil l)elonged to liis tribe. God, however, trans- 
 ferred it from tlie tribe of Reuben to that of Levi 
 (Num. iii. 12, 13; viii. IS). Hence the lirst- 
 born of the other tribes were redeemed from serv- 
 ing God as priests, Ity a sum not exceeding five 
 shekels. Being jireseiiled liefore the Ijord in the 
 temple, they were redeemed immediaiely after 
 the thirtieth day from tiieir liirth (Num. xviji. 15, 
 16; Luke ii. 22). It is to be observed, that only 
 the (irst-horn who y/ex^ Jit for the priesthood (?'. e. 
 gucii as had no defect, spot, or blemish) were tlius 
 presented to the priest. 
 
 2. The (irst-liorn received a double portion of 
 bis lather's propeity. There is some difliculty in 
 <letermining piecisely wiiat is meant by a doulde 
 portion. Some suj)p;se that half tl.e inheritance 
 was received by I lie elder brother, and that the 
 other half was equally divided among llie re- 
 maining brethren. This is not proiiable. The 
 Rabbins believe that the elder brother received 
 Jwice as much as any of the rest ; and there is 
 no reason to doubt the correctness of this opi- 
 nion. When the first-bom died before his father's 
 property was divided, and left children, the right 
 v>f the fatlier descended to the children, and not to 
 ihe brother next of age. 
 
 3. He succeeded to the official authority pos- 
 fessed by his father. If the latter was a king, the 
 former was regarded as his legitimate successor, 
 unless some unusual event or arrangement inter- 
 fered. 
 
 After the law was given through Moses, the 
 rijht of primogeniture could not l)e transferred 
 ftom the liist-born to a younger cliild at the fa- 
 tiier's option. In tlie patriarchal age, however, 
 it was in the power of the ]iaient thus to convey 
 It from the eldest to another child (Deut. xxi. 
 ^5-17; Gen xxv. 31, 32). 
 
 It is not (liHicult to perceive the reason why the 
 f'.rst-born enjjyed greater privileges titan the rest of 
 ilie childien. The peculiar lionour attaching to 
 'liym is easily accounted for. They are to be viewed 
 j«s havi'.ig reference to the Redeemer, the first-l)orii 
 e«f the Viri^in. Hence in the ejjistle to the liom,»ri.'», 
 vkii. 29, it is written concerning the .Son, ' that 
 ue miglit lie \\\v Jif^t-born among many biethren;' 
 »'id in Co'oss i. IS, 'who is llie l>egiiining, tlie 
 first-born from the dead ; that in all tilings he 
 l.ight have tiie pre-eminence' C*»fe alao H<eb. i. 4, 
 
 BISHOP. 
 
 333 
 
 5, C). As the first horn had a doulilc i<rfion, m 
 tlie Lord Je^ns, a.s Mediator, luis an inlieritance 
 superior to his brethren ; he is exalted to the right 
 hand of the Maje.-ty on high, where he reigiia 
 until all his enemies shall \vi sniidueil. The 
 imiverse is his rigiitful dominion in his media- 
 torial character. Again, lie alone is a true jiriest : 
 lie fulfilled all the funcfioin of liie sacerdotal 
 olfice ; and the Levites, to wliom, under the law, 
 the jiriestliood was transferreil from all the lirst- 
 born of Israel, deri\ed the eflU-acy of tl)eir mi- 
 nistrations from their connection with the great 
 high priest (Jahn's Biblical Ardtaology, o 165). -< 
 
 S. D 
 BISHOP. Tlie active controversy in which tli« 
 subject of episcojwcy has been involved, allliough 
 it has not reconciled conllicting ojiiiiions, lia^i 
 brought out the historical facts in their fnlle.st 
 clearness. The able and candid on ojiposite sides 
 can scarcely lie said to diller as to the facts them- 
 selves ; but they dill'er in their estimate of them. 
 The Apostles originally appointed mi;n to su- 
 perintend the spiritual, and occasionally even the 
 secular wants of the churches (Acts xiv. 23 ; xi. 
 30 ; see also 2 Tim. ii. 2 , who were ordinarily 
 called TTpio fivrepoi, elders, from tlicir age, some- 
 times iTr'iaKOTTOi, overseers (bishojMi, from their 
 ollice. They are also said Trpo'iararTSai, to p7'C' 
 sid ■ (1 Tiiess. v. 12; I Tim. v. 17), never dp^fiv, 
 to 7-u/e, which has far too despitic a sound. In 
 the Epistle to the Hebrews (xiii. 7, 17, 24) 
 they are named ifjovixevoi, leading men (comp. 
 Acts XV. 22,; and, figuratively, vroi^ifVej, shep- 
 herds (Ephes. i/. 11). But that they did not 
 always teach is clear from 1 Tim. v. 17 ; ami 
 the name Elders proves that originally age, experi- 
 ence, and character were their most necessary 
 (jnalilications. They were to l>e married mer> 
 with families (1 Tim. iii. 4). and with converted 
 children (Tit. i. 0). In the beginning there had 
 been no time to train teachers, and teaching was 
 regarded far more in the light of a gift than an 
 office; yet St. Paul places ' ability to teach' among 
 episcopal qualifications (1 Tim. iii. 2 ; Titus i. 9 ; 
 the l^.trer of which jassages should he trans- 
 lated, ' that he may be able iioth to exhort men 
 by sound teaching, and also to refute op]V)seTs). 
 That teachers had obt.iined in St. Paul's day a 
 tixed official position, is manifest from (Jal. vi. 6, 
 and 1 Cor. ix. 14, where he claims for them a 
 right to worldly maintenance : in fact, that the 
 shepherds ordered to 'feed the dock,' and lie its 
 'overseers' (1 Pet. v. 2), were It feed them with 
 knowledge and instruction, will never be dis- 
 jiuled, except to supjiort a hypothesis. Tlie 
 haders also, in Heb. xiii. 7, are described as 
 ' 3j)e;rking unto yon the word of Givl.' Eccle- 
 siastical history joins in jiroving that the two 
 otfices of teaching and superinti jiding were, with 
 few exceptions. coml>ined in tl.e same )>erso7is, as, 
 indeed, the nature of things dictated. 
 
 That during St Paul's lifetime no dilTertTic* 
 betweon elders and bishops yet existed in the con- 
 sciouiiiess of the church, is manifest from the en- 
 tire abst^ncc of distinctive names (.\cts xx, 17-2H; 
 1 Pet. V. 1, 2). The mention of bishops and 
 deacons in Phil. i. 1, and I Tim. iii., witiiout 
 anv notice of eldeis, jiroves that at that time no 
 dillerence of order sulisisted lietneen bisbojis and 
 eiuers. A formal ceremony, it is generally be. 
 lieved, wa< employed in ttj^jiointing I'lders, al>
 
 834 
 
 BISHOP. 
 
 though it does not ai)peai- that as yet any fixed 
 name was a])j)U»j!iial«(I to the idea of oidinatioi*. 
 (Tlie wM-dordaini-d is iiiexciisaldy iritvipolated in 
 the Eagltsli vwsioH of Act i. 22, In Tu, i. 5 the 
 (ireek: vrctrd is KuratTTTtcrrjS, set, or set up ; and in 
 Acts xiv. %i it is ■^e\pa)VMrr)frams-, having elected, 
 uropeily, by a sliuw of bauds ^ thou;,'h, abusively, 
 the term came to in«an simply, having chosen or 
 notniK.3.tc4 (Acts x, 41) ; yet in t Got. viii, 19, 
 it seems to have its g^ituiue democratic sense). 
 In I Cor. xvi. 15 we find the house of Steplianxs 
 to liave volunteered the task of ' ministering to 
 the saints-, " and that this was a ministry of ' tlie 
 word,' is evident from the Aj)ostWs urging the 
 church ' to submit themselves to such,' It >i'ould 
 apjjear tli«i that a foimal investitui-e into tlte 
 office was not as yet regarded «sseMZi(d. Be this 
 fts it iwaj-, »o e«e doubts that an ordination by- 
 laying o«i of hands swni bscanie general or uni- 
 versal. Hands were first laid on not to bestow 
 an wffice. but to solicit a spiritual gift ( I Tim. 
 iv. 14; "2 Tim. i. 6; Acts xiii. 3 ; xiv. 26; xv, 
 40). To tl»e same effect Acts viii. t7 ; xix. 6 ;— 
 passages which explain Heb, vi. 2. On the otiter 
 baud, the abs.ilute silence of tlie Scj-i(itures, even 
 if it were not cojifirmed, as it is, by positive tes- 
 timony, wowW prove that no idea of consecration, 
 as distinct from wdiuatiou, at that time existed 
 at all J and, c^nsequaitly, although individual 
 elders may have really discharged functioets 
 which would afterwards have been called episco- 
 pal, it was not by virtue of a ^cotid ordinatiMi, 
 nor, there fot«, of episcopal rank. 
 
 Tlw Afwstles themselves, it is held by some, 
 wei« tine real bishops of that day, and it is quite 
 evident that tliey performed many episcopal 
 functions, it may well be true, tliat tlie only 
 reason why no bishops (in the modern sense) were 
 then wanting was, because the Apostles wei-e 
 living ; but it cannot be inferred that in any strict 
 sense prelates are co-ordinate in rank icith the 
 Apostles, and can claim to exercise their powers. 
 The labe-r ' bish©p' did not come tbrwai-d as a 
 successor to tJie Apostles, but was develojied out 
 of the p.-esbyfer ; much less can it i»e proved, or 
 alleged with [ilausibility, that the Apostles took 
 any measures for securing substitutes for (liem- 
 selves (in the high character of AjKistles) after 
 tlieir decease. It lias been with i.-iany a favourite 
 notion tliat Tisntrthy and Titus exhibit the epis- 
 copal type eveu during the life of Paul ; but this 
 is anobviousmiscoaceptioii. They were attached 
 to the person cf trie Apostle, and not to any one 
 church. In tlie last Epistle writtesi by him 
 (2 Tim. iv. 9) liC calls Tim<tthy suddenly to 
 Rome, ill words which prove that the latter was 
 uot, at least as yet, bishojj, either of Ephesus or of 
 any otiier churdi. That Timothy was an evan- 
 gelist is distinctly stated (2 Tim. iv, 5), and that 
 iie had received spiritual gifts (i, 6, &c.)4 there 
 is then «o difficulty in accounting for the autho- 
 rity vested in him (I Tim, v. 1; xix. 22), with- 
 out imagining him to have been a bishop; which 
 is in lict dis))ioved even by the same Epistle 
 (1. 3). That Titus, morever, had no local at- 
 taclimeait to Crete, is plain from Titus iii. 13, to 
 say noUiing of the eailier Epistle, 2 Cor. passim. 
 Nor is it true tiiat the episcopal power developed 
 ttself oput of wandering evangelists any more than 
 »ut of the Apostles. 
 
 Oc the other hard it woiM seem that the 
 
 BISHOP. 
 
 bishop hegan to elevate himself above the pre* 
 byter while the Apostle John was yet alive, and 
 in churches to which he is lielieved to have pecu- 
 liarly devoted himself. The meaning of the title 
 angel., in tiie opening chapters of the ApKiilypse, 
 has lieen mystically explained by some; but iti 
 true meaning is clear from the nomenclature oi 
 the Jewish synagogues. In them, we are told, 
 the minister who ordinarily led the prayers of the 
 congregation, besides acting as their chief func- 
 tionary in matters of business, was entitled HvC 
 "113 Vn [Synagogue], a name yhich may be 
 translated literally nuncius ecclcsice, and is here 
 expressed by the Greek «-y7€Aos. Tlie substan- 
 tive n^K/O also (which by analogy would lie 
 rendered ayycXla., as "[N/O is iyyeKos) has the 
 ordinary sei.se of opus, mhiisterium, making it 
 almost certain that the * angels oi tlie churches ' 
 are nothing but a harsh Hebraism for ' ministers 
 of the churches.' V\'e therefoi^ '^ere see a single 
 officer, in tliese rather large Christian communi- 
 ties, elevated into a peculiar prominence, which 
 has i)p«si justly regarded as episcopal. Nor does 
 it signify that the authorship of the Apocalypse 
 is disputed, since its extreme antiquity is beyond 
 a doubt ; we find, therefore, the germ of episco- 
 pacy here planted, as it were, under the eyes of 
 an Apoatle. (Neander, Pfianzmng utid Leitung, 
 ii. 468.) 
 
 Nevertheless, it was still but a germ. It is 
 vain to ask, whether these angels received a second 
 ordination and had been piorwoted from the rank of 
 presbyters, Tliat this was the case is possible, but 
 there is no proof of it; and while some will regard 
 the question as deeply interesting, others will think 
 it unimportant. A second question is, whether the 
 angels were overseeis of the congregation only, 
 or of the presbyters too; and whether the church 
 was formed of many local unions (such as we 
 call parishes), or of one. Perhaps both questions 
 unduly imply that a set of fixed rules was al- 
 ready iii existence. No one who i-eads Paul's 
 own account of the rebuke lie uttered against 
 Peter (Gal. ii,), need doubt that in those days a 
 zealous elder would assume authority over other 
 elders, officially his equals, when he thought they 
 were dishonouring the Gospel; and, a fortiori, 
 he would act thus towards an official inferior 
 even if this had not {ireviously been defined oi 
 understood as his duty. So again, the Christians 
 of Ephesus or Miletus were probably too numer- 
 ous ordinarily to meet in a single assembly, espe- 
 cially before they had large buildings erected for 
 the purjiose; and convenience must have led at a 
 very early period to subordijiate assemblies (such 
 a.s would now be called ' chajiels-of-ease ' to the 
 mother church) ; yet we have no ground for sup- 
 posing that any sharp division of the Church into 
 organic {lortions had yet commenced. 
 
 Episcopalians, Presbyterians, mid Congrega- 
 tionalists agree in one point, viz. that (liecans€ 
 of its utility and general convenience) it is la-^- 
 ful for Christians to take a step for which they 
 have no clear precedent in the Scripture, that of 
 breaking up a churcli, when it becomes of un- 
 wieldy magnitude, into fixed divisions, whether 
 jiarislies, or congregations. Tlie question then 
 arises, whether the organic union is to be still 
 retained at all. To this (1) Congregatior.alista 
 reply in the negative, saying tliat die congrega-
 
 BITHRON. 
 
 BLACK. 
 
 333 
 
 t'lons in drffaent purts of a great city no n><«re 
 ne«'il to b« in oij^aiilc union, than those of two 
 diflfitnl cities; ('2) Piesbyteriiins wotiKl keep 
 lip the uiiioa liy mo.itis of a synod of the elders ; 
 (3) K|)iscopaiian< desire to iiiiife tiie sepaiate 
 clmrches by retainin;; tliem under the supervision 
 or a single liead — the his^))). It seems impos- 
 sible to refer U> the practice of the Apostles as 
 deci<ling in I'avour of an;/ one of these methods; 
 for the case had not yet arisen which could have 
 led to tlie discussion. The city churches iiad 
 not yet l>eeome so lars^e as to make sulidivisiou 
 positively necessary ; and, as a fact, it did not 
 take place. To organize <listant churches into 
 a fixed and formal connection l)y synods of their 
 bishojis, was, of couise, quite a later jinicejs; lint 
 such unions are by no means rejected, even by 
 Congregafionalists, as long as they are used for 
 delilreration and advice, tiot as assemblies for 
 ruling and commanding. The spirit of E])isco- 
 inity depends far less on tlie episcopal form itself, 
 lliati on tlie size and wealth of dioceses, and on 
 the union of liishops into synoils, wiiose decisions 
 are to be authoritative on liie whole church : to 
 Bay nothinu of territorial establishment and the 
 supjKiit of me civil government. It", inider any 
 ecclesiastical foim, either ojipression or disorder 
 should arise, it caiuiot be liefeuded ; but no form 
 is asecuiily against such evils. Our experience 
 may, in these later times possil)ly show us which 
 of these systems is on the wluile prefi rable : but 
 tiie discussion must belong to ecclesiastical his- 
 tory, and would be quite out of place here. — 
 
 F. W. N. 
 BITHRON (2 Sam. ii. 29). This name has 
 the same meaning as Bether. It probably denotes 
 a region of hills and valleys, and not any defi- 
 nite place. 
 
 BITHYNIA (Bidwia), a province of Asia 
 Minor, on the Euxine Sea and the Propontis; 
 bounded on the west by Mysia, on the south and 
 east by Phrygia and Galatia, and on the east by 
 Paphlagonia. The Bithynians were a rude and 
 uncivilized people, Thracians who had colonized 
 this part of Asia, ar)d occupied no towns, but lived 
 in villages (KcofxovoXus, Strabo, p. .")66). That 
 Christian congregations were formed at an early 
 ])eriod in Bithynia, is evident from the Apostle 
 Peter having addressed the first of his Epistles to 
 them (1 Pet. i. 1). The Apostle Paul was at one 
 time inclined to go into Bithynia with his assist- 
 atits Silas and Timothy, ' but the Spirit sufl'ered 
 bim not' (.\cts xvl. 7 ). 
 
 BITTER. BITTERNESS. Bitterness (Exod. 
 i. 11 ; Ruth i. 20 ; Jer. ix. 15) is symbolical of 
 affliction, misery, and servitude. It was for this 
 reason that, in the celebration of the Passover, the 
 servitude of (he Isr;telite.s in Egypt was typically 
 represented by hitter herbs. 
 
 On the daij of bitterness in Amos viii. 10, 
 comp. Tibullus, ii. 4. 11 — 
 
 ' Nunc et amara dies, et noctis amarior umbra est." 
 In Habakk. i. (i the Chaldipans are called ' that 
 bitter and swift nation :' which Schultens illus- 
 trates by remarking that llie root Merer in Araliic 
 (answciing to the Hebrew word tor bitter"^ is 
 usually applied to strength and courage. 
 
 Th-e gall of bitterness (Acts viii. 23) describes 
 K stale of extreme wickedness, highly offensive to 
 Sod, and hurtful to others. 
 
 A root of bifterntsi (Heb. xiii. 15) expresses 
 
 a wicked or scandalous jierson, or any .-lan^ernui 
 sin leading to ajwstacy (\Yemyss'3 Clttvis SymffO- 
 liia, Si C.J. 
 
 BITTKR HERBS (^Onnp ; literally 6tV^er»; 
 Sept. ir^Kf^iSey ; \' u]\:;. lucturu- ai/rcslts). Thert 
 has been nnicli dill'erence of ojiinion respecting 
 the kind of herbs denoted l)y this word. On tliii 
 snbjei;t the reader may consult Carpzov, /-Ipparat. 
 ]). 404. SI], 
 
 It howeven seems very doubtful whether anv 
 paiticular herbs were intended liy so general a 
 term as bitters; it is far moie ])robal)le lliat it. 
 denotes whatever bitter lierlis, obtainable in the 
 place where the Passover wa.s eaten, minlit be fitly 
 used with meat. Tliis seems to be established by 
 the fact that the tiist directions respecting the 
 Passover were given in Egypt, where also tiie 
 first Passover was celeliruted ; and as the esculent 
 vegetables of Egypt are \ ery dilTeient from those 
 of Palestine, it is obviou-i that the iiiller herbs used 
 in the first celebration could scarcely have been 
 the same as those which were afierwaids em- 
 ployed for the same purpose in Canaan. Ac-' 
 coriliiig to the Mishna (I'esuchim, ii. G), and the 
 commentators thereon, theie weie five sorts of 
 bitter heibs, any one or all of which might be u.sed 
 on this occasion Tliere weie — 1. r\'^ir[ chazereth, 
 supposed to be wild Ittluce, whicii the Septuagint 
 
 and V^nlgate make stand for the whole. 2. |'K'?iy 
 'itlshi)i, endives; or, according to some, wild 
 endives. 3. HDOn tliamca, whicli some make 
 the garden endive, others horehound, others tansy, 
 others the green tops of the horse-raddish, while, 
 according to De Pomis, in Zemach David, it is 
 no other tlian a species of thistle (carduiis tnarra- 
 bitimj. 4. ni"'3mn charchabinii, su]iposed to 
 be a kind of nettle. .*). TlO maror. wliich takes 
 its name from its bitterness, and is alleged by the 
 Mishnic commentators to be a species of the most 
 bitter coriander. All these might, accoiding to 
 the Mishna, be taken either fresh or dried ; but 
 not ])ickled, boiled, or cooked in ajiy way. 
 
 BITTERN. [KiPfOD.] 
 
 BITUMEN. [Asi'HAj-TUM.] 
 
 BLaVCK. Although the Orientals do not wear 
 black in mourning, they, as did (he ancient Jews, 
 regard tlie colour as a symbol of allliction, disaster 
 and privation. In fact, the custom of wearing 
 black in mourning is a sort of visible exjiression 
 of what is in tlie East a figure of s))eech. In 
 Scripture blackness is used as symbolical of 
 afllictions occasioned by drought and famine 
 (Job XXX. 30; Jer. xiv. 2; Lain. iv. 8; v. 10). 
 VVhether this be founded on any notion that thcliu« 
 of the complexion was deepened by ])rivalion, tias 
 not been ascertained ; but it has hem remaiktti 
 by Chaidin and othei-s, that in the j'eriodica' 
 mourning of the Persians for Hossein many of 
 those who take jiart in the ceremonies ajijiear 
 with their bodies blackened, in order to express 
 the extremity of thirst and heat whicii Hossein 
 sull'ered, and whicii, as is alleged, wiis so great 
 tiiat he tinned black, and the tongue swelled till 
 it protruded from his mouth. 
 
 In Mai. iii. U we read, 'What ]iniflt is it tlwf 
 we keep his ordinances, antl that we have walked 
 in blackness (Authorized Version ' mournfully ') 
 before the Lord of Hosts;' meaning that they 
 had fasted in sac kcloth and ashes. ' Black 
 occurs aa a svmbol of fear in Joel ii. 6 — 'All
 
 336 
 
 BLAINS. 
 
 f&ces shall gallier blackness,' or darken ^fith ap- 
 prehension ami distress. This use ot" the word 
 may he twiralleled from Virgil, JEn. ix. 719, 
 'Atrumque timurem ; and Ge.orif. iv. 168, 
 ' (^ali(iantem nigra tbrmidiiip liii-,um.' 
 The same expression which Joel uses is employed 
 by Nalium (ii. 10) to denote the extremity of 
 pkiiri aM<l sorrow. 
 
 In connection with tliis suhject it may he 
 remarked that lilaik is studiously avoided in 
 dress hy all Orientals, exceijt in certain gar- 
 ments of hair or wool, wiiich. are naturally of 
 that colour. Bla(;k is also sometimes imposed 
 as a mark of immiliating distinction !)y domi- 
 nant nations upcm subject or tributary tribes, the 
 most familiar instance o'i which is the obligation 
 laid upon the Jews in Turkey of wearing black 
 turbans. 
 
 Bl AINS. The word nyiSyni?, which, in 
 the only jjlaces where it occurs, is in our version 
 ^^.♦lered blains, strictly means eruptions. The 
 roots T\])'2, and JJ^J. which are the cognate forms 
 of the root from ivhicli the word is derived, have 
 the primary sense of ebullience and efflorescence; 
 and the s{)eciHc kind of eruption here intended 
 cannot, on account of the vague term by which it 
 is described, be determined with any accuracy. 
 The Septuagint renders it by (pKvKTiSes, which 
 is also a general term for pustules and vesicles 
 [Diseases]. — J. N. 
 
 BL.-VSPIIKMY C\ Dy' ^i^J ; Sept. )8\ao-. 
 prffila). Tlie Greek word fi\a(r<p-i}ij.iai is generic, 
 denoting verbal abuse proceeding from an evil 
 disiMsitJon. It is equivalent to defamation or 
 slatuler, involving an attempt to lessen the cha- 
 racter of vithers, with the intention of doing them 
 injury. All kinds of abusive language, whether 
 called imprecation, calumny, or reviling, come 
 under the term. 
 
 The English word blasphemy is more restricted 
 in its signification. It refers to God only. In 
 like manner when ^Aaarprjfxia is directed against 
 the Supreme Being, or when Jehovah is the object 
 of it, it is specific. In these circumstances it 
 corresponds to the English blaspliemg. The Greek 
 p\a(r<ptiiJ.ia is employed in reference to the de- 
 famation of men or angels equally with the Deity ; 
 but it is proper to use the term blasphemy only 
 when God is spoken against. Thus the Greek 
 and Engliish words are not coextensive in im- 
 port. 
 
 Our English translators have not adhered to 
 the right use of the term. They employ it with 
 the same latitude as the Greek ; but it is gene- 
 rally easy to perceive, from the connection and 
 subject of a jjassage, whether blasphemy, piojwrly 
 so calkxl, be me;int, or only defamation. It 
 would ceit<iirily have been better to have em- 
 ployed detraction or calumny rather than blas- 
 phemy where man is the object; reserving the 
 latter for that peculiarly awful slander which is 
 dirticted against the ever-blessed God. 
 
 BlaspAe/ny signifies a false, irrevei-ent, inju- 
 -:ous use of Gods names, attributes, words, and 
 works. Whenever men intentionally and directly 
 attack the perfections of Jehovah, and thus lessen 
 tlie reveience which others entertain for him, they 
 »re blaspkenurs. If the abusive language pro- 
 ceed front igno-ance, or if it be dishonouring to 
 the majisiy of Heaven only in the consequences 
 
 BLASPHEMY. 
 
 deduced from it by others, blasphemy has ne 
 existence. It is wilfirl calumny directed againsl 
 the name or providence of God that alotie const> 
 tutes the crime denoted by the term. 
 
 Examples of the general acceptation of fiXaxr- 
 (pri/xia in the New Testament are ij.JTimon, wher« 
 the objects of it are men, angels, or the devil, 
 as in Acts xiii. 45; xviii. 6; Jude 9. The re- 
 stricted sense is found hi such passages as Luke 
 V. 21 ; John x. 'o6. 
 
 By the Mosaic law blasphetny was punished 
 with death (Lev. xxiv. 10-16); anc' '.ne laws of 
 some countries still visit it with the same punish- 
 ment. Fines, imprisonment, and various cor|X)ral 
 inflictions are annexed to the crime by the laws 
 of Great Britain. It is matter, however, of sincere 
 satisfaction, that there are very few instances in 
 which these enactments require to be enforced. 
 
 Much has been saiil and written respecting the 
 blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, usually but 
 improperly denominated the unpardovMble sir, 
 against the Holy Ghost. Some refer it to con- 
 tinued opposition Ui the Gospel, i. e. obstinate 
 impenitence or final unbelief. In this view it is 
 unj)ardonable, not because the blood of Christ is 
 unable to cleanse from such a sin, nor because 
 there is anything in its own nature which separates 
 it from all other sins and places it lieyond for- 
 giveness, but because, as long as man continues to 
 disbelieve, he voluntarily shuts himself out from 
 the forgiving mercy of God. By not receiving 
 the Gospel, he refuses jmrdon. In the same 
 maimer, every sin might be styled unpardon- 
 able, as long as an individual continues to indulge 
 in it. 
 
 But we object to this opiii'on, because it gene- 
 ralizes the nature of the sin in question. On the 
 contrary, the Scripture account narrows it to a 
 ])articular sin of a special kind, discountenancing 
 the idea that it is of frequent occurrence and 
 marked hy no circumstances of unwonted aggra- 
 vation. Besides, all the notices which we have 
 refer it not so much to a state of mind, as to tlie 
 outward manifestation of a singularly malignant 
 disposition by the utterance of the lips. 
 
 The occasion on which Christ introduced hig 
 mention of it (Matt. xii. 31, &c. ; Mark iii. 28, 
 ^c). the subsequent context, and, above all, the 
 words of Mark iii. 30 (' because they aaid, He 
 hath an unclean spirit ') indicate, with tolerable 
 ])lainness, that the sin in quesfioii consisted in at- 
 tributing tlie miracles wrought by Christ, or his 
 apostles in His name, to the agency of Satan. 
 If was by the power of the Holy Ghost, given to 
 the Redeemer without measure, that he cast out 
 devils; and whoever maligned the Saviour, by 
 aflirming that an unclean spirit actuates and 
 enabled him to ex\K\ other spirits, maligned ie 
 Holy (ihost. 
 
 There is no connection between the description 
 given in the Epistle to the Hebrews, vi. 4-6, and 
 this unpardonable blasiiherny. The passages in 
 the Gospels which sjjeak of the latter are not ])a- 
 rallel with that in the Epistle to the Hebrews- 
 there is a marked difference lietwet'n the states of 
 mind and their manifestations as described in 
 both. The sins ought not to he identified; they 
 are altogether dissimilar. 
 
 It is diflicult to discover the 'sin unto death,' 
 noticed by the apostle John (1 John v. Ifi), al- 
 though it has Ix^en generally thoui^ht to cuincidt
 
 lifASTUS. 
 
 miih the blasphemy against tlie Holy Spirit ; but 
 thp language of Jolni does not allbid data for 
 pronouncing tliem one and tiie same The first 
 three gospels alone descrilie the blasphemy which 
 sliall not he firgiven : from it the ' sin unto 
 death ' stands apart (See LUcke's Commcntar 
 i/ber die Brirfe cles Ev'iiii/e/istcn Jo/uitmes, 
 Zweytc Aaflage, jip. 305-317 ; Cainplioirs JVcli- 
 minnry Dtsscrtatious to the Gospch, Dissertat. ix. 
 part ii. ; ()lshausen's Commentai; Dritte Aullage, 
 pp. 3()r.-7\-S. 1). 
 
 BLASTUS (B\di7Tos\ a man who was cubi- 
 cularucs to king Herod Agrippa, or who had the 
 diarge of his hed-chainber (Acts xii. 20). Such 
 persons liad usually great inlluence with their 
 masters, and hence the importance attached to 
 Blastus's favouring the peace willi Tyre and 
 Si- Ion. 
 
 BLEimSHES. There were various kinds of 
 blemishes, i. e. imperfections or deformities, wliich 
 excluded men from the priesthood and animals 
 fiom being oflereil in sacritice. These blemishes 
 are described in Lev. xxi. 17-23 ; xxii. 19-25 ; 
 Deut. XV. 21. We leain from the Mishna (Ze- 
 bachrm, xii. 1 ; Becoroth. vii. I), that temporary 
 blemishes excluded !i man frum the priesthood 
 only as long as those blemishes continued. Tlie 
 rule concerning anitnals was extended to im- 
 perfections of the inward ])arts : thus if an animal, 
 free from outward blemish, was found, al'ter being 
 slain, internally defective, it was not offered in 
 3-:icrilice. The natiiral feeling that only that 
 which was in a ])erfect condition was fit for sacred 
 purposes, or vvas a becoming oft'ering to tlie 
 gods, ju'oduced siaiilar rules concerning blemishes 
 among the heathen nations (Cunf Pompon. Laet. 
 De Sacerdot. cap. 6 ; Herodot. ii. 38; Iliad, i. 
 GG ; Servius ad Virg. .■En. ii. 4). 
 
 BI.ESSIXG. The terms • blessing "and 'to 
 bless' occur very often in the Scriptures, and in 
 apj'lications too obvious to require explanation oi 
 comment. Tiie patriarchal blessin>^s of sons form 
 the exception, these being, in fact, jirophecies 
 rather tlian blessings, or blessings only in so far 
 as they f^r the most part involved the invocation 
 Uid the promise of good things to come upon the 
 parties concerned. It has been thouglit by many, 
 in all nations, that the departing soul has unusual 
 keenness of perception with respect to the jja^t 
 and the future, and in a particular mannei 
 receives strong inspirations of things to come. 
 How far this may l)e generally true no one can 
 with certainty atlirm or deny. But that a faculty 
 »f this sort existed in the leading members of the 
 chosc) family of Abraham is beyond all question. 
 The most renuukaljle instances are those of Isaac 
 ' blessing' Jacob and l<"sau (Gen. xxvii.); of Jacob 
 'blessing' iiis twelve .sons (Gen. xlix.j; and of 
 Moses ' blessing' the twelve trilies (Deut. xxxiii.). 
 On the first of these transactions Professor George 
 Bus!) remarks — ' It cannot be doubted that from 
 sucii a father as Isaac a common blessing was to 
 be expected on all his children; but in this 
 faittily there was a ])eculiar blessing jjeitaining to 
 the tiist-born — a solemn, extraordinary, jirophe- 
 lical benediction, entailing the covenant blessing 
 tt Al)rahani, with all the ])romises temporal and 
 »piritual belonging to it, r.nd by which his poste- 
 rity were to be distinguished as God's peculiar 
 people' (Notes on Genesis^. This was the blcss- 
 inff which Is:iac intended to bestow upon Iiis 
 
 BLINDNESS. 
 
 {37 
 
 firstborn Esau, but which was sccureil (or 
 Jacob. 
 
 With regard to (he blessing bestowed by Jacob 
 upon his twelve sons, the same author jireliiccs his 
 valual>le commentary tlien-on with these remarks 
 — ' 1. That the blessings or announcenuiits havp 
 resjiect mainly to the posterity and rwt to Oir 
 persons (»f the twelve sons of Jacol); 2. That 
 consequently, the materials of a just interpreta- 
 tion are to be sought in the sid)-;equent history of 
 these tribes. It is only from tiie documents fur- 
 nished in the sacred record that the leading cha- 
 racteristic traits and the most im]X)rtant events 
 related of each tribe can be (Jetermined; 3. That 
 the fulfilment of these blessings is to be traced not 
 in any one event or in any single period of lime, 
 but in a continuous and progiessive series of 
 accomplishments, reaching down to the latest era 
 of the Jewish polity; 4. That the peculiar ])hra- 
 seology in which the blessings are couched has 
 in most cases a verbal allusion to the names 
 bestou-ed upon the twelve ])hylarchs, or princes ol 
 tribes— a circumstance not, indeed, ob\ious to the 
 English reader, but jialjiable to one who consult* 
 the original.' Most of these latter observations 
 ajiply equally to the blessing pronounced f)y 
 Moses, wliich is in fact a magnificent jmiphetic 
 {Xjem, cliaracterized by the finest attributes of the 
 class of Hebrew poetry to whicli it belongs. 
 
 BLESSING, VALLEY OF (nsnil \)^V ^ 
 Sept. KoiAo's EvKoylas). a. translation of the name 
 Valley of Berachah (benediction), wliich was 
 borne by the valley in which Jehoshaphat cele- 
 brated the miraculous overthrow of the Moabitcs 
 and Ammonites. It was from this circumstance 
 it derived its name ; and from the indications in 
 the text, it must have been in the trilie of Jiidah, 
 near the Dead Sea and Engedi, and in the neigh- 
 bourhood ol' Tekoa (2 Cliron. xx. 23-26). 
 
 BLINDING. [Punishments.] 
 
 BLINDNESS. The frequent occurrence of 
 blindness in the East has aUvays excited the asto- 
 nisliment of travellers. Voliiey says that, out of 
 a hundred persons in Cairo, he has met tuenty 
 quite blind, (en wanting one eye, and twenty 
 others having tlieir eyes red, purulent, or lile- 
 mished f^Travels in Erjypt, i. 221). This is )irin- 
 cipally owing to the Egyjitian oplifhalniia, wliich 
 is endemic in that country and on the coast of 
 Syria. This disease commences with such a vio- 
 lent inflammation of the conjunctiva, that, in a 
 few hours, the whole of tliat membrane, which lines 
 the anterior surface of the eye and the interna' 
 surface of the eyelids, is covered with red fleshy 
 elevations, resembling granulations, and secretini^ 
 a purulent discharge. Tlie inllanimation spreads 
 rapidly over tlie eyeball ; the delicate inlenial 
 tissues are destroyed and converted into pus ; the 
 outer coats ulcerate through ; and the whole con- 
 tents of the eye are evacuated. In its acute and 
 most virulent form, the disease runs its course in 
 3-7 (lays ; otherwi.se it may continue for as many 
 weeks or months. It is to be asciibed to thoso 
 [H'culiar conditions of the atmosphere wliicli are 
 termed miasmatic, of which, however, nothing is 
 known, except that they exert a specific influenoe 
 on the liody, dill'ercnt from the ordinary effects <A 
 cold and damp. Tiie varic ty of causes assigned 
 by travellers for this disease, such as the siu- 
 ptaision of line dust and saline pirticles in Uhi
 
 ais8 
 
 BLOOD. 
 
 atmosphere, the custom so prcvalei»t amongst the 
 inhaliitaiits of all Eastern countries of sleeping on 
 tlj" roofs of tlie liouses, southerly winds, bud diet, 
 Bhavmg tlie head, &c., can only be regarded as 
 secondary or occasional causes ; and amongst 
 these bail diet, great fatigue, and ex(x)sure to the 
 night dews are tlie most impoitant. The Egyptian 
 oplitlialmia is contagious; but it is not often com- 
 yiuuicated from one individual to another. It is 
 not cunlined to the East, but apjjeara here and 
 tiiere throughout Europe; and during the last war, 
 probably on account of the practice of bivouacking 
 ill the oj)en air, and the gieat hardships to which 
 tlie troops were often exposeil, it was a tireadful 
 scourge to most of the Eu)0])ean armies, more 
 j>articulaily to the Prussians during tlie campaigns 
 uf 181u and 1814, althougii thai army had never 
 .eft Europe (Jungkens Augeiikrank. p. 336). 
 Tiie French and En>;lisli suft'ered greatly from it 
 wliile they were \i\ Egyjrt, and subsequently. 
 
 Small-pox is another great cause of blindness 
 In the East (V^jlney, I. c). 
 
 In the New Testament, blind mendicants are 
 irpquently mentioned (Matt. ix. 27; xii. 22; xx. 
 30; xxi. 1-i; John v. 3). The blindness of Bar 
 Jesus (Acts xiii. 6) was miraculously produced, 
 and of its nature we knovr notliing. Winer (s. v. 
 BUndlieif) infers that it was occasioned by Sj>eck9 
 0)1 tiie corne:!, which weie curable, because the 
 same temi, dxAvj, is made use of by Hi])pocrates 
 (UpoppriTiKSf, ii. 215, ed. Kiihn), wlio says that 
 a.X\ves will disapjiear, provided no wound has 
 been infilcted. Before sucii an inference can be 
 .'irawn, we must be sure that the writers of the 
 Ke-v Testament were not only acquainted with 
 the v/ritings of Hippocrates, but were alse accus- 
 tomed to a strict medical terminology. The hazi- 
 •less implied by the expression axAi'x may refer 
 to tlie se)isat<oti of the blind person, or to the 
 uppearaiwe of the eye, and, in both cases, the 
 Ciiuse of the haziness may have been referrible to 
 any of* the other transparent media, as well as to 
 tlie cornea. Tobifs blindness (Tobit ii. 10) was 
 attributed to sparrows' dung having fallen into 
 his eyes, if the story be considered true (which 
 we are by no means required to believe), his 
 cure must be regarded as altogether mira- 
 culous. Though the gall of a fish was an 
 (.Id remedy for diseases of the eyes (Plin. 
 Hist. Nat. xxxii. 24), and has been frequently 
 used in modern times (Richter, Anfancjsgr. d. 
 Wundarznei/c. in. p. 130), it cannot be supposed to 
 liave had any medicinal effect in Tobit's case ; 
 for not only was the cure instantaneous, but the 
 B^iecks which impeded vision were seen to esca{)e 
 from the corners of his eyes; which plainly shows 
 that the whole process, if not the disease itself, 
 was of a kind which does not fall under tlie pro- 
 vince of science [Medicine]. Examples of 
 Mindncss from uld age occur in Gen. xxvii. 1 ; 
 I Kings xiv. 4 ; 1 Sam. iv. 15. The Syrian army 
 that came to apprehend Elisha was suddenly 
 smitten with Ijlindness in a miraculous manner 
 (2 Kings vi. 1*^); and so also was St. Paul (Acts 
 IX. 9). The Mosaic law has not neglecteii to 
 #nculcate liumane feelings towards the Idind 
 (Lev. xix. 14: Deut. xxvii. IS). Blindness is 
 Kinietimes threatened in the Old Te.-lament as a 
 timilshiuerit for disobedience (Deut. xwiii. 28; 
 Lev. xxvi. IG; Zeph. i. 17).— \V. A. N. 
 
 3L00D. There are ivvo respects in which the 
 
 BLOOD, 
 
 ordinances of tht Old and New Testanrwnts con- 
 cerning blood ileserve notice here — the iirohibitlon 
 of its use as an article of food, and the appoint- 
 ment and significance of its use in tlie ritual ol 
 sacrifice ; both of which appear to rest on a com- 
 mon ground. 
 
 In Gen. ix. 4, where the use of animal food ia 
 allowed, it is first absolutely foibidden to eat 
 'flesh with its soul, its blood;' whicii exjiression, 
 were it otherwise obscure, is explained by the mode 
 in whicli the same terms are employed in Deuf, 
 xii. 23. In the Mosaic law the prohibition is re- 
 peated with frequency and emphasis ; although it 
 is generally introduced in C(jnnection with sacri- 
 fices, as in Lev. iii. 7 ; vii. 26 (in both which 
 places blood is coujded in the ])roliibltion witli 
 the fat of the victims); xvii. lU-14; xix. 2; 
 Deut. xii. 16-23; xv. 23. In cases where the 
 prohibition is introduced in connection with the 
 lawl'ul and unlawful articles of diet, the reason 
 which is generally assigned in the text is, thai 
 'the blood is the soul,' and it is ordered tliat it be 
 poured on tiie ground like water. But whore it 
 is introduced in reference to the jiortions of the 
 victim which were to be offered to the Lord, then 
 the text, in atldition to tlie former reason, insists 
 that 'the blood expiates by the soul" (Lev. xvii. 
 11, 12).* This strict injunction not only applied 
 to the Israelites, but even to tlie strangers residing 
 among them. Tiie penalty assigned to its trans- 
 gression was the Ijeing ' cut otl' from the people ;' 
 by which the punishment of death apjiears to be 
 intended (cf. Heb. x. 28), although it is difficult 
 to ascertain whetlier it was inflicted by the sword 
 or by stoning. It is observed by Michaelis (Mos 
 Recht. iv. 45) that the blood of Jishes does not 
 appear to be interdicted. Tlie words in Lev. 
 vii. 26 only expressly mentiuii that of birds and 
 ca*fle. 'This accords, however, with the reasons 
 assigned for the proliibition of blood, so far iu 
 fishes could not be ollered to tlie Lord; although 
 they formed a significant oH'erIng in heathen re- 
 ligions. To this is to be added, that'the Apostles 
 and elders, assembled in council at Jeru.salem, 
 when desirous of settling the extent to wdiioh the 
 ceremonial observances were binding upon tiie 
 converts to Christianity, renewed the injunction 
 to abstain from blood, and coupled it with things 
 ofl'ered to idols (Acts xv. 29). It is perhaps 
 wortliy of notice here, that Mohammed, whikj 
 professing to abrogate some of the dietary restric- 
 tions of the Jewish law (whicli he asserts were ini- 
 jnsed on account of the sins of the Jews, Sura iv. 
 15S), still enforces, among others, abstinence from 
 blood and from things ofl'eied to idols {Qurdn^ 
 Sur. v. 4, vi. 146, ed. Flugel). 
 
 In direct opposition to this emphatic prohibition 
 of bloiid in the Mosaic law, the customs of unci 
 vilized heathens sanctioned tlie cutting of slicea 
 from the living animal, and the eating ol' the IW.i 
 while quivering with life and dripping with blood. 
 Even Sauls army coimnitted this barbarity, as we 
 
 * We can only for brevity refer the reader to 
 Bilhr's Si/mboliA, ii. 207, for the philological rea- 
 sons for this rendering. He there shows that 
 t'Dj2, which is geneially rtndeied as the mer« 
 object of the \erl), mu t, insteatl, be tlie instru- 
 ment ; so that the sense is, in that the soul ig in 
 the blood, therefore the blood atones : or, the bloua 
 atones by means of the soul, Us soul-
 
 BLOOD AND WATER. 
 
 Tead ill I Sam. xiv. 32; and tin' pinplu't also lays 
 it to the cliaif^e of tlio .lews in Kzek. xxxiii. 25.* 
 Tills practice, accoidin;,' to linice s testimony, 
 exists at jnesent anion^ the AWy.ssiniaJU. Moie- 
 yver, pai,'an religions, and tliat of the Pliccnicians 
 among tiie re.st, appointed tlie eating and tirinking 
 of blood, mixed wilii wine, as a rite ot" idolatrons 
 worsiiij), aiid es|iecidlly in the ceremonial ol' swear- 
 ing. To this tlie passage in Ps. xvi. 4 ap^x'ars to 
 *llu(le (cf. J. D. Michaelis, Crillsch. ColU-y. 
 p. 108. where several testimonies on this subject 
 ure aillected). 
 
 Tiie appointment and signiticance of the use of 
 blood in the ritual of sacrifice l»^longs indeeil to 
 tills iieadj but their further notice will be more 
 api)roi)riately pursued in the art. Sackikice. — 
 
 J. N 
 
 BLOOD AND WATER (John xix. 31) are 
 said to have issued from our Lord's side when 
 the soldier pierced him on the cross. Tlie only 
 natural explanation tliat can be offered of the fact 
 is to supjiose tliat some ell'usion had taken place 
 in the cavity of the chest, and that the spear 
 penetrated below tiie level of tlie Huid. Suj)- 
 posing this to have happened, and the wound to 
 have been inflicted siiortly alter death, then, in 
 addition to the water, blood would also have 
 trickled down, or, at any rate, have made its ap- 
 pearance at the mouth of the wound, even though 
 none of the large vessels had been wounded. It 
 is not necessary to supjvise that tije pericardium 
 was pierced ; for, if elfusion had taken place 
 there, it might also have talyen place in the ca- 
 vities of the pleura; and, during health, neither 
 Ihe pericardium nor the pleura contains fluid, but 
 arc meiely lubricated with moisture on tlieir in- 
 ternal or ojjposing surfaces, so as to allow of free 
 motion to the heart and lungs. 
 
 It may be objected to tills view of the question, 
 that, accoriling to the longest computation, our 
 Lord died in six hours, and that this is too slujvt 
 a time to occasion etfusion. Indeed, reasoning 
 Vrom experience alone, it is very diflicult to un- 
 derstand the physical cause of our Lonis death. 
 Tiie crucitixion is quite inadequate to account 
 for it ; for, even if the impression produced by 
 tills torture on a weak nervous sj'stem was suffi- 
 cient to annihilate conscioujness and sensibility, 
 the deatii of the body, or what physiologists have 
 termed organic death, could not have taken jilace 
 in so short a time, a^ long as the brain, lungs, 
 and circulation, the so-called atria mortis, had 
 iustained no material Injury. In othet words, 
 the functions of respiration, circulation, secretion, 
 and nutrition must have continued for a far 
 longer time. In fact, we learn from Eusebius 
 (Hist. J-^c/es. ylii. Sj that many of the Egyptian 
 martyrs jierished from hunger on tlie cross, al- 
 
 * The use of llie ju'eposition /J? in this jassage 
 bas been entirely misuuderstood by Spencer, who 
 (^J)e Leg. llehr. 11. 11) adduces much testimony 
 from profane sources tor tlie txisteiice of the rite 
 of feasting wcr tlie blood of tiie victim. Nevei- 
 Ihele^s, tliat this fjfe[)osJti«n also has the sense of 
 V>itk, ia addition Uj, in^siquir, is established by 
 Gen. xxxil. 12; Exi^d. xii. 9 (Kwald's Ilebr. 
 Gram. ^ 52i); as well as by the recurrence of 
 the whole phrase hi 1 Sam. xiv. 32. Deyling has 
 refuted Sjiencer in a »]i«cial d-ssertatioii (Obftrc. 
 Vocr. ii. 25;. 
 
 BLOOD AND WATER. 
 
 33S 
 
 though they were crucKied witii their heads down- 
 wards. Accortiing to Richter, some survive on 
 the cross for three, four, and even tiir iiiiit- day* 
 (Winer's Bibl. Htalwurt. s. v. Jvxu.^). ( )ur Lord'i 
 death could not liave been occasioned by tetanus, 
 or else it would have been mentioned; and even 
 this disease, though the sniVeier be racked witli 
 the most frightful co'utdsions without iiiterniis- 
 sion, most rarely puts aii end to life in less tiiaa 
 twelve hours. Nor can we attiibute it to i.nt 
 wound inllicted by the soldier ; for althougii, wiieii 
 it is said he ' exjjired, and the soldiers saw that 
 he was dead," oin- Lord might have merely lainted, 
 yet it is Impossible to sujiiose that the soldier 
 would not have jjerceived his error the inomer.t 
 he inflicted the wounil, provided it was nioital ; 
 for then would have coniinenced the death- 
 struggle, whicli, in cases of death l.'V asphyxia 
 and haemorrhage, is very severe, and would have 
 struck the most caieless sjiectati.r. 
 
 Schuster (in Eichhorn's Bibl. Biblioth. ix. 103^^ 
 is of opinion that, iis blood is known to sep'urate 
 into a red coaguluni and a wateiy lluid, the ex- 
 pres.sion ' blood and water ' is to be understood ag 
 an hendiadys, meaning nothing more tiiari l)luo<i. 
 To this it must Ik? objected that blood Is oi.ly 
 observed to separate in that way when it is al- 
 lowed to coagulate in a vessel, and tiiat theiefore 
 the opportunities for observing it must have been 
 a great deal too rare to allow of such liguiative 
 language being employed and undeistood. That 
 it certainly was not so undeistood is clear ; for 
 some of the fathers (Orlg. Contr. Ceh. ii. 82) in- 
 terpreted the expression literally, anil looked upon 
 the fact as a miracle, and a proof of our Lord's 
 divine natuie. According to Strauss [Lcbcn Jesu, 
 ii. 571), the evangelist recolleeied that dead b'-jcil 
 sejiarates in the manner just rm iiti<ine<i, and, iis 
 he wished to bring forward the strongest proof of 
 our Lord's death, he asserted that blixnl ami 
 w'ater issued from the wound, meaning there!>y 
 that our Lord's blood had alreaily nndergojie 
 that change which is only observed when it is 
 removed from tlie body and dejniwd of its vi- 
 tality. This hy})Othesis is wholly untenable; for, 
 if we suppose the evangelist so well acquainted 
 with the separation of blood, lie would have 
 known that the coagulum, which, accoidlng to 
 the hypothesis, is designated by the teim blood, 
 could not, oil account of its solidity, have issued 
 from the wound. Moreover, St John must iiave 
 known, what every one knows, that the lact of luj 
 blood at all being seen would have been a far 
 better proof of our Lord's death. Indeed, the ap- 
 pearance of lilood and water could not have licen 
 regaided as a nioof of death, Init rather as some- 
 thing wondeifui ;uid inexplicable: (iir the word« 
 ol Origen, twv aKKuv i/iKpiiiv cru.'fj.d.rwf rb ai/ia 
 ■n-t)yvvTa.i, km. vdoip KaQaphv ovk anop^et (_/■ c. ), 
 express a fact 'which every one in those day* 
 must have known from personal experience. SJ. 
 John then must have entirely failed in his olc 
 ject, and merely from his Ignorance of the most 
 vtilgar opinions. 
 
 It has lieen asserted by £<iine (as by Winer) 
 that, when deep Incisions are made in the lM«ly 
 after deatli, the blood will be found separated 
 into cruor and serum. This is incorrect. Even 
 in the heart and large vessels the serum cannot bf 
 distinguished, because it leadily tiaiisuiles, and 
 'u imbibed by the surrounding tissues. In many
 
 S40 
 
 I5L00D, ISSUE OF. 
 
 cxKi coagulation takes place very imperfectly 
 aflf-r death. 
 
 It must not lie supposed that the fact of blood 
 coming- from the wound at all militates against 
 .he idea that <)>.r Lord was dead at the moment 
 he was pierced. This .irgument is^ indeed, made 
 tise of hy Strauss (/. c.) ; but it can be refuted by 
 the most ordinary experience. It is well known 
 that, even many days after death, blood will 
 trickle from deep incisions, esjjecially where any 
 of tlie large veins have been wounded. The po- 
 pular opinion that blood will not flow from a 
 corpse, must be taken in a relative, and not ab- 
 solute sense. It certainly will not How as it does 
 from a living l)ody •, and, wlien the wound is 
 small and superlicial, sometimes not a drop will 
 r« seen. 
 
 Tiie three other evangelists do not mention the 
 circumstance. — W. A. N. 
 
 BLOOD, ISSUE OF (Matt. ix. 20). The 
 disease here alluded to is hamorrliagia ; but we 
 are not obliged to supjwse that it continued un- 
 ceasingly fur twelve years. It is a universal 
 custom, in speaking of tlie duration of a chronic 
 disease, to include the intervals of coniparative 
 liealth that may occur during its course ; so that 
 when a dL^ease is merely stated to have lasted a 
 certain time, we have still to learn whether it was 
 of a strictly continuous tyjx', or whetlier it inter- 
 mitted. In the present case, as this point is left 
 undecided, we are quite at liberty to sup]ios€ that 
 the disease did intermit; and can fheiefore under- 
 stand why it did not prove fatal even in twelve 
 years. 
 
 Bartholinus (De Morb. Bibl. p. 61) quotes a 
 case in which haemorrhage is said to have oc- 
 ciuTeil for upwards of two years without cessa- 
 tion; but the details necessary to render such 
 an extraordinary case credible are not given. — 
 
 W. A. N. 
 
 BLOOD-REVENGE, or revenge for blood- 
 glied, was regarded among the Jews, as among 
 all the ancient and Asiatic nations, not only as 
 a light, but even as a duty, which devolved ujwn 
 the nearest relative of the murdered person, who 
 
 on tlii.s account was called DTH 7J{13 (ffoH 
 hiidnm), ihe reclaimer of bhod, or one who de- 
 mands restitution of blood, similar to the Latin 
 taufjuiiiem repc/ere. 
 
 T!)e Mosaical law (Num. xxxv. 31) expressly 
 forbids the acceptance of a ransom for the forfeited 
 life of the murderer, although it might be saved liy 
 his seekinj an asylum at the altar of the Taber- 
 nacle, in cage the homicide was accidentally com- 
 mitted (Exod. xxi. 13; 1 Kings i. 50 ; ii. 28). 
 When, however, in proce.ss of time, after Judaism 
 had been fully develojied, no other sanctuary was 
 tolerated but that of the Temple at Jerusalem, 
 the ciiances of escajx; of suci> an homicide from 
 the hands of the avenger, ere he reached the 
 gates of tlie Teinjile, !)ecame le.ss in proportion 
 to the distance of the spot where the murder 
 was committed from Jerusalem, six cities of rc- 
 
 fiiffc (u7pi^ "'"ly orch miklot) were in conse- 
 quence appointed for the momentary safety of 
 tlie mi.rderer, in various parts of the kingdom, 
 the roads to which were Kej)t in good order to 
 facilitate his escape (Dent. xix. 3). Tliither the 
 Avenger durst not follow him, and there he lived 
 m safety until a proper examination had t&ken 
 
 BLOOD-REVENGE. 
 
 place l)ef(jre the authoritiea of the place (Jo». xs, 
 6, 9), in order to ascertain whetlijr the murdei 
 w.os a wilful act or not. In tin? former case he 
 was instantly delivered up to the Goel, against 
 whom not even the altar could protect iiim 
 (Exod. xxi. 14; 1 Kings ii. 20); in the latt«r 
 case, though lie v.'as not actually deliveve«l into 
 the iiands of the floel, he was notwithstanding not 
 allowed to quit the ])recincts of the town, but was 
 o!>liged to remain tliere all his lifetime, or. until 
 the dcatii of the high-priest (Num. xxxv. (i ; 
 Deut. xix. 3; Josh. xx. 1-6), if he woald not run 
 the risk of falling into the hands of the avenger, 
 and l)e slain by him with imjjunify (Num. xxxv. 
 26; Deut. xix. 6). Tliat such a voluntary exile 
 was considered more in the light of a punishment 
 for manslaughter than a provision fur the safe 
 retreat of the .homicide again.st the revengeful 
 designs of the 7N13, is evident from Num. xxxv. 
 32, where it is expressly forbidden to release him 
 from his confinement on any condition wh.atever. 
 Tliat the decease of the higli-jiiiest slNnild have 
 been the means of restoring him to liberty was 
 probably owing to the general custom among the 
 ancients, of granting free pardon to certain pri- 
 soneis at the demise of their legitimate prince oi 
 sovereign, whom the high-ijriest re]Mesented, in a 
 spiritual sense, among the Jews. Tliese wise re* 
 g^ilations of the Mosaical law, as far as the spirit 
 of the age allowed it, prevented all family hatred^ 
 persecution, and war from ever taking j)lac(^ 
 as was inevitably the case among the other na- 
 tions, where any bhvxlshetl whatever, whether 
 wilful or accidental, laid the homicide open to 
 the duteous revenge of the relatives and family 
 of the slain person, who again in tlieir tuni wei-e 
 then similarly watched and bunted by the op- 
 p>site jiaity, until a family-war of extermination 
 had Icgalhj settled itself from generation to gene- 
 ration, without the least prosjiect of ever being 
 brought to a peaceful termination. Nor do we 
 indeed find in the Scriptures the least trace 
 of any abuse or mischief ever having arisen 
 from these regulations (comp. 2 Sam. ji. 19, &q. , 
 iii. 26, 39.). 
 
 Tliat such insftitutions are altogether at va- 
 riance with the spirit of Christianity may be 
 judged from the fact that revenge, so far from 
 being counted a right or duty, was condemned 
 by Christ f^nd his a]X)stles as a vice and passion 
 to be shunned (Acts vii. 6(1 ; Matt. v. 44 ; Lulu, 
 vi. 28 ; Rom. xii. 14, sq. ; comp. Rom. xiib, 
 where the ]X)wer of executing revenge is vested in 
 the authorities alone). 
 
 Of all tlie other nations, the Greeks and Ro- 
 mans alone seem to have possessed such citiei 
 of refuge (Serv. ad JEn. viii. 342 ; Liv. i. 8 ; 
 Tac. Ann. iii. 60), of which Daphne, near Aiv 
 tioch, seems to have been o>»e of the most jjromi- 
 nent (2 Mace. iv. 31 ; comp. Potters Greek 
 Arclueol. i. 4.S0), and to have served as a refuge 
 even for wilful murderers. Tlie laws and cus- 
 toms of the ancient Greeks in ca.ses of murdei 
 may l)e gatheied from the principle laid down 
 by Plato on that head (1>« hecjih. ix. in t. 
 ix. ]). 2^, sqi) : ' Since, according to tradition, 
 the niurdeieil jierson is greatly iriitatctl against 
 the murderer during the first few months after th« 
 perjjetration of the deed, the murderer ought there- 
 fia'e to inflict a jiunisliment unon himself, I y e»- 
 iling himself from his country for a whole yeaj
 
 BLOODY SV\'EAT 
 
 Mid if tl e niurdereil be a foreigner, hy keejiiii™ 
 tway from his country. If tlie liiniiiciilc subjects 
 liiiii«elf to such a ])unishiiieut, it is hut fair tliat 
 the nearest relative should be apjieaseti and guuit 
 pardon; but in case he does not subni.'t U) that 
 (uinishment, or liaies even to enter the temple 
 while tiie guilt of blood is still upon his i'ands, 
 the avenger siiall arraign him before the bar of 
 justice, wliere he is to be punished with t!ie 
 infliction of a double fine. IJut in ciise the 
 nvenger neglects to proceed against him, the guilt 
 |iasies over to him (the avenger , and any one 
 may t>ike him before the judge, who passes on 
 him the sentence of banisliaicnt for (ive years.' 
 
 Tlie high estimation in which blood-reveuf/e 
 stood among the ancient Arabs may be judged of 
 from the fact that it formed the subject of their 
 most beautiful and elewifed poetry (com]), the 
 i>ckoliast. Tauiizi totlieU)th jx)em in Schulten's 
 Exccrp. Hamas). Blaliomet did not alwlish, but 
 modify, that rigorous cust<»ni, by allowing the 
 acceptance of a ransom in numey for tlie for- 
 feited life of the murderer (^Koran, ii. 173-175), 
 and at the worst, forbidding the indictioii of any 
 cruel or painful death (Jbid. xvii. '.My). 
 
 In EuroiK? the custom of blooil-revenge is still 
 prevalent in Corsica and Sardinia, where, how- 
 ever, it is more the consequence of a vindictive 
 character than of an established law or custom. 
 A Corsican never jusses over an insult without 
 retaliation, either on the otl'euder or his family, 
 and this cruel and un-ChristiaJi custom (^KDidetta 
 iravcrsot, mutual vengeance) is the soiuce of 
 many assassinations. Tlie celebrated General 
 Paoli did his best to eradicate this abominable 
 I ractice, but his dominion was of too short du- 
 ration for the etlective cure of the evil, whicii has 
 gained ground ever since the first Frtnch revo- 
 lution, even among the female sex. It is calcu- 
 lated that about four liundied persons yeaily lose 
 tiieir lives in Sardinia by tliis atrocious habit 
 (Simonot, Leltres sur la Come, p. 31 1). — E. HI. 
 
 BLOODY SWEAT. According to Luke 
 xxii. -14, our Lords sweat was ' as great drops of 
 blood falling to the grouiuL' Michael is takes 
 the passage to mean nothing more than that the 
 drops were as kirue as falling drops of blood 
 {^Annterk. fiJr Ungelehrte, ad loc). This, which 
 also appears to be a common explanation, is 
 liable to some objection. For, if an ordinary 
 observer compares a fluid uhich he is accustomed 
 to see colourless, to blood, which is so well known 
 and so well characterized by its colour, and 
 does not s{)ecify any particular point of resem- 
 blance, he woidd more naturally be understood 
 to allude to the colour, since it is the most pro- 
 minent and cliaracteristic quality. 
 
 There aie several cases recorded by tlte older 
 medical writers, under the title of bloody sweat. 
 With the exception of ojie or two instances, not 
 at>ove suspicion of fraud, tliey have, however, all 
 l>een ca^es of gencial jiaimorrhagic disease, in 
 vlitcli blood has flowed from dilleient jjarts of the 
 body, sjich as the iiose, eye^, ears, lungs, stomach, 
 md bowels, and, lastly, from various parts tif the 
 ikin. Wlien Idood ooz<;s from the skin, it must 
 reach the external surface through orilices in the 
 'pideimis, whit h liave hepix produced by rupture, 
 w, we must suppose that it has been extravasated 
 Lu'.o tne sweat-ducti. But, even in this latter 
 oue, we must na inoie consider haemorrhage of 
 
 BLOODY SWEAT. 
 
 U\ 
 
 the skin to b» a nuulilication of the functon ol 
 sweating, tiian bleeding from the nose to be a nio- 
 diiication of tlie secretion of mucus. The bhrnd 
 is simply mixed with the sweat, precisely in tlie 
 same way as, when spit u]i fnjm the lungs, it is 
 mixed with mucus and saliva in piissing througli 
 the air-tul)es and mouth. It is, therefoie, in- 
 correct to supjKise that lia-morrhag.- from the skin 
 indicates a state of bo.iy at all analogous to that 
 which occasions sweating. If this <listincti<»n 
 had been clearly understood, an<l clearly stated 
 by medical writers, it would have been seen at 
 once how far their ex|jerience went to illustrate 
 the case before us. 
 
 The greater number of cases described by 
 authors were observed in women and childien, 
 and sometimes in infants. Alenfal anxiety we 
 liave only found mentioned as a cause or as a 
 concomitant symptom, in one case, whicii will lie 
 noticed below. The case of a young lady who 
 was afflicted with cutaneous ha?morriiage is de- 
 failed by Jilesaporiti in a leTter to V'alisneri. Sli« 
 is noticed to have been cheerful, although she 
 must have sullered greatly from del/ility and 
 febrile symptoms {Phil. Trans. No. 303, p. 
 2111). The case of an infant, only three inoiiths 
 old, atlected wiih the same disease, is related by 
 Du Gard {Phil. Trans. No. lOi), p. W6). \ 
 similar case is described in tfie ?tov. Act. Acad. 
 Nat. Cur. tom. iv. p. IJI3. See also Z-)i/t. Acad. 
 Nut. Cur. obs. 41; and, lor other references, 
 Cojjeland's Vict, of Med. ii. p. 72. Wlieie 
 hemorrhagic diathesis exists, muscular exertion 
 is a powerful exciting cause of all kinds ol 
 haemorrhage, and must likewise give rise to tlie 
 cutaneous form of the disease. A most reniaik- 
 able case of the kind, occuiring in a horse, is 
 mentioned by Dr. Coj)eland. His friend Dr. 
 W. Hutchinson liad a line Arabian hoise, wliose 
 sweat was sanguineous after moderate exeit on, 
 and almost pure blood upon violent exeition 
 {Diet, of Med., I.e.). 
 
 Bloomtield {Greek Test, note on Luke xxii. 1 1 ; 
 Kays that Aristotle adduces a case of bloixly sweat 
 from extreme agitation, in his Hist. Aniin. iii. 19. 
 This statement, however, is inconect. Aristotle 
 is merely speaking of the blooil in a general way; 
 and says, 'si sanguis inimodicehumescit. morbu,* 
 infestat: sic enim in spiciem saniei diluitiir et 
 adeo sere.scit, ut jam nonniilli sudore ciuento <'x- 
 undarint.' There is no allusion made to any 
 case, nor a word said about extreme agitation. 
 There is, however, a case of this kind recorded l>v 
 Durius, a German physician {Muciti ;i«/. Lplu-- 
 tnerid. p. 351, obs. 179). A student was p<c 
 info prison, ' jiropter insolentias tioctuntas et alia 
 tentata,' when he was seized with such tear and 
 agitation that drojis of bloixl bur-t foilh, heie 
 and there, from his luiiids, chest, and arms. 
 Durius was ordered by the magistrate, who «as 
 informed of the circumstance, to visit the pri- 
 soner ; and he witnessed all that hail Ix'en related 
 to him. The prisoner was'of course immediately 
 released, aid was restored to his foimer state of 
 health as s( on as the cauie of his anxiety had 
 b( tn removed. If this was really a fact, the stu- 
 dent must have been aflected witii iKrmoithagit 
 disease, or have had a very strong 'en<leney to it- 
 but the story does not deserve the slighttst na- 
 dence. The author does not apjK';^ *<• h:>.ie ima- 
 {firu'd, fjr a moment, tliat it was a ca»«. of ini(«
 
 343 
 
 J30ANERGES. 
 
 sition, or fhaf it inii^lit be afterwards suspected to 
 l)e such. His account is, tlieiei'ore, confined to 
 the haie statement of the I'lct, and aH'oids no evi- 
 aence of the correctness of liis ot>servation. It is 
 hig-hly iinprohable that a student of such l)ahits 
 giioiild feel i^ieat aUinn at beinij put in prison ; 
 while iiiithing is more conceivable than that lie 
 shouhl attempt to impose on tho credulity of his 
 attendant-s, in order to obtain his release, and that 
 he shonld even succeed in deceiving a physician. 
 Me lical experience ai)ounds in cases of successful 
 iin])()dtii>ti of a far more extraordinary nature 
 (U iiiholinus, Hist. Anat rar., cent. i. hist. 52). 
 While, then, on the one liand, experience 
 teaches that cutaneous liiEmorrhage, when it does 
 occur, is the result of disease, or, at any rate, of 
 a very {ssculiar idiosyncracy, ami is in no way 
 indicative o/ t!:e state of the mind, we have, on 
 the other, daily experience and the accumulated 
 testimony of ages to prove that intense mental 
 emotion and pain produce on the body etl'ccts 
 evn seveier m degree, but of a very ditiereTit 
 na.iiie. It is familiar to all that terror will 
 blanch the hair, occasion momentary paralysis, 
 fainting, convulsions, melancholy, imbecility, and 
 even sudden de ith. Excessive grief and joy will 
 lircduce some of the worst of these. Sweat is 
 caused by fear, and by liodily pain ; but not by 
 sorrow, which excites no secretion exce))t tears. 
 
 It is very evident, then, that meclical expe- 
 rience does not beir at all upon the words of St. 
 Ijuke. Tlie circiunstances connected with our 
 Loril's sufferings in the garden must be considered 
 by themselves, without any reference to actual 
 observation; otherwise, we shall be in danger of 
 rendering a stateirient, which may be easily re- 
 cei\eii on its own grounds, ci'scure and contra- 
 dictory. 
 
 It may \te remarked that the ])assage in ques- 
 tion onlv occurs in St. Luke, and is om'*ted in 
 ire MSS. of tiiat Gospel.— W. A. N 
 BLUE [Pui^pi.K.] 
 
 liDANERGES (Boavepyes, explained by v'lo] 
 'BpovT^iS,. sons of tJiunder, JVIark iii. 17), a sur- 
 na.me given hy Christ to James and John, pro- 
 bably on account of their fervid, impetuous spirit 
 I'comp. Luke ix. 51, and se<; (,)lsliausen thereon). 
 'i'he word boanerrjes has greatly ]>erplexed philo- 
 logists and commentators. It seems agreed that 
 the Greek term does not conectly re.present the 
 original Svro-C!ialdee word, although it is dis- 
 ))uted wliit that word was. Many, with Jerome, 
 t.liink that ''■;? true word is ^evepeei/j., from tlie 
 Hebrew DJ?"1 *33 hcne-ra OTn, as in Hebrew DV") 
 constantly denotes tl)under. But this varies too 
 much from the vestigia literamm. Others derive 
 it trom the Hebvew ti'I?"! ''3D bene-ra'ash, which 
 deviates still further, and only signities — sons of 
 tumult or commotion. Recent interpreters tiiere- 
 fore incline to the derivation of Canlnlus, DeDieu, 
 and Fritzsche, who take it from C3T ''32 bene- 
 reres, for reges in Syriac and Arabic signifies 
 ' rliuniler.' Thus the word boan-ercjes would 
 •eem to l)e a slight corruption from hoane-reges, 
 tlie bonne being very possibly the (ralilEean pro- 
 nuiici.ition instead of bene fcomp. Bloomfield's 
 NciP Test, on IVIark iii. 17; and Robinson's Gr. 
 hex. s. V. Boavipffs). 
 
 KOAR (Ttn hazir or chazii; in Arabic ckiz' 
 ron). Occurs in Lev. xi. 7; Deut. xiv. S : Ps. 
 \x%x. 13; Prov. xi. 22; Isa. Ixv. 4; ixvi. 3, 17. 
 
 BOAZ. 
 
 Tlie Hebrew. Egyptian, Arabian, Phcenicls^ 
 and other neighbouring nations abstaine<l froi» 
 hog's flesh, and consequently, excejrfing in Egypt, 
 and fat a later j)<'ri()<l) f)eyond the Sea of Ga 
 lilee. no domesticated swine were reared. Is 
 
 187. [Wild IJoar. 
 
 Egypt, where swineherds wei'e treated as the 
 lowest of men, even to a denial of admission into 
 the fem])Ies, and wliere to have been touched by 
 a swine defiled the ])erson nearly as much as 
 it did a Hebrew, it is difficult to conjecture foT 
 what purpose these animals were kejit so aliun- 
 dantly, as it ajjpears by the monumental pictures 
 tliey were; for the mere service of treading down 
 seed in the deposited mud of the Nile when the 
 inundation subsided, the only purpose alleged, 
 cannot be admitted as a sufficient explanation 
 of the fact. Although in Palestine, Syria, and 
 Phcpnicia hogs were rarely domesticated, wild boars 
 are often mentioned in the Scriptures, and *iiey 
 were frequent in the time of tlie Crusades ; for 
 Richard Coeirr-de-Lion enconnterefi one of \ast 
 size, ran him through with his lance, and while 
 the animal was still endeavouring to gore his 
 horse, he leaped over its l)ack and slew it with 
 his sword. At present wihl bixirs frequent the 
 marshes of the Delta, and are not uncommon on 
 Mount Carmel and in the valley of Ajalah. Tliey 
 are abundant aliout the sources of the .Jordan, and 
 lower down where the river enters the De-ad Sea 
 The Koords and other wandering trilies of Meso- 
 potamia and on tlie banks of fioth the great riven 
 hunt and eat the wild boar, and it may be sus- 
 pected that the half liuman satyrs they pretend 
 sometimes to kill in the chace, derive their cloven- 
 footed hind-quarters from wild boars, and offer a 
 convenient mode of concealing from the womer* 
 and public that the nutritive flesh they bring 
 home is a luxury forbidden iiy their law. The 
 wild boar of the East, though conmionly smaller 
 thaii the old breeds of domestic swine, grows occa- 
 sionally to a very large size. It is passive while 
 unmolested, hut vindictive and fiCTce when roused. 
 The ears of the species are small, and rather 
 roundetl, the snout broad, the tusks very jjro- 
 mir.ent, the tail distichous, and tlie colour daik 
 ashy, the ridge of the back bearing a profusion 
 of long bristles. It is doubtful whether this 
 species is the same as that of Europe, for tlie 
 fjrrow are not striped : most likely if is identical 
 with the wild hog of India. — C H. S. 
 
 1. BOAZ (rj?3,«iacWi'as,Sept.Bo({0,awealthy 
 Bethlehemite, and near kinsman of the first hus- 
 band of Ruth, whom he eventually espouse*! undei 
 the obligations of the Leviratelaw, which he will- 
 intrly incurred. The conduct of Boaz — his tine 
 spirit, just feeling, piety, iiud amenity of ni;uaier«
 
 BOAZ. 
 
 — appears to jpeat advantagp in (lie Ixwk of Rntli, 
 Uld forms an interestiiii,' }K)ifrait'ire of the condi- 
 tion and deportment of what was in l.i^ timo tlie 
 onper class of Israelites. By his mavrias^e with 
 Ruth he bocam? (he (ather of Ol>ed, from whom 
 came Jesse, the father of David. He wiis (iius 
 one of the direct ancestors of Christ, and as such 
 his name occui-s in Matt. i. 5. There are some 
 chronological diflicnlties respectini; the time of 
 Boaz and his genealogical connections ; Imt as 
 these are involved in the considerations wliich <le- 
 termine the time of (he book of Ku(h, tliey will l)e 
 more advantageously examined in connection 
 with that larger subject [Rurn ; Genkalooy]. 
 
 2. BO.AZ, the name giveji (o one of the two 
 tirazen ]iillars whicli Solomon erected in the court 
 of the Temple [.Iachin and Boaz]. 
 
 BOCHI.M (D^p^, weepings), (lie name given 
 to a place (probably near Shiloh, wliere (he taber- 
 nacle then was) where an 'angel of the Lord' 
 reprm'ed the assembled Israelites I'or their disolie- 
 dierre in making leai^ues with the inhabitants of 
 the land, and for their remissness in taking pos- 
 session of their heritage. This caused the bi((er 
 weeping among the people for which the place 
 took its name (Judg. ii. 1). 'Angel' is here 
 usually taken in the ordinary sense of 'messen- 
 ger,' and he is supposed to have been a prophet, 
 which is strengthened by his being said to have 
 come from Gilgal : for it was not usual to say 
 hliat an angel came from another place, and Gilgal 
 was a noted station and resort of holy men [Gn.- 
 OAi.]. Most of the Jewish commentators regard 
 this personage as Fiiinehas, who was at that time 
 the high-prie.jt. There are many, however, who 
 deny (hat any man or created angel is here meant, 
 and affirm that no other than the Great Angel of 
 the Covenant is to be imderstood — the same who 
 appeared to Moses in the bush, and to Joshua as 
 Uie Captain of Jehovah's host. Tliis notion is 
 grounded on the fact that ' the angel,' without 
 using the usual ibnnula of delegation, ' thus saith 
 the Lcrd,' says at once ' / made you to go up out 
 of Egypt,' &c. 
 
 BOHAN (}llh, a thumb; Sept. Baicoi'), a 
 Rerihenite, in whose honour a stone was erected 
 which afterwards served as a boundary-mark on 
 the frontier between Jsdah and Benjamin (Josh. 
 XV. 6 ; xviii. 17). It does not apyiear from the 
 text whether this stone was a sepulchral monu- 
 ment, or set up to commemorate some great ex- 
 ploit performed by this Bohan in the conquest of 
 Canaan. Bunting (Itinerar. tot. S. Script, p. 
 144), mentioning Bahurim,says that near to it, in 
 the valley, is a stone called Bohan, of extra )rdi- 
 nary size, and shining like marble. This wants 
 conlirmation, and no aiitiiority is given. 
 
 BOND, BONDAGE. [Slaveuy.] 
 
 l^OOK. [Writing.] 
 
 BOOK OF LIFE. In Phil. iv. 3 Paul 
 Bpeaks ^f Clement and other of his fellow-labour- 
 ers, ' w lose names are written in the book of life.'' 
 On this Heinrichs {Annotat. in Ep. Philipp.) rb- 
 eerves tltit as tl e fntiue life is represented under the 
 image of a -KoXinvfia (citizenship, community, 
 political society) ju>t before (iii. 20), it is tn 
 igreemei * with this to suppose (as usual) a cata- 
 liigne of ':he citizens' names, both natural and 
 adoy.ted Luke x. 20; Rev. xx. L); xxi. 27), 
 »nd from vidch the unwordiy are eraseil Hiev 
 
 BOOTH. 
 
 343 
 
 iii. y), Tlius (he names of the good are iftCT 
 represented as registered in heaven (Matt. iii. 5'.. 
 But (his by no means implies a ci'r(ainty of na'* 
 va(ion fnor, as Doddi idge n-marks, does it n|ij>ear 
 that Paul in this jia.ssage l.ad any particului 
 revelation), but oidy (ha( at that time the p'lSona 
 were on the li.sf. from whicii (as in Rev. iii. H) 
 the names of unworthy mend)ers mii;h( be erasi-d. 
 This explanadon is sullicient and satisfactoiy for 
 (he odier important passage in Rev. iii. .'), wliere 
 the glorilicd C'lirist promises to ' liim that over- 
 comcili,' that lie will not bliit his name out of (lie 
 liook (if lil'e. Here, however, (lie illiisfiatimi has 
 been sought rather in mi/itar;/ t]\;\u in c/i-'Mitie, 
 and (he passage has In-en siijiposed (o contain an 
 allusion to the custom according to which the 
 names of those who were casldeved (or misconduct 
 were erased IVom (he muster-niil. 
 
 When God threatened (o desdoy (tie Israelites 
 altogether, and make of Moses a great nation — 
 (he legisla(or implored forgiveness (or ihem, aii.> 
 added — 'if not, bKit me, I pray thee, out of (he 
 book which thou hast wri((en ' (Exod. xxxii. 34). 
 By (his he ineant nothing so fooiisli or alisunl as 
 to oiler to forl'ei( e(ernal life in the world to 
 come — but only that he, and not (hey. should be 
 cut oil' from tlie world, and bronglit to an mitimely 
 end. This has been regarded as an allusion to 
 the records kept in (he courts of justice, where (he 
 deeds of criminals are regis(ered, aiul hence would 
 signify no more (han (he pur])ose of God wi(!i 
 reference (o fu(ure even(s ; so (ha( (o be cutofiby 
 an untimely death is to be Idotted out of this book. 
 
 A sealed book (Isa. xxix. 11 ; Rev. v. 1-3) is 
 a book whose contents are secret, and have (Vir a 
 very long (ime been so, and are not to be publishetl 
 till (he seal is removed. 
 
 A book or roll trt-itten within and tcithoxtt, i.e. 
 on (he back side (Rev. v. 1), may be a book con- 
 taining a long series of events; i( not bring (lie 
 custom of the ancients to write on the back side 
 cf the roll, unless when (he inside would not con- 
 tain the whole of the writing ("comp. Horace, Ep. 
 i. 20, 3\ 
 
 To eat a jonk signifies to consider it carefully 
 and digest it well in tlie mind (Jer. xv. 16 : Rev 
 X. 9). .A similar meta]ihor is used by Clnisi it 
 John vi., where he rc|)eatedly projioses himself at 
 'the Bread of Life ' to be eaten by his jieople. 
 
 BOOTH (HSD succah; pi. succnth), a hut 
 made of branches of trees, and. thus distinguished 
 from a tent pro})erly so called. Such were (he 
 booths in which Jacol) sojourned for a while on 
 his return to the borders of Canaan, whence the 
 place olitaincd (he name of Succotli (Gen xxxiii. 
 17) ; and sucli were (he (emporarj' green sheds in 
 whicii (he Israeli(es were directed to celelirate ti>e 
 Feast of Taliernacles (Lev. xxiii. 42, 43) .As 
 (his observance was (o commemora(e (he al)ode ot 
 the Israelites in the wildeiness, it has lieen niflier 
 unwisely concluded by some that (hoy (here livcii 
 in such boodis. But i( is evideii( from (he nana- 
 tive, that, during their wanderings, they dwe't in 
 tejifs ; and, indeed, where, in (hat treeless leu-ioi:, 
 cor.id they have found branches with which tu 
 construct their broths V Such structures are only 
 available in well-wooded regions; and it is ob- 
 vious that the direction to celebrate the feast in 
 boodis, radier (han in (ents, was given l)ecHiise, 
 when tlie Israelites becameasettl*! people in Pal»
 
 944 
 
 RORITK 
 
 line, an 1 ceaseil to have a i^aieml use o'fents, it 
 <vas easier }i)r tUeni to t-iect a teinjioraiy shed of 
 jfieeii l.ranches tiiaii to provide a tent lor the 
 occasion. 
 
 BOOTY. [Spoil..] 
 
 BORITH (n"'li) ocv:ura in two i«,?rages of 
 Scriijfiire — first, in Jevem. ii. 22, 'For thoiig'li 
 thou wash thee w ill nitre, and take thee uracil 
 sope (liorirh), yet liiiiie iniquity is marked liefore 
 me, saith the Lord G>)d ;' and again, in Malachi 
 iii. 2, 'But who n\ay al)ide the day ol' his 
 cominij^ and who siiall stand wlien heaj^jx-areth? 
 for be is like a reliners iJie, and like fullers' sope 
 (tH)ritli).' From neither of these passages does it 
 distinctly ai)j)ear whetlicr the snhstitnce referred 
 to Ijy tlie uanie of kxiritli was ohfaineil frora tl.e 
 mineral or from the vegetahle kiirgdom. But it 
 is evident that it was possessed of cleansing pro- 
 perties ; and this is confivnted by tlie oiigin and 
 iignitication of the word, whicli is thus illustrated 
 by Celsius : ' a verlx) "113 Barar, purificazit, 
 qusfi vo.x etiam apud Chaldccos, Syros, Arabes 
 in usu fuit, descendit nomea 13 Bor, puritos 
 (Hierobot. i. p. 419). So Mainionides, on the 
 Talmud, tract Shnnittah, ' Species ablutionsbas 
 iipts, ufi sunt Boritli et Ahal.' 
 
 The word borlth is very similar to the borrd; of 
 the Arabs, written baurakh in the Latin transla- 
 tions of Serapion and Avicemia ; and translated ni- 
 irinn — that is, natron, or carbonate of soda. Boruk 
 ap^)ear-', however, to have been used in a generic 
 rather than in a specific sense, as in the Persian works 
 on Materia Medica, derived chieily frora the Ara- 
 bic, which we have collated, we find that no less 
 than six dilTerent kinds of borr.k (Persian booreK) 
 are enumerated ; of which some are natural, as 
 the Armenian, the African, &c. ; othe/s artificial, 
 as that obtained from burning the wood of the 
 poplar; ^Iso that employed in the prejjaration 
 of glass. Oi" tlrese it is evident tliat the two 
 last are, chemically, nearly tlie same, being both 
 carbonates of alkalis; the incineration of mosl 
 })Iants, as well as of the poplar, yield the car- 
 bonate of potash (commonly called potash, or 
 pearlash) ; while carbonate of soda, or barilla, is 
 ihe alkali u.sed in the preparation of glass. Pre- 
 vious to the composition of bodies having been 
 definitely ascertained by correct chemical ana- 
 lysis, dissimilar substances were often grouped 
 together under one general term ; while others, 
 although similar in composition, were separated 
 oil account of some unimportant character, as 
 difference of colour or of origin, &c. It is unne- 
 cessary for our piesent jjurjjose to ascertain the 
 other substances included by the Arabs under 
 the general trim of banik, and which may have 
 been also included under (he niiruni of the Greeks. 
 It is evident that both the carbonate of soda and 
 of ])oTash were comjirehended under one name by 
 the former. It would be diBicult, therefore, to dis- 
 tinguish the one from the other, unless some cir- 
 cumstances were added in addition to the mere 
 name. Thus in (he above passage of Jeremiah 
 we have nefer (nitre) and borith (sope) indicated 
 as being both employed for washing, or possessed 
 of some cleansing jiroporties ; and yet, from 
 jccurring in the same passage, they must have 
 differed in some resjjects. The term nation we 
 know was, in later times, confined lo the salt ob- 
 MUlicd chietly from the natron-lakes of Es-ypt, 
 
 BORROWING. 
 
 and rteter may also have been so in earlier tiniM 
 Since theiilbre tlie natural carbonate of soda, in 
 mentioned in one part of the verse, it is very pro- 
 bable that the aitilicial carbonates may be alluded 
 to in the other, as both were in early times em- 
 ployed by 'Asiatic nations for the purposes of 
 washing. The carbonate of potash, obtained 
 fr m the burning c>f most plants growing at a 
 distance from the sea oi a saline soil, migh* 
 not have been distinguishetl f'-oin the carbonate 
 of soda, produced from fiie ashes ol' plants grow- 
 ing on the shores of the sea or of sait-water lakes. 
 
 .Hence it is jwobable that the ashes of jjl^ints, 
 called borufe antl Uireli by Asiatic nation.9, may be 
 alluded to under the name of borith, as there is 
 no proof that soap is infendetl, though it may 
 ha\e lieen known to the same peo^jleat very early 
 periods. Still less is it probable that borax is 
 meant, as has been supposed by some authors, 
 appaieufly from the mere similarity of name. 
 
 Supjjosiiig tliat the ashes of plants are intended 
 by the word borith, the next point of inquiry is, 
 whether it is to be restricted to those of any jiar- 
 ticular plants. Tlie ashes of the poplar are men- 
 tioneil by Arabian authors, andofthevine by Dios- 
 corides ; tliose of the plantain and of the Butea 
 frondosa by Sanscrit authors: thus indicating 
 that the jilants which were most common, or which 
 ivere used for fuel, or other purposes, in the different 
 countries, liad also their ashes, that is, imjiure 
 carbonate of potash, employed for wa.shing, &c. 
 Usually the ashes only of plants growing on the 
 sea-shore have been thought to be intended. Al] 
 these, as before mentioned, would yield barilla, oi 
 carljouate of soda. Many of them have been buuit, 
 for the soda they yield, on the coasts of India, 
 of the Red Sea, and of the Mediterranean. 
 They belong cliiefly to the natural family of the 
 Chenopodete and to that of the Mesembryanthe- 
 mums. In Arabic authors, the plant yielding 
 soda is said to be called ishnan, and its Persian 
 name is stated to heghasool, both words signifying 
 'thev/asher' or 'washing-herb.' Rauwolf jxiints 
 out two Jilants in Syria and Palestine which 
 yield alkaline salts. Hasselquist considered one 
 of them to be a Mesembryaiithemum. Fois- 
 kal has enumerated several jilants as being 
 burned for the barilla or soda which tliey afi'oid ; 
 as Mesembrtjanthenmm gmvLulahini and yiodi- 
 fiot-um, both of which are called ghasuul. Sal- 
 sola kali, and his SuafKla monoica, called asul, 
 are other plants, especially those last named, «hica 
 yield sal-alkali. So on the coasts of tlie Indian 
 Peninsula, SaUcornia Indica and Salsula nudi- 
 Jicn-a yield barilla in great abundance and ))urity, 
 as do Salsola sativa. Kali, Soda, and Tragus ; and 
 also Salicornia annua, on the coasts of Spain and 
 of the South of France. — J. F. R. 
 
 BORROWING. On the general subject, aa 
 a matter of law or precept, see Lo.an. 
 
 In Exod. xii. 35 we are told that the Israelites, 
 when on the point of their dejjarture from Egypt, 
 ' boi rowed of the Egyptians jewels of silver, and 
 jewels of gold, and raiment ;' and it is adiled, thai 
 ' the Lord gave the jjeople favour in the sight of the 
 Egyptians, so that they lent unto them such iliing<i 
 as they required. And they spoiled the Egyptians.' 
 Iliis was in pursuance of a Divine command which 
 had been given to them through Muses (Exod. iii, 
 22; xi. 2). This has suggested a dilhculty, seeing 
 tliat the Israelites bad certainly no intention tc
 
 BURROWING. 
 
 ret'im to Etry])t, or to restore the valuables which 
 tfiey .'lius obtained I'roin tlieir Kgypliaii ' iieigh- 
 ooiirs.' The removal of this dilliciilty lias l>een 
 soni^ht in various modes. The first is to question 
 the accuracy of tlie present translation. It is ad- 
 mitted that the (general acceptation of the word 
 
 .■endered borrow (^H^^) is to rcjitcst or denuind; 
 
 altliQiii^h there are places (Exod. xxii. 14; 1 Sam, 
 i. 28 ; 2 Kiiii^s vi. 5) where borrowimj is certainly 
 denote I hy it. Tiie real quesiion, therelbie, is, 
 which of these signilicatious agiees best with tiie 
 context anil the circumstances of the transac- 
 tion. Those who would at all hazards discon- 
 nect the ])ivine name from a transaction resting 
 on this basis, allege that the Israelites did not 
 borroio tiie valualiles, but demanded them of 
 their Egyptian neiglibours, as an indemnity for 
 their services, and iiir the hard and bitter bondage 
 whicii they had endured. liut this does not 
 appear to us to nieyd the matter much ; (or the 
 Israelites had been public servants, rendering 
 certain onerous services to the' state, but not in 
 personal bondage to indi\idual Egyptians, whom, 
 nevertlieless, they, according to this account, 
 mulcted of much valuable property in com- 
 pensation for wrongs conrmitted by the state. 
 These individual Egyptians also were selected 
 not with leference to their being implicated more 
 than others in the wrongous treatment of the Is- 
 raelites : they were those who happened to be their 
 ' neighbours,' and as such open more tiian others 
 to the exaction. This mode of extorting private 
 and partial compensation for public wrong will 
 not stand the test of our rules of public mo- 
 rality, any more than tliat of borrowing without 
 the intention to le.-tine. As so little is to be gained 
 by the proposed change, we incline to adhere to 
 the old interpretation, that the Israelites actually 
 did borrow the valuables of the Egyptians, with 
 the understanding, on the part of the latter, that 
 they were to be restoied. Tliis agrees with the 
 fact that the professed oliject of the Hebrews was 
 not to quit Egy])t tor ever, but merely to with- 
 draw fir a few days info tiie desert, that they 
 might here celebrate a high festival to their God. 
 At sue 1 festivals it was usual among ail nations 
 to app'ur in their gayest attire, and decked with 
 many ornaments ; and this suggests the grounds 
 on which the Israelites might rest the application 
 to their Egyptian neighbours for the loan of their 
 jewels and rich raiment. Tlieir avowed intention 
 to return in a few days must have made tiie re- 
 quest appear very reasonable to the Egyptians; 
 and in fact the Orientals are, and always have 
 been, remarkably ready and liberal in lending 
 their ornaments to one another on occasions of 
 religious solemnity or public ceremony. It would 
 Beeni also as if tiie avowed intention to return 
 precluded the Heiirews from any other ground 
 than tliat of burrowing; for if tiiey had required 
 or demanded these things as compensations or 
 sifts, it would have amounted to an admission 
 tliat they were quitting tlie coiuitry altogether. 
 U is tiierefore best to take these things together — 
 the borroicing as a necessary result of the pro- 
 fessed intention to return; and, although the 
 borrowing without the intention to restore, looks 
 Kiore un justifiable than the avowed intention to 
 return, when the real intrnliun was to witlidraw 
 altogether — both facts must be tried by tlie same 
 
 BOTNIJVI. 
 
 310 
 
 general doctrine of jiublic nioial.s, and must be 
 explained with reference to the same genera! prin- 
 ciples. Tmn which way we will in this matter, 
 there is tut a choice of difliculties ; and this ".eaiU 
 us to suspect that we are not atcjuainted with all 
 the facts bearing on the ciuse, in the alistnce uf 
 which we spend our stiengtii for nougiit in labom- 
 ing to explain it. One of tlie dllliculties isMinm- 
 what softene<l by the conjecture of Professor li.ish, 
 who, in his Note on Exod. xi. I, observes, * VV« 
 are by no means sati.slied that JVIoses was requiied 
 to cimmciud the jieople to jiractise the device here 
 mentioned. We regard it rather, as far as theif 
 were concerned, as tlie mure prcdiclion of i fact 
 that should occur.' 
 
 BOSOM. It is usual with the western Asiatics 
 to carry various sorts of things in the bos<nn of 
 tlieu' dress, viliich foims a somewhat spacious dsc 
 pository, being wiile above the girdle, which con- 
 lii.es i'. so tightly aroiuid the waist as to [irevent 
 anything from slipping thniugli. Aware of this, 
 Harmer and our other Biblical illustrators ratliei 
 hastily concluded that tJiey had foiin<l an expla- 
 nation of the text (Luke vi. 38), ' Good measme, 
 pressed down, and shaken together, and running 
 over, shall men give into your bosom.' All thes« 
 expressions obviously apply, in the literal sense, 
 to corn; and it is certain that corn and things 
 measured in the manner described never are car- 
 ried in tlie bosom. They could not be placed 
 there, or cariied there, or taken out without serious 
 inconvenience, and then only in a small quantity. 
 The things carried in the bosom aie simply sucl» 
 as Europeans would, if in tiie East, carry in theii 
 pockets. Yet this habit of carrying valuabls 
 propeity may indicate the origin of the image, as 
 an image, m(o (he bosum, without requiring wa tu 
 suppose that everything described as being given 
 into the bosom really was deposited tliere. 
 
 To have one in our bosom implies kindness, 
 secrecy, intimacy (Gen. xvi. 5; 2 Sam. xii. 8). 
 Christ is in the bosom of the Father ; that is, pos- 
 sesses the closest intimacy with, and most ]ierfect 
 knowledge of, the Father (John i. IS). Our Savioui; 
 is said to carry his lambs in his bosom, whicli 
 touchiiigly repiesents his tender ooie aiid watch- 
 fulness over them. 
 
 BOSSES, the thickest and strongest parts, lh« 
 prominent points of a buckler [Aums, Aumouu]. 
 
 BOTNIM (D*3P3) occurs only in Gen. xlJii. 
 11, where Jacob, wisiiing to conciliate the ruler 
 of Egypt, desires his sons on their return to '*ak« 
 of the best fruity in the land in their vessels and 
 carry down the man a present,' and along with 
 other articles mentions ' nids and almonds.' Here 
 the word rendered nuts is botnim. Among the 
 various translations of this teim Celsius enume- 
 rates walnuls, hazel-nuts, pine-nuts, peaches, dates, 
 the fruit of the terebinth-tree, and even almonds; 
 but there is little iloubt that pistachio-nuts is the 
 true rendering. From the context it U eviderU 
 that the articles intended for presents were the 
 produce of Syria, or e;isily procurable there 
 Hence they were probably less common in Egypt, 
 and therefore suitable for such a jiurpose. 
 
 The Hebrew word botnim, reduced from itf 
 
 plural form, is very similar to the Arabic «idU 
 
 balam, which we (ind in Arabian authors, as 
 Rliases, Serapion, and Avicenna. It is sometimes
 
 346 
 
 BOTNIM. 
 
 rritten baton, boton, botin, and albotin. The 
 name is applied specially to the teiebinth-tree, or 
 Pistacia terebinthns of botanists, the ripfxivdos or 
 repfPivdos of the Greeks. Tliis is the turpentine- 
 yielding pistacia, a native of Syria and of the 
 Greek Archipelago, which has already been 
 described in the article Alau. The tree, as there 
 mentioned, is remarkable for yielding one of the 
 finest kinds of turpentine, that usually called 
 of Gliio or of Cyprus, which, employed as a medi- 
 cine in ancient times, still holds its place in the 
 British pharmacopceias. From being produced 
 only in a few places and from being highly valued, 
 it is usually adulterated with tlie common kinds of 
 turpentine. In many places, however, where the 
 tree grows well, it does not yield turpentine, which 
 may account for its not being noticed as a pro- 
 duct of Palestine ; otherwise we might have in- 
 ferred that the turpentine of this species of pistacia 
 formed one of the articles sent as a present into 
 Kgypt. This seems to have been the view of tlie 
 translators of tiie Sept., who render botnim by 
 rep^^tfOos. The name batam is applied by the 
 Arabs both to the turpentine and to the tree. It 
 appears, however, to be sometimes used generi- 
 cally, as in some Arabic works it is applied to a 
 tree of which the kernels of tiie seeiis are described 
 as being of a green colour. This is the distin- 
 guishing characteristic of another species of pista- 
 cia, the P. vera of botanists, of which the fruit is 
 well known to the Arabs by the name of fishik, 
 which seems to be derived from the Persian 
 fiMeh. This, no doubt, gave origin to the Greek 
 TTiffTciKia, said by Dioscorides to be produced in 
 Syria and to be like pine-nuts. Besides these edible 
 kernels, the pistacia-tree is descril)ed in the Arabic 
 works on Materia Medica as yielding another 
 product somewhat similar to the turpentine of tlie 
 battam, but which is called ' aluk-al-anbat, a resin 
 if the anbat, as if this were another name for the 
 pistacia-tree. This brings it much nearer the 
 botnim of Scripture. The Botna of the Talmud 
 is considered by annotators ts be the pistacia 
 (Celsius, Ilierohot. i. p. 26). Bochart for this 
 and other reasons considered botnim to be the 
 kernels of tlie ]>istacia-tree. 
 
 The pistachio-nut-tree is well known, extending 
 as it does from Syria to Atlghanistan. From the 
 latter country the seeds are carried as an article 
 9f commerce to India, where they are eaten in 
 ;heir uncooked state, added to sweetmeats, or as a 
 dessert fried with pepper and salt, being much 
 relished by Europeans for tlie delicacy of their 
 ftivour. The pistacia-tree is most common in the 
 Horthern, that is, the cooler parts of Syria, but it 
 is also foiind wild in Palestine in some very 
 remarkable positions, as Mount Tabor, and 
 the summit of Mount Attarous (Nebo ?), (Phy- 
 sical Palestine, p. 323). This tree is said to have 
 been introduced from Syria into Italy by Lucius 
 Vitellius in tlie reign of Tiberius. It delights in 
 a dry soil, and rises to the heiglit of 20, and some- 
 times 30 feet. As it belongs to the same genus 
 as tlie tereliinth-tree, so like it the male and fe- 
 male tlowers grow on separate trees. It is there- 
 fune necessai ,■ for the fecundation of the seed that 
 s. male tree be planted among the female ones. 
 It is probably owing to the Howers of the latter 
 not being fecundated, that the trees occasionally 
 bear oblong fruit-like but hollow bodies, which 
 *re sometimes described as galls, sometimes as 
 
 BOTTLE. 
 
 nuts, of little value. The ripe seeds are inclowd 
 in a woody but l»ri;tle whitisli-coloured sliell, aiid 
 within it is tlie seed-covering, which is thin, meni- 
 branous, and of a reddish colour. The kernel 
 is throughout of a green colour, abounds in oil 
 and has a sweetish agreeable taste. Pistachio- 
 nuts are much eaten by the natives of t're countries 
 where they are grown, and, as we have seen, they 
 form articles of coinmeroe from Atlghanistan to 
 India — a hot country like Egypt. Tliey are al.«o 
 exported from Syria to Eurojie in considerable 
 quantities. They might thereibre have well formed 
 a jiart of the present intended for Joseph, notwith- 
 standing the high position which he occupied in 
 Egypt.— J. F. R. 
 
 BOTTLE. Natural objects, it is obvious, 
 would be the earliest things employed for holding 
 and preserving liquids; and of natural objects 
 those would be preferred which either presented 
 themselves nearly or quite ready for use, or such 
 as could speedily be wroughti into the requisite 
 shape. Tlie skins of animals afford in themselves 
 more conveniences for the purpose than any other 
 natural product. AVhen an animal had lieen slain, 
 either for food or sacrifice, it was easy and natural 
 to use the hide for enveloping the fat or other sub- 
 stances, and with very little trouble the parts of 
 the skin might be sewed together so as to make it 
 hold liquids. The first bottles, therefore, were 
 probably made of the skins of animals. Accord- 
 ingly, in the fourth book of the Iliad (1. 247) the 
 attendants are represented as bearing wine for use 
 in a bottle made of goat's skin, 'AaKoi eV alyelco. 
 In Herodotus also (ii. 121) a passage occurs 
 by which it appears that it was customary ainong 
 the ancient Egyptians to use bottles made of skins ; 
 and from the language emploj'ed by him it may 
 be inferred that a bottle was formed by sewing up 
 the skin and leaving the projection of the leg and 
 foot to serve as a cock ; hence it was termeil 
 iroSidov. This aperture was closed with a plug or 
 a string. In some instances every part was sewed 
 up except the neck ; the neck of the animal thus 
 became the neck of the bottle. This alleged use 
 of skin-bottles by the Egyptians is confirmed by 
 the mpnuments, on wliich such various forms as 
 the following occur. Fig. 1 is curious as showing 
 
 the mode in which tliey were carried by a yoke \ 
 and as it balances a large bottle in a case, this skin
 
 BOTTLE. 
 
 BOfTLK 
 
 317 
 
 Bay be presumed to have contained wine. Fig 7 IxJtfles for wine, unless iimonj,' the Ciiristians of 
 is such a skin of water as in tlie agricultural G«(-rijla, Annenia, and Lebanon, where tbey aw 
 
 •cenes is suspended t'rom the bougli of a tree, and 
 from which the labourers occasionally driniv. 
 Figs. 2 and 3 re]iresent two men with skins at 
 their backs, belonging to a party of nomades 
 entering Egypt. This party has been witii some 
 plausibility supposed to rep'esent the sons «f 
 Jacob — a jwiint elsewhere conbidered [Joseph]. 
 
 The Greeks and Romans also were accustomed 
 to use bottles made of skins, cliielly for wine. 
 Some interesting examples of those in use among 
 the Romans are represented at Herculaneum and 
 Pompeii, and are copied in the aimexed en- 
 graving. 
 
 Skin-bottles doubtless existed among tjie He- 
 brews even in patriarchal times; but the first clear 
 notice of them does not occur till Joshua ix. 4, 
 where it is said that theGibeonites, wisliing to im- 
 pose upon Joshua as if they had come from a long 
 distance, took ' old sacks upon their asses, and 
 wine-bottles old and rent and bound up.' So in 
 the 13th verse oi the same chapter : ' these bottles 
 of wine which «'e filled were new ; and behold, 
 they be rent; and these our garments and our 
 shoes are become old by reason of the very long 
 journey." Age, then, l.-ad the effect of wearing 
 and tearing the bottles in question, which must 
 consequently have been of skin. To the same 
 effect is the passage in Job xxxii. 19, ' My belly is 
 as wine which hath no vent; it is ready to burst, 
 like new bottles." Our Saviour's language (Matt. 
 ix. 17; Luke v. 37. 3S ; Mark ii. 22) is thus 
 clearly explained : ' Men do not ]nit new wine into 
 old bottles, else the bottles break and the wine 
 runnetli out, and the bottles perish ;' ' New wine 
 must be put in new bottles, and both are jneserved.' 
 To ttie conception of an English reader who knows 
 of no bottles Init sucli^as are made of clay or glass, 
 tlie idea of bottles breaking througli age presents an 
 insu,;)eral)le ditficulty ; but skins may become 
 ' olil, rent and bound up;' they also jirove, in 
 time, hard and inelastic, and would in such a 
 condition be very unfit to hold new wine, jirobably 
 in a stale of active fermentation. Even new skins 
 might l>e unable to resist the internal jjressure 
 soused by fermentation. If, therefore, b.y ' new ' 
 is meant 'untrie<l," the passage just cited from 
 Job j)resents no inconsistency. 
 
 As the drinking of wine is illegal among the 
 Moslems who are now in j.osscssion of VVestem 
 Asia, little is seen of the ancient use of skin- 
 
 still thus employed. In (ieorgia the wine 
 stowed in large ox-skins, and is moved or Vept at 
 hand for use in smaller skins of goats or t.'ds 
 
 But skins are still most extensively used through- 
 out Western Asia f >r water. Tlipir mo^t usua' 
 forms are shov.:; in the above cut (170), v.hich also 
 displays the manner in which they are carried. 
 Tiie water-carriers bear water in such skins and 
 in this manner. 
 
 It is an error to represent Iiottles as being 
 made exclusively of dressed or undressed skin? 
 among the ancient Hebrews (Jone?, Biblical Cy 
 clopcedia, in voc). Among the Egy])tians orna- 
 mental vases weie of hard stone, alabaster, glass, 
 ivory, bone, porcelain, bronze, silver or gold; and 
 also, for the use of the people generally, of glaze<l 
 pottery or common earthenware. As early an 
 Thothmes III , assumed to l)e the Pharaoh of the 
 Exodus, B.C. 14S'0, vases are known to have ex- 
 isted of a sha])e so elegant and of workmanship 
 so superior, as to show that the art was not, even 
 then, in its infancy. 
 
 ITl. _ 1. 2. Gold. 3. Cut glass. 4. Pa rtlipn «■«?». 
 5, 7. Porcelain, fi. Hard stone. 8. Gold, with plate* 
 and bands. 9. Stone, li). Alabaster, with lid. 
 
 Many of the bronze vases found at Thel)es and 
 in other parts of Egypt are of a quality which 
 cannot fail to excite admiration, and which proves 
 tiie skill possesse<< by the Egy]itians in the art of 
 working and compounding metals. Their sha])e8 
 are most various — some nciit, some jilain, soma 
 grotesque; some in form not tuilike oar cream-
 
 948 
 
 BorrLE. 
 
 BOWELS. 
 
 jugs, others as devoid of taste as the wine-bottles 
 •four cellars or the flower-})Ots of our conserva- 
 tories. Tiiey had also bottles, small vases, and 
 pots, used fo! holding ointment or for other pur- 
 poses connected with the toilet, which were made 
 of :),labaster, glass, j,^)rcelain, and hard stone. The 
 reader is here presented witii a view of some of 
 these vases and bottlej, from actual specimens in 
 ^he British Museum. 
 
 172. — 1, 3. Eartheuware. 2, 5, 6, 7. Green glass. 
 4. Blue glass. 8,11. Alabaster. 9, 10. Porcelain. 
 
 The subjoined representation of a case con- 
 ta uing bottles, supported on a stand, is among 
 the Egyptian antiquities in the Berlin Museum, 
 and is supposed to have belonged to a medical 
 man or to the toilet of a Theban lady (Wilkin- 
 son, ii. 217). It forms a suitable conclusion to 
 this set of illustrationa. 
 
 The perishable nature of skin-bottles led, at an 
 early period, to the employment of instruments of 
 a more durable kind; and it is to be jiresumed 
 that the children of Israel would, during their 
 sojourn in Egypt, learn, among other arts prac- 
 tised by their masters, Ihat of working in pottery- 
 waie. Thus, as early as the days of the Judges 
 (iv. 19; V. 25), bottles or vases composed of 
 some earthy material, and apparently of a supe- 
 riiir make, were in use ; for, what in the fourth 
 chapter is termed 'a bottle," is in the fifth desig- 
 nated 'a lordly dish.' Isaiah (xxx. 14) expressly 
 mentions ' the bottle of the potters,' as the reading 
 in thfi margin gives it, being a literal translation 
 
 rom the Hebrew, wliile tlie terms whieh the f.roph^ 
 employs show that he could not have intended 
 any thing made of skin — 'he shall break it as the 
 breakii.g of the potter's vessel that is broken if 
 pieces, so tliat there shall not be found in th» 
 bursting of it a slurd to take tire from the heauh, 
 or to take water out of the pit.' In thenineteei th 
 chap. ver. 1, Jeremiah is commanded, 'Go and 
 get a potter's earthen bottle ;' and ('ver. 10) 
 ' break the bottle ;' ' Even .so, saith the Lord of 
 Hosts (ver. 11), will I break this people and thi? 
 city as one brfaketh a potter's vessel, that cannot 
 be made whole again' (see also Jer. xiii. 12-14). 
 Metaphorically the word bottle is used, especially 
 in poetry, for the clouds consideied as pouring 
 out and pouring down water (Job xxxviii. 37), 
 'Who can stay the bottles of heaven?' The cut 
 already given in p. 278 afl'ords an illustration 
 of a passage in the Psalms (Ivi. 8), ' Put th'ju 
 my tears in a bottle ' — that is, ' treasure them up 
 — ' have a regard to them as something precious.' 
 It was, as appears from the cut at p. 278, cus- 
 tomary (o tie up in bags or small bottles, and 
 secure with a seal, articles of value, such an 
 precious stones, necklaces, and other ornaments. — 
 
 J. R. B. 
 
 BOUNDARIES. [Landmarks.] 
 
 BOW. [Arms.] The bow is frequently men- 
 tioned symbolically in Scripture. In Ps. *ii. 13 
 it implies victory, signifying judgments laid up in 
 store against otl'enders. It is sometimes used te 
 denote lying and falsehood (Ps. Ixiv. 4 ; cxx. 4 ; 
 Jer. ix. 8), probably from the many circumstances 
 which tend to render a bow inoperative, especially 
 in unskilful hands. Hence also ' a deceitful bow 
 (Ps. Ixxviii. 57; Hos. vii. 16); with which com- 
 pare Virgil's ' Perfidus ensis frangitur.' 
 
 The bow also signifies any kind of arms. Th« 
 bow and spear are the most frequently mentioned, 
 because the ancients used these most (Ps. xliv. G , 
 xlvi. 9; Zech. x. 4; Josh. xxiv. 12). 
 
 In Habakk. iii. 9 ' thy bow was made bare,^ 
 means that it was drawn out of its case. The 
 Orientals used to carry their bows in a Ccise hung 
 on their girdles. 
 
 In 2 Sam. i. 18 tne Authorized 'Version has 
 ' Also he (David) bade them teach the children 
 of Judah the use of the bow.' ' Here,' says I'ro- 
 fessor Robinson (Addit. to Calniet), ' the words 
 "the use of" are not in the Hebrew, and convey 
 a sense entirely false to the English reader. It 
 should be "teach them the bow," i. e. the son ff oj 
 THE BOW, from the mention of this weapon in 
 verse 22. This mode of selecting an inscription 
 to a poem or work is common in the East ; so iu 
 the Koran the second Sura is entitled the cow, 
 from the incidental mention in it of the red heifer ; 
 comp. Num. xix. 2. In aj,similaf manner, iht 
 names of the books of the Pentateuch in the He- 
 brew Bibles are merely the first word in each 
 book.' 
 
 BOWELS are often put by the Hebrew writers 
 for the internal parts generally, the inner man, and 
 so also for heart, as we use that term. Hence the 
 bowels are made the seat of tenderness, mercy, and 
 compassion ; and thus the Scrijjtural expressions 
 of the bowels being moved, bowels of mercy 
 straitened in the bowels, &c. By a similar asso- 
 ciaMon of ideas, the bowels are also sometimei 
 made the seat of wisdom and uaderstandi.'ig (Jol 
 xxxviii 30; Ps. li. 10; isa. xvi. 11).
 
 BOZRAH. 
 
 BOWING ArriTLDEs.'! 
 
 BOX-TREE ' [Teashuk.] 
 
 BOZRAH (~"]V5 ; Sept. BoaSp), an ancient 
 •jitv, known also o the (iieeks uml Roiti.ms by tlie 
 Diiine of UosTUA. In most ot' llie passages of the 
 Olil TeslaniPiit where it is nieiiiii)ne<l. it aiipoais 
 as II cliief <-itv of the Kilomites (Isa. xxxiv. (> ; ixiii. 
 1 ; Amos i. 12; Jer. xlix. 13, 2-1). In Jer. xlvlii. 
 9A Bozrah is iianieil among the cities of Moah: 
 lint it does not hence follow, as Raunier and otheis 
 contend, that we shonld ie;?aid them as dilVeient 
 cities; for, in consecpience of the continTuil wars, 
 incursions, and conquests wliidi were common 
 emong the small kingdoms of ihat region, tlie pos- 
 session of jiarticnlar cities often passed into dif- 
 feient hands. Tims Selah, i. c. Pctra, the capital 
 of the Edomites, taken from them by Amaziah, 
 king of Judal) (2 Kings xiv. 7\ is also mentioned 
 by Isaiah (xvi. 1) among flie Moai)itis!i cities. 
 Since Bozrah lay not in tlie original territory of the 
 Edomites, t. c. south-east of Judali, but north of (lie 
 territory of the Ammonites, in Auranitis, or Hau- 
 ran, we must suppose that the Edomites had be- 
 come masters of it by conquest, and tliat it was 
 afterwards taken from_ them by the Moabites, who 
 for a tune retained, it 'in their possession. This is 
 upon fiie whole more satisfactory tlian the conclu- 
 sion of Raimier (Paliistiiia), who makes Bostra to 
 b« the Bozrali of Moah, and seeks the Bozrah of 
 Edom in the jiresent Besseyra, i. e. little Bozrah, 
 so called, he conjectures, to distinguish it from the 
 Bozrah of Moab. llis principal argument, that 
 Edom is described as dwelling in ' the clefts of 
 the rocks ' (Jer. xlix. 16), is of little weight, seeing 
 that it is vei-y possible for the dwellers in rocks 
 arid mountams to have x>ossessions in the neigh- 
 bouring plains. 
 
 BOZR/vH. 
 
 3(9 
 
 174. [liozrah.] 
 
 Bcrzrah lay southward from Edrei, one of the 
 caiiitals of Hashan, and, according to Ensebius, 
 21 Roman miles distant from it. The Romans 
 ncjioned Bozrah as belonging to Arabia Deserta 
 (Ainm. Marcell. xiv. 27 J. Alexander Severus 
 made it the seat of a Roman colony. In the acts 
 of the Nicene. Ephesian, and Ciialcedonian coun- 
 cils mention is made nf bishops of Bizrah ; ami 
 *t a later ])eri(«l it l)ccai -le an imi)ortant seat of the 
 Nestorians C\s enian, liiblioth. Orient, torn. iii. 
 pt. 2, p]). 59.^, 730). Abulfeda makes it the capi- 
 tal oi' tjie Ilauraii, in wliicli, according to Bnrck- 
 
 hardf, it is still one of the most impoitant towns. 
 Although the ])lace has l)een since visited liv La- 
 horde ^from whom our engraving is taken), Lord 
 Lini'say. and other later travellers, the account 
 whicii Bnrckhardt gives of Bozrah is still the liest 
 thai we ^xissess. ' Bozrah is situated in the 
 open ])lain, and is at ])resent the last inhabiteil 
 l>lai e in tlie south-east extremity of the Hauran. 
 It was formerly tlie cajiita) u\' Arabia I'rorinria, 
 and is now, including the ruing, the largest town 
 in tlie Ilanran. It is of an oval shajje. its greatest 
 length being from east to west : its circumference 
 is three quarters of an lioiir. It wa-s anciently 
 enclosed liv a tliick wall, which gave it the repu 
 tation of a' place of great strength. Many jparts 
 of this wall, esjiecialiy on the west siile, still re- 
 main; it is constructed will stones of a moderate 
 size, strongly cemented together. Tlie principal 
 buildings of Bozrah were on the east side, and in 
 a direction thence towards tlie middle of the town. 
 Tlie south and soiith-e;ust (juartirs are covered 
 with the ruins of private dwellings, the walls of 
 many of which are still standing, but most of the 
 roofs have fallen in. The style of building seems 
 to be similar to that observed in all the other an- 
 cient towns of the Hauran. On the west side are 
 springs of fresh water, of which I counted five be- 
 yond tlie precincts of the town and six within tlie 
 walls; their waters unite with a rivulet, wliose 
 source is on the north-west side, within the town, 
 and which loses itself in the southern ])lain at 
 several hours' distance. On the eastern quaiter of 
 the town is a large biiket, or reservoir, almost ]>ei 
 feet, 190 paces in length, 153 in lireadth, arnl 
 enclosed by a wall seven feet in thickness, I uilt 
 of large square stones; its dejitli may be about 20 
 feet. A staircase leads down to the water, as the 
 oasin is never completely tilled. This re enoir is 
 a work of t-!ie Saraccn.s, made for watering tke pil- 
 grims' caravans to Mecca, which as late as the 
 scventeentli century passed by Bozrah. . . . Just 
 beyond the walls is a large castle of Saracenic 
 origin, probably of the time of tiie Crusades ; it is 
 one of the best-built castles in Syria, and is sur- 
 rounded by a deep ditch. Its vails are very thick, 
 and in the interior are alleys dark vaults, subter- 
 raneous jiassages, &c. of the most solid construc- 
 tion. This castle is a mjst important post t« 
 protect the harvests of the Hauran against the 
 hungry Bedouins. . . . Of the vineyards for whick 
 Bozrah was celebrated, and which are commemora- 
 ted in the Greek medals of the Colonia Bostra, not 
 a vestige remains. There is scarcely a tree in t!ie 
 neighbourhood of the town, and the twelve or 
 fifteen families who now inhabit it cultivate no- 
 thing but wheat, barley, horse-beans, and a little 
 dhourra (Iiulian corn). A number of fine rose- 
 trees grow wild among the ruins of the town, and 
 are just beginning (A)iril 2Blh) to open theii 
 buds" (Burckhardt's.S'y>w, jip. 22t-23(i). 
 
 The same writer gives a very anijile description 
 of the various luins, the extent and importance of 
 which aie alone sufficient to evince the ancient 
 consequence of the place. They are of various 
 kinds, Greek, Roman, and Saracenic, wi*h trar^of 
 the native works in the jirivatc dwellings. 
 
 Tliese monuments of ancient grandeur serve 
 but to heighten the impression which is created by 
 the Jiresent desolation and decay. — ' Boirah,' sayi 
 Lord Lin<isay, ' is now for the most jiart a iMsap 
 of ruiijs, a nx>»t dreary spectacle ; here and there
 
 SAO 
 
 BRACELET. 
 
 die direction of a street or alley is disceniible, but 
 that is all. The modem iiiliabitants — a mere 
 handful — are almost lost in the maze of ruins. 
 Olivo-trees grew here witliin a few years, they told 
 us — all extinct now, like tlie vines for whicli the 
 Bostra of the Romans was famous. And such, 
 'ax the ninetet-nth century, and under Moslem 
 rule, is tlie condition of a city wliich even in the 
 seventh century, at the time of its capture by the 
 Saracens, was called by Caled "■ the market- 
 place of Syria, Irak, and the Hedjaz." " I have 
 sworn by myself^ saith the Lord of Hosts, tliat 
 Bozrali shall become a desolation and reproach, a 
 waste and a curse ; and all the cities tliereof shall 
 be perpetual wastes !" (Jer. xlix. 13.) And it is 
 so.' 
 
 BRACELET. This name, in strict propriety, 
 is as applicable to circlets worn on the upper jvart 
 of the arm as to those worn on the wrist ; but as 
 it has been fuimd convenient to distinguish the 
 former as Aumlets, the term bracelet must be 
 restricted to the latter. These are, and always 
 have been, much in use among Eastern females. 
 Many of them are of the same shapes and jmtterns 
 as the armlets, and are often of such considerable 
 weigiit and bulk as to appear more like manacles 
 than ornaments. Many are often worn one above 
 another on the same arm, so as to occupy the 
 greater part of the space between the wrist and 
 the elbow. The materials vary according to the 
 condition of the wearer, but it seems to be the 
 rule that bracelets of the meanest materials are 
 better than none. Among the higher classes they 
 are of mother-of-pearl, of tine llexible gold, and 
 of silver, the last being the most corninou. The 
 pvoorer women use plated steel, horn, brass, copper, 
 beads, and other materials of a cheap description. 
 Some notion of the size and value ol the bracelets 
 used both now and in ancient times may be 
 formed i'rom the fact that those which were pre- 
 sented by Eliezer to Rebecca weighed ten shekels 
 (Gen. xxiv. 22 . The bracelets are sometimes 
 flat, but moie fiequently round or semicircular, 
 except at the point where they open to admit the 
 hand, wh^re they are flattened. They are fre- 
 quently hollow, giving the show of bulk (which 
 is much desired) without the inconvenience. 
 Bracelets of gold twisted rope-wise are those now 
 most used in Western Asia; but we cannot deter- 
 mine to ivhal extent this fashion may have existed 
 in ancient times. 
 
 BRAMBLE. [Thorn.] 
 
 BRANCH. As trees, in Scripture, denote 
 great men and princes, so branches, boughs, 
 sprouts, or plants denote their offspring. Ih 
 conformity with this way of sj^eaking, Christ, in 
 respect of his human nature, is styled a rod from 
 lie stem of Jesse, and a liranch out of his roots 
 (Isa. xi. 1), that is, a ])rince arising from the 
 family of David. Tliis symbol was also in use 
 among the ancient puets (Sophocles, Electra, iv. 
 IS; Homer, IliMd, ii. 47, 170, 211, 252, 319; 
 Pindar, Oli/mp. ii. 6, &c.). ' And so even in 
 our English tongue (remaiks Wemyss , the word 
 imp, wliich is originally Saxon, and tlenotes a 
 plant, is used to the same purpo-e, especially by 
 Fox, the martyrologist, who calls King Edward 
 the Sixth an imp of great hope; and by Thomas 
 Cromwell, Earl of Essex, in his dying speech, 
 who has the same exiJiession concerning the 
 Mdr.e prince. 
 
 BkJIAD. 
 
 A branch is the symbol of kings descend<iO 
 from royal ancestors, as branches from the roa» 
 (Ezek. xvii. 3, 10 ; Dan. xi. 7). A.s only a vigo- 
 rous tree can send forth vigorous branches, u 
 branch is used as a general symbol of prosperity 
 (Job viii. 16). 
 
 From these explanations it is easy to see how a 
 branch becomes the symbol of the Messiah (Is;i. 
 xi. 1; iv. 2; Jer. xxiii. 15; Zech. iii. 8; vi. 12; 
 and elsewhere). 
 
 Bra-nch is also used as the symbol of idola- 
 trous worship (Ezek. viii. 17), jjrobably in allu- 
 sion to the general custom of carrying branches 
 as a sign of honour. 
 
 Axi aboininable branch (Isa. xiv. 19) means a 
 tree on which a malefactor has been hanged. In 
 Ezek. xvii. 3 Jehoiachim is called the highest 
 branch of the cedar, as being a king. 
 
 BRASS. This word occurs in the Authorized 
 Version. But brass is a factitious metal, no^ 
 known to the early Hebrews, and wherever il 
 occurs, copper is to be understood [Coppek ]. 
 That copper is meant is shown by tiie text, ' Out 
 of whose hills thou mayest dig brass' (DeuU 
 viii. 9), it being of course impossible to dig a 
 factitious metal, whether brass or bronze, out of 
 mines. That compound of copper and zinc 
 which forms our brass does not appear to have 
 been known to the ancients ; but we have every 
 evidence that they knew and used bronze arms, 
 im.plements of that metal having been founa 
 in great abundance among ancient totribs and 
 ruins. This, instead of pure copper, is probably 
 sometimes, in the later Scriptures, meant by the 
 word t^irij [Copper]. 
 
 Brass (to retain the word) is in Scripture the 
 symbol of insensibility, baseness, and presumption 
 or obstinacy in sin (Isa. xlviii. 4 ; Jer. vi. 28; 
 Ezek. xxii. 18). Brass is also a symbol of 
 strength (Ps. cvii. 16 ; Isa. xlviii. 4 ; Mic. iv. 
 13). So in Jer. i, 18 and xv. 20, brazen walls sig. 
 nify a strong and lasting adversary or opponent. 
 
 The description of the Macedonian empire as 
 a kingdom of brass (Dan. ii. 39) will be better 
 understood when we recollect that the arms of 
 ancient times were mostly of bronze ; hence the 
 figure foicibly indicates tlie warlike character of 
 that kingdom. The /nountains of brass, in Zech. 
 vi. 1, are understooil by Vitringa to denote those 
 firm and immutable decrees by \Vliich God go- 
 verns the world, and it is difficult to aflix any 
 otiier meaning to the phrase (comp. Ps. xxxvi. 6). 
 
 BREAD. The word * bread " was of far more 
 extensive meaning among the Hebrews than with 
 us. There are passages in which it ap])ears to be 
 applied to all kinds of victuals (Luke xi. 3); 
 but it more generally denotes all kinds of baked 
 and pastiy articles of food. It is also used, 
 ho'.v^ver, in the more limited sense of biead made 
 from wheat or barley, for rye is little cultivated 
 in the East. Barley being used chiefly by t.'ie 
 poor, and for feeding horses [Baui.e-y], bread) 
 in the more limited sense, chiefly denotes ihe 
 \arious kinds of cake-like bread prepared from 
 wheaten flour. 
 
 Corn is ground daily in the East [Mii.i,^ 
 After the wheaten flour is taken fiom the liaiut 
 mill, it is made into a dough or paste in a smal. 
 wooden trough. It is next leavened ; after which 
 it is made into thin cakes or flaps, round or ovaJL 
 and tiii^n baked.
 
 BREAD. 
 
 The knead in (f- trouijlis, in wliicli tlie dough is pre- 
 pisred, have no n'seinhlanre to ours in size or shape. 
 Ai one jierson docs not bake bread for many fami- 
 lies, as in our towns, and as one family docs 
 uot bake br» 1 sufticient for many days, as in 
 our villages, but every family l)akes for tlie day 
 only the quanfiiy of bread which it requires, only 
 d comparatively small quantity of dough is pre- 
 pared. This is done in small wooden bowls; and 
 that those of the ancient n<'l)rews were of tlie 
 same description as those now in use appears 
 from their being able to carry them, together with 
 the dough, wra)i])ed up in their cloaks, upon 
 viieir shoulders without difficulty. The Bedouin 
 Arabs, indeed, use for tins purpose a leather, 
 which can ije drawn up into a l)ag by a running 
 cord along the bolder, and in which they prepare 
 and oflen carry their dough. This might equally, 
 and in some resjjects better answer the described 
 Conditions; but, being especially adapted to the 
 **e of a nornade and tent-dwelling people, it is 
 uiore likely that the Israelites, who were not 
 such at the time of the Exod'e, then used the 
 wooden bowls for their ' kneading-troughs' (Exod. 
 viii. 3 ; xii. 34 ; Deut. xxviii. 5, 7). It is clear, 
 from the history of the departure from Egypt, 
 tliat the flour had lirst been made into a dough 
 by wcfer only, in which state it had been kept 
 some little time before it was leavened; for when 
 the Israelites were unexpectetlly (as to the moment) 
 compelled in all haste to withdraw, it was found 
 thiit, although the dough had been prepared in 
 the kneading-trough, it was still unleavened 
 (Exod. xii. 3i; comp. Hos. vii. 4); and it was 
 in commemoration of this circumstance thaf they 
 and their descendants in all ages were enjoined 
 to eat only unleavened bread at the feast of tlie 
 Pa«sover. 
 
 The dough thus prepared is not always baked 
 at home. In towns there are public ovens and 
 bakers by trade ; and although the general rule 
 in large and respectable families is to bake the 
 bread at home, much bread is Ixjught of the 
 bakers by unsettled individuals and jioor persons; 
 and many small households send their dough to 
 be baked at the public oven, the baker receiving 
 for his trouble a portion of the baked breads 
 which he adds to his day's stock of bread for sale. 
 Such public ovens and bakers by trade must 
 have existed anciently in Palestine, and in the 
 East generally, as is evident from Hos. vii. 4 and 
 ler. xxxvii. 21. The latter text mentions (he bakers' 
 »Yeet (or lather bakers' place or market), and this 
 irould suggest that, as is the case at present, the 
 bakers, as well as other trades, had a particular 
 part of the bazaar or market entirely appropriated 
 to their business, instead of being disiiersed in 
 diil'erent parts of the towns where they lived. 
 
 For their larger operations the bakers have ovens 
 of brick, not altogether unlike our own; and in 
 large iiouses there aie similar ovens. The 
 ovens used in doinestic liaking are, however, 
 usually of a [M)rtal)le description, and are large 
 vessels of s'lone, eaithenware, or copjier, inside of 
 which, when properly heated, small loaves and 
 cjikes are baked, and on the outer suiface of which 
 thin flaps of Ijread, or else a large wafer-like bis- 
 cuit, may he preparecl. 
 
 Another mode of baking bread is much used, 
 9spet:ially in the \illages. A pit is sunk in tlie 
 middle of the floor of tlie principal room, about 
 
 BREAD. 
 
 3dl 
 
 four or five feet deep by three in diameter, well 
 lined with compost or cement. When sulliciently 
 heated by a fire kindled at tiie bottom, the breati 
 is made by the liiiii jiancakedike fla]js of dough 
 Iniing, by a ])eculiar k/iack ot liand in tli« 
 women, stuck against the oven, to which they ad- 
 here for a few moments, till they are sulhciently 
 dressed. As this oven requires awisidcrable fuel, 
 it is seldom used except in those parts where that 
 article is somewhat abundant, and where the winter 
 cold is severe enough to render the warmdi of th« 
 oven desirable, not only for baking bread, but for 
 warming the apartment. 
 
 Another sort of oven, or rather mode of baking, 
 is much in use among the jiasttiral tribes. A shal- 
 low hole, about six inches deep by three or four 
 feet in diameter, is made in tlie grounil : this i« 
 filled up with dry Ijrushwood, upon whicii, wiien 
 kindled, pebbles are thrown to concentrate and re- 
 tain the heat. Meanwhile the dough is j)re])aied ; 
 and when the oven is sulliciently heated, the a-shes 
 and pebbles are removed, and the spot well 
 cleaned out. The dough is then deposited in 
 the hollow, and is left there over night. The 
 cakes thus liaked are about two fingers thick, ;md 
 are very palatable. There can be little doubt that 
 this kind of oven and mode of baking bread were 
 common among tlie Jews. Hence, Ilezel very 
 ingeniously, if not truly, conjectures {Uealr Lexi- 
 con, art. ' Brod ') conies the ^"lin vD of Gen. xl. 
 16, whicli he renders, or rather paraphrases, ' baskets 
 full of bread baked in holes,' not ' white baskets,' 
 as in the Authorized Version, nor ' baskets t'ull of 
 holes,' as in our margin ; nor ' white bread,' as 
 in most of the continental versions, seeing that all 
 bread is white in the E;ist. As the process i* 
 slower and the biead more savoury than any other, 
 tliis kind of bread might certainly be entitled to 
 the distinction implied in its being pre|)aied fo' 
 the table of the Egyptian king. Tliat the name of 
 the oven should pass to the bread baked in it, is not 
 unusual in the East, just as the modern tadskeen 
 (pan I gives its name (say /)a/;-cake) to the cake 
 baked by it. Hezel's conjecture thai the oven in 
 question is called a hole, "lin in Hebrew, antl that 
 the bread baked by it is called tlieiefrom /loli- 
 bread, i^s corroborated by, if not founded u];on, a 
 passage cited iiy Buxtorf in his Lt'.c. Talmud: 
 ' Eaciunt IIH I'oiameii, vel cavitatem in terra, et 
 calefaciunt cam igni coquuntcpie in ca ])anem, qui 
 vocatur nilH, a "WU cavitate ilia in qua coctus 
 est.' 
 
 There is a baking utensil called in Arabic tufen 
 
 ( •>-U?) which is the same word (rriydvov) by 
 
 which the Septuagint renders the Hebrew nSHD 
 machabath, in Lev. ii. 3. This leaves little doubt 
 that the ancient Hebrews had this tajvn. It is 
 a sort of ])an of earthenware or iron (usually toe 
 latter), flat, or slightly convex, whicli is put over 
 a slow lire, and on which the thin flaps of dough 
 are laid and baked with consiilerable ex])edilion, 
 although only one cake can l>e baked in tliis way 
 at a time. This is not a household mode of pre- 
 paring bread, but is one of the simiile and pri- 
 mitive processes emjiloyed by'^the wandering and 
 semi-wandering tribes, siiepherds luisoandmell 
 and others, who have occasion to ijicjiare a siiiaJ 
 quantify of daily bread in an easy (jlV-liand uum- 
 ner. Bread is also baked ui a luanner whicit, ^
 
 S5S 
 
 BREAD. 
 
 though apparently very difieren% is I»ut a modifi- 
 cation of the principle of the tajen, and is used 
 diieUy in flie bouses of (he jwasantry. There is a 
 cavity in the liie-liearfh, in whicli, when required 
 for baking, a fire is kindled and burnt down to liot 
 eoilxjrs. A plate of iron, or sometimes copper, is 
 placed over the hole, and on tliis the bread is baked. 
 Another mode of baking is in use chiefly among 
 the pastoral tribes, and Ijy travellers in the ojien 
 countrj', but is not unknown in the villages. A 
 smooth clear spot is chosen in the loose ground, a 
 sajidy soil — socomxnon in the Eastern deserts and 
 narder lands — being preferred. On this a fire is 
 kindled, and, when the ground is sulKciently 
 fleated, the emtiers and ashes are raked aside, and 
 the dough is laid on the heated spot, and then 
 covered over with the glowjng embers and ashes 
 wiiich had just been removed. The bread is seve- 
 ral times turned, and in less than half an hour is 
 snfiiciently t)aked. Bread thus baked is called in 
 Scripture Hiy \iggah (Gen. xviii. C ; 1 Kings xvii. 
 13; Ezek. iv. \'2), and the indication, 1 Kings 
 xix. 6, is very clear, D''SVT njj? 'uggathretzafini 
 ^^coal-cakes), i. e. cakes baked under the coals. 
 The Septuagint expresses this word \iggatk very 
 fairly by iyicpvcpias, panis subcinericius (Gen. 
 xviii. 6 ; Exod. xii. 39). According to Busbequius 
 (Itm. p. 36), the name of Ilugath, which he in- 
 terprets ash-cakes, or a-sA-l)read, was in his time 
 still applied in Bulgaria to cakes prejiared in this 
 fasliion ; and as soon as a stranger arrived in the 
 villages, the women baked such bread in all haste 
 in order to sell it to him. This conveys an in- 
 teresting illustration of Gen. xvi. 6, where Sarah, 
 on the arrival of three strangers, was required to 
 bake ' quickly ' such ash-bread — though not for 
 sale, but for the hospitable entertainment of the 
 unknown travellers. The bread thus prepared is 
 good and palatable, altliough tlie outer rind, or 
 crust, is apt to smell and taste of the .smoke and 
 ashes. The necessity of turning these cakes gives 
 a satisfactory explanation of Hos. vii. 8, where 
 Ephraim is comj;ared to a cake not turned, i. e. 
 only baked on one side, while the other is raw and 
 adhesive. 
 
 The second cliapter of Leviticus gives a sort 
 of Jist of the diflierent kinds of bread and cakes in 
 use among tlie ancient Israelites. Tiiis is done 
 incidentally, tor the purpose of distinguishing the 
 kinds whicli were and which were not suitable for 
 ollierings. Of such as were fit for ofl'erings we 
 find— 
 
 I. Bread baked in ovefis (Lev. ii. 4) ; but this 
 is limited to two sorts, which appear to be, 1st. the 
 bread baked inside the vessels of stone, metal or 
 earthenware, as already mentioned. In this case 
 the oven is half filled with small smooth pebbles, 
 upon which, wlien heated and the fuel withdrawn, 
 the dough is laid. Ihead prepared in this mode is 
 necessarily full of indentations or holes, iiom the 
 pebbles on which it is baked : 2nd, the bread pre- 
 pared by dropping with the hollow of the hand a thin 
 layer of the almost liquid dough upon the outside 
 of the same oven, and which, being baked dry the 
 moment it touclies tiie heated surface, forms a thin 
 wafer-like bread or biscuit. The first of these 
 Moses appears to distinguish by the characteristic 
 
 epithet of n"l?n, per/orated, or full of holes ; and 
 tlie other by the name of D"'p*p^, thin cakes, 
 faetog, «f correctly identified, by much tlie thin- 
 
 BREAD. 
 
 nest of any bread used in the East. A cake of 
 the former was oflered as the first of the dough 
 (Lev. viii. 26), and is mentioned in 2 Sam. vi. 19^ 
 with the addition of ' ' bread,' — perforated bread 
 
 (tiVD rir^n). Both sorts, when used for oflcringa^ 
 were to i)e unleavened (jjerhaps to secure their being 
 prepared Cor the s])ecial purpose); and the first 
 sort, namely, that which appears to have beeii baked 
 inside the oven, was to be mixed up with oil, whil« 
 tlie other (that baked outside the oven), which from 
 its thinness could not jxissibly be thus treated, waa 
 to be only smeared with oil. Tlie fiesh olive oil, 
 which was to be uVd for this purjiose, imparts to 
 the bread something of the flavour of butter, which 
 last is usually of very indifferent quality in 
 Eastern countries. 
 
 II. iiread baked in a pan — 1st, that which, 
 as before described, is baked in, or rather 
 on, tiie tajen. This also as an offering was te 
 be unleavened and mixed with oil. 2nd. This, 
 according to Lev. ii. 6, could be broken into 
 pieces, and oil poured over it, forming a dis- 
 tinct kind of bread and oflering. And in fact 
 the thin biscuits baked on the tajen, as well as the 
 other kinds of breail, thus broken up and re-made 
 into a kind of dough, form a kind of food or pastry 
 in which the Orientals take much delight, and 
 which makes a standing dish among the pastoral 
 tribes. The ash-cake answering to the Hebrew 
 'uygah is the most frequently employed for this pur- 
 pose. When it is baked, it is broken up into crumbs, 
 and re-kneaded with wafer, to whicli is added, 
 in the course nf the operation, butter, oil, vinegar, 
 or hbney. Having thus again reduced it to a 
 tough dough, the ma.s3 is broken into pieces, which 
 are baked in smaller cakes and eaten as a 
 dainty The preparation for the Mosaical ollering 
 was more simple ; but it serves to indicate the 
 existence of such preparations among the ancient 
 Israelites. 
 
 III. Bread baked upon the hearth — that is to 
 say, baked ujxin the hearth-stone, or plate covering 
 the fire-pit which tas already been mentioned. 
 Tills also was to be mixed with oil (Lev. ii. 7). 
 
 As these various kinds of liaked breads were at 
 lowed as offerings, there is no question that they were 
 the best modes of preparing bread known to fl.« 
 Hebrews in the time of Moses; and as all the in- 
 gredients were such as Palestine abundantly pro- 
 duced, they were such ofl'erings as even the poorest 
 might without much dilliculty procure. 
 
 Besides these there are two other modes of pre- 
 paring bread indicated in the Scriptures, which 
 cannot with equal ceitainty be identified by re- 
 ference to modem usages. 
 
 One of these is the Dn"lp3 nikiiddim of 1 Kings 
 xiv. 3, translated 'cracknels' in the Authorized 
 Version, an almost obsolete word denoting a kind 
 of crisp cake. The original would seem by its 
 etymology (from *lp3, speckled, spotted), to de- 
 note something spotted or sprinkled over, &c. 
 Euxtorf {Lex. Chald. et Talm.) writes under this 
 word : 'Orbiculi parvi panis instar dimidii ori'i, 
 Teramoth, c. 5 ;' and in another jilace (Epit. rad. 
 Hebr. p. 014), ' Et bucellata, 1 Reg. xiv. 3, qus 
 biscocta vulgo vocant, sic dict-a, quod in frusta 
 exigua rotunela, quasi puncta conficerentur, aut 
 quod singulari forma interpunctarwitur.' It ia 
 indeed not improbable thai they may have been a 
 sort of biscuit or small and hard baked cak««,
 
 BREASTPLATE. 
 
 eaictilated +o l<eep (for a journey or some otVier pwr- 
 piwe), liy rexsoii of their exci'-sive hardness (or jier- 
 bnps lK'Ing<?oife baked, as the word biscuit inijil ies). 
 Not only are sunli hard cakes or biscuits still used 
 it) tiie East, l)ut tliey are, like all liiscuits, /)»f«e- 
 turedto render them more hard, and sometimes also 
 they are sjirinkled widi seeds : either of whirh cir- 
 cnir.-'atices sufficiently meets the conditions sua^- 
 ge5ted liy theetymolo,:jy of the Hebrew word. The 
 existence of such biscuits is fmther imj)lied in 
 Josli. ix. 5, 12, wiiere Vlie Gil)eonite3 describe their 
 bread as iiaving Injcoine as hard as biscuit (not 
 ' mouldy,' as in the AuthoriziHl Version), by rea- 
 son of the lengtii of their journey. 
 
 The other was a I.ind of fancy tiread, tlie making 
 of wliich appears to have been a rare accomijlish- 
 ineiit, since Tamar was required to ))re[)are it for 
 AmnoJi in his pielended illness (2 S.im. xiii. (!). 
 As the name only indicates that it was some 
 favourite kind of cake, of which there may have 
 been diflerent sorts, no conjecture with reference 
 to it can be ofleied. See Hezel, Real-Le.i:ico?i, 
 art. ' Brod ;' Burckhardt, .Vote o?i the Bedouins ; 
 and the various travel lei s in Palestine, &c., par- 
 ticularly Shaw, Nielmlir, Moiiconys,' Russell, 
 Lane {Modern Kc/i/pfians), Perkins, Olin. &c. 
 compared with tlie present writer's persoiial ob 
 Bervations. 
 
 BREAD OK THK PnESENCK. TShEW BrEAD ] 
 
 BREASTPLATE, a jjiece of defensive ar- 
 mour. [Arms. Aumouu.] 
 
 BREASTPLATE ok the High-Priest, a 
 splendid ornament covering the breast of the liigh- 
 priest. It was composed of richly embroidered 
 cloth, in which were set, in f.iur rows, twelve pre- 
 cious stones, on each of which was erigra\en the 
 name of one of the twelve tribes of Lsrat-l (Exod. 
 xxviii. 1.5-29; xxxix. 8-21). [Priests, 
 
 DRESS OF.] 
 
 BREECHES. [Priests, dress of.] 
 BRICKS. Bricks compacted with straw and 
 dried in the sun, are those which are chiefly men- 
 tioned in the Scriiitures. Of such liiicksthe tower 
 of Babel was doubtless composed [Babei,, Baby- 
 i/3n], and the making of such formed the chief 
 labour of the Israelites when bondsmen in Egypt 
 (Exod. i. 13, 14). This last fact constitutes the 
 piincijjal subject of Scriptural interest connected 
 wiUi bricks ; and leads us to regard with peculiar 
 interest (he mural paintings of that country, vv-hich 
 have lately l/een brought to ligiit, in which .scenes 
 brick-making are depicted. 
 
 BRICKS. 
 
 343 
 
 [ligyptian Itrirkmaking.] 
 
 'The use of crude brick, baked in the sun. 
 
 was universal in Ujij.e- and Lower Egypt, botl; 
 for public and private 'uiltiings ; am' he Itrick- 
 
 field pave abundant , occujiation o nurneitnis 
 laliourers tliroui,dioiit the country. Tbe-e simpl* 
 materials were I'ound to b? jvirticu.aily siiiteil U> 
 thf climate, and the ease, rapidity, and ciiea]ines<i 
 wijh which they were made, alli)i<led additional 
 recommendations. Inclosures of gardens ur gra- 
 naiies, sacred circuits encompassing the courts of 
 temj)le>, walls of foitificali<ins and towns, ilwell- 
 ing-iioiises and toml)s, in short. .all but the temples 
 tliemselves were of crude iirii.!: •, and so great wan 
 the demand, that tlie Egyptian government, ob- 
 serving the profit which would accrue from n 
 mono]:oly of ihein, undertook to sujijily the pul>- 
 lie at a moderate p.rice, thus j/reveiiting all un- 
 aiithoii2e<i )iersons from engaging in tlic manu- 
 factuie. And in order the more ellectually 
 to obtain this enci, the seal of the king, or of some 
 privileged person, was stamped upon the bricks 
 at the rime they were made. This fact, though 
 not positively mentioned by any ancient author, 
 is inferred from (iniling bricks so marked t.-oth 
 in public and j)rivate buildings ; some having 
 the ovals of a king, and some the name and titles 
 of a ]:riest, or other influential jierson : and it is 
 probable that those which bear no characters be- 
 longed to individuals who had obtained a licence 
 or p< imissioii from the government, to fabricaie 
 them for their own consutnptlon. The emjiloy- 
 ment of numerous captives wiio worked a,s slftves, 
 enabled (he government to sell the liiicks at a 
 lower price than those who had recourse solely to 
 free labour; so that, without the necessity of a pro- 
 hibition, they s{)eedily ()ecame an exclusive manu- 
 facture; and we Hud that, independent of native 
 labourers, a great many foreigners were constantly 
 engaged in the brick-fields at Thebes and other 
 parts of Egypt. The Jews, of cour.se, were not 
 excluded from this drudgery; and, like the ca])- 
 tives detained in the Thebaid, they were con- 
 demned to the same labour in Lower Ep;ypt. 
 They erected granaries, treasuie-cilies, and other 
 jniblic liuildlngs for the Egyptian monarch : the 
 materials used in their constiuction were the work 
 of their hands ; and the constant employment of 
 brick-makers may be accounted Air by the exten- 
 sive su))ply requiied and kept by the government 
 for sale' (Wilkinson's Ancient Egyptians, ii. ])p. 
 97, 9S). 
 
 Captive foreigners being thus found engaged 
 in brick-making, Biblical illu^tiatois, with their 
 usual alacrity, jumped to the conclusion (hat 
 tliese captive foreigners weie Jews, and that the 
 scenes rejiresenfed were tho.se of their actual opera- 
 tions in Egypt. Sir J. G. Wilkinson satisfic- 
 torily disposes of this inference by the following 
 remark : ' To meet with Hebrews in the sculjitures* 
 cannot leasonnbly be expected, since the lemaiiiH 
 ill that part of Egypt where they lived have not 
 been ])reserved ; but it is curious to discover other 
 foiei^'ii captives occupied in the same manner, and 
 overhioked by similar 'task-masters.' anil jieiform- 
 iiigthe verysan.e labours as the Israelites described 
 in the Bible; and no one can look at the paintings 
 of Tlielies, representing brick-makei-s, without <> 
 
 feellngof the highest interest It iiscarrely 
 
 fair to argue that, because the Jews made bricks, 
 and the jiersons heic intiodured are so engaged, 
 they must nei-essarily be Jews; since the Kgyn- 
 (ians arul their captives are constantly required to 
 perf<irni the same task; and the great quantity 
 made at all times mav be ju.stlv iiTerred from 
 
 2 A
 
 iiSl 
 
 BRIDGE. 
 
 the number of buil(!ings which still rema'n, con- 
 structed of these mateiials : but it is worthy of 
 remark that more bricks bearinrj the name of 
 Thothmes III. (who is supposed to have been the 
 king at the time of the Exode) have been d^s- 
 eovered than at any other period, owing to the 
 many prisoners of Asiatic nations employed by 
 hirn, independent of his Hebrew captives.' 
 
 The jirocess of manufacture indicated by there- 
 presentations in cut ]7i, does not materially difler 
 from that which is still followed in the same coun- 
 try. The clay was brouglit in t)askets from the Nile, 
 thrown into a heap, thoroughly saturated with 
 water, and worked up to a proper temj^er by tlie 
 feet of tlie labourers. And here it is observable 
 .that the watering and tempering of the clay is per- 
 formed enti.-ely by the light-coloured labourers, 
 wiio are the captives, the Egyptians being always 
 painted red. This lal)Our in such a climate 
 must have been very fatiguing and unwliolesome, 
 and it consequently appears to liave been shunned 
 by tlie native Kgy])tians. Tliere is an allusion to 
 the severity of tliis labour in Nabum iii. 14, 15. 
 The clay, wlien tempered, was cut by an instru- 
 ment somewhat resembling the agricultural hoe, 
 and moulded in an oldong trough ; the bricks were 
 then dried in the sun, and some i'rom their colour 
 appear to have been baked or Imrned, but no 
 trace of this operation has yet lieen disrovered in 
 the monuments (Dr. W. C. Taylor's Bible Illus- 
 trated, p. S2). Tlie writer just cited makes (he 
 following ])ertiiient remarks on the order of the king 
 that the Israelites should collect tiie straw witli 
 which to compact (not burn) their bricks : ' It is 
 evident that Pharaoh did not require a physical im- 
 possibility, because tlie Egyptian reajiers only cut 
 away the tops of the com [Agriculture]. We 
 must remember that the tyrannical Pharaoh issued 
 his orders proliibiting the supply of straw about 
 two months before the time of liarvest. If, therefore, 
 the straw had not been usually left standing in 
 the fields, he would have shown himself an idiot as 
 well as a tyrant ; but the narrative sliows us that 
 the Israelites fountl the stems of the last year's 
 harvest standing in the iields ; for by the word 
 • stubble' (Exod. v. 12) the historian clearly 
 means the stalks tiiat remained f.om the last 
 year's harvest. Still the demand that tliey 
 should comjjlete their lale of Inicks was one that 
 could scarcely be fulfilled; and the conduct of 
 Phataoli on this occasion is a perfect specimen of 
 Oriental despotism.' 
 
 BRIDE, BRIDEGROOM. [Marriage.] 
 BRIDGE. It is somewhat remarkable that 
 the word bridge does not occur in all Scripture, 
 although tliere were without doubt bridges over 
 the rivers of Pales'ine, especially ill tlie country 
 beyond the Jordan, in whicli the principal peren- 
 nial streams are found. There is mention of a mili- 
 tary bridge ('2 Mace. xii. 13) wiiich Judas Macca- 
 bifius intended to make, in order to facilitate his 
 operations against the town oi' Caspis. had he not 
 beer prevented. There are traces of ancient bridges 
 across the Jordan, above and below the lake of Gen- 
 nesarelh, and also over the Arnon and other rivers 
 which enter the Jordan from tlie Eaat ; and some 
 of the winter torrents wliich ti averse tiie western- 
 mo.st plain (the plain of the coast) are crossed 
 Liy br'dges. But the ohlest of these appear to 
 lie of Roman origin, and some ot moie recent 
 date It would be useless, in a suiiject so little 
 
 BRIDGE. 
 
 Biblical, to trace the contrivances wliich wert 
 proliably resjrted to in tiie ruder and mure 
 remote ages. Such contrivances, Inrfore the stone 
 bridge is atlaineil, are j>r.)gressively the same in 
 most countries, or varied only liy local circum- 
 stances. The bridges which existed in the later 
 ages of Scriutural iiistory are ])robal>ly not very 
 ditferent from tliose which we still tiiid in and 
 near Palestine; and under this view the following 
 representations of existing bridges are introduced 
 
 176. [Jacob's Bridge.] 
 
 The priiici]ial existing bridge in Palestine is 
 that shown in cut 17G. It crosses tiie upper 
 Jordan aiiout two miles below the lake Houle. 
 The river here (lows rapidly througli a narrow 
 bed ; and here from the most reniote ages has 
 lain the high road to Damascus from all jiarts ol 
 Palestine; which rcnilers it likely that a bridg* 
 existed at this place in veiy ancient time* 
 although, of course, not the one wliich is nokS 
 standing. The bridge is called Jacob's Bridg* 
 (Jissr Yakoub), from a tradition tliat it nrarksi 
 the spot where the patriarch Jacob crossed the 
 river on his return from Padan-Aram. But it it 
 also sometimes called Jissr Beni Yakoub, th» 
 Bridge of Jacob's Suns, wliich may sugge-sl that 
 
 'Bridge at E!S»k.(
 
 BRIDGE. 
 
 BROTHER. 
 
 3W 
 
 the riame is ratiipv deiiveil fr<>tn some Arab tribe 
 called t\\e Bfiii Viikuiili. The liii«l(»« is a very 
 soli<l strucfuie, well Imilt, with a lii;^h cu ve in 
 the midille like all the Syrian hritiges ; and is 
 composed of three arches, in tiie usual style of 
 ttiesu I'ahrics. Close hy it, on tlie east, is a khan 
 much frequented by travellers, Imilt upon the 
 remains of a fortress wiiicli was erected by the 
 Crusa'l?rs lo command the {)assai;e of the Jordan. 
 A (;w soldiers are now stationed here to collect a 
 U'li upon all the laden beasts which cross the 
 orid^e. 
 
 ^3o. 177 is abridge or arch thrown over a ravine 
 at El Sale, the antiquity of which is evinced by 
 the sculptured cliH's with which it is connected. 
 
 Somewhat similar to this is the bridge next re- 
 presented (No. 17S), which is in many resjiects a 
 
 178, [Bridge of St. Anthony.] 
 
 carious and remarkable structure. It leads to a 
 cnivent (of St. .A.nthony) among the mointaiiis; 
 which explains the Christian symbols t lat have 
 been jjlacei upon it 
 
 179. [Bridge at Tcliavder*.] 
 
 No. 171) is an ancient bridge, at Tchavdere, in 
 Aiia Minor. It is mtrodiicpd as a fair specimen 
 of many ancient bridges of one arch, by which 
 winter torrents and small streams are crossed in 
 Syria and Asia Minor. 
 
 Bridge, such as the following (No. 180\ also 
 entirely unfenced, frequently occur. 
 
 180. [Unfenced Bridge.] 
 
 No. 181 is a Persian bridge; but it is here in- 
 irtxluced as a very fair s))e<;imen of the general 
 character of the bridges which are met with in 
 all jiarts of Western Asia. 
 
 d 
 
 
 181. [Persian Bridge.] 
 
 BRIERS. [Tkouns.] 
 
 BROOK (^05 nachal; Sept. xe^Ma^^oO : <>>• 
 original word thus translated might belter be 
 rendered by tori-ent. It is apt>lied, 1. to small 
 streams arising from a subterraneous siiring, and 
 flowing thnmgh a deep valley, such as the Arnon, 
 Jabbok, Kidron, Sorek, &c. ; and also the brdok 
 of the willows, mentioned in Isa. xv. 7 ; 2. lo 
 winter-torrents, arising from rains, and which are 
 soon dried up in the warm seiison (.lol) vi. 13, 19^ 
 Such is tlie noted river (brook) of Egypt, so often 
 meiitioned as at tlie southernmost border of Pales- 
 tine (Num. xxxiv. 5 ; Josh. xv. 4, 47), and, iu 
 fact, such are most of the brooks and streams of 
 Palestine, which are numerous in winter and early 
 spring, but of which very few survive the beginning 
 of the siniimer. 
 
 BROTHER (HK ; New Test. '\^e\(p6i). Th>« 
 term is so variously and extensively a])plied iu 
 Scripture, that it becomes imixrrtant carefully to 
 distinguish the dilTerent acceptations in wliich it 
 is use<l. 
 
 1 . It denotes a brother in the natural sense, whe- 
 ther the offspring of the same father only (Matt. i. 2; 
 Luke iii. 1, l!l), or of the s;iine father and mother 
 (Lukevi. 14, &c.). — 2. A near relative or kinsman 
 by blood, cousin (Gen. xiii. S; xiv. If! ; Matt, xii, 
 46 ; John vii. 3 ; Acts i. 14 ; Gal. i. 19).— 3. One 
 who is cormected with another by any tie tA 
 intimacy or fellowship: hence — 4. One bom in 
 the same country, descriulcd from the same stock, 
 a fellow countryman (Matt. v. 47; Acts iii. 22; 
 Heb. vii. 5; Exod. ii. 1 1 ; iv. 1«).— .5. One of 
 equal rank and dignity (Jol) xxx. 29 ; Pi-ov. xviii. 
 9; Matt, xxiii. 8). — 6. Disciples, followers, &«. 
 (Matt. XXV. 40; Heb. ii. 11, ia>— 7 ")ne of th»
 
 S56 
 
 BULL. 
 
 «ame faitli (Amos i. 9; Acts ix. 30; xi. 29; 
 
 1 Co . V. xi.) ; from wiiicli and other texts it ap- 
 pears fliat the first con\erta to the faitli of Jrsus 
 were known to each other by the title of Bretliren, 
 till the name of Christians was given to them at 
 Antiodi (Acts xi. 26). — 8. An associate, collca2;ue 
 in olKce or dignity, &c. (Ezra iii. 2 ; 1 Cor. i. 1 ; 
 *l Cor, i. 1 ; &c.) — 9. One of the same nature, a 
 fellow-man ((ien. xiii. 8; xxvi. 31; Matt v. 
 22,23, 24; vii. 5; Heb. ii. 17; viii. 11).— 10. 
 One beloved, i. e. as a brother, in a direct atldrtss 
 (Acts ii. 29; vi. 3; 1 Thess. v. 1). 
 
 In Matt. xiii. 55 James, .loses, Simon, and 
 .Tudas are mentioned as the brotheis of Jesns, and 
 in the ensiling verse sisters are also ascribed to 
 iiim. The Protestant s])irit of opposition to the 
 Popish notion about tiie jierpctiial virginity of 
 Mary, has led many commentators to contend 
 Uiat this must be taken in the literal sense, 
 and that t.liese persons are to be regarded as 
 children whom she bore to her husband Joseph 
 after the birth of Christ. On the whole we incline 
 to this opinion, seeing that sncli a sujjjiosition is 
 more in agreement with the spirit and letter of llie 
 context than any other; and as the force of the 
 liliusion to tlie brothers and sisters of Jesus would 
 he much weakened if more distant relatives are 
 to be uudei stood. Nevertheless there are some 
 grounds for the other opinion, that tliese were not 
 natural brothers and sisfers, but nenr relations, 
 probably cousins, of Christ. In Matt, xxvii. 56 
 a James and Joses are described as sons of Mary 
 (certainly not the Virgin) ; and again a James 
 and Judas are described as sons of Alplireus (Luke 
 vi. 15, 16', which Aljihaeus is probably the same 
 as Cleophas, husband of Mary, sister of the Virgin 
 (John xix. 35). If tlierefore it were clear that 
 this James, Joses and Judas are tlie same that 
 are elsewliere described as the Lord's brothers, 
 (his point would be beyond disjjute ; but as it is, 
 much doubt must always hang over it. 
 
 BUBASTIS. [PiBESETH.] 
 
 BULL (TlK' s/ior), with other kindred terms, 
 has been already noticed in the article Beeves. 
 We may add "liri tor, which occurs only in Ezra 
 vi.9, 17; vii. 17: Dan. iv. 25, 32, 33 [iv. 22, 
 29, 30] ; ill all which passages it seems to lefer to 
 buUocKS, laiwuring or yoke oxen, and cattle wild 
 or tame, taken collectively ; D*"1"'3K cibirim, im- 
 plying strength, and rendeied ' bulls,' is found 
 m Ps. xxii. 12; 1. 13 ; Ixviii. 30 ; Isa. xxxiv. 7, 
 
 and Jer. xlvi. 21 ; and ni?3y aglot/i, u'^JX 
 aylim, are used when the animals are under three 
 years of age. It is contended that the castra- 
 tion of no animal was. jjracti.sed among the 
 Hebrews. If tliat was tire case other methods 
 than tliose generally alluded to must have been 
 ado])ted to break oxen to labour; (or Ine mere 
 application of a metal ring tlirough the cartilage 
 of" tlie nostrils, although it might have greatly 
 restrained the ferocity of the beasts, would not 
 assuredly have rendered them sufficiently docile 
 to the yoke and goad of a peojjle whose chief 
 dependence for food was in the produce of the 
 plough. 
 
 The rearing of horned cattle was encouraged I/y 
 ihe people of Israel. These animals were protected 
 in some cases by express provisions of tlie law ; 
 tbey were held clean, being the usual sacrifice of 
 toDfiidei-a^ior, and the chief article of flesh diet of 
 
 BULL. 
 
 the popnlation. Judging froiT) En^yptian remaini^ 
 there were two great breeds of straight-backed 
 cattle, the long-horned and the short-horned ; and 
 in Upper Egypt at least, there was one without 
 horns. Anotlier himched sjiecies existed, wliicb 
 served'to draw chariots, yoked in the same man- 
 ner as the Brahminee bulls of India are at present. 
 It is still abundant in Nubia, and. under t!>e 
 name of bos sacer, or Indicus, notwithstanding it 
 breeds with the common Sjiecies, is yet considered 
 distinct. The calf is born with teeth; and although 
 ill central Africa, India, and China it is mixed 
 with the other species, and when low in flesh ii 
 almost dejirived of its liunch, the natural cha- 
 racters nevertheless continue ; and from the evi- 
 dence of ancient Egyptian jiictures and written 
 documents it must have been propagated foi 
 above 3000 years. 
 
 In Egypt the straight-backed or common cattle 
 appear, from the same evidence, to have formed 
 a very handsome breed with lunate bonis. They 
 were generally spotted black or red upon a white 
 ground, and there were, besides, others white, red, 
 or black. They all served for common use, but those 
 without red were selected when new sacred bulls, 
 apis or mnevis, were to be supplied ; for they alone 
 had the colours which could show the marks made 
 by chance or by art, and required to iit the animal 
 for the purpose intended. There was, besides, a 
 sacred cow^ ; and a black bull was worshipped at 
 Hermonthis. This was the bash, thelargest of bulls, 
 by the Greeks changed to onaphis, basis, I)azi8, 
 and had the additional character of the hair run- 
 ning the wrong way, or forward ; hence, evidently 
 it was not a true ox or bull, but a sjiecies of gno, 
 the catoblejias gorgon, or cat. taurina, still denomi- 
 nated baas (wliich is a Namaqua Hottentot name, 
 and not Dutch, althougii the same woid in Dutch 
 signifies ' master") by the Namaquas, and a con- 
 gener or the same as the ij^iju>S feshtall of Shaw, 
 
 whose name indicates a similar maned ami 
 bristled external. This ])resents another instance 
 of the extension of Semitic words and names to 
 South Africa ; for though it may be that the same 
 word was applied to a species of an approximating 
 genus, perhaps the Aigocerus niger, which is 
 black, and, like others of the group, has the direc- 
 tion of the hair on tlie mane anil anterior jiarts 
 turned forward, either or both of the above species 
 may have extended so far northward as to have 
 lieen within the occasional reach of me Egyjitian 
 priesthood ; and the first, at least, which has con- 
 geners in Northern Africa, jiossesses external cha- 
 racters suthciently remarkable to have answered 
 their ]iur];oses. 
 
 In Palestine the breed of cattle was most likely 
 in ancient times, as it still is, inferior in size tc 
 the Egyptian ; and provender must have been 
 abundant, indeed, if the number of beasts sacri- 
 ficed at the great Jewish festivals, mentioned in 
 Joseplius, be correct, and could be sustained foi 
 a succession of years. 
 
 Unless the name be taken synonymously with 
 that of other species, theie is not. in the Bible any 
 indication of the bullalo. The Asiatic species w;m 
 not known in Greece till the time of Aristotle, who 
 first speaks of it by the name of the Arachosian ox. 
 No sjjecies of Bos Bubalus is known even at tliig 
 day in Arabia; but in Egypt the Asiatic species hai 
 been introduced in coiise(^uence of the Moliam^
 
 BURIAL. 
 
 BMLan cciiquesU in die East. The indigenous 
 bulVali.-cs of AlVica, aniuiiiitiiig at least to two 
 very distinct siH'cies, a[)[K'ar to have beloiiL^ed to 
 tJje lioutJi and west of tiiat coiitiiieiU, and only at 
 a later j)eriod to have appiiiached E^'ypt as far 
 as tiie present liiiinou ; for iicne are li;,'ined on 
 any known monunienl in eitiier Upper or Lower 
 Kgypt. With regard, iiowever, to wild oxen of 
 the true Taurine ^eiius, some may, at a very remote 
 period, iiave been found in Bashan, evidently 
 tiie origin ot' tlie name, — a re<j;ion where moun- 
 tain, wood, and water, all connecting the Syrian 
 Liljanus with Taurus, were favourable to their 
 existence; but tlie wild bulls of tiie district, 
 icentioned in Psalm xxii. 12, and in various 
 other passages, appear, nevertheless, to refer to do- 
 mestic 8pec;ies, jirobably left to propagate without 
 much human superintendence, except a>inually 
 
 BURIAL. 
 
 M7 
 
 marking the increase, and selectnig a portion foi 
 consumtition. in the same manner as is still prac- 
 tised in some parts of Europe. Eor aitluuigh the 
 words, ' fat bulls of Basiiati close me in m; c\ery 
 side,' are an indication of wild inanneis, the word 
 ' fat " somewhat weakens tlie impression ; and we 
 know tiiat the half-wild white liretd of .Scotland 
 likevvise retains the character vl' fncoiiip;issing 
 olijects that excite llieir distrust. It was therefore 
 natural that in Palestine w Id gregarious instincts 
 should have still remained in o])cratioii, wiicre real 
 dangers beset herds, whicli in tiie time of David 
 were still exposed tn lions in tiie hills around them. 
 See Antelohk, and Cai.k, where Bahumed seems 
 to be a modilicatiun ol' JJ.ihema. Baal is said to 
 liave been wurshipjied in tlie form of a lieeve, 
 and Moloch to have had a c^ill"* or steer's head 
 f Bkevks; Cai.fJ.— C. H. b. 
 
 f-S III 
 
 182. [.\ncient Jewish Funeral: Cotturae, Modern Syrian.] 
 
 BURIAL and SEPULCHRES. Abraham, 
 m his treaty for the cave of Macpelah, spoke the 
 language of nature when he expressed liis anxiety 
 to obtain a secure place in which ' to bury his 
 dead out of his sight;' and accordingly, amongst 
 every ])eo]ile wliose natural feelings have been 
 influenced liy pure morality and religion, ttie 
 consignment of the mortal rem.aii)s of those near 
 and dear to tliem to the custody of their mother 
 earth, has been ap])roved of as the most proper 
 and pleasing mode of disposing of the dead. 
 Two instaiires. indeed, we meet with in sacred 
 history of the iiailiaious practice of buiTiing them 
 to aslies : the one in the case of Saul and liis sons, 
 whose bodies were probalily so mucli mangled as 
 to preclude tlieir receiving the royal lionours of 
 embalment (I Sam. xxxi. 12); the other, men- 
 tioned by Amos (vi. 10), appears to refer to a 
 ifeoson of prevailing pestilence, and the burning 
 of those wiio died of plague was jirobably one of 
 t\\e sanatory measures ailopted to prevent the 
 spread of contagion. But throughout the whole 
 of their nationa-1 history the jieojile of God ob- 
 served the practice of burial. Amongst them, as 
 amongst many other ancient nations, the rites of 
 sepulture were considered as of indispensable 
 importance. It wiis deemed not only an act of 
 humanity, but a sacred dutj' of religion to pay 
 the last honours to the departed; wiiile, to be 
 •leprived of these, as wa.s frequently the fate of 
 enemies at the hands of ruthle-ss conquerors 
 C'2 Sam. xxi. 9-11; 2 Kings xi. 11-16 ; Ps. Ixxix. 
 %; Eccles. vi. .'!), was considered the greatest ca- 
 lamity and disgrace which a person could suffer. 
 On the death of any member of a family, ])re- 
 jjarations weie forthwith made for the liurial, 
 which, among the Jews, were in many re.S]ioct8 
 nrailar to those whicn are common in tlie East at 
 rite present day, and were more or less ex]'ensive 
 according to cirs mst.-mt es. After the solemn 
 cerraaotj^ of the last kiss and closing ^he eyes, 
 
 the corpse, which was peifumed by the nearest 
 relative, having been laid out and the head covered 
 with a napkin, was subjected to entire ablution in 
 warm water (Acts ix. 37), a precaution ])robably 
 adopted to guard against premature interment. 
 But, besides this first and indispensable attention, 
 other caies of a moie elaliorate and costly descrip- 
 tion were amongst certain classes bestowed on 
 the remains of deceased friends, the origin oi 
 which is to be traced to a fond and natural, 
 though foolish anxiety to retard or defy the 
 jjrocess of decomjiosition, and all of which may 
 be included under the general head of embalm- 
 ing. Nowhere was this ojieration performed with 
 such religious care and in so scientific a manner 
 as in ancient Egypt, which could boast of a class 
 of professional men trained to the busine^ss; and 
 such adepts had these ' physicians' Wcome in the 
 art of preserving dead bodies, that there are 
 mu?n7nies still found, which must have existed 
 
 183. [Interior of a Mummy Pit.] 
 
 for many thousand years, and are probably ths 
 remains of aubjecta of the «arly Pharaohs. Tht
 
 tas BURIAL. 
 
 bodies of Jacob and Joseph undenrpnt this emi- 
 nently EgyjJtian jMeparation I'or Ittiiial, wliich on 
 both occasions was doubtless executed in a style 
 of the greatest ma;^nilicence (Gen. 1. 2, 26). 
 Whether tliis expensive method of embalming 
 was imitated by the earlier Hebrews, we have no 
 distinct accounts ; but we learn from their prac- 
 jM-.e in later ages that they had some observance 
 of tlie kind, only they substituted a simpler and 
 more expeditious, though it must have been a 
 less efficient proces^i, which consisted in merely 
 swathing the corpse round with numerous folds of 
 lijien, and sometimes a variety of stuffs, and 
 anointing it with a mixture of aromatic sub- 
 wances, of wliich aloes and myrrh were the 
 rhief ingredients. A sparing use of spices on 
 such occasions was reckoned a misplaced and 
 discreditahle economy ; and few higher tokens of 
 respect could be ])aid to the remains of a departed 
 friend than a profuse ap))lication of costly per- 
 fumes. Tiius we are told by the writers of the 
 Talmud (Massecheth Semacoth, viii.), that not 
 less than eighty pounds weight of spices weie 
 used at the funeral of Ral)bi Gamaliel, an elder; 
 and by Josephus (Antiq. xvii. 8. § 3), tliat in the 
 splendid funeral procession of Herod, 500 of his 
 servants attended as spice-bearers. Thus, too, 
 p.fter the crucifixion, Nicodemus and Joseph of 
 Arima*hea, two men of wealth, testified their 
 regard for the sacred body of the Saviour by 
 ' bringing a mixture of myrrh and aloes about 
 an hundred pound weight' (John xix. 39, 40); 
 *-hile, unknoivn to them, the two Marys, together 
 ■with their associates, were prepared to render the 
 same oHice of friendship on the dawn of the first 
 day of the week. Wliatever cavils the Jewish 
 doctors have made at their extravagance and 
 unnecessary waste in lavishing such a quantity of 
 costly perfumes on a person in tlie circumstances 
 of Jesus, the libe.ality of those pious disciples in 
 the performance of the rites of their country was 
 unquestionably dictated by the profound venera- 
 tion which tliey cherished lor the memory of their 
 Lord. Nor can we be certain but they intended 
 to use the great abundance of pei fumes they pro- 
 vided, not in the common way of anointing tlie 
 corpse, but, as was done in the case of princes 
 and very eminent personaa-es, of preparing 'a bed 
 of spices," in which, alter burning them, they might 
 deposit the boily (2 Ciiron. xvi. 14 ; Jer. xxxiv. 5). 
 For unjiatriotic and wicked princes, however, 
 the people made no such burnings, and hence 
 Oie honour was denied to Jehoram (2 Chron. xxi. 
 19). 
 
 The coqise, after receiving the preliminary 
 atten'ions, was enveloped in the grave-clothes, 
 wkicn were sometimes nothiiig more than the 
 ordinary dress, or Iblds of linen cloth wrapped 
 
 IS4. [Grave-clotlies.] 
 
 round the body, and a najjkin about the head ; 
 though in other cases a shroud was used, whicli 
 had long before been prepaied by die individual 
 for the pur]),ise, and wiis j.lain or ornamental 
 according to taste or other circumstances. The 
 body tiuis dresseii was deposited iii an upjHT 
 
 BURIAL. 
 
 chamlier in solemn state, open tc he view of ^ 
 
 visitors (Acts ix. 37). 
 
 From the moment the vital spark wa.s extin- 
 ^lished, tiie membrrs of the family, especially 
 the females, in the violent style of (Oriental grief, 
 burst out into shrill, loud, and dolefid lamenta- 
 tions, and were soon joined l)y tlieir friends and 
 neighbours, who, on lieaiing of the event, crowded 
 to the house in such numl>ers that M;irk descriljes 
 it by the term 66pvl3os, a tumult (v. 3S). By tiie 
 better classes, among whom surl) liberties were 
 not allowed, this duty of symjjathiziiig with the 
 bereaved family was, and still is, jiei formed by a 
 class of females who engaged themselves as pro- 
 fessional mourners, and who, seated amid the 
 mourning circle, studied, liy vehement sobs and 
 gesticulations, and by singing dirges in which 
 they eulogized the jjersonal qualities or virtuoua 
 and benevolent actions of the deceased (Acts ix. 
 ■!9), to stir the source of tears, and give fresh 
 impulse to the grief of the aH'icted relatives. 
 Numbers of these singing men and women la- 
 mented the death of Josiali (2 Chron. xxxv. 25) 
 The effect of their melancholy ditties was some- 
 times heightened l)y the attendance of minstiels 
 {a'jKr\Ta'i, properly 73«};ers); and thus in solemn 
 silence, broken oidy at intervals by vocal and 
 instrumental strains suited to the mournful occa- 
 sion, the time was passed till the corpse waa 
 carried foith to the grave. 
 
 The period between the death and the burial 
 was mucli shorter than custom sanctions in oui 
 country ; ftjr a long delay in the lemoval cf a 
 corpse would have been attended with much 
 inconvenience, from the heat of the climate gtne- 
 rally, and, among the Jews in paiticular, from 
 tiie circumstance that every one t!iat came near 
 the chamber was unclean for a week. Inteiment, 
 therefore, where there was no emiialniing, was 
 never postponed beyond tv/enty-fbur hours after 
 death, and generally it took place mucli earlier. 
 It is still the practice in the East to have burials 
 soon over ; and tiieie are two instances in sacred 
 history where consignment to the grave followed 
 immediately after decease (Acts v. 6, 10). 
 
 Persons of distinction weie de]M)siteil in coflinst 
 Among tlie Egyptians, who were tlie inventors ol 
 them, these chests were formed most commonly 
 of several layers of pastelioard glued togetlier, 
 sometimes of stone, more rarely of sycamore 
 wood, which was reserved for tlie great, and fur- 
 nished, it is probable, tlie materials of the cofifin 
 wliich received the honoured remains of the viziel 
 of Egypt. Tliere is good reason to believe also tliat 
 the kings and other exalted personages in ancient 
 Palestine were buiied in coffins of wiKid oi 
 stone, on which, as additional maiks of honour, 
 were placed their insignia when they were carried 
 to tlieir tombs — if a prince, his crown and sceptra 
 — if a warrior, his armour, — and if a rabbi, hi< 
 book s. 
 
 But the most common mode of carrying a 
 corpse to the grave was on a liier or beil (2 Sam. 
 iii. 31), which in some cases must have been fur 
 nished in a costly and elegant style, if, as many 
 learned men conclude from the history of Asa 
 (2 Chron. xvi. 14) and of Herod (Joseiihus, 
 Antiq. xvii. 8. 9 3), these royal ))ersonage3 were 
 conveyed to their tombs on tlieir own beds. 
 Tiie bier, however, in use among the common and 
 uieaiier sort of people was nothing bi>t a plaui
 
 BURIAL. 
 
 BURIAL. 
 
 359 
 
 V.-.ui^>fiig^ 
 
 VDodefl board, on which, supported by two poles, Tliestyleofthe public cemeteries around the citiet 
 the iKxiy iiiy concealed only by a slight coverlet of ancient Palestin*; in all prolwibilily resembled 
 
 tiiat of the pri'si'iit buryin,'-pl*ct's o( the Kast, 
 of wliic^i J)r. Shaw gives the fi)lli(winir descrip- 
 tion : — ' They occupy a larf,'e .s()ace, a greHl 
 extent of ground being allolfetl lor the purpose. 
 Each family has a jKirtion of Jt walled in like a 
 gardiii, wlieie tlte bones of its ancestois l*ve 
 remained undistujbed for many generations. For 
 in these ii7cU»sun's the graves are all distinct and 
 sejKiiate; each of them iiaving a stone placed 
 upright, both at tlie licad and feet, inscribed with 
 the name oi- title of the deceased ; whilst the 
 inleimediafe space is citlier planted witli (lowers 
 bordered roirr.d with stone, or javcd with tiles.' 
 
 1*S. [Aocient Sarcophagi in Palestine.] 
 
 firom the view of tlie attendants. On such a 
 humble velncle was the widow's son of Nain 
 carried (Luke vii. 11), and ' this mode of per- 
 forming funeral obsequies,' says an intelligent 
 traveller, ' obtains equally in the present day 
 among the Jews, Moliammedans, and Christians 
 of the East.' The neatest relatives kept close by 
 the bier, and perfoJincd (he office of bearers, in 
 which, hoTj^ver, (liey were assisted by the com- 
 pany in succession. P'or if the deceased was a 
 public character, or, tlwugh in humble life, had 
 been much esteemed, f t*e Aiends and T>eighbours 
 showed their respect by volunteering attendance 
 in great numbers; and Iience, in tlie story of the 
 afl'ecting incident at Nain, it is related that 
 ' much people of the city were with the widow.' 
 In cases whe*e the expense could be afforded, 
 hired mourners aocompanied the procession, and, 
 by every now and then lifting tlie covering and 
 ex]x)Sing the corjise, gave the signal to the com- 
 pany to renew their shouts of lamentation. A 
 remarkable instance occurs in the splendid fu- 
 neral cavalcade of Jacob. Those mercenaries 
 broke oat at intervals into the most passionate 
 expressions of gi'i-ef, but especially on ajiproaching 
 the Iwundaries of Canaan and the site of the 
 sepulchre : the immense company halted for seven 
 days, and, under the guidance of the mouming 
 attendants, indulged in the most violent pa- 
 roxysms (if SO«K5W. 
 
 SejHilclu'es w<Te, as they still are in the East, 
 —by a prudential arrangement sadly neglected in 
 our country — situated without (he pre<rincts of 
 cities. Among the Jews, '..t the case of Levitical 
 cities, tlve distance requi;* 1 to be '2000 cubits, 
 and in all it was consitlerable. Nobody was 
 allowed to be buried' within the walls, Jeru- 
 salem furmiug tiie only exception, and even there 
 the privilege was reserved for the royal family of 
 David and a few persons of exalted character 
 (1 Kings ii. Irt ; 2 Kings xiv. 20). In the vi 
 cinit;' '..f this capital were public cemeteries for 
 tlie general acc(>rv;mo(lation of the inhabitants, 
 besides a (reld ajpropriated to tlie burial of 
 strangers, — the sujiposed site of which, together 
 with the discoveries made in it, has been descrilicd 
 by a late traveller, Wilde, in a most interesting 
 and satisfactory manner, but the evidence he 
 adduces for his conclusions does not admit of 
 aliridgment hei°e. 
 
 IRfi. [Modern Syrian Tombs.] 
 
 Examples of these tombs are given in Nos. 
 ISCand 187. By these it is seen that, as among 
 people in good circumstances, the monumental 
 stcnes are jilaced upon quadrangular lombs, in 
 the centre, of which evergieen or lowering siirubs 
 are often planted, and tended with much care. 
 
 187. [Modern Syrian Tombs. 1 
 
 [Rschel't Sepolehn.l
 
 m 
 
 BURIAL. 
 
 BURIAL. 
 
 purchased, like Abraliam, some of the uataral ca 
 vems with which Palestine aliouiuled, aiid con- 
 verted them Uy sonic suitable alteriitions int« 
 family sepulchres ; while otheis with vast paius 
 and exj)ense made exca\ atians in the s«>lid vock 
 (Matt. XXV ii. 60). These, the entrance to which 
 was either horizontal or by a lliglit ot" steps, had 
 their roofs, which were arched with the native 
 stone, so high as to admit jjersons standing ujiright, 
 and were very spacious, sometimes U'lng- divided 
 intoseveiai distinct apartments; in which case the 
 remoter or innernrost cliandxns were dug a little 
 deeper than tliose that were nearer the entrance, the 
 ajiproach into their darker solitudes being made 
 by anoflier descending stair. Many sei>silchres o? 
 this description are still lonnd in Palt^ine: but 
 the descent into them is so clioked up wiin lue 
 rubbish of ages, that tliey are nearly inaccessible, 
 and have beeu explored only by a few inuefatigaW 
 
 189. [Garden Tomb.] 
 
 There were other sepulchres which were private 
 property, erected at tlie expense and for the use of 
 several families in a neighbourhood, or jjrovided 
 by individuals as a separate burying-place for 
 themselves. These were situated either in some 
 conspicuous ])lace, as Rachel's on the highway to 
 Bethlehem (Gen. xxxv. 19)— tlie comjiaratively 
 modem representation of which is given above in 
 No. 18S — or in some lonely and sequestered s[K)t, 
 under a wide-spreading tree (Gen. xxxv. S) in 
 a field or a garden. Of such garden tomi)? a 
 modem Oriental specimen is given in No. I'^O, 
 and over which, especially when the tomb i.s that 
 of some iioly p&ison. lamps are sometimes hjing 
 and occasionally liglited. In common cases, 
 .sepulchres were formed by digging a small depth 
 into the ground. Ovct these, which were con- 
 sidered an liumble kind of tomb, tlie \yealthy 
 and great often erected small stone buildings, in 
 the form of a house or cujrola, to serve as their 
 family sepulchre. These are usually open at the 
 sides, as in the two specimens annexed, Nos. 190 
 and 191, which are of forms such as a traveller in 
 the East has daily occasion to notice. Some- 
 times, however, these interesting monuments are 
 built up on all sides, as in the tomb of Rachel 
 figured above (No. 188); so that the walls are 
 required to be taken down, and a breach made to 
 a certain extent, on each successive intermefit. 
 'This custom,' says Carne, 'which is of great 
 antiquity, and particularly prevails in the lonely 
 parts of Lebanon, may serve to explain some 
 passages of Scripture. The propliet Samuel was 
 imried in his own house at Ramah, and Joab was 
 buried in his house in the wilderness. These, 
 it is evident, were not their dwelling-himses, but 
 mansions lor the dead, or family vaults wliich 
 fhey had laiilt within their own jjolicies.' Not 
 imfrequently, however, those who had large esta- 
 blishments, and whose fortunes enabled them to 
 command die assistance of human art and labour. 
 
 ISO. [Dotaeil Sepulchre.'", 
 
 4^ ^<>*x|/^. ;^?l-i:'.^t^i:!;;i^c; 
 
 191. [DomeJ Sepulchre.]
 
 BURIAl- 
 
 19a. [interior of Tomb of the Kings.] 
 
 ■unters after antiquities. Along the sides of tliose 
 vast cavein* niches wore cut, or sometimes shelves 
 ranged one above another, on which were dcjxi- 
 Bited tlie bodies of the dead, while in others the 
 ground-floor of the tomb was raised so as to make 
 different coinpartmen's, the lowest jilace in t}-3 
 family vaults being reserved for the servants. 
 These interior arrangements may be the better 
 understood by the help of the annexed engravings 
 showing the interiors of tombs now actually exist- 
 ifig in Palestine. No. 192 is the interior of the 
 celebrated Tomb of the Kings (so called), near 
 Jerusalem. In it are some fuitlier specimens of 
 the stone sarcophagi already noticed. No. 193 
 
 [Ground Plans of Sepulchres.] 
 
 contains two ground-plans showing the general 
 character of the interior arrangements of the more 
 extensive ciyjits. Some of those found near 
 Tyre, and at Alexandria, are of the roimd form 
 shown in tig. 1, but these seem exceptions; for 
 the tombs at Jerusalem, in Asia Minor, and ge- 
 nerally in Egypt and the East, ofl'er the aiTange- 
 ■nent ahown in tig. 2. 
 
 
 r^ 
 
 n 
 
 M 
 
 194. [Interior of Sepulchre at Tyre.] 
 
 The above cut (No. 194) is a chamber ot 
 OXie of Uie sepulchres situate I uear Tyre, with 
 
 BURIAL. m 
 
 three large niches in wliich the bodies were depo 
 sited. 
 
 The entrance chamber of an extensive crypt, ' 
 examined by Dr. Wilde (ytirnUire, ii. 3J4), 
 situated on what he s»ip|Mwes to have been the site 
 of Aceldama near Jerusalem, is siiown in Nii. 195. 
 Tlie dilVeient dixirs, at the upper end and on each 
 siile, lead to small oblong chambers or crypfH, 
 about seven feet long, containing on each side a 
 stone trough or sarcoj)hagus, in e\ery one of which 
 bones still remain. The knowledge of this in- 
 ternal arrangement in those immense subterra- 
 neiin receptacles serves to illusliate iliat mag- 
 nificent passage, where the jirophct in a strain 
 of the most sublime poetry repiesi'nts all tJie 
 kings of tlie earth as lying in aqiulchral glory, 
 
 
 
 95. [Interior of Sepulchre neai Jerutaleas.] 
 
 and as raising themselves from their cells or 
 thrones in aslonishmcnt at tlie arrival of th« 
 haughty tyrant of Assyria (Isa. xiv. 18). Tlie 
 more elevated the position of these sepnlchres 
 was in the rock — perched, as it were, among the 
 high and seemingly inacces-sible clilVs — of course 
 the more notice and admiration tliey attracted, 
 and the greater was thought to be the honour of 
 having achieved so difficult an undertaking; and 
 hence we discover the source of Shel)na's vanity, 
 which drew upon liim in so pointed a manner the 
 disjjleasure and rebuke of God (Isa. xxii. 16). 
 
 196. [Exterior of Tomb of the Kiag».] 
 
 The mouth of the sepulchre was .seoired by » 
 huge stone (Matt, xxvii. CO; John xi. 38). Bu» 
 the entrance-porch, to which the removal of this 
 rude door gave admittance, was so large tliat 
 several persons could stand in it and view the 
 inferior ; and hence we read tliat tlie women who 
 visited the sepulclue of our Lord, ' ciiterii:g in, saw 
 a young man sitting, clothed in a long white 
 garment' (Mark xvi. 5); and in like manner, in 
 reference to the flight of steps, that Peter ' stoop- 
 ing down, and looking in, saw the linwi clothet 
 lying ' (Jolm xx. 5). Some of the more spleudtt
 
 M3 
 
 BURIAL. 
 
 (91. [Kxterior of Sepulchre: Jerusalem.] 
 
 ef these tomlis. however, instead of the l)lock of 
 stone, have the jiorclies surmounted with tasteful 
 inason-woik. and sujjpoited by well-finished co- 
 Limades ; and as they stand 0])on and ex])Os?d, 
 do now, as they did formerly, allbrd retreats to 
 nimilwrs of va'^rants and lawless cliaracters. 
 Tlie rocky valleys around Jerusalem exhibit 
 numberless specimens of these sejmlcliral excava- 
 tions. Representations of two of tliese are here 
 given. No. 19G sliows the exlerior of the so-called 
 Sepulchre of the Kings, the interior of which is 
 represented in No. 19:1. Tlie other (No. 197) is 
 tiie exterior view of the sepulchre, the inferior 
 arrangements of -hich are shown in No. 195. 
 An inteiestinu: account of this tomb is given by 
 Dr. Wilde (lit stip.), by whom it was first exa- 
 mined and descri()ed, after it liad been recently 
 iliscovereil by the Arabs. 
 
 Monuments of tliis elegant description were 
 erected to many of (he prophets and other holy 
 men who figured as prominent cliaracters in 
 the eat ly history of Israel, and it seems to liave 
 been considered, in the degenerate age of our 
 Lord, an act of great piety to repair and orna- 
 ment with fresii devices the se])ulchres of those 
 ancient wortliies (Matt, xxiii. 29). The art and 
 t I'jte of tiie times would, of course, expend their 
 cliief resomces in what was deemed the patriotic 
 service of adding fr'-sh beauty and attraction to 
 edifices v/hicli contained such veneralde and pre- 
 cious du'it. But iiumlder tonilis received also 
 some measure of attention, all in the neighbour- 
 hood of Jerusalem Ijeing at certain seasons white- 
 washed (Matt, xxiii. 27). The origin of this 
 prevailing custom is to be traced not so mucli to 
 a desire of rendering all such objects of interest 
 i.i the environs of Jerusalem pleasing to the eye, 
 as of making them easily discernible, and so ]ire- 
 veniing the risk of contracting ceremonial defile- 
 ment through accident or ignorance, more espe- 
 cially at the annual festivals, when multitudes 
 unacquainted with the localities resorted to the 
 cajjital. To paint tliem with white was obviously 
 tue best ])reservative against the apprehended 
 danger ; and the season chosen for this garniture 
 of the sepulchres was on tlie return of spring, a 
 little before the Passover, when, the winter rains 
 being over, a long unbroken tract of dry weather 
 usually ensued. Tlie words of Christ referred to 
 were sjjoken liut a few days before the Passover, 
 wiien the fresh coating of wliite ])aint would be 
 conspicuous on all the adjoining hills and valleyai; 
 and when we consider the striking contrast that 
 tuusl have been presented between the graceful 
 »rcliitecture and carefully dressed appearance of 
 
 BURNT OFFERINGS. 
 
 these fombs without, and the disgusting relics of 
 mortality that were mouldering within, we cannot 
 fail to perceive the empliatic energy of the lan- 
 guage in which our Lord rebuked tlie hypocrisy 
 of the Piiarisees. 
 
 It remains only to notice that, during the firet 
 few weeks after a burial, meml.'ers of a family, 
 especially the females, jiaid frequent visits to tl\e 
 tomb. This atl'ecting custom still continues in 
 tlie East, as groups of women may be seen daily 
 at the graves of their deceaseil relatives, strewing 
 them with flowers, or pouring over them the tears 
 of fond regret. And lieiice, in the interesting 
 narrative of the raising of Lazarus, when Mary 
 rose abruptly to meet Jesus, whose approach had 
 been privately annoiinceil to her, it was natural 
 for her assemlded friends, who were ignorant of 
 her motives, to suppose ' she was going to the grava 
 to weep there' (John xi. 31). — U. J. 
 
 198. [Women at Tom'os.] 
 
 BURNT-OFFERINGS (PlViy WaA.from h'?^, 
 to ascend), sacrifices which owed their Helirew 
 name to the circumstance that the whole of th«j 
 otl'ering was to be consumed by fire upon the 
 altar, and to rise, as it were, in smoke towards 
 
 heaven : hence also the term 7V3 (Deut. xxxiii. 
 10 ; I Sam. vii. 9 ; Ps. li. 21 ; comp. Judg. xx 
 41")) ; Cliald. XI^OJ ; Gr. oXoKavTw/xa, entire 
 burnt-oj^'ering, alluding to the fact tliat, with the 
 exce]ition of the skin, notliiiig of the sacrifice came 
 to the sliare of the otiiciating priest or priests in 
 tlie way of emolument, it lieing tcholly and 
 entirely consumed by fire. 
 
 Such burnt-ofTerings are among the most an- 
 cient. If not the earliest, on Scriptural record. 
 We find them already in use in tlie patriarchal 
 times; hence the opinion of some, that Aheta 
 offering (Gen. iv. 4) was a buriit-oflering as re- 
 garded the firstlings of his flock, while the pieces 
 of fat whicli he ofl'ered was a thank-offenng, just 
 in the manner that Moses afterwards ordained, or 
 rather confirmed from ancient custom (Lev. i. 
 sq.). It was a burnt-offering tiiat Noah offered 
 to the Lord after the Deluge (Gen. viii. 20). 
 
 Originally and generally all offerings from the 
 animal fciiigdom seem to have passed under the 
 name of olah, since a jiortion at least of erery 
 sacrifice, of whatever kind — nay, that very por- 
 tion which constituted the offering- to God — wai
 
 BTIRNT-OFFERINGS. 
 
 eoii.sumed hy fire iipon the altar. In procoss 
 »f time, liiiwcver, when the sacriticrs became tli- 
 vided into minierOUs classes, a more limited sense 
 
 was given to the lerm tX?)]}, it bein;? solely ap- 
 plicil to those sacrifices in which the priests did not 
 share, and which were inteixled to jiropiliate the 
 anger of Jehorah, for some particular transjjres- 
 sion. Only oxen, male sheei) or goats, or turile- 
 doves and young pigeons, all without blemish, 
 were fit for buriit-oHerings. The olVerer, in jwrson, 
 was obliged to carry this sacrifice fiist of all into 
 the fore-court, as far as the gate of the tabernacle 
 or temple, where tlie anipraal was examinetl by the 
 officiating priest to ascertain that it was without 
 blemish, Tiie offerer then laid his hand U])0u 
 the victim, confessing his sins, and dedicated it 
 as his sacrifice to propitiate tlie Almighty. The 
 animal was foeii killed (wliich might be done by 
 the oiferer himseli) towards tlie north of the a'lar 
 (Lev. i. 11), in iillusion, as the Talmud alleges, 
 to the coming of inclement weatiier (typical of 
 the Divine wrath) from the northern qu.irter of 
 the heavens. After this begaii (he ceremony of 
 taking up the blood and sj)iinkling it around 
 the altar, tliat is, upon the lower part of the altar, 
 not immediately upon it, lest it shoulil extin- 
 guish the fire thereon (Lev. iii. 2; Deut. xii. 27; 
 2 Chron. xxix. 22). 
 
 In the Talmud (^Tract Zcbachim, sect. i. ch. 1.) 
 various laws are jireseribed concerning this sprink- 
 ling of the b-lood of the burnt-otl'ering : among 
 others, that it should be performed about the 
 middle of the altar, Ijelow the red line, and only 
 twice, so as to form the figure of the Greek 
 gamma; also, that the priest must first take his 
 stand east of the altar, Sjirinkliny; in that position 
 first to the east and then to the west; which 
 done, he was to shift his jiosition to the west, sprink- 
 ling again to the east and west, and lastly only 
 round about the altar as prescribed in Lev. i. 5. 
 The nf-;t act was the skinning or flaying of the 
 animal, and the cutting of it into pieces, actions 
 which the ofterer himself was allowed to perform 
 (Lev. i. 6). The skin alone l)elonged to the 
 olliciating priest (Lev. vii. S). Tite dissection 
 of the animal began with the head, legs, &c., and 
 it was divided into twelve pieces. Tlie priest 
 then took the right shoulder, breast, and entrails, 
 and placing them in the i.uids of the oflerer, he 
 put ids own hands beneath tho-e of the former, 
 di)d tlius waved the .saci ilice up and down several 
 tmies ir. a.-knovvledgment of tlie all-poweiful pre- 
 sence of (iod (Tract Cliolin, i. 3). The olliciating 
 priest then retraced his stops to the altar, placed 
 the wood upciii it in the form of a cross, and 
 lighteil the lire. The entrails and legs being 
 cleansed with wafer, the separated pieces* were 
 placed together ii|)on the altar in llie foim of a 
 elain animal. Poor [I'eople were allowed to bring 
 a turtle-dove or a young pigeon as a buvnt- 
 otVerinij» lhe.se birds lieing vsry common and 
 cheaji in Palestine (Maimonides, Morih \evo- 
 chim, iii. -lO). With regard to ihese latter, 
 nothing is .saiil about the sex, whether they were 
 to be males or females. The mode of kiliing 
 
 * 111 Lei . i. R mention is made only c f the head 
 and tlieyl^^ but these comprised, no doubt, also the 
 ether ])ieces. the sacrifice being an H/'lJ?, it> which 
 o4l>;ti(r was left to tlie jiriestB 
 
 BYSSUS. 
 
 363 
 
 tlwm was hy nipping off the head with the nailt 
 of the hand. 
 
 Slaiidiug public bitrnt-ofTcringx were those used 
 daily morning and evening (Num. xxviii. 3; 
 Exod. xxix. 3S), and on the three great festivals 
 (Lev. xxiii. 37; Num. xxviii. 1 1-27 ; xxix. 2-22; 
 Lev. xvi. 3; romp. 2Chion. xxxv. 12-16). 
 
 J'rivate mid occasional htinit-ojff'vrinij.t wet* 
 those brought by women rising from childbed 
 (Lev. xii. fi); those brought by persons cured 
 of lejiTosy {ib. xiv. 19-22); those brought by 
 jifisons cleansed from issue {ib. xv. 11, sq.); and 
 those brought by tlie Nazarites when tendered 
 •.•.nclean by having come in contact with a dead 
 iKidy (^N'.'m. vi. 9), or after (he days of their sejia- 
 ration were ("ultilled {ih. vi. 1 1). 
 
 Nor were the burnf-olVerings confined to these 
 cases alone; we find them in use alrrjst on all 
 imjwrtant occasions, events, and solemnities, 
 whether private or public, and often in very 
 large numliers (comp. Jiidg. xs. 26; 1 Sam. vii. 
 9; 2 (>hr())i. xxxi. 2; 1 Kings iii. 4; 1 Cliron. 
 xxix. 21 ; 2 Chron. xxix. 21 : Kzra vi. 17; viii. 
 35). Heathens also were allowel to offer burnt- 
 ofi'eiings in the temple, and Augustus gave orders 
 to sacrifice f(>r him every day in the temple at 
 Jerusalem a buint-olfering, consisting of two 
 lambs and one ox (Philo, (>]>]y- ii. p. 592; Jo.seph. 
 De Bell. .hid. ii. 17. 2).— K. M. 
 
 BUSHKL is used in the .\uth. Vers, to expreis 
 the Greek /uoSios, Latin tnodius, a measure of 
 aljout a ]ieck. 
 
 BUTTER. [Mii.K.] 
 
 BUTZ [Byssus.] 
 
 BIJZ, son of Nahor and Rlilcah, and brother 
 of Huz (Gen. xxii. 21). Klihn, one of Job's 
 friends, who is distinguished as an Aramaean o» 
 Syrian (Job xxxii. 2), was doubtless descended 
 from tliis Buz. Judgments are denounced ujxjn 
 the tribe of ?)UZ by Jeremiah (xxv. 23) ; and 
 from the context this tribe ajijiears to have kjeen 
 located in Arabia Deserfa ; wliicli may render it 
 uncertain whether the ilcscendants of Nahor s son 
 are intended, although a migration south of the 
 Euphrates is by no means unlikely, and had 
 perha])s already occuiied in the time of IMibu. 
 
 BYSSUS. The Greek word ^(ktitos ocoiirs in 
 Luke xvi. 19, where tlie ricli man is desi'ribed a.s 
 being clothed in purple ninl Jiiie linen ; and also in 
 Rev. xviii. 12, Ifi, and xix. 8, 14, among tlie 
 merchandise, the loss of wiiich would l)e mourned 
 for bv the merchants trading with the mystical 
 Baliylon. But it is by many authors still consi- 
 dered uncertain whether tliis byssus was of_/7nj; or 
 cotton. Referen<:e has been miide to thisaiticle both 
 from bad anil hiitz, and might be al.so from shcsh. 
 For, as Rosenmi'i Her says, 'The Hebrew word slicshf 
 which occurs tliirty times in the two first inMiks of 
 the Pentateuch (v. Shbsh, and Celsius, ii. )>. 25})), 
 is in these places, as well as in Prov. xxxi. 22, hy 
 the Greek Alexandrian translators, intevpretetl 
 bysstis, which denotes Egy])tian cotton, and also the 
 cotton cloth made from it. In the later writings 
 of the Old Testament, as for example, m tlie 
 Chronicles, the iiook of Esther, ancl Eyekiel, buz 
 is commonly used instea<l of shcsh, as an exjires- 
 sion for cotton cloth." This however .seems to 
 be inferred rather than proved, ami it is iust aa 
 likely that improve4 civilization may have in- 
 troduced a substance such as cotton, which waa 
 unknown at the times when sluish was spoken a|
 
 361 
 
 CAB. 
 
 uid ♦Mnploywl ; in l!ie gjime maimer as we Vt\<\w 
 that in Kiiiope wojlli^i, licrtipcii, linen, and cott(>n 
 clotlii's tuive, at one ]ie«ii>(i i>i' sdclety, liefn more 
 *Ktfiisively wcjn flian at anothei-. 
 
 ^3 bad ociiis in nunu'iDUS jtassaj.'-es of Sfiip- 
 fu«-e. as Kxod. xxviii. 4',1, and. xxix. 29; Lev. 
 v\. 3; xvi. 4, '2:$, a:J; 1 Sam. ii. IS; xxxii. 18; 
 
 2 Sa/n. vi. 14 ; I Clnon. xv. '27 ; ICzek. ix. 2, 
 
 3 r.; K. 2, 6, 7; Dan. x. ft; xii. 7. In all 
 tl esc places llie word linen i-; used in the Author- 
 ized Version, and Rosenmiilhn- (Botanij of the 
 Bitde, p. 175) says, ' The otlicial garments of 
 HeUew, as well as of E^yjitian ]v,iests, were 
 iri-ade of linen, in Hebrew bad.'' (Celsius, however 
 (ii. p. 5(>y), states iiis opinion thus : 'Non fuit 
 igitur TH vul^are linutn, iit arhitrati sunt viri 
 quidam doctissinii ; sed liniim yf^i^yjiti optimum 
 "it suhtilissimum ;' and 1.^' quotes (p. 510) Ahen 
 Ezra for its l>ein;j; the same tliin^' as hufz : ' Butz 
 idem est quod bad, netnjie spec-ies lini in j^^y))to.' 
 
 1*13 butz or buz occurs in I Chroii. iv. 21 ; 
 XV. 27; 2 Chron. ii. 14; iii. U; v. 12; Esther 
 i. 6; viii. 15; Ezek. xxvii. 1(5; and in these pas- 
 sages in the Authorized V^ersion it is rendered 
 /wie Uneii and tohite linen. Accoriling to 
 Celsius, ' Butz idem est quod Grasci ^vcrcrov et 
 Latin! bi/ssuni adpellant;' while Rosenmiiller, 
 as above stated, considers liuz and byssus to in- 
 dicate cotton and the cloth made from it ; as does 
 Forster in his hoolc De Bysso Antiquoriim. 
 
 Tiie mere similarity of name would not prove 
 the correctness of either opinion, for tliey are not 
 
 more lil<e than are ,,y^ kootn, and /^cS 
 
 htdan, adduced by Rosenmiiller (Bibl. Bot. p. 
 t76), as the Arabic names of cotton, while in fact 
 they indicate, Uie lirst cotton, and tUa second, (lax. 
 So at p. 179, the same autlior states that ' in tiie 
 Sanscrit, karpasiom ilencres a linen ciotii." Now 
 nothing is more certain tlian that the Sanscrit 
 word indicates cotton, and cotton only, winch 
 was no doubt known to the Hebrews during a 
 fiart at least of ttie time when the Scriptures 
 were written. Mr. Harcner has justly observed 
 that ' tliete were vaiions sorts of linen clotli in 
 the days of antiquity ; for little copmns as the 
 Hebreiv language is, there are no fewer than four 
 different words, at least, wliicli have l>een lendered 
 " linen,'" or " fine linen," by our translators.' 
 rhese words are, bad, butz. pUhet, and sliesh. 
 To which may be-added carpas ovkarpas, and as 
 Dr. Harris suggests, sadin antl seti.'iuti. But as it 
 will be more satisfactory, in the midst of so many 
 uncei-tainties, to proceed froin the known to the 
 unknown, and from a knowledge of tilings to the 
 names by wliicli tltey were in early times indi- 
 cace<l, so it will be degiraUe in tliis work to treat 
 of the dill'erent substances employed for clothing, 
 uraler the hcii^ls of CorroN, Fi.ax, and Heup, 
 as well as under Silx and Wool.. — J. V. R. 
 
 c. 
 
 CAB, a measure mentioned in 2 Kings vi. 25. 
 The Rabbins make it the sixtli part of a seah or 
 latum, and the eighteetitb part ui' an ephah. In 
 that case a cab contained 3^ pints of our wine 
 Bieasure, or if. pints of our corn measure. 
 
 CABBALAH. [Kabbalah 1 
 
 C/^.SAREA. 
 
 CABUL ;"?-113 ; Sept. "Optoy). A distric 
 given to Hiram, kirijf of Tyre, by Solomon, in 
 acknowledgment ol' tiie important services which 
 lie had reniU'ied towards the building of the 
 Temiile (1 Kings ix. I'J). Hiram was by no 
 means )ile.ised witli the gift, and llie district re- 
 ceived the name of Cab il {tinpleasing) from tluB 
 circumstance. The situation of Cabul lias been 
 disputed ; but we are content to accept tlie in- 
 formation of Josejihus (An/iq. viii. 5. 3), who 
 seems to place it in the north-west part of Galilee, 
 adjacent to Tyre. In Galilee it is also placed 
 by the Sejituagint. There uas a (o.vn nanitc". 
 Cabul in the tribe of Zebulun (.lo.sli. xix. 27), 
 and as it was in Galilee, it is possible that it 
 was one of the twenty towns consigned to Hiram, 
 who, to mark his dissatisfaction, ap])lied tiie 
 significant name of tiiis one town to tiie whole 
 district. Tlie cause of Hiram's di.slike to what 
 Solomon doubtless considered a liberal gift, is 
 very uncertain. It has been conjectured (Pic- 
 torial Bible, note on 1 Kings ix. 13) that ' pro- 
 bably, as tlie Phoftnicians were a maritime and 
 commercial people, Hiram wi.shed ratlier for a part 
 of the coast, which was now in the hands oi 
 Solomon, and was not therefore jirepared to a]>- 
 pove of a district which might have been of con- 
 siderable value in the eyes of an agricultural 
 people like the Hebrews. Perhaps the towns 
 were in part payment of what Solomon owed 
 Hiram for his various services and contributions.' 
 
 C^SAR, a name assumed by, or conferred 
 upon, ail the Roman emperors after Julius CiEsar. 
 In this way it became a sort of title like Pharaoh, 
 and, as such, is usually ajjplied to tlie emperors 
 in the New Testarr.ent, witliout their distinctive 
 projier names (Augustus). Tiie CaBsars mentioned 
 in tlie New Testament arje Augustus (Luke Ii. I); 
 Tilierius (Luke iii . 1 ; xx. 22); Claudius (Acts 
 xi. 28) ; Nero (.\cts xxv. 8) ; Caligula, who suc- 
 ceeded Tiberius, is not mentioned. 
 
 C^^AREA. Tliere were two im]X)rtant towns 
 in Palestine dius named in compliment to Roman 
 emjieiors. 
 
 1. C^sAREA Pai.estina, Or CsBsarea of Pales- 
 tine, so called to distinguish it from the other C.e- 
 sarea, or simiily Cacsarea, without addition, from its 
 eminence as the Roman medojiolis of Palestine, 
 and the residence of tlie procurator. It wa» built liy 
 Herod tiie Great, with mucli of beauty and con- 
 venience, twenty-two years before the birth ol 
 Clirist, on a spot where had formerly stood a tower 
 called Straton's Tower. 
 
 The wtiole coast of Palestine may Ije said to be 
 extremely inhospitable, exposed as it is to the fury 
 of the western storms, with no natural port afford 
 ing adequate shelter to the vessels resorting to it. 
 To remedy this defect, Herod, who, though an 
 arbitrary tyrant, did much for tlie improvement 
 of Judaea, set alx>ut erecting, at immense cost 
 and lalwur, one of the most stupendous works of 
 antiquity. He threw out a semicircular mole, 
 which protected thejKirt of Casaiea on the south and 
 west, leaving only a sufKcient opening for vessels to 
 enter from the north ; so that, within the enclosed 
 space, a fleet might ride at all weathers in perfect 
 security. The mole was constructed of immense 
 blocks of stone brougiit fromagre.it distance, ano 
 sunk to the depth of 20 fatltoms in tie sea. Th« 
 best idea of the work may pei-hajis !« realized.
 
 C^ESAREA. 
 
 r/T:SARKA. 
 
 46a 
 
 by compriiing: it as to ile«i;^n aw\ execution with 
 the Breakw.'itir at Plyinonth. Hesides t\ui. Heroil 
 ad(l«l iDiiTi) splendid buildin;,'s to the cifv : 
 among wliicli was a temple, deilicated to Csesar, 
 a theatre, and iin aiDphitlieatre ; and when the 
 whole was liiiislied, whicli was u ilhin twelve veiirs 
 I'rom tiie comnienceniciit of the nndevf.ikin;^, he 
 fixed his residence there, and thns elevated the 
 city to itie rank ot" the civil and military ca])ital 
 of Jndaea, whicli rank it continued (o enjoy as 
 long as (lie coimtry remained a province of the 
 Roman empire (Joseph. Antiq. xv. 9. &c. See 
 Dr. Mansf.ini, Script. Gazetteer). Vespasian 
 raised Cwsarea to the rank of a Roman r>)lony, 
 graiitinif it first, exemption from the capitation 
 lax, and af^erwanls, from the groinid taxes (the 
 real jus ItaUcum, see Colony). The jjlace was, 
 however, inhabited chiefly by Gentiles, tliongh 
 some thousands of Jews lived in it (Joseph. De 
 Bell. Jtid. iii. 9. 1 ; iii. 14 ; Antig. xx. 8. 7 ; 
 Vita. 11> 
 
 CfP.'area is the scene of .several interesting cii* 
 enni.Htancps de,s<-Tibetl in the New TcslanifnU, 
 such as the conversion of Cornel ins, the lirsf-fniit* 
 of the Gentiles (Acts \^ ; tlie residence of Philip 
 the Kvaiif^elist (Acts xxi. 8); tlie jonrney thither 
 of St. Panl ; his pleailiiii; there lieforf Felix ; hil 
 imprisonment for two years; and his final jileail- 
 in-j; befoie VVstns and Kini,' A.,'rij>])a (Acts xxiv.). 
 It was liere also, in the aniphitlieafre built by his 
 father, that Heioil .-Vi^riiipa wa.s smitten of Gu<l, 
 and died (.\ci9 xii. 21-23). 
 
 It seems there was a stuncling dispute between 
 the Jewish anil (rcntile inhabitants of (Jipsarea, 
 to which of them fiiecify really lielon;,'ed. The for- 
 mer claimed it as having been built by a Jew, 
 meaning Kin^ Hero<l ; the latter admiftol this, 
 lint co)itended that lie bnilt it for them ar<i 
 not for Jews, seein;^ that lie had filled it wit., 
 statues and temjiles of their ^;ods, wliich the laftftr 
 abominated (Joseph. De Bell. Jud. ii. 1.'). 7). This 
 quarrel sometimes came to blows, and eventually. 
 
 199. [Caesarea.^ 
 
 Ae matter was Tpferred to the emperor Nero, 
 wnose decisioii in f;ivonr of the Gentiles, and the 
 behaviour of the latter theirnpon, s,'ave deepotfence 
 to the Jews ffcneially, and afVurded occasion for 
 the first outbreaks, which led to the war with the 
 Romans (JtNpjih. De Bell. Jtid. ii. 14). One 
 of the first acts o*" that war was the in;i.s»acre of 
 all the .Jewish irihabifaiits bv the Gentiles, to the 
 n>ir/il.er of 2" 00(1 fJo^eph. v. s. ii. 18. 1.). 
 
 In later times. Ciraari'a is chiefly noted as the 
 birtli-]i1ace and episcojjate of Eosebiiis, the cele- 
 brated Cliurch historian, in the beg-innin^ of the 
 4lli century. 
 
 Caesarea is almost thirty-five miles nnrtli nf 
 Joj JKI or .lafla, and fifty-five miles from Jenisalem. 
 !t .-till retain*; the ancient name in the (mm 
 of Kaiseraih ; l)tit has long been desolate. The 
 :iii>s' consnlcuoiis -uiri is that of an old castle, at 
 
 the extremity of the ancient mole (see the en 
 graving). .-\ great extent of ground >» covered 
 by the remains of the city. A low wall of 
 grey-stone enc-ompasses these ruins, and without 
 this is a moat now dry. Between the accnmu- 
 iatioii of nibbish and the growlh of long grass, it 
 is difflculf to define the form and. nature of the 
 various rnlns thus enclosed. Neveilheloss, tiifl 
 remains of two arpieduets, running noifh and 
 south, are sfill visible. Tlie mie nevt the sea is 
 carried on high arches; the lower one, to the east- 
 ward, carries its wateis along a low wall, in an 
 arched channel, five or six ff-ef wide. T!ie water 
 is ah'uidant and of excellpin (piality; and th« 
 snn.ill ve-.se's of the connlry often put in lierp to 
 take ill their snpjiliei. Cresarea is, a]:]>ai'*nrly, 
 never freipien'ed fir any other purjiose; even the 
 hij^h-roaii leaves it wide; ami it 1ms Invn viniUal
 
 S06 
 
 C^SAREA. 
 
 6y very feworihe numerous fiavellers in Palestine. 
 The jMvseiit tenants of the ruins are snakes, scor- 
 
 6 ions, lizards, wild boars, and jackals (George 
 ^binscui. Travels, ii. jip. IR9, 191 ; see also I)"Ar- 
 vieux, Clarke, Buckingham, JolitTe, and Monro). 
 2. C,«sAitE\ Pmi.ipi'i. Towards tlie springs 
 of tiie .Ionian, and near tlie foot of Isbel Sluik, or 
 the Princes Mount, a lofty branch of Lebanon, 
 fonning in that direction the boundary between 
 Palestine and Syria Proper, stands a city ori- 
 ginally called Bauias, wliicli has erroneously 
 been considered by many to be the Laish cap- 
 hired by the Danites, and by them called Dan 
 (Judg. xviii. 7-29). But it apfsears, from tlie 
 lestiraony of both Eusebius and Jerome, that 
 they were then separate and distinct cities, si- 
 tuated at the distance of four :niles from each 
 other. This city, wliicli was in later times much 
 enlarged and beautified by Philip the tetrarch, 
 who calleti it Caesarea in honour of Tilierius the 
 emperor, adding the cognomen of Philippi to 
 distinguish it from Caesarea of Palestine, lay about 
 120 miles north from Jerusalem, and a day and 
 a half's journey from Damascus (Matt. xvi. 13; 
 Mark vlii. 27). Herod Agrij)pa also bestowed 
 upon it a considerable share of attention, still 
 further extending and embellishing it. In com- 
 pliment to the emperor NetO, its name was 
 afterwards changed to Neronias ; and Titus, 
 after the overthrow of Jerusalem, exhibited some 
 public games here, in which tlie Jewish prisoners 
 were compelled to light like gladiators, and num- 
 bers perished in the inhuman contests. Under 
 the Christians it was erected into a bishopric of 
 Phoenicia. ' During the Crusades,' says Dr. 
 Robinson, ' it was the scene of various changes 
 and conllicts. It first came into the possession of 
 the Christians in 1129, along with the fortress«on 
 the adjacent mountain, being delivered over to 
 them by its Israelite governor, after their unsuc- 
 cessful attempt upxjn Damascus in behalf of that 
 sect. It lias now resumed its original name of 
 Banias, which is the Arabic pronunciation of the 
 Paneas of the Greeks and Romans. The city and 
 castle were given as a fief to the Knight Rayner 
 Brus. In 1 1 H2, during the absence of Rayner, 
 Bunias was taken, after a short assaul.^, by the 
 Sultan Ismail of Damascus. It was recaptured 
 by the Franks, aided by the Damascenes them- 
 selves. In II 39, thetemporal control wasrestored to 
 Rayner Brus ; and the city made a Latin bishoj;- 
 ric, under the jurisdiction of the archbishop of 
 Tyre (Researo/ics in Palestine, vol. iii. p. i560). 
 Banias has now dwindled into a paltry and in- 
 signl'ficiint village, whose mean and destitute 
 cmdition contrasts strikingly with the rich and 
 luxuriant character of the surrounding country. 
 It is said that many remains of ancient architec- 
 ture a.re (bund in the neJghl«urliood, bearing tes- 
 timony to the f(Mmer grandeur of the place, al- 
 though it is difficult to trace the site of the splen- 
 did temple erected here in honour of Augustus. 
 The ruins of the castle of Banias, which appears 
 to liave been a. work of the Saracens, crown the 
 summit of the adjoining mountain, and display a 
 wall 10 feirt in thickness, by which the ibrtress 
 was deferuled. The ruins of another fortified 
 castle are visible on the south of the village, and 
 a substantial bridge which conduct.3 to it, in- 
 •crihed with an Aribic legend, its date being of 
 xhe age of tlie Cfiisadcs. — R. J. 
 
 CAIN. 
 
 CAIN. The derivation of this word is dis- 
 puted. Most writers trace it to pp, an acquisition 
 or possassicm, but some derive it from a verb .sig- 
 nifying to lament, and others from a verb of similar 
 sound, signifying to envy. Both Eusebius and 
 Chrysostom seem to su]))iort the last inteqjretation ; 
 but the best Hebrew authorities are on the side (rf 
 that first named. 
 
 Abounding s.s the Scriptures do with proofs o^ 
 human guilt, and filled yet more as are the secu- 
 lar annals of tlie world with instances of crime, 
 none impress the mind with a stronger feeling of 
 honor than that of Cain. It is easy to understand 
 how the passion of envy or jealousy wrought in 
 the heart of the offender; but some degree of mys- 
 tery attends the immediateorigin of his crime. Abel, 
 it ap[jears, brought two oflerings, the one an obla- 
 tion, the other a sacrifice. Cain brought but tha 
 former — a mere acknowledgment, it is supjx)sed, 
 of the sovereignty of God ; neglecting to oHier th« 
 sacrifice which would have been a confession of 
 fallen nature, and, typically, an atonement for 
 sin. It was not, tlierefore, the mere dill'erence of 
 feeling with which the two off'erings were brought 
 which constituted the virtue of the one, or the guilt 
 of the other brother. God's righteous indignation 
 against sin had been ])lainly revealed, and there 
 can be no uoufit that the means of safety, of recon- 
 ciliation and atonement, were as plainly made 
 known to Adam and his otl'spring. The refusal, 
 therefore, of the sacrifice was a virtui^l denial of 
 God's right Ui condemn the sinner, and at the 
 same time a proud rejection of the profi'ered 
 means of grace. 
 
 The punishment which attended the crime was 
 such as could only be inflicted by an Almighty 
 avenger. It admitted of no escape, scarcely of any 
 conceivable alleviation. Cursed from the earth 
 himself, the earth was doomed to a double barren- 
 ness wherever the oflender should set liis foot. Not 
 like his father, sentenced merely togather his food 
 from the unwilling ground, bearing herbs, though 
 thorns sprung up along with thenx, for him it was 
 not to yield i'-i strengtti ; it was to lie as without 
 life beneath him. I'uysi.'al want and hardship, 
 therefore, were among the first of the miseries 
 heajied upon his head. Next came those of mind 
 and conscience : 'The voice of thy brother's bhxKl 
 crieth unto me from the ground,' was the announce- 
 ment of his discovered guilt. He could now hear 
 that same voice himself; nor did any retreat 
 remain to him f'rom the terrors of his own soul 
 or those of Divine vengeance : ' From thy lUta 
 shall I be hid,' was his agonizing cry, even whcr 
 trembling at the voice of his judge; no hope, as 
 he knew and thus confessed, continuing to exist 
 for him who was utterly cut oft" from communion 
 with God. By the statement that ' Cain went 
 out from the presence of the Lord,' probability ii 
 given to the conjecture which represents him as 
 abiding, till thus exiled, in some favoured sjiot 
 where the Almighty still, by visible signs, mani- 
 fested himself to his fallen creatures. Tlie ex- 
 pression of dread lest, as he wandered over the 
 face of the earth, he might be recognised and 
 slain, has an awful sound when falling from the 
 mouth of a munlerer. But he was to be protected 
 against the wrath of his fellow-men ; and of this 
 God gave him a-ssurance, not, says Shuckford, by 
 setting a mark ujion him, which is a false transla^ 
 tion, but by appointing a sign cr token which ba
 
 CAINAN. 
 
 bimKif miglif nndeistand as a proof that lie 
 thoulil not ]K'i sli liy tlie hand of another, as Abel 
 had iJCrished I y his. 
 
 What was the Divine purpose in atTv)rding him 
 this j-,rotectiuii it is liilliciilt to detennine. That 
 it w;is not with the intention of proloiifrinj; iiis 
 misery may he conjectmed from the fact, that it 
 was granted in answer to liis own piteous cry for 
 mercy. Stime writers have spoken of the possi- 
 bility of his becoming a true jieniteiit, and of his 
 naving at length, after many long years of suf- 
 fering, obtained tlie Divine forgiveness. It must 
 be confessed that tiiis alliirds tiie easiest solution 
 of some dilliculties in the circumstance alluded 
 to; nor ought we, in any way, peremjjtorily to 
 conclude tliat such repentance was impossible, 
 when Iwth our l)lesse.l Lord and St. Stephen, and 
 1 whole host of inaityrs, <lid not refuse to pray for 
 their murderers, assuiedly intimating iheieby that 
 no irrevocable sentence had, as yet,, been passed 
 »i])on them. 
 
 It may be worthy of observation, that especial 
 mention is made of tite fact, that Cain having 
 travelled into tiie land of Nod there built a city; 
 anil fuifiier, tliat iiis descendants were chietly 
 celebrated for their ,>kill in the aits of social life. 
 In liotli accounts may prof)ahly lie iliscovered tl;e 
 jxjwerl'ul stiuggle.'; witli which (Jain stiove to over- 
 come the dilhculties which attended his position 
 • as one to whom liie tillage of tiie ground was 
 virtually prohibited. — II. S. 
 
 CAIN AX (ip'P, posscxso)- ; Sept. Kaiudv). 
 I. Son of Enos, and father of Mahaleel (Gen. v. 
 9 ; 1 Chron. i. 2). 2. Son of Arphaxad, the son 
 of Shem, and father of Salah. His name is 
 wanting in the j)resent copies of the Hebrew 
 Scriptures ; but is found in the Sepfuagint 
 version of Gcii. x. 24; xi. 12, and in Luke 
 iii. 36. As the addition of his generation of 
 130 years in the series of names is of great 
 chronological importance, and is one of the 
 circumstances which render the Septuagint com- 
 putation of time longer than the Hebrew, this 
 matter has engaged much attention, and has led 
 to great discussion among cliionologers. Some 
 have suggested titat the Je'-s purposely excluded 
 the second Cainan from their copies, with the 
 design of rendering the Septuagint and Luke sus- 
 pected ; others, that Moses omitted Cainan, 
 being desirous of reckoning ten generations only 
 from Adam to Noah, and from Noah to Abra- 
 ham. Some su|)]K)se that Ar])haxad was father 
 of Cainan and Salah, of Salali nafuraUy, and of 
 Cainan legally ; vvliile others allege that Cainan 
 and Salah were the same person, under two 
 names. It is believed by many, however, that 
 »he name of tiiis second Cainan was not originally 
 in the text of Luke, but is an addition of inad- 
 rertent transcribers, who, remarking it in some 
 copies of the Septuagint, added it (Kuinoel, ad 
 Luc. iii. 3(j). Ui)on the whole, tlie balance of 
 critical opinion is in favour of the rejection of 
 this second Cainan. Even Hales, though, as an 
 adv-.cate of the longer chronology, predisposed to 
 its reten'ion, decides that we are fully warranted 
 to conclude that the second Cainan was not, ori- 
 ginally, in (he Hebrew text, and the Sej.tua- 
 gmt versions deiived (Vom it. And since water 
 cannot rise t6 a level higher than that of tlie 
 ip'ing from which it issues, so neither can the 
 
 CAIAPH.VS. 
 
 Ml 
 
 authority of the New Testament for its retention, 
 rise higher tlian tiiat of the t)ld Testament, Irowi 
 which it is jirofessedly copied, for its excliisuni 
 (Chrunologi/. i. ji. 291). Some tif the grounds for 
 this conclusion are — 1. Tliat the Hebrew anil 
 S.imaritan, wiili all the ancient veisions and tiir- 
 gums, concur in the omission ; 2. That the Sep- 
 tuagint is not consistent with itself; for in tlx 
 repetition of geriealo.;ies in 1 Cluon. i. i|, it 
 omits Cainan and agrees with the Hebrew text ; 
 3. That the second Cainan is silently 'rejected by 
 Jose])lius, by Philo, by John of Aiitioch, and by 
 Eusebius ; and that, wiiiie Origen retaineii the 
 name itself, he, in his copy of the .Septuagint, 
 maike<i it with an oiielisk as an unauthoiizet' 
 reading. 
 
 CAIAPHAS (Kaia^aj). calle.1 by Josephtts 
 (Antiq. xviii. ^ 2) Josejih Caia])has,wa8 higii-priest 
 of the Jews in the reign ofTilierius Ca!sar(Lukp 
 iii. 2). We learn from Josephus that he suc- 
 ceeded Simon the son of Camith (aliout a.d. 27 or 
 2S), and held the oflice nine years, whi-n lie was 
 deposed. His wife was the daugiiter of Anna«, 
 or Ananus, who had formeily iieeii high-priest, 
 and who still |H>ssessed great inlluence and con- 
 trol in sacerdotal matters, seveial of his family 
 succe-ssively holding the high-priestliood. The 
 names of Annas and Caiaphas are coupled by 
 Luke — 'Annas and C^aiajiiias being the high- 
 pnests ;' and this has given occasicn to no small 
 amount of discussion. Some maintain tliat An- 
 nas and Caiaphas then discharged the functions 
 of the highpiiestliood by turns; but this is not 
 reconcilable with tiie statement of Josephus. 
 Others think that Caiaphas is called liigh-i)riesf, 
 because he then actually exercised the functions 
 of tlie (iflice, and that Aimas is so called because he 
 had formerly tilled the situation. But it does not 
 thus appear, why of those who had befiire Caia- 
 phas held the high-priesthood, Annas in particu- 
 lar should be named, and not Ishmael, Eliazer, 
 or Simon, wlio had all served the office more 
 recently than Annas. Hence, Kuinoel and others 
 consider it as the more probable opininn, thai 
 Caiaphas was the high-priest, but that Annaa 
 was his vicar or deputy, calleil in the Hebrew, 
 PD sagan. Nor can that olTice be tlicug.it un- 
 worthy of a man who liad tilled the pontifical 
 oilice, since the dignity of sagaii ■vas also great. 
 Thus, for instance, on urgent occasions he 
 might even enter tlie Holy of Holies (I^ightfoot, 
 liur. Hcb. ad Luc. iii. 2). Noi ou^ht it lo.secsi 
 strange or unusual that the vicar of a high- 
 jiriest should be called by that name. For if, am 
 it appears, those who had once held theoflice were 
 ever alter, by courtesy, called high-priests, with 
 greater justice might Annas, who was botli a jion- 
 tilical person and high-priest's vicai\ be so called. 
 In fact, the very apiiellation of higii-priest is gi\ en 
 to a sagan by Josephus (Aiitiq. xvii. fi, -1). Set 
 the commcntiitors on Luke iii. 2; paificulailv 
 Hammond, Lightfoot, Kuinoel, and liioonifii-hl 
 
 Caiaphas is the high-priest who rent his clothes, 
 and decl-aieil Jesus to be worthy of deatii. When 
 Judas had betrayed him, our Lord was liist taken 
 to Annas, who sent him to Caia])lias (John xviii. 
 13), who perlia]is alcxle In another ])ait of \he 
 same jialace. What became of Caiaphas after 
 his de^xisition in a.d. 38, is not kiuwn. 
 
 CAKES (Bbead).
 
 MS 
 
 CALAH. 
 
 CALAH (n'^3; Sept. XcX^x). "'" ^t''«^ 
 Calacii, a city <»f Assyiia, built hy Ashur or 
 Nimrod (the ijliiuse in Geii. x. II, 12, being 
 ambiguous). It was at some distance from 
 Nineveh, tt>e City of Ilesen lying lietwcen them. 
 Most writers concur in placin;^ it on tlie Great 
 Zab (tho ancii'nt Lycus) not far from it^ junction 
 with the Tlgri-;, and Rcsen is placed higlier up 
 on the same river, so as to he between it and 
 Nineveh, Tiieie apiwars to l<e a trace of this 
 name in Galacheiie, whicli Strabo describes as a 
 province of Assyria, lying between the source of 
 die Lycus and tlie Tigris. Many suppose that 
 this Calah is the same as the Chalach {Auth. 
 Vers. Halah) in 1 Kings xviii. 6; xvii. 11, 
 whither Salmanassar tians|)lanled a colony of 
 Israelites ; liut there are gi)od reasons assigned 
 under ano1h«r head (Jialaii) for disputing this 
 c(Hijecture. 
 
 CALEB (n?D, do(j; Sejit. XaAe/S), son of 
 Jephunneh, of tlie tr.ilie of Judah. He was sent with 
 Joshua and others to explore the land of Canaan, 
 and in consequence of iiis joining witli Joshua in 
 opposing tlie discouraging accounts brought back 
 by the otlier sjiies, they were both specially ex- 
 ettipted from tlie decree of death wluch was pro- 
 nounced on the generation to which they belonged 
 (Num. xiii. 6; xiv. 6, 24, 3S). When the land 
 of Canaan had been invaded and partly con- 
 quered, Caleb was privileged to chiose Kirjath- 
 arba, or Hebron, and its neighbourhood, 'or his pos- 
 sess-on (Josli. xiv. 6-L5). He accordingly went 
 and wrested it IVom the native inhabitants, and 
 thence proceeded to Debir, which was taken for 
 him by his nephew Otlmiel, who, as his reward, 
 received in marriage the hand of Caleb's daughter 
 
 IAcHSAPHJ, with a valuable dower (Josh. xv. 
 3-19). Caleb is usually supposed to have out- 
 Jived Joshua. 
 
 CALF (7?.y) is mentioned in several ]ilaces, 
 but, not requiring a zoological explanation, it 
 
 irrrr n — i 
 
 Ul 
 
 800. [Egyptian Calf- Idol.] 
 
 may be sufficient to make a few remarks on 
 
 the worship of calves and other superstitious 
 firactices connected with them. The most ancient 
 and remarkable notice in the Scriptures on tliis 
 head, is that of the golden calf wliich was cast 
 ly Aaron fiom the earrings of the people, while 
 *;;e Israelites weie encamiied at the foot of Sinai 
 ind Moses was absent on tlie Mount. Tlie next 
 notice refers to an event whicli occiured ages after, 
 wlien Jeroboam, king of Israel, set up two idols 
 Ui 'he form of a calf, the one in Dan and the 
 Other in Bethel. This almost incomprehensible 
 
 CALF. 
 
 degradation of Iranian reason was, more particu- 
 larly in tlie first instance, no douljt tlie restJi »' 
 the debasing inducnces wliich operated on the 
 minds of the Israelites during tht-ir sojourn in 
 Egyjit, where, amid the tlaily practice of the 
 most degrading and revolting religious cere- 
 monies, tliey were accustomed (o see the image of 
 a sacred calf, surrounded by other symbols, car- 
 ried in solemn ponij) at the head of marching 
 armies; sucli as may be si ill seen depicted in 
 the processions of Rameses the Great or Sesostris. 
 Tlie preceding figure is a representation of a 
 calf-idol wliicii tlie present writer copied from the 
 original collection made r)y the artists of the French 
 Institute of Cairo. It is recumbent, with human 
 eyes, the skin llesh-coloured, and tlie whole after- 
 parts covered with a white and sky-blue diapered 
 drapeiy : tlie horns are not on tlie head, but above 
 it, and contain within them the symbolical globe 
 surmounteil* by two feathers. Upon the neck is 
 a blue and yellow yoke, and the iiagellum, of va- 
 rious colours, is suspended over the back : the 
 whole is fixed upon a broad stand for carrying, 
 as here shown. The rendering of the Audi. Vers., 
 which alludes to tlie image lieing finished with 
 a graving tool, is obviously correct, for all the 
 lines and toolings of the covering cloth, oi the 
 eyes, and of the feathers, must have required that 
 manual operation (Exod. xxxii. 4). It is doubt 
 ful whether this idolatrous form is either Apis or 
 Mnevis; it may lerhaps represent the sun's first 
 entrance into Taurus, or more probably bea symbol 
 known to the Egyptians by an undecipheied de- 
 signation, and certainly undeistnod by the Edom- 
 ites of later ages, who called \ibaliu)ned axxilkJiaruf. 
 or the calf, the my.sterious aiiima taundi: accord 
 ing to Von Hammer {Prcf. to Ancient Alpha 
 bets), the Nabathsean secret of secrets, or the be- 
 ginning and return of everything. With th» 
 emblems on the back, it may have symbolized th« 
 plural Elohim, long Ijefore the cabbalistical addi 
 tions of this mysterious type had changed the figure 
 At the time of the departure of the Israelites frow 
 Egypt this may have lieen the Moloch of tlieii 
 neiglibours, fur that idol was figured with tlie head 
 of a calf or steer. A similar divinity belonged to thi 
 earliest Indian, Greek, and even Scandinavian my- 
 thologies ; and therefore it may be conceived tha' 
 the symbol, enduring even to this day, was at thai 
 period generally understood by the multitude, and 
 consequently that it was afterwards revived by 
 Jeroboam without popular opjjosition. Egyptian 
 paintings illustrate the contempt which the prophet 
 Hosea (x. .5) casts upon the practice of those 
 whom he designates as * coming to sacrifice and 
 kiss the calves;^ and commentators have been at 
 pains to explain in what manner Moses reduced 
 the golden calf to such a state as to make it 
 pijtable in water; but surely as the science of 
 making gold-leaf for gilding was already prac- 
 tised in Egypt, there could be no difliculty, even 
 if chemical processes had not then been disco- 
 vered, in effecting the object. With regard to 
 Jer. xxxiv. IW, 19, it may be sufficient to mention 
 that many nations of antiquity had a practice ot 
 binding themselves to certain resolutions by the 
 ceremony of cutting a calf or other victim into two 
 halves or sides, laying them on the ground, anU 
 passing between the severed paits. This was co5> 
 sidereci as constituting a jieculiarly binding obli» 
 gation (comp. Gen. xv. 10, 17). — C. H. S.
 
 CALNEH. 
 
 CALNEH vf^37? ; Sept. XuXdvvv), or rather 
 Chai.nf.ii, tht fomtli of Ninirod's cities (Gen. x. 
 10), and probiihly not (lilTcrent fnnn the C'-alur) of 
 Isa. X. 9, or tin- Caniieii ot" I'^zek. xxvii. 23. 
 According to tlic CliaKlee translation, with whicli 
 Eusebius and Jerome agree, tliis is the same 
 place that was siibseqiienfly called Ctesiphon. 
 It lay on the Tigris, opposite Seleucia, and was 
 for a time the capital of tiie Parlliians. Tliis 
 ancient opinion respecting Chalneh is renilered 
 probable by tlie circumstance tiiat the district 
 named Ctesiphon was called by flie Greeks 
 Chalonitis (Pliny, Hist. Nat. vi. 26, 27 ; Polyb. 
 V. 44). Ammianus Marcellinus (xxiii. 6. 23) 
 states that it was the Persian king Paconis 
 (who reignjcd from a.d. 71 to 107) who changed 
 the name of the city to Ctesiplion ; but tliat natne 
 mnst have been more ancient, as it is mentioned by 
 Polybiiis. In the time of the prophet Amos, Cal- 
 
 CAMEL. 
 
 W9 
 
 neli appears to Iiave constilufed an independent 
 principality (Amos vi. 1,2); lint not long after 
 it became, with the rest of \\'estern Asia, a prey I^j 
 the Assyrians (Isa. x. 9). About 150 years later, 
 Calnch was still a considerable town, as may :je 
 inferred from it.s being mentioned by E/ekiel 
 (xxvii. 23) among the ])lace3 wiiicli tradeil with 
 Tyre. The site of Ctesiphon, orCalneh, was alU'r- 
 wards occupied by El-Madain, i. e. the {two) 
 cities, of wliich the only remains are the ruins of 
 a remarkable palace called Taiik-kesra, some 
 mounds of rubbish, and a corisideraljje exti-nt ct 
 massive wall towards the rirer. Tiic ruined 
 palace, with its broken arch, allhoiigh it stands 
 on low ground, is a most conspicuous object, and 
 is seen at a considerable distance, in ascending 
 the river, in varied and striking points of view, in 
 consetpience of the seijientine course of the atreau) 
 in this part. 
 
 [ I'nuk-kesra.] 
 
 CALVARY, the place where Christ was 
 crucified. In three of tlie Gospels the Hebrew 
 name of tlie ])lace, G(ii.gotha {place of a skull), 
 IS given; and in Luke (xxiii. 3'5\ where we 
 .Ind Calvary in tAe At'ithurized Version, the 
 original is not Calvary, but Cranion ( Kpaviov), a 
 diminutive of npavov (a skull). Calvaria is the 
 Latin translation of this word, adopted by the 
 V'ulgate, from which it found its way into oin- 
 version. But as the names Cranion and Calvaria 
 are respectively Greek and Latin translations of 
 the original Golgotha, which occurs in three out 
 of the four Gospels, the plan of this work requires 
 that the various particulars connected witli tlie 
 site of the Crucifixion should be referred to Goi,- 
 
 OOTHA. 
 
 CAMBYSES. [AiiAsuERUs.] 
 
 CAMEL (?03 gamal in Hebrew and Syriac, 
 ftnmala in Chaldaic, Jcmel in ancient Aral)ic, 
 djammel in modern, and KajxriKos in Greek). 
 These are the principal names in Eastern history 
 of tlie genus Camelus, as constituted by modern 
 naturalists. In this arrangement it comprises two 
 species positively distinct, but still possessing the 
 ctimmon characters of being ruminants without 
 Uorns, witliout muzzle, with nostrils forming ob- 
 lique slits, the upper lip divided, and separately 
 Biov ible and extensile, tlie soles of tlie feet iioiny, 
 with two toes covered by unguiiuilatcd claws, 
 the limbs long, the abdomen drawn up, and the 
 iMtck, long and slender, is bent down and up, the 
 
 reverse of that of a horse, which is arched. Ca- 
 mels liave thirty-six teetli in all, whereof three 
 cusp.'tlate on each side above, six incisors, and 
 two cuspidate on each side below, which, though 
 ditferenrly named, still have all more or less the 
 character of tushes. They have callosities on tlie 
 breast-bone and on the llexures of the joints. Of 
 the four stomachs, which they have in common 
 with other animals chewing the cud, the ventri- 
 culus, or paunch, is provided with membranous 
 cells to contain an extra provision of water, ena- 
 bling the s|iecies to subsist for four or more days 
 without drinking. But when in the desert, tlie 
 camel has the faculty of smelling it afar oil', and 
 then, breaking through all control, lu? rushes on- 
 wards to drink, stirring the element previously 
 with a fore-foot, until quite muddy. Camels are 
 temperate animals, lieing fed on a march only once 
 in twenty-four hours, with about a jwund weight 
 of dates, beans, or barley, and are enaliled in the 
 wilderness, by means of their long (lexible necks 
 and strong cuspidate teetli, to snap as they jiass at 
 thistles and tliorny plants, mimos.is and ca]ier- 
 trees. They are emphatically called the ships 
 of the desert; having to cross regions wlieie no 
 vegetation whatever is met witli, and where they 
 could not beejialile<l to continue their nuuch but for 
 the aid of tlie double or single hunch on the liack, 
 which, lieing comyxised of muscular fibre, and cei- 
 hilar substance highly adapte<l for the accMmula- 
 tioii of fat, swells in proixiition as the animal is 
 healthy and well fed, or sinks by absorption as it 
 
 2b
 
 370 
 
 CAMEL 
 
 »up])li('s tbe want of sustenance under fatigue and 
 sc;ucity ; thus f,n\ ing ai; extra. &tock of food with- 
 out oalinir, till l)j' exhau>tiori the skin of the jiro- 
 minences, uistead of standing up, falls over, and 
 hani^s like emjity bags on tlie side of the dorsal 
 ridge. Now, wiien to these endowments are added 
 a lofty stature and great agility ; eyes that discover 
 minute objects at a distance; a sense of smelling 
 of prodigious acuteness — ever kept in a state of 
 sensibility by the animal's power of closing the 
 nostrils to exclude the acrid jiarticles of the sa'ndy 
 ileserts ; a spirit, moreover, of patience, not the 
 result of fear, buf of forbearance, carried to the 
 length of self-sacrifice in the practice of obedience, 
 so often exemplified by the camels bones in great 
 numbers strewing the surfice of the desert ; when 
 we perceive it furnished with a dense wool, to 
 avert the solar heat and nightly cold, while on 
 the animal, and to clothe and lodge his master 
 when manul'actured, and know that the female 
 carries milk to feed him, — we have one of the most 
 incontrovertible examjjles of Almighty power and 
 beneficence in the ada])tation of means to a direct 
 purjwse, that can well be submitted to the ap- 
 prehensior»of man ; for, without the existence of 
 the camel, immense portions of the surface of the 
 earth would be uninhabitable, and ever impassable. 
 Siuely the AraOs are right, ' Job's ber,st is a monu- 
 ment of God's merc^/l' The two species are — 1. The 
 Bactrian camel (catnelus Bactrianus of authors) 
 is large and robust; naturally with two huiiches, 
 and originally a native of the highest table-lands 
 of Central Asia, where even now, wild individuals 
 
 202. [Bactri.-in Camel.] 
 
 may be found. Tlie sjiecies extends through China, 
 Tartary, and Russia, and is priiici))ally imported 
 across the mountains into Asia Minor, Syria, and 
 Peisia. One appears figured in the processions of 
 ihe ancient Persian satrapies among the bas-reliefs 
 of Chehel Miliar, where the Arabian species is not 
 seen. It is also this species which, according to tiie 
 ipsearclies of Burckhardt, constitutes the l)rovvn 
 Taous variety ofsingle-liunchcd Turkish orToorkes 
 camels commonly seen at dn^tantinople, iheie 
 b^ing a very ancient practice among lireeders, 
 not. it appears, attended witii danijer, of extir- 
 putint,' with a knife the foremost hunch of the 
 an;mal soon aftpr biith, thereby procuring more 
 •tuce for tlie packsaddle and load. It seems that 
 uiis made ol lenJerinn 'he Bactiian :ross-breed 
 
 CAMEL. 
 
 similar to the Arabian camel or d. pmedary (loj 
 Burckhardt misa])p1ies the last name), is one oi 
 the princij)al causes of the confusioTi and contra- 
 dictious which occur in the descriptions of the 
 two species, and that the various other intermix- 
 tures of races in Asia Minor and Syria, having for 
 their object either to create greater pov.'ers of en- 
 durance of cohl or of heat, of body to carry weight, 
 or to move with speed, have still more jjerplexed 
 the question. From these causes a variety of 
 names have arisen, which, when added to the Ara- 
 bian distinctions for each sex, and for the young 
 during every year of its growth, and even for the 
 camels nursing horse-foals, the appellatives be- 
 come exceedingly numeious. We notice only — 
 
 203. [Arabian Camel : baggage.] 
 
 2. The Arabian camel or dromedary (camehia 
 droinedarius or Arabicus of naturalists, 133 
 bacar ; and female and young mD3, Isa. Ix. 6 ; 
 Jer. ii. 23) is. jnojierly the sjiecies havmg natu- 
 rally but one hunch, and considered as of \Vest- 
 em-Asiatic or of African origin, although no 
 kind of camel is figured on any monument of 
 Egypt, not even where there are representations of 
 live stock such as that found in a most ancient 
 tomi> beneath the pyramid of Gizeh ; which shows 
 herdsmen bringing their cattle and domesticated 
 animals to be numbered before a steward and his 
 scribe; and in which we see oxen, goats, sheeji, 
 asses, geese, and ducks, but neitlier horses nor 
 camels. That they were not indigenous in the early 
 history of Egypt is countenanced by the mythical 
 tale of the priests describing ' the flight of Ty- 
 phon, seven days' journey upon an ass." We find, 
 however, camels mentioned in Genesis xii. ; but 
 being placed last among the cattle given by 
 Pharaoh to Abraham, the fact seems to show 
 that they were not considered as the most impoit- 
 ant part of his donation. Tliis can be true only 
 upon the -tUj)])ositlon that only a few of these ani- 
 ni;ds were delivered to him, and therefore that 
 they were still rare in the valley of the Nile; 
 though soon after there is abundan' evidence ci 
 the nations of Syria and Palestine having whole 
 herds of them fully domesticated. These seem 
 to imply that the genus Camelus was originally 
 an iniiabitant of the elevated deserts of Central 
 Asia, its dense fur showing that a cold but dry 
 atmosjihere wa? to be encountered, and that it 
 came alieady domesticateil, towards the .south and 
 west, with tlie oldest colonies of ino.mtaineers whc 
 are to 1 e distineuished from earlier triljes who suU 
 dued t'ne ass, and jwrhajw fiom others si ill more an
 
 CAMEL, 
 
 CANA. 
 
 871 
 
 MMit, who, taking to\ne livers, di'sceiulfdliy water, 
 and afterwai'ils coasted and crosseil narioH' seas. 
 
 Of the Aiahian sjjecies two very distinct 
 races are iioticetl ; those of strongei' frame but 
 jlower {lacc used to cany burdens, varying from 
 500 to 700 weight, and travelling little more 
 tlian twenty-four uiiles per day; ajid those of 
 lighter form bred for the saddle with single riders, 
 whereol' the lleetest serve to cwivey intelligence, 
 &€., and travel at tlie rate of 200 milco in 
 twenty-four hours. Tliey are designated by seve- 
 ral appeilatioiia, such as Deloul, the best <x)iniiijj; 
 
 804. [AisbUa Camel : saddle.] 
 
 irom Oman, or from the Bishareens in Upper 
 Egyjit; also Hadjeens, Ashaary. Maherry, Reches, 
 Badees at Herat, Rawaliel,and Racamliel in India, 
 all names more or less implying swiftness, the 
 same as Spo/j-ds, sicift. Caravans of loaded camels 
 have always scouts and tlankei-s mounted on these 
 
 lit animals, and in earlier ages, Cynis and 
 -dieis employed tliem in the line of battle, each 
 carrying two archers. The Romans of the third 
 and fourth centuries of our era, as appears from 
 the ^yotitia,' maintained in Egyjjt and Palestine 
 several ala: or squadrons, mounted on diomeda- 
 vies ; probalily the wars of Belisanus with the 
 nortliem At'ricans had shown their impoitance in 
 protecting the provinces bordering on the desert; 
 such was the ala dromcdariorum An/ana at Am- 
 mata in the tribe oi' Judah, and three others in the 
 Thebais. Buonaparte formeii a similar corps, and 
 in China and India the native j)rinces and the 
 Ea.^t India Comjjany have them also. 
 
 All camels, from their very birth, are taught to 
 Itend their limbs and lie down to receive a load or 
 a rider. They are often placed circularly in a 
 recumbent posture, and together with their loads 
 form a sntlicient ramjiart of defence against rol)- 
 bers on horsebacli. The millv of she-camels is 
 still considered a very nutritive cooling drini<, 
 and when turned it becomes intoxicating. Their 
 ■dung supplies fuel in the deseit, and m sandy 
 regions where wood is scarce; and occitsionally it 
 is a kind of resource for horses when otlier food is 
 wanting in the wilderness. Their iksli, paitir^i- 
 larly the hunch, is in request among the Arab-;, 
 but was hnbidden to the Hebrews, more ])erha])s 
 from rootives of econojny, and to keep the people 
 j*rom again becoming wand-ei-ers, than from a<iy 
 real I'.ncleanuess. 
 
 Camels wore early a so^irce of riches to the pa- 
 triaachs, and from tliat period l)ecaine an increas- 
 «ig object of rural iuroortaxice to the several tribe* 
 
 C/f Israel, who inhabited the grazing and bonla 
 districts, liut still tliey never e(jualled the nunv 
 hers {KK-iscssed by the Aralis of the desrit. In 
 what manner the Hebrews derived ihe valuable 
 i«munerafions obtainable from them does not di- 
 rectly appear, but it may be surujiscd tli.it Ijy 
 means (,r their camels they weie in jK(sse>:si',>n i< 
 the WMole trade that passed ()y huid from A.'.ia 
 Minor juid Syria to (he Red Sea und Kxyj t ; 
 and from the Red Sea junl Arabia towards the 
 north, and to tiie Plienician fea-p<]i(s. On swift 
 dromedaries the trotting motion is so hard that 
 to enduie it tlie rider recjuires a severe ajipren- 
 ticeshi]) ; but riding upon slow camels is not 
 disagn-eable, on accoiuit of the measured stip i,f 
 their walk ; ladies and wojnen in general are 
 conveyed ujon ihejn in a kind of wirkenniik 
 sedan, known as the takht-iavan of Iniiia and 
 Persia. Those which carried the kin,'"s iff 
 vants or guests, acconling to Piiilostratiis "ere 
 always distinguished by a gilded boss on rhe 
 forehead. 
 
 It is likely the word D''3"inC'nX (wlifushfer'iui.'n 
 (Esth. viii. 10), rendered 'young dromedai ies ' 
 (ihougi* Bochart regaids it as meaning nudes), 
 implies the swilt jiosiage or conveyance of ordeis, 
 the wliole verse showing that all the mear.s of dis- 
 patcli were set in motion at the disjiosal of govern- 
 ment. • With regajd to tlie jjassage in Matt. xix. 
 24, ' It is easier for a camel to go tlirougii the eye 
 of a needle,' &c., and tiiat in Matt, xxiii. "24, 
 ' i""". stiain at a gnat, and swallow a camel,' it 
 may be sullicient to observe, that both are j lover- 
 bial expressions, similarly applied in tlie kindred 
 languages of Asia. — C. H. S. 
 
 CAMPHIRE. [CoPHER.] 
 
 CANA (Kai/n), a town in Galilee, not far from 
 Cajieinanni, where Christ perforim'd his 'irst mi- 
 racle by turning water into wine (John iv. 4(1). 
 ■This Cana is not named in the Old Testament, 
 but is mejitioned by .losephus as a village of 
 Galilee (Vita, § I6,'6l; De Bell. Jud. i. 17. ^). 
 The site has long i)een identilied with the present 
 Kefr Kenna, a small place about four miles noilh- 
 east I'rum Nazareth, nn one of the roads to Tilie- 
 rias. It is a neat village, pleasantly situateil on 
 the descent of a hill looking to the south-west, 
 and surrounded by plantations of olive and oth*>r 
 fruit trees. There is a large s]iring in the neigh- 
 bonriiood, enclosed liy a wall, which, if this lie the 
 Cana of the New Testament, is doubtless that 
 from which water- was drawn at the time of our 
 Lord's visit. It is filso observalilc that wa'^er- 
 l>ots of compact limestone are still used in this 
 neighhomhood, and some old ones are, as migiit 
 beexjiected, shown as those whicli once containrd 
 the miiaculons wine. Here are also the remains 
 of a Greek chinch, iuid of a house said to ije t!:at 
 of Natiianiel, who was a native oi' Cana TJuhn 
 ii. 1-1 1). The view which we give is that cf '.he 
 traditional Cana. 
 
 There is a mined place callod Kana el-Jelil, 
 about eight miles N.^VE. from Nazareth, wl.iili 
 Dr. RobiiisiHi is inclined to regard as the luore 
 proJiable site of Cana. His rciisiHis, whicli are 
 certainly of amsiderable weight, may be .>e< n in 
 Biblical Researches, iii. 20i-20fi. I)escii|.iti,iiM 
 of Kefr Kenna may be fountl in Pociickf. Hniric- 
 hardt, Clarke, (i. Robinson (Traveh\ Kich&ro. 
 ioih, Monro, Schubert, &c.
 
 2?S 
 
 GAN;iAN. 
 
 CAMAANITEft, 
 
 5BEa<>i,43JS*^ 
 
 i'-iSi'. 
 
 CANAAN (|y33 ; Xavadv), son of Ham and 
 grandson of Noah. Tlie transgression of his 
 father Kam (Gen. ix. 22-27), to which some sup- 
 pose Canaan to have been in some way a party, 
 gave occasion to Noah to ])ronounce that doom on 
 the descendants of Canaan which was, perhaps, 
 at tiiat moment made known to him hy one of 
 those extemporaneous inspirations witli which the 
 
 Eatriarchal fathers appear' in other instances to 
 ave heen favoured [Bi.essinq]. That there is 
 no just giound for tlie conclusion that the de- 
 scendants of Canaan were cursed as an immediate 
 ronsequence of the transgression of Ham, is shown 
 by Professor Bush, who, in his Notes on Genesis, 
 has fairly met the difficulties of the subject. 
 
 CANAAN, Laind of, the ancient name of 
 that portion of Palestine which lay to the west of 
 the Jordan (Gen. xiii. 12; Num. xxxiii. 51; 
 Deut. xi. 30 : Jndg. xxi. 12), the part beyond 
 the Jordan eastward being distinguished by t!ie 
 ge:ieial name of Gilead (comp. Judg. xxi. 12). 
 The denomination Canaan included Philistia 
 and PhcBnicia (comp. Isa. xxiii. 11, and (^ese- 
 niiis thereon; Ezek. xvi. 29; Zeph. ii. 5). The 
 name occurs on Phoenician coins (Eckhelj Doctr. 
 • Nvm. iv. 4U9), and was not even unknown to 
 liie Carthaginians (Qcsen. Gesch. d. Heb. Sprach. 
 p. IG). For an account of the geography, &c. 
 of the country, see Palestine. 
 
 CANAANITES {^IV^Z ; Sept. Kavavaloi), 
 the descer.dants of Cauaau. the son of Ham and 
 grandson of Noah, inhabitants of the land of 
 Canaan and the adjoining districts. A general 
 nccount (if the dirt'erent nations included in tlie 
 term is given in the preseirt article, and a more 
 detai'ed account of each will be found under 
 then- respective names. 
 
 The Israelites were delivered from Egypt by 
 Moses, in order tliat they irvight take possession of nymic, (See Josh. xv. 17.'* 
 
 [Cana. Kefr Renna.] 
 
 the land wlitch God had promised to their fathers. 
 Tliis country was then inhabited by the descend- 
 ants of Canaan, who were divided into six or seven 
 distinct nations, viz. the Hitfites, Girgashitesj 
 Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites, and 
 Jebusites (Exod. iii. 17, wliere the Girgashites- 
 are not mentioned ; Deut. vii. 1, &c.). All these 
 tribes are included in (he most gcneial accepta- 
 tion of the teim Canaanites ; but the word, in ita 
 more restricted sense, as apjjlietl to one tribe, de- 
 signated those 'who dwelt by the sea, and by 
 the coasts of Jordan" (Num. xiii. 29). Besides 
 these ' seven nations,' there were se\ eral tribes of 
 the Canaanites who lived beyond the borders of tlie 
 Promised Land, novtlnvanl. These were the 
 Arkites, Sinite.s, Arvaditis, Zemarites, and Hama- 
 thifes (Gen. x. 17, JR), with wlion), of course, the 
 Israelites had no concern. Tliere were also o'hei 
 tribes of Canaanitish origin (or possibly othernames 
 given to some of tliose already mentioned), who 
 were dispossessed by the Israelites. Tlie chief of 
 these were the Amalekites, the Aiiakites, and th« 
 Rephaim (or ' giants, ' as they aie frequently 
 called in our translation).* These nations, and 
 especially the six or seven so freqjioitly mentioned 
 by name, the Israelites were commanded to dis- 
 possess and utterly to destroy (Exoil. xxiii. 23 ^ 
 Num. xxxiii. 53;" Deut. xx. 16, 17). Tiie d*- 
 
 * Other tribes are mentioned in the promise to 
 Abraham (Gen. xv. 19), viz, the Kenites, Ke- 
 nizzifes, and Kadmonites. Of the^e the Kenites, 
 or at least a branch of them, seem to have adhered 
 to the Israelites, through their connection by mar- 
 ''age with Moses (Judg. iv. 11), and they were 
 caeated with kindness wlien the Amalekites were 
 destroyed by Saul (1 Sam. xv. 6). The ethers 
 are not elsewhere mentioned — the tenr. Kenezite^ 
 applied to Caleb ( losh. xiv. 14), Iieiiig a jwtio-
 
 CANAAN ITES. 
 
 a*niction, however, was not to be accomp^s;_ed 
 at once. Tlie promise on the ])ait ol' <to(1 was 
 that he woiihl • put out those nations hy little and 
 Jittle,' and the command to the IsiiU'litit; cor- 
 responded with it; tlie reason given Unng, 'lest 
 tlie beasts of tlietiehl increase upon tliee' (Exod. 
 xxiii. •2y ; Deut. vii. 2-2). 
 
 Tlie destfurtiv'e war commenced with an attack 
 mlDe Israelites, by Arad, king of the Canaanites, 
 vhich issued in tlie destrilction of several cities in 
 die extreme south of Palestine, to which tlie name 
 ef Horinah was given (Num. xxi. l-.'i). The 
 Is.ielites, liowever, did not follow up this victory, 
 which was simply the consequence of an unjiio 
 voked assault on tiiom; but turning back, and com- 
 passing the land of Edom, they attemjited to pass 
 through the country on the other side of the Jordan, 
 inhabited by a tiibc oi tlie Amorites. Their pas- 
 sage l)eing refused, and an attack made on thetn 
 by Sihon, king of the Amorites, they not only 
 forceil tlieir way through his land, Imt destroyed 
 its inhabitants, and ju-oceeding onwards towards 
 the adjoining kingdom of Bashan, they in like 
 Hiannev destioyed the inhabitants of that district, 
 and slew Og, tlieir king, who was the last of the 
 Rephaim, or giants (Deut. iii. 11). The tract of 
 which they thus Ixicame possessed was subse- 
 quently allotted to the tribes of Reuben and Gad, 
 and the half tritje of Manasseh. 
 
 After the death of Moses tlie Israelites crossed 
 the Jordan, and, under the conduct of Joshua, 
 took possession of the gi'eatei' part of the Promised 
 Land, and destroyed its inhabitants. Several cities, 
 flowever, still held out, particularly Jebus, after- 
 wards Jerusalem, which was not taken till the 
 time of David (2 Sam. v. 6), and Sidon, which 
 seems never to have yielded to the tribe of Asher, 
 to whom it was allotted (Judg. i. 31). Scattered 
 portions also of the Canaauiti-sh nations escaped, 
 and were frequently strong enougli to harass, 
 tliough not to dispossess, the Israelites. The in- 
 habitants of Giix'on, a tiibe of the Hivites, made 
 peace by stratagem, and thus escaj>ed the ilestruc- 
 tion of their fellow-countrymen. Individuals 
 from amongst the Canaanites seem, in later times, 
 to have united tliemselves, in some way, to the 
 Israelites, and not only to have lived in |jeace, 
 but to have been cavable of holding places of 
 liotiour and power; thus Uriali, one of David's 
 captains, was aHittite (1 Chron. xi. 41). In the 
 time of Solomon, when the kingdom had attained 
 its highc'^.t glory and greatest power, all the lem- 
 naiits of these nations were made triliutary, and 
 bond-service was exacted from them (1 Kings ix. 
 20). The Girgashites seem to have been cither 
 wholly destroyed or absorbed in other tribes. 
 We lind no tnention of them subsequent to tlie 
 book of Joshua, and the opinion that tlie Gerge- 
 Benes, oi Gadaiene.s, in the time of our Lord, were 
 their descendants, lias very little evidence to 
 support it (lioseiimiiller. Scholia m Gen. x. 
 16; Reland, PaUestina, i. 27, p. I38j. The 
 An.T.kites were comijletely destroyed by Joshua, 
 except in three cities, Gaza, Gath. aiid Ashdod 
 (Josh. xi. 21-23); a«d the powerf'jl nation of tlie 
 Ama'ekite?, many times defeated and wnit inually 
 harassing t\w Israelites, were ut last totally de- 
 otroyed by tike trilie of Simeon \'l Chron. iv. 43). 
 Even aficr tlie return of ti;e Jews from the lial>y- 
 lonisli captivity, there were surv i -ors of five of tlie 
 Caaaanitish nations, with whom alliances had been 
 
 CANAANITES. 
 
 37S 
 
 made by the Jews, contrary to the rommand* 
 which had been given them. Some of the Canaan- 
 ites, according to ancient tradition, left the land 
 of Canaan on the approacli of Joshua, ami emi- 
 grated to the coast of Africa. I'rocxipius (L>« 
 Bcllo Vamhdico, ii. 10) i elates that there were in 
 Numidia, at Tigisis ( 7Y«<7w), two columns on 
 which were inscribed, in Phcenician characters, 
 riiiiis icrniv ol <pvy6i'T(s airh wporrwirou 'hjcrov toG 
 \i)(rrov vlov NavT; — ' W'e are those who lied I'n ;ii 
 the face of Joshua, the robber, the son of Aaue." 
 (Bochart, Pe%, i. 24 ; Michaelis. Laus of 
 Moses, art. 31, vol. i. p. 176, Smitli's Transl."; 
 ^\ iners Realworterbuch, arts. 'Canaaniter' and 
 ' Josua'.) 
 
 The manner in which the Israelites became 
 possessed of the Promised Land has been so fre- 
 quently brought iis an objection to the ins; iuvl 
 chaiacler of the Old Testament, and indetd is so 
 lar removed from the ordinary ))rovi<leiitial iro- 
 verument of God, that it will be proiier, in ch.siiig 
 tJiis account, to notice the dillicutty which Uum 
 been felt, and to advert to some of the hypothe.es 
 by which it is sought to be removed. Many h.i. p 
 asserted, in order to alleviate the dilliculty. that 
 an allotment of the world was made by Noah to 
 his three sons, and that by this allotment the Laud 
 of Promise fell to the share of Sliem — that tiif iJe- 
 scendaiits of Ham were therefore usu:])ers ami in- 
 terlopers, and that on this ground the Israelites, ad 
 the descendajits of Shem, had the right to disjwssess 
 tliem. This explanation is as old as Epijihanius, 
 who thus answered the objection of the Majii- 
 chaearis. Others justify the war on the ground that 
 the Canaanites weie the Hist aggressors — a justifica- 
 tion wljich applies only to the territory on the uther 
 side of the Jordan. Michaelis, to whom we mi.st 
 refer for a lengthened investigation of the suliject 
 (Laws of Moses, b. ii. ch. iii. vol. I, p. lli-179, 
 Smith's TtaiisL), dissatisfied with these and otliex 
 attempted apologies, a-serts that the Israelites had 
 a right to the land of Canaan, as the common jias- 
 ture land of their herdsmen, in consequence i,f the 
 undisturbed pussession and approjiriation of it 
 from the time of Abraham till the depaituie oi 
 Jacob ujto Egypt — that this claim had never liee/i 
 relinquished, and was well known to the Canaan- 
 ites, and that therefore the Israelites oiilv took 
 pos,session ^yi' that which belonged to them. The 
 same hypothesis is maintained by Jahn (Ilcbrtto 
 Commonioealth, ch. ii. § x. Stowe's Traiisl. . In 
 tlie Fragments appended to Taylors edition oi 
 Calmefs Dictionary (vol. iv. pp. 9.3, 96), another 
 ground of justification is sought in the supposed 
 identity of race of die Egyjrtian dynasty under 
 which tlie Israelites were oppressed, w ith the tiil>es 
 that overran Canaan — so that the destruction of- 
 the latter was merely an act of letrilmtive justice 
 for the injuries which their compatriots in Egypt 
 had inflicted on the Israelites. To all these and 
 similar atfenipti to justify, on tlie ground of lerjul 
 right, the forcible occupation of tlie land by the 
 Israelites, and tiie extermination (at least to a great 
 exterit)of the existing occupant*, it is to l>eol>ject«i, 
 that £10 such reason as any of these is hinted at in 
 tlie sacred record. The right to carry on a war (>l 
 extermination is there rested simply on the divine 
 command to do so. That the Israelites weie in 
 struments in God's hand is a lesson not only con- 
 tinually impressed on their minds liy tiie teatiiing 
 of Moses, but enforced by tzeir def'eat whenevei
 
 37i 
 
 CAN DACE 
 
 ftsey relied on tlieir own stiengtli. That there 
 may have licen gyounds of justification, on the plea 
 of human or lejjal right, ouglit not indeed to be 
 denied, but it is, we imagine, quite clear, from 
 the numerous attempts to lind wliat tliese grounds 
 were, tiiat fhey are not stated in the Old Testa- 
 meiit : and to seek for them as though they were 
 necessary to the justification of the Israelites, seems 
 to be an al)andonmeut of the higli ground on 
 which alone their justilication can be safely rested 
 — tlie express command of God. 
 
 It may be said tliat this is only sliifting the 
 ditliculty, and that just in projwrtion as we 
 exculpate the Israelites from the charges of rob- 
 bery and murder, in their making war without 
 kr/ar ground, we lower tlie character of the Being 
 *'h:ise commands they obeyed, and throw doubt 
 on tiiose commands being really given by God. 
 This has indeed been a favourite objection of infi- 
 ih'ls to the divine authority of tlie Old Testament. 
 Such obj-'ctors would do well to consider whether 
 God has not an absolute right to dispose of men as 
 iie sees fit, and whether an exterminating war, 
 from which there was at least the opportunity of 
 escape by fliglit, is at all more opposed to our 
 notions of ji^istice, than a destroying flood, or 
 eartliijuake, or pestilence. Again, whether the 
 fact of making a chosen nation of His worshippers 
 the instruments of punishing those whose wicked- 
 ness was notoriously great, did not much more 
 impressively vindicate his character as the only 
 God, who 'will not give his glory to another, 
 nor Ills praise to graven images,' than if tlie pu- 
 i.ishmenl had been brought about by natural 
 causes. Such considerations as these must, we 
 apprehend, silence those who complain of injustice 
 ilone to the Canaaiiites. But tiien it is objected 
 fuitiier, that sucli an arrangement is fraught with 
 evil to those who are made the instruments of 
 punishment, and, as an example, is peculiarly 
 liable to be aimsed by all who have the power to 
 persecute. As to the first of these objections, it 
 must be remembered, that the conduct of the war 
 wai never put into the hands of t^e Israelites — 
 that tiiey were continually reminded that it was 
 fi>r the wickedness of those nations that tliey were 
 thiven out, and, above all, that they themselves 
 would lie exposed to similar punishment if they 
 were seduced into idolatry — an evil to which they 
 viJeie especially prone. As to the example, it can 
 ap]>ly to no case where there is not an equally 
 clear expressiou of God's will. A person without 
 such a commi.ssion has no more right to plead the 
 cxain|:Je of the Israelites in justification of his ex- 
 terminating or even harassing those whom he ima- 
 gines to be Gcd's enemies, than to plead the 
 example of Moses in justdicafioii of hi-s promul- 
 gating a new law jjurpoiting to come from God. 
 In a word, the justification of the Israelites, as it 
 &];)p"ars to us, is to be sought in this alone, that 
 they were clearly commissioned by God to ac- 
 c-j..i]ilish this work of judgment, thus, at once, 
 jiving public restimony to, and receiving an aw- 
 ful impressi;in of. His power and authority, so as 
 in some measure to clieck the outrageous idolatiy 
 into which aln'.ost the wdiole world had sunk. — 
 
 F. W. G. 
 
 CANDACE, or, more correctly. Kandake 
 
 [both the OS fieing hard), was the name of rliat 
 
 ^ueen of the Ethiopians (KavSaKr) 7] ISaffiAiacra 
 
 kiOt6irxt'), ^vhose high treasurer was converted t« 
 
 CANDAOR 
 
 Cliristianity under the preaching of Philip tb« 
 
 Evangelist, (Acts viii. '27). The country ov«» 
 which she ruled was not, as some writers allege, 
 what is known to us as Abyssinia ; it was thai 
 region in U])])er Nuljia whicri was called ijy llie 
 Gieeks Mero'e and is supposed to correspond li> 
 the ])resent iirovince of Atbara, lying between 13' 
 and IS^ north latitude. From the circumstance u' 
 its being nearly enclosed by the Atliara (Astalio- 
 ras or Tacazze) on the right, and tlie Bahr ei 
 Abiad, or White river, and the Nile on the loft, 
 it was sometimes designated the 'Island' of Me- 
 roii ; but the ancient kingdi)'» a])pears to have 
 extended at one period to the no'th of the island 
 as far as Mount Berkal. Tlie c'ty of iMeroe 
 stood near the jnesent Assour, about twenty miles 
 north of Shendy ; and the extensive and magniti- 
 cent ruiiLs found not only there, but along the 
 upper valley of the Nile, attest the art and civiliza- 
 tion of the ancient Ethiojiians. Tliese ruins, seen 
 only at a distance by Bruce and Burckhardt. 
 have since been minutely examined and accu 
 rately de3cril>ed by Cailliaud {Voyage it Meroe], 
 Riippel {Reisen in Nubieii, t^c), and other travel- 
 lers. Meroi.', from being long the centre of com- 
 mercial intercourse between Africa and the south 
 of Asia, became one of the richest countries upon 
 earth ; the ' merchandise' and wealth of Ethiujiia 
 (Isa. xlv. 14) was the theme of the poets both ot 
 Palestine aiid Greece; and since much of that 
 affluence v/ould find its way into the royal cofl'ers, 
 the circumstance give? emphasis to the phrase — ■ 
 •KaariS rris yd^v^i ^ uH the treasure' of Queen Can- 
 dace. It is further interesting t>o know, from tie 
 testimonies of various profane authors, that for 
 some time both before and after the Cliristian era, 
 Ethiopia Proner was under the rule of female 
 sovereigns, who all bore the appellation of ' Can- 
 dace,' which was not so much a projier name as 
 a distinctive title, common to every successive 
 queen, like ' Pharaoh' and ' Ptolemy" to the kings 
 of Egy|)t, and ' Caesar' to the emperors of Rome. 
 Thus Pliny {Hist. Nat. vi. 29) says that the cm 
 turions whom Nero sent to explore the country 
 reported — ' regnarc in Meroe feminam Candaccn, 
 quod nomen multis ja,m aunis ad reginas transiit.' 
 Stiabo also (];. 820, e;!. Casaub. ) speaks of a 
 wariior-queen of Ethiopia called Candace, in the 
 reign of Augustus, the same whom Dion Cas^iv.j 
 (liv. 5) descntjes as queen of the AifiioTres vtrfo 
 Alypjrrov olKOhvres- An insult having been of- 
 feied to the Romans on the Ethiopian frontier of 
 Egypt, Caius Petronius, the governor of the lat- 
 ter province, marched against the Ethiopians, and 
 having defeated them in the field, took Ps.'lea. 
 and then crossing the sands wliich iiad long b-^fore 
 proved fatal to Cambyses, advanced to Piemnis, 
 a strong position. He next attacked Napafa, the 
 capital of Queen Candace, took and destroyed it ; 
 but then retired to Premnis, where he left a gar- 
 rison, whom the warlike queen assailed, but tliey 
 were relieved by Petronius. This Napata, !)>• 
 Dion called Tenape, is supposed to ha\e stood neat 
 Mount Berkal, and to have been a kind of second 
 Meroe ; and there is still in that neighbourhood 
 (where there are likewise many splendid ruins) a 
 village which bears the very similar name o* 
 Meraw!-. Eusebius, who flourished in the fourth 
 century, says, that in his day the queens of Ethi- 
 opia continued to be called Candace. 
 
 A curious coufumation of the fact of femal*
 
 CANDLESTICK. 
 
 ioverejgn-.y having prevaileil in Etliiopia luos been 
 remarked on tlie existing monuments of the coini- 
 try. Tims, on the largest sciiuluhial {jyianiiil 
 near Assour, the ancient Mcioe (see Cailliaiid, 
 plate xlvi.), a female wanioi, with the royal en- 
 signs on her head, drags forward a nmnher of 
 captives as ollVrings to the gods ; on anotiier com- 
 partment she is in a warlike hahit, about to de- 
 stroy the same group. Hwvcn, after describing 
 the monumeubi at Naga, or Naka, south-east of 
 Shendy, says, 'It is evident that these representa- 
 tions possess many peculiarities, and tliat they 
 are no', pure ]''gy}.lian. The most remarkable 
 dilTerence appears in the jjersons ollering. The 
 ciueeiis appear with the kings; and not merely as 
 presenting otferings, but as heroines and con- 
 querors. Notliing of this kind has yet been dis- 
 covered on the Egyptian reliefs, either in Egypt 
 or Nul)ia. It may therefore with certainty im 
 concluded, that they are subjects peculiar to 
 Ethiopia. Among the Ethiopians, says Strabo 
 (p. 1177), the women also are armed. Herodotus 
 (ii. 100) mentions a Nitocris among the ancient 
 queens of Ethiopia. U[X)n the relief [on the 
 monument at Kalabshe] representing the con- 
 quest of Ethiopia by Se.soslris, there is a queen, 
 with her sons, who appears before him as a cap- 
 tive" (Heeren, On the Aations of Africa, vol. ii. 
 p» 399). It is singular enough, that wlien Bruce 
 was at Shendy, the government of tlie district was 
 in the hands of a fen)ale called SiUuia, i.e. the 
 lady or mistress. He says 'There is a tradition 
 there, that a woman, whose name was Ilendaque, 
 once governed all that country, whence we might 
 imagine that this was part of the kingdom of 
 Candace ; for writing tliis name in Greek letters 
 it will come to be no other than Ilendaque, the 
 native or mistress of Chendi or Chandi (^Travels 
 to discover ihe Source of the Nile, vol. iv. p. 529; 
 com.p. vol. i. p. 50-5). It is true that, the name 
 Kajidake being foreign to the Jews, it is in vain to 
 seek with Calmet for its etymology in Hebrew, but 
 the conjectural derivation proi)Osed by Bruce is 
 wholly inadmissible; nor is the attempt of Hiller 
 to trace its moaning in the Ethiopic language 
 much moie satisfactory (Simonis, Onomasticon 
 Nov. Test. p. 88). De Dien as.serts, on the au- 
 tliorlty of ecclesiastical tradition, that the proper 
 name of the queen mentioned in the Acts was 
 Lacasa, and that of her chamberlain Judich. 
 It is not unlikely that some form of .ludaism was 
 at this period professed to a certain extent in 
 Ethiopia, as well as in the neitrhbouring country 
 of Abyssinia. Irenaeus (iii. 12) and Eusebius 
 (^Hist. Eccl. ii. 1) ascribe to Candace's minister 
 het own conversion to Clhristianity, and the pro- 
 mulgation of tiie Gos.pel throughout her kingdom ; 
 and witli this agrees the Abyssinian tradition, that 
 lie was likewise tiie apostle of Tigre, that part of 
 Abyssinia which lay neaiest to Meroe ; it is 
 adde<l that he afterwards preached the Gospel in 
 Arabia Feli.\, and also in the island of Ceylon, 
 where he sulVcred martyrdom (See Tillemont, 
 Mem. Hist. Eccl. torn. ii. ; Basnage, Exercitatt. 
 anti-Baron, p. 1 lo ; Ludult", Conimc7it. ad Hist. 
 A-lth.iip. p. 89). [Ethiopia.; Abyssinia.] — 
 
 N. M. 
 
 CANDLESTICK (Hlbrpri; Sept. -h Kvxvia). 
 The cande'alivum which Moses was conimandcd 
 io make fu( the tabernacle, after the model shown 
 
 CANDLESTICK. 
 
 375 
 
 him in the Mount, is chielly known to us by the 
 jjassages in E.wil. xxv. 31-10 ; xxxvii. 17-21 ; on 
 which some additional light is thrown by the 
 Jewish writers, ;uid by the representation of tl; 
 sjwils of tlie Temple on the arch pf Titus. 
 
 The material of which it was made was fine 
 gold, of which an entire talent was expended on 
 the candelabrum itself and its appendages. The 
 mode in which the metal was to be woiked is 
 described by a term whicli apjiears to mean 
 wrought with the hammer, as opjKised to cant by 
 fusion. The structure of the candelabrum, as far 
 as it is defined in the passages referred to, con- 
 sisted of a base ; of a shaft rising out of it ; of 
 six arms, which came out by threes from two 
 opposite sides of the shaft ; of seven lamps, which 
 were supported on the summits of the central 
 shaft and the six arms; and of thiee dilVeierit 
 kinds of ornaments belonging to the shaft and 
 arms. These ornaments are called by names 
 which mean cups, globes, and blossoms. The 
 cups receive, in verse 33, the epitlnl almond- 
 shaped (it being unceitain whether the leseni- 
 bliince was to \\\c fruit or to \\\e Jloicers). Three 
 such cu)]S are allotted to every ann ; but four to 
 the shaft : two-and-twenty in all. Of the four^)n 
 the shaft, three are ordered to be placed seve?- 
 rally under the spots where the three iiairs of arms 
 set out from the shaft. The place oi' the fourtli 
 is not assigned ; but we may conceive it to ha\e 
 been either between the base and the cuji Udow 
 the lowest tier of arms, or, as Biihr prefers, to 
 have beed near the summit of the shaft. As for 
 the name of the second ornament, the word only 
 occurs in two places in the Old Testament, in 
 wliich it appears to mean the capital of a column; 
 but the .lewish writers generally (cited in I'golini, 
 I'hesaur. xi. 917) concur in considering it 'i; 
 mean apples in this place. Josepiius, as ht 
 enunieratcsybt^r kinds of ornament.^, and there- 
 fore two of his terms must be considered identical, 
 mav be sujiposed to have imdirstood globes, ov 
 pomegranates (crcpaipia, l)oiaKoi, Aiiti(/. iii.6). But 
 iw the term here vised is not the cuiuuion na.-ne 
 for pomegranates, and as the Seiil. and Vul-
 
 37(5 
 
 CAXD1.KSTICK. 
 
 CANON. 
 
 gate renil«;r it irtpixipuiTripes aud sphan'idee, it is 
 safoit to assume that it denotes bodies ofa splieiical 
 shape, and I* leave the precise kind undelitied. 
 Bulir, liowever, is in favour ol' apples (Si/mbolik, 
 i. -111). The iiaitie of ibe third ornament means 
 hlosbom. bud; Inil it is so general a term that it 
 inriy aj.pl y to any llower. Tlie Sept , Josephus, 
 and Maiiiionides. understand it of the lily ; and 
 Baiir piel'ers the llower ol' ihe almond. li nov re- 
 mains to consider the manner in which these 
 three ornaments were attached to the candela- 
 luum. Tiie ohscurity of verse 33, wiiich orders 
 that there shall ije ' three alniond-sha])ed ctips on 
 one arm, globe and bloisoni, and three almond- 
 shaped culH on the other arm, globe and blossom; 
 so on all the arms which come out of the shaft,' 
 has led some to snj.jjOje that there was onlj' one 
 globe and blossom to every three ciij)s. Hov/ever, 
 tiie fact that, according to verse 34, the shaft 
 (which, as being the princij)al j)art of the whole, 
 is here called the ccmdelabrum itself), which had 
 only four cups, is ordered to have globes and 
 blossoms (ill the plural)^ is a sufficient proof to 
 tlie contrary. 
 
 It is to be observed, that the original text does 
 not deline Ihe height and breadth of any part of 
 the candelabrum ; nor whether the shaft and 
 arms were of equal height ; nor whether the arms 
 were curved round the shaft, or left it at a right 
 angle, and then ran parallel with it. The Jewish 
 authorities maintain that the height of the can- 
 delabrum was eighteen jialms, or three ells ; and 
 that the distance between the outer lamps on each 
 side was two ells. Balir, however, on the ground 
 of harmonical proportion with the altar of incense 
 and table of shew-bread, the dimensions of which 
 are assigned, conjectures that the candelabrum 
 was only an ell and a half high and broad. The 
 .Jewish tradition uniformly sup])orts the opinion 
 that the aims and shaft were of equal height ; as 
 <l<) also Josephus and Philo {J. c. ; Quis Rer. Div. 
 Har. § Ji); as well as the representation on the 
 arch of Titus. Scacchius has, however, main- 
 tained that they fi)rmed a pyramid, of which the 
 Khaft was the ajjex. 
 
 This candelabrum was placed in the Holy 
 Place, on the south side (i. e. to the left of a person 
 Entering the tabernacle), opposite the table of shew- 
 iSiead (Exod. xxvi. 35). Its lamps, which were 
 supplied with ]>ure olive oil only, were lighted every 
 evening, and extinguished (as it seems) every 
 mcflning (Exod. xxvii. 21 ; xxx. 7, S; Lev. xxiv. 
 3; 1 Sam. iii. 3; 2 Chron. xiii. 11). Although 
 the tabernacle had no windows, there is no good 
 ground for believing that the lamps burnt bv day 
 in it, whatever may have been the usage of the 
 second temple. It has also been much disputed 
 whether the candelabrum stood lengthwise or 
 diagonally as regards the tabernacle ; but no 
 conclusive argument can be adduced for either 
 view. As the lamp on the ccntial shaft was 
 by the Jewish writers called "imyD "13, the 
 western, or evening lamp, some maintain that 
 the former name could not be applicable unless 
 the candelabrum stood across the tabernacle, as 
 then only would the central lamp point to the 
 west. Others again adhere to the latter significa- 
 tion, and build on a tradition that the central 
 lamp alone burnt from evening to evening, the 
 other six being extinguished by tlay (Reland, 
 Atitiq. i. 5. S^,. 
 
 In the first temple, instead of this single can 
 delabrum, there were ten candelabra of pure m\(i 
 (whose structure is not described, although _/7ozfer- 
 are mentioned : 1 Kings vii. 49 ; 2 Cliron. iv. 7), 
 one half of which stood on the north and the othei 
 on the soutli side of the Holy Place. These were 
 carried away to Babylon (Jer. Iii. 19). In the 
 temple of Zerubbal)el there aj)pears to ha\'e been 
 only one candelabrum again (1 Mac. i. 21 ; iv. 
 49, 50). It is ])robable that it also had oi»ly seven 
 la.mps. At least, that was tiie case in tlie cande- 
 labrum of the Herod ian temple, according to the de- 
 scription of Josephus (l)e Hell. Jud. vii. 5). This 
 candelabrum is the one which, after the destruc- 
 tion of Jerusalem, was carried with other spoils to 
 Rome ; then, a.d. 455, became a part of llie plun- 
 der which Genseric transjiorted to Africa; was 
 again, about a.d. 5'53, recaptured from the V^aii- 
 dals by Belisarius, and carried to Constantinople, 
 and was thence sent off to Jerusalem, and from 
 tliat time has disappeared altogether. It is to this 
 candelabrum that the representation on the arch 
 of Titui at Rome was intended to apply ; and, 
 although the existence of the ligures of eagles and 
 maiine monsters on the pediment of that lamp 
 fends, with other minor objections, to render the 
 accuracy of that cojjy very que.stionable (as it is in- 
 credible the Jews should have admitted any such 
 graven images into their temple), yet there is 
 reason to believe that, in other points, it may be 
 relied upon as a reasonably correct representation 
 of the Herodian candelabrum. Reland has de- 
 voted a valuable little work to this subject, De 
 Spoliis Temjjli Hierosohjm. in Arcti Titiano, etU 
 sec. Schulze, 1775.— J. N. 
 
 CANE (or Calamus), Sweet, an aromatic 
 seed, mentioned amcng tne drugs with which sa« 
 ere I perfumes were compounded (Ezek. xxvii. 19") 
 [Kaneu]. 
 
 CANKER-WORM. [Yelek.] 
 
 C.4NNEH (Ezek. xxvii. 23), probably tlie 
 same as Calneh (Gen. x. 10), which see, 
 
 CANON. i. The Greek word V.av(i>v de- 
 notes, primarily, a straight rod ; and from this 
 flow numerous derivative uses of it, in all of 
 which the idea of straight ness, as 0];posetl to obli- 
 quity, is apparent. Among the rest, it is em- 
 ployed to denote a ride or standard, by a refer- 
 ence to which the rectitude of opinions or acticois 
 may be determined. In this latter acceptation it 
 is used in the New Testament (com]). Gal. vi. 16 ; 
 Phil. iii. 16). In the same sense it is frequently 
 used by the Greek fathers (Suicer. Thes. Ecclcs. 
 in voce) ; and as the great standard to which 
 they sought to appeal in all matters of fiiith and 
 duty was the revealed will of God contained in 
 the scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, 
 they came insensibly to apply this term to the 
 collective body of those writings, and to speak of 
 them as the Canon or Rule. In the same ac- 
 ceptation we shall use the term in th's article. 
 
 2. The Canon then may be defined to be ' The 
 Authoritative Standard of Religion and Morals, 
 composed of those writings whicii have been given 
 for this purpose by God to men.' A definition 
 frequently gi\en of the Canon is, that it is ' Th* 
 Catalogue of tlie Sacred Books ;' while Semlei 
 (^Von Freier Vntersuchunycn dcs Canons), Doe- 
 derlein (Insiitutio Theol. Christ, torn. i. p. 83), 
 and others, define it as ' The List of the Eooki 
 puldicly lead in the meetings of tb« early C'Ln»
 
 CANON. 
 
 CANON. 
 
 371 
 
 Sans.' Tlie foimei of these definitions, however, 
 leaves out ol" sii,'lif tlie true nleilnill^' of the teini 
 Canons and the latter is doubly cnoneous, ;is it 
 j!i)t only omits the main characteristic of" the 
 Canon, its divine <u(thori/i/, hut suhstitiites for 
 this a characteristic which is liistorically false, 
 as !■ i€ Canon was not at any time synonymous 
 uitli the list of books read in public in the early 
 tliurches. 
 
 .■J. According; to this definition, in order to esta- 
 blish tlie Canon of Scripture, it is necessary to 
 shoiv that all the books o\' which it is composed 
 are of divine authority ; that they are entire and 
 incorruijt : that, having them, it is complete 
 v.ilhout any addition from any other source; and 
 that it comprises the whole of those books for 
 wliich tlivine authority can be proved. It is ob- 
 vious that, if any of these tour paiticulars be not 
 true, Sc.'ipture cannot be t/ie note and miptwie 
 standard of religious truth and duty. If any jf 
 the Ijooks of whicii it is composeil be not of di- 
 vine authority, then ])art of it we are not bound 
 tosulimit to; and consequently, as a tvholc, it is 
 not tiie standard of ti uth and morals. If its se- 
 }iarate parts lie not in the state in which they left 
 t!ie hands of their authors, but have been muti- 
 lated, interjx)lafed, or aitereil, then it can form 
 no safe standaril : for in appealing to it, one can- 
 not be sure that the appeal is not made to what is 
 s[)urious, and what, consequently, may be erro- 
 neous. If it require or admit of sujiplementary 
 revelations fiom God, whetiier jneserved by tra- 
 dition or communicated from time to time to tiie 
 Church, it obviously would he a mere contradic- 
 tion in terms to call it complete, as a standard of 
 the divine will. And if any other books were 
 extant, having an equal claim, with the iiooks 
 of which it is composed, to be regarded as of di- 
 vine authority, it would be absurd to call it the 
 sole standard of trui.i ; for in this case the one 
 class of books would be quite as deserving of our 
 reverence as the other. 
 
 4. Respecting the evidence by which the Canon 
 is thus to be established, there exists considerable 
 uill'erence of opinion amongst Christians. Some 
 contend, with the Catholics, that the authorita- 
 tive decision of the Church is alone competent to 
 determine the Canon ; otliers appeal to the concur- 
 rent testimony of flie Jewish and early Christian 
 writers; and others rest their strongest reliance 
 on tlie internal eviiience furnished by the books 
 of Scriptuie tiiemselves. We cannot scy that we 
 are satisfied with any of these sources of evidence 
 exclusively. As Michaelis remarks, the first is 
 one to which no consistent Protestant can appeal, 
 for tlie matter to be determined is of such a kind, 
 that, unless we grant the Church to be infallible, 
 it is quite possible that she may at any given jie- 
 riod of her existence determine erroneously ; and 
 one sees not why the question may not be ;is suc- 
 cessfully investigated by a private individual as 
 by the Churcii. Tlie concurrent testimony of the 
 ancient witnesses is invaluable so far as it goes; 
 but it may be doubted if it be sullicicnt of itself 
 to settle niis question, for the question is not en- 
 tirely one of facts, and testimony is good proof 
 only iov facts. As fcr the inttinal evidence, one 
 needs only to look at the havoc which Semler and 
 his school have made of tlie Canon, to be satisfied 
 that wheie ilogmatical considerations are allowed 
 to ''etcnnine exclusively such q^uestions, each 
 
 man will extend or extruncate the Canon so at 
 to adjust it to the Procrustean couch of liis own 
 jireconceiveil notions. As the (]ueslion is on« 
 partly of fact ami jiarlly of opinion, the appro- 
 priate grounds of decision will Ijti Ijesl seemed by 
 a combination of authentic Jlslimony with the 
 evidence supjilied by tlie books themselves. \Ve 
 want to know tliat these bixiks were really wri'ten 
 by the jiersons whose names they hear ; we w:uit 
 to be satisfied that these jersinis were comniuiily 
 reputed and held by tlieir contemporaries to l<e 
 assisted by the divine s]iiiit in what they wrote; 
 and we want to be sure that care was taken by those 
 to whom their writings wore first addressed, that 
 these should lie jire^ierveil entire and uncorrupt. 
 For all this we must appeal to tiie testimony ol 
 competent witnesses, as tiie only suitable evidence 
 lor such matters. Hut after we have ascertained 
 these points allirmatively, we still require to lie 
 satisfied that the books themselves contain notliing 
 obviously incompatible with the ascription to 
 their authors of the divine assistance, but, on tlie 
 contrary, are in all respects favourable to this 
 supposition. We want to see that they are in 
 harmon)' with each otlier; that the statements they 
 contain are credible; that the doctrines they 
 teach are not foolish, immoral, or self-contradic- 
 tory ; that their authors really assumed to be 
 under the divine direction in what they wrote, 
 and allbrded competent jiroofs of this to those 
 around tiiem ; and that all tlie circumstances ol 
 the case, sii(;h as the style of the writers, the allu- 
 sions made by them to jilaces and events, &c., are 
 in keeping with the conclusion to whicli the ex- 
 ternal evidence has already letl. In this way we 
 advance to a complete moral jiioof of the divine 
 authority and canonical claims of the sacied 
 writings. 
 
 5. The books specified as canonical in the 6;h 
 Article of tiie Churcii of England, and the 1st 
 of the Confession of the Cliurch of Scotland, arj 
 received as such by the majority of Protestants. 
 To these the Church of Rome adds, as part of tiie 
 Old Testament, ten otiier books, or jiarts of books, 
 which Protestants reject as Apocryphal [Apo- 
 crypha]. For the evidence in sup])ort of the 
 genuineness and divine authority of those books 
 universally regarded by Cliri~tians as canonical, 
 taken individually, we shall refer her^ *o 'he ar- 
 ticles in this work under the titles of tfwse books 
 respectively. The remainder of the present a'- 
 ticle shall be devoted to a sketch of tlie f'ormatiiKi 
 and history of the Canon, first of the Old Testa- 
 ment, and then of the New. 
 
 6. Formation of the Old Testament Canon. — 
 By this is meant the collection into one whole of 
 all th(}se books whose divine authority was recog- 
 nised liy the Jews, and which now form the Old 
 Testament, as that is received by the Protestant 
 churches. The question is — At what time and 
 by whom was this done '? 
 
 In answer to this, a very sfeadfiist trailition ol 
 the Jews ascribes the completion of the Old Te^ta- 
 nient Canon to Kzra,and certain other persons who, 
 after tiie re-building ol' the Temple, formed with 
 him, and under his auspices, what has been called 
 
 the Great Synagogue (n^n 3 n nD33). Without 
 pretending to be able to give full demonstration ol 
 the accuracy of this traditionary ojiiiiion, it seetiu 
 to lu one winch may by evidence, both direct and
 
 378 
 
 CANON. 
 
 CANON. 
 
 circumstantial, be rendered so extremely pro- 
 bable, that to call it in question would be to ex- 
 hibit a detjiee of scepticism such as, in all other 
 questions of a similar kind, would be thought 
 higlily unreasonable and al)3urd. In the Jirst 
 ^acc, there is tiie testimony of tiie tradition itself. 
 It occurs in one of the oldest books of the Tal- 
 mud, the Pirke Aboth ; and is repeated, with 
 greater minuteness, in the Babylonian Gemarah 
 {Tr. Baba Bathra, fol. 13, 2. See the ])assages 
 in Buxtorfs Tiberias, lib. i. c. 10). The sub- 
 stance of it is that, after Moses and the elders, 
 the sacred books were watched over by the pro- 
 ])hets ; and that the Canon was completed by 
 Ezra, Nehemiah, and the men of tlie Great Syna- 
 gogue. Against this tradition it has been ob- 
 jected that it proves too much, for it says that tlie 
 men of the Great Synagogue torote the later books, 
 such as the twelve minor prophets, &c. But that, 
 by W)'itinc, is here meant not the original com- 
 posing of these books, but the ascription (the to- 
 writing) of them to tlie sacred Canon may be in- 
 ferred, partly from the circumstance that, in the 
 same tradition, the men of Hezekiali are said to 
 liave written the Proverbs, which can only mean 
 that they copied them (see Prov. x.xv. 1), for the 
 purpose of inserting them in the Canon ; and 
 partly from the fact that the word here used 
 (priD) is used by the Targumist, on Prov. xxv. 
 1, as equivalent to the Heb. pT)]}. An attempt 
 has also been made to discredit tiiis tradition, by 
 adducing the circumstance that Simon tlie Just, 
 who lived long after Ezra, is said, in the Pirke 
 Aboth, to have been one of tlie members of the 
 Great Synagogue ; but to this much weight can- 
 not be allowed, partly because Simon is, in the 
 passage referred to, said to have been one of the 
 remnants of the Great Synagogue, which indi- 
 cates his having outlived it ; and principally be- 
 cause the same body of tradition which states 
 this opinion, makes him tlie sticcessor of Ezra : so 
 that either the whole is a mistake, or the Simon 
 referred to must have been a different person from 
 the Simon who is comrnonly known by the title of 
 'Just' (Cf. Otlionis, Z/fi.T. Rabbin. Philul. p. 604, 
 Gen. 1675 ; Havernick's Einleitung in das A. T. 
 Th. i. Abt. 1, s. 43). Or we may adopt the opinion 
 of Hartmann (Z>?e Enge Verbindung des Alt. 
 Tes*. ?>iit d. Neue.n, s. 127), that the college of 
 men learned in the law, which gathered round 
 Ezra and Nehemiah, and whicli properly was the 
 synagogue, continued to receive accessions for 
 many years after their death, by means of which 
 it existed till the time of the Maccabees, without 
 OUT being required to suppose that what is af- 
 firmed concerning its doings in the time of Ezra 
 is meant to refer to it during the entire period of 
 its existence. Suspicions have also been cast 
 upon this tradition from the multitude of exti'ava- 
 gant wonders narrated by the Jews resjiecting the 
 Great Synagogue. But such are found in almost 
 every traditionary record attaching to persons or 
 bodies which possess a nationally heroic cha- 
 racter; and it is surely unreasonable, because a 
 chronicler tells one or two things which are in- 
 credible, that we shoidd disbelieve all besides 
 that he records, however possible or even probaljle 
 it may be. ' Je ne nic pas,' says Fabricy {T)es 
 Ti'res Prhnitifs de la Revelation, i. 87, Rome, 
 1772), ' que les Docteurs Juifs n'ayent avanc6 
 biw (le« chimeres au sujet de cettc Grande-Syna- 
 
 gogue ; inais laissons Ic fabuleux, et pr^nons c« 
 qn'il y a de VMii dans uri point d'antiquit^ He- 
 braique, appuye sur des lemoignages que la 
 bonne critique ni; pcrnict pas de revoquer en 
 doute.' — 2ndly. The part of this tradition wliich 
 ascribes the formation of the Canon, before lti« 
 Exile, to Moses and the propliets, is sutlicnently 
 supjiorted by the testimony of Scripture itself. 
 When Moses had finished the writing of the Law, 
 'he delivered it to tlie priests, the sons of L<'vi, 
 and imto the elders of Israel' (Dcut. xxxi. 9); 
 and the book was then taken and put in the side 
 of the ark, in the most holy place (ver. 26). To- 
 wards the close of the book of Joshua it is said 
 that ' be wrote these words in the book of the 
 law of God;' which Le Clerc, witli considerable 
 probability, exjilains as meaning that he aggluti 
 nated the membrane on which his words wer*- 
 written to the volume of Moses which had been 
 deposited in the side of the ark {Comment, in 
 loc). At a later period we find that Samuel, 
 when he had told the people tlie manner (DDt^'C 
 the Jus jjubliciun) of the kingdom, wrote it in tha 
 book (12Dn), and laid it up before tlie Lord 
 (1 Sam. x. 25). Hilkiah, at a still later date, is 
 said to ' have found the book of the Law in the 
 House of the Lord ' (2 Kings xxii. 8). Isaiah, 
 in calling attention to his own prophecies, says, 
 ' Seek ye out of the book of the Lord and read; 
 no one of these shall fail ' (xxxiv. 16) ; a passage 
 on which Gesenius says (^Comment, i. 921), ' Th* 
 poet seems to have before his mind the placing ol 
 his oracle in a collection of oracles and sacred 
 writings, whereby future generations might judge 
 of the truth of his predictions.' And Daniel in- 
 forms us, that he ' understood, by the books, the 
 numljcr of the years of the captivity ' (ix. 2) ; an 
 expression which seems to describe the sacred Ca- 
 non so far as it then was complete (Gesenius, Lex. 
 Heb. in v. 1SD). From these notices we may 
 gatlier — that such books as were sanctioned by 
 tlie authority of Moses and the prophets (whose 
 business it was, as the watchmen of Zion, to 
 guard the people against either the reception of 
 any writing that was spurious or the loss of any 
 tliat was genuine) were acknowledged by the 
 Jews, before the Exile, as of divine autliority ; 
 that in all probability an authentic copy was in 
 every case laid up in the sanctuary, and placed 
 under the care of the priests* (Joseph. Antiq. v. 
 1. 17), from which copies were taken and circu- 
 lated among the peojile (2 Chron. xvii. 9); and 
 that collections of these were made by pious per- 
 sons for their own use, such as Daniel probably 
 had in Babylon, and such as Jeremiah seems to 
 have had, from the frequent quotations in his pro- 
 phecies from the older books. — 3rdly. It is natu- 
 ral to suppose that, on tlie return of the people 
 from their exile, they would desiderate an autho- 
 ritative collection of tJieir sacred hooks. We 
 know that, on that occasion, tliey were filled with 
 an anxious desire to know the will of God, for neg- 
 lect of which, on the part of their fathers, they 
 had so severely suffered ; ami that, to meet fliii 
 desire, Ezra and certain of the Priests and Le- 
 
 * The entrusting of the sacred books to the 
 care of the priestliood was common to the Jewe 
 with the ancient nations generally. See HUve^ 
 nick's Einlcit. i. 1. § 17, and the authors '-'ted 
 thete.
 
 CAW ON. 
 
 CANON. 
 
 37 » 
 
 rites read and ex]x>uiuled Uie wonl of the Lord 
 to the pcojile (Nth. viii. 1-S ; ix. 1-3). As (lieir 
 fathers also had been misled hyfahe propliets, it 
 is natural to supjiose that tliey would earnestly 
 crave some assuran(:e as to the writers whose 
 words they inight with safety follow. Tlie 
 Temj)le also was now bereft of its sacred trea-sures 
 (Joseph. ])e Bell. Jiid. vi. G; Tract. BaJibin. 
 Joma. ed. Sheringliam, p. 102, sqq.). During 
 the exile, and the troublous times jireceding it, 
 several prophets had committed their oracles to 
 writing, and these required to be added to the 
 Canon; and the majority of tlie peojile having 
 lost acquaintance witli the Hebrew, a translation 
 of their sacred boolis had become necessary. All 
 this conspired to render it imperative that some 
 competent authority should, at the time of the 
 second tem))le, form and tix the code of sacred 
 truth. — 4tlily. The time of Ezra and Nehemia^i 
 was the latest at which this could be done. As 
 the dutj' to be performed was not merely that of 
 determining the genuineness of ceitain books, but 
 of pointing out those which had. been divinely or- 
 dained as a rule of faith and morals to the 
 Church, it was one which none but a prophet 
 could discharge. Now in the days of Neiiemiah 
 and Ezra there were several prophets living, 
 among whom we know the names of Haggai, 
 Zechariah, and Malaciii ; but with that age ex- 
 pired the line of prophets which (joil had ap- 
 pointed ' to comfort Jacob, and deliver them by 
 assured hope ' (Ecclus. xlix. 10). On this point the 
 evidence of Joseplms, the Apocryphal books, and 
 Jewish tradition, is harmonius (comp. Joseph. 
 Co}tt. Ajjion. i. 8 ; 1 Mace. iv. 46; ix. 27; xiv. 
 / 41 ; Hieronym. ad Jes. xlix. 21 ; Vitringa, Obs. 
 Sac. lib. vi. cap. 6, 7 ; Hiivernick, Einleit. i. 1. 
 27 ; Hengstenberg, Beitriige zur Einleit. ins A. 
 T. i. s. 245). As the men of the Great Syna- 
 gogue were thus the last of the propliets, if 
 ♦he Canon was not (ixed by them, the time was 
 passed when it could be fixed at all. — Sthly. 
 That it was lixed at that time appears from the 
 fact, that all subsequent references to the sacred 
 writings presuppose the existence of the complete 
 Canon ; as Mell as from the fact, that of no one 
 among the A})0cryphal books is it so much as 
 hinted, either by the autlior or by any otlier 
 Jewish writer, that it was worthy of a pliice 
 among the sacied books, though of some of them 
 the pretensions are in other respects sufliciently 
 high {e. g. Ecclus. xxxiii. 16-18; 1. 28). Jose- 
 phiw, indeed, distinctly affirms (Cont. Ap. loc. cit.) 
 that, during the long period that had elapsed be- 
 tween tlie time of tlie close of the Canon and his 
 'l.iy, no one had dared either to add to, or to take 
 ifom, or to alter anything in, the sacreil book.;. This 
 plainly shows that in the time of Artaxerxes, to 
 which Josejjhus refers-, and which was the age of 
 Ezra and Nehemiah, 4lie collection of the sacred 
 books was completed by an authority wliich 
 tlienceforward ceased to exist. 
 
 7. Division of I he Canon into three parts, the 
 Lair, the Prophets, and the Writings (min 
 D''2"ir!D'l D^STIJ). This division is very ancient ; 
 it apjx'ars in the prtilogne to Eccle.siasticus, in the 
 New Testament, in Philo, in Josephus, and in the 
 Talmud (Surenhusii Bi/3. KaraW. p. -19). Re- 
 S{)e3*ing the principle on which tiic division has 
 been made, there is a considerable dilVerence of 
 ppinior^ "Whilst all are agreed that the firs? 
 
 part, the Law, was so named from its containing 
 tlie iiatiiiiial laws and regulations; the other twa 
 are regarded by some as named iVom the charac- 
 ter of the writings they contain; by others, from 
 tiie otMce and station ol" their authors; and by 
 others, from a sort of accidental combination, for 
 which no reason can now be assigned. 0( these, 
 the secoiid is the only one that will iiear the test 
 of examination. Two very niiterial points in 
 it.s favour are, 1st, that in the days ol' tlie Tlieo- 
 cracy tliere was a clas< df persons who bore the 
 name of Prophets (CK'QJ) piofcssionallij, i.e. 
 fhey were persons not who were occasionally 
 favoured "vilh divine revelations, but who, re- 
 nouncing all other occupations, gave themselves 
 up to the ihities ui the prophetic otlice ; and, 2ndly, 
 that of all the books in the second division tlie 
 reputed authors belong to this class; whileoftho.se 
 in the third division, none of the authors, with 
 two exce))tioiis, belong to this class. The ex- 
 ceptions are Daniel an<l Lamentations. Of iJies* 
 the (list is only ajiiiarent, tor, though Daniel ut- 
 tered ]/ropliecies, he was not bg proj'essiun a pro- 
 phet. The latter presents a greater dillicnlty; 
 the best way of getting over which perhaps is, 
 with Hitveriiick, to admit it to be an exception, 
 and suppose it made intentionally, for the pur- 
 pose of classing this book of elegies with the 
 Psalms and other lyric poetiy of the Jews (/."/;( /c/f. 
 6 11, s. 65). Ado]jting this theory, the title of 
 the second division is accounted for. As for that 
 of the third, the most probable account of it is, 
 that, at first, it was fuller — viz. 'the other writ- 
 ings," as distinguished from the Law and the Pro- 
 phets (comp. the expres>ion ra 6.\\a. ^i$\la. used 
 by the Son of Sirach, Ecclus. Prol.) ; ami that ixi 
 process of time it was abbreviated into ' the writ- 
 ings." This part is commonly cited under the 
 title Hagiographa. 
 
 8. Subse(iuent IJistury of the Old Testament 
 Canon. — The Cauon, as established in tlietimeot 
 Ezra, has remained unaltered to the present day. 
 Some, indeed, have supjiosed that, becauj^e the 
 Greek version of the Old Testament contains some 
 books not in the Helirew, there must have been 
 a double canon, a Palestinian and an Egyptian 
 (Semler, Apparat. ad liberaliorem V. T. inter- 
 pret. ^0,10; Corrodi, Belcttchtung der Gesch, 
 dts Jiidisch. u. Christlich. Kanons, s. i5.'')-184; 
 A\v^us\\, Einleit. ins. A.T. s. 79); but this notion 
 has been completely disproved by Eiclihorn 
 {Einleit. bd. i. s. 23), liUvernick (Einl. i. ^ 16), 
 and others. All extant evidence is against it. 
 The Son of Sirach, and Philo, both Alexandrian 
 Jews, make no allusion to it ; and Josephus. who 
 evidently used the Gieek version, expressly de- 
 clares against it in a passage above referred to 
 (^ 6). The earlier notices of the Canon simply 
 designate it by the threefold division already con- 
 sidered. The Son of Sirach mentions ' the Law, 
 the Propliet.s, and the other books of the fathers;' 
 and again, ' the Law, the Prophecies, and tiie 
 rest of the books;' expressions which clearly in- 
 dicate that in his day the Canon was fixed.'* In 
 
 ■'■'' Hitzig and some others speak of the title 
 thus ajijilied to -he third division as ' vague," and 
 as indicating no .settled canon. But this is ali- 
 surd. ' The rest of the biidks" ])re-<upposes a fixed 
 number of books, by subtracting from which tl>e 
 remainder is found.
 
 380 
 
 CANON. 
 
 rtie STcM Testament our Loiil frequently refers to 
 tlie Old Testament, under tl^e title of 'The Scrip- 
 tures,' or of 'The Law' (Matt. xxi. 12; xxii. 
 29; John X. 30, &c. kc); and in one place he 
 sneaks of ' the Law of Moses, the Prophets, and 
 the Psiilms" (Luke xxiv. 41) ; by the tliird of 
 ttiese titles intending, doubtless, to designate the 
 Ha.'iograjjha, either after the Jewish custom of 
 leuutiug a collection (if books by the title of that 
 witli which it commenced ; or, as Havernick sug- 
 gests, using the term i^aA/xoi as a general designar 
 tion of these books, I lecanse of the larger compara- 
 tive amount of lyric poetry contained in them 
 'Einl. § II); Paul applies to the Old Testa- 
 ment the appellations ' The Holy Writings ' 
 (ypaipal ayiai, li.mi. i. 2); 'the Sacred Letters' 
 (Upa yp6.iJLp.aT a, 2 Tim. iii. 15), and ' the Old 
 Covenant' (r/ iraAaia 5ia9^;/CA), 2 Cor. iii. 14) ; both 
 our Lord and iiis Apostles ascribe divine autho- 
 rity to the ancient Canon (Matt. xv. 3 ; John x. 
 34-36; 2 Tim. iii. 16; 2 Peter i. 19-21, &c.) ; 
 and in the course of the New Testament, quota- 
 tions arc made from all the books of the Old ex- 
 cept Ruth, tlzra, Nehemiah, Esther, Canticles, 
 Lamentations, and Ezekiel ; the omission of 
 which may be accounted for on the simple prin- 
 ciple that the writers I'.ad no occasion to quote 
 from them. Philo attests the existence in his 
 ti.ne of the Upa ypd/j-p-aTo., describes them as 
 comprising laws, oracles uttered by the prophets, 
 hymns, and the other books by wliich knowledge 
 anil godliness may be increased and perfected (De 
 Vita Contempliit. in Opjj., torn. ii. p. 275, ed. 
 Mangey); and quotations from or references to 
 the most of the books are scattered through his 
 writings. Tlie evidence of Josephus is very im- 
 
 Eortant, for, besides general references to the sacred 
 ooks, he gives a formal account of tlie Canon, as 
 it was acknowledged in his day, ascribing five 
 books, containing laws and an account of the origin 
 of man, to Moses, thirteen to the Prophets, and four, 
 containing songs of praise to God and ethical pre- 
 cepts for men, to diflerent writers, and affirming 
 that the faith of the Jews in these books is such that 
 they woukl for them sutler all tortures and death 
 itself (Cont. Apion. i. 7, 8 ; Kichhoni, Einleit. i. 
 § 50 ; Jahn, Introductio, p. 50). Melito, bishop of 
 Sardis in the second century of the Christian era, 
 gives, as the result of careful inquiry, the same 
 books in the Old Testament Canon as we have 
 now, with tlie exception of Nehemiah, Esther, and 
 Lamentations ; the two first of which, however, 
 he probably included in Ezra, and the last in 
 Jeremiah (Euseb. Hist. Eccles. iv. 26 ; Eichhorn, 
 Einl. i. § 52). The catahjgues of Origen (Euseb. 
 Hist. Eccles. vi. 2, 5), of Jerome (Prol. Galeat. 
 in 0pp. iii.), and of others of the fathers, give sub- 
 stantially the same list (Ei(;hhorn, I. c. ; Au- 
 gi;sti, Eiiil. § 54 ; Cosins, Scholastical Hist, of 
 ike Canon, ch. iii. vi. ; Henderson, On Inspira- 
 tion, 449). In the Talmudic Tract entitled 
 Baba Bathra, a catalogue of the books of 
 the sacred Canon is given, which exactly cor- 
 responds witli that now received by Christians 
 (Buxtorf, Tiberias, c. U). Hence it appears 
 that all the evidence we have shows that the 
 Canon, once fixed, has remained unaltered. 
 
 9. Formation of the Neic Testament Canon. 
 — Whilst there is abundance of evidence in 
 favour of the divine authority of the New Testa- 
 aieut books, taken separately, fully greater per- 
 
 CANON. 
 
 haps than can be adduced in suppcrt of man^ 
 of tiiose of the Old Testament, the history of tin 
 formation of the New Testament Canon is in' 
 volved in much greater obscurity than that of tha 
 Old. An ecclesiastical tradition ascribes to the 
 apostle John the work of collecting and sanction- 
 ing the writings which were worthy of a ]ilacein 
 the Canon; but this tradition is too late, too un- 
 supported by collateral evidence, and too much op- 
 posed by certain facts, such as the existence of doubt 
 in some of the early churches as to the canonicity 
 of certain books, the different arrangement of the 
 books apj}arent in catah)gues of the Canon still 
 extant, &c., for any weight to be allowed to it. 
 A much more probable opinion, and one in which 
 nearly all tlie modern writers who are favourable 
 to the claims of the Canon are agreed, is, that 
 each of the original churches, especially those of 
 larger size and greater ability, collected for itself 
 a complete set of those writings which could be 
 proved, by competent testimony, to be the pro- 
 duction of inspired men, and to have been com- 
 municated by them to any of the churches as 
 part of the written word of God ; so that in this 
 way a great many complete collections of the 
 New Testament scriptures came to be extant, the 
 accordance of which with each other, as to the 
 boolvs admitted, furnishes irreiragable evidence oi 
 the correctness of the Canon as we now have it 
 This opinion, which in itself is highly jirobable, is 
 rendered still more so when we consider the scru- 
 pulous care which the early churches took to dis- 
 criminate spurious compositions from such as were 
 authentic — the existence, ajnong some, of doubts 
 regarding certain of the New Testament books, 
 indicating that each cliurch claimed the right of 
 satisfying itself in this matter — their high venera- 
 tion for the genuine apostolic writings — tlieii 
 anxious regard for each other's prosjierity leading 
 to the free communication I'rom one to anolhei 
 of whate\er could promote this, and, of course, 
 among other things, of those writings which had 
 been entrusted to anyone of them, and by which 
 more than by any other means, the spiritual welfare 
 of the whole would be promoted — the practice of 
 the fathers of arguing the canonicity of any book, 
 from its reception by the churches, as a sufficient 
 proof of this — and the reason assigned by Euge- 
 bius (Hist. Eccles. iii. 25) for dividing the books 
 of the New Testament into 6fj:o\oyov/j.evoi and 
 avTi\ey6p,evoi, viz. that the former class was 
 composed of those which the universal tradition 
 of the churches authenticated, while the latter 
 contained such as hatl been received by the ma- 
 jority, but not by all . (Storch, Comment. Hist. 
 Crit. de Libb. N. Tcstaineiiti Catione,8ic. p. 112, 
 fl". ; Olshausen's Echtheit der IV. Evang. s. 439). 
 In this way we may readily believe that, with» 
 out the intervention of any authoritative decision, 
 either from an individual or a council, but by 
 the natural process of each body of Christiana 
 seeking to procure for themselves and to convey ti 
 their brethren authentic copies of writings in 
 which all were deeply interested, the Canon of th« 
 New Testament was formed. 
 
 10. History of the Neio Tcstainent Canon.-^ 
 The first certain notice which we have of tha 
 existence of any of tlie New Testament wrifingi, 
 in a collected form, occurs a\ 2 Pet. iii. 16, whera 
 the writer speaks of the epistles of Paul in such « 
 way as to lead us to infer tha at that time thi
 
 CAXON. 
 
 whole OT rtie prio.^'cr ]):»rt of tiipse were *olk'cte<l 
 together, were kiioun ainonus' tlu^ cliurcli»3 fjetie- 
 rally (for Peter is not aililressiii^' any ^lavticiihir 
 cl:urch), and were reL,'anle(l as nil a |)ar witli ' llie 
 other Scrijitures," liy which lattev exjiression Peter 
 plainly means the sacreil writings hoth of the 
 Old Testament and the New Testament, as far 
 as then extant. — Tiiat John must have had hefore 
 lii:n copies of the other evangelists is ]mihahle 
 from the ■wp/>tc>nc!it<iri/ character of liis own 
 gospel. — In the anonymous Epistle to Dioj;netiis. 
 which is, on goo<l grounds, supjiosed to be one of 
 the earliest of the iminspired Christian writings, 
 die writer speaks of tlie Law, the Proplietis, tlie 
 Gospels, and tiie Apostles (\) xi. ed. Ilefele). — Ig- 
 natius speaks of ' hetaking liiinself to the Gospel 
 as the Hesli of Jesus, and to the apostles as tlie 
 Presbytery of the church," and adds, 'the pro- 
 phets also we love;" thus showing, that it is to the 
 Scriptures lie was referring {£]>. ad Philadel- 
 phcnos, ^ V. ed. Ilefele). — Theopliilus of Antloch 
 sjieaks frequently of the New Testament writings 
 under the appellation of al ayiat ypacpal, or <5 duos 
 K6yos. anil in one jilace mentions the Law, the 
 Prophets, and the Gospels, as alike divinely in- 
 spircil (^AdAutol. iii. 11). — Clement of Alexandria 
 frequently refers to the books of the New Testa- 
 ment, and distinguishes them into ' the Gospels 
 and Apostolic Discourses" (Qtiis Dives Sahiisf 
 projie tin.; Stromat. saepissime). — TertuUian 
 distinctly intimates the existence of the N^w 
 Testament Canon in a complete form in his day, 
 bj' calling it ' Evangeiicum Instrumentum ' 
 (Adv. Marc. iv. 2), by describing the whole 
 Bible as ' totum instrumentum utriusque Testa- 
 mtnti ' {Adv. Prax. c. 20), and by distinguish- 
 iujj between the ' Scriptura ^'etus ' and the ' No- 
 vum Testamentum ' {ibid. c. 13). — IienEens 
 .repeatedly calls tlie writings of the New Testa- 
 ment ' the Holy Scriptures," ' the Oracles of God' 
 {Adv. Heer. ii. 27 ; i. S, &c.), and in one place 
 he puts the Evangelical and. A)iostolical writings 
 on a par with the Law and tlie Prophets {ihid. i. 3, 
 $ (3). From tlie^e allusioni we may justly infer 
 that before the midille (if the third cewtury the 
 New Testament Scriptuies were generally known 
 by the Christians in a collected foim, and re- 
 ycreiiced as the word of God. That the books 
 tliey received were the same as those now possessed 
 by us, is evident from the quotations from them 
 furnished by the early Fathers, and which have 
 been so carefully collected by t'ne learned and 
 laborious Lardner, in his Credibilitij of the Gospel 
 Hiitory. The same thing appears from the re- 
 seaiches of Origen and Eusebius, both of wliom 
 carefully inquired, and have accurately recorded 
 what books were received as Canonical by the 
 tiailition of the churclies or tlie church writers 
 (fciwiAT/triofTTocT; wapuSoffis)) and both of whom 
 enumerate the same books as are in our jiresent 
 Cauin, though of some, such as the Epistles of 
 James and Jude," the 2iid I'^p. of Peter, the 2nd 
 and 3id of Jolm, and the Apocalypse, they men- 
 tion that though received by the majority, they 
 were doubted by some (Euseli. H. E. iii. 2.') ; 
 
 * Origeii omits these altogether in his list as 
 gi\en by Eusebius, but elsewhere in his writings 
 ne so fully a<lmits their Canonicity, fliat this 
 omission can be regarded only as an oversight 
 •itber on h'4 part or on that of Eusebius. 
 
 CANTICLE.S. 
 
 38J 
 
 vi. 24). Besides these sources of infurmation w« 
 have no fewer than ten ancient cataliigiies of llie 
 New Testament Ixxiks still extant. Of tliese. six 
 accord exactly with our present Can in, whil* (J 
 the rest thrve omit only the Ajiocalyjise, and one 
 omits, with this, tlie Kjiistle to the Hebrews 
 (Lardner ".s Works, vol. iv. anil v., 8vo. ; Home"* 
 Introdmlioii, vol. i. p. 70, Sfh editidii). Ar 
 accumulation of evidence so co|iioiis and direct 
 as this renders the integrity of the New iVstainenJ 
 Canon a fact, than which none of a purely his- 
 torical kind is better ascertained. 
 
 11. With the external evidence thus furnished 
 in favour ol" the sacred Canon, the internal I'tilly 
 accords, in the Old Testament all is in keeping 
 with the assumj-.tion that its books were written 
 by Jews, sustaining the character, surrounded by 
 the circumstances, and living at the time as- 
 scrihed to their authors ; or if any apparent dis- 
 crepancies have been found in any of them, they 
 are of such a kind as further inquiry Ims served to 
 explain and reconcile. The literary jieculiarities 
 of the New Testament, its language, its idioms, 
 its style, its allusions, all are accordant with the 
 hypothesis that its antliora were exactly what they 
 profess to have been — Jews converted to Chris- 
 tianity, and living at the commencement of the 
 Christian era. C)f both Testaments the theo- 
 logical and ethical systems are snijstantially in 
 harmony; whilst all that they contain tends to 
 one grand result — the manifestation of the jiower 
 and jierfection of Deity, and the restoration of 
 man to the image, service, and love of his Creator. 
 The conclusion from the whole facts of the "case 
 can be none other tiian that the Bible is entitled 
 to that implicit and undivided reverence which 
 it demands, as the only divinely appointed Caticm 
 of religious truth and duty. 
 
 12. Besides the immortal work of Lardner and 
 the difl'erent introductions to the crilico-historical 
 study of Scripture, the following works may 
 with advantage be consulted on the subject of the 
 Canon: — Cosin"s St/iolastical History of the 
 Canon, 4to. London, 1G57, 1672; Du Pin's 
 History of the Canon and Writers of the Boolcs 
 of the Old and Neio Test. 2 vols, folio, London, 
 1699-1700; Ens. liibliotheca Sacra, site Dia- 
 t}-ibe de Librorum Nov. Test. Canotie, 12mo. 
 Amstel. 1710; Storcli, Comment. Hist. Crit.de 
 Libb. Nov. Test. Canone, 8vo. Francof ad 
 Viadrum, 1755; Schmid, Hist. Antiq. et Vin- 
 dicatio Canonis V. et N. Test. Svo. Li]is. 1775; 
 Millii Proleg. m Nov. Test. I'ars Prima, Oxon. 
 1707 ; Jones's Neio and Fvll Method of settling 
 the Canonical Authority of the Neto Test. 3 
 vols. Svo. ; Paley's Horce Paidin<e ; Alexan- 
 der's Canon of the Old and Neto Test, ascer- 
 tained, 12mo. Princeton, U. S. 1826, London, 
 1S2S.— W. L. A. 
 
 CANTICLES, or Solomon's Song (TJ? 
 D^'nt^'n ; Sept. dcr/xa rttiv OT/uaTcuj' ; Vulg. Can- 
 ticnm Canticorum; all signifying the Song of 
 Songs), is generally believed to have been so 
 denominated in the inscription, to drttote the 
 supeiior Ideality and excellence of this poem. It 
 is one of the five vieyilkdh, or volumes, placeii 
 immediately after the Pentateuch in tiie jiresen'. 
 manuscripts of the Jewish Scriptures, in the fol 
 lowing order, viz. Canticles, Ruth, Lamenta- 
 tions, Ecclesiastes, and Esther ; nltboujjh tJzi*
 
 ««2 
 
 eANTICLES. 
 
 ord«r is « «rietiines violated [Scuiptuhe, Holy]. 
 It also constitJites the I'ourth of the Cetuhiin, or 
 Wiitin'j;s (liagiographa), which in tlie Jewish enu- 
 nneiati(.n coiiij)ieiiencl the Psalms, Proverbs, Job, 
 Canticles, Ruth, LamentationSjEcclesiastes, Esther, 
 Daniel, and Ezra ; which last includes the book 
 ol' Neheniiah. Tliese books are supposed to have 
 been so called in contradistniction to the Law, 
 which was delivered orally, and to the propheti- 
 cal books, which were dictated in a peculiar 
 manner. The Cetubim the Jews regard as the 
 inspired writings of men v,ho had no prophetic 
 tnissiou [Hagioghapha]. 
 
 Cammicity of Canticles. — In favour of the 
 canonical authority of tliis book (which has been 
 questioned in ancieiit and modern times) we may 
 oliserve, that it is found in all the copies of the 
 Hebrew Bible which have descended to our times, 
 as well as in the version of the Se\ enty, which was 
 iir.ished some time in the second century before 
 the Christian era. It is also found in all the 
 ancient catalogues which have come down to us 
 from the early Christian churcii. The most ancient 
 which we possess, that of Melito, l)ishop of Sardis 
 (a.d. 17t)), preserved by Eusebius {Hist. Eccles. 
 iv. ch. 26.), professes ti» give an account of the 
 book.s of tlie Old Testament, according to the 
 order in which they were written, from accurate 
 inibiniijtion obtained in the East. The names of 
 these books, he acquaints us, are as follows : — 
 ' of Moses, rive books, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, 
 Numbers, Deuteronomy ; Jesus Naue, Judges, 
 Ruth; four books of Kings; two of Paralipo- 
 mena ; Psalms of David ; Proverbs of .Solomon ; 
 Ecclesiastes ; Song of Sony s ; Job; of Prophets, 
 isaiali, Jeremiah ; of the twelve Prophets, one 
 book ; Daniel, Ezekiel, Esdras.' The book of 
 Canticles is invariably contained in all subse- 
 quent catalogues. It has consequently all the 
 external marks of canonicity possessed by any 
 other bonk of the Old Testament not expressly 
 cited in the New. Those who have questioned 
 its riglit to a ])lace in the sacred volume have pro- 
 ceeded more in dogmatical than on historico-criti- 
 cal grounds. It has been, inileed, attemjited to be 
 sh;)w:i lliat the Song of Solomon was not included 
 by Josephus in his account of tlie books of canoni- 
 cal Scripture, on the following grounds : — Jose- 
 i;hus divides these books into the 'five book.s of 
 Moses ; thirteen books containing the history of 
 their own times, written by the Prophets who suc- 
 ceeded hiin, to tlie time of ArtaMerxes, son of 
 Xerxes, king of Persia ; and the remaining four 
 consisting of hymns to God, and admonitions 
 I'or the cHnduct of men"s lives." It is generally 
 Rupjwsed tliat these four books are — Psalms, 
 Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Canticles; and that 
 the tliirteen other- books, included under the term 
 Prophets, are — Joshua, Judges and Ruth, Samuel, 
 Kings, Chronicles, Ezra and Nehemiah, Estlier, 
 Isaiaii, Jeremiah and Lamentations, Ezekiel, 
 Daniel, the twelve minor Prophets, and the book 
 of Joli. But it has been maintained, that this 
 las* book mure appropriately belongs to tlie four 
 which contain hymns and admonitions liir liu- 
 ^ man conduct, t,.apii to tlie Prophets wlio wrote 
 the liistory of tiieir own times after Ifoses, and 
 consequently that there is no place left for Canti- 
 cles. Those who adopt this view are compelled 
 bo Mipaiate the book of Ezra from that of Neiie- 
 siiah, in order to make up the number of thirteen 
 
 CANTICLES. 
 
 prophets ; but whatever ajipearance of truth then 
 may te in this rea-noning, which is that advanced 
 by Mr. William Whiston, in his supjilement ti 
 his Essay towards restonng the Text of the Ola 
 Testament, it is overbalanced by the fact already 
 stated, that this book formed ]iart of tlie Jewish 
 canonical Scriptures and of the Septuagint ver- 
 sion. It is true tliat other books are found in the 
 copies of this latter version, which were either 
 originally written in Greek, as the Book of Wis- 
 dom and others, or are translated from the 
 Helirew or Chaldee, as Ecclesiasticus, and the 
 tirst book of Maccabees ; but it is confessed that 
 these never formed part of the first or Jewish 
 canon. The Book of Canticles was also translated 
 into Greek, from the oiiginal, by Symmachus 
 the Jew, and by Aquila, in the second cen- 
 tury. 
 
 The Canticles was one of the books translated 
 by Jerome from the Greek, or rather, corrected 
 from the older Latin version, and published 
 by that Father; but this work is now lost. We 
 still possess in the present Latin Vulgate Je- 
 rome's translation of this book from the original 
 Hebrew. 
 
 Subject of Canticles. — The subject of this 
 book is confessedly Love. But it has been a 
 matter of much controversy, especially in modem 
 times, what kind of love is here celebrated. It is 
 equally a matter of dispute among divines whe- 
 ther the interpretation of the poem is limited to 
 its obvious and primary meaning, or whether it 
 does not also include a latent mystical and alle- 
 gorical sense. We shall speak of these subjects 
 in order. And, tirst, as to the literal and pri- 
 mary meaning, the earliest information which we 
 have is contained in the preface of Origen to liis 
 commentary on tliis book. This eminent scholar 
 holds it to be an epithalamium, or marriage-Son^ 
 ir the form of a drama. This idea has been, il 
 mouern times, improved by Lowth, Bossuct, 
 Micliaelis, and other commentators. ' The Soii^ 
 of Songs,' sa)'s Bisho]) Lowth, ' for so it is entitled, 
 either on account of the excellence of the suliject 
 or of the composition, is an epitlialamium, or 
 nuptial dialogue, or ratlier, if we may be allowed 
 ^0 give it a title more agreeable to the genius of 
 the Helnews, a Song of Loves. Such is the title 
 of Psalm xlv. It is expressive of the utmost 
 fervour as well as delicacy of passion : it is in- 
 stinct with all the spirit and sweetness of alTec- 
 tion. The principal characters aie Solomon him- 
 self and his bride, wlio aie lepiesented sijcaking 
 both in dialogue, and in soliloquy, when acci- 
 dentally separated. Virgins, also, the compa- 
 nions of the bride, are introduced, who seem to lie 
 constantly on the stage, and bear a part of the 
 dialogue. Mention is also made of young men, 
 friends of the bridegroom, but tliey ai« niuto 
 persons. This is exactly conforma'.ile to the 
 manners of the Hebrews, who liad always a num 
 ber of companions to the bridegroom, thirty of 
 whom were present in honour of Samson at his 
 nujitial feast (Judg. xiv. 13). In tlie New Tes- 
 tam-ent, according to the Ilelirew idiom, they are 
 called children, or sons of the bridechtmljer, and 
 ti'ieiids of the bndegroom. There, too, we find 
 mention of ten virgins who went llirth to meet 
 the bridegroom and conduct him home; whicb 
 circumstance* indicate that this poem is founded 
 on tlie nutitial rites of tbe Hebrews, and ig es-
 
 CANTICLES. 
 
 ■ire of the forms or ceremonial of flieir mar- 
 rlaice 111 this oi)iiiion, indeed, tlie lianiiori)' of 
 comnientatois is not less reinarKable than their 
 disasjrceiiient cnn©wni!i!^ tlie treneral economy 
 and conduct of the work, and the order and ar- 
 raiiLjcmcnt of tlie several parts. Tlie present 
 oliject of inquiry, however, is only wheiher any 
 plot or faille be contained or represented in this 
 piiem ; and upon this poii't the most probable 
 ojiiiiion is that of the celebrated Bossnet, a critic 
 whose profoinid learning will ever be acknow- 
 ledi^-td, and a sciiolar wiiose exq^uisite taste will 
 ever be admired.' 
 
 Iiossuet"s idea of this poem was, that it is a 
 regular drama, or pastoral eclogue, consisting of 
 seven acts, each act filling a day, concluding 
 with theSabbatli, inasmuch as the bridegroom on 
 lliis day does not, as usual, go fortii to his rural 
 employments, but proceeds from the marriage 
 chamber into public with his bride. Tiie fol- 
 lowing are Bossuet's divisions of the ])lots : — 
 
 First day . . Chap. i. — ii. 6. 
 
 Stfcond day . ii. 7 — 17. 
 
 T'lird day . iii. — v. I. 
 
 l'\->.ith day . v. 2— vi. 9. 
 
 Fifth day . . vi. 10— vii. 11. 
 
 Sixth day . . vii. 12 — viii. 3. 
 
 Sabbath . . . viii. 4—14. 
 
 Lowth so far differs from Bossuet as to deny the 
 existence of a regular drama, inasmuch as there 
 is no termination to the plot. Michaelis, in his 
 notes to his German translation of Lowth's Pre- 
 lections, endeavours to overturn the views of 
 Bossuet and Lowth, and to show that this poem 
 can have no relation to the celebration of a mar 
 riage, inasmuch a.s the bridegroom is compelled 
 in ins nuptial week to quit his spouse and friends 
 for whole days, in order to attend to his cattle in 
 the pastures ; and while he altogv?ther rejmdiates 
 the idea, which some iiave liad the rashness to 
 maintain, that the subject of the poem, in its 
 literal signification, is a clandestine amour, inas- 
 much as vhe transaction is described as legal and 
 (Hiblic, and the consent of parents plainly inti- 
 mated, he equally rejects the views of those 
 wlio conceive tiiat tliese songs relate to the state 
 of ])arties betrothed before marriage. His opinion 
 is, that this poem has no reference to a futvue mar- 
 riage, but that the chaste loves of conjugal and do- 
 mestic life are described. This state, he conceives, 
 in tlie East, admits of more of the ]ierplexities, 
 jealousies, plots, and artifices of lo\e than it does 
 with us; the scene is more varied, and there is 
 consequently greater scope for invention. 
 
 But the idea that the conjugal state, or the loves 
 ofmained persons, aie here referred to, has been 
 strongly opposed by some of the aljlest modern 
 writers, including Eichhorn (Einleifiinf/), Rosen- 
 inijller (ScAo//rt in Cunl. Pref p. 261), Jahn(iwvi- 
 hitung anil Introduct. in Compendium redacta), 
 who maintain tiiat tiie chaste mutual loves of two 
 young persoMsanfecedent tomarriageare liere cele- 
 lirated. Tlie last-named writer having observed that 
 neither in monogamy nor in ]io!yganiy is the] wssion 
 (d'h.Me so ardent as is here represented, jHOceeds 
 to uiaintairi that no other object remains but 'the 
 cliaste and reci])r,)cal atl'eclion of the sexe^ pre- 
 viously to marriage. ^ Some of the language,' he 
 adds, 'may l)e thc/Uglit indecorous in ))ersons in 
 luch circumstances ; but tiiis is not the case, un- 
 le-is it be taken in the worst sense. It admits of 
 
 CANTICLES. 
 
 381 
 
 a meaning perfectly chaste, which in the moiithi 
 of chaste lovers, such as the jwrlies aie "uii- 
 formly re])resenled, is the only one that can oe 
 true.' He conceives that there is no necessity 
 to suppose any actual historical foundation Hut 
 the ])oem. 
 
 Here it may be necessary to state, that the 
 learned are divided on the point whether the 
 Canticles consist of one continued and connecte<l 
 poem, or of a number of detached songs or 
 amorefs. The first ])ers()n who maintained the 
 latter opinion was Father Simon, who was on 
 tliis account unjustly accused of tlenying the 
 canonicity of the book. This opinion has neen 
 subsequently ddeniled by Eichhorn (Einleiluuff), 
 Jahn, Pareau ( I)is/itu/io Intcrprctia V. T. p. 
 iii. § iv. c. xi. 6 3 ; Biblical Cabinet, vol. ii. j). 
 129), and many oth.ers. A very general opinion 
 is, that it is an idyl, or rather, a inimber of id vis, 
 all forming a collective whole. Such is the o]jiniou 
 hekl, among others, by Sir 'William Jones and 
 Dr. J. Mason Good, in his beautiful translation of 
 the Song of Songs. Dr. Adam Claii;e, however, 
 will not allow that the book of Canticles c(>ines 
 under the denomination of a pastoral, an idyl, 
 an ode, or an epithalamium. He conceives it 
 to be a composition sui generis, partaking more 
 of the nature of a m;isk tiian anything else — an 
 entertainment tor the guests who attended a mar- 
 riage cennnony. He admits no mystical sense. 
 Jahn, in the work above alluded to, having 
 stated his opinion that the work comprehends 
 several amatory poems, thus distributes them : — 
 1. An innocent country maiden makes an undis- 
 guised profession of her attachment, and her lover, 
 a shepherd, replies to it with equal jjroteslationt 
 of atVcction (i. 2 — ii. 7). Some prefer concluil- 
 ing this dialogue at i. 11, and making i. 12 — ii. 7, 
 a soliloquy, in which the maiden is supposed to 
 repeat some com])liments of her lover. But this 
 is without suflicieiit reason.- — 2. A maiden sings of 
 her lover, who is seeking her everywhere, and she 
 also confesses her warm alVection (ii. 8 — iii. .5). 
 Some su])pose that ii. 8 — 14 is a dream, an*l that 
 in verse 1.3 the maiden awakes, who dreams iigain 
 in iii. 1-5. But if these places are similar Ij 
 dreams, it ought to be remembered that waking 
 dreams are not uncommon with lovers. This tlie 
 poet, true to nature, has here represented. — 3. A 
 maiden in a litter, surrounded by Solonton's 
 soldiers, is brought to the harem of the king. 
 The lover prefers, far bel'oie all the royal beau- 
 ties, his own beloved, in whose society he declai?s 
 that he is happier than tlie king ainiself ('iii. (i- 
 V. 1). Some choose to make iv. 8 — v. 1, a distiiut 
 poem : but they can hardly offer any suflicient 
 reason lor separating this ))oition from the other. 
 Nevertheless tlie distribution of the work into its 
 several parts must be left very much to the> 
 reader's own taste and feeling. — 4. A maiden 
 beloved sings of her lover. He had come to 
 her door at night, and had (led away before she 
 opened it. She seeks him ; is be.iten by the watch, 
 and stripped of her veil. She ilcsciilies the 
 beauty of her lover, who at Itngth answeis, cele- 
 brating her loveliness, with a contemptuous 
 glance at the multitude of the king's wives (v. 2- 
 vi. 9). — 5. Siiulamith recounts, in i^w words, 
 the allurements of the courtieis, whom she has 
 met with unex|)ecleilly in the garilen, and hei 
 rejection of them, and celebrates her atlection fuj
 
 
 CANTICLES. 
 
 her lover (vi. 10 — viii. 3).— 6. Protestation and 
 praises of constant allection (viii. 4-7). — 7. A 
 discourse between two brotiieis, about guarding 
 and giving away their sister in marriage.; wlio 
 replies with scorn, that she would be her own 
 guardian (viii. S-12). — 8. A fragment. A lover 
 wishes to hear his beloved. She rejjlies by per- 
 suading him to fly. Perliaps her parents or rela- 
 tions were near, who, in tlieEast, never permit 
 sucti meetings (viii. 13, 14). 
 
 Ewald considers 1 he poem to consist of a drama 
 in four parts. The heroine of tlie poem, accord- 
 ing to this writer, is a country maiden, a native 
 ofEngedi, who, while rambling in the plains, fell 
 in with the chariots of Solomon, and was carried 
 bv him into his jtatace. (Ewald's Das Hoke Lied 
 Saio/no's, Gotting. IS2G). 
 
 We may here mention, that tiie divisions in 
 general of this poem have been moditied accord- 
 ing to the views of its dilVrrent commentators. 
 Those, for instance, who regard it as proiihetical, 
 have adopted various divisions; such as the 
 Icffal And 'evangelical — the former commencing 
 with the captivity, and ending with, the death of 
 Clirist, from the commencement to chap. iv. 6 ; 
 and the latter from cliap. iv. 7 to the end. Ni- 
 cholas Lyranus considers the six first chapters to 
 represent the Old Testament, and the two last the 
 New. Ederus (CEcotiom. Bibl. p. ISO) supposes 
 that it describes the history of the chujch to 
 the time of Christ, in ten dramas. Gregory 
 de Valentia divides it info two parts — the first 
 containing the history of tlie Israel itish church 
 to Solomon : and the second, the professing 
 Christian church, to the time of Constantine. 
 Cornelius a Lapide finds in it tlie Christian 
 church in its infancy to the feast of the 
 Pentecost, its youth to the time of Constantine, 
 its manhood under Constantine, its old age 
 in the time of the Arian and Nestorian heresies, 
 and its renovation under Basil, Chrysostom, and 
 Augnstiu. Those who consider it as a dogmatical 
 l)Ook form other divisions. Thus, Cocceius, 
 holding it to be a re])resentation of the progress of 
 religion in the soul, or the spiritual wedlock of 
 Christ and the church, divides it into four parts, 
 consistin.g of espousals, mutual love, reconciliation, 
 and consummation in heaven ; while Calovius 
 forms of it three divisions, consisting of the desire 
 of'Christ and his advent, grief for the loss of the 
 bridegroom, and the song of the bridegroom and 
 bride. 
 
 Object of the Canticles.— It has been in all 
 ages a matter of dispute, whether we are to seek 
 for any hidden or occult meaning under the enve- 
 lope of the literal and obvious sense. Wliile seve- 
 ral eminent men have maintained that the object 
 of these poems is cwifined to tlie celebration of 
 the mutual love of tiie sexes, or that its main 
 design, in so far as its sacred character is consi- 
 dered, is the inculcation of marriage, and espe- 
 cially of monogamy, the majority of Christian 
 interpreters, at least since the days of Origen, 
 have believed that a divine allegory is contained 
 under the garb of an epithalamuim, founded on 
 the historical fact of the marriage of Solomon 
 with the daughter of Pliaraoh : others have Held it 
 to be a simple allegory, having no liistorical truth 
 for its basis. We are informed by Jerome, that 
 Origen wrote ten books of commentaries on this 
 Ot»Tn, containing twenty thousand stichi. Of 
 
 CANTICLES. 
 
 thsse there are extant, in Latin, two homilks^ 
 translated from the original Greek by Jen)me j 
 and four books of Commentaries, in the version of 
 Rufinus (Origen, Opera, Paris, 1740, vol. iii.). 
 Wliile the celebrated author admits the liistorical 
 sense, lie represents, according to his custom, % 
 hidden sense, in which either the church or tha 
 soul of the believer (for he doe.s not determino 
 which) converses with the divine Redeemer. 
 'Tin's little book,' he says, 'seems to be an epi- 
 thalamium — that is, a nuptial song — written by 
 Solomon, and sung in the person of a bride to her 
 Inidegroom, who is the word of God burning witli 
 celestial love. For she loved him passii)nalely, 
 whether we consider her as the soul made after his 
 image, or the church.' Jerome, in his Epistle to 
 Pope Damasus, observe.s, that ' Origen, having in 
 his other writings exceeded all others, in his work 
 on Canticles has exceeded himself.' Jerome and 
 the Fathers in general have followed Origen's in- 
 terpretation. The otdy exception to this view, 
 among the early writers, whose name has come 
 d.'jtvn down to us. is the famous Syrian commenta- 
 tor, Theodore, Bishop of Mopsuestia, the friend 
 and schoolfellow of St. Chr)'sostom. This emi- 
 nent writer altogether denied tlie allegorical 
 interpretation, and is said to have consideied the 
 Canticles to have been composed with the view of 
 f^aining the affections of an Ethiopian princess. 
 Tlieodoret, in his Commeutarit on Canticles, 
 while he states that Eusebius, Cyprian of Car- 
 thage, and others nearer to the apostolic age re- 
 cognised the Canticles as a spiritual book, ac- 
 quaints us that there were persons who slandered 
 the book, and denied its spiritual meaning, ])ut- 
 ting together fables laiworthy of a doting old 
 woman ; others, he observes, were of opinion that 
 the wise Solomon writes concerning hunself and 
 the daughter of Pharaoh, while some authors of 
 the same class feigned that the Shunamitc O'or 
 the word is sometimes thus read) was no other 
 than Abishag, who was a native of Shunem. St. 
 Bernard assigns to the book three senses — a his- 
 torical, a mora-i, and a spiritual. He describes 
 it as an agreeable and figurative epithalamium, 
 in which Solomon sings the mysteries of an eternal 
 marriage ; and among the moderns, Bossuet ob- 
 serves, that 'Solomon adduces, as an example, 
 his chaste afl'ection towards Pharaoh's daughter; 
 and while on the foundation of a true history he 
 aptly describes the most j.iassionate love, he sings, 
 undei the envelope of an elegant fable, celestial 
 loves and the uraon of Christ and the Churcu.' 
 
 Among those who have maintained the opinion 
 that the Song of Songs is an allegory founded on 
 facts, were Isidore Clarius and Francis Vatablu*. 
 Lighlfoot also considers the poem to refer to a 
 daughter of Pliaraoh, an Ethiopian and a Gentile. 
 Others, as we have observed, among whom *.•» 
 the learned Lutherans Carpzov (introdnciic 
 ad Libros Canonicos F. T.), and Gerhard (Pos- 
 till. Salomon^, in Cant, prooem. cap. x. ), main- 
 tain that the book is a simple allegory, having no 
 historical base whatever, but describing the love 
 which subsists between Christ and the ChurcL 
 under figures borrowed from the ardour of humah 
 nassion. These writers maintain that there ex 
 ists no double sense whatever, but that its pn 
 mary is its only sense, and that this primary 
 sense is entirely of a spiritual character. 
 
 As, however, the Scriptures give no iutimatioe
 
 CANTICLES. 
 
 that Oiis boi)k oontains a mystiial or alletiin-icul 
 ».mse, lecoiiis* lias bt>en liail to tlie analoi;y of 
 8uai« (»f llie M issiaiiic Psalms, wliose ajiplieution 
 to Spiiiiual objects is recoil I isird in tin- New 
 Test iitieiit. Est eciiillv a great i«senilil,iiic« lias 
 ux'ii oiiservetl lietwwii the cliaracter of tlie Caii- 
 tii-lci anil the 15th Psal-.n ; and it wili snfliccCor 
 mil present i)ur[io^ to cite the ojiiiiion of Uosi^n- 
 (iiiilier, one of the ablest commentatiu's on tlie 
 Mesiiaiiic Psalms, in reference to this snliject. 
 Professing to follow the opiniim of the ancient 
 Ilebiews, connnunicatcil by the Chalilec [lara- 
 jjhrast, and the writer of the Ej)istle to the Htv 
 (irews — namely, that ihelSth Psalm celebrated the 
 excellencies and praises of the f,^reat Messiah ; he 
 observes, 'Tiiroughout the latter jjart of the 
 I)5alin this allejjory, in which the Hebrew }ioets 
 , particulaily delighted, is maintained. They were 
 accustomed to represent God as entertaining-, to- 
 wards las chosen jieople, i'eelings which they com- 
 pared to conjugal alliections ; antl which they 
 <lednced, under this figure, into all their various 
 and even minute expressions. In tiie illustrating 
 and oeautifying of this allegory, the whole of 
 tlie Sonff of SoiiCfS is occupied ; that the subject 
 of that poem, and that of the jjsalm before its, 
 is the same, there is no doubt amotifj sound in- 
 'erpreXers.' The reader may also refer, in illus- 
 tration of this subject, to the many passages of 
 Jie Old ;uul New Testament in which this figure 
 :s retained by the sacred writeis: such as I.saiah 
 i\'. 5; Ixii. 5; Jerim. iii. 1, &c. ; Ezek. xvi. 
 iKlxxiii.; Matt. ix. 15; John iii. 29; 2 Cor. 
 xi. 2; SpUes. v. 2, 3, &c. ; Rev. xix. 7; xxi. 2; 
 x\ii. I?. (See, esjxx;iai!3', Bishop Lowfh's 2!st 
 Lecture, De Sacra ITeb. Poesi.) Tiie wiiters, 
 however, who have admitted the allegorical sen?e, 
 are divided as to the oliject and design of the 
 •allegory. The ancient Chaldee jiarajihrast, a 
 writer Tiot more ancient than tlie sixth century, 
 IS been considered by some as preserving rlie 
 iadition of the Jews on this suiiject. In this 
 iiiimentary (the Targum) the Canticles are ex- 
 .iined as a figurative dsscripticai oi'tlie giacious 
 xonduct of Jehovah towaids his people, in deli- 
 [ veiing t^^ena from tlie Egyptian bondage, con- 
 ferring great benefits on them during their pro- 
 eiess tlmxigh the wildemess, and cxmveying them 
 in safety to tlie promised land. Aben Ezra, the 
 <-elebrated Jewish commentatw of the 12tli cen- 
 tury, ciMisidered that the Cant ic'es repn'sented the 
 iiistoiy of tlie. Jews from Abrahaju to the Messiah. 
 Otiiers tiavp conceived the bride to be A\'is- 
 thnn, with whom Solomon was acquainted from 
 liis r!iil(ilj(X)d, and with wliose beauty he was 
 ta]itivHted (LeoHebraeus,Dialog. iii. De Am-we). 
 This latter is the view followed by Rosen mill let- 
 in his Scholia. He conceives the suelden tian- 
 sitions of tlie biide from the court to the giove 
 ine.xplicable, on tlie principle ti.at the Canticles 
 desciibe only human love; \nxX while adojiting 
 the allegorical interpretation, he ijrofesses to fbl- 
 low tlte Clialdee paraplpast and Solomon Jarchi, 
 and ce:/»is the Canticles a dramatico-aliegorioal 
 poem. Lutlier, in his Commentary onC'<iiiticles, 
 maintained the allegorical intirpretalio.i, con- 
 ceiving Jehovah to be the bridegroom, the bricte 
 the Jewish nation, irid the ]joem itself a figura- 
 tive di'-ici ijit ion of Soloiiioti's civil government, 
 wh.ch, as we have already seen, appears, from 
 TlieuHOret, to Live lieen an opinion of so^aie oi thp 
 
 CANTlCi.1 
 
 3Sft 
 
 ancients. In his Commevtatij on 1 Peter, how. 
 e\er, he explains the bride to be ihe Ne«' Teslw- 
 nient church. For the vi*w in iiis Co'iiMcntar-' 
 on Cimticles lie is put down as a followfr oril)iise 
 ancient heretics ''y SiKtiis of Siuina. aid oii.ej 
 wiiters of the ciiincli u( S nie. Hut from i 'i- 
 ciiargelw is ably viefended by Ce"!uird ((/^ supra . 
 The modern wrileis of the Roman church ha\e, 
 in getieral, followed Oiigen and Jeionie in their 
 allesroiical inter] iretations. Tiie learned IIo^ 
 hov'rver ''Dos HohtUed in ctnen uoch uiirir- 
 stu'hfcn Dtutiuitj, Eieyberg. I''l3).,has gi\en an 
 entirely new interpretittiiin. He finds, iwmUt ihe 
 image of the liride, the ten tril)es, ijiui !v lir- 
 brothers of the Shulamite he understands ti:e 
 cili/cns o\' Judah, inasmuch as lliev did in t 
 think the Jews w.utliy of being united v.ith tlieiij. 
 lie regards the book as an attempt made in the 
 time of Hezekiah to re-unite the remnant of the 
 ten tribes to the tribe of Judah. Carjizov states 
 that the Papists imd Christ the swjuse, and Maiy 
 the bride : liut this only applies to very few writeis 
 in the Roman c<immunion. Others among 1. em 
 explain the allegory as descriptive of the union be- 
 tween Christ and iierfect souls, including liie 
 blessed Virgin; amotig Englisii comineniai.)!.'; 
 also the idea is very pievalent th.it the Canticles 
 have a jieculiar reference to the union of the soul 
 oi' the believer with Christ. The Rev. T Scolt 
 observes, in his Commcrdartf, that 'no otliei ))oeU4 
 of the kind c<iuld be so explained as to (les(:ril.'<,' 
 the state of the heart at diHerejit times, and t<. 
 excite admiring, adoring, gvatiful love to (r<id 
 our Saviour as this iloes." We sliall briedy di.-<- 
 miss the other views held re¥]iecfirg the Canticles 
 by those who admitted the allegorical sense.. 
 Giotiiis has lieen justly censured for his views on 
 tills subject. Cni'ceiving it to be a dialoi'>ie be- 
 tween Solomon and the daughter u\' the king of 
 Egypt, he sujiposes that the mysteries of niiuriage 
 are hidden under nMidest expressions. His < («i> 
 ments cannot be too highly rep'ribated for their 
 grossness and ol^sceriity. At the .same time I.e 
 adds that ' Solomon, in order to perjietuatc (he 
 work, composed it with such art that, witliout 
 much distortion, it migiit be li>und to contain an 
 allegory exjii-essive of tlie love of God to (l;e 
 Israelites, as lield by the Chaldee {jarapl-.rast and 
 Maiinonides. But as this was a ty|)e i/f flie love 
 of Christ to his Church, Christians laudiibly em- * 
 ployed their genius in applying lite wards of the 
 Song to this.' Carpzov, who admits Jio literal 
 inteijH-etation, considers that Bossutt onlv re- 
 haslied this idea of Grotius, whom he acknow- 
 leilges to have been a great man, if iie had lei 
 sacred subjects done. 
 
 Among the remaining allegorical senses given 
 to this |xiem, is tliat of its being a dialogue be- 
 tween God and the human soul, and even between 
 the divine and human nature of C^hrisl ; while 
 the alchemists conceive the whole Wik to treat 
 ofnothmg but the philosopher's stone, of wliich 
 Solomon was in search fse* Carjizov's Ititri.diu- 
 tioii). We must not omit the opinion i.l' liie 
 learned Keiser, who conceives it to lie a his'(iiici>- 
 allegorical song, t^elebrating riie restoration of tlie 
 Mosaic worship by Zerubbabel, K/.ra, and Nelie- 
 miab {Da* Uohelied, Eilangen, 1S2.V;,. 
 
 We aie now to give some account ot'ihose who 
 deny any but a liteial Interpretation of tliii Unkk 
 We find in the Mishna (J'irke Ai'oth and Mm
 
 3SC 
 
 CANTICLES. 
 
 Kchet Jttdaini) some allusion to an idea tha^ 
 
 nnlil (lie time of E/ra douhts were entertained as 
 to the authenticity of tliis book ; anil to a deci- 
 lion of the Ral)biii-i, that so far from its being an 
 impure book, it was the most noly of all the lia- 
 giographa ; and that if any controversy existed, it 
 was only in respect to Ecclesiastes. We are also 
 informed by Origeii and Jerome that the Jews 
 t'or'iade tiiis boolv to l)e read by any one until he 
 arrived at thirty years of age — a restriction wnich 
 tlie=e Fathers approved of in consequence of the 
 amatory character of the poem. Among the 
 Cliristian writers we have already observed that 
 rtie only author of antiquity who lias defended its 
 literal interpretation was Theodore of Mopsuestia, 
 who was condemned at the second Council of 
 Constantinople for liaving ' disparaged the Can- 
 ticles, l)y asserting that Solomon wrote these 
 things to his bride, expounding things unutter- 
 able to Christian pars.' Leontius of Byzantium, 
 a writer of tiie seventh century, in his book against 
 Nestorius (see CanLsms, vol. i. p. 577), observes, 
 among other things, of Theodore, that he ' inter- 
 preted libidinously, according to his own mind, 
 and with meretricious tongue, the most holy Song 
 of Songs, wbicli, with incredible audacity, he cuts 
 oil" from the sacred books. Jalin also (Intro- 
 duction) says, that the worst interpretation of all 
 Wiis tliat of Theodore, who considered the Can- 
 ticles an obscene book. Dr. Nathaniel Lardner 
 had long since observed that this accusation was 
 probably false, as lieing made by his enemies. Tlie 
 reader can onl}' form his judgment from tlie few 
 fragments which have come down to us from tliis 
 eminent interpreter. The following is, perhaps, 
 the most remarkable : — ' It becomes all readers to 
 reflec* that this book of the wise man cannot be 
 looked on as an encouragement to immorality, and 
 tlreiffore to be held in disrepute. Neithei- should the 
 Ixjok, on tlie other hand, be commended as having 
 a prophetical character, lor the edification of the 
 Church; for isad it been a projjhetical book, there 
 would have been soii»e mention in it of the name 
 of God ; but all, ought to know that the book is a 
 table entertainment, such as Plato, at a later 
 perjotl. wrote concerning love, on which account 
 the public reading of the Canticles was never 
 allowed either to the Jews or to us, as being a 
 domestic and nuptial Song of Sol(jmon, singing 
 to i)is guests the repioa^"ies cast ujx>n his bride.' 
 But wiiatever might have been Tlieodore's parti- 
 cular views, he a])peai-' to have had no followers 
 for many ages ; the allegorical interpretation hag 
 been the currvnt one in the Christian Church. 
 Eiiism^ J 's said to have been the .'I'rst after Theo- 
 dore t() deny this interpretation (American Ency., 
 ait.' .Sol.'s Song). Le Clerc, at a later periml. t(H>k 
 the same view, maintaining that it was simply 
 a»> idyl or ))astoral eclogue ; and, in more 
 n.(«lein times, some of the most distinguished in- 
 tfr|)»4?ters have followed tin's interpretation. 
 
 Tlie oj)in ions of those who have acknowledged 
 no other than the literal interjiretation of the 
 tianlicles has had a considerable inllupnce in the 
 question of the ^anonicity of the book. Nor is it 
 at all smprising that those who were in the habit 
 of attaching a spiritual meaning to it should Hnd 
 it iliniciilt to l)elie\e that a book, treating of 
 /lurnan lo>'e, should have a place in the inspired 
 volime. Jahn eideavours to explain this by 
 yie lypotlifisis that the author or authors of theg<» 
 
 CANTICLES, 
 
 songs .lo not celebrate all kinds of chaste love 
 
 the sexes before marriage, but only that wliicb 
 leads to monogamy (whicii is commended iu 
 Ecclesiastes ix. 9) and polygamy condemned^ 
 iii. 6-1 1, and vi. R, 9 ; or tliat tlie jnophets — pos- 
 sibly Haggai, Ze<;hariiih, and Malachi — who 
 placed the Canticles in the canon, seem to have 
 imdeistood it in the mystical saise; so that the 
 canonical sense is mystical, although this sense 
 was not intended by the authors [iNsinu.*.- 
 tion]. Most, howevei', of the literal courr'Anta- 
 tors are of Oj)inion that marriage, being a divr.je 
 institution, the chaste love of the scxre is a St 
 subject for sacred song. Tlius Pareau (Jnstitutio 
 Jnte-rpretis V. T. \ see Translation in Bib. Co' 
 bin",t, vol. ii. p. 291), who conceives that these 
 songs are employed in 'describing the chastest 
 love subsi-'ting between a certain young man and 
 a girl betrothed to him, in which the poet givea 
 the reins to a most lu.^uriant imagination,' thinks 
 that, at the same time, nothing is seen adapted to 
 excite or nourish impure feelings, but that the 
 author seems to have studiously endeavoured to 
 adorn the virtuous loves of the future spouses with 
 all tlwse allurements which a fervid and Oriental 
 genius could imagine, that he might more effica- 
 ciously recal the young men of his time from the 
 enticements of impure love (See also Seiler'3 
 Her?nencutics, ^ 17.')). Seller conceives that the 
 aim of these songs consists in a commendation of 
 conjugal fidelity, and of pure love for one wife, 
 who is the legitimate spouse, even in a state of 
 polygamy. 
 
 An argument has been made use of against the 
 literal sense derived from the style of the poem ; 
 some critics having maintained that actual de- 
 formities are ascribed to the bride, which is incon- 
 sistent with an amatory poem ; hut from this 
 charge it has been powerfully vfnlicafed by 
 writers of exquisite taste, of whom it will he sulfi- 
 ciait to name Bossuet, Lowfh, Eichhoi-n, and Dr. 
 J. Mason Good. ' Even regarding it,' says Calmet, 
 ' as a mere hunjan composition, it has all the 
 beauties of which a piece of this nature is capable. 
 The bride and bi-iilegro(7m express their senti- 
 ments in fi^^urative and enigmatic periods, and 
 by comparisons and similitudes deiivetl from 
 rural sceneiy. If the comparisons are sometimes 
 too strong, we must allow something to the genius 
 of the Orientals and the vivacity of love. The 
 style is taider, lively, animated, and delicate' 
 (Preface to Canticles). 
 
 Tliese views, however, respecting the beauties of 
 the poem, leave the question of its mystical and 
 sjjiritual character initouched. We know that 
 many poets, ancient and modern, have written 
 amatory s<ings, which have allegorical, distinct 
 from the jirimary, meaning. To adduce a fami- 
 liar instance, it is known that several ,of Mr 
 Moore's Melodies are of this character. It is, 
 therefore, at least possible 'hat the Canticles may 
 have a hidden meaning ; but as ''he Scriptures no 
 where refer- to this, it can only be Inferred from 
 analogy. It is, at the same time, remarkable;, 
 that although the ancient Jews have attached a 
 Messiani : character to seveial of the {tsalms, they 
 have never, as far as we know, sought this mean. 
 ing in the Canticles. 
 
 It was chieHy the subject of the poem tb^it ir> 
 fluenced Dr. J. Pye Smith in rejecting the Canti- 
 cles from the Canon^ allhouj;!) he also maintaineil^
 
 t.uVTICLES. 
 
 CAPERNAUM. 
 
 381 
 
 with Wliistnn, thaf Jospplms did not include it 
 in liis caUlogiie {Scripture Testimony, i. 5'), 
 3r(l edit. 1S37; aiuo Congregational Magazine 
 11)1 1S37. IS3S.) 
 
 Jiiit by many who defend tiie allegorical inter- 
 metation, it is acknoaledijed that, even in its 
 literal sense, W tias a just claim to l)e considered 
 1 canonical bixik. J)r. J. Mason Good, for instance, 
 wcio. alrii()ui;li iie acUiiowledireti that we have no 
 enllicient data to Imihl a decisive ojjinion, still 
 believes it an allei::i)ry (obsf-rving that 'tiiis alle- 
 ijoric mo<'e of descrii)ini< the sacred nnion sub- 
 ^istinsf l>et.\veen mankimi at large, or an indivi- 
 dual and pious soul, and the great Creator, is 
 common to almost all I'listeni iH)etry,' in proof of 
 which lie refers 'o ihe chaste and virtuous Sudi or 
 •ho trore impassioned Hafiz), and maintains that 
 ' ti) ihose who disbelieve the existence of such an 
 alle-rory, they still alVord a hai)j)y example of the 
 pleasures of holy and virtuous love; they incul- 
 cate, beyond the power of didactic poetry, the 
 tenderness which the husband should manifest 
 for his wife, and the delerence, modesty, and 
 tidelily w th which his atVection should be 
 returned ; and, considered even in this sense alone, 
 they are fully entitled to the honour of constitut- 
 ing a part of the sacred Scriptures' (Sung of 
 ^oi>gs, ur Sacred Idyls, hy J. Mason Good, M.D.). 
 The translators of the Canticles have cume in 
 for their sliare of obloquy. ' Sebastian Casfellio,' 
 says Beza, ' wanted to expunge the Canticles 
 from the Canon as an impure and obscene poem, 
 and heajjed the vilest reproaches on those ministers 
 who resisted him. For this he was summoned 
 before the senate, and exjjelled from Geneva. 
 Conceiving the whole to relate to the amours of 
 the polygamist monarch, he rendered it into 
 Latin so as to express the effeminate and softly 
 breatliing sighs of lovers, imitating rather Ca- 
 tu'lus and Petronius than a divine inophet.' 
 Beza styles Caslel Ho an ambitious and self-opinl- 
 ated man. Sixtus Senensis is equally seveie on 
 CV.stellio"s translation (Bib. Sac. book vi. haer. 
 xiii. p. *3()4). He has been even accused of call- 
 ing the Canticles ' a llagitious book.' These are, 
 however, it must be borne in mind, the accusa- 
 tions of Castellio's enemies; and it must be recol- 
 lected tiiat Castellio was particularly obnoxious 
 to Beza on (tther accounts, especially for disap- 
 jjroving of the burning of Servetus, which Beza 
 had defended, together with the propriety of 
 burning heretics in general (Beza's Life of 
 Calvin). Beza himself subsequently incurred 
 similar obloquy for his own translation ; and it 
 is known, that when in his old age he married his 
 second w'fe, he facetiously called his youthful 
 bride Ijy the name of his Shunamite. 
 
 Author and Ags of Canticles. — These have 
 been also much disputed. The inscription as- 
 criljes H to Solomon ; and this is confirmed by 
 ihe lUiiversal voice of antiquity, although some 
 if theJe.vs have attributed it to He/.ekiah. 
 
 Fiom some Aramaic words, the spelling of 
 D;ivid, in the solitary instance in whicli it 
 Dcturs with a * (yod), and the abbreviation of the 
 
 ijr'uoun "^l^'N, the work has been supposed, liy 
 ^^.ichhorn. Jahn, and others, to be written after 
 the ca])tivify. RoserimuUer ilwells on tlie word 
 ' Parail'se," wliich is found oidy heie (ch. iv. 13), 
 »i)d in Ecclesiasteg (ii. 5), and (Nehemiah (iv. 
 §), as a proof of this later date. The two latter 
 
 ?:oks he regards as evidently wri.. eti after tl.>« 
 exile. But this mode of spelling David, whit.li 
 also occurs in Amos (vi. 5), only jjroves that tlw 
 ])resent text is corrupted. Ar.miaic words ara 
 ibund in othei; books of Srripture, whose antiipiity 
 is undis])ute(l. Ewahl lixes it to the year m.c. 
 920, which brings it near the age of Solomon ; and 
 Pareaii, although coinciding with Hoiemiiiiller ill 
 the oiiiiiion that Ecclesiastes was written alter the 
 captivity, has not ' llie least doubt thai the song 
 is rightly attributed to Solomon ;' and tlie emi- 
 nent critic I)e Wette {Lehrbticli) is of opinion 
 that the whole range of the (igures and allusions, 
 and the character of the manners depict>'d, prove 
 lliat this work l)elongs to the age of Solomon. He 
 acci)unts for the later ii'atures liv supposing 
 several minor ])oems ^o have lieen collected .it some 
 late period. — W. W. 
 
 CAPKRNAUM (KaTrepr/aoi'/iH a city on the 
 norih-westem side of the Lake of Gennesarelb, 
 an<l on the border of the tribes of Zebidun ami 
 Najjlitali. The infidelity and impenitence of the 
 iiiliabifants of this place, alter the evidence gi\'en 
 to them by our Saviour himself of the truth of his 
 mission, brought upon them this heavy denuncia- 
 tion : — 'And thou, Capernaum, wliich art ex- 
 alted unto heaven, shalt be brought ilown to hell : 
 for if the mighty work.s which have been done in 
 thee had been done in Sodom, it would have re- 
 mained unto this day,' &c. (Matt. xi. 23.) This 
 seems to have been tiioie than any other place 
 the residence of Christ after he commenced liis 
 great mission ; and hence the force of t!ie denun- 
 ciation, which has been so conqiletely accom- 
 jilished. that even the site of Cajiernaum is quite 
 unceitain. Dr. Robinson (liibl Researches, iii. 
 '28S-29i) ex])o«es the eirors of all previous travel- 
 lers in their various attempts to identify the site 
 of Capernaum ; and, from a hint in Quiiresmius, 
 he is rather inclined to look for ii ,in a jilace 
 marked only by a mound of ruins, called l)y tlie 
 Arabs, Khan Minyeh. This is situated in the 
 fertile plain on the western border of the Lake of 
 Gennesareth, to wliich the name of 'the land of 
 Gennesaredi' is given by Jo.-ephus (De Bell. Jud. 
 iii. 10, 8). Tliis plain is a sort of triangular hol- 
 low, formed by the retreat of the mountains about 
 (he middle of tlw western shore. The base of this 
 angle is along the shore, and is about one ;.CJr'ii 
 journey in lengtli, whereas it fakes an hour and a 
 half to trace the inner sides of the plain. In this 
 jdain Josephus places a fountain called Caphai* 
 naum : he says nothing of the town ; but, as it 
 can be collected from the Scriptural intimations 
 that tiie town of Capernaum was in (his same 
 plain, it may be safely concluded that the foun- 
 tain was not far from (he (own, and took its name 
 (herefiom. In this plain there arc now two foun- 
 tains, one called "Aiu el M.uiauwarah, (he 'Round 
 Fountain" — a large and beautiful fountain, rising 
 inuTiedia(ely at the foot of the wes(ern line of 
 lulls. This Pococke (ook (o be the Fountain 
 of Capernaum, and Dr. Robinson was at (he time 
 dis])Osed (o ado]it (his conclusion. Theie is an- 
 odier fountain called "Ain et-Tin, near the north- 
 ern ex(iemi(y of the plain, and not far from toe 
 lake. It is overhung by a fig-tree, from which it 
 derives its name. Near this are .seierai (>tl er 
 sj)rings, the water of which is said to be lirackish j 
 but Burckhardt, who rested for some (iiiie undei 
 the great fig-tree, describes ti,e water of the mftix.
 
 ass 
 
 CAPHTHOR. 
 
 ?oi!rcf as s\v?et. This is tlie fixintain wliich Dr. 
 Roljiusnn inclines forei^aid as tlint which Josejilins 
 jnPntioTis niider the name of Caiiliarnaum ; and 
 'lie reasons which he a<sij,'n3 cpitainly make it 
 aujiPar preferable to the other fountain at the iiinei- 
 pait of the plain. Whichever be tlie Capliar- 
 naum. we jihoiild look f>)r soine traces of an 
 aiicient town in the vicinity, and, finding fiieni, 
 should he justified in .sui)po.sinij that they formed 
 tlie remaina of CaTjeniaum. Theie aie no ancient 
 remains of any kind near the Round Fomitain, 
 wiiich is one of the reasons aa:ainst its claim to 
 indicate the site of ancient Capernaum. But 
 near the "Ain et-Tai is a low mound of ruins, 
 rccupying a considerable circumference, which 
 certainly offer ti.e best probability which has yet 
 been olfered of being the remains ol' the doomed 
 city : and if these be all its remains, it has, ac- 
 cording to that doom, been brought low indeed. 
 Near the fountain is also a khan, which gives the 
 name of Khan Minyeh to the spot. This khan 
 is now in ruins, l)ut was once a large and well- 
 built structure. Close on the north of this khan, 
 and of the fount.iin, rocky hills of consideraljle 
 elevation come down quite to the lake, and form 
 the northern termination of the plain. It is im- 
 ])()rtant to add, that Qiiaresmius expressly slates, 
 that in his day, the jilace called by the Arabs 
 Minyeh, was regarded as marking the site of Ca- 
 ■oernaum (Eluei-l. t. s. ii. p. P61). 
 
 CAPHTHOR ("lh23 ; Deut. ii. 23; Jer. xlvii. 
 -1 ; Amos ix. 7) was t;.e real and proper country 
 of the Philistines. There has been a great diver- 
 sity of ojjiniou with reeani to the exact situation 
 of that country. Tlie ganeial opinion tliat Caph- 
 tlior was Cappadocia, is, upon the whole, founded 
 more on tlie ancient versions of the Bible, such 
 as the Septuagint and the Targums, than on any 
 sound argument. Against this opinion have been 
 urged: — 1. Tlie authority vf Josephus, who 
 seems to seek Caphthor somewhere bet.veeu Egypt 
 and Etiiionia; 2. That the Caphthorim came 
 originally from Egypt, from wliirh Cappadocia 
 is so far removed, that it seems highly improt)able 
 that an Egyptian coL;ny should first have emi- 
 grated thither, and then again removed to Pa- 
 lestine still more rem-te : 3. That Ca])hthor and 
 Cappadocia are very di.ssimilar names even in 
 sound; 4. Tliat Cajihthor is (Jer. xlvii. 4) de- 
 signated as an inland (""JO, th;.ug!i ^N sometimes 
 ai.so signifies a coast. 
 
 .Others again, such as Calmet (Dissert, sur 
 V Origine d?s Philist'ms, p. 321), and still more 
 J. G. Lackemacher (Obser. Phil. )). 2, 11,5917.), 
 «ave tried to prove that the Philistines derived 
 tiieir origin from the island of Crete, because — 
 i. Caphthor is, with Jeremiah, an. island, and — 
 2 The proper name of the Philistines is D''n"lD 
 1 E/ek. XXV. 16; Ze,)li. ii. 5 ; 1 Sam. x. 14). Tiie 
 Sei)t., ho.vever, evidently oiakes a distinction be- 
 tween D*"lin3D and DTIID ; nor is it probable 
 that Crete slioulJ have been so populous, in the 
 time of Abraham, as to send colonies to remote 
 Palestine. 
 
 By far more probaljle is Calmet's previous 
 opi;jion (found in the first elition of his Comment. 
 v>n Genesis, but wliicli lie af'ierwards reca'.leil), 
 iimt (."kV) ''tlioi is the i.slaud of Cyprus. From the 
 ^eogiajjiiical situation of that island, it may have 
 'Uesii .;.iioivii to tlie Egyptians at a very early pe- 
 
 CAITIVITIES. 
 
 riod, and they may have sent colon es thither, who 
 alterward.s removed, from some reason or other, to 
 the southern coast of Palestine bordering on Egypt. 
 Swinton (Insvr. Cit. Oxon. 1730, pp. 7S, 85) ac- 
 tually found on that island an anclerit Phunician 
 coin, witli tlie inscription "II^D (Kulidor), not 
 very unlike "inSD ; but in tlie Allf/eineine Liter. 
 Zeitung (Leipsic, 1S35, i. 410) it has liecn proved 
 that Swinton was mistaken in the reading of that 
 inscription. Forater (I'.p.st. ad Michael, p. 17, 
 5(7.) thinks that the Cajiiithorim had lived on the 
 Egyptian coast (as 'N in Jer. xlvii. 4 is also' used 
 of sea-coa-sts), somewhere about Damiefta. From 
 hence, he supposes a colony of that people, 
 and their brethren and easterly neighbours, the 
 Casluchim, had gone forth, in the period between 
 the first wars of the world (describi d in Gen. xiv.) 
 and the birth of Isaac, and settle! on tlie southern 
 coast of Palestine, under the name of Philistines, 
 after having exjjelled the Avim, who lived about 
 Gaza [Avim]. Only in subsequent times, Forster 
 thinks, these new Philistines had again sent a 
 colony who conquered the province of Lanethus, 
 in the island of Cyja-us. This colony he identifies 
 with the Ethiopians, who lived, according to Heio- 
 dotus (vii. 8S), u])on that island. Tlieie is miu;h 
 solid ground in fa\ our of this opinion. — E. M. 
 
 CAPPADOCIA (KaTTTraSoKia), an ancient 
 province of Asia Minor, bounded on the north by 
 Pontus, on the east by the Eiujhrates and Arme- 
 nia JMinor, on the south by Mount Taurus (lie- 
 yond which are Cilicia and Syria), anil on the ea.st 
 by Phrygia and Galatia. The country i.s moun- 
 tainous and abounds in water, and was celebrated 
 for the production of vt-heat, for its fine jiastures, 
 and for its excellent breed of lioijes, asses, and 
 sheep. The inhabitants were notorious for their 
 dulness and vice. They were called ' Syrians ' 
 in the age of Herodotus (i. 72 ; v. 49), and even 
 in Strabo's days they bore the name of ' Leuco- 
 Syiians,' i. e. 'White Syrians' (xii. p. 511), in 
 contradistinction to those dwelling beyond the 
 Taurus, whose complexion was darkened by the 
 sun. Cappadocia was sulijugated by the Persians 
 under Cyrus ; but after the time of Alexander ' 
 the Great it had kings of its own, who bore the 
 common name of Aiiarathes. It continued to b« 
 governed by tributary kings under the Romans 
 till A.D. 17, when Tiberius made it a Roman pro- 
 vince. Christianity was very early propagated 
 in Cappailocia. for St. Peter names it in address- 
 ing the Christian churches in Asia Minor (1 Pet, 
 i. 1 ). Ca]jijadocians were present at Jerusalem 
 on the dav of Pentecost (Acts ii. 9). 
 
 CAPTIVITIES. The word Captivity, as ap- 
 plied to the people of Israel, has been apjirojiriated. 
 coiitiary to the analogy of our language, to mean 
 Expatriation. The violent removal of the entire 
 population of a city, or sometimes even of a dis- 
 trict, is not an uncommon event in ancient history 
 As a measure of [lolicy, 110 objection to it on th& 
 ground of humanity was felt by any one; since, 
 in tact, it was a very mild proceeding, in compa- 
 rison with that of selling a tribe or nation inta 
 slavery. Every such destiuction of national 
 existence, even in modern times, is apt to be em- 
 bittered by tlie simultaneous disruptiiin of religion* 
 bonds; but in the ariv. eiit world, the positive 
 sanctity attributed to sjiecial iiLues. and tlie local 
 attachment of Deity, ma<le expatriation iloulily 
 iCver^'. The Hebrew people, for iiisUince, iii IU&214
 
 »^APTIVIT1ES. 
 
 CAPTIVITIES. 
 
 asw 
 
 a»o«t vi*al points, could no lori<,'er obey their sacred 
 law at all, when personally removed iVoiii Jerusa- 
 lem ; iuid in many otr^ers tliey were forcerl to 
 modify it by reason of their cliange of circum- 
 stances. 
 
 Two principal motives impelled couipieriiij^ 
 }X)wers thus to transport families in ihi" nui^s : 
 fir=S') the desire of rapidly tilling with a vaUi.il)le 
 pkipulation new cities, built for prido or for])olicy ; 
 next, the determination to break up hostile organi- 
 i(a,tions, or dangerous reminiscences of ])ast great- 
 ness. Both might sometimes be combined in tiie 
 same act. To attain the former object, (he skilled 
 artisans would in particular be carried oil'; while 
 the latter was better effected by tians])i)rting all 
 the families of the highest birth, anil all the well- 
 I rained soldiery. The Greeks used the special 
 epitiiet dyacrTrafTToi for ajxipulation thus removed 
 (Herod, vi. 93, et passim). 
 
 The expatriation of the Jewish peojile belongs 
 to two great eras, commonly called the first ami 
 second Captivity; yet dilVering exceedingly in 
 character. It is to the former that the above re- 
 marks chiefly apply. In it, the prime of the na- 
 tion were c'ai'ried eastward by the monarchs of 
 Assyria and Babylon, and were treated with no 
 unnecessary haishnoss, even under tlie dynasty 
 that captured them. So far were they from the 
 condition o( bondsineii (which the word 'captive' 
 sugge.sts), that the book of Susanna repre3ent.s tiieir 
 elders in Babylon as retaining tlie power of lile 
 and death over thtir own j^eople (i. 2S), when 
 Uaniel was as yet a very young man. Tlie au- 
 thority of that book cannot indeed be pressed as 
 to the chronology ; yet the notices given by Eze- 
 Kiel (xiv. 1 ; xx. I) concur in the general fact, 
 that they still held an internal jurisdiction over 
 their own members. At a later time, under the 
 Seleucidae, we have distinct proof that in the 
 princij)al cities the Jews were governed by an 
 otlicer (efli'apx'?^) of their own nation; as also in 
 Egypt under the Ptolemies. The bo.jk of Toliit 
 exhibits Israelites in Media possessed of shives 
 themselves (viii. IS); the book of Daniel tells us 
 of a Jew, in eminent political station ; and that of 
 Esther celebrates their povver and consequence in 
 the Persian empire. Under the Seleuciihu [An- 
 TiocHUs] they were occasionally important as 
 garrison-soldiers ; and it may be suspected that, 
 on the whole, their lot was milder than that of the 
 other conquered nations among which they dwelt. 
 That which we name the first Captivity, was by 
 no means brought about by a single removal of the 
 population. In fact, from beginning to end, tiie 
 period of deportation occjipied full 150 years; as 
 file period of return reaches probalily througli 100. 
 The first blow fell ujion the more distant tribes of 
 Israel, about 741 b. c. ; when Tiglath-[iileser, 
 king of Assyria (2 Kings xv. 29), carried olT the 
 pastoral population vvliich lived beyond the Jordan, 
 with Zebulon and Naphtali. (To this event allu- 
 lion is made in Isaiah ix. 1 ; a passage very ill 
 translated in our received version.) In the time 
 of this conquering monarch, Assyria w;is rapidly 
 rising into power, and to aggrandize Nineveh was 
 probably a great object of policy. It is theiel'ore 
 credible, as he had received no particular provoca- 
 tion from the Israelites, that he carried oil' these 
 masses of population to stock his huge city with. 
 His sucoessor Shalmanezer made the Israelitish 
 king lio^heii r lU.aiy. AV hen the InlaUc was 
 
 withheld, he attacked and reduced Samarik 
 (b. c. 721), and, by way of punishment and of 
 prevention, traiis|)orted inti Assyria and Media 
 its king and all tiie most valuable po|)ulati<in re- 
 maining to file ((!» tribes ^2 Kings x.ii. G). That 
 he did not carry oft' all the ]ieasants is jirobabl* 
 from the nature of the case; Hengstenberg how- 
 ever maintains th<; contrary (AuZ/ie/itir ties J'tuta- 
 tcitc/tcs, ch. i. ' On the Samaritan'). Tiie families 
 thus hemoved were, in great measure, settled in 
 very distant cities; many of them jirobably not 
 far from the Cas])ian Sea; and iheii place was 
 sujipiied by coloniL's from Babylon and ."^iisis 
 (2 Kings xvii. 21). Such was tiie end of Israel 
 as a kingdom. — An interval of more tl.an a cen- 
 tury Iblloived before Judali was to siiil'er a similar 
 fitte. Two se]iarate deportations aie narrated in 
 the book of Kings, thiee in thai of Jeremiah, while 
 a fourth and earlier one appears in the book of 
 Daniel. Jeremiah dates by the years of Nebu- 
 chadnezzar's reign (who came to the throne k.c. 
 606 or 605), and estii;xates that in his seventh 
 year 3023 were carried oil', in his. eighteenth 832, 
 and in his twenty-third only 715; making iu all, 
 as the writer is careful to note, 4(500 (Jer. Hi. 
 28, &c.). The third removal he as';ribes to Nebu- 
 zaradaii, the Babylonian general. That some 
 error here exists, at least in the numbers, a]ipears 
 unileniable ; for 4600 jjcisons was a very petty 
 fraction of the Jewish people ; and, in fact, 42,3(;0 
 are stated to ha\e returned immediately upon tlie 
 ileerce of Cyrus Ezra ii. 61). In 2 Kings xxiw 
 8-16, we find 1S,000 carried off at once, in the 
 third month o!' king Jehoiacliiii, and in the eightii 
 year of Nelmchadnezzar ; wiiich evidently is the 
 same as the first removal named by Jeremiah, and 
 may be placed in b.c. 5!)8. After this, the 
 vassal king Zedckiah having rebelled, his city is 
 beleaguered, and finally in his eleventh ye.ir :s 
 reduced (u.c. 5S^) by Nebuchadnezzar in per- 
 son ; and in the course of the same year, ' the 
 nineteenth of Nebuchadnezzar" (2 Kings xxv. 8^, 
 Nebuzaradari carries away all the population ex- 
 cept the peasants. Perhaps we need not wonder 
 that no mention is made in the ' Kings' of the ti.ird 
 deportation; for the account of the destruction 
 was in a manner complete, ujieii the second in\ a- 
 sion. There is a greater diiiicully in the state- 
 ment with which the book of Daniel opens, which 
 is generally interpreted to mean that i'/( (he third 
 year of .Jehoiakim, Nebuchadnezzar besieged and 
 captured Jerusalem, partially pliimieied the tem- 
 ple, and carried oil' the first poition of the people 
 into captivity, among whom was Daniel. Ths 
 text however does not explicitly say so much. 
 aUhough such is the obvious moaning; but if ihi-i 
 is the only inteipietalion, we find it in diiect col- 
 lision with the books of Kings and Chronicles 
 (which assign to Jehoiakim an eleren years' 
 reign), as also with Jeiemiah xxv. 1. Th-; 
 statement in Daniel partially rests on 2 Chroii 
 xxxvi. 6; which is itself not in perfect accord- 
 ance with 2 Kings xxiv. In the tarlier history, 
 the war broke out during the reign of Jehoiakim, 
 who died before its clo.se ; and when his son and 
 successor Jehoiachin had reigned three moiilhs, 
 the city and its king were captured. But in the 
 Chronicles, the same event is made to hapiK'n twica 
 over, at an interval of three months and ten days 
 (2 Ciiron. xxxvi. 6 and 'J), and even so, we no no.' 
 obtain accordance willith' received inlerj i elation
 
 361 
 
 CAPTIVITIES. 
 
 tjf Da^iicl i. 1-3. It st'Cinsuii llie wliule tlie easiest 
 t.ipjkjsitiui). llidt ' the tliiiii //<>«>■ of Jelioiii/tZ/u' is 
 there a mistake lor 'the third inonih of J ehohi- 
 chin.' Ht'ii^stciiljer;,', hov/ci-er, and Haveniick 
 deiciid the coiiunon readiii,,'. and think tliey recon- 
 cile it with t.iC other accoMiits. On the whole, it is 
 prelty clear that the jie.iple ol Jiidah, as of Israel, 
 Mere carried oiil of tlii.ir land l)y rwo piincipal 
 removals. The former, u.c. ;j9S, was directed to 
 iwell the araiies and streiii,'tlien the towns of the 
 conquoior; for of the l.S.OOO tlirti carried away, 
 10t)() were 'cralVsnien and sniiihs, all strong and 
 upt for war, ' and the lest aif called ' mighty men 
 of valour.' (Vet there is a dilliculty aiiout veriPS 
 I-l and 16 in 2 Kinirs xx'iv.) It was not until 
 thr lelicllion of Zedekiah that Nebaclia.lne/zar 
 p.-oceeded to llic extre.nity of breakinj^ up the 
 national existence, B.C. . ^^ >. As the temple 
 was then l/urnt, with all the jialace, and the city 
 wails, and no i^oveniment was left hut that of the 
 Bai)yloiiiaii satrap, this latter date is evidently the 
 tiue era of the captivity. Previou.dy Zedekiah 
 was tributary ; hut so were Josiah and Ahaz long 
 before ; the national existence was still saved. 
 
 Details concerning the Return from the capti- 
 vity are preserved in the books denominated after 
 Ezra and Nehemiah; and in the projiliccies of 
 two contempi)rarieo, Haggai and Zechariah. Tiie 
 Hist gieat event is tlie decree of Cyrus, u.c. 536, 
 in consequence of which 42.360 Jews of Babylon 
 returned under Sliesbbazzar, with 7337 slaves, 
 .besides cattle. This ended in their building the 
 altar, and laying the foundation of the second 
 temple, 53 years after the destruction of the (irst. 
 The j)rogre.ss of the work was, however, almost im- 
 mediately stopped : for Zerubbabel, Jeshua and the 
 rest abruptly reiVised all help from the half-heathen 
 iiihabitiiits of Samaria, and soon felt the ell'ects of 
 the enmity thus induced. That the mind of 
 ("yrus was changed by their intrigues, we are not 
 informed; but lie was probably absent in di.stant 
 paits, through continual war. (Tliere is a dilli- 
 culty in Ezra iv. as to the names Ahasuerus and 
 Artaxerxes; yet the general facts aie clear.) — 
 When Darius (Hystaspis), an able and generous 
 monarch, ascended the throne, the Jews soon ob- 
 tained his favour. At this crisis, Zerubbabel was in 
 chief authority (Sheshbazzar perhaps being dead), 
 and under him the temple was begun in the second 
 and ended in the sixth year of Darius, B.C. 520- 
 516. Although this must be reckoned an era in 
 Jie liistory, it is not said to have been accomjja- 
 liied with any new immii;ration of Jews. We 
 pass on to 'the seventh year of king Aitaxerxes" 
 (Longimanus), Ezra vii. 7, that is, u.c. 458, when 
 Ezra comes up from Babylon to Jerusalem, with 
 tlie king's commendatory letters, accompanied by 
 a large boiiy of his nation. The enumeration in 
 Ezia viii. makes them under ISOO males, with 
 tlieir families; jM'vhaps amounting to 5000 per- 
 sons, young and old : of whom 113 are recounted 
 as having heathen wives (Ezra x. 18-43). In the 
 • wentielii year of the same king, or b.c. 445, 
 Nehemiah, his cupbearer, gains his ])ermission to 
 restore 'his fathers" sepulchres," and the walls of 
 his native city ; and is sent to Jerusalem with large 
 powers. Tliis is the crisis which decided the na- 
 titn^l restoration of the Jewish peoule : for before 
 their city was fortified, tiiCy had no defence against 
 jjie now coiifirnied ennuty of :lie:r Saniantaii 
 lieigiibuurs ; and, in fact, U'fore the walls could 
 
 CAPTIVlTIi{3. 
 
 be built, severa. inincos around wei *ble to iiffei 
 great opposition [SANHAi,]..vrj. Ti.e Jewish j)o- 
 pulation was overwhelmed with debt, and liad 
 generally moi tgaged their little estates to the rich ; 
 but Nehemiah 's iulliience succeedeil in bringing 
 about a general forleiture of debts, or at least o! 
 the interest: after which we may regard the new 
 order of things to have been finally established in 
 Judaea [Nehemiah]. From this time forth it 
 is probable that numerous families returned in 
 small ])arties, as to a secure home, until all i!ie 
 waste land in the neighbourhood was re-occujiied. 
 
 There has been great uiti'erence of opinion, as to 
 how flie 70 years of cajjtivity spoken of by Jere- 
 miah (xxv. 12; xxix. 10) are to be estimated. A 
 plausible opinion would make them last from ttie 
 destruction of the first temple, B.C. 5S8, to the 
 finishing of the second, b.c. 516 : but the v\ord« 
 of the text so specify ' the punishing of the king 
 of Babylon ' as the end of the 70 years — which 
 gives us the date b.c. 538 — tliat many, with Jaim, 
 cling to the belief that a first captivity took place 
 in the third year of Jehoiakim, b.c. 605. Winer, 
 on the contrai y, suspects that a desire to make out 
 the 70 years in this way, has generated the story 
 in Daniel, so irreconcilable with the books of 
 Kings and of Jeremiah. But, in fact, if we read 
 Jeremiah himself, it may appear that in c!j. xxv. 
 he intends to comjjute the 70 years from the time 
 at ichich he speaks (ver. 1, ' in the fointh year Of 
 Jehoiakim,' i. e. b.c. 6(!4) ; and that in xxix. 10 
 the number ' ssveuty years ' is still ke]/t up, in 
 ren.embrance of the former prophecy, although 
 the language there used is very lax. 
 
 The great mass of the Israelitish race never- 
 theless remained in dispersion. Prev ious to the 
 captivity, many Israelites had settled in Egy])t 
 (Zech. x. 11 ; Isa. xix. iS), and many Jews 
 afterwards fled thither from Nebuzaradan (Jer. 
 xli. 17). Others appear to have established them- 
 selves in Sheba (see Jost's Geschichte &c), where 
 Jewish influence became very powerful (Sheba). 
 
 It is inaintained ijy Von Bohlen (^Genesis, p. 
 cxvi.) that the ten tribes intermarried so freely 
 with tli€ surrounding population as to have be- 
 come completely absorbed ; and it apjjears to be 
 a universal opinion that no one now knows where 
 their descendants are. But it is a harsh assumjj- 
 tion that such intermarriages were commoner 
 with the ten tribes than with the two; and cer- 
 tainly, in the apostolic days, the twelve tribes are 
 referred to as a well-knuvvn j)eo])le, sharply de- 
 lineil. from the heathen (James i. I ; Acts xxiv. 7) 
 Not a trace ajipears that any repulsive pinciple 
 existed at that time between the Ten and tJie 
 Two. 'Epliraim no longer envied Judah, nor 
 Judah vexed E])hraim ;" but they had ijecome 
 'one nation;' thou_;h only pailially 'on the 
 mountains of Israel' (Isa. xi. 13; Ezek. xxxvii, 
 22). It would seem, therefore, that ;ne result of ihf 
 captivity was to blend all the tribes togedier, and 
 produce a national union wiiicli had never been 
 eff'ected in their own land. If ever there was a 
 difference between them as to the books counted 
 sacred, that diilerence entirely vanished ; at least 
 no evidence appears of the contrary fact. When, 
 moreover, the laws of landefi inheritance no longei 
 eid'orce.i the maintenance of se)Tiirate tribes and 
 put a difficulty in the way of tiie r intermairiag«, 
 an almost inevitable result in course ol tini« 
 was the eiitire obliteration of this distinction
 
 CAPTIVITIES. 
 
 CAPTIVITIES. 
 
 :iyi 
 
 va^ BC a fact, no modern Jews know to wliat 
 tril-e they belong, altliough vanity always makes 
 tliem choose to say that they are ol' the two or 
 tliiee, and not of tlie ten triUy. Tliat all Jews 
 now livini^ have in tliem the blood of all the 
 twelve tril)es, ought (it seemsj to be believed, 
 until some better reason tlian mere assertion is 
 advanced against it. 
 
 AVheii Cyins gave jierniission to the Israelites 
 to return to tlieir own country, and restored their 
 sacred ve-sels, it is not wonderlul tliat iew |jei"- 
 9ons of the ten trilies were eager to take ud- 
 vantiige of it. In two centuries they liad btxonie 
 thorcughly naturalized in their eastern settle- 
 ments ; nor had Jerusalem ever been the centre 
 of ]ir(md asjiirations to them. It is perhaps re- 
 markable, that in Ezra ii. 2, 36 (see also x. IS, 
 2o), the word Israel is used to signify wliat we 
 might call the Laity as opposed to the priests and 
 Levites; wliich might seem as though the writer 
 were anxious to avoid asserting that all the fa- 
 milies belonged to the two triljes. (If this is not 
 tlie meaning, it at least shows tliat all discrimi- 
 nating force in the words Israel and Judah was 
 already lost. So, too, in (he book of Esther, the 
 twelve tribes through all parts of the Persian 
 empire are called Jews.) Nevertheless, it was 
 to be expected tlrut only those would return (o 
 Jerusalem whose expatriation was very recent; 
 and principally those whose parents Lad dwelt in 
 the Holy City or its immediate neighbourhood. 
 The re-migiants doubtless consisted ctiieliy of the 
 pious and ttie poor ; and as the latter proved do- 
 cile to their teachers, a totally new spirit reigned 
 in the restored nation. Vv hatever \v;uit of zeal 
 the anxious Ezra might discern in his comrades, 
 it is no slight matter tliat he could induce them 
 to divorce their heathen wives — a measure of 
 harshness which St. Paul would scarcely have 
 eanctioned (1 Cor. vii. 12): and tlie century 
 which followed v/as, on the whole, one of great 
 religious activity and important permanent re- 
 sults on (he moral cliaracter of the nation. Even 
 *he proplietjc spirit liy no means disappeared i'or 
 a century and a lialf ; altliough at length both 
 the true and the false jnophet were supplanted 
 among them by tJie learned and ililigent scribe, 
 the anxious commentatoi-, and the o\er-literal or 
 over-tjgurative critic. In place of a people prone 
 to go astray after sensible objects of adoration, 
 and readily admitting heatlien ciistt)ms; attached 
 to monarchical power, but inattentive to a hier- 
 rachy ; careless of a written law, and movalde 
 \)y alternate impuUes of ajjostacy and lepentance ; 
 we henceforth iind in tliem a deep and perma- 
 nent reverence for Moses and the projihets, an 
 aversion to foreigners and foreign customs, a 
 profound Iratred of idolatry, a gieat devotion tt 
 priestly and Levitical rank, and to all who iiad 
 an exterior of piety ; in siiort, a slavish ol>edience 
 both to the law and to its authorizet. expositors. 
 Now iirst, as far as can be ascertained i, observe 
 the paiticularity of detail in Neii. viii. 1, &c.), 
 were tlic synagogues and houses of prayer in- 
 stituted, and the law ];eiiodica.lly read aloud. 
 Now tiegair the close oliservance of the Passover, 
 the Sabliatlu and the Sabbatical year. Sucii was 
 fhecliange wrought in the guardians of the Sacred 
 Books, that, whereas the pious king Jusiali liad 
 lat iigliteen years on the throne wiih(.ut knowing 
 cf I le existence of ' tire Book of the Law" (2 
 
 Kings xxii. 3, S) ; in the later |>snod, on 'lia 
 contrary, the text was v atched over with u 
 scrupulous and fantastic punctiliousness. From 
 this era, the civil jiower uus absorbed in that of 
 tlie priesthood, and the Jewish jH.*o)ile alfurds the 
 singular s|iectaclc of a nation in wliich the 
 priistly niie came later in time tiian lliat of 
 heredit.iry kings. Sijuielhing iuialognus may 
 pciliaps be seen in the priestly autlmrity at Co- 
 mana in Capjiadocia under the Roman sway 
 (Cicero, Ep. ad Div. xv. 4, &c. ). 
 
 In their hablt.s of life also, the Jewish natic jj 
 was permanently aiVected liy tlie Iirst captivity. 
 The love of agriculture, which tlie institutions of 
 Moses liad so vij»orously inspiie<l, had necessarily 
 declined in a fortign land; and they returned 
 with a taste for commerce, banking, and letail 
 trade, which was probably kept up by constant 
 intercourse with their brethren wlio M'mained in 
 dispersion. Tiie same intei course in turn pro- 
 pag;ated towards Uie rest the moral s])irit ttiilcli 
 reigned at Jerusalem. The ]''gyptia!i Jews. i( 
 would seem, had gained little good I'roin the con- 
 tact of idolatry (Jer. xliv. fi) ; but those who had 
 fallen in with the Persian religion, |irobal/Iy about 
 the time of its great reform by Zoroaster, iiad 
 been preserved from such temptations, and le- 
 tumed jiurer than they went. Thenceforward 
 it was the honourable function of Jerusalem t.' 
 act as a religious metropolis to tiie whole dis- 
 jiersed nation; and it cannot be doubted that tlik 
 ten tribes, as well as the two, learned to l>e ]iroud 
 of the Holy City, as the gieat and free centre t.t 
 their name and dieir faith. The same leligious 
 influences thus dilfused themselves thnjugh all 
 the twelve tribes of Israel. 
 
 Tlius in Egypt and Araiiia, in Babylonia. 
 Assyriii, Media, masses of the nation were 
 planted, who, living by tratlic and by banking, 
 were necessitated to spread in ail directions as 
 their numliers increased. By this natural progitirf 
 they moved westward, as well as eastward, and, 
 in the time of St. Paul, were abundant in Asia 
 Minor, Greece, and the chief cities of Italy. 
 
 The extermination sulVered by the Jewisli in- 
 liabitaiits of Palestine, under the Romans, far 
 better deserves the name of captivity : tor al'tei 
 the massacre of countless tliousanils, the captives 
 were reduced to a real bondage. According to 
 Josephus (De Bell. Jiul. vi. l*. o), 1. 100,000 men 
 fell in the siege of Jenisalcm by Titus, and 
 97,000 were captunnl in the whole war. Of flie 
 latter number, the greatest jiait was distributed 
 among the provinces, to be l/Utcheied in the 
 amphitJieatrcs or cast there to wild bciists : others 
 were doomed to vvoik as puldic slaves in Egy|t • 
 only those under the age of seventeen weie si. Id 
 info private bondage. An etpially dieaill'ul !.»■- 
 struction fell upi.n the remaii.s of the natlun, 
 which had once more assembled in Jiidiea. under 
 the reign of Hadrian (a.u. l^oj, v/hich Diui 
 Cassius concisely relates : and by these (wo 
 savage Wius, the Jewish popidation must iiave Iwen 
 cllectiially extirjiated from the Holy Land itself, 
 aiesiilt which did not foll:jw liom tin- Baby lunian 
 captivity. Afterwards, a tireary [iciidd of lilt'-eti 
 hundred years' oppression crushed in Euro]*; all 
 who bore the name of Israel, and ChiLstian natiimi 
 have visited^ on tlicir head i crime perpetiatid by 
 a few thousand inhabitants of Jerusalem. uIm 
 were » ot the real (brttiilbers of the Europtas
 
 SB2 
 
 CAKAV.4 N. 
 
 Jews. N.<r in the East lias tlieir lot •een much 
 jnore clieeriiig. Witli lew ami partial .'xceptions, 
 <jey 'oave ever since benn a despiseil, a » oppressed, 
 •id nitmally a de^'rade.l ix'ople; t.iougli iVom 
 theiw li.ivu spread lijjlit and trutii to tiie distant 
 aatiiHis or tilt' eaitli.— F. W. X. 
 
 CARAVAN I" .'ij*^' is tlie name given to 
 
 a l))dy of nier^luiuts or pilijrinis as tliey travel 
 111 tlie East. A multituiie of people, oi'all as^es 
 «nd conditions, asH^mblin^ to uiideitake a journey, 
 and prosecutin"; it ait^masse for days and weelis 
 to.4^tiier, is a thinu; unliiiown in Europe, wheie, from 
 the ni.my facilities for tiavelliii^, and a well or- 
 p-aiiized system of p.ilice, travellers can go alone 
 a.it) unprotected alon^ the highways to any dis- 
 tance with the most ])erfect security. But troops 
 ^f ])eop!e on march are a common sjwctacle along 
 the roads of Eastern countries ; and, indeed, the 
 tiatiire of tin- countries in many places, as well as 
 tiiedisoiderly state of siciety, points out the only 
 practical)]e way of travelling to be in large cara- 
 vans. The (lungers arising from tlie vast deserts 
 that intersect these regions, as well as from wild 
 iiea-t,^ ■'nd hands of marauding .\ral)s, are too nu- 
 men> md imminent for single traders or solitary 
 trave .s to encounter ; and hence merchants 
 and pilgrims are accustomed to unite for mntual 
 protection in traversing these wild and inhospit- 
 able parts, as well as for offering a move effectual 
 resistance to the attacks of robbers. Tlirough this 
 kind of intercour.se, which principally obtains in 
 Turkey, Per.sia, and .\rabia, most of the inland 
 Commerce of tlie East is carried on ; and certainly 
 of all the various modes in which the commodi- 
 ties of one country are conveyed to another, it-is 
 ti>e cheapest and the most expeditions, as the pos- 
 session of the camel affords facilities for journey- 
 ing over liavren and sandy regions, which would 
 be inaccessible to wheel-cania«ei, and the difti- 
 •culties and privations of which no beast of bur- 
 den but this invaluable creature could endure. 
 Ti)*; company composing a caravan is ofren very 
 numerous, consisting, it may be, of several hun- 
 ilred persons, and as many thousand camels; and 
 it may bo supiiosed that the assembling of so 
 Riany individua's, together witii the orderly 
 disfrilmtiori of their respective bales of mer- 
 chandise and travelling equipage, is an alfair 
 requiring both time and the most careful atten- 
 tion. .Accordingly, the packing and unpacking 
 of the camels, as well as the general service of the 
 caravans, employ a great many hands, some of 
 whom, by dint of economy and active haliits, 
 often rai.se themselves from the condition of ser- 
 T21 ts to the more respectalile status of mevcli.ints, 
 «(.o travel on tlieir own account or in the ca])a- 
 cit .• of carriers. Any person can, under certain 
 re/ulati.iiis, fjrm a caiavan at any time. But 
 generally tliere aie stated jieriods, which are well 
 kniiwn as tlie regular staiting-tinies for the mer- 
 cantile journeys; aiif. the merchants belonging 
 :0 the eornpany, or those travellers who are de- 
 sirous of a^;companyi ig it f.ir tlie benefit of a safe 
 conduct, rej'iir to t'ui place of rendezvous where 
 '.he cavavaii s to be formed, exhibiting, as tlieir 
 goods and ..>.mels successively arrive, a motley 
 grou)) — a busy and tumultuous scene of prepara- 
 tion, wiiich can be more easily conceived than 
 described. .\s in the hot season the travelling 
 is lie: formed under night, the pieviouj. naitof tlie 
 
 CARAVAN. 
 
 day on which the caravan leaves is consumed n 
 the preparatory labours of packing — an ind'sj^n*- 
 able arrangement, which has Ix'eri ohserved w'tli 
 unlnoken uniformity since the days of Ezekiel 
 (xii. .'J); and then, about eight o'clock, the usual 
 starting-time, the wliole party put themselves ic 
 motion, and continue tlieir journey without inter- 
 rujition till midnight (Luke xi. 5, 6) or later. 
 Af other seasons they travel all day, only halting 
 for rest and refreshment during the heat of noun 
 The dist^iues are measured by a day's journey; 
 and from seven to eight hours seem to have beeu 
 a usual day's journey for caravans (Hoiiieniaiin, 
 p. 150); so that, estimating the slow and un- 
 wieldy gait of a camel at '2^ miles an hour, tli*,- 
 average rate of travel will be from 17 to 20 milet 
 per day. 
 
 The earliest caiavan of merchiuits we read of 
 is the itinerant company to whom Joseph wai 
 sold bjf his IjTethren (Gen. xxxvii.) 'Here,' saj< 
 Dr. Vincent, ' upon ojiening the oldest history it 
 the world, we find the Ishmaelites fiom Gilead 
 conducting a caravan loaded with tlie spices -J 
 India, the balsam and myrih of Hadiaiiiaut. an^ 
 ill tlie regular course of their tiatlic proceeding \t 
 Egypt for a market. The date of this transact lo* 
 is more than seventeen centuries before tlie Cliri.Si 
 tian era, and notwithstanding its antiquity, it ha^ 
 all the genuine features of a caravan crossing the 
 desert at the ])vesent hour' (Commerce and Navig. 
 of the Ancients, vol. ii. p. 262). This caravan 
 was a mi.xed one, consisting of three classes, Ish- 
 maelites (vcr. 25), Midianites (ver. 2S), and Me- 
 danites, as the Hebrew calls the last (ver. ;ifij, who, 
 belonging to the mountainous region of Gilead, 
 would .seem, like the iiomade tribes of Africa in the 
 present nay, to have engaged themselves as com- 
 mercial tiavellers, and were then, in ])assiiig over 
 the plain of Dothan, on the high caravan-road for 
 the market of Egypt. This circumstance, though 
 minute, and incidentally introduced, is a beauti- 
 ful coiiliimatioii of the truth of Scrip'nre history; 
 for it is well known that the ancient Egyptians 
 were not addicted to commerce, and tliat all tlieii 
 tratlic was thrown into the hands of foreigners, who 
 by o\eiland carriage regulaily imported the pro- 
 ductions of other countries — slaves, from Ethiopia 
 incense, from Arabia; and spices, fvuni liulii 
 — into Egypt, which was then, as it has been in 
 all ages, the emjxirium of the Southern and West- 
 ern nations. 
 
 Besides these communities of travelling mer- 
 chants in the East, tlieie are caravans of pilgrimsi, 
 i. e. of those who go for religious ^inrposes to Mecca;, 
 coinjirising vastly gieater multitudes of peojile 
 Four of ihe e start regularly every year : one fi-om 
 Cairo, consisting of Mahommeiians from Bai- 
 barv ; a second from Damascus, conveying the 
 Turks; a third fi'om Babylon, fi)r the accommo- 
 dation of the Persians; and a fourth from Ziliith, 
 at the mouth of the Red Sea, which is the re;idezr 
 vous for those coming from Aiabia and Inditt. 
 Tlie orLranization of tiie immense lioides whicli, 
 on such occasions, assemble to undertake a dis- 
 tant expedition, strangers to each, other, and un- 
 acciustomed to the strict discipline which is iiidis- 
 jjensable fir their comfort and security dinii'j^ 
 the maicli, though, as might be ex];ecteil, a wor'l 
 of no small dilhculty, is accu i.^lished in the Ea« 
 by a few simple airangemenf i which aie the result 
 of long ex[ierieiice. ('ue oi,viuas bund of imitw
 
 CARAVAN. 
 
 to the main body, when tnnelliiig by iii^ht and 
 throngli extensive deserts, is tlie music of tlio Arab 
 wrvants, who by alternate songs in their national 
 manner liefrnile tlie tedium oi' the way; while 
 the incessant jin^lini^ of inntuierahh' bolls fas- 
 tened to the necks of tlie camels — a character- 
 istic feature of Oriental caravans — enlivens the 
 patient beiists, fris^htens animals of prey, and 
 keeps the party together. To meet all the exigen- 
 cies of the joiirne)', liowever, which wouhl be a . 
 lask impracticable witliout the establishment of 
 some kind of order, luid a prudent division of la- 
 bour, the caravan is placed under the charge of a 
 caravan bashe, the chief who presides over all, 
 and under whom there are live leatling olKcers 
 appi)inted to difl'eient departments: — one who re- 
 gulates the march; a second, whose duties only 
 commence at halting time; a tliinl who su])er- 
 intsnds the servants and cattle ; a fourth wlio takes 
 charge of the baggage ; a fifth \\ ho acts as j)ay- 
 master, Sec. ; and besides these, there are the officers 
 of tlie military escort that always accompanies it. 
 One functionary of the highest importance remains 
 to be noticed — the hybecr, or guide, a word de- 
 rived by Bruce from the Arabic verli hxibbar. to 
 inform or direct, and whose services are indisj ens- 
 able in crossing the great deserts, such as that 
 alon^ tlie coast of the Red Sea or on tlie western 
 extremities of Africa. He is commonly a person 
 uf inrtuence, belonging to some powerful tribe, 
 whose valuable assistance on an emergency may 
 by his means be obtained ; and, besides the indis- 
 pensable qualities of truth and fidelity, his per- 
 sonal qualifications must emlirace an extensive 
 and accurate acquaintance witli the whole features 
 of tiie land. For as he has the lives and property 
 of all in his jiwver, it is absolutely necessary that 
 he understand the prognostics of the weatlier, 
 tlie time and jilaces where the terrible sinioiini or 
 hot wind blows, and the tracts occupied by shii't- 
 ing sanik ; and tliat he know the exact locality 
 and qualities of the wells, the oases that all'ord 
 the rel'resliments of sliade for the men and grass 
 for the cattle, the situation of hostile or treach- 
 erous tiibes, and the means of escaping those 
 threatened dangers. 
 
 This description of the general economy of cara- 
 vans we follow up by the account given by Pitts 
 of the Hadj caravan which he accompanieil to 
 Mecca, and embracing so many minute details, 
 that it may Ire both interesting and instructive to 
 the reader to be furnished with it in tlie traveller's 
 own words. 'Tlie lirst day,' says he, ' we set out 
 from Mecca, it was without any order at all — all 
 'lurly-burly , but the next day every one laboured 
 to get forward, and in order to do it there was 
 many times much quarrelling and fighting. But 
 after every one had taken his jilace in the cara- 
 van, they orderly and peaceably kept the same 
 place till they caine to Grand Cairo. They travel 
 four camels abreast, uhich are all tied one after 
 another like as in teams. The whole body is di- 
 vided into several cottars, or companies, each 
 of which has its name, and consists, it may be, of 
 several thousand camels; and they move, one 
 cottor after another, like 'distinct troops. At the 
 head of each cottor is some great gentleman or 
 orticer, who is carried in a thing like a litter, 
 borne by two eamels, one before and the other be- 
 Oin I. At the head of every cottor there goes !ike- 
 wi*.' a sumjiter camel, which carries his treasure, 
 
 CARAXAX. 
 
 3H1 
 
 &c. Tims cauiel h.is two bt-lU, hajigiJK one \.-n 
 ea<;h sule, the sounil of wiiich niav be iie.nd a 
 great way olV. Others of the camels lia\e belli 
 round aliont their necks, like those which our 
 carrieis put about tiieir fore-liorse •. neck ; vvhicti, 
 together with the servants wlio belong to t!i« 
 camels, and travel on foot, singing all nigiii, niuka 
 a pleasant noise, and the journey jiasses away Oe- 
 lightfnlly. Thus they travel in good ortler every 
 day till tliPy con e to Gland Caiin; ami were it 
 not for this order, you may guess what contusion 
 Would be among such a v.ist ninlliliide. Tliev 
 have lights by iiiglit ( whicii is the chief time of 
 travelling, because of l!ie exceeding heat of tli« 
 sun), whicii are carried on the top of high jioles. ro 
 direct the hadjis, or pilgrims, on their niarcii. 
 These are somewhat like iron st(;ves, into whicii 
 they jiiit short dry wooil, wiiich some of lii< 
 camels were loaded with: it is canieil in great 
 sacks, which have a hole neiir the bottom, wliei« 
 the servants take it out as they see the fiie needs 
 a recruit. Every cottor bos one of these jwlea 
 belonging to it, some of which have ten, soin« 
 twelve, of these lights on their to])3, or uiuie or 
 less : they are likewi.se dill'eient in ligures as well 
 as in numbers — one perhaps oval-way, like a gate ; 
 another triangular, or like N or M, &c. ; so that 
 e\ery one knows by them his respective cotttir. 
 They are cairied in the front, and set u|) in the 
 place where the caiavan is \o |illch, before that 
 come up, at some distance from one another. 
 They are also carried by day, not lighted ; but 
 yet, by the figure and number of tiiem, tlie hadjis 
 are directed to what cottor they belong, as .sol- 
 diers are by their colours where to lendezvous ; 
 and without such directions it would be im|)oa- 
 sible to avoid confusion in such a vast number of 
 people." 
 
 This description of the Hadj caravans that 
 tra\ el yearly to Mecca, bears so close a re.^eni- 
 blance to the far-famed jouiney of the Israelites 
 through almost the same extensive deserts, that, as 
 the arrangement of tho->« vast travelling bodies 
 seems to have undergone no material alieiation 
 for nearly four thousand yeais, it all'ords the best 
 possible commentary illustrative of the Mosaic 
 narrative of the Exodus. Like them, the iminense 
 liody of Israeliti.sh eiiiigiants, while the chief 
 burden devolved on Moses, w;is divided into com- 
 panies, each comjiany being under the charge tf 
 a subordinate ollieer. called a jirlnce (^Nuni. 
 vii.). Like them, the Hebrews made their first 
 stage in a hurried manner and in tumultuous dis- 
 order (Exod. xii. 11) > and, like them, eacli tribe 
 had its re.spective standard, the |)iecise form and 
 device of which, amid the coidlRtiiig accounts of 
 the Rabl)ins, it is not easy to deteiiiiine [Stanu- 
 Aiius] ; but which, of «hate\er desciiptlon it 
 Mas, wiis pitched at the dilliereiit stages, or tinost 
 Ijerpendicularly into the ground, and thus formed 
 a central point, around which the straggbng 
 party spread themselves during their lioura of rest 
 and leisure (Num. ii. 2). Like iliem. the signal 
 for starting wasgi^enby the bhut of a tiiini|)et, 
 or rather trmnpels (Num. x. 2, >'>)•, and the timw 
 of march and halting was regulated by the saintj 
 rules that have been observed by all travel leu 
 from time immemori.d during the hot season. 
 Lik-' theirs, too, the elevation of the standard, >u 
 it was borne forward in the van of each coai|j.tnf, 
 formed a prominent object to prevent disiie sioii, oi
 
 «94 
 
 CARAVAN. 
 
 enable wantleiers to recover their place within the 
 line or division o wiiich they belonged. Nor 
 Wiis tlieie any di Veiciice here, except that, while 
 tlie Israelites in like manner prosecuted their 
 journey occasionally by night as well as by day, 
 they did not require tlie aid of fires in their 
 jtaridiirds, as the (Vii-ndly [iresence of tlic tiery 
 nillar superseded the necessity of any artihcial 
 iighls. One other point of analogy remains to be 
 ti'aced in the circumstance of Hobah being en- 
 listed in the service of the Hebrew caravan as 
 its guide tinougli the great Arabian tlesert. At 
 first si^^ht, tlie extreme solicitude of Moses to 
 secure his l)rotiier-in-law in that capacity may 
 ai)i)ear strange, and not easily reconcilable with 
 the fact tliat tliey enjoyed the special benetit of a 
 heavenly guide, m ho had guaranteed, in a super- 
 natural manner, to direct their piogress through 
 the wilderness. But tlie difficulty will vanish 
 tvlien it is borne in mind, that although the 
 pillar of cloud by day and of tire by night suf- 
 ficed to regulate the main stages of the Hebrews, 
 foraging parties would at sliort inter\ als require 
 to be sent out, and scouts to reconnoitre the 
 (knnitry for fuel, or to negotiate with the native 
 tribes for provender and water. And who so well 
 qualified to assist in tliese important services as 
 Hobah. from his intimate acquaintance with the 
 localities, his inlkience as a Sheikh, and his 
 family connection with the leader of Israel? 
 
 The nature and economy of the modern Hadj 
 caravans might be applied also to illustrate tlie 
 return of the Hebrev/ exiles under Ezra from the 
 land of their captivity. 
 
 Tire iiands of Jewish pilgrims that annually 
 repaired from every corner of Judaea to atterd 
 the three great festivals in Jerusalem, wanted 
 this government and distribution into distinct 
 companies, and seem to have resembled less 
 the character of the great Mecca caravans than 
 the irregular processions of tlie Hindoos to and 
 from the scene of some of their religious pageants. 
 On such occasions multitudes of men, women, 
 and chihlren, amounting to ten or twenty thou- 
 sand (^Roberts Oriented Illustrutions, and Ward's 
 View of the Hindoos), may be seen bending 
 tlieir way to the place of ceremonial, with 
 their beds, cooking implements, and other lug- 
 gage on their heads, prosecuting their journey 
 •n this marmer from day to da)', by long or 
 shorter stages, as custom or physical strength 
 may dictate. As in a crowd of this motley de- 
 scription not tlie slightest regard is paid to regu- 
 larity or order, anil evei-y one of course takes the 
 place or mingles with the group that pleases 
 nim, the .reparation of the nearest friends for a 
 wliole day must, in such circumstances, be a 
 common and unavoidable occurrence ; and yet 
 anxiety is never felt, unless the missing one fail 
 to a]ipcar at the appointed rendezvous of tlie 
 family. 'In like mann'^r among the ancient 
 Jews, the inhabitants of the same village or 
 district would naturally form themselves into 
 travelling parties, for mutual security as well 
 as 'or enjoying the society of acquaintance. The 
 poorer sort would liave to travel on foot, wliile 
 females and those of the lietter class might 
 ride on asses and camels. But as their country 
 was divided into tribe.s, and those wlio lived in 
 the same hamlet or canton would be more or less 
 connected by family t'^s, tlie young, the volatile, 
 
 CAk.W'AA' SERAIS. 
 
 and active among the Jewish pilgrims had fat 
 more inducements to disperse themselves amongM 
 the crowd tlian ibose of the modern pr /cessions 
 numbers of whom are necessarily strangers to each 
 other. In tl.rse cinmmstances it is easy to under* 
 stand how the young Jesus might mingle succes- 
 sively with groups of his kindred and acquaint- 
 aiice, who, cajitlvated wiih his precocious wisdom 
 and piety, might be fond to detain him in tireir 
 circle, while his mother, together with JosepU' 
 felt no anxiety at his absence, knowing the gravfl 
 and sober character of their companions in tra\ el ; 
 and the incident is the more natural that hi? 
 ])arents are said to have gone ' one day's journey 
 from Jerusalem before they missed him ; since 
 according to the present, and probably the ancient, 
 practice of the East, the first stage is always a 
 short one, seldom exceeding two or three hours. 
 Mlcmash — the modern El Vyra, where Mary's dis- 
 covery is reputed to have been made — is, accord- 
 ing to Mr. Munro (S;«H/He;- Ramble, vol. i. p. 265), 
 scarcely three miles from Jerusalem, where th* 
 caravan of Galilaean pilgrims halted. — R. J. 
 
 CARAVANSERAIS. In the days of the elder 
 patriarchs, tliere seem to have been no places spe- 
 cially devottd to tlie reception of tra\ ellers, at 
 least in the pastoral districts frequented by those 
 venerable nomades; for we lind Abrah .m, like tlie 
 Oriental shepherds of the present day, under a 
 strong sense of the difficulties and privations with 
 which journeying in those regions was attended, 
 deeming it a sacred duty to keep on the outlook, 
 and otfer the wayfaring man the rites of hospitality 
 in his own tent. Nor could the towns of Pales* 
 
 S07. « 
 
 tine, as it would seem, at that remote period, 
 boast of any greater advance with res])ect to esta- 
 blishments of this sort; for the angelic strangers 
 who visited Lot in Soilom were entertained in his 
 private house ; and on the tumultuous outrage 
 occasioned by their arrival disinclining them xa 
 subject his family to inconvenience and dangei 
 by prolonging their stay, they announced theii 
 intention to lodge in the streets all night. This 
 elicited no surprise, nor any other emotion than a 
 strenuous opposition on the part of their kind- 
 hearted lio.st to their exchanging the. comforts of 
 his home for a cheerless exposure to the cold and 
 dews of midnight ; and hence we conclude that 
 the custom, which is still frequently witnessed in 
 the cities of the East, was then not uncommon, 
 for tiavellers who were late in anix ing, and who 
 had no introductions to a jirivate family, to 
 bivouac in the streets, or wrapping themselves 
 up in the ample folds of their hykes, to pass the 
 night as they best could in tlie open air. In 
 the 'Arab towns and villages, however, when a tra- 
 veller arrives in the daytime, the sheikh, or some 
 principal person of the place, goes out to welconi« 
 him, and treats him with great civility in his own 
 house ; or else he conducts him to the tnenzil, whnxi, 
 though a place of rather a nondescript character, 
 is understood to be the house occupied by those 
 who entertain strangers, when there are no otnei 
 lodgings, and to which the women in the sheikh"*
 
 CARAVANSERAIS. 
 
 V.«i8e. tiiiviiis^ siiiveyed the lumibt-r of flie guests, 
 Brml provisions of evt-ry kind accciding to flie 
 season, and jn'ovide every ucconiniodation liie 
 jjlace can atVord (La Roque, Dc lu I'alestuie, 
 p. 124). 
 
 Tiie first mention of an inn, or house set apart 
 for the accommodation of travellers, occurs in 
 tiie account of the letuiu of Jacol/s sons fioni 
 Egypt (Gen. xlii. 27); and as it was situated 
 wiiiiin the confines of that country, and at the 
 lirst stage from the metroitolis, it is prohable tiiat 
 the erection of such places of entertainment origi- 
 naled with the Egy[iliiins, who were far superiipr 
 lo all their contemporaries in the habits and tlie 
 arts of cirilizeil life, and who, though not tiiem- 
 selves a commercial peojjle, yet invited to their 
 markets sucli a constant influx of foreign traders, 
 liuit lliey must liave Ciuly felt the necessity and 
 provided the comfiuts of tliose public establish- 
 ments. The ' ituis" where travellers lodge in t!ie 
 Easl do not, however, lieav the least resemblance 
 to the respeclable houses of the same class in this 
 country, much less do they ap])roxirnate to the 
 character and aj)purtenances of European hotels. 
 The Egyptian inn, wiiere ihe sons of Israel 
 lialteil to bait their asses, was probably, from 
 the remote peiiod fo which it belonged, of a 
 rude and humble descri{)tion, in point both of 
 appearance and accommodation — merely a shed, 
 umler the roof of which tiie cattle and their 
 drivers might obtain shelter from the heats of 
 noon and tlie dews of midnight; and such is 
 the low state of art, or the tyrannical force of 
 cust(;m in the East, that establi.^hments of this 
 kind in the present day can, with leiv exceptions, 
 boast of improvements, tliat render them superior 
 to the mean and naked poverty of those which 
 received the pilgrims of the patriarclial age. 
 
 i^y^' khan, or j^i t-xJltiS karavanserai-, is 
 
 the n.ame which this kind of building bears; 
 and tiiough (he terms are often applied indis- 
 criminately, there is an acknowledged distinc- 
 tion, whicli seems to be, that khan is ajiplied 
 to tiiGse which are situated in or near towns, 
 whereas caravanserais (a lodge for caravans, as 
 tlie compound word im.ports) is the more appro- 
 priate designation of such as are erected in desert 
 And sequestered places. A khari is always to be 
 found in the neiglibourhood of a town; and while 
 houses corresponding to the description of the 
 other are generally disposed at regular stages 
 along public and frequented roads, they are more 
 or less numerous in proportion to the relative dis- 
 tances of towns, ami the pojiulous or desert state 
 of the country. Some are provided at the j)ultlic 
 exiiense, or owe their existence to devoted Mussul- 
 maiis, who bestow a portion of their wealth, as a 
 meritorious act of cliarity, in promoting the com- 
 fort and refreshment of pilgrims; while others are 
 erected by the contributions of private merchants 
 for their own accommodation. The latter, of 
 course, are the most spacious, the most elegant 
 ami besl ajjpointed ; but though varying in cha- 
 racter and si/e, this class of establishmenlsr pre- 
 •eivps so generally the same uniform plan of con- 
 struction, that a description of one may serve to 
 convey an idea of all. Let the reader ; nagine, 
 riien, a large edifice, which, though in th' distance 
 it seems an immense pile, resem,' ling a castellated 
 Son, ou a nturer approach hjses much of tliis for- 
 
 CARAVAiNSERAIS. 
 
 39» 
 
 niidable ajipearance, wlien if is found that no par*. 
 of the building rises above the enclosing wall. 
 It ])resent» the form of a square, the sides of uhicli, 
 about IdO yaids in lei>i;fh each, are surroundtni 
 f)y iin external wall of liye brickwoik, based od 
 stone, rising generally Jo the heigh' of twenty f(Pet. 
 In the middle of the faint wall theie is a wide 
 and lofty archway, having on one or Ixith side* 
 a lodge for the jwiter and other attendants; 
 wliile the upjier jwrt of it, being faced with carv- 
 iiig or ornamental mason-work, and containing; 
 several rooms, surmounted by elegant dome^, is 
 considereil the most honouraiile jilai'e of the 
 building, iind is therefore aitjjrojiriated to the use 
 of the better sort. This arcliway leails into a 
 spacious rectangle, the area ftirming a courtyar«l 
 for cattle, in the midst of which is a well or foun- 
 tain. Along the sides of ihe rectangle arc piazxas 
 extending the whole length, ando|)ening at every 
 few ste]« into archeil and open recesses, wliich 
 are the entrances into the travellers' apartments. 
 An inner iloor beiiind each of these conducts to a 
 small oldong chamber, deriving all its light iVom 
 the door, oi from a small o]ien window in the back 
 wall eiilirely destitute of furniture, anil alVording 
 no kind of accommodation in the way of presses 
 or shelves, except some rude ni<:iies excavated in 
 the thick walls. This cell is intended for the 
 donnitory of the traveller, who generally ])refers, 
 however, the recess in front for sitting in under 
 shade during the daytime, as well as for slec])ing in 
 during the night, when the season allows ; being the 
 nioreada])ted tor this purpose that the floor is neatly 
 paved, or consists of a smooth bed of earth, on a 
 platform rising two or three feet above the level oi 
 the area. Tiiere being no other door but the en- 
 trance arch, each occupant remains isolated in 
 his own quarters, and is cut ofi" from all C(mimu- 
 nication with the other iiimaies of tlje caravan- 
 serai. But in the miildleof each of the three sidi-t 
 there is a large hall, which serves as a travellers' 
 room, where all may indiscriminately assemble: 
 while at the end of each side there is a staircase 
 leading fo tlie flat roof of the house, where the cool 
 bieezeand a view of the s\urouiiding country may 
 be enjoyed. Tiiese chambers generally stand on 
 the ground-floor, which is a few feet above tiie 
 level of the court-yard ; but in the few buildings 
 of this sort which have two stories, the travelleis 
 are accommodated above, while the under flat is 
 reserved for the use of their servants, (ir apj)ro- 
 ]iriated as warehouses l"or goods. And in such 
 establishments there is found one other addiliijial 
 advantage in iiaving a supply of servants anc' 
 cooks, as well as a shop in tlie jxjrter's houst., 
 where all conunoilities may be procured. Cara- 
 vanserais of this siqierior class, luiwever, aie rarely 
 to be met with. The most ]iaii are but wietciied 
 lodging-places — filled, it may be, with diit and 
 vermin — consisting only of bare walls, in which 
 not ail article of furniture is to be seen, nor a 
 cooking utensil to i>e found, nor provisions of any 
 soit to be obtained for love or money. The tia- 
 veiler mu.-,( ciiriy along with him, as well a< 
 provide with ids ownlian<ls, whatever is necessiiry 
 for his use and comfort. If he ]iei forms his journey 
 on camels or on horseback, ne must, on arrivin^f 
 at the stage, act as his own ostler, tie up his beast, 
 and distribute its provender and litter. Tj suix 
 )ily the want oi a divan and Lied, he crust tak« 
 his mat and c^irpet, whicii, folded up, may h£T<
 
 396 
 
 CAr,.\V AM SERAIS. 
 
 wrved him for a saddle, and squat u])on the floor, 
 or repoae liinisell" at iiiglit ; or iChe is a jjedestriaii, 
 ard inmt travel as lightly as [wssible, he makes 
 the cloak whicli he wsak by day disclmrife the 
 office of a counterpane by nii^ht. In the vic- 
 tualling depart iiient he (iudi as },M'eat a dearth 
 as in tiiat of I'uridture. He must subsist on the 
 supply of food and articles of luxury he may 
 have had the foresight to provide, and husband 
 them as well as he can, as no adilition to his 
 stores can be made till he rea hes the next 
 town. In general he must content himself with 
 a i)!ain diet of dry bread, fruits, or such prepared 
 viands as admit of preservation ; or if lie wishes a 
 fresh cooked meal, he must himself furnish the 
 fuel, kindle the tire, superintend the boil or the 
 roast, as well as wash and arrange his eating-pan. 
 ' The baggage of a man, tliereforo, wlio wishes to 
 be completely provided,' says Volney, ' consists 
 of a carpet, a mattress, a blanket, two sa,uce[)ans, 
 with lids, contained within each other; two dishes, 
 two plates, &c., colVee-pot, all of copper well 
 tinned. A small wooden box for salt and pepper, 
 a round leather table, which he susjiends from the 
 sachile of his horse, small leather buttles or bags 
 for oil, melted butter, water, a i)ipc, a tinder-box, 
 a cup of cocoa-nut, some rice, dried raisins, dates, 
 Cyprus cheese, and, above all, coflee berries, with 
 a roaster and wooden moitar to ])ound them.' 
 Every one, although his travelling equipage may 
 not be so complete as this, must find several of 
 these items and imiflements indispensable to 
 existence during a journey in the East; for in 
 many of the khans or caravanserais to which he 
 may come, he can look for nothing from the 
 keeper except to show him the way to his cham- 
 ber, ami give him the key if it is furnished with 
 a dixir. One assistance only he may depend upon, 
 and it is no inconsiderable one, — that of receiving 
 some attendance and aid if overtaken by sickness ; 
 for one of the requisite qualifications for the office 
 is, that the functionary possess a knowledge of 
 simples, and the most ajjproved jjractice in case 
 of fracture or common ailments. And hence the 
 good Samaritan in the parable (Luke x. 30), 
 although he was obliged, in the urgency of the 
 case, himself to apply from his own viaticum a 
 few simjjle remedies for the relief of the distressed 
 man, left him with full confidence to be trea!ed 
 and nursed by the keeper of the khan, whose assi- 
 duities in dressing the wounds and bruises of his 
 patieot might be quickened, perhaps, i)y the liberal 
 remuneration he was promised, as well as by the 
 CKample of the humane traveller. 
 
 Among the Egyptians, and indeed among the 
 ancients generally, the keepers of houses of public 
 entertainment were always women (Herod, ii. 
 ■j.3j ; and hence we can easily account for the 
 ready admission which the spies obtained into the 
 house of Ridiab, 'on the wall of Jericho.' situated, 
 as su'.h houses were, for the reception of strangers, 
 for the most part at the gate or entrance into the 
 town (Josh. ii. 1). This woman is c/iUed a 
 tiarlot in our ti-andation. But the Hebrew, PlJIt 
 zona/i, signifies also the landlady of an inn or 
 tavern — must of whom, doubtless, in ancient 
 'imes, were women of easy virtue — the more so as 
 -he idolatrous religion to which they were educated 
 encoinaged prostitution : and lience there being 
 oni ■• a single word in the original descriptive of 
 both nr'.jfessu-ns, and the first having been adopted 
 
 CAR.WAXSERAIS. 
 
 by the S<»ptuagint, which was th« coriimon rw 
 sion of tlie Jews in fiie days of Paul and .l«:nfli 
 (Heb. xi. 31 ; James ii. 25), those two Apcst'e* 
 might have used ,tlie same expression that thej 
 found there. The original Hebrcvv, however, 
 admits of beijjg translated by anothei' word, lo 
 which no degrading or infamous asociatioiis are 
 attaclied. 
 
 The preceding observations on the ancient aru\. 
 existing accommodation for journi'vlng in tJie 
 East, will serve to illustrate many ])assages in the 
 sacred volume, wliere allusions are matle to ii>- 
 cidents of travel. The state of Judaea, however, 
 in the time of Christ and the Apostles, was, pro- 
 bably, in respect to means of communication, 
 much superior to that of any Oriental country in 
 the present day ; and we may be disposed to con- 
 clude that for the encouragement jf inteicourse 
 beiween distant ))art.s, that country was then 
 studded with houses of public enteitainment on 
 a scale of lilieral provision at preserit unknown in 
 the same quarter of the world. But the warm 
 commendations of hospitality so frequently met 
 with in the works of contemporary classical writers, 
 as well as the pressijjg exhortations of the in- 
 spired Apostle to the practice of that virtue, loo 
 plaiidy prove that travellers were then chietly 
 dependent on the kindness of private indivi- 
 duals. The strong probability is, that the ' inns' 
 me?itioiied in the New Testament find their truj 
 and correct representations in the Eastern khans 
 and caravanserais of the present day ; and that, 
 although the Jews of that period could not have 
 been acquainted with the largest and most mag- 
 nificent of this class of buildings, which do not 
 date earlier than the commencement of the MeCca 
 caravans, and which the devotion of opulent 
 Mussulmans then began to erpct for the accom- 
 modation of the pilgrims, they had exjierience of 
 nothing better than the bare walls and cell-like 
 apartmerits of such edifices as we have described 
 above. Bishop Pearce, Dr. Campbell, and others, 
 indeed, have laboured to show that KaraKvfxa. 
 the word used by Luke to denote the jilace whence 
 Mary was excluded by the ]ire\ious inllux oi 
 strangers, is not synonymous with TravSox^^oy, 
 the house to which the good Samaritan biought 
 the wounded stranger, although in both instances 
 our translators, for want of corresponding terms 
 in tiie English language, have indiscriminately 
 rendered it by ' inn.' KaTaKv/jLa signifies the guest- 
 chamber (Mark xiv. 14; Luke xxii. 11); and it 
 is extremely probable that, as upper-rooms were 
 always the largest in a house, and most suitable 
 for the rece()tion of a numerous company, every 
 respectable householder in Jerusalem appro] n iateij 
 one gratuitously to his friends, who llocked to 
 Jerusalem at the annual feasts, and who from 
 that circumstance might call it theu' ' inn.' 
 Xlai'Soxf^ov, again, was a house set apart for tlie 
 accommodation of all strangers wiio could pay for 
 their lodging and entertainment ; and as the 
 name, ' receiver of everything,' seems to iniply, 
 was of a mean description, having no partition 
 wall, men and cattle being both included undej 
 the same roof, the former occupying one side, 
 and the latter the other. Beth-leliem being the 
 chief city of the famil' of David, a KaraAv/ia 
 might have been placed, tiy the kindn<'*s of sunia 
 friend, at the service of Josejili and Mary, who 
 were wont to resort to it as often as bu^jjiCM la
 
 CARAVANSERAIS. 
 
 Viendsliip called tliem to town. But cs the same 
 '>rivi]eu:e miijlit iiave lefn olVeied to others, who, 
 iwinij to tlie fferiPial census, (l(ickp<l in such iiii- 
 *onfv>d numlKTS, that the (iist comers romph'tely 
 tccMpied every vacant sjiace, they were ohli'/i-d 
 *o wilhtlraw to tlie iravSoxf^ov, where, in \.ie 
 Billy retiri'd corner, viz.. at tlie head of tlie cattle, 
 the motlier of Jesiis hroui^ht forth her child. This 
 ex])lanatiori of these eminent critics, however, 
 does not invalidate, nor in the least de'j;rep alTect 
 the views we have a Ivanced resjiectinsT the 
 peneral resemblance of the ancient inns of Judaea 
 to the modern khans or caravanserais; fur in 
 these, as well as in tlie KaraKi'ifiara, jiersons are 
 generally admitted without payment. .-Ind occa- 
 sions are constantly occurinsj to set multitudes 
 on travel, many of whom are driven, like Jose])li 
 and Mary, ft)r \vant of room, from the inn to the 
 adjoining stahles. 
 
 Many caravanserais, ho^veve^, har.'a not the 
 accommodation of staldes, ' the cattle being al- 
 lowed to ranL'e in the open area ; and hence has 
 arisen an opinion wamily esjjoused by many 
 learned writers, and supported by a venerable 
 tradition, that our Lord was bom in an adjoining 
 shed, or probably in a subterranean cave, like the 
 grotto that is sometimes connected with the foun- 
 ■ ain of the ])lace (Justin Martyr, Dial, with 
 Tnjpho, p. 3()3; Origen, Cont. Cels.). [Beth- 
 l.KHKM.] Moreover, much learning has been ex- 
 pended on the word (pdrvTi, which our trans- 
 lators have rendered 'manger;" although it is 
 capable of the clearest demonstration, tiiat the 
 ancients, equally with the modern inhabitants 
 of the East, are strangers to the conveniences 
 which go under tliat name in European staiiles. 
 The anecdote, quoted by Cam]ibetl from He- 
 rodotus, respecting Mardonius, the Persian ge- 
 neral, having brought with liim a brazen man- 
 ger for his horses, only establisiies our remark, 
 proving as if does that those ancient mangers were 
 more like troughs than the crib out of which our 
 horses are fed ; and, indeed, in the only other place 
 in tiie New Testament where cpdrvTi occurs, it is 
 rendered ' stall ;' that is, not the thing outof which 
 •^he cattle ate, but tlie place from wtiicli they ate 
 'see Parkhurst, in loco). No explanation, how- 
 ever, that we have met with, a;)])ears so satisfac- 
 •ory, and conveys such an intelligible picture 
 to the eye, as that given by tiie editor of the 
 Pictorial Bible (Luke'ii. 7); with whose words 
 we shall conclude this article. ' Tlie most com- 
 plete establishments have very excellent stables 
 in covered avenues, which extend behind tlie 
 ranges of a])artmeiits — that is, between the back 
 walls of these langes of building and the ex- 
 termd vji\\\ of the khan: and the entrance to it 
 is by a covered passage at one of the corners of 
 tiie quadrangle. The stable is on a level with 
 the court, and consequently l)elow the level ot 
 the l)uildings. by the height of the platform on 
 which they .stand. Nevertheless, this plattorm is 
 allowed to project behind into the stable, so as to 
 fomi a bench, to which the horse-i' heads are 
 Oimed, and on wtiich (hey can, if they like, rest 
 the )iose-bag of hair-cloth, ii'om which they eat, 
 topualile them to reach the bottom when its con- 
 fenls gel low. It also often happ'-iis that not 
 I'fi'v this bench exists in the stable, but also re- 
 cesses corresponili:ig to those m front of the apart- 
 ee/its, aud fomned by the side walls which divide 
 
 CARltiKL. 
 
 191 
 
 tlie rooms, being allowed to jiroject behind ini« 
 the stable, just ns the jirojectioii of tlie same wall« 
 into the great area forms the recesses in front. 
 These recesses in the stable or the bench, if thero 
 are no recesses, furni.sh accommodation U) the 
 seriants and others who have charge of the beast.s; 
 and when persons find on their arrival that the 
 apartments usually ujijiropriated to travellers ai» 
 already occupied, they are glad to find accom- 
 modation in the stalile, jiarticularly when l!ie 
 nights are cold or the season inclcmi nf. It in 
 evident, then, from this descri])tion, that the part 
 of the stable called ' the manger,' cciuld not re-.i- 
 sonably have been otiierihan one of those recen-e^, 
 or at least a jiortion of the bench which we have 
 mentioned, as afl'ording accommodation «o travel- 
 lers under certain circumstance.' — R. J. 
 
 CARBUNCLE. [Ekuah.] 
 
 CARCHEMISII OI^'-PPIS) is mentioned in 
 Isa. X. 9 among other places in Syria which Lid 
 Wen subdued by an Assyrian king, jiroliably 
 Tiglath-jiileser. That Carchemish was a strong- 
 hold on tiie Eiijihrafes apjiears from the title of a 
 ])ro])hecy of Jeremiah against Egyjit (xlvi. 2) : — 
 ' .\gaiiist the army of Phanuih-necho, king of 
 Egypt, which lay on the ri\er Iviphratcs, at Car- 
 chemish, and which Nebucha<liiczzar the king 
 of Babylon overthrew, in the fouith year . of 
 Jehoiakim, the son of Josiah, king of Juduh.' 
 According to 2 Chron. xxxv. 20, Nerho had live 
 years before advanced with his ally Josiah, tiie 
 father of Jehoiakim, against the Babvliinians, on 
 the Eu])hrales, to take Carchemish. These two 
 circumstances — the position of Carchemish on tlie 
 Euphrates, and its being a frontier town, lender 
 it probable that the Hebrew name |ioinfs to a city 
 which the Greeks called Kirkesion, the Latin.s 
 
 (^ercusium, and the Arabs, Kerkesiyeh ( i. . « J ; 
 
 for ihi.s too lay on the western bank of the Enphiaiis, 
 where it ii joined by the Chaboras. It was a large 
 city, ;.nd surioundeil by strong walls, which, in the 
 time of the Romans, were occasionally reiieued, 
 as this was the remotest out-]iost of their empire, 
 towards the Euphrates, in the direction of Per>ia 
 (.\nuiiiaii. Marcell. xxiii. II). It is unknown 
 wlietlier any traces of it still exist; for, as if lies 
 oil" the usual route of caravans, it has not been 
 noticed by mo<lern travellers (Rosenmuller, Bib. 
 Geog.) 
 
 CARIA (Kap/o), a country lying at the sonfh- 
 weslein extremity of .■\sia Minor, 'o which, among 
 others, the Romans wrote in iavour of the Jews 
 (1 -Mace. XV. 22, 33). Its principal towns were 
 Ilalicarnassus, Cnidns, and Myndus, which aie 
 all mentioned in the rescript of tiie Roman senate, 
 t > whicii we refer. Halicainassus was the birlii- 
 jilaceof III rodotiis ; Cnidns is mentioned in Acts 
 xxvii. 7, as having been passed by St. Paul on 
 liis voyage to Rome. 
 
 C.\RMEL i^Pl? ; Sept. Kipn-nKos), a range 
 of hills extending north-ivest from the |ilain of 
 ICsdiaelon. and ending in a ]iromoiitory, or cajie, 
 which forms the Bay of Acre. The extent of this 
 range of hills is abou' six miles, not in a direct 
 line ; but the two extremities ron the western side 
 towards the sea) jut out, ari<l stand over against 
 each other, forming a bow ir. the middle. Tlie 
 height is :iboMf 1500 feet; and at the foot of fht 
 moiuitahi, on the south, runs tlie brook Kishot^
 
 89« 
 
 CAR:\rEL. 
 
 and a liftle fnrtliprnoifh, tlie river Bolus. Moun* 
 CarTOol consi<its rather of several connected hills 
 than of one riilire; the north and eastern parts 
 being somewhat higher than tlie southern and 
 western. The foot of the northern portion ap- 
 proaches the water very closely, so tliat, wlien 
 seen from tlie hills nortli-east of Acre, tlie moun- 
 tain appears as if ' dijiping his feet in tlie western 
 sea;' but further sontii it retires more inland, so 
 as to leave between the mountain and the sea 
 an ex'ensive and very fertile plain. 
 
 Mount Cannel forms the only great promontory 
 upon the coast of Palestine. According to th« 
 reports of most travellers, the mountain well de- 
 serves its Hebrew name (Carmel — country of 
 vineyards a7id ffardens). Mariti describes it as 
 ' a delightful region,' and says the good quality of 
 its soil is a])pareiit from the fact that many odori- 
 ferous plants and flowers, as In'acinths, jonquils, 
 tazettos, anemones, &c., grow wild upon tlie moun- 
 tain ( Travels, p. 274. sq). Otto von Richter (M'all- 
 fahrten, p. fi 1) gives tlie follow'ng accoimt : Mount 
 Carm.el is entirely covered with verdure. On its 
 summit are pines and oaks, and further down 
 olives and laurel trees, everywliere plentifully 
 watered. It gives rise to a multitude of crystal 
 Srooks, the largest of which issues from the so-called 
 Founain of Elijah ; and they all huiTy along, be- 
 tween banks tliickly overgrown with busiies, to ihe 
 Ki^lion. Every species of tillage succeeds here 
 admirably, under this mild and clieerful sky. 
 The prosiiect from the summit of the mountain 
 •ver the gulf of Acre and its fertile shores, 
 and over the blue heights of Lebanon and the 
 White Cape, is enclianting.' Mr. Carne also 
 a.sceiided the mountain, and traversed its whole 
 summit, which occupied several hours. He says 
 — ' No mountain in or around Palestine retains 
 its ancient beauty so much as Carmel. Two or 
 'hree villages and some scattered cottages are 
 found on it; its groves are few, but luxuriant ; 
 it is no ]dace for crags and precipices, or rocks of 
 the wild go\ts ; b«t its surface is covered with a 
 rich and c<Mistant -erdure' {Inters, ii. 119). Such 
 descri])tions admiiably ilhistnite the vivid repre- 
 gentatioiis of the inspired Hebrew prophets and 
 poets in respect of Carmel. Tlius, Isaiah (xxxv. 
 I) alludes to 'the excellency (.']ilendid ornaments) 
 •f Carmel.' So, on '"coun of the graceful form 
 
 CARMEL. 
 
 and verdant heauty of the summit, the head of 
 the bride in Cant. vii. 5 is compared to Carmel. 
 It was also celebrated for its pastures, and is thece- 
 fore ranked with Bashan in Isa. xxxiii. 9; Jer. 
 i. 1!) ; Amos i. 2. 
 
 It is nevertheless right to state that a nmchles* 
 glowing account of Carmel is given by many 
 travellers ; but we arc satisfied that the ditieretioe 
 arises from the time of the year at which the place 
 was visited. Tiicse who were on Carmel in the • 
 spring, or early summer, found the mountain 
 covered with verdure; whereas those whose visit 
 was later in tlie year. — towards the end of summer 
 or in autumn, — found every tiling paiched, dry, 
 and brown. This is tlie real secret of the discoid 
 ant accounts which travellers of equal credit often 
 give of the same places. 
 
 The mountain is of comiiact limestone, and, .^u 
 often hapjiens where that is the case [Caves], there 
 are in it very many caverns — it is said, more than 
 a thousand. In one tract, called the Monk's Ca- 
 vern, there are as many as four hundred adjacent 
 to each other, furnished with windows and with 
 jilaces for sleejiing hewn in the rock. A peculi- 
 arity of many of these caverns is mentioned l)y 
 Shulz {Leitiinri, &c., v. pp. 187, .3R2), that the eu- 
 tiances into them are so narrow that only a 
 single person can creep in at a time ; and th; 
 the caverns are so crooked that a person is 
 immediately out of sight unless closely fol- 
 lowed. This may serve to give a clearer idea 
 of what is i7itended in Amos ix. 3, where the 
 Lord says of those who endeavour to escape his 
 pirnisliments, 'Though they hide them.5elvcs in 
 the top of Carmel, I will search and take them 
 out thence.' That the grottoes and caves of 
 Mount Carmel were already, in very ancient 
 time.s, the abode of prophets and other religious 
 jiersoiis is well known. The jirophets Elijah and 
 Elishaoiten resorted thither (1 Kings xviii. 19. s^. 
 42 ; 2 Kings ii. 2.5 ; iv. 25 ; and comp. perha])S 
 1 Kings xviii. 4, 13). At the ])resent clay is 
 shown a cavern called the cave of Elijah, a li'tle 
 below the Monks' Cavern already mentioned, and 
 which is now a Moslem sanctuary. Upon the 
 summit is an ancient establishment of Carmelite 
 monks, which order, indeed, derived its name 
 from this mountiiin. The old convent was de- 
 stroyed by Abdallah Pasha, wlio converted tde 
 materials to his own use ; but it has of late years 
 been rebuilt on a somewhat imposing scale by the 
 aid of contributions from Euroix; (Dr. Robinson's 
 Addit. to Calmet, in art. 'Carmel;' comp. 
 Winer's Biblischcs Renhcorterbitch ; Raumer's 
 Paliistina ; and the following travellers: D'Ar- 
 vieux, M-aundrell, Pococke, Mariti, Clarke, 
 Buckingham, Irby and Mangles, Monro, Ski ruier. 
 Hardy, G. Robinson, Richter, Schubert, &c. 
 
 2. CARMEL. Another Carmel, among the 
 mountains of Judah, is named in Josh. xv. S5. It 
 was liere that Saul set up the tropliy of his victory 
 over Amalek (1 Sam. xv. 12), and where Nabal 
 was shearing his sheep when the atliiir took place 
 between him and David in which Abigail bore so 
 conspicuous a part (I Sam. xxv. 2, sq.y This 
 Carmel is described by Eusebius and Jerome as, 
 in their day, a village, with a Roman garrison, 
 ten miles from Hebron, verging towards the 
 east. From the time of the Crusades till the 
 present century its name seems to have been 
 forgotten. But it was recognised by Seetxeii
 
 CAKPUS. 
 
 (VT. 
 
 a!i9 
 
 aJl'l mnre r'^ccntly l)y Count TJortou and Dr. 
 Robiusini, iiiuier tlie name of Kninnil. Tlie 
 place is now utterly (iesolate, bnt tlie ruins indi- 
 cate a town orcoi)si(lerai)le extent and inipartance. 
 Tiiese ruins lie around the iiead ami aloni^' tlie 
 two sides ol" a valley ol" some widtli and depth 
 the heaii of wliii'li tonus a semicircular amjih'.- 
 theatre shnt in hy rocks. They consist chielly of 
 the foundations and broken walls of dwellin;,'s 
 and other edilices, scattered in every direction, 
 and tliroivn to^:etlier in moiniiful ceidiision and 
 desolation. The most remarkable ruin is tiiat of 
 a castle, quatlran;4;ular, standiuij on a swell of 
 groiuul in the midst of the town. A minute de- 
 gorijition of this and the otiier remains is ijiven by 
 Dr. Robinson (Bib. Researches, ii. pp. 195-201). 
 The distance of this place from Hel)ron is nearer 
 eif^ht Roman miles than ten, as assigned by Eu- 
 sebius and Jerome. 
 
 CARXAIM. [AsHTAROTH.] 
 CARPENTER. [H.a.ndich.akt.] 
 CARPUS (Kdp-n-os), a disciple of Paul who 
 dwelt at Troas (2 Tim. iv. 13). 
 
 CART (H^jy ;. Sept. "A/xa^a). The Hebrew 
 word rendereii by out translators in some places 
 Dy • waggon,' and in others by ' cart,' denotes any 
 vehicle moving on wheels and usually drawn by 
 oxen ; and their particular ciiaracter must bo ile- 
 termineil by the context indicating the ])urpose 
 for which they were employed. First, we iiavo 
 the carts which the king of Egypt sent to assist 
 in transporting Jacob's family from Canaan 
 (Gen. xlv. 19, 27). From their being so sent 
 it is manifest tliat they were not used in the 
 latter country; and that they were known there as 
 being peculiar to Egypt is shown liy the conlirm- 
 fttion which they alforded to Jacob of the truth of 
 the strange story told by his sons. These carts or 
 waggons were, of course, not war-chariots, nor 
 lucii curricles as were in use among the Egyptian 
 nobility, but were not suited for travelling. The 
 
 only other wheel-vehicles actually or probably 
 used by tlie Egyptians themselves are those re- 
 presented in figs. I, 2, of No. 210. But they are 
 not found on the monuments in such connection 
 as to show whether they were employed for tiavel- 
 lina: or fur agriculture. Tlie solid wheels would 
 Fuggest the latter use, if, indeed, tlie same feature 
 does not rather show that, although figured on 
 Egy]itian monuments, tiiey are the cars of a fo- 
 reign ])eople. This is the more probalile, inasmuch 
 IS the ready means of transjiort and travel by the 
 Nile seems to have remiered in a great measure 
 unnecessary any other wheel-carriages than tliose 
 for war or jileasure. Tlie scul])tures, however, 
 exhibit some carts as used by a nomade peojile 
 (enemies of the Egvjitians) in their migrations. 
 If any of these had. liy the rout of Ih-s p''o))le, been 
 left in the hands of the Egyptians, the king would 
 M doubt consider them suitable to assist the mi- 
 jration of another jKople of similar habits. At 
 
 any rate, ( tv afTonl tin- only attainable anali gy, 
 ami an- lor t:iat le.ison here repiesenteil (^No. 21/9). 
 Elsewhere (Num. vii. 3, G : 1 Sam. vi. 7 ) we ri'ad 
 of carts used for the removal of the sacreil arki 
 and ut«nsiU. These also were drawn l>j tiriioxon. 
 
 eio. 
 
 In Rossellini we have found a very curious repre- 
 sentation of the veliicle used for such jiurp ises by 
 the Egyptians (No. 2in, fig. 3). It is little more 
 than a jilatform on wheels ; and the apiirehension 
 w'^iich in<iuced Uzzah to put forth his hand to 
 stav the ark when shaken by the oxen (2 S.im. vi. 
 6), may suggest that the cart employed on that 
 occasion was not unlike this, as it would be easy 
 for a jerk to (lis])lace whatever might be upon it. 
 As it appears that the Israelites useii carts, 
 they doubtless employed them sometimes in the 
 removal of agricultural produce, alrbough we 
 are not aware of any distinct mention of this 
 practice in Scripture. Tliis is now the only use 
 for which carts are employed in Western Asia, 
 They are such as are represented in No. 211. 
 
 jA.^ ^ — ^. 
 
 CASLUHIM (D"'n|?p3 ; Sept. yUKTriufitluX 
 properly Casluehim. a people whose jirogenitor 
 was a son of Miziaiin ((ien. x. 11; 1 Clirm. 1. 
 12). He, or they, for the word ajiplies rather to 
 a peo])le than to an individual, are supposed 
 by Uochart anil others to have carried a colony 
 from Egypt, wliidi settle<l in the district between 
 Pclnsium and Gaza, or, in ol:.t>r wOrds. between 
 the Egvi)tians and the Philistines. There are 
 some grounds for this conjecture; Out it is im[)C9- 
 siblc to obtain any certainty on so oliscure a 
 8ul)ject. 
 
 CASSIA. [Kktziah.] 
 
 C.'VSTLE. [FoUTIKICATIONS 1 
 
 CASTOR AND POLLUX (At^ffKovpoi), the 
 Dio'^curi : in heathen mythology, the twin sons 
 of Ju])iter by Leda. They had the s].ecial jiro- 
 vince of assisting persons in danger of .sfiip 
 wreck (Tiicocrit. fd. xxii. 1 ; Xei oph. Si/!np. \ iii. 
 29 ; comp. Horat. Carm. i. 3. 2 iv. R.31 ) ; and 
 hence their figures were often ado))ted for 'tlie 
 sign' (r<> irapdn-qfi.ov, msitj7U'), from whieh a ship 
 derived its name, as was the cast? with thai ' ship 
 of ,\lexan<lria ' in which St. Paul sailed on his 
 journey for Rome (Acts xxviii 11% 
 
 CA'T (alKovfios). It might be assumed that 
 the cat was an useful, if not n necessary, domestic 
 animal to the Ht'lirew people in Palestine, wher* 
 com was grown for exportation, as well tJt far
 
 CAT. 
 
 «onmtin])t(on of the resident population, twenty 
 or thirty-fold more than at present, and wliere, 
 morein-er, the condit'.ons of tlie climate required 
 tiie iTecaution of a ])ie;itir:il store being kept 
 in reserve to meet the chances of scarcity. The 
 Bnimal could not be unknown to the people, 
 for their ancestors had witnessed ihe F.t^yptians 
 treatin.sj it as a divinity, under tlie denomina- 
 tion of Pasht, the Lunar Goddess, or Diana, 
 holdin;j every domesticated inilividual sacred, 
 «nbalniing it after death, and often sending it 
 for interment to Bubastis. Yet we find the cat 
 nowhere mentioned in the canonical books as 
 a domestic animal. And in Barucli it is no- 
 ticed only as a tenant of Pagan temples, where 
 1)0 doubt tise fragments of sacrificed animals 
 and vegetables attracted vermin, and rendered 
 tlie presence of cats necessary. This singular 
 circumstance, perhaps, resulted from the animal 
 being deemed unclean, and being tliereby ex- 
 cluded domestic familiarity, tliough the Hebrews 
 isay still have encovirageJ it, in common with 
 other vermin-hunters, about the outiiouses and 
 farms, and corn-stores, at the risk of some loss 
 among tlie broods of pigeons wliich, in Pales- 
 tine, were a substitute for poultry. If the do- 
 mestic sj)ecies of cats were not tolerated, there 
 could not e.xist many wild in a country almost 
 destitute of forests; but, in their stead, at least 
 in Egypt. Syria, Arabia, and Persia, there are 
 tif.meious sf)ecies of viverridae and raustelidae, 
 to which, in common phrase, we apply the word 
 cat, as civet cat and polecat. Tiiese are species 
 that hunt in open grounds and visit ruined build- 
 ings; and among them, perl lup'!, some wild ca- 
 ftida? may l»e collectively those denominated, with 
 oJxious propriety 0"'''^* Tziyini. 
 
 With regard to the nei,rhhouring nations just 
 named, they ail had domestic cat<, it is presumed, 
 derived from a wild species foiuid in Nubia, and 
 ( rs( I'.escribed by Ruppel under the name of Felis 
 Maniculata. Tl>e typical animal is smaller, 
 more slender, and more delicately limbed than 
 the Eorojieaii. The fur is pale yellowi-h grey, 
 w ith some dark streaks across the paws, and at the 
 tip of the tail. In tlie dome:.ticate<.l state it \ aries 
 •Ai colom-s and markirtgs, for lire ancient monu- 
 ments of Egypt contain many painted ligures, 
 wiiich show tiiem cross-ljarred like our wild species 
 in Eurofie. Two specimens are liere given from 
 these pa intings ; one clearl y a cat ; the other, in the 
 original, figured as catching birds; acting like a 
 retriever for his master, who is fowling in a lioat. 
 tt is not, apparently, a cat, but a species of gen- 
 Ret or paradoxurus, one of tlie genera befoie 
 winted at. Both are nearly allied to tiie cele- 
 brated Ichneutnori, Ihe He;pestes of authors, the 
 Xiod«jn X>ms, whicli is eien no.v occasionally 
 
 CAVES. 
 
 domesticated ; it difl'ers in manners, for tlie Hw-' 
 pestes ])haraonis does not frequent the uplaudf, 
 but willinfrlv takes the water. — C. H. S. 
 
 CATERPILLAR. [Chasii.J 
 
 CATTLE. [Beasts: Buj.i..] 
 
 CAVES. The geological formation of Syria ii 
 highly favouralde to the production of caves. It 
 Consists chielly of limestone, in dilTerent degrees 
 of density, and abounds with subterranean rivu- 
 lets. The S|)rings issuing from limestone gene- 
 rally contain carbonate of lime, and most of them 
 yield a large quantity of free carbonic acid upon 
 exposure to the air. To the erosive e/Tect upon 
 limestone rocks, of water charged with this acid, 
 the R,)rmation of caves is chiefly to be ascribed 
 {Enc. Metropol. art. ' Geology,' 'pp. 692, fi93). 
 The ojieration of these causes is sometimes exem- 
 plified by a torrent perforating a rock, and form- 
 ing a natural arch, like that of the Nahr el 
 Leben, wliich falls into the Nahr El Salib, called 
 also the river of Beirout. The arch is upwards 
 of 160 feet long, 85 feet wide, and nearly 200 
 feet abo\'e the torient (Kitto's Fhysical History 
 of Palestine, art. 'Geology an^ Mineralogy'). 
 li\\f^si(hordinate strata of Syria, sandstone, chalk, 
 basalt, natron, &c. favour the foi-matioii of ca\ es. 
 Consequently the whole region abounds with sub- 
 terranean hollows of difl'erent dimensions. Some 
 of them are of immense extent ; tliese are noticed 
 by Strabo, who speaks of a cavern near Damascus 
 ca])ab]e of holding 4000 men (xvi. p. 1096, edit. 
 1707). This cavern is shown to the present daj"- 
 Modem travels abound with descriptions of the 
 caves of Syria. The Crusade writers record the 
 local traditions respecting them current in their 
 times (William of Tyre; Quaresmius, Elucid 
 Ter. Sane). Tavernier ( Voyage de Perse, part ii. 
 chap, iy.), speaks of a grotto between Alepjjo 
 and Bir, which would hold near -3000 horse. 
 Maundrell has described a large cavern under a 
 high rocky mountain, in the vicinity of Sidon, 
 containing 200 smaller caverns (Travels, pp. 
 158, 159). Shaw mtotions the numerous dens, 
 holes, and caves, in the mountains on tie sea 
 coast, extending thrdugh a long range on each 
 side of Joppa. The accounts of the latest and 
 mo.st accmate travellers verify their statements. 
 The Jirst mention of a cave in Sci ipture relates 
 to tliat into which Lot and his two daughters 
 retired from Zoar, after the destruction of So- 
 dom and Gomoriah (Gen. xix. 30). It M'as 
 some cavern in the mountains of Moab, but 
 tradition has not fixed upon any of the nu- 
 merous hcillows in that region. The next is the 
 cave of Machpelah, in the field of Ephron, wliicli 
 Abraliam purchased of the sons of Hefh (Gen 
 XXV. 9, 10). There Abraham iiuried Sarah, and 
 was himself afterwards buried ; there also Isaac, 
 Rebecca, Leah, and Jacob, were buried (Gen. 
 xlix. 31 ; 1. 13). The cave of Machpelah is said 
 to be under a Mahometan mosque, surrounded 
 by a high wall called the Harani : but even tlie 
 Moslems are not allowed to descend into the 
 cavein. The tradition that this is the burial- 
 place of the patriarchs, is su])ported by an im 
 incnse array of evidence (Robins(.n, Biblical Re- 
 searches in Palestine, ii. 433-440). 
 
 The situation of the cave at Makkedah , into 
 which the five kings of the .^moiites leliied upos 
 their defeat by Joshua, and info which their c&/ 
 cases were ultimately cast, is not known (Josh, r
 
 CAVES. 
 
 ,6, 2TJ Some of tlic cave« mentioned in f no Sciip- 
 Aires were artificial, or coiisisteil ofnatuiiil fissmos 
 enlarged or modified for tlie purposes intended. 
 It is recorded (Jutlj^. vi. 2\ tljat • liecause of tlie 
 Midiqnites, tlie children of Israel ninde fliem the 
 dens whi(tti are in the mo-intains, and caves, ami 
 strongholds.' Caves miid(; liy art are met with in 
 various quarters. An inniimeralile multitude 
 of excavations are found in ihe rocks and valleys 
 round Wa<ly Musa, \<-hici) were prohahly formed 
 at first as sepulclires, but afterwards inhahited, 
 like the tombs of 'J liebes (liohinson's Ucscarchcs, 
 ii. 529). Oflier exeavaiin.is oceiuat J)i'ir Duli- 
 bi'in (ii. 333); others in llie Wady leading to 
 Santa Hanneh (ii. 395). ' In the mountains of 
 Kul'at Ibn Ma'au, the natural caverns have been 
 united by passages cut in the rocks, in order to 
 render them more comniodious liabilations. In 
 the midst of these caverns several cisterns have 
 been built ; the whole would atliird refuge for 
 600 men" (Bmckhardt's Trdreh, \\. 331). Caves 
 were used as (hoeUing-places by the early inha- 
 bitants of Syria The Horite^, the ancient inlia- 
 bitants of IdurriEea Pioner, were Troglodytes or 
 dwellers in caves, as then- name imports. Jerome 
 •ecords that in his lime Iduma-a, or the wliole 
 .southern region from Kleutherupolis to Petra and 
 Ailah, was lull of iiabitations in caves, tiie inha- 
 bitants using subrerianean dwellings on account 
 of the great lieat (Comm. mi Obad. v. 6). 'The 
 excavations at Deir Dubban and on the south side 
 of the ^Vady, leading t^) Santa Ilaimeli, are pro- 
 bably the dwellings of tlie ancient Horites " (Ro- 
 binson, ii. 353), and they are peculiarly nume- 
 rous around Beit Jibrin (I'^leutheropolis) (ii. 
 <25). The Scriptures abound with references 
 to habitations in rocks; among others, see Num. 
 xxiv. 21; Cant. ii. 14; Jer. xlix. 16; Obad. 
 3. Even at the jiresent time many persons 
 live in caves. The in!ial)i(ants of Anab, a town 
 on the east of the Joidan, lat. 32^, long. 35° 
 E., all live in grottoes or caves hdllowed out 
 of the rock (Buckii;gl:am's Travels ainovg the 
 Arab Tribes, ]>. 61). In the neigiiliourliood of 
 Hel)ron peasants still live in caves, and especially 
 during the summer, to lie near their flocks (Wil- 
 kinson's Travels. \. 313). Poor families live in 
 caverns in the rocks wliich seem formerly to have 
 been inhabited as a sort of village, near the ruins 
 of El Burj. So also at Siloam, and in the neigh- 
 Ixjurliood of Nazareth. Ca\es afforded excellent 
 refuge in Vie time of tear. Thus the Isi-aelites 
 (1 Sam. xiii. 6) are .said to have !iid themselves in 
 caves, and in thickets, and in rocks, and in high 
 placas, and in jiits. See also Jer. xli. 9; Jose])h. 
 A7itiq.x\\. 11. I. Hence, ilien, to ' enter into the 
 rock, to go into the holes (if tie rocks, and into the 
 caves of ihe earth ' (Isa. ii. 19), would, tothe Isiael- 
 jles, be a very projM-r and familiar way to express 
 terror and consternation. The jiits s]:oken of 
 seem (ohave consisted of large wells, in 'the sides' 
 of which, excavations weie made, leading info 
 various chamlK-rs. Such ] i'.s were sometio'es 
 ns(A aa 2^ris()HS (I.sa. xxiv. 22; Ii. 14; Zech. ix. 
 H); and with niches in the sides, for hurying- 
 piaces (E/ek. xxxii. 23 ). Many of flio^e vamlted 
 pits remain to fliis day. The cave in wliich La- 
 zarus teas buried was probafdy something of this 
 kind. The tomti shown as his\ at Bethany, is not 
 atrended with the slightest piobability (Robinson, 
 ii lOOJ. Tl ° striiughold^ jf F.nyedi. w'j-li 
 
 CA\ ES. 
 
 40 
 
 afTordeil a retreat to David and iii^ fullowers ( 
 Sam. xxiii. 20; xxiv. 1\ can be cle.uly idcntw 
 fied. They are now rall'.-d 'Ain Tidy by tl^ 
 Arabs, which means the same as the Hebrew 
 namely, 'The Fountain of the Kid." 'On alj' 
 sides the country is full of cavenis, which might 
 serve as luiking-places for David and his men, 
 as they do for outlaws at the jresent ihiy. The 
 whole scene is drawn to the life " (Robinson, ii. 
 203). The cave if Advll.m. in \v\ruh David 
 retired to avoid the persecutions of Saul (1 Sam. 
 xxii. 1, 2), and in which he cut ofl' the skiit of 
 Saul's robe (I Sam. xxiv. 4), is an immense natu- 
 ral cavern at the V^'ady Khurelfun, which jiasses 
 lielow the Frank mountain (Ilerodium: seethe 
 Map of Palestine). For a descri]ition of this cav* 
 by Iiiiy and Mangles, and the reasons for Ijelieving 
 its identity, see article .-Vori.i.AM. Dr. Pococke 
 refers to a tradition that 30,000 persons once 
 retired into it to avoid a malaria. Such is the 
 extent of the cavern, that it is quite cunceivalile 
 how David and his men might 'lemain in the 
 si<lcs of the cave," and not be noti<ed by Saul 
 {Trawls, vol. ii. p. 41). Caverns were also 
 frequently fortified and occupie<l liy soldiers, 
 •lo.sephus otWn mentions this circumstance. He 
 relates also that Heiod .sent horsemen and footmen 
 to destroy the robbers t/iat dwelt in raves, and did 
 much mischief in the country. They were very 
 near to a village called Aibela (now called Kulat 
 Ibn Ma"an) ; the adjacent ruins arc known by 
 the name of Irbid, a corruption of Iil>il, Ara- 
 bic for Arbela ( Bmckhardt's Travels, p. 331). 
 On the fortietii <lay after, Herod came with hi.« 
 whole ai-my to exteiniinate liiem. The lobbers 
 sallied out of their caves and Jjoldly gave him 
 battle, and even caused the left wing of his army 
 to gi\ e way, though they were ultimately defeateii. 
 Herod then laid siege to certain other caver.ns 
 containing robbers, but found operations against 
 them very difficult. Tliese were situated on the 
 middle of abrupt and ];recipitous mountains, and 
 could not be come at from any side, since they tiad 
 onlysomcwindingjjathways, very nai row, by which 
 fliey got up to them. The rock tliaf lay on thfir 
 fioiit overhung valleys of immense dep.th, and of 
 an almost j-eryiendicular declivity. To meet 
 fiiese difliculties Herod caosed large boxes (ille<l 
 with armed men to be loweied fiom thetopofthe 
 mountain. Tiiese men had long hooks in their 
 hands with which they might jiull out those who 
 resisted tiiem, and tumble them down the moun- 
 tains. I*"iom fhe-se boxes they at length slijij ed 
 in',3 the caverns, destroyed tic robbeis ami set 
 fire to their go«>d» {Antiq. xiv. 15, §4, 5; Dc 
 Bell. Jtul. i. 16, ^ 2-4). I'his description of 
 caves of robbers leminds us of our Lord's words, 
 in which he repioaches the Jeas with having 
 made the Tcmyile o den of thieves, a-irfjKaioi- 
 \riaT(i>i' (Mn\U xxi. 1.3). In the Cnimer of' ihrs* 
 jiassages Josephus calls them rohs iv toij (nrn- 
 Kaiois \ri:nas, and in the latter, ATjc-ra-r tivuv « 
 a-iTT^Kaiois KaTotKouvTuy. Ceitain caves were 
 aileiwaids foitified liy Joseilius himself duiing 
 his command in Galilee umler the Romans. In 
 oll|| place he sjeaks of these as ti.e caveinsof .\r- 
 befa ( I'itn. ^ 37), and in another as ti.e caveins 
 near the lakeCVenr.esuiefl. ( ]>v Bcll.Jitd. ii. 20. (Jj 
 A furtilied cavein exi.sled in the time of the Cm 
 sades. It is mentioned by William of Tyre(xxii 
 l^ 21), as situate in the country beyond ti eJoidaiL
 
 «02 
 
 CEILING 
 
 sixteei. Re/.Tian miles from Tiberias. The cave 
 of Elijah is Mrcfended t.) he sliown, a fhn foot of 
 Mount Sinai," in a chajml dedicaled to him; and 
 a hole near the altar is pointed out as tiie place 
 where he lay (Rohiiison, i. 152). — J. F. D. 
 
 CEDAR. [EiiEs.] 
 
 CEILING. Tlie orientals bestow much atten- 
 tion n{k')n tlie ceilings of their principal rooms. 
 Where wood is not scarce, they are usually com- 
 Twsed of one curious piece of joinery, framed 
 entire, and then raised and nailed to the joists. 
 These ceilings are often divided into small square 
 compartments ; hut are sometimes of more com- 
 plicated patterns. Wood of a naturally dark co- 
 lon- is commonly chosen, and it is never painted. 
 lu piaces where wood is scarce, and somelimes 
 where it is not particularly so, the ceilings are 
 formed of fine plaster, with tasteful mouldings and 
 ornaments, coloured and relieved with gilding, 
 and with pieces of mirror inserted in the hollows 
 formed by liie involutions of the raised mouldings 
 of tlie arabesques, which enclose them as in a 
 frame. The antiquity of this taste can be clearly- 
 traced by actual examples up to the times of ths 
 Old Tes'.ament, through the Egyptian monu- 
 ments, which display ceilings painted with rich 
 colours in such patterns as are shown in the 
 umexed cut. The explanation thus obtained 
 
 CENSER. 
 
 viii. II : Eccl i4 1. 9). Censers were uMfd in tm 
 daily offering of incense, and yearly on the day 
 
 satisfactorily illus*rates the peculiar emphasis 
 with which 'ceiled houses' and ' ceiled chambers' 
 are mentioned bv Jeremiah (xxii. 14) and Haggai 
 Ci. 4). 
 
 CENCHRE.^. (Kfyxpeat), one of the ports of 
 Corinth, whence Paul sailed for Ephesus (Acts 
 xviii. lb). It was situated on the eastern side of 
 Uie istl mus, about seventy stadia from the ci|y : 
 the other port on the western side of the isthmus 
 was called Lechseum. [Corinth.] 
 
 CENSED, the vessel in which incense was 
 pj-e8ent<'d in the temph (2 (Uiron. xxvi. 19; Eiek 
 
 SU. [Egyptian Censexs.] 
 
 of atonement, when the high-priest entered tb« 
 
 Holy of Holies. On tlie latter occasion the priert 
 filled the censer with live coals from the sacred 
 fire on the altar of burnt-offering, and bore it 
 into the sanctuary, where he threw upon \'ne 
 burning coals the 'sweet incense beaten small' 
 which he had brought in his hand (Lev. xvi, 
 12, 13). In this case the incense was burnt 
 w'nile tlie high-jniest held the censer in his hand ; 
 but in the daily ollering the censer in which the 
 live coals were brought from tlie altar of burnt- 
 offering was set down upon the altar of incense. 
 This alone would suggest the jirobability of -some 
 difference of shape between the censers used on 
 these occasions. The daily censers must have had 
 a base or stand to admit of their being placed on 
 the golden altar, while those employed on the 
 day of atonement were probalily furnished with 
 a handle. In iact, there aie different names lor 
 these vessels. Those in daily use were called 
 JT112PJ3 miktercth, from "ItOpD, 'incense;' whereas 
 that used on the day of atonement is distinguished 
 by the title of nhnD michtah or ' coal -pan. 
 We learn also that the daily censers were of brass 
 (Num. xvi. 39), wl.sreas the yearly one was oi 
 gold (Joseph. Antiq. xvi. 4. 4). The latter is 
 also said to have had a handle (Mishn. tit. Yoma, 
 iv. 4), which, indeed, as lieing held by the priest 
 while the incense was burning, it seems to have 
 required. These intimations help us to con- 
 clude that the Jewish censers were unlike those 
 of the classical ancients, with which the sculp- 
 tures of G -^ece and Rome have made us familiar ; 
 as well as \ %e (with ])erforated lids, and swung 
 by chains) *^ ch are used in (he church of Rome. 
 The form of the daily cteuser we h\-'e no means 
 of determining beyond the fact that il was a pan 
 or vase, with a stand whereon it might rest oo 
 the golden altar. Among tlip Egyptians the ^ 
 cense was so generally burned iii tlie hand of tn-. 
 officiating priest, that the only ci-nsers ,<hich w« 
 find in the least degree suited to this purpose Uff
 
 CENTURION. 
 
 dwae represent il in K^s. 2 and 3 of No. 214. 
 
 But the nimifioiis (iguies of Kj^yj-tian cersers, 
 consisting of a small cup at the I'lid of a long 
 jhaft or liaiidle (ol'ien in the sliajx; of a liaud), 
 prol)ai)ly oft'er adequate illustration of tliose em- 
 ployed by the Jews on the day of atonement. 
 There was, however, another kind of censer (fig. 1) 
 less frequently seen on the Kgyjjtian monuments, 
 and likewise furnished with a lianilte, which 
 will probahly be regarded by many as olVering a 
 more probable resemblance. It is observable lliat 
 in all cases the Egypfiai. priests had their cosily 
 license made u'l into sm^ll round ])ellets, wliich 
 they jirojccteci successively t'roin between their 
 finger and thumb into the censer, at sucli a dis- 
 ■Jince, lliat the operation must have required a 
 p'culiar knack to be acciuired only by much 
 rrictice. As the incense used by tlie Jews was 
 made up into a kind of paste, it was probably 
 ■jn])loved in the same manner. 
 
 CEJSiSUS. [Population.] 
 
 CENTURION (tKarovTapxris and eKarSv- 
 apxos), a Roman military otlicer in command of 
 a hundred men, as the title implies. Cornelius, 
 Jie first Gentile convert to Cliristianity, held this 
 rank (Acts x. 1, 22). Other Centurions are 
 mentioned in jMatt. viii. 5, 8, 13; xxvii. 54; 
 Luke vii. 2, 6; Acts xxi. 32; xxii. 25, 26; 
 xxiii. 17, 23; xxiv. 23; xxvii. 1, 6, 11, 31, 43; 
 SXviii. 16. 
 
 CEPHAS {Kri<pas ; in later Hebrew or Syriac 
 KCS), a surname which Christ bestowed upon 
 Simon (John i. 42), and which the Greeks ren- 
 dered Ijy nerpos, and the Latins by Petius, both 
 words meaning a ' rock,' which is the signitication 
 of the oriijinal [Petek]. 
 
 CKRATI A, Ceuatonia, is the name of a tree 
 of the family of Leguminous plants, of which 
 tiie fruit used to be called Silicjua edalls and iSi- 
 Uqua dtilcis. By the Greeks, a;s Galen and Paulus 
 y5igineta, the tree is called Keparia, KeoardivtOL, 
 from the resemblance of its fruit to Kfoas, a horn. 
 The word K^paTiov occurs in Luke xv. IG, where it 
 has been translated huiks in the Authorized Ver- 
 sion : ourSaviour, in the parableof the prodigal son, 
 says that 'he would fain have lilled his belly with 
 the husks that the swine did eat ; and no man 
 gave unto him.' In tlie Arabic Version of the New 
 
 Testament, the word C-J*^ Kharoob, often writ- 
 ten C— r*4j^>- Khamoob, is given as the synonym 
 
 of Kcialia. According to Celsius, the modern 
 Greeks lave c. nverfed the Arabic name into 
 ^dpouPa, and the Spaniards into Garrota and 
 Algaroba. The Italians call the tree Caroba, 
 the Yxvnch .Carrovhier, and the English Carob- 
 tree. Though here, little more tl-ari its name is 
 known, the Carol)-tree is extremely cj.T.ar.on in 
 the South of Europ', in Syria, and in Egypt The 
 Arabs distinguish it by the name of Khamoob 
 shamee — that is the Syrian Carob. The ancients, 
 asTheophrastusand Pliny, likewise mention it as a 
 native of Syria. Celsius states that no tree is more 
 frequently mentioned in th<. Talmud, where its 
 fiuit is stated to be given as food to cattle and 
 twine : it is now given to horses, asses, and mules. 
 During the Peninsular war the horses of the Bri- 
 tish cavalry weie ofien fed on the beans of the 
 Carob-tree. Both Pliny (Hist. \at. xv. 23) and 
 '^'.olumella (vii. JKi mention that it was given as 
 
 CHABAZZELETII. 
 
 403 
 
 food to swine. By some it has been tlioughr, but 
 apparently without reason, tiiat it was u\>im tiie 
 iiusks of this tice that John the Baptist fed iu tht 
 wilderness: from this idea, however, it u often 
 called St. John's Bread, and liocust-brcfc 
 
 215. [Ceratonia Siliqua.] 
 
 Tlie Carol>-tree grows in the south of Euro])e 
 and north of Africa, usually to a moderale-size, 
 but it sometimes l)econies very large, with a 
 trunk of great thickness, and afl'ords an agreeable 
 shade. The quantity of pods borne by each tree 
 is very considerable, being often as much as SCO 
 or 900 pounds weiglit : tliey are flat, brownish- 
 coloured, from 6 to 8 inches in length, of a sub- 
 astringent taste when unripe, but, when come to 
 maturity, they secrete, within the husks and round 
 the seeds, a sweetish-tasted pulp. When on the 
 tree, the pods have an unpleasant odour; hut, when 
 dried upon hurdles, they become eatable, and 
 are valued by poor people, and during famine in 
 tlie countries where the tree is grown, esi)ecially in 
 Spain and Egypt, and liy the Aralis. They are 
 given as food to cattle in mo(>rrn, as we read tliey 
 were in ancient, times ; but, at the best, can only 
 be considered very jioor fare. — J. E. R. 
 
 CETUBIM (Drains, (he U'ritiuffs), one of 
 the three larger divisicms of the Old Testament 
 used by the Hebrews, anil thus distinguishetl from 
 the Law and the Prophets (the other two divisions) 
 as being in the tiist instance committed to writing, 
 and not deliveretl orally. Hence the book of 
 Daniel is found in this ilivisiim ; his pn)i>liecie« 
 having been originally wiitten down, and not 
 orally delivered. This is the divi.sion of .Scripture 
 known also by the coiresj oiiding Greek name »») 
 HAGiooitAPHA. It continued P.ialni-, Proveihs, 
 Job, (Canticles, Ruth, Lami'iitatioiis, Ecclesiastes, 
 Esther. Daniel, Ezra and Nchemiah (leckoned as 
 one), and Ciironicles. 
 
 CHABAZZELETII (riS*?D) orcura in 
 two places in Scripture, lirst in the passage o/ 
 Cant. ii. I, where tiie bride replies, ' I am tbc
 
 49!t 
 
 CHABAZZELETH. 
 
 Rose of Sharon and tlie lily of the valleys;' and 
 ^comlly, in Isa. xxxv. 1, ' The wilderness and 
 |b« solitaiy place shall be glad for fliem ; and the 
 ■wen shall rejoice, and blossom as tlie rose.' In 
 hoth jiasages we see, that in the Auth. Vers., as 
 also in some others, the word is considered to in- 
 dicate the rose. The Sept. renders it simply by 
 dower in the p;issage of the Canticles. In this it 
 has been followed by the Latin Vul;^ate, Lutlier, 
 &c. It is curious, however, as remarked by Celsius, 
 Ifiero., i. p. 480, ttiat many of those who translate 
 :habazzeleth by rose or fioxoer in the jiassage 
 »f tlie Canticles, render it by lily in that of 
 Isaiah. 
 
 216. [Narcissus tazetta.] 
 
 The rose was, no doubt, highly esteemed by the 
 Greeks, as it was, and still is, by almost all 
 Asiatic nations, and, as it foitns a very frequent 
 Bubject of allusion in Persian poetry, it has been 
 inferred that we might expect some reference to 
 so favourite a (lower in the poetical books of the 
 Scripture, and that no otI)cr is better calculated 
 to illustrate the above two passages. But this does 
 not prove that the word chabazzeleth, or any 
 similar one, was ever applied to the vose. Other 
 flowers, therefore, have been indicated, to which 
 the name chabbazzeleth may be supposed, from its 
 derivation, to apply more fitly. Scheuzer refers 
 to Hiller {Hierophift. p. 2), who seeks c!)abazze]e:h 
 amoBg the i)ulbons rooted jilants, remaiking that 
 the Hebrew word may be derived from chabab 
 and hatzal, a bulb, or bulbous root of any 
 plant ; as we have seen it applied to the onion in 
 the article Betzai,. So Rosenmiiller remarks 
 tliat the substantial part ( f the Hebrew name 
 shows that it denotes a flower growing from a 
 
 ^ulb, and adds in a note 'that riT'^'Hr! is formed 
 
 'rom ?V3 or bulb, the guttural n being some- 
 times put before triliterals, in order to form qiia- 
 driliterals from them '.(spe Gesen. Gram. p. f;o3). 
 Some therefore have selected the asphodel as the 
 bulbous plant intended ; respecting which the 
 author of ' Scripture Illustrated' remarks, ' It is 
 *. very beautiful and odoriferr is flower, anil 
 hig:hly praised by two of the greatest masters of 
 Srecian song. Hesiod says it grows cnimonly 
 
 CHAIN. 
 
 in woods ; and Ilinr.er (Oot/ss., i. 24) calls tb* 
 Elysian fields ' meads (ilied with asiJiodel.' 
 
 Celsius (i.e.) liiLs already rKniail;eii iliatBochari 
 has translated chabaz/.clelh by na-cissus; and 
 not without reason, as some Oriental translaton 
 have so explained it. In th* Targum, Cant. ii. 
 1, instead of chabazzeleth v. c have narkom, 
 which, however, sliould have been written narko* 
 CplJ, as ajipears from the words of l.*avid Cohen 
 de Lara, ' ]\'a7-kos idem est ac chabazze.hth Saron. 
 So in Isa. xxxv. 1, chabazzeleth 's written chant 
 zaloil-o in the S3"rian tran.slation. ' quod maronita 
 Latine vertit narcissum ' (Cels. llierobot. i. p. 
 489). This, Rosenmiiller informs u.s, according 
 to the testirppny of Syriac Arabic Dictionaries, 
 denotes the ' colchicum autunmale,' that is, the 
 meadow saffron. Tliat plant certainly lias a bullj- 
 like root-stock ; in form the flovveis resemble those 
 of the crocus, are of a light violet colour, but 
 without any scent. Narkom and narkos are, no 
 doubt, the came as the Persian nurgus, Arabic 
 
 / hftC»-jJ, and which, throughout (he East, in- 
 dicates Narcissus Tazetta, or the polyanthus nar» 
 cissus. The ancients describe and allude to tho 
 narcissus on various occasions, and Celsius has 
 quoted various passages from the ])oets indicative 
 of tlie esteem in which it was held. As they were 
 not so particular as the moderns in distinguishing 
 species, it is probable tliat more than one may b» 
 referred to by them, and, therefore, that N. Tazetta 
 may be included under the same name as N. 
 poeticus, which was best known to them. It i» 
 not unimportant to remark that the narcissus wa« 
 also called $o\p6s iixeTinSs, and Bulbus vomi- 
 torius, and the Arabic btisl-al-kye, no doubt refers 
 to the same or a kindred species. It is curious 
 also that an Eastern name, or the corruption of 
 one, should be applied by gardeners even in this 
 coimtry to a species of narcissus — thus, N.Trew- 
 rianus and crenulatus, — the foimer, supposed l)y 
 some io be a variety of N. oriental is, were onoe 
 called bazalman major and bazalman minor. 
 That the narcissus is found in Syria and Palestine 
 is well known, as it has been mentii ned by several 
 travellers; and, also, that it is highly esteemed 
 by all Asiatics from Syria even as far as India. 
 Hence, if we allow that the word cliabazzeleth haa 
 reference to a bulb-bearing root, it cannot apply 
 to the rose. The narcissus, therefore, is as likely 
 as any other of the bulbous tribe to have been 
 intended in tlie above passages. — J. F. R. 
 
 CHAFF, the refuse of winnowed com. It 
 is used as a svmbol for unprofitaiile and worthleM 
 characters (Ps. i. 4 •, Malt. iii. 12). 
 
 CH.A.IN. Chains of gold ajiijear to have been 
 as much used among (he Hebrews, for ornament oJ 
 otticial distinction, as they are among ourselves at 
 the jiresent day. Tlie earliest mention of them 
 occurs in Gen. xli. 42, where we are told that 
 a chain of gold (()rmed a part of the investi- 
 ture of Joseph in the high office to which he was 
 raised in Egypt; a later instance occurs in Dan 
 v. 29, from wliich we learn that a golden chain 
 was part of a diess of honour at Babylon. In 
 Egy])t tlie judges woie chains of gold, to which 
 was attached a jewelled figure of Thmei, or Truth ; 
 and in that country similar chains were also v/om 
 as ornaments by the women. It is not, however, 
 necessary to suppose that the Hebrews derived 
 this custom from the Egyptians; for the facil
 
 <*HALCEDONY. 
 
 (hat chains are sifvitioned anion;; (he sjwil of the 
 Midianites shows that tlicy were in use among 
 people whose cont-ition of life more nearly resem- 
 bled tha.t of the Israelites liefoie tlioy obtained 
 possession of Canaan. It would seen lliat chains 
 were worn both by men and women ^Prov. i. 9 ; 
 Ezek. xvi. 11), and we find them enumerated 
 among the oinaments of brides (Cant i. 10 ; 
 iy. 9). 
 
 It was a cns'om among the Romans to fasten a 
 prisoner with a lii;lit chain to tlie solilier who was 
 ajijwinted to guard him. One end of it was at- 
 tached to the rigiit hand of the prisoner, and the 
 other to the left hand of tiie soldier. This is the 
 chain by whicli Paul was so often hound, and 
 to wliicii he reprateilly alludes (Acts xxviii. 20 ; 
 Eiih. vi. 20; 2 Tim. i. 16). When the utmost 
 security was desiied, the prisoner was attached by 
 :wo chains to two soldiers, as was the case with 
 •^eter (Acts xii. (!). 
 
 CHALCEDONY (xaA.KTjSaS;', Rev. xxi. 19), 
 . piecious stone, supjjosed liy some to be the same 
 Jiat occurs in the Hebrew Scriptures (Exod. 
 Kxviii. 18) under the n;.me oi nojihek (translated 
 'emerald'); but (his is doubtful. Ciialcedony 
 
 a variety of amorphous quartz, and the distinc- 
 .on between it and agate is not very satisfactorily 
 ital)lished. It is harder than flint (specific gra- 
 jty 2 01), commonly semi-transpaicnt, and is 
 merally of one uniform colour throughout, usu- 
 
 ly a light biown and often nearly white; but 
 )ther shades of colour are not infiequent, such as 
 grey, yellow, green, and blue. Chalcedony occurs 
 m irregular misses, commonly forming grotesque 
 cavities, in trap rocks and even griuiite. It is 
 found in most parts of the world ; and in the 
 ea«t is employed in ilie f.ilirication of cups and 
 plates, and aiticles of taste, which are wrought 
 with great skill and labour, and treasured among 
 precious things. In Europe it is made into snulV- 
 boxes, buttons, knife-handles, and other minor 
 articles. 
 
 CHALDvEAN PHILOSOPHY. This is a 
 subject of inlercst to the student of the Bible, 'n 
 consequence of the influence which the Baby- 
 .onian phdosopliy exerted on the opinions and 
 manner of tiiinking of the Israelites during their 
 captivity in Babylon — an influence of a general 
 and decided character, which the Rabbins them- 
 selves admit, in alleging that the names of the 
 angels and of the months were derived by the 
 nouse of Israel iVom Bal;ylon (Rush Ilashanah, 
 p. 56). The system of opinion and manner of 
 thinking whicli the captives met with in Babylon 
 cannot be characterized exclusively as Chaldasan, 
 but Afas made u[) of elements whose biifh-place 
 was in various p irts of the East, and which api)ear 
 to have found in Baliylon a not uncoirgenia! soil, 
 where they giew and produced fruit wliic^h co- 
 alesced into one general system. Of these ele- 
 ments the two prhicijKil were the Chaldean and 
 die Medo-Pers'an or Zoroastrian. It is to the 
 first that the reader's attention is invited in this 
 aiticle. 
 
 Tlie Chalda'ans, who lived in a climate where 
 file rays of the sun are never darkened, and the 
 aight is always clear and bright by mean': of the 
 light of the moon and stars, were led to believe 
 fcLat light was (he soul of nature. Accordingly 
 it was by the light of the sun iuid stars that tiie 
 flUversal spirit bra ight forth all tiiiiij^ ; and 
 
 CHALDvT-.AN PHILOSOPHY. «»> 
 
 therefce the Chalda;ans oWre<l ilieir homage tc. 
 tlie Su jreme Being in the heavenly bodies, wher« 
 he app'ared to them in a s|x'(ial manner to dwell. 
 As tlie stars form separate bodies, ini.igination le- 
 presenled them as distinct existences, which had 
 e-ach their |)iv"uliar function's, and exerted a Ke- 
 parate influence in bringing forth tlie prcdnctioru 
 of nature. The idea of a universal snirit di»- 
 apix'aied, as being too abstract for the people, and 
 not without dilllculty for cultivated minds ; and 
 worship was ofllered to the stars as .<o many 
 powers that governed tt;e world. It is easy to see 
 how the Chalda'ans passed from this early cor- 
 ruption of the primitive reli;jion of tlie Bible to a 
 low and degrading jxily theism. 
 
 As li-ht w;is regarded as the only moving- 
 power of nature, and every star had its own in- 
 fluence, so natural phenomena apjieared the result 
 of the [xuticular influence of that heavenly body 
 which at any given time was above the horizon ; 
 and tlie Chahhran philosophers believed that they 
 found the cause of events in its position, and th« 
 means of foretelling events in its movements. 
 Tlie^e views, and perhaps tiic extraordinary heat 
 and the pestilential winds which in certain months 
 prevail in the country, and against which there is 
 no protection except in the hills, led the Clial- 
 daeans to the mountains which gird the land. 
 On these observatories, which n.Uure seems to have 
 expressly formed lijr the jiurpose, they studied (he 
 positions and movements of tiie heavenly host. 
 They thought they saw that similar phenomena 
 were constantly accomjianied by the same con- 
 junction of the stars, which seemed to observ« 
 regular movements and a similar course. On 
 this the Clialdaean [iriests came to the convic- 
 ti&i) that natural event-s are bound together, and 
 that sacrifices do not internijit their course ; that 
 they all have a common origin, which works ac- 
 cording to unknown princijiles and laws, whose 
 discovery is so important as to deserve their best 
 attention. The heavenly bodies themselves anj 
 obedient to these laws; their formation, position, 
 and influence, are conse<piences of these universal 
 laws, by which nature was controlled. This de- 
 termined the ClialdsBans to seek in the heavera 
 the knowledge of the original cause which created 
 the world, and of the laws which that cause fol- 
 lowed in the formatioi! of things, and in the pro- 
 duction of ])henoniena, since in the heavens dwelt 
 the rower which brings all things forth. 
 
 The stars were masses of light ; the space which 
 held them was tilled with light ; no other power 
 appeared to oiierate therein : accordingly the Chal- 
 deans held light to be the nioving-]}ower which 
 had produced the stars. It could not be doubted 
 that this power possessed intelligence, and the 
 operations of the mind a]ipear to have so much 
 resemblance to the subtlety and fleetness of light, 
 that men who had only imagination for their 
 guide had no hesitation to repiesent intelligence 
 as a property of light, and the univeisal spirit or 
 highest intelligence as liglit itself. The observa- 
 tions of the (^haldajans had taught them that the 
 distances of the stars fiom the earth are unequal, 
 and that light decreases in its atinroach (o the 
 earth, on which they concluded that light strcani3 
 forth from an endless fountain far removeil froni 
 the earth, in doing which it fills si^ace with ita 
 beams, and forms tlie h.eavenly boiiies in difl'errnl 
 positions and of diflerent maijnituUes. 11i«
 
 «VI CHAL )^AN PHILOSOPHY. 
 
 Chaldean philosophy. 
 
 ereDtive sprit was therefore set forth by tnetn 
 tinder tiie iniet^w of an eternal iiiexhaiistiWe foun- 
 tain of li;^ht; they thjtifjht this fountain was to 
 tlie universe what the sun is to the regions 
 lighted and warmed l)y his beams. 
 
 As light becomes less in propaijating itself, its 
 fountain must be of an inconceivable subtlety and 
 purity, and acr,ordin;,'ly, in its loftiest condition, 
 infelligent. As its Ix-ams are removed from their 
 source they lose their activity, and by the gradual 
 \yanni^ of their inlluence sink from their 
 original perfection ; they therefore produced dif- 
 ferent existences and intelligences, in proportion as 
 tliey became more distant from the fountain of 
 light ; at last, jjiissing from one element into 
 another, tliey lost their lightness, were pressed 
 together, and made dense, till they became cor- 
 poreal, and produced chaos. Tliere accordingly 
 was between the Supreme Being and the earth a 
 chain of intermediate existences whose jjeifections 
 decreased as they were more remote from the First 
 Great Cause. This Supreme Being had com- 
 municated in a distinguislied-degree liis 'primary 
 radiations, intelligence, power, productiveness; 
 all other emanations had, in proportion to their 
 distance from the highest intelligence, a less and 
 less sliare in these jierfections ; and thus were 
 the dilTerent legions of light, from tlie moon to the 
 dwelling-place of the Supi erne, lilled with various 
 crders of spirits. 
 
 The space which contained the First Cause, or 
 i'ountain of radiations, was lilled with pure and 
 happy intelligences. Immediately beneath this 
 region began the coi-poreal world, or the empy- 
 reum, which was a boundless space, lighted by 
 the pure light which (lowed immediately from 
 the Great Source ; this empyreum was filled with 
 an in&iitely less pure fire than the original light, 
 but immeasurably finer than all bodies. Below this 
 was the ether, or grosser region, filled with still 
 grosser fire. Next came the fixed stars, spread over 
 a wideregioa where the tiiicl^est parts of the ethereal 
 fire had come together and formed the stars. The 
 world of planets succeeded, which contained the 
 sun, moon, :md the wandering stars. Then came the 
 last order of beings — the rude elements which are 
 deprived of all activitv, and withstand the mo- 
 tions and influence of light. The di.!l(?rent parts 
 of the world are in conta,ct, and the s])irits of the 
 upper regions can influence the lower, as well as 
 descend and enter into them. As the chaotic 
 elements were without shajw and motion, the 
 spirits of the higher regions must have formed the 
 earth, and human souls are spirits sprung from 
 them. To these spirits fri;)m above the svstem of 
 the Chaliiaeans ascribed all the productions, ap- 
 pearances, and movements upon the earth. The 
 formation of the hiunan body, the growth of the 
 fruits, all llie gifts of na,ture, were attributed tu 
 beneficent spirits. In the space below tiie moon, 
 iu the midst of night, temjjests arose, lightnings 
 threaded the dark clouds, thunder broke forth and 
 laid was'^e the earth , tliere were found spirits of 
 daikness, corporeal demons spread through the 
 air. Often, too, were flames of fire seen to rise 
 ou' of the bosom of the eartti, and the mountains 
 were shaken. Earthly powers or demons were 
 supposed to dwell in the centre of the earth ; and 
 nnce matter was held to be without aciivity, all 
 «novenfients were attril)uted to spirit->. Storms, 
 rolcanod* teiut)ests, appeared to have uo other 
 
 object than to destroy human liappiness • an>i 
 these demons wern held to be wicked spirits wl.f 
 piwuuced these evils ; to them every luifortuiiatt 
 event was ascribed, and a sort of hierarcny was 
 fo.ined of these evil b;'ings. as had iieen done m tht 
 case of the good spirits. But why did not the Su- 
 preme mind put down, by an exeition of his power, 
 this swarm of wicked s])irits? Some thojjght it wa;i 
 beneath the dignity of the Primary Essence to 
 contend with these demons; others were of op' • 
 nion that these bad spirits were naturally ind.^- 
 structible, and as the Supreme could neither 
 destroy nor improve them, he had banished tnem 
 to the centre of the earth and to the region beneath 
 the moon, where they indulged in their baseness 
 and exercised their dominion : in order, however, 
 to prott'ct ihe human race against fiends so nu 
 merous and fearful, he commissioned good spirit.s, 
 whose off.ce it was to defend men agamst these 
 corporeal demons. As the good and the i)ad 
 spirits had various degrees of power, aird different 
 offices, so they had names given to them which 
 described their functions. As the good spiiits 
 were under an obligation to protect men and 
 furnish succour. in their need, they were com- 
 pelled to learn human language; accordingly it 
 was believed that a guardian angel against every 
 evil was possessed by every one who bore hia 
 mysterious name — a name which was to be pro' 
 nounced only when succour was needed. All 
 manner of names were therefore devised, by 
 which the good spirits were conjured or informed 
 of human necessities; and all the combinations of 
 the alphabet were exhausted in order to bring about 
 a commerce between men and angels. Here is the 
 origin of the Cabbala, wliich gave strange names 
 to these spirits, in order to bring them into con- 
 nection with men, and by this means to do wonder- 
 ful tilings (Matt. xii. 24-27). These names also 
 sometimes served to drive bad spirits away : they 
 were a kind of exorcism. For siii^s it was be- 
 lieved that these demons had been banishe'l to the 
 centre of the earth, and that they couhl uo eviv 
 only in consequence of having liallled the vigi- 
 lance of the guardian sjiirits and escaped to the 
 outer world, so, it was held, they weie compelled 
 to flee as soon as they heard the name of the good 
 angels whose business it was to keep them shut 
 up in subterranean caverns, and to punish them 
 if they ventured from their prisonhouse. A power, 
 too, was ascribed to the name of the spirit, or to 
 the image which marked his ofiice — a jiower 
 which forced the spirit to come on being called ; 
 and, accordingly, it was held that tliis nams 
 carved on a stone kept the spirit near the person 
 who wore the stone — a notion in which is pro- 
 bably found the origin of Talismansj wiiich were 
 formed either by words or symbolical figures. 
 
 Tiie fragments of Berosus, preserved by Eu- 
 sebius and Josephus, and to he foiuid in Sca- 
 liger (De Emendat. Temp.), and more fully in 
 Fdbricius (Bib. Gr. xiv. 175), atl'ord some in- 
 formation on the subject of ChaMwan pliilosophy. 
 Berosus was a priest of the god Baal, at Babylon, 
 i'.i the time of Alexander the Gre.it. Tl>e Talmuil 
 and other woiks of th Jewisli Rahbins may also 
 be advantageously consulted. to;^efher with th« 
 foUowuig authorities : — Euseii. Piv/'p Evang. ix, 
 10 ; Philo, D^ Mij. Mim. ; Selden, De DO* 
 Syris, Piolcg. 3; Stanley's Tlisiory of OrienfOm 
 J'hilosophy i Knorrii de Rosenroth, Cabbala i^
 
 CHALDyEANS. 
 
 CI Al.D^.ANS. 
 
 10*4 
 
 9udafa, 3. doctrina sbreroruin transcendi'nfalU 
 et mctaphijsica atqic (hcologiea, X. 1, SolisI). 
 1677, t. 2. ' Liber JoliuT. restittitiis,' Fiaiicuf. 1GR4; 
 Kleuker, Uchcr der Xatiir tend den I'npyunri tier 
 Emanationslehre bei den Kabbalistcn, Ri^a, 
 17S6 ; Md'.ittii, VliUosophie der Geschic/tte, 
 1827-8; .Mai'' mm, Die eiir/e Verbhidun/j des 
 A. T. mi: dent N., 1R;U ; Ketzer, Lexicon von 
 P. Fritz, 1S:?S; Biucker, Hist. Crit. Phil.; 
 'R\i\er, Gcichi -h. der rial.; Vcr^ileichende Mij- 
 thologie txri Nork, 1836. — J. R. li. 
 
 CHAL[^/j:ANS (Dntr?^, is the name wliich 
 13 found sip])i-oj)riated in jiaits of the Ohl Testa- 
 ment to inhabitants of Babylon lunl subjects 
 of the Babyhmian kinj^dom. In 2 Kings 
 XXV., where an account is given of the s\ege 
 of Jerusalem in the reign of Zcdekiali, by Nebu- 
 thadiiezzar, the latter monarch is expressly desig- 
 nated ' King of Baliylon,' while his troo])s in 
 gtnera! are spoken of as ' Ciialdees,'' ' the army 
 of the Chaldees.' In Isaiah xiii. 1!', Babylon 
 is called *the glory of kingdoms, the beauty 
 of the Clialdees' excellency ;' and in xxiii. 
 13 of the same book, the country is termed 
 ' the land of the Clialdaeans." So in Daniel 
 ix. 1, ' lu the first year of Darius, of tlie seed of 
 the Medes, which was made king over the reahn 
 of the Chalda»ans.' Ptolemy iises the term Xa\- 
 Saia (x<ipa), Chaldsea, for that part of liabylonia 
 which, lying in the south-west, borders on Arabia 
 Deserta. Strabo sjieaks to the same ellect, and 
 Pliny terms Babylon Chaldaicarum gentium 
 captU, the liead of the Chaldaean nations. Tlie 
 origin and condition of the people who gave this 
 name to the Babylonians, have been subjects of 
 dispute among the learned. Probably, however, 
 they were the same people that are described iti 
 Greek writers as having originally been an uncul- 
 tivated tribe of mountaineers, placed on the Car- 
 duchian mountains, in the neighbourhood of 
 Armenin. whom Xenophon describes as brave and 
 fond of freedom {Cyrop. i. 31 ; Anab. iv. 3, 4, 7, 
 8; 25). In Habakkuk i. 6-10 the Clialdsans are 
 spoken :ii in corresponding terms : ' Lo, I raise up 
 the Chaldasans. that bitter and hasty nation, which 
 sliall march through the breadtli of the lanil to 
 possess the dwelling-places that are not theirs; 
 they are terrible and dreadful ; their horses are 
 swifter than leopards and more fierce than evening 
 wolves ; their horsemen shall spread tlicmselves ; 
 they shall fly as the eagle that hastelh to eat.' 
 They are also mentioned in Job i. 17: ' Chal- 
 ceans fell vipon the camels (of Job) and carried 
 them away.' These p;issages show not only their 
 warlike and predatory haljits, but, especially that 
 in Job, the eaily period in history at which they 
 were known. 
 
 As in all periods of history hardy and brave 
 tribes oi mountaineers have come down into the 
 plains and conquered their comparatively civil- 
 ized and elfeminate inhal)itants, so these Arme- 
 nian Clialdaeans appear to have descended on 
 Babylon, made themselves maslers of the city 
 »nd the government, and eventually founded a 
 iominior, to which they gave their name, as well 
 as to tht inhabitants of the city and the country 
 tributary to it, inf'ising at the same time voung 
 blood and fresh vigour inio all the veins and 
 snembers of the social fraiie. What length of 
 %3iie tLe chiuiges hereiil implied may have 
 
 taken cannot nr w be ascertaineil. \Vin«'f ( Ural- 
 tciirtcrhiich, s. \. fVirtWoc*') coTijoclnres that the 
 Chaldieans were at tiist sulijects of the Asiv- 
 rian mormrcliy. which, from 2 Kin^js xvii. 21, 
 &c., also 2 ('hron. xxxiii. 11, appears *o have 
 been esfal)lished in Bwhylon ; and tliat, while 
 subjects of that em))iie, they liccanie civil izwl, 
 gained for themselves tlic government, :ind fo:inde(f 
 the Chaldce-Iialiyloniiin king(h)ni or dynasty. 
 
 Of the kingdom of liiibylon, Nimrml ((ien. x, 
 8, sq(].) was the founder and Hr.it sovereign. 
 Tlie next name of a Babylonian monarch i. 
 found in Gen. xiv. I, where ' Anuaphej, king 
 of Sbinar,' is cursorily mentioned. A long v.f 
 terval occurs, till at last, in 2 Kings xx. 12, 13, 
 tlm name of another is given : ' Berodacli-lKi- 
 ladan, the .son of ]i,dadan, king of Babylon,' 
 it appears 'sent letters and a jiresent unto Heie- 
 kiau; lior he had iieard that He/ekiah had been 
 sick. And Hezekiah hearkened unto them, and 
 g'n*!wed them all the house of his |)recioui 
 thinirs : there was iiothing in his house, nor in 
 his aominion, that Hezekiah shewed them not.' 
 On becoming acquainteil with this fact, the 
 prop'tiet Isaiah announced th.it the treasures of 
 the Kingdom wouhl be plundered and taken 
 to Babvlon along with the dcscendant.s of Ileze- 
 kian, wiio were to become eunuchs in fJie palace 
 of tne king of Babylon. The friendly act which 
 passed i)etween these two kings took ])lace in tbi 
 year B.C. 713. About a hundred years later, the 
 projihets Jeremiah and Habakkuk speak of tlio 
 invasion of the Chaldcean arm.y. Nebuchad- 
 nezzar now appears in the hi.storical books, and, 
 in Ezra v. 12, is descril)ed as 'tiie king of Baby- 
 lon, the Chaldaean, who destroyed this house (the 
 temple), and carried the jwople away into Baby- 
 lon.' How extensive and powerful his empire 
 was, may be gathered from the words of Jcremiali 
 xxxiv. 1 — ' Nebuchadnezzar, ki;ig of Baliylon, 
 and all his army, and all the kingdoms of ibe 
 earth of his dominion, and all the people, fought 
 against Jerusalem.' Tlie result was, thai •J'O 
 city was surrendered, and the men of war fled, to- 
 gether with king Zedekiah, but were overtaken in 
 the jilains of Jericlio and comjiletely routed. The 
 Israelitish monarc'n was carrietl before Nebu- 
 chadnezzar, who ordered his eyes to U' ])ut 
 out, after he had been comjwlied to witness 
 the slaughter of his sons : he was then bound 
 in fetters of brass and conveyed a captive to 
 Babylon. The next Chaldee-Babylonian mo- 
 narch given in the Scriptures is the son of the 
 j)rpceding, Kvil-merodacli, who (2 Kings xxv. 27) 
 began his reign (b.c. 562) by delivering JehoJa- 
 chin, king of Judah, after the unfortunate sove- 
 reign lad endured captivity, if not incaiceration, 
 for a period of more than six an<i thirty years. 
 Circi mstances incidentally recorded in connection 
 with this event serve to ilisjjlay the magniludt 
 and grandeur of the em)iire ; for it appears (ver-. 
 28) tliat tliere were other captive kings in Baby- 
 lon l)esi<ies Jehoiachin, and that eacli cue of them 
 was indulged with tlie distinction of havinfi^ hii 
 own throne. With Belshazziir (u.c. 538), tlie soa 
 of Nebuchadnezzar, clo.ses the line of Clialdicau 
 monarchs. In the seventeenth year of his reign, 
 this sovereign was put to death, while ergaged 
 with all his court in high revelry, by (lyrus, when 
 lie took the city of Babylon in 'lie night »eaaoa 
 (Dan 30), ail'.' established in tiie city uid ita
 
 t03 
 
 CHALD>K\iSiJ. 
 
 ii«>t'Wi'e'icie3 tlie rule of the Medo-PersijJis [Bal- 
 sa Jl7.2a it}. 
 
 It Ijus been seen, from tliu forej^oing statemente. 
 that the history of Bahylori supplied by the Scrij:- 
 turcs i» brief iinpei feet, and fiagnientary. Little 
 additional li^iit can Iw bonowed from other quar- 
 letji, in relation to the jjeriod comprised within 
 tl»e Bil)lical accounts. 
 
 The oldest liistory of tlie land, as delivered by 
 Berosiis (Eiiseb. Vltro7i.), gives no information 
 capable of being annexed to the sacred narratives ; 
 whilst tliere is in the Canon of Ptolemy a list of 
 l^bylonian kings, wliicli, in nnion witii Berosus 
 A3<1 Aliydeniis (Euseb. CAroM.), leads to a not im- 
 probable result. This canon enumerates from the 
 time of Nalioiiassar (u.c. 7i7), the liist inde- 
 pendent king of Babylon, nineteen Babylonian 
 kings, whose united reigns, including two periods 
 of interregnum, make a total of 210 years. The 
 first rime whicli is found alike in Ptolemy and 
 Berosus is Bel ihus, or Elibus, and Berosus lepre- 
 sents this monarch as immediately succeeding 
 Merodach-baladan, with the remark that the last, 
 after the murder of the Assyrian viceroy, had 
 liberated Babylon from the Assyrian yoke, ai:d 
 Belibus, putting his predecessor to death, (o«i the 
 government as an independent prince, until, after 
 a period of three years, Sanherib besieged the city, 
 and made Babylon again an Assyrian province, 
 under his suii Esarhaddon, or Asordanius. With 
 Nabopolassar, the father of Nebuchadnezzar, 
 there begins a new and clearer epoch in Baby- 
 lonian his'oiy. This prince, who was properly an 
 Assyrian viceroy or satrap in Babylon, being 
 supported by an alliance with the Median rulers, 
 succeeded in making himself the independent 
 sovereign of Babylon, destroyed the city of Nino- 
 veh, and establislied his dominion over Flioenicia 
 and Cu;le-Syria. His sou (b.c. 604) puslied 
 these coiKjue.its as far as Egypt. Evil-merodacu, 
 his son, succeeded him (b.c. 5(51), but was, in the 
 second year of his reign, put to death by his 
 brotjter-in-law Nerigl'ssar. The latter, on the 
 death of his wife, undeitook the government, and 
 after four years (u.c. 555) was succeeded by his 
 son, Laboro- soarcnod. But the youth could not 
 sustain himself in jiower for longer than nine 
 montiis. A consjjiracy robbetl him of his crown 
 and life, and Naboniiidus (in Herodotus called 
 Labyiictusj, that is, the Belshazzar of the Bible, 
 ascended the throne, who, in the year b.c. 538 or 
 539, was overcome by Cyras. From this event 
 Babylon became a Persian province, and shared 
 the f ite of the Persian empire. 
 
 Authentic history affords no information as to 
 the time v.hen the Clialdijean immigration look 
 place. It is possible that, at a very early period, 
 a trilje of Chaldees wandered into Babylon and 
 gave to the land the seven Chaldee kings men- 
 tioned by Berosus ; but it is possible also that 
 the Chaldaeans entered in a mass into the Baty- 
 ioiiian territory for tlie first time not long helbre 
 the era of Nabonassar (b.c. 747), which Michaelis 
 arid others have thought the woids of Isaiah rei- 
 der probable, cli. xxiii. 13 — ' Behold the land 
 of the Ch.ildajans, tJiis people was not, till the 
 Assiyrian founded it for them that dwell in the 
 wilderness.' The circL'mstance, moreover, that 
 a Shemitic dialect is found to have prevailed in 
 Babylon, i-oruborates tiie idea 'hat the Chalda'ans 
 »ere immigrantSj siace the nirtuo i Chaldseaus 
 
 CHALDEANS. 
 
 aust, from their position, have spoke.ii a diSisTea^ 
 iorm of speech. 
 
 Tlie kingdom of the Chaldees is found atnuug 
 "lie four ' thrones' spoken of by Daniel ( vii. 
 i, sqq.), and is set forth under the symbol of a 
 fion having eagles" wings. The government was 
 desjiotic, and the will of tlie monarch, wtio bore 
 (he title of ' King of Kings' (Dan. ii. 37), waa 
 supreme law, as may l.e seen in Dan. iii. 12 •, xiv. 
 28. The kings lived inaccessible to their subject3 
 iti a well-guarded palace, denominated, as v>th 
 (he ancient Peisians (Xenop. Cijrop. 1), ' the g.»te 
 of the king' (Dun. ii. 49, complied with Esther 
 li. 19, 21, and iii. 2). Tire numlier of court and 
 state servants was not small ; in Dan. vi. I, 
 Darius is said to have set over the whole kingdom 
 no fewer than ' an hundred and twenty princes.' 
 The chief officers appear to have been a sort of 
 'mayor of the palace,' or ])vime minister, to which 
 high office Daniel was appointed (Dan. ii. 49), 
 ' a master of tlie eunnchs' (Dan. i. 3), ' a captain 
 of the king's guard' (Dan. ii. 14), and 'a mastet 
 >f the magicians,' or piesident of (he Magi (Dan. 
 iv. 9). Distinct probably from the foregoing was 
 the class termed (Dan. iii. 24, 27) ' the king's 
 counsellors,' who seem to have formed a kind 
 of 'privy council' or even 'cabinet' for advisin(( 
 "he monarch and governing llie kingdom. The 
 intire empire was divided into several provinces 
 (Dan. ii, 48; iii. 1), presideil over by officers of 
 vari.ius ranks. An enumeration of several kiiuls 
 may be found in Dan. iii. 2, 3. The head ofliceis, 
 who united in themselves the highest civil and 
 military power, were denominated J''3D~>l^'nN, 
 ' presidents" (Dan. vi. 2); those whopiesided over 
 single provinces or districts liore the title of 
 n"inS(Hagg. i. 1 ; ii. 2), in the Chaldee dialect 
 ."^mnS, 'governor.' The administration of 
 criminal justice was rigorous and cruel, will 
 eing substituted for law, and huiiian life and 
 uman siillering being totally disregarded. Ne- 
 uchadnezzar (Dan. ii. 5) declares to the college 
 f the Magi — ' if ye will not make known unto 
 oe the dream with the interpretation thereof, ye 
 jail l>e cut in pieces, and your houses shall be 
 oade a dui.'ghill" (see also Dan. iii. 19; vi. 8; 
 'er. xxix. 22). The leligiou of the Clialdees was, 
 s with the aiicient Arabians and Syriai;*, the 
 worship of the heavenly bodies ; the planets 
 Jupiter, Mercury, and Venus were honoured as 
 Bel, Ne'.jo, and Meni, besides Saturn and Mars 
 (Gcjenius On Isaiah). Astrology was naturally 
 connected with this woiship of the stars, arui the 
 astronomical obseivatiuns which have made tlie 
 Chalda'an name famous weie thereby guided 
 and advanced. Tlie language spoken in Babylon 
 was what is designated Chaldee, which is Shemi- 
 tic in its origin, belonging to the Aramaic 
 branch. Tiie immigrating Chaldaeans spo'-e 
 probably a quite diff'eient tongue, wliich the geo- 
 graphical ]K)sition of their native country shows 
 to have belonged to the Medo-Persian stock. 
 
 The term Chaldaians lepieseuts sAsi a liranch 
 of the order of Baljyloi^ian Magi (Hesych. XoA- 
 Zaioi yivos 'iJlo.ywv). In Dan. ii. 2 tiiey appear 
 among ' tlie magicians, and the astrologers, and 
 the sorcerers,' wlio were ' called for to shew the 
 king his dream." In tlie lOlh verse of the sam» 
 chapter tliey are represented as spea'uing in i;ie 
 name of trie rest ; or othei^wise tueirs was a genera) 
 designation which couipxised tiie entire class
 
 CH^LDEE LA>GUAGE. 
 
 ^Dan iv. 7 ; v. 7): a freneral description of tiiese 
 diiToiviit oiileis is foiiml in Dan. v. 8, iis ' the 
 khig's wise men.' In liie Greek and Roman 
 writers tlie term Clialdefans ilt'scribes llie wlu)'.» 
 prvier of tlie learned men of Uabvlon, (Stralio, xv. 
 J..5 '8; Diod. Sic. ii. 29; Cic. Ue Div. i. 1. 2). In 
 lata.- periods the nanw; Cliahl»ans seems, without 
 reference to phicc of birlii, to have been applied in 
 the western parts of the world to persons who lived 
 by imposin;^ on tiie credulity of others, j^oint,' from 
 place to place professing to interpret dreams and 
 disclose the fulurf. In this sense the word is 
 obviously used Ity Josephus {De Bell. Jud. ii. 
 vii. 3Sj, when ' diviners and some Ciialdaeans' 
 are said to have l)een called in by Arciielaus to 
 expound what was ' p.>rt('iidfld' by a dream he 
 had had when he 'seemed to see nine ears of 
 corn, full and larire, but devoured by oxen.' — 
 Winer's liealicurlerbuch ; Heal - Kncijcdopadle 
 der Class. AUerthum, \\ . von Pauly ; Idek-r, 
 Haiidhuch der Chron. [Bahylon]. — J. R. B. 
 
 CHALDEE LANGUAGE is the name by 
 which the eliler form of the Aramaic idiom is 
 generally distinguished. AVhether there is any 
 authority in the Old Testament for applying this 
 designation to \\\^. Aramaic language is a question 
 which depends on the sense in which the exjjres- 
 sion ' tongue of tlie Clialdees,' in Dan. i. 4, is to 
 be taken; and which involves such im{)ortant 
 historical points that it does not come within the 
 scope of this article (see Hengsteuljerg, ^«</teji<je 
 des DanieL, p. 310). Another preliminary ques- 
 tion is, whether there is any ijroprL.'y in the 
 common definition of the Chaldee language as 
 the eastern, and especially as the Bubijlonian 
 dialect — or, indeed, even as a dialect at all — of 
 the Aramaic. Hupfeld strenuously maintains 
 the negative of all these propositions in the Tlieo- 
 logiscke Studieu for 1830, p. 290, sq. Avoiding 
 these debateable points, however, we apply tlie 
 name Chaldee lans;uage to that Aramaic idiom 
 which, in our present text of the Old Testament, 
 is employed in the passages of Daniel, from 
 ii. 4 to vii. 2S ; in Ezra, from iv. S to vi. 18, 
 and vii. from 12 to 26; in Gen. xxxi. 47; and 
 in Jer. x. 11 ; as also to that in which several 
 translations and ])aiaphrases of portions of the 
 Old Testament, the so-called Targums, are 
 written. The language is thus distinguished, as 
 to the nature of the documents in which it is 
 empluyed, into Biblical and Targumical Chaldee. 
 \\ iner, however, r garding linguistical charac- 
 ttiristlcs chielly, liistinguislies three grades of its 
 purity : the language, as found in the Targum 
 jf Onkelos, as most free from Hebraisms ; the 
 Biblical Chaldee, wiiich, as it frequently inter- 
 mixes certain peculiarities of Hebrew (as the H 
 •j<i the article, the plural ending im, the dual 
 form, and the conjugation H'phal), ranks below 
 the first class ; and the idiom of the other Tar- 
 gums, which not only abounds with foreign 
 word.s, but [jossesses several peculiar formations 
 which border on those of the Syriac and of Rjib- 
 binical Hebrew. Tlie language of the Talmud 
 is also usually called Chaldee ; and, if we except 
 the Mislinah (which is written in an idiom not so 
 very far removed from Biblical Hebrevi'. with a 
 tincture of Chaldee j, it is true of the Gemaraa 
 that they are written in such very corrupt 
 Chaldee that their idiom is more properly desig- 
 ua*«d as the Talmudical dialect. 
 
 CHAMBERS OE I.M.VCJILRY. 
 
 409 
 
 We have already [ \iiamaic Lanuuaok] no- 
 ticed those several f<atures which the Clialdef 
 possesses in coinmoi with ihe Syriac ; and it 
 now remains to delir.< those, certainly not marked, 
 characteristics Ijy V ,iich it is distinguished from 
 it. These ar',- — th • ] rcdominance of I lie A-sound 
 where Syri.ic has o ; the avoidance of diphthonga 
 and of otiant letters; the use of thigesh-forie ; 
 the regular accentuation ol' (lie last syllable; 
 and the formation of the infinitives, except in 
 I'eal, without the preformative C- The mode ol 
 writing is also much less d-cfvctivc tlian in Syriac 
 [Takcum]. — J. N, 
 
 CHAMBERS OF IMA(iERY. The scenes 
 of pictorial representation referral to by this 
 phrase are connected with an interesting |ja8sage 
 in the history of Ezekiel and the Jewisii exiles, 
 who were stationed in Assyria, on liie. banks of 
 the Chebar. At one ol" their interesting prayer- 
 meetings for the restoration of Israel, wiiich liad 
 been held so often and so long without any 
 jTospect of brighter days, and when the faith and 
 hopes of many of the unfortunates were waxing 
 dim and feeble, Ezekiel, in presence of his friends, 
 consisting of the exiled elders of Judah, was sud- 
 denly wraj)t in mystic vision, and graciously 
 shown, for his own satisfaction, as weii as tliat o/ 
 his pious as.^ociates, the reasons of Goil's pro- 
 tracted controversy with Israel, and the sad 
 necessity there was for still dealing hardly with 
 them. Transpiorted liy the Spirit (not bodilv, 
 indeed, nor by external force, but in imagina- 
 tion) to the city and temjile of Jerusalem, he 
 there saw, as plainly as if it had been witli the 
 eye of sense, atrocities going on within the pre- 
 cincts of the holy place — the perpt'tration ol 
 which in the very cajiital of Juda>a, tiie placa 
 which God had chusen to ]iut his name there, af- 
 forded proof of the woful extent of national aiK)»- 
 tacy and corriijjtion, and was sufhcient to justify, 
 both to the mind of tlie ]iropliet, ami his circle vi 
 pious associates, the severity of the divine judg- 
 ments on Israel, and the loud call there was for 
 prolonging and increasing, instead of putting a 
 speedy end to, the dire calamities they had so 
 long been suilering (Ezek. viii.). 
 
 Tlie lirst spectacl* that caught his eye, as he 
 perambulated, in mystic vision, the outer court 
 of the Tem])le — that court where the people usu- 
 ally assembled to worship — was a colossal statue, 
 pr(jbably of Baal, around whiidi crowds of de- 
 votees were jjei forming their frantic revelries, 
 and whose forbidden ensigns were jiroudly bla- 
 zoning on the walls and portals of His house, 
 who had proclaimed himself a God jealous yf 
 his honour (ver. 3, Lowth in loc). Scarcely 
 had the prophet recovered from his astonish- 
 ment and horror at the ujien and undisguised 
 idolatry of the multitude in that sacred enclosure, 
 when his celestial guide bade him turn another 
 way, and he would see greater abontinations. 
 Leading him to that side of the comt, along 
 which were ranged the houses of the priests, his 
 conductor ])ointeti to a mu<l-wall (ver. 7), wtiicti, 
 to screen themselves from observation, the apostate 
 servimts of the true God had raised; and in that 
 wall was a small chink, by widening wiiich he 
 discovered a jiassage into a secret chaml)er, which 
 was com])letely im[)ervious to the rays of tlie sun, 
 but which he found, on entering it, lightel up 
 by a profusion of brilliant lanijjs. The sides q(
 
 i\0 CHAMBERS OF IMAGERY. 
 
 it were coverpil with numerous paintin'^s of beasts 
 and reptiles — t!ie favourite deities of Egy])t ; and, 
 witli their eves intently fixed on these decora- 
 tions, was a conclave oi' seventy persons, in the 
 garl) of priests — tlie exact mm tier, and, in all 
 )irobal)ilil V, the individual ineir l»ers of tlie San- 
 hedrim, wIki stood in the* attitude of adoration, 
 l.olding in their h.iiids each a golden censer, con- 
 taining all tlie costly and odoriferous materials 
 which the pomp and magnificence of the Ej^yplian 
 ritual re([uireil. ' Ttiere was every form of creep- 
 inj;! things and abominable beasts, anil all the 
 idols of the lionse of Israel por'rayed round 
 about.' The scene described was wholly formed 
 on the model of Egyptian worship : and every 
 one who has read the works of Wilkinson, Bel- 
 zoni, Richartlson, and others, will perceive the 
 close resemblance tiiat it bears to the outer walls, 
 the sanctuaries, and the hieroglyphical figures 
 that distinguished the ancient mythology 'of 
 Egypt. What were the strange and unsightly 
 images engraven on tlie walls of this chamber 
 discovered by Ezekiel, and that formed the ob- 
 jects of the profane reference of these apostate 
 councillors, may be known from the following 
 metrical description, which the late Mr. Salt, 
 long the British Consul in Egypt, has drawn of 
 the gods worshipped by the ancient idolatrous in- 
 habitants of that country. Those who have pro- 
 secuted their researches among the rubbish of the 
 temples, he says, have found in the deeply-se- 
 questered clianibers they were able to reach — 
 ' The wildest images, unheard of, strange, 
 That ever puzzled antiquarians' brains : 
 Genii, v/ith heads of birds, hawks, ibis, drakes, 
 Of lions, foxes, cats, fish, frogs, and snakes, 
 Bulls, rams, and monkeys, hippopotami ; 
 With knife in paw, suspended from the sky, 
 Gods germinating men, and men turn'd gods, 
 Seated in honour, with gilt crooks and rods; 
 Vast scarabaei, globes by hands upheld. 
 From chaos springing, 'mid an endless field, 
 Of forms grotesque, the sphinx, the crocodile, 
 And other reptiles from the slime of Nile.' 
 In order to show the reader still further how ex- 
 actly this inner chamber that Ezekiel saw was 
 constructed after the Egyptian fashion, we sub- 
 ji'.in an extract from the work of another traveller, 
 descriptive of the gieat Temjiie of Edfou, one of 
 the admired relics ol' antiquity ; from which it will 
 be soen that the degenerate priests of Jerusalem 
 had borrowed the whole style of the edifice, in 
 which they were celebrating their hidden rites — 
 its form, its eritiance, as well as its pictorial 
 ornaments on the walls — from their idolatrous 
 neighbours of Egypt : — ' Considerably below the 
 surface of the adjoining building,' says he, ' my 
 conductor pointed out to me a chink in an old 
 wall, which, he told me, I should creep through 
 on my hands and feet; the aperture was not two 
 feet and a half liigh, and scarcely three feet and 
 A half broad. My companion had the courage 
 to go first, thrusting in a lamp before him : I fol- 
 lowed. The jiassage was so narrow that my 
 mou'^* and nose were almost buried in the dust, 
 and I Wis nearly suffocated, .\fter proceeding 
 aiwut ten yards in utter darkness, the 'neat be- 
 came excessive, the breathing was laborious, the 
 j/erspiration [Hjured down my face, and I would 
 aave given the world to have got out; but my 
 wmpanion, whose person I could not distinguish, 
 
 CHAMBERS OF IMAGERY. 
 
 thougii his voice was andible. called out to me tt 
 crawl a few feet farther, and that 1 should find 
 jilenty of room. I joined him at length, and had 
 the inex])re3sible satisfaction of standing onc« 
 more upon my feet. We found ourselves in a 
 splendid apartment of great magnitude, ailorned 
 with an incredible profusion of ^a.zxi.'A painting i 
 and hieroglyphics' (Madden's Trav. in Tur- 
 key, Egypt, <S(C. ; see also Maurice, Indian Antiq. 
 vol. ii. p. '212). In the dark recesses of such a- 
 chamber as this, which they entered like the tra- 
 veller through a hole in the outer wall, and in 
 which was ])ainted to the eye the grotesque and 
 motley group o( Egyptian divinities, were the 
 chief men at Jerusalem actually employed when 
 Ezekiel saw them. With minds iiighly excited 
 by the dazzling sjjienilour, and the clouds of fra- 
 grant smoke that filled the apartment, the per- 
 formers of those clandestine rites seem to have 
 surpassed even the enthusiastic zeal of their an- 
 cestors in the days of Moses, when, crowding 
 round the jiedestal of the golden calf, they rent 
 the air with their cries of ' Tht-se be tiiy gods, 
 Israel !' Be.nearh a calmer exterior, the actors in 
 the scene pointed out to Ezekiel concealed a 
 stronger and more intense passion for idolatry. 
 Every Ibrm of animal life, from the noblest qua- 
 druped to the most loathsome re[)tile that spawned 
 in Egypt, received a shaieof their insane homage; 
 and tiie most extraordinary feature of the scene 
 was that tlie individual wlio app^-areii to be the 
 director of these foul mysteries, the master of 
 ceremonies, was Jaazaniah, a descendant of that 
 zealous scribe who had gained so much renown 
 •as the principal adviser of the good king Josiah, 
 and whose family had for generations been re- 
 garded as the most illustrious for piety in tns 
 land. The presence of a scion of this venerated 
 house in such a den of impurity, struck the pro* 
 phet as an electric shock, and showed better, than 
 all the other painl'ul spectacles this chamber exhi- 
 bited, to what a fearful extent idolatry had inun^ 
 dated the land. 
 
 It might have been supjinsed impossible foi 
 men to have sunk to a lower depth of superstition 
 than that of imitating the Egyptians in worship- 
 ping the monsters of the Nile, or the vegetable 
 jiroduce of their fields and gardens, had not the 
 prophet been directed to turn yet again, and he 
 would see greater abominations that they did. 
 ' Then he brouglit me to the gate of the Icrd's 
 house, which was towards the north ; and behold 
 there sat women weering for Tammuz (ver. 14). 
 This, the principal deity of the Phoenicians, and 
 who was often called also by tliat jieop.le Adoni, 
 that is. My Lord, became afterwards famous in the 
 Grecian mythology under the well-known name 
 of Adonis ; and the circumstance of his being se- 
 lected for the suljject of their most beautiful fic- 
 tion by .so many of the classic poets, is a sufficient 
 proof of the great popular i.nterest his name and 
 rituil excited among the idolators of the ancient 
 world. It is saicl to have originated in a tragic 
 adventure that befel an intrepid and beaatiful 
 prince of Phcenicia, who was killed while hunting 
 a wild boar, by which that land was infested, 
 and whose untimely death in the cause of his 
 country was bewailed in an annual festival held 
 to commc morate the disastrous event. During 
 the seven ilays that the festival lasted, the PhcB- 
 nicians appeared to be a nation of mourners ; and
 
 CHAMELEON. 
 
 in every town ami villa^'C a fictitious rrprrscnta- 
 tion cfTamiDiiz wiis got u)) tor tlie occasioiu and 
 the whole ijcpiilatiun asseniljlid to jxiur Ibrth 
 their uiilwuiidod soir.-w loi his hapless late, more 
 e3{)ecially at Byl)los, in Syria, where a temple 
 Wixs erected in lioiniir of tliis national deify. 
 A stranj?e imposture was practise<l to influence 
 the public iameiitations. There was on tliis 
 temple a gisjantic statue ot die god, tJie eyes of 
 which were tilled with lead, which, on lire being 
 applieil within, of course melted and fell in big 
 drops to the ground, a signal for the loud wail- 
 ings of the bystandei-s, whose eyes in 8ym})utlietic 
 imitation were dissolved in tears. Conspicuous 
 among I he crowil, on such occasions, a band of 
 mercenary females directeil tiie orgies; and, in 
 confoiinity with an ancient custom of bewailing 
 the dead on anniversaries at ^he doors of house 3 
 (Potter's Grec. Antiq. b. iv. ch. 3), otliers took 
 their station at the gate, witli tlieir faces di- 
 rected nortiuvavd, as the sun was said to have 
 been in that q\iarter of the heavens at the time 
 when Tammuz died. These violent efl'orts in 
 •noumiug were always followed by scenes of 
 the most licentious and revolting revelry, which, 
 though not mentioned, are manifestly implied 
 among the 'greater abominations'' which de- 
 graded tliis other group of idulators. 
 
 Besides the hieroglyphics of E,i*\'pt and the 
 •rgies of Tammuz, tliere was another form of su- 
 perstition still, which in Jerusalem, tlieii almost 
 wholly given to idolatry, had its distinguished 
 patrons. ' Turn thee yet again," said his celestial 
 guide to the propiiet, ' and thou shalt see greater 
 abominations than these" (ver. 16). And he brought 
 him 'unto the imier court of the Lord's house, and 
 behold at tlie door of the femijle of the Lord, be- 
 tween the porch and the altar, were aliont five-and- 
 twenty men, with their backs towards the temple 
 of the Lord, and their faces towaids the east; and 
 t'aey worshipped the sun towards the e<ist.' Perhaps 
 rf all the varieties of superstition which had crept 
 in among the Hebiews in that j eiiod of general 
 ilecline, none displayeil such flagrant dishonour to 
 the God of Israel as this (Clemens Alexandrinus, 
 Strom, vii. p. 520); for, as tiie most holy place 
 was situated at the west end of the Sanctuary, 
 it was impossible for these twenty-five men to 
 j)ay their homage to tlie rising sun without turn- 
 ing thtir l)acks on the consecrated place of the 
 divine jnesence; and accordingly this fourth 
 circle is intioihiced last, as if their emjiloyment 
 formed tlie climax of aliomiiuilions — flie worst 
 and most wofid sign of the times. Could stron^'er 
 ]'roi)fs ue wanted that the Loid had not forsaken 
 Israel, but w.is driven from them? This was the 
 lesson intended, and actually accomplished, by 
 t'le vision ; for while the pro|)het was made aware 
 by this mystic scene of the actual state of things 
 anong his degenerate coinitrymen at home, he 
 sav himself — and instructed the pious circle 
 ar.iund him to see — a ])roof of the long-suffering 
 an 1 the jn>t severity of God in <lefi-i ring to an- 
 swer tlieir fervent and long-conrinue:l prayers for 
 the emaiici])ation of loeir coinitry. — K. J. 
 
 CH.A.MKLEON ap]iears to be a satisfactoiy 
 translation of HTwiS'Jn tiiishemcth, which denotes 
 a small species of lizard, celebrated for thefacidiy 
 il iias of changing the colour of its skin. This 
 iroperty, howeva , has no reference to the substance 
 It may lie placet on, as generally aeseitaJ, but is 
 
 CHAOS. 
 
 411 
 
 s< lely derived from tlie bulk of its respiratory 
 (vgans acting n]Kin a transjwrenl skin, and on tb« 
 lliKid of the animal. Tlie chamrloons form a 
 small genus of Saurians, easily disrin,,'uished by 
 the shagrcened character of the skin, and the five 
 toes on tiie feet, divided differently from those of 
 most other animals, there being, if the exj resuion 
 may lie allowed, two thumlw opjiosed to three 
 lingers. Their eyes are telescopic, move st-jia- 
 r.itely, anil can be directed backwanls or forwards. 
 Cliameleons are slow, inolVensive, and caj)al>le of 
 considerable abstinence from food : whi'-li consist* 
 solely of Hies, caught by tlie rapid proJrusion of a 
 
 217. [Chameleon Africanus.] 
 
 long and viscous tongue. Among them<:elves 
 they are irascilile, and are then lialile to change 
 their colours rapidly : da'k yellow or grey is 
 predominant when they are in a quiescent state, 
 liut, while the emotions are in activity, it jxtsses 
 into green, purple, and even ashy black. Tli8 
 species found in Palestine and all Northern 
 Africa, is the common Chameleon Africnnvi, 
 and is that referred to in Lev. xi. 30, where 
 unclean animals are mentioned. — C. H. S. 
 
 CHAMOIS. [Zemf.u.1 
 
 CHAOS, a term taken from the Greek mytho- 
 logy, according to which Chaos was the first ex- 
 istence and the origin of all subsequent forms of 
 being (Hesiod, Theogon. 11(5; Ovid, MetO' 
 viorph. i. 5). The description which Ovid gives 
 of Chaos if.self, and of the formation of th» world 
 from the chaotic mass, bears .so many str'king re- 
 semblances to the Mosaic account of the creation, 
 that one can scarcely I'ail to regjird it iw having 
 been derived from traditions, the source of which 
 is to be traced to the sacred record. There is, 
 however, this great dill'ereiice between the scrip- 
 tural and the heathen cosmogonies — that the 
 former sets out with the emphatic declaration 
 that the unformed mass was the creation of (iwl ; 
 whilst the latter speaks of it as the already exist- 
 ing materials out of which he formetl the world, 
 or even as itself the cause and author of all 
 things. II", however, heathen philosophers have 
 been indebted to the insjiireil narrative for their 
 most consistent views of the formation of tiie 
 world, on the other hand ('hristinn ]:hiloso])hei» 
 have borrowe<l from them (wi'h \eiy little ailvan- 
 tage, as we think) the term by which the un- 
 formed condition of the world was denoted, and, 
 with the word, have too frequently a.ssociate<l some 
 part of the heatlien idea attacoeil to it. Our pre- 
 sent object is to in(piire what the Chaos was of 
 which Moses speaks (Gen. i. 2). Was it the first 
 form in which matter was created? at«l do tl»f 
 succeeding operations descril>e<l relate to the very 
 l)eginning of material order and animal I'rfe? Ol 
 was it merely a condition preparatory to the r^
 
 412 
 
 CHAOS. 
 
 CIIARGOL. 
 
 organization of (lie world, wliicii liavl alri.id^ h(-tri ation for uiilimitod periods, duvin? wnicfc iw 
 the aboile of living lieiii.^s f — :ii otlu'r woriis, is chari^^es we aie spoakinif of took ])l;ice. Thi* 
 the first verse of tiie inspired record to lie dissoci- ground has, iio\/«ver, been almost coinplcteiy 
 ated from the succeed in.:^, lUid to he un lerstood atiandoned, both liecause tiie account so iiiider. 
 oiily as a declaration of llie iinportanf truth, that stoo<l does not a.;ree with the piiysical pheix*- 
 tae vi?ible uuiver-e was not made from anytuing mena, and been use such an interpretation is, tc 
 alivady existintj (Heb. xi. 3); whilst the confu- say the least, hardly admis.siliie on cxeg-etical 
 sion and daikness which are descriljt.d in the principles. If we keep in mind that the revela- 
 succeeding verse, relate to a state long sul)se- tion of God to man is not intended to teach phy- 
 qiient to the ' beginning,' and were introductory sical science — tiiat it never speaks tlie lauguags 
 to a new oraer of material existence, of which of philosophy, but of appearances — and that it 
 n.aii is the chief and lord "^ Tiie (irst of these opi- tells of these only so far as they relate to tlie hu- 
 mous is not only in accordance with the ancient man race, we obtain a clue by whici) we may lie 
 nutioMs of cliaoi to which we have referred, but is safely guided tlnough these dillic'ulties. We 
 that which would lie naturally maintained, uides5 shall not then wonder that no notice should be 
 cause be shown to the contrary. No one would taken of previous conditions and inha!)ifants oi 
 gratuitously assume a long interval, where it this earth, supjwsing such to luive existed. The 
 must l)e admitted tliere is no intimation of sucti Hist sentence of the inspired record will then be 
 an interval having occurred. Accordingly, most regarded as the majestic declaration of a fact, 
 interj^ireters, who iiave been ignorant of geological wliich the world had lost sight of, but which it 
 phenomena, have at once decided that the ciiaos de -jily concerned men to know. What occurre<l 
 of which Moses speaks was the form in which subsequently, until the earth was to be furnislied 
 matter was first created. Some have even de- for the al)ode of man, is to be gathered not from 
 clared tliat there cannot have been any such in- the written word, but from the memorials en- 
 terval as we have s-poken of (Prof.'Stuart, in Bib. graven on the tablets of the world itself. The 
 Repos. No. xxi., Jan. lS''i6). But, on the other succeeding verse of the Mosaic account then re- 
 hand, the world gives intimations, in the rocks lates to a state of chaos, or confusion, into which 
 which compose itis crust, of various and long-con- the world was thrown immediately before tiie last 
 tiiuied ch inges both of condition and of inhabit- reorganization of it. The connection of the two 
 ants. Those who have carefully examined these sentences by the Hebrew copulative 1 seems to us 
 different forms of being, and have attentively to funiish no serious difficulty. Every attentive 
 Studied the circumstances in which their remains reader knows that this particle is very frequently 
 are now found, have been forced to the convic- used to continue a narrative when the events so 
 tion, that in many cases the rocks have been gra- connected were by no means immediately corise- 
 dually formeil by deposition at the bottom of an cutive. Nor is such a chaos opposed to geologi- 
 ocean, which has lieen successively the haljitation cal phenomena, which plainly tell of ' critical 
 of races differing alike from each other and from periods' and of 'revolutions of organic life' 
 those now existing; that the coeval land likewise (Pliillips's Geology, in Cah. Cycl. vol. ii. p. 264). 
 has had its distinct races of iniiabitants, and that Geologists are not indeed at present (if evei 
 the land and water have changed places many they may be) in a condition to identify the dis- 
 times in the history of the world. It is imjws- ru[)tion and confusion of wliich we sup|X)s<,' 
 sible to do more than barely glanoe at these Moses to speak with any one of these violent 
 geological facts; but it will be seen tiiat they convulsions; tiut that events which might be de- 
 lead to these three conclusions — (1) that the scribed in his language have taken place in the 
 world has existed during some long ])eriod before world's history, over C()nsideral)le portions of its 
 the Mosaic reconl of creation in six days -(2) surface, seems to l)e fully establisiied. Whether 
 tiat, during that period, it was tlie abode of ani- the ciiaos of which we are now speaking was uni- 
 mals ditliering in organization and structure from versal, or was confined to those regions which 
 those now found on its surface — and (3) that it formed the criidle of the hum;ii! race, is a quea- 
 has been exposed to various convulsions and re- tiun on whicli we do not feel it needful to enter, 
 organizations, more or less general. In the face of We do not regard tlie evidence wliich geology 
 tl«ese facts it appe.'u-s impossible to hold the onli- furnishes as complete enough to decide such a 
 narily received opinion that the universe was ere- point, though the latter supposition has be'en 
 ated only just befiue the creation of man; and adopted by Dr. Pye Smith, in his lectures On the 
 the (piestion then is, how are these fads to be Relation between the Holy Scriptures and some 
 reconciled with the Mosaic narrative'? Not by Parts of Geological Science. To these lectures, 
 denying the eviilence of our senses (which is, in as well as to the articles by Pvoft>ssor Hitchcock, 
 truth, a very dangerous mode of upholding the in the Biblical Repository (Nos. 17, 18, 20, and 
 sacred record, though it has been adopted by 22), and to various papei-s which have appeared 
 those who especially claim to themselves the title at different times in the Christian Observer, the 
 of Scriptural Geologists), nor, on the other hand, reader is referred t'nr a fuller discussion of this 
 by treating th« Mosaic account as a mythus, or and kindred questions. — F. W. G. 
 allegorical representation (a mode of expLmation, / . 
 
 which, if ever admissible, ought not to be r°- CHARGOL (?3"^n ; Sept. '©(^lo/taxij; Vul*. 
 sorted to without tlie most pressing necessity), Ophiomachus ; Eng. Vers. J3fie^/e ; found only in 
 but surely by re-jxamiuiug the interjnetation we Lev. xi. 22). This word cannot mean the beetle. 
 have put on the words of Scripture, and by seek- No species of scarabaous was ever used as food by 
 iiig to ascertain wiiet'tier the discrepancy does not tho Jews, or perhaps any other nation. Nor doea 
 arise from oia view oi the narrative. A favourite any known species ansv/er to the generic descrip- 
 au>de of explaining the Mosaic account, a few ticm given in the preceding verse: ' This ye may 
 fvsxi back, was to take the six days of cr«- eatof every winged creeper which goeth upon foui
 
 CHARGOL., 
 
 i^leet); that which hath joints at the ijpjHT part 
 of its ii'tnl ^e'j;f^,. to leap with tlicm upon tlio eaitli' 
 (comp. Niebiilir. Dcscrip. dc l' Arabic, Co|«'n- 
 has^iip, 1773, j). 33). Hence it is phiiii tliat the 
 ohargol is some winded cnvper, ivliich lias at 
 least lour feet, wliicfi leajis with its two hind 
 jointed le?s, and wliich we might e3H)Cct, from the 
 permission, to find actually used as food. This 
 description ii;:^rees exactly with the locust-tribe 
 of insects, which are well known to have been 
 eaten hy the common jjeople in the East Irom the 
 earliest times tv) the ])re.-cnt day. This conclusion 
 is also favoured hy the derivation of the word, 
 which comes from 3"in, to shake, and 7J"), the f >ot, 
 like the English grassliojjper, and French sauterelle. 
 
 The Arabic {J^-^- 's derived from a word sig- 
 nifying a trooji or swarm, and is explained by 
 Goliiis as a species of locusts tcithoiit xoings. 
 It seems, indeed, to be .so geiwrally agreed 
 among the learned that ciiargoi denotes the lo- 
 cust, that the matter of dispute is rather what 
 particular species of locust is intended, or whe- 
 ther the word describes any one of those several 
 stales through wliicli tlie locust passes, in each 
 of which it greatly resenibles the peifect insect, 
 the only dilliience being, that in the larva state 
 it is entirely destitute of wings vlxwX iving-cases, 
 and that in the pupa state it possesses only the 
 rudiments of those members gathered up so as to 
 fonn four little buttons on the shoulders. Swain- 
 inerdam observes that the want of attention to 
 these particulars, in former \yi iters, had led to 
 a very unnecessary multi)jlicafioit of names, Al- 
 drovand, Johnson, Mouiliet, and others liaving 
 described the locust in theae several states under 
 the names bruchi, atelabi, aselli, &c., siipjwbing 
 them to be so many distinct species. Michael is, 
 on the other hand, contends tiuit the seieral 
 words in this passage, DypD, 73""iri, 3311, HSIN, 
 
 denote only the four successive states of locusts, 
 produced by casting oil' their several skins or 
 coverings. 
 
 Their first state, he thinks, is before they 
 have cast olT their first cuticle; but that, since in 
 this state they are so small as not to be readily 
 used for food, Moses enumerates only ihmfotir re- 
 maining states (Supplement, ad Lexicon Hebraic. 
 pt. iii. pp. 0(57 6(59, and 910-912). To this view, 
 however, it is justly objected by Roscniuuller (apud 
 Bochart), that the phrase 'after its kind or spe- 
 cies,' added to each of these terms, is not con- 
 sistent with the various states merely through 
 wiu'ch the locvist passes. Tychsen maintains that 
 the words refer to f )in- ditl'erent specie.'! of locusts, 
 and endeavours to show that H^IX is the gryllus 
 
 (/regrrtritM, Forskalii ; that DJ//3 '* the gryllns 
 erer.snrde a^so apud Ittrselium ; ^1^, the gryllua 
 (jurges de a.isn. f\ grylhm rcrnicivini.t. J.,i]iii. ; 
 and that the 2'n is the gryllus coronatus. Linn, 
 f Tychsen, ('ooimefit. de lx>cv.stis HiM ci.t, sub- 
 joined to D.ai ignacio de Asso y del Rio's, Ah- 
 handlnng cfn rl^n Hcuschrecken xind ihrcn, &c.. 
 8,.~-t(K:k, 17!^7-S). 
 
 In attem])ting to ascertain the particular species 
 uf locust intended by the word ' chargol," great 
 defeience is due to the term adapted by the Se])- 
 "uarint and repeated by .Fei-ome, wiiich is ovi- 
 Unt'y deriveil fron»o<^<s and txaxVt *"'' iuilidtes 
 
 OII.\RGOL. 
 
 413 
 
 a creature tliaf lights with ser|)ert«. Ina]ipli<-:ib1« 
 as such a descrijition Tnay seem to i)e to tl>e habiti 
 of any known species of locust, it may, u^ver 
 
 SI 8. [Truxalis nasiitiis.] 
 
 thele^s, help to identify the species of wliich w 
 are in search. Now the ancients have certainly 
 referred to the notion of locusts lighting with .<<er« 
 pents (Aristot. Hist. Atiim. ix. 9; Plin. Hisi. 
 Nat. xi. 35). Although this notion is justly 
 discarded by Cuvier (Grandsagiie's edition of 
 Pliny, Paiisiis, 1^29, p. 4.')1, notel, yet it may 
 serve to account \'cix the application of the term 
 o<pioixa,x-ns to a species of locust. For 'this word 
 instantly suggests a reference to the ichneitmoTt.^ 
 the celebrated destroyer of serjents ami othei 
 vermin ; aiid it is remarkable that liesychius, in 
 the second century, applies the word bpwu.ix(-i 
 both to the icJmetimnn, and a species of locus* 
 having no wings. If then any S])eries of locust 
 caj) be adduced whose habits resemble those of 
 the iclmcHvion, may not this resemblance ac- 
 count for the name, qxtasi the ichneumon (locust) ; 
 just as the wliole genus of ijisects called IchMen- 
 monidiE were so denominated because of the ,w/p- 
 posed analogy lietween their services and thus^ 
 of tlie Egyptian ichneumon? and might not this 
 name, given to that species of locust at a very 
 early ]ieriod, have atYerwards originated the er- 
 roneous notion referred to i)y Aristotle and Pliny t 
 Now, there is one k ind nf locus-ts. the genus tr?iralia 
 (fierce or cruel), inhabiting Africa and China, and 
 comprehending many s])ecies, which hunts and 
 preys uptm insects. It is also called the truxalis 
 na-sutus, or long-nosed. May not, then, this winged, 
 lea])ing, insectivorous locust, and its various 
 species, be ' the chargol, after its kind,' and the 
 o^iOjUctx''?^ of the Septuagint ? or might the name 
 have arisen from the similarity of shape and 
 colour, which is striking, betwe<>n the tiuxalis 
 nasutus and the ichneumon; just as the locu«t 
 generally, is, at this time, called caralette by the 
 Italians, on accoimt of its resembhuice in shape 
 to the horse? We kno>V that the ancients in- 
 dulged in tracing th^ many resemblances of the 
 several parts of locusts to those of other animals 
 (Bochart. Ificroz. |it. ii. lib. iv. c. •}, p. -175). 
 It may be observed, that it is no objection to the 
 former and more jirobable sujjposilion, that a 
 creature which lives njKH) other insects should I)* 
 allowed as food to tlie Jews, contrary to the general 
 principle of the Mosaic law in reguid tobirilsand 
 (juadrupeds, this having l)een unquestionalily the 
 case with reganl to many sjiecies of fishes coming 
 within the regulation of having 'fins and scales,' 
 and knov.'n to ex-st in Palestine at the present 
 time- as the ]ierch, carp, b.irbel, .%c. (Kiftos 
 Phijsicril Hislorti of I'alr.ifinr, article FisnK«\ 
 The fa<-t that tiie Chargol is never mailethe mean* 
 of tl>« divine chastisements (fur wiiich •>tir{io*e ■
 
 414 
 
 CHARIOTS. 
 
 locuct preying upon insects could scarcely be 
 uaed), concurs, at kust, with the fuiegoing specu- 
 lation— J. Y. D. 
 
 CHARIOT RACES. [Games.] 
 
 CHARIOTS. The Scriptures employ diffe- 
 rent woiils to denote carriages of dilVerent sorts, 
 but it is not in every case easy to distinguish 
 the kind of vehicle which these words severally 
 denote. We are now, however, Ihrougli tiie dis- 
 covery of ancient sculptures and paintings, in 
 possession of such infoimation respecting the cha- 
 riots of Egypt, Assyria, Bal»ylon, and Persia, as 
 gives advantages in the discussion of this subject 
 which were not jwssessed by earlier writers. 
 The chariots of these nations are, in fact, men- 
 tioned in th■^ Scriptures ; and by connecting the 
 known wt,,.. Jie unknown, we may arrive at more 
 determinate conclusions than lia\'e hitherto been 
 attainable. 
 
 The first chiwiots mentioned in Scripture 
 &re those of the Egyptians ; and by close atten- 
 tion to the various nutices which occur respect- 
 ing them, we may be able to discriminate the 
 dillerent kinds which were in use among that 
 people. 
 
 The earliest notice on this head occurs in 
 Gen. xli. 43, where the king of Egypt honours 
 Joseph by commanding that he siiould ride in 
 the second of the royal chariots. Tliis was 
 doubtless a siate-chariut, and the state-chariots 
 of the Egyptians do not appear to have been 
 diilisient Irom their war-chariots, the splendid 
 military ap])ointments of wliich rendered them 
 fit for purposes of royal jx)mp. Tliis view of the 
 matter is cuntirmed I y pur finding that, although 
 ri>e same word ( H^D'ID mci-cabali) is again used 
 for chaiiots of state in Gen. xlvi. 29, I Sam. viii. 
 11, 2 Sam. XV. 1, it uniloulitedly denotes a 
 war-chaiiot in Exod. xv. 4, Joel ii. ■'). In Isa. 
 :i. 7, the same word appears to comprehend 
 cliariots of eveiy kind which were found in cities. 
 This niay be accounted for by the fact that cha- 
 riots anciently in the east were used almost 
 entirely for purposes of stale or of war, being 
 very rarely en^ployed by private persons. We 
 also observe tliat wliere private cariiages were 
 known, as in Egypt, they we»3 of the same 
 sliaije as those u>ed in war, and only differed 
 from them by having less complete military 
 accoutrements, although even in these tlie case 
 for ajiows is not wanting. One of the most 
 mteresting of the Egyptian paintings rejjresents a 
 jjCKon of quality arriving late at an entertaiu- 
 tnent in his curricle, drawn (like all the Egyptian 
 cLaiifcts) by two horses. He is attended by a 
 
 819. [Egyptian Curricle.] 
 
 number of nmning footmen, one of whom hastens 
 forward to knock at ibe door of the house, another 
 sdvuices *4 take tii« reins, a th rd bears a stool 
 
 CHARIOTS. 
 
 to assist his master in alighting, and most of theta 
 carry their sandals in their hands that they may 
 run with the more ease. This conveys a livel/ 
 illustration of such passages as I Sam. viii. 11 , 
 2 Sam. XV. 1. The principal distinction between 
 these private chariots and those actually used in 
 war was, as appears from the monuments, tliat in 
 the former the party drove himself, whereas in wax 
 the chariot, as among the Greeks, often contained 
 a second person to drive it, that the warrior might 
 be at liberty to employ his weapons with the more 
 ellect. But this was not always the case ; for in 
 the Egj'ptian monuments we ol'ten see even royal 
 personages alone in their chariots, warring fu- 
 riously, with the reins lashed round their waist 
 (No. 223). So it appears that Jeiiu (who cer- 
 tainly rode in a war-chariot) drove himself; for 
 his peculiar style of driving was recognised at a 
 considerable distance (2 Kings ix. 20). 
 
 Tiiere has beeir some speculation as to any dif- 
 ference of meaning between the jjreceding word 
 mercabah (HSSID), and mercab (33"IJ3). In 
 1 Kings v. 6, the latter obviously means chariots, 
 taken collectively. But m Lev. xv. 9 (rendered 
 in the Auth. Vers. ' saddle') and Cant. iii. 10 (ren- 
 dered ' the bottom ') it has been understood by 
 some to denote the seat of a ciiariot. To this view 
 there is the fatal objection that ancient chariots 
 had no seats. It ajjpears to denote the seat of a 
 litter (ftie only vehicle that had a seal), and its 
 name mercab may have been derived from the 
 general resemblance of the body of a litter (dis- 
 tinguished from the canojjy, &c.) both in form 
 and use, to that of a chariot. 
 
 Another word, 331 receh, from the same root, 
 appears to signily a carriage of any kind, and is 
 especially used with reference to large bodies of 
 carriages, and lience most generally of war-cha- 
 riots; for chariots were anciently seldom seen to- 
 gether in large numbers except when employed in 
 war. It is applied indillerently to the war-chariot» 
 of any nation, as to those of the Egyptians (Exod. 
 xiv.9), theCanaanites(Josh. xvii. IS; Judg. i. 19 
 iv. 3), the Hebrews (2 Kings ix. 21, 24 ; x. 16), 
 the Syrians (2 Kings v. 9), the Persians (Isa. xxi. 
 7, 9). By a comjiarison of these references with 
 those passages in which mcrcahah occurs, we find 
 the two words applied >vith so little distinction to 
 all sorts of carriages as to suggest that they were 
 used indillierently and interchangeably, just as we 
 should say either ' carriage ' or ' coach,' — neither of 
 which is speciKc, and l)oth of whichditler morefrom 
 each other than the Hebrew receh and mercabah 
 — to denote tlie same vehicle. Indeed there are 
 ])assages in which both words are manifestly aj>- 
 plied to the same identical vehicle, sa in 2 Kings 
 V. 9, 21, and 1 Kings xxii. 35, 38 ; where no reader 
 would suspect a change of vehicles, which some 
 have endeavoured to establish in order to make out 
 a dii'erence Iretween the rcceb and mercabah. Mr. 
 Charles Taylor, in one of the fragments appended 
 to his edition of Calmet, indulges in much in- 
 genious s|)eculation on this subject, and labouis 
 to make out that while i.ie mercabah denoted a 
 chariot of state drawn by four horses, the receh 
 was a humbler chariot drawn by two horses, and 
 sometimes a litter carried by two horses. To this 
 it may be sufficient to answer that chariots of 
 state were not drawn by four horses in the East, 
 that no instance of such a practice can be pro- 
 duced ; and that the l)est Hebrew scholars of tlie
 
 CHARIOTS. 
 
 CHARIOTS OF WAR. 
 
 llfl 
 
 •OTitT.ent fieiiy that it can be proved that reccb 
 ■ny where denotes a litter, for which indeed there 
 ia a ditVerent word [LiTTEit]. 
 
 There is another word .which is gemetimes 
 rendered by cliariot, viz. TO'V 'cfjafc/t ; but as 
 we have elsewhere [CautJ sliowi that it denotes 
 a planshutn, cart, or wajj;gon, drawn by oxen, we 
 need not here return to the sul ject. It is indeed 
 alleged that in Ps. xlvi. 9 the word manileslly 
 imports a chariot of war. The plural 'a<jaloth, 
 is there use<l, and the supposition that it means 
 a chariot of war proceeds on tiie assutnjition that 
 only chariots were used in war. But this is not 
 tlie fact, for in the scer.es of Eufvptian warfare 
 we find carts, drawn by oxen, brougiit into tiie 
 field by certain noniade nations, and in which 
 they endeavour to escape from their ])ursuers. 
 
 \n the prophecy of Nahiim, who was of (he 
 first captivity, and resident (if not born) at El- 
 kosh in Assyria, there is much allusion to chariots, 
 suggested doubtless by their, frvtpiency before his 
 eyes in ttie streets of Nineveh and throufjhout tlie 
 Assyrian emijire. J.n fact, when propliesying the 
 iownfall of Nineveh, he gives a jjarticuiar and 
 animated description of their action in the streets 
 of the great city : — 
 
 Tlie shield of his mighties is made red : 
 The valiant men are clothed in scarlet : 
 The chariots ate as the fire of lamps, in tlie 
 
 day when lie pre]iaretl) lliem. 
 And the Iwisetncn spiead fear 
 In the stieets, the ciiariots madden : 
 They run to and fro in tlie bmad peaces : 
 Their appearance is as lamps, tney run 
 
 as lightning. Nahuni ii. 3, 4. 
 
 Tliese allusions to the horsemen and chariots of 
 Nineveh give mirch interest to one of the very 
 recent discoveries of M Botta, on the site of that 
 very ancient city. In excavatnig a certain mass 
 of building, which a])pears to have formed part of 
 some mucii more extensive pile, he discoveped 
 various inscriptions and sculjitures, whicli seem 
 to show tliat the work was earlier than the age of 
 Cyrus, and may be referred to the times of tiie 
 Assyrian Empire. In one ))lace is a bas-relief, 
 representing a horseman at full gallop. Another 
 part of the same wall represents two horsemen 
 galloping side by sitle, with anotlier follow- 
 ing at a sliort distance. Furtlier on, two armed 
 horsemen are visible, one following tiie other at 
 full gallop. Tlie movement oi' tlie horses is very 
 animated ; and both men and iiorses show traces 
 of colour. In another place are two horsemen walk- 
 ing their horses side hy side. Tiie only horse- 
 man visible lias a sword ; a quiver and l)OW are 
 over his siioalder, and his legs are clotlied in 
 mail. These figures are very interesting, not 
 only in counect-on with ttie prophecy wliich so 
 distinctly mentions the ' horsemen' of Nineveh, 
 but because they are, in fact, the only mounted 
 figures which occur among the more ancient 
 monuments of Asia. None have been found at 
 Babylon, none at Perseiwlis ; and among the 
 nnmercus scirptures and paintings of Egypt, only 
 one solitary unarmed figure, w':io seems to have 
 crossed the back of the animal l>y accident. But 
 the matter of greatest interest is the discovery of 
 a curious bas-relief, representing a ctiariot drawn 
 by two horses, and containing three ^lersons. The 
 princijia] of tlie=« ■^.pp'ait to b« a bearded man. 
 
 lifting his right arm, and holding in his Irft hand 
 a how. He wears a tiara paint'-d red \' the valiant 
 men are clothe<l in scarht'); l>ehind him is j 
 beardless slave, carrying a frin^jed ]iiir.isol, and a' 
 his left is the charioteer holding the reins and 
 the whip. The principal |*rson and the rhariote«'i 
 v/ear ear-rings. Tlie chaiiot-wheels have eight 
 spokes : the chariot itself has been covered with 
 carving, now im]X)ssib1e to l)e made out. Tlie 
 most noticeable tiling is a bench, which seems \o 
 be attached to the chariot by a double belt, and 
 wliicH M. Biitta supjtoses to iiave been a metal 
 rod, intended to secure tliv solidity of the whole. 
 The horses are admirably drawn, and allbrd in- 
 dications of pure Araiiian blood. Their harness it 
 very rich, and still liears evident traces of colouring, 
 among which lilue and red only can lie liis- 
 tiiiguisheil, the re.>-f liaving turned bl.uk. Be- 
 hind the chariot rides a cavalier, liearing a lance, 
 with a sword at his belt, and a quiver over liit 
 shoulder (Athenanim, July *9, 18^3). 
 
 220. [I'ersian Chaiiot.] 
 
 From this descrijition it would appear that the 
 Assyrian chariots were consideralily dllferent 
 from those of tlie ancient Egyptians, and e\ en 
 from (hose of the Persians, with whicii we are 
 acquainted through the Persejiolitan sculpture 
 (now in the British Museum), here copied 
 (No. 220), and whicli are of a much heavier 
 build than those of Egypt, as jierhajis the more 
 mountainous character of the country required. 
 The chariots of Assyria woultl seem in some 
 respects to have occupicii a middle place lietwem 
 the other two. Among other jioints we observe that 
 the spokes of the wlieels are never moi-e than six 
 in the Egyptian chariot, while in the Assyrian 
 
 221. fnabyloiilan Oiariot.] 
 
 (here are eight, and in the Persian eleven. Not 
 very dilVerent from the Peisian chariot is one rejirc- 
 sented on a coin found at Babylon (No. 221 ) : 
 but the spokes of the wheels are eight, as in flie 
 Assyrian chariot. This coin has given occasion 
 to much unsound sjieculation in ihe attempt to 
 connect it with the history of Daniel. 
 
 CHARIOTS OF WAR. The Egyptians 
 used horses in the equipment of an aimed foic*
 
 416 
 
 CHARIOTS OF WAR. 
 
 b«-fi)re Jacob and liis sons h;id settled in Goshen ; 
 they liacl chariots of war, and ninimled asses and 
 mules, and therefore couhl not be ignorant of the 
 art of ridinir; but fir ages after that jjoriod Arab 
 nations rode on the bare back, and guided the ani- 
 mals with a wanil. Others, and ])n)bai)ly tlie shep 
 herd invader*, noosed a single rope in asli{)-knot, 
 round the lower jaw, forming an impcrlect biidle, 
 with only one rein; a juaclice still in vogue 
 among the Ikdouins Thus cavalry were but little 
 formidablecoinpared with chariots, until acom])Iete 
 oommaiid over the horse was obtained by tlie disco- 
 very of a true bridle. This seems to have been first 
 introduce<l liy cluiiiot-driver-j, and there are figures 
 of well-consfructed luirness, reins, and mouth- 
 pieoes, in very early Egyptian monuments, repre- 
 senting belli native and foieiyn chariots of war. 
 These dilVered litlle from each other, both consist- 
 ing of a light pole, suspended l)efween and on the 
 withers of a pair of horses, tlie alter end resting on a 
 light axle-tree, with two low wheels. Upon the axle 
 
 CHARTUMMIM. 
 
 in the time of the IMaccabees (2 Mac. \'n\. ft) 
 and in Britain when Cajsar invaded tlie isltOiL'] 
 
 222. [Egyptian War Chariot.] 
 
 Blood a light frame, open behind and floored for 
 the warrior and his charioteer, who both stood 
 within : on the sides of the frame hung the war- 
 bow, in its case; a large quiver with arrows, and 
 darts had commonly a particular sheatii. In 
 Persia, the chariots, elevated up(in wheels of con- 
 uiderable diameter, had four horses alireast; and, 
 in early ages, there were occasionally hooks or 
 scythes attached to the axles. In lighting from 
 chariots great dexterity was shown I'v the warrior, 
 not only in bandlitig his weaptms, but also in 
 stepping out upon the pole to the hoi ses' sliouldeis, 
 in order liie better to attain his enemies, and the 
 charioteer was an important person, sometimes 
 e<iual in rank to the warrior himself. Both the 
 kingdoms of Jmiah and Israel had \var-chariot.«, 
 and, from flie case of king Josiali at the battle of 
 Megiddo, it is clear they had also fi-avelling- 
 veliicles, for being wo:!nded he quitted Ids (ightirig- 
 •Jiariot., a;i<l in a second, evidently more commo- 
 dious, he was brought to Jerusalem (""iChron. xxxv. 
 %i^ Chariots of war a)ntlnued to be used in Svria 
 
 223. [Egyptian War Chariot.] 
 
 but it would lead us beyond our proper liinits \i 
 we were to expatiate on the Biga and Quadriga, 
 the Essedum, Rheiia, and Covinus of the ancients. 
 The subject Ijelongs more jrroperly tw a dictionary 
 of classical antiquities. — C. H. S. 
 
 CHARITY. The Greek word a-yrfn-Tj, fre- 
 quently thus rendered in the Authorized Version oi 
 the New Testament (e. gf. 1 Cor. xiii. thronghont"), 
 in that which is more usually translated 'love' in 
 the same version (e. g. John xv. throughout). 
 Tlie tiiinslation of the word by ' love " is the 
 more proper, seeing that * charity " has acquired 
 a signification in our language which limits it to 
 overt acts of beneficence, 'kya-n-r) denotes that 
 kindly state of mind or feeling whieh renders a 
 person full of such goodwill or affectionate regard 
 towards others as is always ready to evince itself 
 in word or action. In short, it describes that state 
 of feeling wiiich the apostle enjoined the Romans 
 (xii. 10) to enterta'n : ' Be ye kindhj affectioned 
 one to another.' This extended meaning of the 
 word ex))lains the pre-eminence which the apostle 
 assigns to the virtue whicli it imjilles over every 
 otlier Christian grace (1 Cor. xiii.). 
 
 CHARMING OF SERPENTS. [Adder.] 
 
 CHARTUINIMIM (D''??13"in ; Sept. iiraoi^ol, 
 (papuaKol). Tliis is the title rendered 'magicians' 
 in our \ersion, applied to the ' wise men' of Egypt 
 CGen.xli. 8.22; Exod.vii. 11 ; viii. 7, IR, 19; ix. 
 1 1), and of Babylon (Dan. i. 20 ; ii. 2). The word 
 'magicians' is not in either case properly applied, 
 as the magi belonged to Persia, rather than lo 
 Balrylon or Egypt; and should be altogether 
 avoided in such application, seeing that it has 
 acquired a seiise ditl'erent from that which it once 
 bore. The Hebrew word properly denotes ' wise 
 men,' as they called themselves and were called by 
 others ; but, as we should call them, ' men emineni 
 in learning and science,' their exclusive j^ossessioL 
 of which in their several countries enabled them 
 occasionally to produce cfl'ects wliich were ac 
 counted supernatural by the peojile. Pythagoras, 
 who was acquainted with Egypt and the East, and 
 who was not unaware of the luifalliomable deptlis 
 of ignorance which lie under tlie highest attainable 
 conditions of human knowled^^e, thought the mo 
 dest title of pliihisopher ((pi\6<T0(t'0s), ' lover ot 
 wisdom,' more becoming, and accordingly hf 
 brought it into irse ; but that of ' wise men t^iH 
 retained its hold in the East.
 
 CHARUL. 
 
 Greseiiius concludes that the Egy])(i:in Charlum- 
 muin were tliose of llit' Kf,'yj)iiaii piiesls who hail 
 charge ol" tlie sacred records. His eiyniological 
 n»i>suris may lie se<»ii in ids Thesaurus. There ran 
 be little doubt tljst tliey belonged to some biaiieh 
 of the priesthoo(\, seeing that the more recondite 
 departments of learning and science were culti- 
 vated exclusively in that poweiful caste. 
 
 CHARUL (b-IID) occurs in tliree places in 
 Scripture, and in them all is translated ' nettles^ in 
 the Auth. Version. Thus in Prov. xxiv. 3f), 31, it 
 is written, ' I went by thelield of the slothful, &c., 
 and, lo, it was all groan over with thorns, and net- 
 tles fcAant/mw) liad covered tlie face thereof.' So 
 in Job XXX. 7 it is stated that he was insulted 
 by the children of those whom he would formerly 
 have disdained to employ, and who were so ab- 
 ject and destitute that 'among the bushes they 
 brayed; under the nettles they were gathered 
 together;' and in Zeph. ii. 9, ' Surely Moab shall 
 be as Sodom, and the ehildien of Ammon as 
 Gromorrah, e\en tlie breeding of nettles, and salt- 
 pita, and a perjietual desolation. ' Considerable 
 difficulty has been experienced in determining 
 the plant which is alluded to in the above pas- 
 sages, which, as Celsius says, ' sacris scriptoiibus 
 parcius memovata, et notis paucissimis (b scripta, 
 ac distincta.' The majority of translat.ii-s and 
 commentators have thought that some thorny or 
 prickly plant, or a nettle, is intended l)y thecharul, 
 on account of the otlier ]ilants which are men- 
 tioned along with it. Hence brambles, the wild 
 plum, and thistles, have been severally selected; 
 but nettles ha\e had the greatest iniinljer of suj)- 
 •jorters. Celsius however prefers the Zizyphus Pa- 
 liurus, or the plant which has been called Ciirist's 
 thorn, as that best suited to the several contexts. 
 
 Of all the.^e determinations, however, it must 
 be observed that they amount to nothing more 
 than conjectures, because, as Roieiniiiiller says, 
 the cognate languages have not this word, and 
 also because 'the Greek translators of Alexandria 
 in the first and last of these three places (the only 
 places in which the Hebrew word occurs) entirely 
 deviate from our present Hebrew text ; but in the 
 jMissage of Job they tiauslate charul by wild 
 &kriO)s.^ To U3 it does not appear, from the im]>ort 
 of the above passages, tliat a thi)rny plant is neces- 
 sarily meant by llie term under leview. All that 
 is im])lied is that neglected fields, that i.s, fields 
 in cultivation which are neglected, will become 
 covered with tcecds, and that these sliould be of a 
 kind such as idlers, as in the pa -sage of Job, 
 might take shelter under, or lie ilown among. 
 This passage, indeed, seems to piecluile any 
 thorny plant or netth', as no one would volui»- 
 tarily resort to such a situation ; and one of the 
 commentators, as quoted by Celsius (ii. j). 168), 
 apy)ears to have been of the same ojiinion ; 'Bar 
 Bahlul apud Ca.5telltun pisa vcl cicerculas expii- 
 cat :' that is, he considers /^ease, or rather vetcfiey, 
 to be intended. Moreover, it is worthy of remark, 
 that tliere is a word in a cognate language, the Ara- 
 bic, which isiiot very dissimilar (lorncharulvr kha- 
 >'>«2,aiid which is aiplieii to plants apparently quite 
 
 suitable to all theabf>ve na.ssau-es. The word /)<>•(>. 
 
 k\ardi»l is ijijilied in all old Arabic works, as 
 ■well as at the ))iesei,t day, to dillercnt s])ecies of 
 Bustard, ait i also to uh>; lis v.liich are employed 
 
 CHARUL. 
 
 4)7 
 
 for the Rime jiurposes as mustard (as we how to 
 be able to show in the artit;le Sin.\i>i\ imd it isnol 
 very unlike the khurul or c/iarul of Srrijitine. In 
 fact, they do not dill'er more than inuny wonis whic4 
 are (-oiisidered to have lieen originally the sums. 
 Some of the wild kinds of mustard are well 
 known to spring i\\i in corn fields, atid to be lli« 
 most troui'l.'SiJtne of all the weeds with which lh« 
 liusbaiidiuan has to (h-al : one of these, inileed, «t- 
 tiajjts arceiisis, is well known to Ix-, and is sjierially 
 meiiliuned l)y a modrrn b(itaiiical auihiir,Sir Jamea 
 Smith, us abundant in com-lields, where it is a very 
 troidilesome weed, and also in waste ground, 
 when newly disturbed. So also, as old a writer 
 as Gerarde. in bis Iferbitl, says, ' There be fliree 
 sorts of wild tuiiicp? ; one our common rape, which 
 beareth the seed whereof is made raj) '-oil, and 
 feedieth singing birds : the other, the common eni- 
 my to come, which we call charlock.' He likewise 
 mentions that this is also called carlock, c/iadlock 
 and kudtoclt, words which it is cui ions to observe for 
 their rt^semblaiice to khardul. k/iaiiil, or charul, 
 antl which are a]iplied in our country to' this 
 wild kind of mustard, as khaidul is to the species 
 of mustard indigenous in dillerent paits of Asia. 
 That some of these are found in Syria and Pales- 
 tine is well known, as Russel mentions the alrove 
 sinnpis arvensis, or charlock, as common in the 
 neighbourhood of Aleppo, and, in (act, it is one of 
 the most widely dill'used of the sjiecies. Decan- 
 dolle, in his Si/sl. Aatiirnl. ii. ji. 6).5. describes 
 it as 'Habitat arvis, vineis, agris Furopa; inter- 
 dum nimis copiosa, a Lusitania ad Petronoiim, 
 a Sicilia ad Daniam, ab Anglia ad Tauriam.' 
 
 
 
 224. [Sinapia Orientalis.] 
 
 
 '^ 
 
 Irby and If-m.'les moreover state, that in (heV 
 journey Un-w liysan to .\dJHloiui they met with tV 
 mustard phmt growing ivild. and as high as l.'V 
 hor.ies' heads. In fact, 8>> l.irge do some of/ 
 siH'cici gioiv in, jh|;j^e c^:»ujitj:ics, t'.iai one of 
 
 2 ^
 
 41S 
 
 CHASIL. 
 
 has b«Ti snjitjost'd to be (he nustanl tree alluded 
 f« by our Saviour. .S. arveiiaij beiiit; so widely dif- 
 fused is probulily also found in Palestine, though 
 this Ciin only be determined by a good botanist on 
 the sjiot, 01- by a comparison of genuine specimens. 
 But there is another specii s, the S. orienia/is, which 
 is connnon in corn-iields in Syria, and soulli 
 and middle Europe, and which ran scarcely be 
 distinguished Jroni S. arvemis. Eiiher of these 
 will suit the above passages, and as tlie name 
 i» not very dissimilar, we are of opinion that it is 
 better entitled to l>e tbe charul of Scripture than 
 any other plant tliaf has hitherto been adduced. 
 It would be tiio tj«t tti spring up in a carelessly 
 cultivated field, and choke tbe neglected com, 
 wiule it v>'ould suon cover deserted fields, and 
 might readily be resjrted to for shelter from a hot 
 wind, or even fron! tla; rays of the sun, when 
 growing so lai'ge ;i3 is described by some of the 
 travellers in t!ie Holy Land. — J. F. R. 
 CHASE. [IiUNTiNO.J 
 
 CHASIL (7*pn; Sqjt. ^poZxos; Vulg. 
 bruchiis ; Eng. Vers, caterpillar) occurs in He- 
 brew, 1 Kings viii. 37; 2 Chron. vi. 28; Ps. 
 Ixxviii 4(>; Isa. xxxiii. 4; Joel i. 4; ii. 25. 
 
 Ill the Sept. Lev. xi. 22; .3 Kings viii. 37 ; 
 2 Chion. vi. 2S ; Ps. civ. 34 ; Joel i. 4 ; ii. 25 ; 
 Amos vii. 1 ; Nahum iii. 15, Iti. 
 
 In the J'tdr/. Lev. xi. 22; 2 Chron. vi. 2H ; 
 Ps. civ. 31 ; Isa. xxxiii. 4; Jer. Ii. 14; Joel i. 
 4; Nahuin iii. 15,16. 
 
 In ihe,lM//i. Vers. 1 Kings viii. 37 ; 2 Chron. 
 vi. 2S ; Ps. Ixxviii. 46: cv. 34 ; I.sa. xxxiii. 4; 
 Jer. Ii. 11, 27; Joel i. 4; ii. 25. 
 
 Tlie English word caterpillar belongs strictly to 
 the larva- of the genuslepidoptera, and more especi- 
 ally to the larvae of a section of it, the Pajnlionidce. 
 
 It is, however, far from provable that the ?^Dn 
 is any species of caterpillar. The root PDH, from 
 which it is deriveil, signifies to 'consume" or 'de- 
 vour,' and it is especially used todenote the ravages 
 of the foci/si; (Deut. xxviii. 3S, n3~lt^n l^'pOH'). 
 The Araliic and Syriac cognates also sigiiiJ'y to 
 consume. Tlie woid ^podxos, by whicli it is fre- 
 quently retiilered in tiie Septuagint, from ^picrKw, 
 I eat uj), conveys also the idea of lavenousness. 
 All these names indicate a cteature whose chief 
 characteristic is vorai^ity, an<l which also attaches 
 to all the sjjecie.s of locusts. The ancients, in- 
 deetl, concur in referring the word to the locust 
 tribe of insects, but are not agreed whether it sig- 
 nifies any particular species of locust, or is the 
 name tor any of those states or transformations 
 through which the locust passes fiom die egg to 
 ♦.he ])erfect insect. The L«/m Fathers take it to 
 mean the larva of the locust, and the Greek un- 
 derstand it as the name of an adult locust. The 
 Latins give the name bruchus to the young locust 
 before i.t has wings, call it attelabus when it begins 
 *o (ly, aud locnsta when it is fully able to fly. 
 Thus Jerome, in his Comm. on Nahiim, c. iii. 
 ' Biiichus nihil alind faciat, nisi semjier in terra 
 sit, e* ibsqne alis cibo et ventri serviat ; attelabus 
 autfcin saltem modicas assumat alas, et, cum in 
 altum volare no i possit, tamen de terra exsilire 
 notatur. et tandem perveniens in loctistam volitat' 
 And again, ' At elabus quem significantius com- 
 messorem interpietatus e.st Aquila, parva locusta 
 est, ialer locusiam et bruchum, et modicis pennis 
 
 CHASIL. 
 
 repfans, pofius qnam volans semjierque snbsilienA ' 
 .\.ugustine also, on Ps. civ., Siiys ' Bruciua est 
 locusta; yiciiw ; una pla^a est locu.siae et bruch'^ 
 quoniam altera est jiaiens, et alter est foetus.' 
 The same opinion is maintai.ied by Gregwius 
 ^in Jobiim Vii^. xxxiii. c. 17.' These stiiti'menta 
 of Jerome, and the other Latins, are very remark- 
 able, since the Vulgate, in Na.huir» iii. 16, read» 
 Bruchus expausus est et avolavit, nTu\Jiie» awai/ ; 
 and the Septuagint, also, in tlie same place, reads 
 fipovxos Sipfirjcre Koi e^eTreraffdr]^ and wlvat is still 
 more lemarliable, Jerome himself. Lev. xi. 22, 
 puts the bruchus among the volucves. It is curi- 
 ous to see the Greek fathers iiscribing winffs and 
 the power of ^^iV/AMo the bruclrus, in t/icir com- 
 ments on the same passages. Thus Gyril npon 
 Nabum iii. : 4>aal'}ap, 07i,Trtirr(,vffris X'^^^V^} 'f«« 
 veTu>y Karapriyyvufji^viav abpavrjs en irrijiyiv & 
 0povx<fs, KaTaSeSevixtuwu a'jT!p tUv miptmy. And 
 Theodoret upon the .same ]'assage : ttjs rj\iaKV3 
 irposfiaWmff-ris cmrlvos aylcrraTcu nal ■jreravvvai 
 yk -mfpu, Kol els erepoy p.£TaPaiyei TOTfoy. The 
 same writer on Amos vii. 1 plainly distinguishes 
 the bruchus from the yoimff of the locust. 'Eiri-yo- 
 yrjf&eaKpiScvf, he observes, (Kah7)eP€ rhv'Ao (rvptof, 
 Ppovxoy Sf rhu Ba0u\wviov. Tlie 8p])t«agitit also 
 in Lev. xi. 22, seems to tii-stiikguish the Ijiuchus 
 and jV,? to. ouota, ' and its kind," from tl>e anpis, or 
 common locust, aud its ra o/xoia as diJl'eiing not 
 in age but in species. Ilieoiihiastus also, Tlepi rwy 
 aOpucL'y (paivofxivwv i,u>o>v says, xoAf^ai fxiv oiiu ai 
 anpiSc;, vaAsTrwTfpoj S( ol o-TTeKe^oi, Kal -rodritiv 
 p.a.'\i<jTa om KaXoxiat ^poiiKODS {^povxovs). The 
 testimony of Hesychius is very clear : BpoC- 
 Koi aKpiSccv elSos "looves- Kvirptot 5e ttjv ^(.Vij/jav 
 aKpiSo,, PpovKav. Tapaprtvoi 5e, 'Art\i^i>v, knpoi, 
 'Apoupalay /j.di'Tiy. Tlie inconsistency of Jerome s 
 statements, and the contrariety both of his notions 
 on the subject and of the other Latins to those o! 
 tlie Greeks, may lie owing to the circumstance 
 tliat in his time the use of tlie words in question 
 might have become arbitrary, or loose and uncer- 
 tain. Even Pliny calls the attelabi, minimae lo- 
 custarum «j«e^e«>iM (Xat. lUst. xxix. 4, 20 j. 
 
 Thus Jerome translates p'DH, in 1 Kiiiga viii. 37, 
 by ruliigo; nor does file Sep'oagiiit observe strict 
 iinilbrinity ; for, in P.s. Ixxviii. 46, it has 
 ipvai^T) and in Is. xxxiii. 4, aKpiSes. 
 
 Tlie superior antiquity lisnvever of the Septua 
 gint entitles its opinion to preference, and, in the 
 jiassages already (juoteil, it ascrdies./f/r/Ai to the 
 Ppovxos, and speaks of it as a distinct species; 
 and in the former particular es|)ecially, it is diffi- 
 cult to suspect it of an egregiorjs error. The 
 statement of Aristotle is also worthy of i.otice, who 
 speaks of the attelabos as a mature insect, for 
 he refers to its parturition and eggs (^ Hist. An. 
 V. 29). 
 
 The arguments and speculations of ttie most 
 eminent modern writers may be seen in Bochart, 
 Hierozo. ; Rosenmiiller, vol. iii. p. 256, sqq. Lips. 
 1793-6. Upon tiiose arguments and speculations, 
 the learned editor gives an opinion, which appears 
 to us the best that can be formed ; it is this, tiiat 
 the Hel)rew word does mean a locust, but of what 
 species it is impossible to determine. One of his 
 observations we cannot forbear to quote, namelyi 
 that in Ps. Ixxviii. 46, the 7*011 is jiarallel t» 
 rt31N, the most certain name lor the locust ; and 
 that in Isa. xxxiii. 4, the Dv^DH answer to ti»e
 
 CHASMIL. 
 
 £*33 in tlie other n^cmher of ilie sentence, a col- 
 cation whicli st'ciiis plainly to intimate liifTerent 
 tpecics. — J. F. D. 
 
 CHASMIL ("rOC'ri, Kzek. i. 4, 27; viii. 2) 
 was probahly a comixisition of several sorts of 
 metal, since even ijKfKTpiv, by wliicii ilie word is 
 rendere<l by the ancients, tVeqiiently signifies a com- 
 position of gdlii and silver (Pi in. Ifisl. \at. xxxiii. 
 23 ; ix. 65). Nor were the ancients nnacquaitited 
 with the art of amalgam^vtinR various species of 
 metal ; and (he L itin aurichakum, at least ac- 
 cordin,^ to the (Ieri\ ation cf Isiik)rus {Grig. xvi. 
 19 : ' Aurichiilcmn cUcitur, quod et splendortm auri 
 et duritiem aeris possiileat '), would tliiis coincitle 
 with Bochart's etvmoloi'y (llicroz. iii. v. S9.i) of 
 ^DtJTl ; for he thinks the word composed of C^'PIJ 
 IPS, and ??D (lurtcni, and prop)ses to read ^D'JTIJ. 
 instead of /DCil. Neither can there be any tloubt 
 that aurichalcinn is a mere Latinized form of 
 the Greek ooei'xaAK-os (Homer, Ihjmn. v. 9; Hes. 
 Scut. 122; Callini. In lav. Pallad. 19). According 
 to Serv. (ad Aui. xii. 87), tlie aurichalcum pos- 
 Ksseil the brightness of gold and tl:e hardness 
 of copper, and might not iiii])robably liave been 
 our present pladna, which h.is l)een re-discovered 
 in the Ural mountains, after having long been 
 knor\vn as an American fossil. Pliny (Hist. 
 Nat. xxxiv. 1) says of aurichalcum, ' Nee re- 
 ])erit'ir longo iatn tempore, etl'eta tellure.' Perhajis 
 by the mVO nC'n: (Ezra viii. 27) was meant 
 aurichalcum ; at least the derivation of the words 
 tallies with the properties of that metal. — E. M. 
 
 CHATZIR ('^''VC)' o»' Chazir, also Chajir. 
 Tliis word occurs in several ])laces in the Old 
 Testament, vviiere it is variously translated, as 
 grass, in 1 Kings xviii. 5, 2 Kings xix. 26, Job 
 xl. 15, Ps. xxxvii. 2, &c. ; herb in Job viii. 12; 
 hag, in Prov. xxvii. 25, and Isa. xv. 6 ; and 
 court, in Isii. xxxiv. 13: but in Num. xi. 5, it is 
 translated leeks. Heljrew scholars state that the 
 word signifies ' greens ' or ' grass" in general ; and 
 it is no doubt clear, from the context of most of the 
 above passages, that th's must be its meaning. There 
 is therefore no reason wliy it slionld nut lie so trans- 
 lated in all the passages where it occurs, except 
 in the last. It is evidently incorrect to trans- 
 late it hay, as in the above ])assages of Proverbs 
 arid Isaiah, because the ];eople of Eastern coun- 
 tries, as it has been observeil, do not make hay. 
 The auth;)r of Fragments, in continuation of 
 Calmet, has justly remaiked on the incorrectness 
 of our version, 'The hay appeareth, and the ten- 
 der grass slioweth itself, and the herbs of tlie 
 mountains are gathered (Prov. xxvii. 25) : — 'Now 
 certainly,' says he, ' if tlie tender grass is but just 
 beginning to show itself, the hay, wiiich is grass 
 cut and dried after it has arrived at maturiy, ought 
 by no means to be associated with it ; still less 
 ought it lo be placed Ijcfore it.' The autlior con- 
 tinues, 'The word, I apprehend, means tlie lirgt 
 shoots, the ri.sing, just budding spires of grass.' 
 So in Isa. xv. 6. 
 
 In the pa.ssageof Num. xi. 5, where the Israel- 
 ites in the desert long for ' the melons, and the 
 leeks, and tlie ouion.s, and the garlick' of Egy])t, 
 it is evident that it was not grass which they ilc- 
 tired for food, but some green, |)erhaps gr;iss-like 
 vegetable for wiiich tiie woid chatzir is usetl, end 
 vhich is above tra.nglated leeks. In the same 
 
 CHATZIR. 
 
 4lf 
 
 way that, in this country, the word greens if 
 a])|i1ic<i to a variety of cabbage, in India tubs«*, 
 from std)z ' green ' is useti as a ifeuei.i! term fo« 
 herbs cooked as kitcheti vegetables, it \» mure tli«:i 
 
 -joW"'^ 
 
 
 probable, therefore, that chatzir is here similarly 
 employed, though tiiis does not prove that leeks 
 are intended. Ludoljihus, as quoted by Celsius 
 {Ilierobot. ii. 261). sujiposes that it may mean 
 lettuce, or salads in general, and othere fliat the 
 succory or eiulive may be the true ]ilant. But 
 Rosenmiiller stales, 'The most ancient Gieek and 
 (he Ciialdee translators unanimously inter[)ret the 
 Hebrew by the Greek irpdo-o, or leeks." The name 
 moreover seems to have been sjjecially ajiplied to 
 leeks from the resemblance of their leaves to grass, 
 and from their being conspicuous for their green 
 colour. Tiiis is eviileiit from minerals even having 
 been named fiom npdaoy in account of their' co- 
 lour, as prasius, jirasites, and clirysoprasium. The 
 
 Arabs use the word ui-JiJ kooras, or koorath, 
 
 as the translation of the irpaaov of the Greek.s, 
 and with them it signifies the leek, both at the 
 present day and in tiieir older woiks. It is cu- 
 rious that of the diflerent kinds descrilied, one is 
 calleii kooras-al-bnkl, or leek used as a vegetable. 
 That the leek is esteemed in Egyjit we have the 
 testimony of Ha'^sehjuist, who says, '(haf the 
 kind called karrat by (he Arabs must ceitainly 
 have been ime of tho<e desired by tlie children of 
 Israel; as it has been cultiva(ed and esteemed 
 from the earliest times to the jiresent time in 
 Egypt.' So (he Roman satirist — 
 
 ' Porrum et cepe nefiis violare et frangere 
 
 morsu. 
 O sarjctas gcntes, quibus haec nascuniur in 
 
 hortis 
 Numina ! ' 
 
 The Romans employed it much as a season- 
 ing to their dishes, as is evident from the numl>»f 
 of recipes in Apicins leferred to by Celsius. Tlie 
 liek (Allium Porrum) was introduced into this 
 country about the year 15()2, aral. as is well known, 
 continues to be esteemed as a seii»kiuni; to kmiih 
 and stewt. — J. F R.
 
 <20 
 
 CHEBAR. 
 
 CHERAR 05? ; Sept. Xofidp), a river of 
 Meso])utainia, mKin the banks of which k'ng 
 Nebuchadnezzar planted a colony of Jews, among 
 whom was the proj)het Ezekiel (2 Kings xxiv. 
 15; E/ek. i. 1,3; iii. 15, 23; x. 15,22). This 
 is without doubt the same river that was known 
 s.monL; the Greeks as the Cliaboras, an<l which 
 now iiears the name of Khabiiur. It Hows to 
 the Euphrates through Meiopofamia, and is the 
 only considerable stream which enters that river. 
 It. is formed by the junction of a number of 
 small br(X)ks, which rise in tiie neighbourhood 
 of a ruined t.iwn called Ras-el-Aiii, 13 furlongs 
 sjufh-wcst of Merdin. It takes a southerly direc- 
 tion tin it receives the waters of another stream 
 equal to itself, when it bends westward to the En- 
 plirates, which it enters at Keikesia, the Carche- 
 aiish of Scripture. [Cauchkmish.] (Rosenmiiller, 
 JBib. Geor/. ii. ISO; Kinnier, Geug. Mem. of the 
 J'ersian Empire, p. 211). 
 
 CHEDEK. [Thorns.] 
 
 CHEDORLAOMER, King of Elam, and 
 leader of the five kings wlio invaded Canaan in 
 the time of Abraliam (Gen. xiv). [Abraham; 
 A.ssyRiA ; Elam.] 
 
 CHEESE. The most important pa.ssage in 
 which this preparation from milk is mentioned in 
 Scripture is that where Job, figuratively describing 
 the formation of the fetus in the womb, .says — 
 
 'Hast thou not poured me out like milk, 
 
 And curdled (condensed, soliditiedj me like 
 chee.?e?' (x. 10). 
 
 We know not how our Biblical illustrators have 
 deduced from this that the cheese used in the 
 East necessarily was in a semi-fluid state. It ra- 
 tlier alludes to that progressive solidification whicli 
 is common to all cheese, which is always soft 
 wJien new, ihuugh it hardens when it becomes old. 
 But for flie tendency to seek remote and recon- 
 dite e.vplanations of plain things, it must seem 
 perfectly oiivious that to ' curdle like cheese' does 
 not mean that curdled milk was cheese ; but that 
 milk was curdled to form eventually the hardened 
 cheese. If the text proves anything as to the 
 condition of cheese, it would rather show that, 
 when considered fit for use, it was liard, than 
 that it was soft or fluid ; tlie process of solidifi- 
 cation being the subject of allusion, of which 
 curdling the milk is, in the case of cheese, only 
 the first though the most essential operation. Un- 
 doubtedly the Orientals do eat curds, or curdled 
 milk; but that therefore their cheese conists of 
 curdled milk is not the correct inference. We 
 also eat curds, but do not regard curds as cheese 
 — neither do they. The other passages describe 
 'cheese' in the plural, as jiaits of military ])io- 
 vision, for whicli tlie most solid and comj)act sub- 
 stances are always ])refeired. Persons on a march 
 would not like to encumljer themselves with 
 curdled milk (2 Sam. xvii. 29). 
 
 Tliere is much reason to conclude that the 
 ciieese used by the Jews differed in no respect from 
 that still common in the East ; which is usually 
 exhitjited in small cakes about the size of a tea 
 saucer, white in colour, and excessively salt. It 
 lias no rind, and soon becomes excessively hard 
 and dry — being, indeed, not made for long kee])- 
 ing. It is best when new and comparatively soft ; 
 and, in this state, large quantities are consumed 
 is lumps or crumbs not made up 'uto cakes. All 
 
 CIIELBENAH. 
 
 cheese in the East is of very indifferent qmlity 
 and it is witliin the writer .i own knowleilge tliat 
 the natives intinitely prefer English or Dutch 
 cheese when they can olitaio it. In making 
 chee.se, the common rennet is either butter-milk or 
 a decoction of tlie great-headed thistle, or wild 
 artichoke. The curds are afterwards put into 
 small baskets made of rushes or i)alm le;.ves, wiiicli 
 are then lied up close, and the necessary pressuK 
 ap])lied. 
 
 There are several decisions in tlie Mishnab 
 relative to the pressure by which cheese was made 
 {C/.olim, viii. 2). This jiroves that, as observed 
 before, no jireparation of milk was regarded ai 
 cheese while in a fluid state, or before being sub- 
 jected to pressure. In another jjlace (^Avoda Sara, 
 ii. 5) it is decided that cheese made i)y foreigners 
 could not be eaten, from the fear that it migli.t 
 possibly be derived from the milk of some animal 
 which had been oil'ered in sacrifice to idols. 
 
 CHaLBENAH (n32^n) is mentioned in 
 Exod. XXX. 3-1, as one of the substances from 
 which tlie incense for the sanctuary was to be 
 prepared : ' Take unto thee sweet spices, stacte 
 and onycha and (chelbcnali) galbanum.' The 
 Hebrew word is very similar to the Greek 
 ^aX^duT], which occurs as early as the time of 
 Hippocrates. The substance is more jiarticu- 
 lavly described by Dioscorides, who gives ixetui-kiov 
 as an additional name, and states that it is an 
 exudation produced by a ferula in Syria. So 
 Pliny (xii. 25), as translated by Holland, 
 ' Moreover we have from Syria out of the same 
 mountain, Amanus, another kind of gum, called 
 galbanum, issuing out of an heilj-like fennel- 
 geant, which some call by the name of the said 
 resiii, others stagonotis. The best galbanum, 
 and whicli is most set by, is grisly and clear^ 
 withal resembling bammoniacum.' Theophras- 
 tus had long previously (Hist. PL ix. 7) said 
 tliat galbanum flows from a Panax of Syria. 
 In both cases it is satisfactory to find ii plant of 
 the same natural family ot Umbelliferse pointed 
 out as yielding this drug, because the plant ha« 
 not yet been clearly ascertained. The Arabs, 
 however, seem to have been acquainted with it, as 
 they give its names. Thus, ' galbanum' in Persian 
 works has harzu assigned to it as the Arabic, 
 hireeja as the Hintloostanee, with kliultjan and 
 metonion as the Greek names (evident corruptions 
 of xaA/3d;'7; and [ierdiziov, arising from errors in the 
 reading of the diacritical jwints) : h'mneh and 
 nafeel are stated to be names of the plant, which is 
 described as bein.; jointed; thorny, and fragrant 
 (R(jyle, Illust. IJimal. Hot. p. 23). Lobel made an 
 attempt to ascertain the plant by sowing siime 
 sf'eds which he found attaclicd to the gum of coin 
 merce : ' Oritur in hoi lis nostris haec pervenusfa 
 ])lanla semine copioso, lato, toliaceo, aromalico, 
 reperto Antvverpiae in galhani lachryme'' (Obs. ]) 
 431). Tiie plant which was thus obtained is the 
 Ferula ferulago of Linnaeus, a native of N . Africa, 
 Crete, and Asia Minor. It has been objected, how- 
 ever, that it does not yield galbanum in any of these 
 situations; but the same objection might be made, 
 tliough erroneously, to the mastich-*ree, as not 
 yielding mastich, because it does not do so except 
 in a soil and climate suitalilefo it. Other '.ilants, 
 as the Bubon galbanum and gummil'eium. havf^ 
 in conaeqnence, been selected, but with '.ess claiuoi
 
 CHELBENAB. 
 
 M tney are natives of tlie Cape of GcxjiI Hope. 
 TJie late Professor Don, li.aving found some seeds 
 of an imihellii'vroni jil<>nt sticking to liie tjallia- 
 num of commeice, l:as named the plant, tlioni^ii 
 yet unknown, Galbaniiui oflicinale. These sexjds, 
 however, may or may not have belonged to tlie 
 galbanum plant. Dr. Lindlcy has 8n^;j;este<l 
 anofherplant, which he has named Opoidia (jalbnni 
 fera, and whicli grows in Khorassan, ii Diirrood, 
 whence specimens were sent to this c unfry by 
 Sir Johi. M'Niell, as yieUling an intV lor sort of 
 ammoniacum. Upon the whole, it is evident 
 that the plant ia yet to be ascertained. Gal- 
 banum is in the preseiit day imported into this 
 country, both fio.ii tlie Levant and from India. 
 That from foe latter country is e.v]iorted fiorn 
 Bombay, having been first imported thither, pro- 
 bably from the Persian Gulf. It is tlierefore pro- 
 liable that it may be produced in the countries at 
 the head of that gulf, tliat is, in the northern 
 parts of Arabia or in Per ia, (portions of which, as 
 IS well known, were includetl in the Syria of the 
 ancients ;) perliaps in Kurdistan, which nearly 
 I'orresponds with ancient Assyria. The later 
 Greeks, finding the country to the north of Pales- 
 tine subject to the Assyrians, called the country 
 Assyria, or by contraction Syria. It is on this 
 account that in classical writers the names 
 Assyria and Syria are so often found interchanged 
 (/. c. p. 214). 
 
 Gaibanum, then, is either .a natural exudation, 
 or obtained by incisions from some umbelliferous 
 plant. It occurs in commerce in the form eiiher 
 o'^ tears or masses, commonly called lump-gal- 
 banum. The latter is of the consistence of wax, 
 tenacious, of a brownish, or brownish yellow 
 colour, wifh white spots in the interior, which are 
 the agglutinated tears. \U odour is strong and 
 balsamic, but disagreeable, and its taste warm 
 and bitter. It is composed of 66 per cent, of 
 resin, and 6 of volatile oil, with gum, &c., and im- 
 purities. It was formerly held in high esteem as 
 a stimtilant and auti-spasmodic medicine, and is 
 still employed as such, and for exteinal applica- 
 tion to discuss indolent tumours. A French 
 author enumerates various pharmaceutic prepa- 
 rations of which it foiinerly constituted an in- 
 gredient, as 'le Mithridate, I'orvietan, le dioscor- 
 dium de Fracasta, Tonguent des A])6tres on de- 
 dacaphaimaqae d'Avicenna, &c., les emplaties 
 divin de Jactpies Lemort, manus Dei magnetique 
 il'Ange Sola,' &c. It is still more to our pur- 
 pose that we learn from Dioscorides that, in 
 preijaring a fragrant ointment, gaibanum was 
 mixed witli other aromatic substances ; as under 
 yierdnriov he says, in the Latin translation of 
 Sprengel, ' Paraturet in j^gyptounguentum, ver- 
 iiaculo nomine iMetopiu.n dictum, scilicet propter 
 galbani permistiooem. Lignum enim e quo gai- 
 banum manat. mrtopium vocatur. Ex oleo om- 
 phacino et aniygdalarum amararum, cardamomo, 
 scheno, calamo, inelle, vino, myrrha, balsamisemi- 
 ne, galbanoet resina componitur.' Hence we see 
 that it was the jnactice of the ancients to mix gai- 
 banum with tl.e most fragrant sul)stances with 
 which they were acquaintevl. The efi'ect of such 
 mixture must tle|K,viil ujion the projjortion in which 
 it or any other stiong-smelling substance is in- 
 termixed, more th m upon what is its ])eculiar 
 trdour when in a ooncenttated state. We need 
 Mt, tberefot^ Inr^ui.'e iut > the reaaoos which have 
 
 CHERETHITES. 
 
 4a« 
 
 been assigned to account for gaibanum being ii^ 
 termixcd with stacfe and onycha as sweet npicefc 
 We see tiiat tlie same pra< ti.'e existed among the 
 Greeks and the Kgvjjfians. — J F R 
 
 CIIEMOSri (B^lD? ; Sept. xv<i.) is fl« 
 name of a national god of the Mnabiles (1 Kin"8 
 xi. 7; 2 Kings xxiii. 13; Jer. xlviii. 7 ; w ho are 
 for this reason called the ' jK'ople of Chemosh,' in 
 Num. xxi. 29), and of the .Ammonites (Judg. xi. 
 21), whose worship was introduced among the 
 Israelites by Sohimon (I Kind's xi. 1 ). No ety- 
 mology of the name which has been i;rn|Mise(l, and 
 no attempt which has been made to identify fhia 
 god wilh odiers whose attributes are better l.nowI^ 
 are suiliciently plausible to deserve particular 
 notice. Jerome's notion that Chemosh is the same 
 as liaal Peor has no hi,lorical foundation; and 
 the only theory which resU on any |jrol»abiiity ia 
 that which assumes a resemblance iK-iween Che- 
 mosh and Arabian idolatry (cf. Beyer, AddU. ad 
 Sehlcn.p. 322 ; Pocock, Specimen, \,. 307 ■. Jew- 
 ish tradition alliims that he was woreliipped under 
 the symbol of a black star; and Maimonideg 
 states that his worshippeTs went bare-headed, and 
 abstained from the use of garments sewn together 
 by the needle. The black star, the connection 
 with Arabian idolatry, and the fact that Chemosh 
 IS coupled with Moloch, favour the theory that he 
 had some analogy with the ])lanet Saturn.— J. N. 
 
 CHENANIAII (n;?:q, Cod-s .joodiuss-, 
 Sept. Xajz/eria), a master of the temple muslo, 
 who conducted the grand musical services when 
 the ark was removed from the house of Obeil-edom 
 to Jerusalem (1 Cliron. xv. 22). 
 
 CHERETHITES and PELETIIITES ('nn^ 
 ^ri?Dl, 6';e^/(( and /'^Mj without the final D in tiie 
 pliual ; Sept. Xepeei koX *€\eei), names borne liy 
 the royal life-guaids in tlie time of David ( 2 Sam. 
 viii. 1«; I Chion. xvlii. 17). Pievailing oiilniori 
 translates their names, ' Headsmen and Foot-run- 
 ners." The word D*n"lD is used for woodcutters, 
 2 Chron. ii. 10, and it might seem jnobable iliat 
 the Cherethifes, like the llctois of the Roman dicta- 
 tor, carried axes, botli as a badge of office and for 
 prompt use. In the later years of David, their 
 captain, Benaiali, rose to a more commanding 
 iiripoi tance than the generals of the regular troops , 
 just as in imperial Rome the pia-fect of the prae- 
 torian guards became the second ))erson in tlie 
 empire. It is evident that, to perpetrate any sum- 
 mary deed, Benaiah and the guards were chiefly 
 relied on. That they were strictly a body-guard 
 Is distinctly stated in 2 Sam. xxiii. 23. The 
 grammatical form of the Hebiew words is never- 
 theless not quite clear : and as the Cherelhlles are 
 named as a nation of the south (1 Sam. xxx. Hi, 
 some are disposed to believe Cietlii and Plethi to 
 be foreign Gentile names used collectively. No 
 small confirmation of this may be drawn'from 2 
 Sam. XV. 18: 'All the Cherethifes and all tiie 
 Pelethites and all the Gittites, six hundred men,' 
 &c. If tiie two first words were giamniatical 
 ])luralg, like the third (Gittites), it is scarcely cre- 
 dible that final D should be added to tlie third, 
 and not also to the other two. As the word all is 
 rejieated three times, and COO men is the number 
 intended the third time, the Cherethites and Pele- 
 thites must have been reckoned by the hundred ; 
 aud since the Gittites were clearly foreiguen, aU
 
 422 
 
 CHERITH. 
 
 *he I priori improbability wliich some have seen in 
 David's ddendiriL? himself by a. forev/n guard 
 Vails to the ground. His (iittite satellites are one 
 moreproolDr the intensity of the lyvannical prin- 
 cijjle already come in; since equally among the 
 Greeks and Romans, and in modern Europe, for a 
 prince to trust the care of his person to foreign 
 (fuards has ever been looked on as the most 
 evidetd maik that he is keeping down his own 
 sp.bjecfs by force. 
 
 That in 2 rJam. xv. 1, Alisalom's runners are 
 called by the name CVl, which they also after- 
 wards bear, may periiajis go to i)rove that Plethi 
 or Peletliiles does not mean ' runners." Indeed, as 
 such a meaning of the word cannot be got out of 
 pure Hebrew, but recourse to the Arabic language 
 is needed, the ])robabilily would in any case be, 
 that the institution, as well as the name, was 
 impf)rted i)y David fiom the south. Ewald be- 
 Iie\es that Flcthi means PJdUstines, and that it 
 lias been slightly corrupted to rhyme with Crethi. 
 May not Plethi Jjave been from another dialect ? 
 Be this as it may, these body-guards for the 
 prince are not found under the reign of Saul. — 
 
 F. W. N. 
 
 CHERITH (Tins ; Sept. y^o^'pid), a river 
 in Palestine, on the banks of which the pro- 
 phet Elijah found refuge (1 Kings xvii. 3-7). 
 Eusebius and others ha\e conceived themselves 
 
 bound by the words jTI'Tl ^3Q ^y, rendered 'east 
 of the Jordan', to seek the river in tlie Trans- 
 Jordaiiic country : but ajthougli the words some- 
 times require this translation (as in Gen. xxv. 18 ; 
 Josh. XV. 1 8), they may also be rendered ' towards,' 
 or 'before the Jordaii (comp. Gen. xvi. 22) — that 
 is, in coming from Samaria. And this interpreta- 
 tion, which ]ilaces the Clierith west of the Jordan, 
 agrees with tlie history, with Josephus (Aatirj. viii. 
 13, 7), and with the local traditions wiiicli have 
 uniformly placed the river of Elijah on this side 
 the Jonlan. Dr. Robinson drops a suggestion 
 tliat it may be the Wady Kelt, which is formed 
 by the union of many streams in the mountains 
 west of Jericho, issuing from a deep gorge, in 
 which it passes by that village and then across 
 the plain to the Jo. dan. It is dry in summer. 
 
 CHERUBIM (Cherui), pi. Cherubim) is the 
 nam.? of certain symbolical figures frequently 
 mentioned in Scriptiue. Hebrew nouns of the 
 masculine gender generally end in ini, and 
 our translators, in adopting this form into their 
 version in preference to the English cherubs, have 
 in several places imjiroperly added the letter s 
 to the termination of the word — a grammatical 
 error, supjjosed l)y some to have originate 1 in the 
 circumstance of the writers of the preceding age 
 employing in the vulgar Latin, then in u.se, the 
 term cherubini, instead of cherubi. Parkhurst and 
 other learned Hutchinsonians derive the word 
 niD iVom 3, a particle of similitude, and 3^, 
 'great' or 'powerful'.— so as, according lo tlie theory 
 of their school, to constitute the cherubic figure's 
 emblems of the Almighty. Archbishop New- 
 come and others trace it.s origin to a Chaldee 
 root 3"1D, signifying ' to (ilough,' and hence, 
 tins operation being in ancient times and in 
 Eastern countries the work of oxen, cherub is 
 •ometimes used in .Scripture to denote that ani- 
 mal — as in Ezekiel (i. 10), where tlie face of 
 % cherub is synonymous with that of an ox. 
 
 CHERUBIM. 
 
 A third class of etymologists, considering tha 
 God is frequently described as riiliug on tl:e r^.;e. 
 rubini as his cliariof, propose by a transposition 
 of the letters to deduce it from 33"), tlie \ral'ic 
 word signifying 'lo ride;' while another derivation, 
 on the same principle of transpo.sition, lias lately 
 been suggesfeit by Dr. Kirl>y, who thinks that "|"?!S, 
 ' to bless' or ' curse,' is more likely to be the genuine 
 root of the term. Without deciding to which o/ 
 these etymological conjei tures tlie ]m'ference is 
 due, as they are all founded on tl e views which 
 their respective authors have ado]>tcd of the cha- 
 racter and design of those remarkable images, it 
 may be oh3cr\ ed in general, tliat they all involve 
 the leading idea that the cheiubim were sym- 
 bols, either diiectly emblematic of Deity, or sig- 
 nificant of the ruling ]X)weis by wliicli the agency 
 of God is carried on in tlie natural and moral 
 world. 
 
 Figures of the cherubim were conspicuous im- 
 plements in the Levitical tabernacle. Two of 
 them were placed at each end of the mercy-seat, 
 standing in a stooping attituile, as if looking 
 down towards it, while they overshadowed it with 
 their expanded wings — and, indeed, they were 
 component paits of it, formed out of. the same 
 mass of jHue gold as the mercy-seat itself (Exod. 
 xxv. 19), 
 
 These figures were afterwards tiansferred to the 
 most lioly place in Solom.n's temple, and it has 
 been supposed from 1 Cliron. xxviii. 19, that that 
 prince constructed tivo additional ones after the 
 same pattern, and of the same solid and costly 
 material ; but whether it was with a view to increase 
 their number in accordance with tlie more spa- 
 cious and magnificent edifice to uhicii they weie 
 removed, or merely to supply the place of those 
 made by Moses, which in the many vicissitudes 
 that beiel the ark miglit have bi en mutilated oi 
 entirely separated from the mercy-seat to which 
 they were attached — is not asceitained. This 
 much, however, is known, that Solomon erected 
 two of colossal dimensions, in an erect posture 
 with their faces towards the walls (2 Chron. iii. 
 13), covering with their outstretched wings the 
 ei tire breadth of the debir, or most holy jilace. 
 These sacred hieroglyphics were ] rofiisely em- 
 I roidered on the tapestry of ihe taliernacJe, "n 
 the curtains and the great vail that separated the 
 holy from the most holy place (Exod. xxvi. 1-31), 
 as well as carved in several ))laces (1 Kings v'iL 
 6-8) on the walls, doors, and sacred utensils of 
 tlie temple. The position occiipieil by these sin- 
 gular images at eacli extreinitv of tie incicy-seat 
 — while the Sliechinah, or sacred flame tiiat sym- 
 bolized the divine presence, and tlie awful name 
 ofjeho\ahin written charact.rs (Bates, Critica 
 Ilabro'a, p. 288) were in the intervening space — 
 gave rise to the well-known jihiasetdngy of the 
 sacied writers, which repiesents tlie Deity dwell- 
 ing between or inhabiting the cherubim; and, in 
 fact, sii intimately associated weie they with the 
 manifestation of the divine glory, that whether the 
 Liird is descrilied as at rest or in motion, as seated 
 on a thnme, or riding in a tnumijhal chariot, 
 these symbolic figuies were essential elements in 
 the description (Numb. vii. 89; Ps. xviii. 10; 
 IxxN. 1; xcix. 1-10; Isa. vi. 'i ; xxxvii. 16). 
 It may be remarked, on the second last passage^ 
 that the clause which our translators have reisr 
 dtred ' above him stood the seraphim,' ia in tha
 
 CHKRUBIM 
 
 Septuagint ' th< cherubim stood rownil aljout 
 ))im.' 
 
 The pK)inin««nt, place assigned to thesechenibic 
 <igures in tlie <h\ miAy~a.\^HH'.\tiKl place ol' ancieiil 
 worship invests tiicm witii an interest aixJ jmpoi^ 
 tance suftici«nit to stir{mlu.te the curiosity <»f the 
 Biblical student to inquire (nith into tlieiv foi-m 
 and tlieir desigiti. Tiie difticiilties, Iwwever, at- 
 tending the inquiry »!■« neitJKT few nor small. 
 Joseplius, a lea«ncd Jew of the saceixlotal tribe, 
 declares that tltey resembled no animals that ever 
 were seen bj' tn;ui, and that their form no man knew 
 in h\s fi^y (^Anti^. iii. 6); and several modern 
 Jews of girat erudition, an.oii<^ wliom is Abtnezra, 
 think that tiie *e«m cherubim was iniliscriiiii- 
 nat^ly appiiou to figures ■'of any kind that wine 
 •culptniied <m stone, engraven on metal, cau'ved 
 on woshI, or inwroufjlit on clotli,' alth<«ii,'h that 
 writei' himself states it to iie his opinion — fouinled 
 appjurantlyoYi no iiasis TnrcR-e solid than a cojiji'c- 
 tural klea of tlie compaiative ease with whicli 
 the human foiw a<lwii1i> of bendijig forwani, anil, 
 therefore, adopted by the -ancient masters in their 
 paintings — that ttie figures whicJi Moses placed 
 looking -down at the mercy-seat were tliose of 
 winged men <ji' Iwys, B^it although tl)e later Jews 
 lost ail knowledge of tiiese mj-stic symbols, and 
 in tht! ^icriijtiu res— tlie only soui-ce wIk'hcc true 
 iniornjatiivn is to beobtaioetl — tnucli obscurity as 
 well as great dix-^.sity mark all tlie jiassages tiiat 
 contain allusions to tifesuliject, yet sufficient (hita 
 exist from which, ifwecarmot surmount all tl>e 
 diffioukies fhat lie in tlie way of tlie investigation, 
 we may at lea<t apjiroximate to the truth. Re- 
 jecting the opinion <Kf tiwse who r/Kiintain that tlie 
 cheruWiw were of various shajies, we assume it to 
 be, if not absolutely certain, at least liigiily jho- 
 bable, tlvat in all tlie passages of Scnptuie where 
 they are spoken of tlieir figunes were uniform. 
 The first occasion on which tliey ai e nient ioncd 
 is on the exp?ilsio» of our iirst parents from Eden, 
 when the Lord placeii cherubim on tiie east of 
 the gaaden. Tl«e word 0"TpD, translated ' on the 
 east,' may signify as well '■before or on tlie edge 
 of;' and the histoiiasri does not say that the Lord 
 placed tliere cl»end)iin, but 0"'Il'13n, the che- 
 rubim. Besides, 31;^^, rendered by our trjinslatois 
 ^placed," signilies jirojjerly ' to jilace in a tabernacle,' 
 an exjnessiim whicli, viewed in c<«inectioii with 
 some incidents m the alter history of the jirimev al 
 family (Gen. iv. 14-16), seems a conclusive es- 
 tablisiimont of tlw opinion that this was a local 
 tabernacle, in which tl»e symbols of the Divine 
 presence weie m;ini<ie4ed, suitably to the alteied 
 circuHistauces in which maji after the Fall came 
 ijefore God, and to tlie acceptable mode of wor- 
 ship he was taught to observe. That consecrated 
 ilace, witii its striking symbols, called ' the pre- 
 sence of tho Lord,' there is reason to believe, con- 
 tinued till the time of the deluge, otiierwise llicie 
 would have been nothing to guard the way to tiie 
 iree of life ; and thus the knowledge of tlieir form, 
 from the longevity of the antediluvians, could 
 have been easily transmitted to tlie time of Abia- 
 hajn (Fuller, I lorar Motaictx, b. ii. ch. 6). Moreover, 
 it is an ajiproved opinion tliat, when those em- 
 blems were removal at ihe close of the patriarchal 
 dispensation from the place of public worship, 
 the ancestors of that jiatriarch formed small 
 mode.s of them for domestic use, under the name 
 »f Seraphim, or Terapliim, according to the Chal» 
 
 OHKRU7JIM. 
 
 423 
 
 dee dialect (Falicr, Orinn oj' Purj. Idol. i. 256). 
 The next occasion in the course of the s.icred his- 
 tory on which tiie cherubim are noticed is wiien 
 Moses w«3 commaiKled to jirovide I he furnit-ire 
 of tlie tabernacle ; and, ulthuHgh ho leceived in- 
 stnrcticms to- make all things aceoidiiig to tlie 
 iKittern sliown him in ihv Mtiunt, and altUmgli it 
 IS natural to suppose that he saw a figure of tli* 
 cherubim, yet we (ii:d no minute and .special de- 
 scri|)tion of tlicni, as is gnen of e»«'rytliing else, 
 for tiie diiection of tlic aitiliceis (ExikI. xxvi. 31). 
 Ti.e simple mention wliich the sacred iiistoriaii 
 makes, in bolli tiiese jwssages, of the cherubini, 
 conveys tlie impression that the symbolic figures 
 whicli had been introduced into tlie Lcvitical 
 taiietiiacle wcie substantially the same with those 
 established in the primeval ]i1ace of worship on 
 the outskirts of Eden, ami that by tr.iditional 
 infoiTualion, w some otiier means, tlieir fonn waj 
 so well known, botli to Bt':taleel and the w1m>1« 
 congregation of Israel, as to render sujierfluou* 
 all fuithei- description of them. On no other 
 groujid can we account (or the tot il silence as to 
 their configuration, unless we embrace the ground- 
 less and unworthy opinion of those who impute 
 to the aiithor of tlie Pentatevich a studie<i con- 
 ccaliuciit of some jiarts of iiis litual, after the 
 manner of the Mystics (Laiidseer, Salxran lie- 
 searclios. p. 321). But there was no mystery as to 
 those reiiiaikable figures, for Ezekicl knew at once 
 (x. 20) the living creatuies which apiieared 
 in his vision supjiortiug the throne of God, and 
 bearing it in majesty from place to ]ilace, to be 
 cherubim, from having (requontly seem them, ip 
 common with all other worship]n'is, in the carved 
 work of tlie outer sanctuary. Moreover, as is the 
 opinion of maiiy eminent divines the visionary 
 scene, with which this jjrophet was favoured, ex- 
 hibited a transciipt of the Temple, which was 
 shown in pattern to David, and afterwards erected 
 by his son and succes-or ; an<l, as the chief de- 
 sign of that later vision was to inspire the Ilebievr 
 exiles in Babylon with the hojie of seeing, on their 
 return to Judsa, anollier loniple, more glorious 
 than the one tlien in ruins, it is reasonable to 
 believe that, as tlie whole style and apparatus 
 ai' this m3'stic temple boie on exact resemblance 
 (I Kings vi. 2W) to that of Solomon's magnificent 
 editice^ so tlie clierubs also that ajiix-ared to his 
 fancy pntiaywl on the walls would lie fac 
 similes of those that belonged to its ancient pro 
 totyjie. Taking then his desciiptlon of tlicm fr 
 be the proper apjiearance that belonged in com 
 moil to all his cherubic creatures (chaps, i. x. 
 xli.), we are led to conclude that they were 
 comjioiind figures, unlike any living animals or 
 real object in nature; but rather a cvinibination, 
 in one nonilesciipt artificial image, if the distin- 
 guishing features and pro|icrties of scveial. The 
 ox, as chief among the tame anii iistful animals, 
 the lion among the wild ones, the eagle amon^ 
 the feathery trH>eii, and man, as head over all — 
 were the animals which, or rather paits of which, 
 coni]K)sed the symbolical figures. Eacii cheiub 
 hail four distinct faces on one neck — ihat of u 
 man in front, that of a lion on the right side, and 
 of an ox on the left ; while behind was the face oi 
 an eagle. Each had four wings, the two uiidei 
 ones covering the lower extremities (Ileb. the feet;, 
 in tiiken of decency and humility, while the uiijiei 
 ones, spread out on a level witli the head aiitl
 
 Hi 
 
 CHERUBIM. 
 
 ^oulilers, were su jwined together, to tlie edge of 
 his nei;»'i!K)u«', as to Ibrni a carnipy ; and in this 
 ma iner tbey soaveJ ratlier than tle.v. without any 
 vibvatory inolion with their winjjs. throdgh the 
 air. Each hail strai-ht IVet. The Hebrew version 
 renders it 'a straight foot;' and the probability is, 
 that the legs were destitute of any flexible joint 
 at tlie knee, and so joined fogetlier that its loco- 
 motions must liave been performed in some other 
 way tlian by the ordinary process of walking, or 
 lifting one toot after anottier. Dr. Adam Clarke 
 has explained this by referring ' to some ancient 
 Egyptia-i imager of Isis, Osiris, Anubis, &c. in 
 his possession, where tlie legs were not separated,^ 
 nor was tliere any bend at the knees ; so that if 
 there Wiis any motion at all, it must have been by 
 gliding, not" progressive walking" {Commmt. in 
 loc). The ideal picture, then, whicli Ezekiel's 
 ilescription would lead us to form of the cherub, 
 is that of ft winged man, or winged ox, according 
 to (he particular phase it exhibited or the jrarticu- 
 lar direction from which it was seen. If viewed 
 m one aspect, it sliowed conspicuously the livce, 
 bands, and body of a man : in another, the broad 
 face, legs, and cloven foot of an ox appeared as 
 tlie prominent features of liie image. And this 
 consideration may serve to reconcile the discre- 
 pancies that apijear in the accounts which, in dif- 
 ferent parts of Scripture, are given of the cheru- 
 bim. Thus, for instance, in certain parts of tlie 
 lavers of Solomon's Temple were carved, between 
 groups of palm-trees, the faces oi lions and oxen, 
 evidently as parts of the cherubim (1 Kings, vii. 
 29, 36), while no hint is given of the usual ac- 
 companiments of the man and the eagle ; and in 
 themystic temple of Ezekiel, the cherubim, which, 
 alternately with a jjabn-tree, were seen engraven 
 on its walls and doors, exhibited the fvce of a man 
 and a lion, wliile no mention is made of either an 
 eagle or an ox, of the liuman hands, or the ox-like 
 feet of tliese singular images. Tlie difference in 
 these several descriptions is tn be accounted for 
 from the circumstance of the living creatures 
 being beheld by the yirophet at one point of ob- 
 servation, and of theartiKcial ones being engraven, 
 carved, or embroitlerei'l on a fi.it extended sur- 
 face; and, consetjuently, one side or a small part 
 onlvof the figureappeared tot.heeyeof the beholder. 
 To use the words of Dr. Watts, 'That figure which 
 would have had all four faces visible if it had 
 stood forth as a real animal or a statue, could 
 have had but two faces, or at most three, visible 
 wh«n figured on a wall or curtain, the other being 
 hid behind ; and thus the cherubs may be in all 
 places of Scripture the same four-faced animals, 
 and yet only two or tiiree of their faces ajipear, ac- 
 cording to their designed situation and the art of 
 jjersuective (Remnants of Time, xx.). 
 
 Whether the golden calf constructed by Aaron 
 miglit be — not the Apis of Egypt — but a repre- 
 sentation of the antediluvian Cherubim -as some 
 suppose, from its being made on ' a feast to the 
 Lord,' and called 'the gods of Israel' (Exod. 
 xxxii. h\ and whether Jeroboam, in the erection 
 of his two calves, intended a scliismatic imitation 
 of the sacred symbols in the Temple of Jerusalem 
 rattier than the introduction of a new species of 
 idolatry (1 Kings xii. 2S), we shall not stop to 
 'nquirc. But, as paganism is a corruption of 
 patriarchal worship — each nation having added 
 •ora ithing according to its own taste and faijcy — 
 
 CHERUBIM. 
 
 perhaps we may find a confirmation of the viewt 
 given above of the comy-ound form of the cherubim 
 in the strange figrnes iliat are gron|>ed together ia 
 the heatlien deities. Tlie nunieious ox-heads, foi 
 instance, in the statue of the ancient Diana, and 
 particularly the .-Asiatic iih)l3, almost all of which 
 exhibit several heads and arms attached to one 
 person, or the headsofdillVrent animals combined, 
 afford a collateral proof, similar to the universal 
 prevalence of sacrifice, that the form of tlie \)n: 
 mitive cherubim has been traditionally preserved 
 and extended over a large ])ortion of the world. 
 See Calmet, Fragments ; Clarke On Ezekiel; 
 and, particularly. Park hurst, Heh. Lex. 
 
 [This may indeed lie shown by the following 
 actual figures cojjied from ancient moiiuments, 
 all of which illustrate some one or more of the 
 notions which we attach to the cherubic forms ; and 
 while they afl'ord material assistance to our ideas 
 on thesubject, they show that figures of this kind, 
 as sacred symbols, were not peculiar to tlie He- 
 brews, and that their prisence in the sanctuary 
 was not calculated to excite any surprise among 
 the neighbouring nations, or to lead to the notion 
 that the Jews also were worshippers of idols, for 
 even in the pagan monument they never apj)ear 
 as idols, but as symbols; and it was very possiljly 
 this fact — that the cheiiiljic figures were not liable 
 to be misunderstood — ;vvhich induced the Divine 
 wisdom to permit their introduction into the most 
 holy place. Of all tiiese, the most remaikable is 
 the figure scul))tured in bas-relief. The first 
 group (No. 226) is from Egyjjt. Tlie figures are 
 the more remarkable from being such as appear 
 upon the sacred arks of that country, and the dis- 
 ptisition of their wings agrees much with one or 
 another of the arrangements which have been 
 ascribed to the cherubim of the Ark [Ark]. As 
 such figures certainly existed in Egypt ijefore tli« 
 time of Mttses, this may suggest another reason in 
 addition to that already given, why a particular de> 
 scriptiun of the cherubim was not judged necessary. 
 
 The next gr .up of figures (No. 227) is aim 
 Egyptian, and shows the diversity of the winged 
 symbols which so often appear on tlie monumenta
 
 CHERUBIM. 
 
 "^». 1 and 8 are siuh lioveriii'j; wiiij^cil fi^jmes ^ 
 iiiua.lv siirm<iuiit llie wliole of a sacreil tablet or 
 iatiau : and to sucli hovering wings tliere seem 
 
 CIlERUniM. 
 
 M 
 
 ^"^^r^ ^ 
 
 ■ome sj'mbolical allusions in Scripture even when 
 the cherubim are not mentioned. Fgure 4, that 
 of a hawk with the face and symbols of Isis, and 
 »1m» crowned and winged serpents (figs. 6, 7), are 
 
 bols are discovered. Tiic cut (No. '22S) is fiom 
 an aiititjiie gem riiiiiid ut li.ibylon. It conibiuet 
 the human and (jnadrujiedal forms willi thr wings 
 of a bird, and is nut uidike tlif Kgyplian sjihinx, 
 excepting tiiat tlic head is tliat of a man, nut of a 
 woman. The next (No. 22!') is from a liaby- 
 loiiian cylinder, and is lemaikalih- as ^jiviiii; not 
 only tiie wings but the lie.id of a bird to ilie human 
 form. 
 
 In proceeding to the monunient.s of ancient 
 Persia, the winged syinbols become still more 
 sti iking. The very remaikable example in th« 
 annexed engraving is from a has relief at .Mourg 
 Aub (No. 230), representing a man arrayi il in a 
 richly embroidered ro'e, with sneh quadruple 
 wings as the vision of Kzekie iscril)es to the che- 
 rubim, with the addition of ample horns (tb« 
 well-known symbols of reijal ])ower) issuing from 
 the head, and upbearing a synd)olical crown oi 
 mitre, such as is often seen on the heaiU of tha 
 Egyptian gods and their ministering iriext* 
 
 tbe o(il; compound images, and as such deserve 
 forticuiar attention. 
 
 If \»o proceed to Babylon, similar winged sym- 
 
 Thc next cronp of figures (No. 931) J* ool 
 lected from diflerent ancient Persian srnl|<nr«s 
 and gems. Fig. 1 is a hovering winged symbol.
 
 i36 
 
 CHERUBIM. 
 
 CHERUBIM. 
 
 which occurs as fwquoritly i" tlie Persian momi- 
 T»iefits as tlie similar (iijtiies do in those ol" Egypt. 
 I and 4 are reniarkalrle as olVering a nwir aji- 
 pior'.ch to the traditional figure which has iKjen 
 assignf<i tu ari|^cls ; an(i 3 artords a very curious 
 e.x.itnple of ((iiadriijile wings, resemlding those i:i 
 No. 230, hilt heing niucli shorter. 
 
 Tlie Ith figure in the aho\e cut (231) aflords 
 a riire example of" tlie combination of the heast, 
 hird, and man, and seems to he the same as the 
 B.iliyloniarj .«])hinx in a difVerent position. Tlie 
 other figures in the same cut are frequently re- 
 jieated in the Persian sculptures. They are 
 acknowledged Mithric symhols ; and, as such, 
 thev go far to evince the purely symbolical 
 character of tlie cherubic figures. In all of 
 fliese, except the last, a warrior is represented 
 irr.isping these winged symbols by the single 
 iioin, with which all of them are furnished, 
 with one hand, while he thrusts his second 
 into them with the othei It is observable that 
 tliese figures, taken together, include all those 
 
 which Ezekiel's vision a.isigi « to tlie Cheruoiui— • 
 the head of a man, an eagle, a lion, and an 3X 
 (fig. 5) : but we do not any where find all thcM 
 combined in a single figure, as a])pears lo have 
 been the case in the visionary cherubim. 
 
 It is of some importance to remark, that th« 
 winged symbolical figures of this description ai* 
 far more rare in the remoter East — in India — 
 China, than in Western Asia.] 
 
 The opinions concerning the design of the che^ 
 rubim are as diversified as tliose relative to their 
 form. All are agreed that they had a symboHca; 
 meaning, although it, is not easy to ascertain it. 
 The ancients, as well as the fathers, considered 
 that they had Ijoth a physical and a metapiiysical 
 oliject : thus, for instance, Pliilo regarded them as 
 signifying the two hemisjiheres ; and the flaming 
 sword, the motion of the ])lanets ; in which opi- 
 nion he is joined by some moderns, who ccnsitier 
 them to have been nothing more than astronomical 
 emblems — the Lion and the Man being equivalent 
 to Leo and Aquarius — the signs of the zodiac 
 (Lanilseer, Sab. Hesear. \), 31.5), Ireiieeus views 
 them as emblematic of several things, such as the four 
 elements, the tour quarters of the globe, the four 
 gospels, the four universal covenants (^4«(I». HtB^res. 
 iii. 11). Tertullian sujiposed that the cherubic 
 figures, particularly the flaming sword, denoted 
 the torrid zone (Apol. cap. 47). Justin Martyr 
 imagined that the living creatures of Ezekiel 
 weie symbolical of Nebuciiadnezzar, the Assyrian 
 monarch, in his distress; when he ate grass like 
 an ox, hi.\ hair was like a lion's, and his nails like a 
 bird's c]a.v!s (Qtifest. xliv.). And Aihanasius sup- 
 posed that they were significant of the visible 
 heavens {Qiteest. ad Antiocl. cxxxv.). The opi- 
 nions of the moderns may be reduced to three 
 systems. Hutchinson and his followers consider 
 the cherubim as emblems of the Trinity, with man 
 incoqiorated into the divine essence: in proof of 
 
 which they remark that DlTTlN 3"im signify 
 either a flaming fiery sword, as the words are 
 rendered Uy the Septuagmt, or rather, a flame of 
 fire and a sword or knife; so tiiat, in this figure, 
 there was exhibited in visible foim, to the minds 
 of our first parents, tire — the emlilem of divine 
 wrath, as well as an instrumeiit for sacrifice — • 
 which, as it enfohled or revolved round itself 
 (naeinm or asEzekiel writes nilpPHO), can 
 mean nothing else than a picture pf the satisfaction 
 to be madeby deityitself. But the grand rbjection 
 to this theory, where it is at all intelligible, is, thai 
 not only arethecherubim, in all the places of Scrip- 
 ture where they are introduced, described as distinct 
 from God, and no more than his attendants, but that 
 it represents the divine Being, who is a pure spirit, 
 without parts, passions, or anything material, mak- 
 ing a visible picture of himself, when in all ages, 
 from the beginning of time, he has expressly pro- 
 b.ibited 'the likeness of anytiiiiig in heaven above' 
 (see Parkhurst, Heb. Lexicon, sub voce). Another 
 system regards the cherubim as symbolical of th« 
 chief ruling powers by which God carries on the 
 operations of nature. As the iieaven of heaveni 
 was typified by tiie holy of holies in the Leviticai 
 tabernacle (Heli. ix. 3-12, 2t-2S), this system 
 considers that the visil)''e heavens may be typified 
 by the holy place or the outer sanctuary, and ac- 
 cordingly finding, as its supporters imagine they 
 do, the cherubim identified with the aerial firmap
 
 CHILDREN. 
 
 ftient aid its elements in such passas^os a^ (lie fol- 
 lowing . ' He rode upon a cherub, and did (ly, yoa, 
 he did fly u])on the winn;3 of the wind,' where the 
 last hemistich is exegetical oi the former (Ps. 
 xviii. 10); 'Who ridetli upon the heavens in thy 
 help, and in his excellency upon the sky' (Dent. 
 xxxili.2(>; Ps. Ixviii. 4) ; ' lie maketh tlie ch)ud9 
 his chariot :' he is said to descend in lire (Exod. 
 xix. 18), and between which he dwelt in ligiit 
 '(1 Tim. vi. 16); and it was in tliis very man- 
 ner lie manifested liis divine i,dory in the tabernacle 
 and temple — they inter])ret the cherubim, on which 
 the Lord is described as ridinjr. to be symbulical 
 of the wind, the clouds, the fire, the light-, in 
 short, the heavens, the atmosphere, the great 
 physical powers by which the Creator and pre- 
 server of the universe carries on tlie operations of 
 nature. 
 
 A third system considers tl>e cherubim, from 
 their being instituted immediately after the Fall, 
 as having particular reference to tlie redemption 
 of man, and as symbolical of the great and active 
 rulers or, ministers of the church. Those who 
 adopt this theory as the true explanation of their 
 emblematical meaning, are accustomed to refer 
 to the living creatures, or cheruliim, mentioned in 
 the Apocalyjitic vision (Rev. iv. 6), improperly 
 rendered in our English tianslat ion ' beasts" {^(Jia), 
 and which, it is clear, were not angels, but redeemed 
 men connected with the church, and deejj'y in- 
 terested in tlie blessings and glory ]iro<ured by tl-.e 
 Lamb. The same character may be ascribed to 
 the living cieatuies ili Ezekiel's visions, and to 
 the cherubim, which stood over and looked in*o 
 the mercy-seat, sprinkle^ with the blood of the 
 ati)nement, and on the Shechinah, or divine glorv 
 arising I'roin it, as well as the cherubic ligures which 
 were placed on tlie edge of Eden ; and thus the che- 
 rubim, which are prominently introduced in all 
 the three successive dispensations of the covenant of 
 grace, appear to be symbols of those who, in every 
 age, should ollicially study and ])roc]aim the 
 gloiy and manifold wisdom of fJoil (See on 
 this curious subject Moiiceau, Aaron Purfjattis ; 
 Shaw, On the Cheruhhn ; Sjiencei, De Legib. 
 lIcbrTor. ; Grot ius. Notes on the Old Test. ; Bo- 
 chait, De Animal.; Bryant's Mythol. ; Kiiby's 
 liifi iliKt to Bridr/cirater Treatise.') — R. J 
 CHESTNUT-TREE. [Aumon.] 
 CHILDREN. The word 'children ' is some- 
 times used ill the plural number, when meant to 
 designate only one male issue (com[). 1 Chron ii. 
 31 ; 2 Ciiron. xxiv. 25 : x\xiii. 6). In such j.laces 
 the teim^ D*33. literally ' sons,' is equivalent to 
 otfspring. all of whom had probably died except 
 tie last-meiitione<l in the text. The more children 
 — esjiecially of male chililrcn — a person had 
 among the Hebrews, the more was he lionouied, 
 it l>eing fonsidfred as a mark oi" divine favour, 
 wdiile sterile peoji^e were, on tiie contraiy, iield in 
 c.inteiiipt (comp. Gen xi. 30 ; xxx. 1 ; 1 Sam. ii. 
 5 ; 2 Sam. vi. 'iJ ; Ps. cxxvii. 3. .sq. ; cxxviii. 3 ; 
 Luke i. 7 ; ii. 5). That children were often 
 Uiken as bondsm«!n by a creditor for delits con- 
 tiacted !; )■ the fattier, is evident from 2 Kings iv. 
 1 ; Is. 1 1 ; Neh. V. 5. Among the Helirews, 
 ft father had almost unlimited jwwer over his 
 children, nor do v/e find any law in the Penta- 
 teuch restricting that power to a certain age; 
 it was indeed the parents who even selected wives 
 fix their sons (Gen. xxi, 21 ; Exgd. xxi. 9, 10, 
 
 CHIOS. 
 
 471 
 
 II ; Jiidg. xiv. 2, f>). It would ajpj.ear, linwever, 
 that a father's power over his dauglifers wai 
 still greater than that over his .son*, since he might 
 even annul a sacred vow made by a tlaughter, 
 but not one made by a son (Num. xxx. 4. 16). 
 Children cursing or assaulting their imrents 
 were ])unished by the Rlosaical Law with death 
 (Exod. xxi. 1ft, 17; Lev. xx. *)); a remarkable 
 instance of which is quoted by Christ (Matt. xv. 
 4, 6; Mark vii. 9, 13). Before the time of 
 IMoses a father had the right to chottse among his 
 male children, and declare one of them (nsiially 
 the child of his favoinite wifej na his tirst-lnim 
 (1133), though he was |iriha]H only the youngest. 
 Properly s])»>aking, the ' tirsl-lmrn ' was he who 
 was first begotten by the father, since jxilygamy 
 excluded all regard in that respect to the mo- 
 ther. Thus Ja(!ob had sons by all his four wives, 
 while only one of them was called the lirst-bom 
 (Gen. xlix. 3 ; we find, however, instances, 
 where that name is apjilievl also to the first-lxirn 
 on the mother's side (1 Chron. ii. 50; comii. v. 
 42; Gen. xxii. 21). Tlie privileges of the first- 
 born were considerable, as shown in 'Birth- 
 right. 
 
 The first-bom son, if not expressly dejirived by 
 the father of his jieculiar rights, as was the case 
 with Renben (Gen. xlix.), was at libeity to sell 
 them to a younger brother, as ha]'])ened in the 
 case of Esau and Jacob (Gen. xxv. 31, sq.). 
 Considering the many privileges attache«l to 
 first-birth we do not wonder tiiat the .Ajiostle 
 called Esau a.thou(ihtloss]icrsim (Heb. xii. 16). 
 There are some allusions in Scrijiture to the 
 modes in which children were carried. These 
 appear to be adequately rejiresented by the ex- 
 isting usage.«, as rejiresented in the following cut 
 (No. 233). in which lig. 1 rejiresents a Nestorian 
 woman bearing her chiiil bundled at Iter back, 
 and (ig. 2, an Egyptian female beaiing her child 
 
 ( ■ her shoulder. The fnimer mode appears to 
 1 e alluded to in several ]ilace.s, and the latter in 
 Isa. xlix. 22: For other malteis regarding chil- 
 dren, see Adoption, Biuth, Bihthuight, Euu- 
 
 CATION. — E. M. 
 
 CHINNERKTH. [Cinneb-cth.] 
 CHIOS Xi'oy), one of the ))ri»icipai islands of 
 tlie Ionian Arciiipelagc, mentioned in .Acts xx. 
 1 ■'). It belongetl to loi ia, ami lay lietween the 
 islands Lesbos and .Sami-s, ajid distant eight 
 miles from the nearest jiromontorv (Areniuiin 
 Pr.) of Asia Minor, It is ihiity mA<^ long liouj 
 N. to S., and its greatest bieiidth ten miles. 
 It is very fertile in rotlon, silk, and fruit, and 
 was anciently celebrateti for its wine. 1 r.e 
 principal town was also railed Chios, ixnti ;.aj 
 the advantage of a good haibour (Stiabo xiv. 
 p. 645). Tlie island is now calleil by the Gteeka
 
 428 
 
 CHISLFA'. 
 
 Khio, and by the Italians Scici. Tl.e wln.les.de 
 massacre and ensl.ivement ol" ilie Inli.iliit^iiit.s l)j- 
 tiie Turks in l^'2'l forms one of lUe must shocking 
 incidents of the (iivek ".ar. 
 
 CIllSLEV vl!?P? ; 1 Mace. i. 54, XaaeKev) 
 is the name of tiuit month wl\ich is the third of 
 the civil, and the ninth of the ecclesiastical year 
 cf tlie Jews, and which commences with the new 
 nuxm of our l>ecenil)cr. It corresjionds, in Jo 
 geplius, to the Macedonian month 'AireWcuos. 
 As it is now adinitied that Chislev is one of those 
 IVrsiun names of months which the Jews adopted 
 after the ca])tivity, it is fruitless to search for a 
 Syro-Arabian etymology of the word. Benfey 
 has shown tliat VD3 is a mutilated form of 
 ?vD2 ; and, by an ingenious, although adven- 
 turous, moile of dcrivaticii, deduces that word 
 from the Zend Khsathravairya, through a series 
 of commutations incident to its transit through 
 «,}ie difterent dialects (^Monatsnamen einiger alter 
 Vdlker, p. 12i). 
 
 The memorable days which were observed in 
 this month were : — The feast of the dedication of 
 the Temple, in commemoration of its being puri- 
 fied from the heathen abominations of the Syrians, 
 ;*hich was celebrated by illuminations and great 
 demonstrations of joy for eight days, beginning 
 from the 25th of this month (1 Mac. iv. 59 j : and 
 a fast on account of Jehoiakim having, in this 
 month, l)urnt the roll containing Jeremiah's pro 
 phecy (Jer. x.v.wi. 22, 23). There is some dis- 
 pute whether this fast was observed on the 6th or 
 on the 28th of the month. It is an argument in 
 favour of the eailier tiay tliat the other would fall 
 in tlie middle of the eight days" festival of the 
 dedication. — J. N. 
 
 CHITTAH. [Wheat.] 
 
 CHITTIM, or Kittim (D"7il3, D''*^!'?), a 
 branch of the descendants of Javan, the son of 
 Japheth (Gen. x. 4). The plural termination of 
 Chittim, and other names in this ethnograpliical 
 survey (ver. 13, 14), renders it ])robable that the 
 term ion must be understood (like its correlate, 
 father ; v. An) not in the strict sense of that re- 
 lation. On the authority of Josephus, who is 
 folhiwed by Epiphanius and Jerome, it has been 
 generally admitted that the Chittim migrated 
 ftom Phoenicia to Cyprus, and founded there the 
 town of Citium, the modern Chitti. ' Chetlumus 
 possessed the island of Chethima, which is now 
 called Cyprus, end from this, all islands and 
 maritime places are "called Cliethim by the He- 
 brews' (Joseph. Aniiq. i. 6, § I). Cicero, it may 
 be remarked, sjjeaka of the tJitians as a Phoeni- 
 cian colony (iJe Finihus, iv. 20), ' scis enim Ci- 
 tiacos clientes tuos a Phoenicia profectos.' Dr. 
 Pococke copied at Citium thirty-three inscrip 
 tions in Phoenician characters, of which an en- 
 graving is given in his Description of the East, 
 (vol. ii. p. 213), and which have lecently been 
 explained by Gesenius in his Monum. Phmnic. 
 (p. 124 133). Some passages in the prophets 
 (Ezek. xxvii. 6; Isa. xxiii. 1, 12) imply an inti- 
 mate connection between Ciiittim and Tyre. At 
 a later period the name was applied to the Mace- 
 'ioTiians (1 Mace. i. 1, XeTxeietV ; and viii. i, 
 KiTie'u.'i'). Hengstenberg has lately endeavoured 
 Ur prove that in every passage in the Old Testa- 
 Bieal wliere the word occurs, it means Cyprus, or 
 
 CHRONICLES. 
 
 the Cyprians. On Numbers xxiv. 21. he rema-lu 
 that the invaders of As or and Etic; are said to 
 come wvA from Chittim, but D\"I3 'W'., fror\ the 
 cueist of Chittim, that being the track of vessels 
 coming from the west of Palestine. In Dan. xi. 
 30, he contends that tlie use of the absolute 
 form, D''^^*, instead of the construct, denr)tes a 
 less intimate connectioin with the following 
 word, and that the phrase means, like that in 
 Balaam's prophecy (t6 which he supposes th**' 
 prophet alludes), ships sailing along the coast of 
 Ciiittim. The Vulgate translates Ciiittim, in this 
 passage, Romanos, s.n interpretation a<lopfed by 
 several of ths ancient Je.vish and Christian writers. 
 Bochart attcmjitg to supjK)rt it on etymological 
 grounds, of which Michaelis presumes to say, 
 'etymologica autein quas de Latio Bochartus 
 habet, facile ipsi relinquo, qusestiones geogra- 
 phicas his crepimdiis carere cupions.' 
 
 After a careful examination of the works of 
 which the titles are given at the end of this article, 
 the writer is disposed to acquiesce in the opinion 
 expressed by the editor of the Pictorial Bible, 
 ' Chittim seems to be a name of large signification 
 (such as our Levant), apiilied to the^slands and 
 coasts of the Meditenanean, in a loose sense, 
 without fixing the particular part, though particu- 
 lar and different parts of the whole are probably 
 in most cases to be understood" (v. notes on Ezek. 
 xxvii. 6 ; Michaelis, Spicilegium Geographiee 
 HehrcEorum Exterce post Bochartum, pars i. pp. 
 1-7, 103-114; Michaelis, Supplemenfa ad Lexica 
 Hebraica, pp. 113S, 1377-13^0; Bocharti Geagr. 
 Sacr. c. 157-161; Gesenii Thesaurus, ]). 726; 
 Pococke's Description of the East, vol. ii. p. 
 213; Neuton"s Dissertations on (he Prophecies, 
 v.; Hengstenberg, Die Gescliiclite Bileams i/nd 
 seine Weissagungen, Berlin, 1842, pp. 200-202). 
 
 J. E. R. 
 CHIUN. [Remph.vn.] 
 
 CHLOE (XA({t7), a Christian worrian at Co- 
 rinth, some members of whose family atlbrded 
 Paul intelligence concerning the divisions which 
 reiifned in the ciiurcii at that place (I Cor. i. 11). 
 CHOACH. [Thorns.] 
 CHORAZIN (XopafiV), a town mentioned in 
 Matt. xi. 21 ; Luke x. 13, in connection with 
 Bethsaida and Capernaum, not far from whichj 
 in Galilee, it appears to have been situated. 
 Jerome makes it a village of Galilee, on the shore 
 of the lake Tiberias, two miles from Capernaum 
 ( Onomast.,3iTi. ' Chorozain "). Lighlfoot and other 
 Talmudical scholars have endeavoured to identify 
 it with certain places named in tlie Mishnah; 
 and travellers have hazarded various conjectures 
 as to its site. But no place of the name has 
 been historically noticed since the days of Jerome ; 
 and not only the town, but its very name ap- 
 pears to have long since perished. [Bethesda , 
 Capernaum.] 
 
 CHRIST. [Jesus.] 
 
 CHRONICLES. Name.—Thh name seema 
 to have been first given to two historical Wooks ol 
 the Old Testament liy Jerome (Pmlog. Galeat.) 
 The Hebrews call them D''?D''n 'IIT, i. e. words 
 of days, diaries, or journals, and reckon them 
 but one book. Tlie Alexanilrian translators, who 
 regarded them as two liooks, used the appellatiou 
 TiapaXiiirifjiiva, things omitted, as i " they were 
 supplementary to the other historical records Im* 
 longing to the Old Testament cinon.
 
 CHRONICLES. 
 
 Contents — In 1 Cliron. i-ix. is piven a nenen 
 «f f^eiiealo^ical fal)lps infersjK'rsed wifli liisforical 
 notices. These g^nealo^^ios are not complete. 
 
 1 Chron. x-xxix. contains tlie liistory of Daviil, 
 partly agreeing «itli tiie accoiuil given of liini in 
 tlie hooks oC Samuel, thongli \vith several impor- 
 tant aklifions relating to the Levites. 
 
 3 ('liron. i-ix. contains the history of Solomon. 
 
 2 ('hron. x-.xxviii. furnishes a succinct account 
 of the kingdom of Jitd/ih while Ismvl still re- 
 mained, l)nt separate fioni the history of the latter. 
 
 2 ("Cliron. xxix-xxxvi. describes the kingdom of 
 Jiidati after the downfall of I.M-ael, especially with 
 reference to the woiship of God. 
 
 From this analysis it appears that the Clin>- 
 nicles contain an epitome of sacred history, par- 
 ticularly from tiie origin of the Jewish nation to 
 the end of the first captivity. 
 
 Diction. — The diction is such as suits the time 
 immcdiatehj juhscquent to the captivity. It is 
 9ul)st.iintially the same with- that of Ezra, Nehe- 
 miah, and Esther, v?;luch were all written shortly 
 after the Bahylonisli exile. It is mixed with 
 AranifPisms, marking at once the decline of the 
 Jews in power, and the corruption of their native 
 tongue. The pare Hebiew had been then laid 
 aside. It was lust dm'ing their sojouin in Biil)ylon. 
 The orthoyntphij is characterized by an adoption 
 of the matrcs Icctionis, ]i:irticularly in the word 
 in, which is written T'lT. In one passage (2 
 Chron. XXV. 1) D*'?Dn")» occurs for D^^T. In 
 proper names Ahqih is frequently intei changed 
 with h'! quiescent at the end, as NtJ? for TWV ( 1 
 Chron. xiii. 7). A contrary interchange of the 
 kanie letters is found at tlie fomniencemenl of a 
 word as yT\ for "j'-X (1 Chron. xiii. 12). Aleph 
 pi'osi/ietic occurs in '''C'ii for ''^'i (1 Chron. ii. 
 13) We meet also with such peculiaiities of 
 diction as |1i-l^^ \\,i JDnN (2 Chron. ii.G); J'U, 
 a Persian wuid (2('lut)n. ii. 13;; n"l''2, which 
 appears also to lie of Persian origin f 1 Chron. 
 xxix. 1); -jnj (1 Chron. xxviii. 11); tJ'nTin 
 (I Chron. V. 17); ^TID (2 Chron. xxiv. 27; 
 xiii. 22) ; p3 (] Chron. xxi. 7) ; -p-^ (2 Chron 
 ii. 15J; h^p (2 Chion. xxix. 16); To'pn (1 
 Chron. xxv. 8). (See Gesenius"s Geschichte der 
 Hcb. Sprache xtnd Schrift ; Graniberg's Die 
 Chronik nach ilircm Geschi-chtl. Charakter, &.<i.; 
 De Wette's Einleitiaiff. 4th cd. 5 ISO.) 
 
 Ar/e and Author.. — Internal evidence suf- 
 ficiently demonstrates that the Chronicles were 
 writteri after the captivity. Thus the history 
 is brought down to tlie end of the exile, and 
 mention is made of the restoration by Cyrus 
 (2 . Chron. xxxvi. 21, 22). It is certain that 
 they were comjiilcd after the time of Jeremiah 
 (2 Chion. XXXV. 2')), who lived to see the destruc- 
 lion of Jerusalem by the Chaldiean?. The genea- 
 fogy of Zerubbiibel is even continued to the time 
 of .Alexander (1 Onoh. iii. 19-21). The same 
 opiinon is siqijwrted by the character of the or- 
 thofiraphij and the nature of the hinguacje em- 
 (jloyed, as we have already secti, both which are 
 Aram;can in C'oiviplexion, and hanrlimize with the 
 books confessedly >viitton after the exile. The 
 lews generally iucril)* the Chronicles to Ezra 
 iBaha Batli)-ci, f xv. c.X). Such is their most 
 ancient tiadition, ^lowever falf(j' it may be in the 
 opinion of Kv.aTil. With th^ni agree Carpzov, 
 Eiclihorn. Ki il.and HUvernick ; but Calniet, Jahn, 
 
 CHRONICLFA 
 
 43» 
 
 De Wette, Bertholdt, Gramberg, and M i-ers at- 
 tribute them to some unknown author. ITie ful- 
 lowing arguments may be adduced in favour of 
 the current Jewish ujiinion : — 
 
 1st. The language of Ezra, who is gmeralljr 
 thought to have written the IxM.k that liears his 
 name, remarkably coincides with that of the 
 Chronicles. A<-cordingly, Movers fully concedes 
 llinSif^lironicles anil Ezra formeil originally one 
 Ijook'iind pro'-eeded fiom one autiior, altliough be 
 argues that oidy n part of the biH.k of Ezra wjia 
 written liy himself, while the other ] art and the 
 books of Chnniicles were comjiiled by some j)rie.st 
 or Levile. But if Ezra wiofe a jxiriion of that 
 hook whi:;h is now called by his name, there is no 
 good groinid for sup|»osing that he did not com- 
 jiose the whole ; and if lie compileil the whole, 
 tlien we argue that the fragment ity character and 
 the entire style present a remarkable sinijlaiity to 
 the books of the Chronicles. They obviously 
 point to the same writer (See Keil's Apologhtiacher 
 Veisuch iih^y die Clirw.ik, Berlin, 1«3:}, Svo.). 
 
 2ndly. Another argument in supjort of the 
 same view is, that the book of Ezra liegins with 
 the same woi-ds with wliich the Chronicles termi- 
 nate. The same person repeats his own words in 
 order to connect his history. 
 
 This re])etition, however, h.xs l)een accounted 
 for ill otiier ways. Thus if has-been conjec- 
 tured that the last two verses were added by some 
 transcriber, who, having finished the book of Chro- 
 nicles at verse 21, proceeded, without leaving the 
 usual flistance between different books, to write 
 the b(K)k of Ezra ; bur, soon finding his mi.stake, 
 broke off abruptly and began Ezra at the usual 
 distance, without erasing the lijies which he had 
 care'essly .ipjended to Chronicles. Tliis supposes 
 that Ezra once followaf Chronicles. Cthers ac- 
 count for the repetition by referring to a practice 
 among tlie Jews, who, ' in the jiublic reading of 
 their Scriptures, to avoid ending with the recital 
 of any calamity producing dejection, add the 
 commencement of the next para,uapii, or repeat a 
 portion of that wliich precedes, in order to finish 
 witii something consolatory." (Tiamberg thinks 
 tliat such repetition proves the writer of Ctironicles 
 to have had the book of Ezra before him; but 
 this is purely conjectural, and contrary to other 
 evidence. Besides, why may it not as well es- 
 tablisii the reverse? The wish of tuis Rationalist 
 writer to I ring down these bixjks to a vjpry lale 
 ])eriod prompte"! him to advance an argument so 
 utterly baseless. ' 
 
 To the first mwle, which aftrilmies this remark- 
 able rccaiiilulafion to a transcriber, we do not 
 attach mucli proiiability. It n:ay beobjccteil that 
 there are at least two verbal dillincnces Mwem 
 tlie woids as they appear in Chronicles and in 
 Ezra, so that the careless transcriber must !«■ sup- 
 jiosed not only to have written .so far without per- 
 ceiving his mistake, but also to have rojjitd inac- 
 curately. Besides, it is not c .nsr^tenf wifli the 
 haliitual accuraity of the Jewish s'l ibes to have 
 committed so palpable an error : or, al>er having 
 fallen inti,- it, not to ro'tify it. The tmivn-sality 
 of its existence also militates a ;ainsf the liy[>othe- 
 sis. Another copyist mustsoi'U have d"-te»ted the 
 mistake, unless I.e had chosen to .<ihuf hi< eye.v 
 All copies contain tlie jnxssage in b..th jilaces ; UnA 
 it is found in the Sejituagint tnucthitioii Ui'h si 
 Clininiclei and E.^ra.
 
 130 
 
 CHRONICLES 
 
 The second mcnle of accounting for the fact 
 i» equally imjirobalile. Tlie practice to wliicli 
 appeal is made lelates to the public recital of the 
 Heliiew Sciiptuios, rather than to their wriClcn 
 ttatc. Be.si(hs, the mnemonic teiin p^Jy'' in- 
 cludes a detiiiite nutnl)er of hooks, viz. Isaiah, 
 the twelve minor piciphets, Lamentations, and 
 Eccl'siastes, in roadinj; which the Jews wa» ac- 
 customed to lejieat tiie jKirticm tiiat precedes the 
 (cmiiriatioii. Tliat ihey added the ciimmence- 
 meiit of the paragraph subsequent to the sad por- 
 tion, or tliat such a practice was extended to Ezra, 
 or indeed to any other of the sacred books except 
 those specified, can never be proved. It is a 
 gratuitous snpjH>sition destitute of all foundation. 
 
 In shoiJ, no method of accounting for the 
 reji^tition is so probable as that which makes 
 Ezra ciintini j his own liistory nearly in his own 
 words. 
 
 3rdly. Th-; jiortions jieculiar to the Chronicles 
 are just suci as we might expect from Ezra. 
 They correspond to his character as a zealous 
 ref )imer and priest. 
 
 In opposition to these arguments it hiis been 
 asserted — • 
 
 1st. That the genealogy of Zerubbabel is 
 brought down to tlie time of Alexander, who was 
 later than Ezra. Hence some have even placed 
 the writer in 'the time of Alexander tlie Great 
 So lie VVette. in tlie third edition oi his Introduc- 
 tion to the Old Testament. Eichhorn, Jahn, nnd 
 Dahlcr assume, that 1 Chion. iii. 19-24 was ap- 
 pended by a moilein hand. Tliis conjecture may 
 ne tine, tliough it does not commend itself to our 
 approbation, t»ecau-e there is strong evidence in 
 favour of tlie opinion that the canon was com- 
 
 tleteil by Ezra and the learned men with whom 
 e was associated (see H<i\emick"s Einleitimg in 
 das Alte Testament, p. 49). Was it not possible, 
 howe\'er, for Ezra to write the portion in question ? 
 If he was inspired, as we believe, is there aught 
 to forbid the supposition that such knowledge was 
 directly communicated to liim ? The fact of his 
 uispiration is quite suflicient to account for his 
 recording the genealogy of Zerubbabel. 
 
 2ndly. The dilference of the genealogies in 
 I Chron. vi. 3, etc., and Ezra vii. 1, etc., proves 
 that Ezra was not the writer of both. So De 
 Wette. This ar4:ument is weak. Ezra's design 
 in writing the book that bears his name must have 
 been different from his object in compiling the 
 Chronicles. Most properly, therefore, does he 
 vary in his accounts. Sometimes he relates more 
 briefly what he had already narrated in detail, 
 and vice versA. 
 
 3rdly. It is improbable that the histories con- 
 tained in the books of Kings and Chronicles 
 should be written by the same person, since they 
 contain numerous tliscrepancies and contradic- 
 tions. This olijection is valid only against those 
 who believe that the books of Kings were written 
 by Ezra. So far from supposing, with Dr. Allix 
 and others, that Ezra wrote the Chronicles about 
 26 years after the Kings, we believe, upon the 
 ground of strong internal evidence, that there was 
 almost an interval of .t. century between the com- 
 position of the two works. 
 
 4thly. Such ])assages as 2 Chron. v. 9 and viii. 
 8, the former of which speaks of the ark being in 
 tlie holy place ' unto this day,' and the latter, of 
 tribute being paid ' until t u day,' seerr to imply 
 
 CHRONICLES. 
 
 that the Chronicles were written while the t«mpt« 
 
 was standing, before the decline of Jridah. 
 
 Were it supposed tliat Ezra was the orif;',nai 
 writer of these passages, they would prove fatal to 
 the idea of his ha\ ing composed these historicai 
 books. But, on the contrary, they were trao- 
 scribed from records existing before tlie tempi* 
 was demolished, and inserted verbatim as Ezra 
 found them. But why, it may be asked, did he 
 not accommodate them to his own time? Did lie 
 quote indiscriminately, as has been said, without 
 taking the trouble to reconcile inconsistencies! 
 Far he it from us to adopt or sanction such un- 
 guarded language as virtually sets asifle the in- 
 spiration of tiie writer. 
 
 The Chronicles were intended as a supplement 
 to other historical books, especially Samuel and 
 Kings. Accordingly, the portions repeated from 
 these for the sake of completeness, or derived 
 from public annals, the compiler did not deenr 
 necessary or desirable to adapt in e\ery in. 
 stance to the time in which he himself live<i. 
 They were copied with the subordinate design oi 
 connecting such portions as he was prompted to 
 write for the first time. They are incidental, not 
 essential, lo the author's purpose. They serve as 
 links to give unity and compactness to such para- 
 giaplis as the Holy Spirit thought to be the most 
 important. To change these extracts was not, 
 therefore, regarded necessary. Minute and sys- 
 tematic etVoit for attaining accuracy does not 
 characterize the sacred authors. With an ingenu- 
 ous and noble negligence they disdain artificial 
 trammels. Expressions like these show the scru- 
 pulous fidelity with which the compiler a<lhered 
 to the ancient records. The same jiassages, it may 
 be remarked, also occur in the books of Kinga 
 (I Kings viii. 8; 1 Kings ix. 21). and show, from 
 their exact similarity, that they were copied fi-om 
 the same original. 
 
 Stilly. The difference of style and manner of 
 narration in Ezra and Chronicles shows that Ezra 
 was not the author. So Jahn. This assertion is 
 certainly unfounded. The style, language, and 
 idiom are remarkably alike, as will be manifest to_ 
 ihe attentive reader of these works. The manrier 
 of narration in botli jiartakes of no greater dissi- 
 milarity than the different objects with which they 
 were written demand and justify. Other argu- 
 ments in fivour of Ezra may be seen in Keil's 
 Apologetischer Versuch iibcr die C'/ironik, BerVm, 
 1833, 8vo. 
 
 Scope. — The principal design of the writer 
 seems to have been to maintain the proper distinc- 
 tions between the tribes and families of the re- 
 turning Hebrews, that the Messiah's descent out 
 of the tril;e and family whence he was to spring 
 according to prophecy, might be made manifest. 
 Accordingly, the family of David is specially no- 
 ticed and prominently portrayed. The author als* 
 shows how the lands had been distributed before 
 the captivity, that the peojile might obtain the 
 ancient inheritance of their fathers. In doing so 
 he goes back to the most ancient times, and pre- 
 sents to his countrymen their earliest history, lest, 
 during their exile, they might have forgotten their 
 original and lost the traces of their real ancestry. 
 In addition to this object it was also intended to 
 show how the worship of God should be jjroperly 
 resumed and orderly re-established. In accord- 
 ance with such a purpose he gives the getie»
 
 CHRONICLES. 
 
 logy of the priests and Levites more fully than 
 »ny otiier wiiter, lecoids tlieir I'mictioiis and laiik, 
 and eiitcis with paiiiculaiity into the uriaiige- 
 ments estdlilislied amoiitj tliem by David and 
 Soloaiiin. Tuese two ]juiposes, wliicli are closely 
 *Uie;l, will serve to deiiionsliate the [leiftct cim- 
 (jruity of all that is jieculiar in tiie Cliimiicles. 
 Ttiey account lor the geiiealoijical tables, the >jpe- 
 citicatioiis of tribes and families with tl)?ii- biiua- 
 tion, as also f..r a variety of references to the 
 priests and Levites, to the preparations made by 
 David for I'uilding tiie temple, the refoimatioiis 
 ■which took place at dillercut periiids, the pros- 
 j)erity of such kings as feared Jehovah and walked 
 in his ways, to tlie maivellous inler|}osition3 of 
 Heaven on behalf of those who trusted in Him 
 alone, to the idolatry of Israel and their conse- 
 quent misl'ortunes. 
 
 Tlie books of Chronicles as comjiared with those 
 of Kings art' moie didactic than historical. Tiie 
 historical tendency is siiliordinated to ihe didactic. 
 Indeed, the puiely historic torm appears to be 
 j»reserved only in so far as it presente<l an appro- 
 priate medimn for those religioirs anil moral ol)- 
 servations wliich the a'lthor was directed to ad- 
 duce. Samuel and Kings are more occupied 
 with the 1 elation of /;c</<^ita/ occmrencei ; while 
 the Clir.inicles fiunisli det<iiled accounts of eccle- 
 siastical institutions. 
 
 ,>t,urces. — A tlioroii.rli examination of these 
 books as compaieii with iluse of Samuel and 
 Kin^s will satisfy the inipuier that the latter were 
 known to Ezra and extensively used by him in 
 the composition of Clironicles. It is impossible 
 to believe, with Le Clerc, that the writer of the 
 Chronicles did not know the books of Samuel and 
 Kings. De Wette anil Miivers reler to the cha- 
 racter of originality belonging to the earlier ac- 
 counts of Samuel and Kings as contrasted wltii 
 the compilation-manner of the records in the 
 iKjoks beiore us, but this has a feeble and ques- 
 tionalile existence. Tiie earlier books themselves 
 must have been com;)iled from annals. So far 
 as the history contained in them is concerned, it 
 fiears little evidence of originality. It is true that 
 the books of Samuel present no references to na- 
 tional records such as occur in Kings, but their 
 internal character and structure evince their deri- 
 vation from annals contemporaneous with the 
 events they relate. 
 
 But the books of Samuel and Kings are not 
 the only source from which the Chronicles have 
 been taken. Public documents formed the com- 
 mon groundwork of the thiee histories. The 
 Pentateuch has also been used in their compi- 
 lation. A coniiiarison of the first nine chapters 
 of 1 Cliron. witli the Mosaic books will show the 
 parallelism existing lietween them; and it should 
 be especially noticed that 1 Chron. i. 43-54 agrees 
 verbatim with Genesis xxxvi. 31-43. Perhaps, 
 tiowever, this passage in both has been drawn 
 Irom tlie same source. 
 
 As the Almighty does nothing superfluously, 
 and puts fortli iiu extition of his po.ver where his 
 infinite wisdom does not perceive a fitting neces- 
 sity, it would have iieen unnecessary, as far as we 
 can perceive, to suggest ane.v to the mind of the 
 writer facts with which he must have been jiar- 
 tially acquainted by tradition, and whicii he had 
 . an o[)portuiiity of knowing from th« sacred records. 
 It is evident that the CItronicles vere conmiled 
 
 CIIUONICLES. 
 
 431 
 
 not only from former inspired wriliiigs, but, foi 
 tlie most ]!art, froMi public records, itglsier.s, and 
 genealogies l>elongin|{ to the Jews. Tluit iijitional 
 annals existed tliere can lie no doubt. They ar» 
 expressly mentioned, as in 1 C^hion. xxvii. 24 
 They contained an acroiinl of the niDSt important 
 events in the history ul the Ilebiews, and were 
 generally lodged in the laljernacle or temple, 
 where they could be most conveniently <onsulled. 
 The histories of kings appear to have been 
 usually written hy prophets (1 Cliron. xxix. 2& , 
 2 Chion. ix. 2!); xii. 1.'); xiii. 22). Hence Uiey 
 constantly refer to the di\ i)ie rewards and punisli- 
 mcnts characterizing tlie theocracy. These his- 
 torical writings of the prophets were, for th« 
 most pait, inserted in the public annal<, as is 
 evident t'rom 2 Chron. xx. 31 ; xxxi 32; xii. 1.^; 
 
 XXIV. 27. W hether they were always so inserted 
 is questionable, for they seem to be distin|j^ii.-.hcd 
 from the annals of the kingdom in 2 Chron. 
 xxxiii. 19. From such souices Kzra extracteii 
 the accounts which he was )jromj)ted to wiite for 
 the use of mankind in all ages. U'e cannot be- 
 lieve that his selection wiis indiscriminate or care- 
 less. His insjiiration efl'ectually secured him 
 against eveiy filing that was inaccurate or unsuit- 
 able to the purposes for which he was sujwina- 
 turally enlightened. That he commitleil mistakes 
 cannot for a moment be admitted, else his history 
 is imjjugned and. its position in the canon inex- 
 plicable. His veracity* integrity, and scrupulous 
 exactness must be held fast by eveiy right-minded 
 believ er. 
 
 The following are the references to older me- 
 moirs or historical works: — 1. The book of Sa- 
 muel the seer, the book of Nathan the pioplief, 
 and the book of Gad the seer (1 Chron. xxix. 29). 
 This cannot mean the insjiired books of Samuel, 
 because they do not contain the entire history of 
 David (' his acts first and last"). It refers to a 
 history of his own times written by Samuel, and 
 to a continuation of it, embracing succeeding 
 times, written by Nathan and Gad, from which 
 it is probable that part of the contents of the 
 present books of Samuel was drawi..— 2. The 
 book of Nathan tlie pro)ihel, the prophecy of 
 Ahijah the Shilonite, and the visions of Iddo the 
 seer (2 Chron. ix. 29). — 3, The book of Siiemaiah 
 the prophet, and of Iddo the seer concerning ge- 
 nealogies ; or, as De Wette translates it, after 
 the manner of famihj-registei's (2 Chron. xii. 
 15). — 4. The story, or rather, tli.- intciyre'.ation 
 (jnidrash) of the jirophet Iddo (2 Chron. xiii. 22^). 
 — 5. The book of Jehu the son of Hanani, inserted 
 in tlie book of the Kings of Israel (2 Cliron. xx. 
 34). — 6. The history of Uzziah, by Isaiah the son 
 of Amoz (2 Chron. xxvi. 22). — 7. The vision of 
 Isaiah the prophet, in the book of the Kings of 
 Jiidah and Israel i2 Chron. xxxii. 32.) (^Sce 
 Gesenius's Commentar iibcr den Jesnia ; Einleit. 
 § 4.) — S. The sayings of Hosai (2 Chron. xxxiii. 
 19). — 9. The interpretation of the b;>ok of the 
 Kings (2 Chron. xxiv. 27).— 10. The book of the 
 Kings of Judah and Israel (2 Chion. xvi. 11 ; 
 
 XXV. 26 ; xxvii. 7 ; xxviii 26; xxxv. 27 : xxxvi. 
 8). This could not have been our present book' 
 of Kings, bnt public annals, because in several 
 instances where the rea<ier is referre;l to them fof 
 further information, our books of Kings con'ain 
 less than what is stateil in tlie Chronicles. — I] 
 The book of the Kings of Israel i^l Chion. xx. ii^
 
 43) 
 
 CHRONICLES. 
 
 — 12. Tlie words -jr liistoiies of tho Kings of Israel 
 (3 Chrun xxxiii. IS). Il is jjiobable tliat Nos. 
 10, 11, aivd 12 refer to tlie same historical work. 
 —13. The Chronicles of King David (1 Ciiron. 
 xxvii. -in.— 14. The Lumentiitions (2 Chron. 
 zzxv. "2.")). This does not mean the Lamentations 
 of Jeremiah which we now h:ive, but ottiei- Li- 
 mentationj composed by flie propliet on the death 
 ^ of Josiah, and long since lost. 
 
 Disircp'.mcics biiweeii the books of Chronicles 
 and former hlstjrics. — These discrepancies may 
 be arranged under three hea<ls : I., variations in 
 orthoipaphif and d.ctian ; II, in urraiigemcnt ; 
 III., in facta and nunibem. 
 
 I. <>{Jer and inore difficult expressions are 
 usually changed for suck as are later and 
 easier. 
 
 Th()<e variations (hat respect orthography alone 
 are of a fhreefold kind. 
 
 («..) The Scriptio plena instead of (he defec- 
 tiva (comp. 2 Chron. viii. 18 with 1 Kings ix. 
 27). 
 
 (b.) Variations adapted to the later and, for 
 the most ])art, the Aramxan form of the language 
 (comp. 2 Chron. x. \.H with 1 Kings xii. 18). 
 
 (c.) Corrections of anomalous forms (comp. 2 
 Chron. xxi. 9 with 2 Kings viii. 21). 
 
 Vaiiafions of a gramniaiicai nature exliibit the 
 same endeavour to accotiiioodate the text of the 
 older and more dillicult original to later usage, 
 thus : — 
 
 (a.) The older form of a substantive is changed 
 for a later form from the same root (comp. 
 1 Chron. xiv. 2 with 2 Sam. v. 12). 
 
 (6.) The more ancient or irregular flexion of a 
 substantive or verb is altered into tha( belonging 
 to later ii.sage (comp. 2 Chron. ix. 19 with 
 I Kings x 2U; 1 Chron. xix. 12 with 2 Sam. 
 X. llj. 
 
 (p.) Alteratiims adap(ed to the later iisns lo- 
 guendi are made in the construction. Thus, in 
 place of fiie infinitive absolute^ joined to the finite 
 verb of tlie same root, the writer of the Chronicles 
 uiiiformly omits the infinitive (comp. 1 Cliron. 
 xiv. 10 with 2 Sam. v. 19; 2 Chron. vii. 19 with 
 1 Kings Ix. (5). 
 
 {d.") Grammatical corrections. Thus, in verbs 
 Lamed He, the writer of the Chronicles uses the 
 apocopated future conversire, instead of the full 
 form (comp. 2 Chron. xviii. 23, 33 with 1 Kings 
 xxii. 21, 34). 
 
 Tlius far with regard to the orthography and 
 grammatical character. In respect to the lan- 
 guage of these books we find — 
 
 (a.') That an older or unusual expression is 
 changed for one later or more current (comp. 
 
 1 Chron. xxi. 2 with 2 Sam. xxiv. 2; 1 Chron. 
 X. 12 with 1 Sam. xxxi. 12). 
 
 (b.) Names that liad become rare or antiquated, 
 are altered into such as had become cm-rent and 
 better known (^comp. 2 Chron. xvi. 4 with 1 Kincs 
 XV. 2il;. 
 
 (c.) Defniteness and precision are given to 
 indenijite expressions used in tlie sources whence 
 the writer (hew (comp. 2 Ciiron. xxxiv. 24 with 
 
 2 Kings xxii. IG). 
 
 (d.) Exi;ressions liable to be taken in an er- 
 roneous or Lad sense arech.mged for others which 
 are synonymous (comp. 2 Chron. xxii. 12 with 
 2 Kings xi. 3; 1 Chron. xix. 4 with 2 Sam. 
 «.4> 
 
 CHRONICLES. 
 
 II. Discrepancies in arrannemcnt. 
 
 Even a cursory perusal of these books, as com' 
 ])ar(:'d with those of .Samuel and K'tigs, will show 
 that several sections are dillerently placed. Thil 
 fact, however, is of no weight against (he authen- 
 ticity or authority of the Chronicles. Tiie sacred 
 writers do not profess to follow the order of time. 
 The historical writings of Moses, the prophecie* 
 of Isaiah and Jeremiah, the Gospels of Matthew, 
 Mark, and Luke, are not placed in tiie exact 
 order of time : 1 Chron xiv. (comp. 2 Sam. v. 
 11-25), 2 Chron. i. 14-17 (comp. 1 Kings x. 
 2()-29), ani) 2 Chron. ix. 25, &c., are evidentlj 
 out oi their true chronological ])osition. 
 
 III. Under this head may be classed — 
 
 (a.) Omissions of words, plirases, sentences, 
 and paragraphs ; as also abbreviations of formej 
 statements. 
 
 (6.) Additions, longer or shorter, as compared 
 with preceding accounts lelative to the same 
 topics. 
 
 If we remember (hat these books are supple- 
 ■mentary, we shall not be surprised at such par- 
 ticulars, but rather be jirepared to expect them. 
 Several localities had changed their names or 
 undergone alterations. The restored Jews knew 
 certain tilings under other appellations and by o-'her 
 definitive marks than those which had formerly 
 distinguished them. The writers had also difier- 
 ent purjjoses, requiring an adaptation of their nar- 
 ratives to the circumstances amid which they 
 lived, and the state of knowledge ]X)ssessed by 
 their contemporaries. Besides, the materials were 
 more numerous after the cajjtivity. So far, then, 
 from accusing the writer of inco7-7'ectness, sense- 
 lessness, and co7ifusion, as De Wetfe does, be- 
 cause of these discrepancies, we regard them as 
 evidences of his fidelity and proofs of his artless- 
 ness. Variations are not contradictions. No 
 two historians in narrating the same event's will 
 give exactly the same circumstances, although 
 both their narratives may be most true. 
 (c.) Discrepancies arid contradictions. 
 But not only do discrepnjic/es exist between 
 the Chronicles and former histories, there are also 
 c07iiradictio7is. Looking at the iMasorctic text, 
 the fact cannot be questioned. However disagi^ee- 
 able or unwelcome, it must be admitted. 
 
 Many passages, however, which are usually 
 adduced under this head, do not belong to it 
 Thus— 
 
 2 Ciiron. ix. 25 1 Kings iv. 26. 
 
 „ xxii. 2 2 Kings viii. 26. 
 
 1 Chron. xxi. 1 2 Sam. xxiv. 1. 
 
 „ xxi. 5 „ xxiv. 9 
 
 „ xxi. 11, 12 . . . „ xxiv, 13 
 „ xxi. 25 „ xxiv. 24. 
 
 2 Chron. xiii. 2 . 1 Kings xv. 10. 
 
 are not opjiosed to one another. There is no con- 
 trailiction in them : they are quite reconcilable. 
 Dr. Kennicott and others liave hastily infeiTed 
 that there is corrujrtion, because they did not per- 
 ceive their right meaning. Our sjiace will not 
 allow us to point out the true mode of harmo. 
 nizing them ; we may therefore be permitted to 
 refer to Davidson's Sacred Hermeneutics, where 
 they are fully resolved The jireeeding are not 
 all the passages fiequently quoted as contradic. 
 tory. They furnish a spechnen of lho.se that ap 
 pear to be so. In Movers, Kennicott, and Gram* 
 berg, others may be found which are injud'ici u'sif
 
 CHRONICLES. 
 
 hroi I ^lit forward as truly at variance; yet there 
 are real contradictious. Thus — 
 
 2 Chron. viii. 18 1 Kinjrs ix. 2<^. 
 
 1 Chron. xi. 11 2 Sam. xxiii. 8. 
 
 „ xxi. 5 ,. xxiv. 9, whore 
 
 the numbers of Jmiali are (lilVercnt. 
 
 „ xviii. 4 2 Sam. viii. 4. 
 
 „ xix. 18 „ x. 18. 
 
 and other places that miglit be quoted, present 
 real contradictions. How then are ihey to be dis- 
 posed off To this we re])ly, that the text is cor- 
 rupt. It is \vell known that the text of the b(K)ks 
 of Samuel, Kings, and C'hronicles is in a woise 
 condition th.9.n that of the otlier inspired writings. 
 The fact is unquestionable, in whatever way it 
 may be explained. Heie, trans'-ribers fell info 
 more mistakes than they have elsewheie com- 
 nutted. Many of the nau\es and words that are 
 difleiently written, should be referred to this 
 head. Some omissions and some interpolations 
 also belonj^ to it. They are notliini; iiut corrup- 
 tions in the text. Hut the piincij/al contradic- 
 tions relate to nnmhers. These seem to have been 
 ex])ressed in various ways; and co])yists, having 
 difl'erent methods of maikinsr ihem, were natu- 
 rally exposed to errors. Sometimes numbers were 
 designated by letters, occasionally h\ ciphers ; 
 and again they were maiked by irords. 
 
 ^* is time that the text of these iiistoiical books 
 should be rectilie<l in those instances where an 
 unquestionalde necessity exists. If there be not 
 manuscrijit evidence to warrant cp)tain changes, 
 we siiould not be deterred from making tliem. 
 Common sense, the credit of the inspired writers, 
 and, above all, their sacred authority, outweigh 
 all scru{)les about c.ovrectin^ \iy covjccture. Heal 
 contradictions should never be allowed to tarni.sh 
 t text written under llie immediate su];erintend- 
 ence of the Holy Spiiit. Errors (•ommitte<l by 
 copyists should be at once removed, else evil- 
 minded men may charge them on the original 
 authors. Some areaveise to believe that they iiave 
 originated, since the close of the canon, in the nn- 
 uroidahle changes incident to the nmltiplication 
 of copies during many centuries. It is mar- 
 vellous to observe the attachment with which lia- 
 tioiialists adhere to the Masoietic text as if it were 
 perfect. On the groimd of its absolute correct- 
 ness, they attiil)ute to the sacred writers ignorance, 
 falsification, and error. We greatly a<lmire a 
 conscientious zeal for the general purity of our 
 jiresent text, and envy not the motives of the man 
 who emends it rashly. A disjuisition to alter it 
 Vequeiitly and I'livolously is not tar from sce|)ti- 
 jisRi. Iiut we ecpially dislike that rigid adher- 
 ence to its present con(iition wliich individuals 
 having no concern tor tiie truth of God or the 
 honour of his word exhibit — an adbereirce, so far 
 from being conunendable, that it subserves the 
 very worst purpose, even to impugn the trufliful- 
 ness of the most honest historians. 
 
 But l)e V\'ette alhims that the writer of Cliro- 
 niclen contradicts /li/it.tclf, as well as preceding 
 historians. In proof of this asseitioii lie (piotes 
 the following jia^sages : — 
 
 2 Cliron. xiv. 1 2 Chron. xv. 19, and 
 
 1 King.s XV. 32. 
 
 „ xiv. 2 2 Cliron. xv. 17. 
 
 „ xvii. 6 „ XX. 33. 
 
 „ XXX. 2fi „ XXXV. 18. 
 
 FtotE a careful perusal and comparison of these 
 
 CHRONICLES. 
 
 43a 
 
 places, we afTrm that they are not ccniradiilory. 
 It is only the oiqK-itii iaiily of rationalism or 
 the Idindness of infidelity that discovers u|)posi- 
 tion in tliem. 
 
 T/if r/taiarter of such stntemcnis as are />*• 
 culinr to the Chronii les. — From an insjjection 
 of I Chron. xvi. 4-11 ; 1 (Ihron. xxii.-xxvi. 2S; 
 xxviii. ; xxix. ; 2 Chron. xv. 1-15; 2 Chnm. 
 xvii. 7, &c. ; xxvi. l()-2l ; xxx. ; xxxi.. it will 
 be m;uiifest. that it was one design of Y.aa. to 
 notice with particularity the order of the divine 
 worship as established by David and Solomon, 
 with various leformatioiis in the theocracy that 
 took place at different limes. The Levitical 
 priesthood, and the public seivice of God, are 
 specially noticed and prominently broui^ht into 
 view. From 2 Chron. xiii.; xx. 21, &c.; xix. 
 2, &c. ; XXV, 7, &c., it is evident that God's 
 miraculous inteiference on behalf of Juda!i, 
 and his displeasure with idolatrous Israel, weie 
 also intended to beilppicte<l. In accordance with 
 the same object, pious kings evincing appropriate 
 zeal f r the glory of Jeliovah are commended, and 
 theirelfoits marked with approval (comp. 2 Chron. 
 xiv. (i-lj; xvii. 10, &c. ; xx. ; xxvi. 5, &c. ; 
 xxvii. 4-(). &:c.), while the ruin of idolatrous j)ruc- 
 tices is forcibly adiluced (2 (cliron. xxi, 11, Ik.':.; 
 xxviii. 5, &.C.; xxxiii. 11, &c. ; xxv. 1 1, &c. ; 
 xxxvi. fi). 
 
 .'^uch are the characteristic j)eculiarities oi 
 these books; and we now ask the impartial reader 
 to consider if they lie not worthy of the Holy 
 Spirit uniler whose guidance the Chronicles we-.-a 
 written. Are they not admiiably in unison with 
 tlie character of Ezra the high-priest and reforme; 1 
 What more natural, or more accordant with th» 
 solicitudes of tiiis holy man, than to ilwell u]x»i 
 such matters as relate to the W(irship of Jeliovah, 
 to the priests, and Lcvifes'^ Surely he was ap- 
 projniately directed to record the leformalioiis 
 effected by godly kings, anil the disastrous cons* 
 quenccs of forsaking thetiue God, whose zeal wa.i 
 abundantly manifested in reform, and to whom, 
 idolatry was peculiaily offensive. And yet upon 
 these very cha])ters and paragraphs charges the 
 most flagrant have been founded. The autiior of 
 them has been accused of hatred to Israel, predi- 
 lection for the Levifes, love of the marvellous, 
 design to magnify pious kings and to heighten 
 the mistakes of the kingdom of Israel. If is »m- 
 necessary to enter into any refutation of these 
 monstrous accusations. They bear with them 
 their own condemnation. They are the offspring 
 of that Rationalism which resolves to see nothing 
 but what it relishes. On every page of these his- 
 torical t)ooks are impressed (je^iuiucncss anil 
 honesty. The wruer candidly refers to the 
 sources whence his information was deiived ; ariu 
 contem[Hirary readers, jilacing iin])li<-it reliance 
 on his statements, allowed the original uocumenl^ 
 to jH'risli. He relates many things disguu.-eful to 
 Judah and its kings, while he evinces no desire 
 to jialliate or conceal sin. He even retains, as 
 we liave seen before. ex])ressions incongruous with 
 his own age, and thiretine exactly co|)ied lioni 
 the ancient records. Surely a wiit^ r guilty of 
 falsification would have been cartful to altr^ 
 these into exact corres|K)n<lence with his owi 
 times. Transparent simplicity uf character nei da 
 nor such minuti^ip. 
 
 We liave alluded to the attacks made i --m
 
 434 
 
 CHRONOLOGY. 
 
 Hi»se (ooks in Germany, because ihey are of a 
 most serious nature. Nor have tliey vet ceased. 
 Tiiey are still continued. Since De Wette t)ut 
 forth his ener<;ies in the unlioly service (in iiis 
 Beitriiije ziir Emleitung in das Alte Testament, 
 Halle, 180G, ^vo.), helms lejjeated and enlarged 
 his objections in every edirion of a po])ular Intro- 
 tluction to the Old Testament, altliouufh Dahler, 
 De Libro)-um Paralipomeni'm auctoritate atqite 
 /ide hislori a, Av'^enhn. 181i>, Hvo., successfully 
 «oml)ated his statements. He has heen aided too 
 and strengthened hy Granil)erg, inhis7)iV Chronik 
 nack ihrem Geschichtl. Chariikter imd Hirer 
 GlaidjicWrdUikeit nexi gepriift, Halle, 1S23, 8vo., 
 and indirectly encouraged by Gesenins, in his 
 Geschichte der Hebr. Sprache und Schrift, 
 Ijcipzig, 1S15, 8vo. ; and in his Comnientar i'ber 
 d&n Jesaia. Yet the credibility of the bonks has 
 stooi! these various attacks, uninjured. In o})])0- 
 sition to ])e Wette and Gramberg. two scholars 
 have appeared who have successfully vindicated 
 the Chronicles from their superficial accusers. 
 We refer to F. C. Movers, who, in his Kritische 
 Untcisiic/umf/en iiber die BibliscJie Chronik, 
 li.imi, 1834, Svo., has entered into an examina- 
 tion of all the ])oints connected with these books 
 witii great skill and minuteness. His work is of 
 a masterly and most satisfactory character. It 
 is immeasuraljly (he best on the subject that has 
 ever a])peared. In addition to Movers, we allude 
 to C. F. Keil, whose Apologetischer Versuch iiber 
 die Chronik, Berlin, 1833, 8vo., forms a very 
 valuable treatise on the same side. Di Bering in 
 various respects from Movers, he takes up some in- 
 teresting topics in connection with the Chronicles, 
 and occasionally advances opinions more correct 
 than those of the pastor in Bonn. To these may 
 be subjoined the observations of Eichhorn, in his 
 Introduction, who is wondrously judicious and 
 sound on this subject; as also the Introduction 
 of Jalin, who displays here his wonted ability. 
 Nor should the old but valuable Introduction of 
 Caqizov lie neglected. — S. D. 
 
 CHRONOLOGY is the science which mea- 
 sures time by the periodic revolutions of the 
 heavenly Ixxlies, ])articularly of' the sun, moon, 
 and stars. The idea of time is derived from the 
 succession of events which happen in the hea- 
 vens or on the earth. The entrance of events 
 in Iniman history is accidejital and irregular, but 
 in the history of the heavens it is subject to fixed 
 arid certain laws. Accordingly the Ijeavenly 
 phenomena atford the surest basis for the divi- 
 sion of time, and serve best to give orderly ar- 
 rangements to the irregular and accidental events 
 which sui^ceed each other in civil history. Chro- 
 iiology is divided into two kinds, theoretical and 
 practical, or mathematical and historical. The 
 fii-st teaches the division of time in reference to 
 the phenomena of the heavens ; the second teaches 
 it in regard to the succession of human events. 
 The culmination of a star, or, what is the same 
 thing, the daily turning of tlie earth on its axis, 
 oHers a regular and constantly-recurring event 
 as a measure of time, and answers for this )iur- 
 ]X)se better than the varying period of tirne which 
 is derived from the revolution of the earth round 
 tiie sun. 
 
 The kno\rle<!ge of the Hebrews in chronology 
 rested altoge'iier on appearances; not a trace of 
 viything like a scientific view is to be found in 
 
 CHRONOLOGY. 
 
 their literature. The books of the Old TestaixKn 
 recognise none of the great eras which othej 
 nations have employed Nor is it until the first 
 book of the Maccabirs tliat any such guide i» 
 found. Times and periods are for the most part 
 left relatively iHuletermined ; and consequently 
 it is diflicult, if not ini])ossible, to establish any 
 satisfactory chronology for the succession o! 
 events in the history of the Hebrew people. 
 Genealogical tables indeed are not wanting, but 
 they are of little service for the general purposes 
 of chronology. Neither the new moon nor the 
 year were the ancient Hebrews able to mea- 
 sure and foretel with astronomical accuracy, so 
 as to possess some standard for chronological 
 puqx)ses; and they were content, so far as re- 
 gards the moon, with such information as marka 
 and traces on the hills, or messengers could 
 a'Tord, after the new moon had made her ajjpear- 
 ance. » 
 
 The last thing which appears of im)X)rtance to 
 the annalist of a rude age is to mark the precise 
 order of the occurrences which he records, and 
 more especially to afionl tlie means of deter- 
 mining iheir place in the map of time, by noting 
 their distance from some common jx)int to which 
 they may all be referred. In the uiure ancient 
 portion of the Old Testament we have to rely 
 almost solely upon the uncertain standard whicli 
 is fdunded upon the average duration of human 
 life and the length of a generation — a mode o< 
 reckoning which, as it proceeds upon a principle 
 at no time fixed, and assumes the constancy o< 
 elem.ents which are subject to an incessant, but 
 irregular variation, cannot be applied with any 
 degree of confidence to estalilish the date of 
 events removed from one another by the la])se of 
 centuries. From the flood to the days of Abia- 
 ham the generation or period between the birth 
 of a father and that of his eldest son became 
 gradually contracted ; but as the rate of dimi- 
 nution was far from being uniform, no satis- 
 factory conclusion can hence l>e deduced in 
 regard to the numlier of years which jjassed frojn 
 the nativity of Arpliaxad to the infancy of the 
 patriarch. Haii the sacred liistoriiins been led 
 to measure the la])se of time and the succession 
 of events by a reference to the e[)och of creation, 
 or even to that of the deluge, theie would have 
 been no diflicuUv in finding the proper place of 
 every other occurrence, as well as tlie true limits 
 of every particular epoch. From ^he Exo<le down 
 to the era of Christianity, tlie life of the human 
 being, having fallen more nearly to its present 
 extent, su])plies a better standard ; and iience 
 from the death of Moses to the decline of tlu» 
 Jewish state, chronology shines with a clearer and 
 more steady light. 
 
 Chronology finds it no easy task to haimonizt 
 the discrepa'ucies which present themselves aKk" 
 in regard to the length of the entire period which 
 elapsed from the Creation to the birth of Christ, 
 ami the several great jieriods into which, for the 
 sake of convenience, the lengthened whole ha» 
 been divided. The distance of the Creation from 
 the Christian era, which has been stated with 
 about 140 ditVerent variations, is given in the 
 Indian Chronology, as computed by Gentil, at 
 6171 years; in iheBaliylonian, by Bailly, at6158j 
 in the Chinese, by Bailly, at (51.^7; in the Sep- 
 tuagint, by Abulfaragius, at 5508; while Jewiik
 
 CHRONOLOGY. 
 
 CHRONOLOGY 
 
 43A 
 
 writers britiff it down lielow the computation of Tniml)ers whir li comixise this chn.iiolopical period 
 Capelhis, namely, 100(1, and out-, Ralil.i Lipmaii, are thus stated by Uslier, Plavfair, Jackson, ami 
 to go contracted a sum aa 3Gl(» The s«^j)arate Hales: — 
 
 from Creation to Deluge 
 „ De!ug<! to Birth of Abraham . 
 „ Birth 1o his leaving Haran . 
 „ that event to the Exode . 
 „ Exode to foundation of Temple 
 „ Tem))le to Christian era . 
 
 4004 
 
 The clironology of the Enj^lish Bible was regu- 
 lated by the views of Uslier, who followed, in 
 general, the authority of tlie Hebrew text. Jack- 
 gon and Hales put tliemselves under the guidance 
 of the Septua^fint and Josepluis, maintaining that 
 the modern Hebrew text has been great!)- vitiated 
 in the whole department of chronology, and more 
 especially in the genealogical tables wliich res[)ect 
 the antediluvian patriarchs, as well as the ten 
 generations immediately after the Flood. The 
 computation of Jackson places the Creation b.c. 
 6126; that of the modem Hebrew lor the same 
 era is 4004, making a ililTereiice of 1422 years. 
 According to Hales the world was created b.c. 
 5411 ; according to the modern Hebrew Bible, 
 4004 — dili'erenee, 1407 years. The shorfened 
 scheme, adopted by Usher from the Masorite.Iews, 
 is recent in its origin, when compared with the 
 more comprehensive chronology of the Sept uagint. 
 This last was used before the advent of our Lord, 
 was followed by the fathers of tlie church, and 
 appears not to have been called in question till, 
 iti the eighth century, a disposition to exchange 
 it for the Rabbinical method of reckoning was 
 first manifested by the venerable Bede. The 
 preference given, in consequence of the reformation 
 iVom Pojiery, to everything Hebrew, or connected 
 therewith, led, at an early period afier that great 
 protest aga nst the corruptions of the Western 
 church, to the adoption and general use, at least 
 in this country, of the numbers of the original 
 Hebrew text. In time, however, o]iponetits to this 
 (system appeared. Isaac Vossius, in his treatise 
 I)e Vera yJCtate Mwidi, was the first of any note. 
 He was feebly answered by Hornius. Pezroii, in 
 his woik L Anti(fuite des Terns retablie et d4- 
 fendue contre les Juifs et les noKvemix Chrono- 
 logistes. produced a great impression in favour of 
 the lengthened period advocated by Vossius. The 
 positions of Pezron were assailed by iVIartianay, 
 whose chief merit lies in having given occasion 
 for Pezion's reply, entitled befenae de I'Anti- 
 yiiite des Terns. The treatise of Mr. Hayes on 
 the chronology of the Septuagint is the first con- 
 siderable wi)rk by an English autlior on the 
 genealogical numl]ers of the Greek Scriptures 
 compared with those of the Hebrew text, and it 
 is peculiarly v:i.luable for a successful attemj^ to 
 prove that theCiialdsean and Egyptian antiquities 
 are consistent with tlie sacred history of the Jews, 
 when viewed through the medium of the Se[itua- 
 gint. It was not, however, till the middle of the 
 last century that the indefatigable Jackson pro- 
 duced, ill three volumes, quarto, his great wovk, 
 
 Pl.AYFAIR. 
 
 Years. 
 
 . ]()56 . 
 
 292 . 
 
 ■35 . 
 
 430 . 
 
 510 . 
 
 . 1014 . 
 
 4007 
 
 Halbs. 
 
 Yp«r«. 
 22')6 
 
 1002 
 
 75 
 
 430 
 
 621 
 
 1027 
 
 5411 
 
 Jackson. 
 
 Yearn. 
 . 2256 
 
 . 11)72 
 
 7j 
 
 . i'M) 
 
 . .079 
 
 . 1014 
 
 5426 
 
 the Chronological Antiquities. Adopting the 
 principles of Vossius, Pezron, and Hayes, he 
 made the interval between Adam and Christ 
 5126 years. In tlie beginninar of tlie present 
 century Dr. Hales publislied the first volume of a 
 laliorious woik entitled, A Xcw Anal ijsis of Chro- 
 nology, an undertaking which ultimately ex- 
 tended to three volumes, without adding anything 
 of much value to the conclusions of .Jackson. 
 Mr. Faber, in his woik on Pagan idolatry, offers 
 some judicious observations on the clironology of 
 ancient history, treading generally in the footsteps 
 of Hales. The Origines of Sir William Drum- 
 motid jiroceeds also on the ground supplied by 
 the Septuagint clironology. 
 
 The contracted scheme of t\vi Hebrew text is 
 rejected by the greatest names in this branch of 
 Biblical literature, as being glaringly incon- 
 sistent not only with Ihe records of oilier nationx, 
 but even with the history of the ancient Hebrews 
 themselves. A detailed statement of grounds for 
 admitting the autiuirity of the Se])tuagint in 
 preference to that of the original Helirew may 
 be found in a preliminary dissertation prefixed 
 to the first volume of Dr. Michael Rus-sell's 
 CoiiJiection of Sacred and Profane History, 
 from the Death of Joshua to Ihe Decline of the 
 Kingdoms of Israel and Judah. London, iS27. 
 The compiuation which j)r. Russell considers to 
 ' accord tiest with the ancient Si ri(itures, as well 
 as with the several histories which have been 
 derived from them, does not extend the iiuml»er 
 of years from the creation to the advent of 
 Christ beyond 5141.' The same wiiter under- 
 takes to prove that the great dilfereiice which is 
 found between the chronology of the modern 
 Hebrew Scriptures and the system of dates which 
 determine the order of the covre-'ponding events, 
 as iecorde<l in the Samaritan Pentateuch, in the 
 Septuagint version, and in the woiks (.f Josepluis, 
 did not always exist, luit must have l)een occa- 
 sioned by an alteration introduced into the 
 Jewish registers between the peiiud at which tlie 
 translation of the Seventy Wius first made public 
 and the middle of the second century of the 
 Christian era. Evidence is also adduceil tr» 
 show tiiat this difl'erence was not accidental and 
 such as might have originated in tlie ignorance or 
 carelessness of transcribers, but was regularly 
 planned and etVected for an unwoithy oliject. 
 The chronology of the Helirew Scriptures and 
 that of the G'reek version, the ailtlior contends, 
 were originally the same ; and that the accuracy 
 of the latter was not called in question by tli«
 
 436 
 
 CHRONOLOGY. 
 
 lews for nearly four Imndred years — that is, until 
 tlie ra))i(l progress of Christianity awakened the 
 enmity of certain unprincipled individuals of 
 that ' nation,' wlio were induced to alter the 
 dates of their ancient chronicles in order to 
 weaken the arguments derived from tlieiu in 
 8iip|)ort of tiie new religion. 
 
 The entire ])eriod which ela])sed from the Crea- 
 tion till ilie hirth of Christ is usually divided for 
 chronoloc;ical ]iur])oses into the liillowingr a^fes : — 
 From the C'reation to the DeUij^e: from the De- 
 luge to the hirth of Abraham; iiom the biith of 
 Abraham to the Exode of the Israelite's; from tlie 
 
 CHRONOl.OGr. 
 
 ExckIo t.) flu building of Solomon's temple; firow 
 
 the buildiir^ of the fejiqiie to the destj notion of 
 the game ; fioni the destruction of tlie teni])Ie tc 
 the re-itoration of the Jews; and from that eva)f 
 to tlie Christian eia. In tlie first of the above 
 periods a very great disi;re[kincy is found to 
 ])ievail between the nvimeration of the modem 
 Hebrew text and tliat of tlie Septuagint and 
 Josephus. The amount of th; dillerence between 
 these ancient authorities, as well as the singular 
 variation which apiieare in the Samaritan Penta- 
 teucii, will be understood from the following 
 table : — 
 
 Number of Years from the Creation to the Dei.uhe. 
 
 
 Lived before birth of 
 Eldest Son. 
 
 After the Birth of 
 Eldest Son. 
 
 Total Length of Life. 
 
 
 Hebr. 
 
 .Samar. 
 
 Sept. 
 
 Josep. 
 
 Hebr. 
 
 Samar. 
 
 Sept. 
 
 Josep. 
 
 Hebr. 
 
 Samar. 
 
 Sept. 
 
 Josep. 
 
 Adam • • • • 
 
 130 
 
 130 
 
 230 
 
 230 
 
 800 
 
 800 
 
 700 
 
 700 
 
 930 
 
 930 
 
 930 
 
 930 
 
 Seth . , . , 
 
 105 
 
 >05 
 
 205 
 
 205 
 
 807 
 
 807 
 
 707 
 
 707 
 
 912 
 
 912 
 
 912 
 
 912 
 
 Enos .... 
 
 90 
 
 90 
 
 190 
 
 190 
 
 815 
 
 815 
 
 715 
 
 715 
 
 C05 
 
 905 
 
 905 
 
 905 
 
 Cainan . • . 
 
 70 
 
 70 
 
 170 
 
 170 
 
 840 
 
 ^iCi 
 
 740 
 
 740 
 
 910 
 
 910 
 
 910 
 
 910 
 
 Malaleel . 
 
 65 
 
 65 
 
 165 
 
 165 
 
 830 
 
 «30 
 
 730 
 
 730 
 
 895 
 
 895 
 
 895 
 
 895 
 
 Jared .... 
 
 162 
 
 62 
 
 162 
 
 162 
 
 8110 
 
 7^5 
 
 800 
 
 800 
 
 962 
 
 847 
 
 962 
 
 962 
 
 Enoch .... 
 
 65 
 
 65 
 
 165 
 
 165 
 
 300 
 
 300 
 
 200 
 
 200 
 
 365 
 
 365 
 
 565 
 
 365 
 
 Methuselah 
 
 187 
 
 67 
 
 187 
 
 1R7 
 
 782 
 
 653 
 
 782 
 
 782 
 
 969 
 
 720 
 
 969 
 
 969 
 
 Lamech . . 
 
 182 
 
 53 
 
 188 
 
 182 
 
 595 
 
 600 
 
 595 
 
 595 
 
 777 
 
 653 
 
 753 
 
 777 
 
 Noah, at the Flood 
 
 600 
 1656 
 
 600 
 1307 
 
 600 
 
 600 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 To the Flood . . 
 
 2262 
 
 2256 
 
 
 Tluis, from the Creation to the Deluge, the 
 Uumber of years, according to tiie 
 
 Hebrew text, is . . . . 1656 
 Samaritan Pentateuch . . 13ll7 
 Septuagint Version . . . 22G2 
 
 Josephus 2256 
 
 Between Josephus and the Septuagint the dif- 
 ference is only six years ; while both of these 
 differ from tlie modern Hebrew Bible not less 
 tha'i six hundred. The cause of this remarkable 
 variation, or rather what has Ijeen consideied the 
 manner in which it was occasioned, may be dis- 
 covered in the principle according to which the 
 Jews constructed their chronological tables. They 
 measured the several eras of their ancient histoiy 
 not by adding together the full lives of their 
 successive patriarchs, but by taking the sum ot 
 their c/enerathns — that is, the age to wh>ch they 
 bad respectively attained at the birth of their 
 eldest son. For example, tlie generation of Enos, 
 or his age at the birth of fJainan, is estimated by 
 the Hebrew and Samaritan texts as having ex- 
 tended to 90 years ; the residue of his life, ac- 
 cording to the same authorii es, i? 815 years; 
 and the total length of life, being the amount of 
 both these sums, is 905 years; whereas, in the 
 Bept'iagint and Josephus, the generation is en- 
 Jargeil to 190 years; the residue of life is dimi- 
 uiflied to 715 years; while the full length of life, 
 •r 905 Tear*, is tlie same in all diese anci""* 
 
 records. Hence, in order to lengthen or shorten 
 any particular era, it was only necessary to alter 
 the proportion between the generation and the 
 residue of life, and such. Dr. Russell states, wa.s 
 tlie method actually adopted. 
 
 An era properly so called the ancient Hebrews 
 did not possess. Signal events seem to have l>een 
 made use of as points from which to date. Moses, 
 like Herodotus, reckoned by generations. The 
 Exodus, as may be seen in Exod. xix. 1, and 
 Num. xxxiii. 3S, probablj, also, the building ol 
 the trist temple (1 Kings ix. 10; 2 Cliron. iii. 2), 
 were em])loyed as sfarfing-jioints to aid in assign- 
 ing events their position in historical succession. 
 Also the destruction of the iirst temple, or the 
 beginning of the Babylonish captivity (in the 
 summer of the year b.c. 586), and the liberation 
 of tne Jews from the Syrian yoke by the valour of 
 the Maccabees (in the autumn of the year B.C. 
 143), tvere usetl as epochs from wliich time was 
 reckc red. Alter the manner of other nations, tlie 
 Hebrews c mput.^d time by the succession of their 
 ]irince3, as may be seen throughout the books ot 
 Kings and Chronicles. At a later period, and in 
 the Hist book of the Maccaliees, what is termed the 
 Greek era, or that of tb.e Seleucida;, began to he 
 employed. This era, which is also called the era 
 of the Syro-Macedonians, commenc-^s from th« 
 year of Rome 442, twelve years after the death o* 
 Alexander, and 311 years and four m^intlis befort
 
 CHRCNOLOGY. 
 
 he birth of our Saviourj the epoch of the first con- 
 quest oCSeleiicusNiciitor in that jiartof the West 
 which afterwards coinixwed tlie imnieuse empire 
 of Syiia. Tlie Julian year, furmeil of tlie Roman 
 months, to which Syrian names were k'^Oj was 
 used. This era prevaiU'd not only in tlie do- 
 minions of Sileucus, hut among ahuost all tlie 
 Irtjople of the Levant, where it still exists. The 
 Jews did not ahandon the use of this era until 
 within the last 400 years. At j)resent they date 
 from the Creation, which they hold to have taken 
 place 3760 years and tlsree months before the 
 commencement o( the Christian era. In order to 
 fix tiieir new moons and years, as well as their 
 feasts and festivals, they were obliged to make use 
 of astronomical calculations and cycles. The 
 first cycle they used for this purjxise was one of 
 64 years; but this bein;^ discovered to be faulty, 
 they had recoiuse to the ]\Ietonic cycle ot 19 years, 
 which was estaltlished by the authority of Kabbi 
 Hillel, prince of the .Sanhedfim, about the year 
 360 of the Christian era. This they still use, and 
 say it is to be oiiserved till the coming of the 
 Messiah. Indeed, some contend that their pre- 
 sent practice of dating from the Creation of the 
 world is of great antiquity. Their year is luni- 
 solar, consisting either of 12 or 13 months each, 
 and each month of 29 or 30 days : for in the 
 compass of the Metonic cycle there are 12 com- 
 mon years, consisting of 12 months, and seven 
 intercalary years, consisting of 13 months, which 
 are the third, sixth, eighth, eleventh, fourteenth, 
 seventeenth, and nineteenth of the cycle. 
 
 Tlie birth of the Saviour of the world probably 
 tocik place somewhat earlier than the date which 
 IS usually assigned to it. Usage, however, has 
 long fixed the era to which it gave rise, namely 
 the Christian era, or the era of the Incarnation, 
 to begin on the 10th day of January, in the 
 middle of the fourth year of the 194th 01ympia<i, 
 the 753rd year of the building of Rome, and in 
 the 4714th of the Julian period. The use of the 
 Christian era was introduced in (he sixth cen- 
 tury; in France it was first emjjloyed in the 
 seventh. About the eighth it was generally 
 adopted; but considerable dilVerence has existed 
 not only in various countries but even in the 
 lame place in the same country and at the same 
 
 OHRONOLOGY. 
 
 437 
 
 periotl, respecting the comii.eiicemont of the vent. 
 Nor did the use of the em becontc universal id 
 Christendom till tlie lilteenth century. Ths 
 Christian year consists of 365 days for three suc- 
 cessive years, and of 366 in tJie fouitli, which is 
 termed leajt-year. This computation subsistei 
 for 1000 years uilhout alteration, and is still u««hJ 
 by the followers of the Greek church. Tiie sitji- 
 jilicity of this loriu has biiiughl it into very 
 general use, and it is cuslomaiy for a.strononier« 
 and chnuiologists, in treating of ancient limes, to 
 date back in llu- same order from its commence- 
 ment. Theie is uiifoiluiiately a little ambiguity 
 on tiiis head, some persons reckoning the year im 
 mediately liefore tlie biitli of Clirist as" I u.i., 
 and others noting it with 0, and tlie second year 
 WCore Christ with 1, thus jiroducing one year less 
 tlian tiiose who use the former notation. The fiist, 
 houever, is the usual mode. 
 
 The Ciirlsti.m year, arranged as has been snown, 
 was 11' 11" loo long, an eiror which amounted to 
 a day in nearly 129 years. Towards (he end of 
 the sixteenth century the time of celebrating die 
 Church festivals had advanced ten days beyond 
 the periods fixed by the Council of Nice in 326. 
 It was, in consecpience, ordeied by a Bull of Gre- 
 gory XIII. that the year 15S2 should consist of 
 only 355 days, which was brought about by 
 omitting ten days in the month of October, namely 
 from the 5tli to the 14th. And to prevent the re- 
 currence of a like irregularity, it was also ordered 
 that in three centuries out of four tl;e last year 
 should be a coiinnon instead of a leap-year, as it 
 would have lieeii by the Julian Calendar. The 
 year KiOO leiiiaitied a leap-year, but 1700, 1^00, 
 and 1900 were lo be common years. Thi» 
 amended mode of comijuting was called ' The 
 New Style." If was immediately adopted in all 
 Catholic countries, but Piotestants c;ime to use it 
 only gradually. In England the relormed ca- 
 lendar was ado])ted in the year 17.52 by omitting 
 eleven days, to which the dilVerence between the 
 styles then amounted. The alteration was ellected 
 in the month of September, the day which would 
 have been the third lieing called the fourteenth. 
 
 The following summary shows the corresjwn- 
 dence uf the principal epociis, eras, and perimia 
 widi that of the birth of Chriat, or Christian era. 
 
 Epochs, Eras, and Teriods. 
 
 Months and Yean of Commeae«in«nt. 
 
 The Grecian year of the World .... 
 
 September I, B.C. 5598. 
 
 The ecclesiastical era of Constantinople . 
 
 March 21, or April 1, u.c. 550S. 
 
 The civil era of Constantinople . . . . 
 
 September 1, u.c. 5508. 
 
 The Alexandrian era 
 
 August 29, u.c. 5502. 
 
 The ecclesiastical era of Antioch .... 
 
 September 1, B.C. 519?-. 
 
 The Julian period 
 
 January 1, B.C. 4713. 
 
 Tiie Mundane era 
 
 October, B.C. 4008. 
 
 The Jewish Mundane era . • . . . . 
 
 Vernal equinox, B.C. 3761. 
 
 The civil Jewish era 
 
 October, u.c. 3761. 
 
 The era of Abiaham ' 
 
 October 1, u.c. 2015. 
 
 The destruction of Troy • . . • . • 
 
 June 12 or 21, u.c. 1184, 
 
 The e; och of the building of Solomon's temjile 
 
 May, u.c. 1()15. 
 
 The era of the Olympiads 
 
 New moon of Summer solstice, b.o 176. 
 
 The Roman eia •....•«•. 
 
 April 21, B.C. 753. 
 
 The era of Nationassar 
 
 February 26, u.c. 747. 
 
 The epoch of Daniel's 70 weeks .... 
 
 Vernal equinox, u.c. 458. 
 
 The Metonic cycle ........ 
 
 July 1."), u.c. 432. 
 
 The Calippic jveriod ..,,.,. 
 
 New moon of Summer solstice, ».c- W©. 
 
 The Ph'lippean era ....... 
 
 June, B.C. 323.
 
 438 
 
 CHURCH. 
 
 CTT.ICIA. 
 
 Epochs, Eiaa, and Periods. 
 
 The 
 The 
 Tlie 
 The 
 The 
 The 
 The 
 The 
 Tlie 
 The 
 The 
 The 
 The 
 The 
 The 
 The 
 The 
 The 
 The 
 The 
 
 Syro-Macedonian era . • • 
 Tyrian era ....«• 
 Sylonian era . . . . • 
 Caesarean era of Antioch . 
 
 Julian era 
 
 S[)aiii9h era 
 
 Act i an era 
 
 Actian era in Egypt . . . 
 Aiigijslan era ..... 
 P.iiitifical iniliction . • . 
 iridiction of Constantinople 
 vulj;;ar Christian era . 
 destruction of Jerusalem . 
 era of the Maccabees . . . 
 era of Dioclesian .... 
 era of Ascension .... 
 era of Mailyrs ..... 
 era of the Armenians . . . 
 era of the Hegira .... 
 era of Yezdegird, or Persian era 
 
 Months and Years of Commencement. 
 
 September 1, B.C. 3! "2. 
 
 October 19, B.C. 125. 
 
 October, B.C. 1 10. 
 
 September 1, B.C. 48. 
 
 Jantiary 1, B.C. 45. 
 
 January 1. b c. 38. 
 
 January 1, b.c. 30. 
 
 September 1, B.C. 30. 
 
 February 11, B.C. 27. 
 
 December 25, or January 1, B.C. & 
 
 September 1, d.c. 3. 
 
 •January 1, a.d. 1. 
 
 Se))tember 1, A.n. 6^'. 
 
 November 24, a.d. 166. 
 
 September 17, a.d. 2S4, 
 
 November 12, a.d. 295. 
 
 February 23, a d. 303. 
 
 July 7, a.d. 552. 
 
 July 16, A.D. 622. 
 
 June 16, A.D. 632. 
 
 In addition to the works mentioned in the ar- 
 ticle, the following will be found of service to the 
 student of Biblical Chronoloj^y : Prideaux, Old 
 and New Testament Connected; Shuck ford, The 
 Sacred and Profane History of the li orld Con- 
 nected ; Memoires de l' Academic des Inscriptions 
 et Belles Lettres ; Michaelis, Schreiben an 
 i^chlozer, die Zeitrech7iung vu7i der SiJndJiuth 
 bis Salomo betreffend, im ' Getting. Mag. der 
 VVissensch." 1 Jahrg. ; Gesenius, Dc Pentutetichi 
 Samarit. Origine, Hal. 1815. On the era of 
 tlie Seleucidae see Petavii Doctr. Temp. ix. 
 40. Hi;.u:e>. i.sch, Einl. in die Hist. Chron. Alt. 
 1811 ; V i.-;Ui)'e-s C tironologie de V Histuire Sainte, 
 &c., Beiiiij, 17P3 ; Beer's Abhandlungen ztir 
 Erldut. d. ulteii Zcitrcchn. Lei])z. 1752; Frank's 
 Astronom.-Grundrechnung der Bibl. Gesch. 
 Leipz. 17r-3 ; Lud. Ca]jelli Chronoh ; Bengelii 
 Ordo Temp.; Silberschlag, Chronologic der 
 Welt, Berliiij 1783; Chronology of History, by 
 Sir H. Nicholas, in Lardner's Cabinet Cyclupcedia. 
 A valuable treatise on Eras of Ancient and 
 Modern Times may be found in the Companion 
 to the Almanac, 1830.—.!. II. B. 
 
 CHRYSOLITE. rTiiAusmsH.l 
 
 CHRYSOPRASUS'. [Shoham.J 
 
 CHURCH CEKK\r)(ria). The original Greek 
 word, in its larger signiKcation, denotes a number 
 of pt-r.sons called together for any pmixise, an 
 assembly of any kind, civil or religious. As, 
 however, it is usually a])plied in the New Testa 
 nient to religious assemldages, it is very properly 
 translated by ' assembly," in the few instances in 
 wiiich it occurs in the civil sense (Acts xix. 32, 
 3y. 41). It is, however, well to note that the 
 word rendered 'asicnibly' in those verses is the 
 ^dme which is rendered 'church" everywhere 
 else. 
 
 In a lew places the word occurs in the Jewisli 
 sense, of a congregation, an assembly of the jjeople 
 for worshi}), either in a synagogue (Matt, xviii. 
 17) or generally of tlie Jews regarded as a reli- 
 gious body (Acts vii. 38; Hel). ii. 12). The text 
 last cited is quoted from Psalm xxii. 22; where 
 the Septuagint uses iKKArialn, for the Heliiew 
 ^rip, which has the same »neaning. namely, assem- 
 
 bly or congregation. Elsewhere also this word, 
 which we render ' church ' in the New Testament, 
 is used by the Sej)t. for the Hebrew word which 
 we render ' congregation ' in the Old Testament. 
 
 But the word most frecpiently occurs in the 
 Christian sense of an assemblage (of Christians) 
 generally (1 Cor. xi. 18). Plence it denotes a 
 church, the Chri.'tian church ; in which, however, 
 we distinguish certain shades of meaning, viz. — 
 1. A jiarticular clunch, a church in a certain 
 jilace, as in Jerusalem (Acts viii. 1 ; xi. 23, &c.), 
 in Antioch (Acts xi. 26 ; xiii. 1, &c.), in Corinth 
 (1 Cor. i. 2; 2 Cor. i. 1), &c. &c. 2. Churches 
 of (Gentile) Christians, without distinguishing 
 place (Rom. xvi. 4). 3. An a^senddy of Chris- 
 tians which meets anywhere, as in the house of 
 any one (Rom. xvi. 5 ; 1 Cor. xvi. 19 ; Philem. 2). 
 The Church universal — the whole body of 
 Christian believers (Matt. xvi. IS; 1 Cor. xii 
 28; Gal. i. 13; Eph. i. 22; iii. 10; Heb. xii 
 23, &c.). 
 
 CHUSHAN-RISHATHAIM(D^ri;?!l^n|K'-13; 
 Sejjt. XovaapaaOal/J.), a king of Mesojiotamia, by 
 whom the Israelites were ojiprcssed for eight years 
 (b.c 1394 to B.C. 1402), until delivered by 0th- 
 niel (Judg. iii. 8-10). 
 
 CHUZA (Xov^as), steward of Herod Antipas 
 whose wile Joanna w.is one of those who em- 
 ployed their means in contributing to the wants 
 of Christ and hks apostles (Luke vii'i. 3). 
 
 CILICIA (KiAiKia), the south-eastern part 
 of Asia Minor, bormded on the W. by Pamphy- 
 lia; separated on the N. from Capjiadocia by 
 the Taurus range, and on the K. by Amanus 
 from Syria ; and having the gulf of Issus (Isken- 
 deroon) and the Cilician Sea (Arts xxvii. 5) on 
 the .Soudi. By the ancients the eastern part was 
 called Cilicia Projiria (-/; iSiws KiAiklo, Ptolemy), 
 or the level Cilicia (?; tnHtds, Stiabo) ; and iiie 
 western, tlie rough {r, rpaxf^a, Straho, xiv. 5), or 
 mountainous (^ opeifii, Herod, ii. 34). The 
 former was well-waleieti, and alxjunded in varioui 
 kinds of grain and fruits (Xeiioph Anab. i. 2, 
 ^22. Cilicia — dives bonis omnilius terra. Am« 
 mianus Marctll. xiv. 8. ^ 1. The chief towns iu 
 this division were Issits (Xenopli. Anab. i. 4), ai
 
 CINNERKTH. 
 
 \bK south-easteni extremity, cileln-ated for the 
 rictory of Alexaiuler over Durius CodotniiiuK 
 (B.C. 333), ami not Car Irom tlie passes of Ainaiius 
 (rail' 'AfjutviSccr \eyon(vctiy nvAa/if. Polyl*. xii. 
 8); Solte. originally a colony of Arrives and 
 Rhodians, ttie birth-place of .Meiiajiiler, tiie comic 
 |)oet (b.c. 262J ; the stoic jiliilosopher (^hrysippus 
 (b.c. 206), and of Aratus, author of the astrono- 
 mical poem TO, 'Paifoft.cra B.C. 270) ; and Tarsits, 
 the birth-place of the Ajjostle Paul [Taksusj. 
 Cilicia Trachea furnished an inexiiaustilile supply 
 of cedai-s ajid firs for shlp-builditiif ; it Wiis also 
 noted fot a Sfjecies of ijoat, of whose skins cloaks 
 and t«?nts were manufa'tured. Its breed of horses 
 was so superior, that 3fifl (one for each tlay of the 
 year) formed jiart of tin; annual tribute to the 
 king of Persia (Herod, iii. 90). The neij,'hbour- 
 '»ood of Cotycus pi((duc<?d large cpiaiitities of 
 Kaliion (Crocuin sylvtsti* optimum. Prima no- 
 •jilitas Cilicio, et ibi in Coryco moute, Plin. Nat. 
 Hist. xxi. 17). Herodotus says that tlie first 
 inhabitants of the country were called Hyjjacliaei, 
 Tiraxatof; and derives the name of Cilicia from 
 Cilix, son of Ageiior, a Pii(ruici;in settler (vii. 
 91). He also states that the Cilicians and Ly- 
 ciaus were the only naticms within the Halys who 
 were not conquered by Croesus (i. 28). Though 
 jKirtially subjected to the Assyrians, Medes, Per- 
 sians, Syrians, and Romans, the Eleuthero- (or 
 free) Cilicians, as the inhabitants of the moun- 
 tainous districts were called, were governed by 
 their own kings (Reguli, Tacit, ii. 78), till the 
 time of Vesijasiau. Tlie sea-coast was for a long 
 time occupied by pirates, who carried on the ap- 
 proprii.te vocation of slave-merchants, and found 
 ample ensouragement for tliat nefarious traffic 
 among the opulent Romans (Mannert, vi. 1 ; 
 Strabo, xiv. 5); but at last tlieir depredations be- 
 came so formidable, tliat Pomj)ey was invested, 
 with extraordinary powers lor their supjiression, 
 which he accomplished in forty days. He settled 
 the surviving freebooters at Solae, which he rebuilt 
 iind named Pompeiojxjlis. Cicero was proconsul 
 of (3ilicia (n.v.c. 702), and gained some successes 
 over the mountaineers of Amanus, for which he 
 was rewarded with a triumph (Epist. ad Fam. 
 XV. 4). Many Jews were settled in Cilicia. 
 (Acts vi. 9; Philo, De legat. ad Caium, ^ 36.) 
 
 According to the modern Turkish divisions of 
 Asia Minor, Cilicia Proper Ijelongs to (he Pasnalic 
 ofAdana; and Cilicia Trachea to the Liwah of 
 Itcliil m tlie Mousselimlik of Cyprus. (Malte- 
 iii'un''s Georfrajj/i!/, Edinb. 1S22, vol. ii. p. 97.) 
 A copious account of the ancient Geograpiiy of 
 Cilicia is given in Mannert.'s Geographie der 
 Griecheii und Royncr. vi. 2, pp. 32-113. — 
 
 J. E. R. 
 
 CINNAMON. [KiNNEMON.] 
 
 CINNERETH, or Cinneroth (nn33 or 
 miss), one of the ' fenced cities" of the tribe of 
 Naphtali (Josh. xix. 35; Deut. iii. 17; Josh. xi. 2). 
 In the last of the texts cited it seems to in- 
 dicate a district. It is also the earlier name 
 of thelakef rennesareth (which is sup|X)sed to Ije a 
 torniption ot" Ciiinerelh), from which we may 
 collect that (he tov,Q lay on the western border of 
 the lake, and was of snlKcient consequence to 
 give its own name to it. It is e\en supposed 
 tha*; Cinnereth, aftPtwarls Geniiesaretli, was the 
 earlier trnme of the town of Tiberias, and under the 
 
 CIRCUMCISION. 
 
 '13ft 
 
 latter cliange still extende<i i(s own denomination 
 to the lake ; nor is there anything in)prol>uble in 
 this conjecture. 
 
 CIRCUMCISION. The history v,f Jewish Cii- 
 cumcisi(»n lies on the surface of the Old Testament. 
 .'Mira'nam received the rite from .lehovali, Mos»j 
 establislied it as a national ordinance, mi<i .losliua 
 carried it into elVect betbre the l.sraelites i-ntered 
 the land of Canaan. Males only wei-e suljjecied to 
 tiie o|)eiation, and it was to be (u'rlormed on the 
 eightli day of the child's life : forei','n slaves also 
 were forced to submit to it. on entering an Isiael- 
 ites family. Those wiio are unacquainted witii 
 other sources of information on the subject beside.* 
 the Scriptures might easily sujipose ',,iat the •••«• 
 was original with Abraliam, characteristic of n.* 
 seed, and jiractised among tliose nations onl; "iho 
 had learned it from them This, however, a,' ears 
 not to have been the case; and the principal i b- 
 ject of the ])re.sent article is to put togefi..'r what 
 is known on the ex^rn-Jewish Circimicision. 
 
 The topic has lieen treated with mu<'n research 
 by so many leained writers that it may seem im- 
 probable that any passages of ancient authors 
 which bear upon it c;in have escajieil notice. 
 Michaelis (Latcs of Moses, vol. iv.), to whom we 
 are indebted (or various references, has dedicated 
 forty-one jiages to the subject : nor does it appear 
 (hat any imjwrtant addition has been made b)- 
 later inquirers. It remains, therefore, to form oui 
 own judgment upon the facts wliich have been 
 ascertained. 
 
 First of all, t/ie Egyptians were a circum- 
 cised people. Vonck, followed by Wesseling 
 {ad Herod, ii. 37) and by numei->)us able writers, 
 alleged tliat this was not true of the whole nation, 
 but of the priests only ; that at least the priests 
 were circumcised is beyond controversy. No one 
 can for a moment imagine that they adopted the 
 rite from the des|)ised shepherds of (xoshen ; and 
 we are immediately forced to l)elieve tliat Egyp- 
 tian circumcision hail an independent origin. A 
 great preponderance of argument, however, ap- 
 pears to us to prove that the rite was universal 
 among the old Egyptians, as long as their native 
 institutions Nourished ; although there is no ques- 
 tion that, under Persian and Greek rule, it gradu- 
 ally fell into disuse, and was retained chiefly by 
 the priests and ijy those who desired to cultivate 
 ancient wisdom (see Origen, quoted by Michaelife, 
 § IK.-), p. 25). 
 
 Herodotus distinctly declares that the Egyp* 
 tians jiractised circumcision; and tl at he meant 
 to state this of the whole nation is manifest, not 
 only since he always omits to add any restriction, 
 but because, immediately following his first state- 
 ment of the fact, he annexes this remark — ' Th» 
 jiriest.i moreover shave their whole body every otiier 
 day," &c. (Herod, ii.37). It isdillicult fosiqqiose 
 that the historian could have been mistaken on thi.i 
 point, considering his {)ersonal accpiaintance with 
 Egypt. Further, he informs us that the Colchiar.)) 
 were a colony from Egyjit, consigting of soldiers 
 from the army of Sesustris. \Vitli these lie liad 
 conversed (ii. 101), and lie positively dednrfs 
 tiiat they practised cir>'umcision. Yet if tl:e rite 
 had been confined to the priestly caste of Egyji*, 
 it could hardly have been found among tlie Col - 
 chians at all. Tlie same remark will ajjji'y <" 
 the savage Troglodytes of Africa, every bianr'i o^ 
 wiiom, except one (the Kolobi^ i.s Diodoms id
 
 140 
 
 CIRCUMCISION. 
 
 CIRCLiMCISION. 
 
 ,.«*ms us (iii 31), was circumcised, having learnt 
 '?e practice iVc ni tlie Kgy|)(ians The Tioglo- 
 ivtfs appear to nave been widely difl'iised through 
 «it)ya, wliici) ar^'ues a corresponding diU'usion of 
 '^le rite; yet, from the silence of Diodorus con- 
 cerning tlie otiier savage nations whom he re- 
 rcuiits as African Ethiojjians, we may infer that 
 it was iiut |)ractised by them. The direct testi- 
 mony of Diodorus, Philo, and Strabo is to t!ie 
 «ame eiVect as tliat of Herodotus respecting Egypt ; 
 yet tliis can hardly be called conHrniatory, since 
 in their days the rite was no longer universal. 
 Josejihas (Contra Ap. ii. 13) speaks of it as 
 j-ractised l)y tiie priests only; he however re- 
 proaches Apion for neglecting the institutions of 
 his country in remaining uiicircumcised. Oiigen, 
 ir\ tlie jiassage above referred to, coiilirms the state- 
 ment of Josephus. In Keniick's Herodotus (\\. 
 'Al) the French commissioners who examined 
 »ome Egvjjtian mummies, are quoted, as estab- 
 lishing iiom them the fact of Egyptian circum- 
 eisiun. 
 
 Hcrotlotus, moreover, lells us that the Ethiopians 
 were also circumcised ; and lie was in doul)t whe- 
 lher;they had learned tl)e rite from the Egyptians, or 
 the Egy|)tians irom tliem. By the Etliiopian, we 
 jnust iinder>taiid liim to mean the inliabitants of 
 Meroe or Sennaar. In tlie (nesentday the Coptic 
 Church continues to practise it, according to C. 
 Niebuhr (cpioted by Michaelis) ; the Abyssinian 
 Christians do the same (Ludolf. Hist. Et/iiop. 
 do, do.) ; and that it was not introduced among 
 tlie latter with a Judaical Christianity appears 
 from their performing it u[)on both sexes. (It is 
 scarcely wcjrlh wliile to invent a neiv name, reci- 
 •ion, or resection, for accuracy's sake.) Olden- 
 dorp describes the rite as widely spveail through 
 Western Africa — 16^ on each side of the Line, — 
 even among natives that are not Mcihammedan. 
 In later times it has been ascertained that it is 
 practised by the Kafir nations in South Africa, 
 more properly called Kosa, or Am diosa, whom 
 Pricliard su[)jK)ses to form 'a great part of the 
 native population of Africa to the southward of 
 *he Equator.' He remaiks upon this : — ' It Is 
 scarcely within probability that they borrowed the 
 custom from nations wiio profess Islam, or we 
 •hould find among tiiem other proofs of intercourse 
 with people of that class. It is more probal)!e 
 that this practice is a relic of ancient African 
 customs; of which the Egyptians, as it is well 
 known, partook in remote ages ' (Prichard, F/'ii/- 
 sical Hist, of Man, 3rd ed. vol. ii. p. 287;. 
 
 How far the rite was extended through the 
 8yro-Arabian races ia uncertain. In the 9lh sec- 
 tion of the Epistle of Barnabas (wiiich, whether 
 genuine or not, is very old), the writer comments 
 as follows : — ' Byt you will say, the Jews were 
 circumcised for a sign. And so are all the Sy- 
 rians and the Arabians, and the idolatrous ))riests ; 
 
 and even the Egyptians tliemselves are 
 
 circumcised.' This language is vague and po- 
 ',ular ; yet it shows how notorious was tlie wide 
 dill'usion of the custom. The Philistines, in tiie 
 lays of Saul, were however uncircumcised ; so 
 also, says Herodotus (ii. lul), were all the Phoe- 
 nicians who had inter^-ourse with the Gieeks. 
 That the Canaanites, in the days of Jacob, were 
 not all circumcised, is plain from tlie allair of 
 Dina'i aid Shechem. The story of Zipporah 
 (£xod iv 25) who did not circumcise Lev son, 
 
 until fear came over her, that Jehovah woul<i slaj 
 her husband Moses, jiroves that the fantilf M 
 Jetliio, the Midianite, had no fixed rule abou.' it, 
 although the Midianites are generally regarded 
 as children of Abraham iiy Keturaii. On the 
 other hand, we have the distinct testim my oi 
 Josephus (Antiq. i. 12, 2) that the Ish.jiaelite 
 Arabs, inhabiting the district of Naliathaa, were 
 circumcised after their 13ih year : (his must .be 
 connected with the tradition which no doviht 
 existed among them, of the ageatwhicii their fore- 
 father Ishmael underwent the rite (Gen. xvii. 2.5). 
 St. Jerome also (quoted by Michaelis) informs us 
 that, to his day, '■vs(/uc Jiodie,' the tribes dwelling 
 round Jiidaa and Palestine weie circumcised, 
 ' especially all the Saracens who dwell in the 
 desert.' Elsewhere he says that, ' except tiic 
 Egyptians. Idumaeans, Aminonitt.s, Moal)ites, and 
 Ishmaelites of the de.seit, of whom tlie greater part 
 are circumcised, all othtr nations in tlie world 
 are uncij-cumcised.' A negative argument is 
 more or less dangerous : yet there is swnething 
 sti iking in the fact, that tlie books of Moses, of 
 Joshua, and of Judges, never bestow the epithe* 
 uncircumcised as a reproach on any of the seve-j 
 n-ations of Canaan, any more than on the Moali- 
 ites or Ammonites, the Anialekites, the Midianites, 
 or other inland tribes with whom they came into 
 conflict. On the contrary, as soon as the Philis- 
 tines become prominent in the nairative, after the 
 birth of Samgon, this epithet is of rather common 
 occurrence. The fact also of bringing back, as a 
 trophy, the foreskins of sliiin enemies, never oc- 
 curs except against the Philistines (1 Sam. xviii.). 
 We may perhaps infer, at least until other proof 
 or disproof is atranied, that wiiile the Philistines, 
 like the Sidonians and the other maritime Syrian 
 nations known to the Greeks, were wiiolly strangei* 
 to tlie practice, yet among the Canaanites, anil 
 all the more inland tribes, it was at least so far 
 common that no general description could be 
 given them from tlie omission. 
 
 It apjjears from Jo>ej)hus {Antiq. xiii. 9), that 
 when Hyrcanus subdued the Idumaeans, he forced 
 them to be circumcised on pain of expatriation. 
 This shows that they had at least disused the rite. 
 But that is not wonderful, if it was only a cus- 
 tom, and not a national religious ordinance; for, 
 as Michaelis observes, the disuse of It may have 
 dated from the edict of Antlochus Epiphanes, o/ 
 which it is said (I Mace. i. 41, 42), 'Tlie King 
 Antioclius wrote to all his kingdom, that all 
 should be one people ; and that all should keep 
 the oidlnances of his country : and all the na- 
 tions acquiesced accoiding to the word of the 
 king.' 
 
 Tlie rather obscure notices which are found ii» 
 Jeremiah and Exekiel of flie circumcision of the 
 nations who were in Immediate contact with Israel, 
 admit of a natural ii!te;pietati(,n in conformity 
 with what has been alreaily adduced (Jer. ix. 25; 
 Ezek. xxxi. 18 ; al.so xxxii. 19, et passim). The 
 difficulty turns on the new moral use made of the 
 term 'uncircumcised,' to mean simply i»j/jM>-«. 
 The passage in Jeremiah is thus translated by 
 Ewald : — 
 
 ' Behold, the days come, that I visit all the un« 
 circumcised circumcised ones ; Egypt and Judah; 
 Edom and the children of Amiiii»n and Moab 
 and all the dwelleis in the wiklemess that ar< 
 sharet? ;n tlie temples; for all the heathej' ar*
 
 CIRCUMCISION. 
 
 CIRCUMCISION. 
 
 U 
 
 mcirciimclseil, and so h all llie liouse of Israel 
 nncii'cutncisfil in liwiit." 
 
 The sliaviii^ ol' tlie temjiles ii])|)i'ars to be a leli- 
 gluiis custuin ot" the same kind : Ileiodotus (iii. 8) 
 MciibfS it til the Arabs (i;eneialiy, anil Josephus 
 rather strangely iCifards the epithet TpoxoKovpiSts, 
 in the ancient (jreek jjoet t'licerilns (c. Ap. i. 
 22), as a duscii[)tion ot" iiis own countr) men. 
 Knowing that tlie Egyptians were circmnciseJ, 
 it no longer remains iloiibtt'iil how l/ic reproach 
 qf Egypt iJosli. v. 9) should be interpreted. 
 
 How Car tlie rite of circumcision s])read over 
 tlie soutli-west of Arabia ni delinite ie<ord sub- 
 sists. The silence of tlie Koran conlirms tlie 
 statement of Abulfed^ (Ilislor. Ante-hluniica, 
 p. 180, ed. FIcisclier, 1S31), that the ciiatiira is 
 older than Mohainiued, wlio, it would appear, in 
 no respect regarded it as a religious rite. Ne- 
 vertheless it lias extended itself witli the Moiiani- 
 medan faith, as thougli it were a positive ordi- 
 nance. Pocock {SpeciiHcn Hist. Arab., p. 300) 
 oites a tradition, which ascrities to Mohammed 
 tiie worils — 
 
 Circumcision is an ordinance for tnen, and 
 hojiourabln in women. This extension of the 
 rite to the other sex might, in itself, satisfy ns 
 that it did not come to tiiose nations from Alira- 
 iiam and Islimael. We have already seen tliat 
 Abyssinian circumcision has the same pecu- 
 liarity : so that it is every way probable that 
 Boutliern Arabia had the rite from the same 
 source or influence as Ethiopia. In fact, the 
 very closest relations are known to have subsisted 
 between the nations on the ojiposite coasts of the 
 Red Sea. Anotliei passage of Abulfeda(yl)i«rt/es 
 Muslemici, vol. i. p. 92) gives specific informa- 
 'ion on this subject. In the iiattle of Ohod, in 
 'lie third y^ar of the Hegira, ' Hamza, the uncle 
 c-f tlie prophet, cdinmitted great slaughter. When 
 Sabfia' ben' Al)d ul Uz/.a, whose mother was a 
 circumciser in Mecca, passed by him, Hamza 
 called out. Come on, you son of a slie-circum- 
 cJser I [rcsectricis nympharicm .'Y The form of 
 the word proves that this was strictly the trade of 
 the old woman, and tliat the custom, as applied 
 (o females, was no innovation of those days. 
 
 Pocock quotes tlie ecclesiastical historian Phi- 
 Imrorgius, for tlie fact that the Himyarite .Arabs 
 circumcise their cliildren on the eighth day. He 
 adds a [liissage from Al Gazzali, in wliicli the 
 v/riier says, tiiat the Arabs dill'er from the Jews 
 AS to the lime; tor they postpone it until the 
 cliild hiis teeth, which he tliinks safer. Finally, 
 .ie cites Ibn Athir, who, writing of the times 
 antecedent to Moliammed, says that the Aralis 
 were accustomed to circumcise between the tentii 
 and fiflecntli years. 
 
 The slalement of Philostorgius may receive 
 ,'iglit from the Arab historians, who relate f Jost, 
 Geschiclite dcr Israeliten, vol. v. p. 236, sqq.) 
 lliat about a century before tiie Christian era, 
 several Jcivish sovereigns reigned in the region 
 ealletl Slii'ba liy the Jews, and Yemen by the 
 moderns, wliere tlie Ilimyarites (or Homcrita;) 
 dwelt. Tlie few facts preserved sliow tliat they 
 were not close oiiserver-i of the Mosaic Law, and 
 upicion migiit ar!<e that they were called 
 diieflf fro:ii their having receivetljewisii 
 
 circumciiion. We have, liowever, a r.'l'iitcnil 
 evidence of nuicli iiniiortance, to prove lii.ii ih« 
 iniliience acting on them had really come fniin 
 Judaea; namely, it is well kn >wn tliat in Abys- 
 sinia a nation called the Ealasha ^ilill exists, 
 which has very tlioroiighly adopted the Jewish 
 religion, insomuch as to have inventeil legentU 
 that allege their descent from the Ilelirews. 
 They jiossess the Old Testament in tlie Giie«z 
 language and chaiaeter, but their own lan:.Miag« 
 is said to be quite alien fiom the Hebrew; facts 
 which prove that they were waWy pnischjti-d by \\w 
 Jews at some early iieriiul. [.\bviminia.] .\t that 
 same time, it is creilible, (he Hebrew faith riiet with 
 nimilar success on the oii)K)site coa^t ol' the lied Sea. 
 Jost believes that, during the war of tht? .Macca- 
 bees, gieat numliers of Jews niigialed into .\iabia ; 
 and it is certain that in later tim&> they weie very 
 numerous in Yemen, and their inllyence jjreat. 
 Wherever they were settled jiroselytes must have 
 been made; and great zeal was doubllws used ♦« 
 induce them to circumcise their cliildren duly 
 according to the Mosaic rite. We can tlien 
 quite understand Philostoigius's fact, if we ar« 
 allowed to supjxise tiiat lie sjKtke loosely of 'the 
 Himyarites' doing that which was done by a 
 great many of them. [Concerning the connectioD 
 of the Jews with Yemen, see farther under Solo- 
 mon.] 
 
 An interesting story is told by Josephus — th« 
 date so late as the reign of tiie Em|)eiiir (Claudius 
 (^Antiq. XX. 2) — how Izale-s, the \oung kingof Adi- 
 abene, and his mother Helena, were converted by 
 Jewish teachers to a belief in the one true God, tl>a 
 Gild of tlie Hebrews : and how, when Izates was 
 desirous of being circumcised, and his mother 
 dreaded that it would alienate his subjects, his 
 Jewish instructor Ananias warmly seconded licr 
 views, with a iieart like that of Paul ; telling him 
 that if he was resolved to imitate Jewish institu- 
 tions, he could, without being circumcisihl, adore 
 the true divinity ; and that this wiis t'ar more im)Kirt- 
 ant than circumcision. At the time lie satisfied 
 the young monarch ; but afterwards, another Jew, 
 named Eleazar, came from Galilee, and in- 
 veighed so strongly on the imjiiety of his dis- 
 obedience, that, without more delay, I/.ates subi- 
 niitted to the rite. It is evident that, in a con- 
 troversy of this sort, the more narrow-minded 
 teacher had the advantage : and, in consequence, 
 it apjiears that 'prosidytes of righteousness' were 
 always circumcised (Judith xiv. 10, and Tacit. 
 Hist. V. 5). The facility with which whole 
 nations iiave adopted the practice froir the Mo- 
 hammedans proves that it is not so serious an ob- 
 stacle to the spread of a religion as some hav« 
 thought it. 
 
 Tiie moral meaning of the word ' nncircum- 
 cisi-il ' was a natural result of its having been 
 made legally essential to Hebrew faith. ' Uncii''- 
 cumciseil in heart and ears ' was a metaphor to 
 which a prophet would be carried, as necessarily 
 as a Christian teacher to such ])lirases as ' unbap- 
 tized in soul,' or ' washed by regeneration.' \i, 
 however, we try to take a step faither back still, 
 and ask tchy this ordinance in jtartiiular was 
 selected, as so eminently essential to tlie seed of 
 Abraham, we jirobably find tliat we lia\e reached 
 a point at which we must be satisfied with know- 
 ing the fact without the reas.m. Every external 
 ordinance, as fur instance baptism, luu^i b&v«
 
 143 
 
 CIRCTJMCISION. 
 
 wore or les< that is arbitrary in it. It is, however, 
 abv:ndaiitly plain that circumcision was 7iot in- 
 tendetl tn st-paiate the Jews from otlier nations 
 generally, Wir it could not do so : and, least of all, 
 ftci.n the Ej^yiJtians, as the words in Joshua v. 9 
 show. R.itiit r, it was a well known and already 
 understood symbol of purity. 
 
 A great deal of speculation and argument has 
 been emphiyeil on the utilify and origin of the 
 rite to the E^yjitians and others. Herodotus, long 
 ago, declared that it was adopted for cleanliness, 
 vaOapidTqTos e'tVe^a : and a sligiit acquaintance 
 with the 'ileiLS of the Turks, concerning personal 
 defilement, will make it easy to believe that an 
 idea of cleanliness continued toe practice among 
 nations whici) had once become habituated to it. 
 In the ancient Egyptians this Tinkish spirit was 
 carried to a great height ; nor is it wonderful ttjat 
 in hot cliiifates iletailed precepts of cleanliness' 
 form a \ery large part of primitive religion. But 
 we can harlly rest in this as a suflicient account 
 of tl;e ori(/in of the rite. A sort of circumcision 
 has l)een found in various ])aits of the Indian 
 Seas anil Pacific Ocean ; many notices of which 
 have been coUecfed m the Penny Ci/ckma-dia 
 (art. Ciicun^cisiori) \ hut nothing would be 
 gained liy reproducing them here. It is more im- 
 portant to state that an adecpiate physical reason 
 for performing tlie 0]:eration on females of several 
 African races lias been fidly substantiated. The 
 curious reader will find in Laure/ices Lectm'es 
 (chap, v.), the decisive testimony of Rlr. Bairow 
 and Dr. Somerville on this point; with an allu- 
 sion to the efibrts of the Romish missionaries to 
 forbid the practice in Abyssinia, and tlie unex- 
 pected consequences which thwarted tliem. No 
 jjositive evidence lias yet been obtained, that 
 the operation is equally expedient for tiie males 
 in any of the same races : yet the analogy of 
 the two cases forces us to believe tliat in both 
 the custom lias a physical or medical ground ; 
 especially when it is remarked to predominate so 
 much in Africa, where alone (as far as yet ap- 
 |)ears) such pliysical ];eculiaiit'es of stiuctui-e 
 exist. It was practised, moreover, by the males 
 of African tribes so savage and so little addicted 
 t(j religious ceremonialism, that a broader ground 
 must be sought for it than simple cleanliness. 
 We have already named the Tioglidytes. Stiabo 
 mentions two other tribes oi' Afiica, whom he 
 calls Kieophagi and Kolobi (xvi. 4 ; pp. 3!s7- 
 390, 3'J"2. eel. Tauch.), v^ho practised on themselves 
 a yet tno'^e shocking mutilation (koAojSoI raj 
 BaKaiJvs), ascribed to the Kolobi by Diodorus 
 also. The fact, also, that most of these nations 
 performed whatever operation it was, net on in- 
 iants, but on tliose who were advancing towards 
 tnarriagealile age, conspires to indicate that some 
 physical inconvenience gradually showed itself 
 (as with the Bushmen females), of which tliey 
 desired to get rid. Jost looks ui)on infant cir- 
 cumcision .'is the distinguishing mark of Judaism ; 
 and this may lie nearly correct, though we have 
 seen that, according to Abuifeda. some Arabs de- 
 layed it only till ai'ter teething. In fact Diodorus 
 (iii. 31). when speaking of that branch of the 
 Troglodyte nations, which was called Kolobi, 
 declares tliat they were subjected to the oj^eration 
 in infancy (eV uTjnlou). Tiieir unnatural and 
 cruel custom is possibly to lie referred to super- 
 (tition. Some indeed have looked on circum- 
 
 CISTERN. 
 
 cision itself as a softened form of the barharoul 
 rite liy whicli tlie Gaili, or priests of Cybele^ 
 were qualiiied for tiieii office. Tlie Koiobit« 
 custom migiif, on tlie contrary, be a carrying out 
 of that barbarity to the extiemest point jiossible, 
 short of exterminating the ])iipulation of a tribe. In 
 Winer's Realworierbuch (ait. Beschiieidung) will 
 be found details of the mode in wliicli tiie Jews carry 
 their law into elVect ; and of the still more singulal • 
 and ].„inful jiiocess by which a circumcised ]ier« 
 son was in some sort restored to his natural con- 
 ditioi (see 1 JMacc. i. l/); Josejjh. Anfiq. xii. 5, 
 1 ; and Paul, 1 Cor. vii. 18, iTTKntacrQai). 
 
 If an independent and liuman origin has been 
 discovered lbrEgy]itian circumcision, tiie thought 
 ofneces-iity arises tliat the Israelites must have 
 had it from the same sources as the nations around 
 them ; and it has been discussed ^Spencer, Del.cg. 
 Heb.) wlietlier they even Ijonoweil it from ti:48 
 Egyjitians. The idea has naturally given much 
 oflence : Imt in trulii tiie question involves no 
 peculiar ditliculty ; it is only part of another far 
 wider inquiry. It is notorious that many otlier 
 ancient nations had vari.ius ceremonies and insti- 
 tutions in common with the Jews, and that tlie 
 Hebrew law is by no means in all points original. 
 That sacrifice jjre-existed, is on the sui face of th« 
 Bible History. The same, however, is true of 
 temples, tabernacles, priests, e\erd)uining fire, 
 oracles, Ike. Tiie fact has been often denoted by 
 saying that tlie Jewisli institutions are a selection, 
 revision and re-enactment of an older patriarchal 
 religion.— F. W. N. . 
 
 CISTERN. In a country which has scarcely 
 more than one perennial stream, wiiere fountairis 
 are not abuiulant, and where the months of sum- 
 mer jiass without rain, tlie preservation of the rain- 
 water in cisterns must always have been a matter 
 of vast importance, not only in tlie pasture- 
 grounds, but in gardens, and, above all, in 
 towns. Hence the frequent mention of cisterns 
 in Scripture, and more esjiecially of those which 
 are found in the open country. These were, it 
 seems, the projieity of those by whom they were 
 formed (Num. xxi. 22). They aie usually 
 little more than large pits, but sometimes take tlie 
 character of extensive subterraneous vaults, open 
 only by a small mouth, like that of a well. 
 They are filled with rain water, and (where the 
 climate allows) with snow during winter, and are 
 then closed at the mouth, with large flat stones, 
 over which sand is spread in such a way as to 
 ]Tevent their being easily discovered. If by any 
 chance the waters which the shepherd has thua 
 treasured up are lost by means of an earthquake 
 or some other casualty, or are stolen, both he and 
 his flocks are exposed to great and imminent 
 danger ; as are also travellers who hasten to a 
 cistern and find its waters gone. For this reason 
 a failure of water is used as the image of any 
 greatcalamity (Isa. xli. 17, 18; xliv. 3). There 
 is usually a large dejiosit of mud at the bottom of 
 these cisterns, so that he who falls into them, even 
 when they are without water, is liable to perish 
 miserably (Gen. xxxvii. 22, sq. ; Jer. xxxviii. 6; 
 Lam. iii. 53; Ps. xl. 2; Ixix. 15). Cisterns 
 were sometimes used, wlien empty, as prisons, and 
 indeed prisons wliicli were constructed under« 
 ground received the same name, IIIH (Gen. 
 xxxix. 20 ; xl. 15). 
 
 In cities the cisterns were works of muck
 
 CISTERN. 
 
 labour, for thry weie eitlier hewn in the rocks or 
 
 suirourideJ Aili suljffiraiieimi walk, and liiieil 
 with a line incnistation. The system whicli in 
 t'lis respeo' ioriuerly prevailed in Palebtiue is, 
 ilouLtle^«, llie same that exists at present ; and 
 indeed tliere is every prohahility that must of 
 the cisterns nc>w in use were constructed in very 
 ancient times. Prol'essor Robinson assures us, 
 that ' the main dependence ol' Jerusalem at the 
 present day is on its cistems; and this has jivo- 
 nahly always been the case.' He then mentions 
 tlie immense cisterns now and anciently existing 
 within tlie area of the Teuiple; supplied ])aitly 
 by rain watLT, and partly by an aqueduct iVum So- 
 lomon's Pools, and whicli,of themselves, would lor- 
 nisli a tolerable supply in case of a siege. ' lint, 
 in addition to these, almost every piivate house in 
 Jerusalem, of any size, is understood to have at 
 least one or more cisterns, excavated in the soft 
 limestone rock on which the city is built. Tire 
 house of Mr. Lanneau. in wiiicii we resided, had 
 no less than four cisterns; and as these are but a 
 specimen of the manner in wliicii a'l the belter 
 class of houses are supplied, 1 subjoin here the 
 dimensions : 
 
 Length. Breiidth. Depth. 
 
 I. 15 feet 8 feet- 12 tieet. 
 
 11 . 8 „ 4 ., 15 
 
 ill .0 „ 10 ;, 15 
 
 IV. 30 „ 30 „ 20 
 
 Tiiis last is enormously large, and the numbers 
 given are the least estimate. Ttie cisterns have 
 usually merely a round opening at the top, some- 
 times built up with stonework above, and fur- 
 nished with a curb and a wheel for tlie bucket ; 
 so that they have externally nmcli the ap]iear- 
 ance of an ordinary well. Tlie wafer is con- 
 ducted irjto them from the roofs of the houses 
 during the rainy season ; and, with jiroper caie, 
 remains pure and sweet during the whole summer 
 and autumn. In this manner most of the larger 
 aouses and the public buildings are supplied. 
 The Latin convent, in particular, is said to be 
 amply furnished; and in seasons of drought is 
 able to deal out asuthciency for all the Cliristian 
 inhabitants of the city. 
 
 Most of these cisterns have imcloubtedly come 
 dewn from ancient times; and fheir immense 
 extent furnishes a full solution of the question as 
 to the supply of water for the city. Under the 
 disailvantages of its ]iosition in this resjiect, Jeru- 
 salem must necessarily have always been depend- 
 ent on its cisterns; and a city which thus an- 
 nually laid in itssupply for seven or eight months 
 could never be overtaken by a want of water 
 during a sie^e. Nor is this a trait peculiar to 
 the Holy Ciiy ;. for the case is the same 
 throughout all tlie hill-country of Judah and IJen- 
 icimin. Fountains and streams are few, as com- 
 oared with Kinojf! and .America; and the inha- 
 litants, therefore, collect waler during the rainy 
 »eason in tanks and cisterns in the cities, in the 
 lields, and along the high roads, for thesu->tenance 
 of themselves and of their fiocks and lierd'^, and 
 for ll e comfort of the jiassing traveller. Many, 
 if not the most, of these are oliviou^ly anticjue ; 
 and fjiey e,\i,t not unlVeqnently along the anoient 
 loads which are now deserted. Thi'.s, on the long- 
 forgotten way from Jericho to Bethel, 'broken 
 cisterns' cf high antiquity are I'ound at regular 
 Intel vals. Tiiat Jeiusalem was thus acttuilly 
 
 CITIES OF REFUGE. 
 
 4« 
 
 supplied of old with w.iter is ap^uirent also from 
 tiie niimcrinis rrniains of ancieiil r.islerns still ex- 
 isting in the tract noilh of the city, whicii wm$ 
 once enclosed within the walls' I UkkkkvuiusI. 
 
 CITIES. [TowN«.] 
 
 CITIES OV REFUGE, riaces . of rrfirK« 
 where, under tlie cover of religion, the gni'ty 
 and the unforlunale might find shelter aiul pro- 
 tection were not unknown among the ancient 
 heathen. Tiie jus asyli, or right of shelter ai)d 
 impunity, was enjoyed by ceitaln places repufe«l 
 sacred, such as groves, temples and altar*. 
 This protective power commonly spiead itself 
 over a considerable district round the lioly siwl, 
 and was watched over and pieserved by severe 
 jjenalties. Yet the fate of Pausaniiis, wt le tliere 
 no other similar case, shows that it could no* 
 always stand against the aasanlts of )x>pular in- 
 dignation. Pans.inias. having lampeieil with the 
 gieat enemies of his native cmntry, tlie Persians, 
 was (rie<l at Sparta and condemned, lii order to 
 escape from tlie consequent ])iinishmeiil, he (led 
 into a temple of Minerva. With a \ iew to keep 
 him tl.eie and thus punish him with death, tli« 
 Ephori blocked up the doors and destroyed ilia 
 roof, the mother Cr the criminal bringing Uie lirst 
 stone. 
 
 Among the Greeks and Romans the number of 
 tiiose ))lacrs of asylum became in process of time 
 very gieat, and led, by alinse, to a fiesh increase 
 of •;riminals. Tibeiius, in conse(juence, causeda 
 soU'mn inquiry into their ellects to be made, 
 which resulted in a diminution of their number 
 and a limitation of their privileges (Suet. Tii. 
 37, compared with Eini^ti, Kjccursus ad h. /. , 
 Osiander, De Asylia Gentium, in Gronov. Th^ 
 saur. t. vi.). 
 
 In the Ajjocrypha (2 Mace. ir. 33) mention is 
 made of a city having the jus asyli — ' Oniai 
 withdrew liim»elf into a sanctuary at Daphne 
 that lieth by Antiochia.' The temple of Diana 
 at Ephesus (Acts xix. 27) was also a heathen 
 asylum, whose privileges in this respect increiised 
 witii the progress of time. 
 
 This pagan custom passed into Christianity. 
 As early as Constantine the Great, Cliristian 
 churches were asylums for the unfortunate persons 
 whom an outraged law or powerful enemies pur- 
 sued. Tlieodosius, in 431, extended this piivilege 
 to the houses, gardens, and other places which 
 were under the jurisdiction of the churches, and 
 the synod of Toledo, in 681, widened the right ol 
 asylum to thirty paces from every < hurch. Sine* 
 then this ecclesia'tical jirivilege prevailed in tlie 
 whole of Catholic Ciiiistendom, and was pre- 
 seived undiminished, at least in Italy, so long 
 as the papal independence remainetl. Thf 
 right acted benelicially in ages when violenc* 
 and revenge predominated, and lixed haliitations 
 were less common than now ; iiuf its tendency to 
 transfer jMiwer from the magistrate to the priesV 
 hootl was injiiiious to the ilivioiab'lily of law 
 and tlie steady administialion of justice. It liaa 
 accordingly in reci-nt times been abrogale<l by 
 most governmentfl (^Ccnvcrsutiom Lcxicou, in 
 voc ). 
 
 Among the Je«8 the 'cities of refuge' bora 
 some res«-niblance to the asylum of the classic 
 nations, but xvere happily e\<'nipt fiom the evil 
 conseijuences to which refeicj'Cc has been mac'e^ 
 and atliird, even to the piesent di>y uo meaa
 
 444 
 
 CITIES OV REFUGE. 
 
 pix>of of the superior wisdom and betiijjnatit spirit 
 of tlie Jewisli laws. 
 
 The instituiion was framed with a view to 
 (bate the evils which ensued Cmim the old esta- 
 blished riglits 111' the lilood aveii!,a'r [Bi.ood-Re- 
 VengkI. and thereby to further tlie prevalence in 
 the natuiii of a rnilii, gentle, an<l f()rL,Mvin,!^ spirit. 
 
 Fron. the laws on this point (Exod. xxi. 13; 
 Nurn. XXXV. 9-35: Deut. xix. 1-13) it appears 
 that Moses set apart out of the sacerdotal cities 
 six as 'cities of refuge." There were, on the 
 eastern side oi' tlie Jordan, three, namely, ' Bezer 
 in the wililerness, in the plain country of the 
 Reul)enites, and Ramolh in Gilead of the Gadites, 
 and Golan in Bashan of the Manassites' (Deut. 
 iv. 13); on the western side three namely, "Kedesh 
 in Galilee in Mount Na]ihtali, and Shechem in 
 Mount Eptnaim, and Kir>ath-arba, which is He- 
 ir tn, in the mountain of Judah" (Josh. xx. 7). 
 If foimd desirable, then otlitr cities might be 
 a<lded. An inspection of the map will show how 
 wisely these places were chosen so as to make a 
 city of refuge easy of access Irom all parts of tlvo 
 land. To any one of these cities a person who 
 had unawares anil unintentionally slain any one 
 might flee, and if he readied it before he was 
 m'ertaken by the avenger of Idooil, he was safe 
 witliia its shelter, provided he did not remove 
 more than a tliousand yards from its circuit, nor 
 quit the refuge till tlie decease of the high-priest 
 under whom the homicide had taken place. If, 
 however, he transgressed tiiese provisions, the 
 avenger might lawfully put him to death. The 
 roads leading to the cities of refuge were to be 
 kept in good repair. Before, however, the fugitive 
 could avail himself of the shelter conceded by 
 the laws, lie was to undergo a solemn trial, and 
 make it ap})ear to the satisfaction of tlie magis- 
 trates of the place where the homicide was com- 
 mitted that it was jjurely accidental. Slicild 
 he, however, be found to have been guilty of 
 murder, he was delivered ' into the hand of the 
 avenger of blood, tiiat he might die.' 
 
 And the Israelites were strictly forbidden to 
 BjKire him eitlier from considerations of pity or in 
 consequence of any jiecuniary ransom. This dis- 
 allowal of a.cc)mj)ensation by money in the case 
 of murdf r shows a just regard for human life, and 
 ajipears much to the advantage of the Hebrev/ 
 legislation wlien compared with the practice of 
 ether countries (Athens, for instance, and Islam), 
 in which pecuniary atonements were allowed, 
 if not encouraged, and where, in conseepience, 
 <iie life of the poor must liave been in as great 
 jeopardy as the cliaracter of the wealthy. 
 
 Tiie asylum alVorded by Moses displays the 
 same benign regard to human life in respect of 
 the homicide himself. H-ad no obstacle been put 
 in the way of the Goel, instant tleatli would liave 
 awaited any one wiio had the misfortune to occa- 
 sion tlie death of another. By his wise arrange- 
 ments, however, Moses interposed a seasonable 
 delay, and enaliled the manslayer to appeal to 
 the laws and justice of ids country. Momentary 
 wratli could hardly execute its fell purposes, and 
 a suitable refuge was provided for the guiltless 
 and unfortunate. 
 
 Yet as tiiere is a wide space between the inno- 
 cence of mere homicide and the guilt of actual 
 murder, in which various degrees of blame might 
 <a«ily exist, so the legislator took meaus to maka 
 
 CITIES OP REFUGE. 
 
 the condition of the mam layer less happy tlan i; 
 was liefore tlie act or the mischance, lest entir* 
 impunity might lead to the neglect of necessary 
 piecaution and care. With great projirietV; 
 tiierefoie, was the homicide made to feel som« 
 legal inconvenience. Accordingly he was re- 
 moved from his patrimony, restricted in his 
 sphere of locomotion, alfected indirectly in hia 
 pecuniary interests, and ]irohably reduced from 
 an allluent or an easy station U> one of .service and 
 labour (Michael is, Mas. Recht, vi. 4). Should 
 any reader still think that this treatment of a 
 manslayer was unnecessarily severe, let him 
 advert to the spirit of tlie age, and especially 
 study the recogrused rights of the next of kin to a 
 slain jrerson, and he will most prubalily be ready 
 to allow that everything was done in this matter 
 which circumstances admitted. The benefit ot 
 the jrrotection atl'orded was common to strangers 
 and sojourners with native Israelites. 
 
 What ensues rests on the authority of th« 
 Rabbins. In order to give the fugitive all pos 
 sible advantage in his liight, it was the business 
 of the Sanhedrim to make the roads that led to 
 the cities of refuge convenient by enlarging them 
 and removing every obstruction that might hurt 
 his foot or hinder his speed. No hillock was left, 
 no river was allowed over which there was not a 
 bridge, and the road was at least two and thirty 
 cubits broad. At every turning there were posts 
 erected bearing the words Refuge, Reftige, to 
 guide the unhappy man in his flight ; and two 
 students in th^ law were a)ipointed to accompany 
 him, that, if tlie avenger should overtake him 
 before he reached the city, they ndght attempt 
 to jracify him till the legal investigation could 
 take place. 
 
 When once settled in the city of refuge, tlw 
 manslayer had a convenient habitation assigned 
 him gratuitously, and the citizens were to teach 
 him some trade whereby he might support him- 
 self. To render his confinement more easy, tli* 
 mothers of the high-priests used to feed and 
 clothe these unfortunate fugitives, that they might 
 not be imjratient and pray for the death of their 
 sons, on whose decease they were restored to their 
 liberty and their property. If the slayer died in 
 the city of refuge before he was released, his 
 bones were delivered to his relations, after tire 
 death of the high- priest, to be buried in the 
 sepulchre of his fathers (Lewis, Origines He- 
 braicee). 
 
 That the right of asylum among the Jews was 
 in later periods of their history so extended as to 
 0])en the door to great abirses may be inferred 
 from 1 Mace. x. 43, where unqualified impnnity 
 and exemption from both liabilities and penalties 
 are jiromised, under the influence, not of the 
 Mo-aic law, but of heathen morals and ambition, 
 to ' whosoever they be that flee unto the temple 
 at Jerusalem, or be within the liberties thereof.' 
 
 In the words now cited reference appears to be 
 made to a custom which prevailed from very early 
 rimes, both amoig the chosen people and the na- 
 tions of the world, of fleeing, in case of personal 
 danger, to the altar. With the Jews it was custom- 
 ary for the fugitive to lay hold of the horns oi 
 tlie altar, whether in the tabernacle or temple; 
 by which, however, shelter and gecuiity were ob- 
 tained only Hot those who had committed sins ol 
 ignorauca or inadvertence: thus txue did Mosei
 
 cmZKNSHIP. 
 
 remain to liis principle that tlic wilful slierlding of 
 aumaii blood t-^ul^l only Uy Mood l)e afoiicd — a 
 piincljile whicli tlie ad\aiices of civilization iind 
 tlie spread of the gentle 8))iiit ol" the fTi)»|)el liave 
 caused to 'lequestioned.il'not fX])loded f Kxod. xxi. 
 14; 1 Kings i. 50 ; ii. 2fS). I'loni the two last pas- 
 sages it seems tliat stale crin>inals also sought the 
 protection of the altar, prolwhly more from tiie 
 force of custom than any express law. Their safety, 
 however, depended on the will of the king; for in 
 the passages lefeiretl to it a])pears that in one case 
 (that of Adotiijah) life was sjuiied, hut in tlie other 
 (tiiat of Joal)) it was tAkeii away even • hy the 
 iltai.' Compare Matt, xxiii. 35. — J. R. B 
 
 CiTIZKNSHIP. Strict isolation did by no 
 means, as some sujipose, form the leading prin- 
 ciple in the system jf theocracy as laid down by 
 Moses, since even non-Israelites, under the va- 
 nous names of "12, HiJ. or ^K'ln, not only were 
 allowed to reside in Palestine, but had the 
 fullest pruteclioTi of the law, equally witii tlie 
 tiative Israelites (Exod. xii. 19; Lev. xxiv. 22; 
 Num. XV. 15; xxxv. 15; Deut. i. 16; xxiv. 17 : 
 tiie law of usury, Deut. xxiii. 2), made, how- 
 tver, an exce]>lion), and were besides recom- 
 mended in general terms by Moses to humanity 
 anil charity (Exo<l. xxii. 21 ; xxiii. 9; Lev. xix. 
 33, 34 : Deut. x. 18 ; comp. Jcr. vii. 6 ; Mai. iii 5; 
 Jose))h. Contra Ap. ii. 28), as well as to a ))articii;a- 
 tion in certain prerogatives granted to the poor of 
 the land, such as a sliare in the tithe and feast- 
 oH'ering, and tlie liarvest in the Jul)ilee-year 
 (Deut. xiv. 29; xvi. 10, 14; xxvi. U; Lev. 
 XXV. G). In return, it was icquiied on the part of 
 tijn-lsr;iclit^s not to commit acts iiy which the 
 religious feelings of the jjeople might be hurt 
 'Exod. XX. 10; Lev. xvii. 10; xviii. 26; xx. 2; 
 xxiv. 16; Deut. v. 14 The eating of an animal 
 which had tlied a natural death, Deut. xiv. 21, 
 seems to have been ihv: sole exception). The advan- 
 tage the Jew had over thtGentile was thus strictly 
 spiritual, in his being a citizen, a member of the 
 theocracy, of the niri'' /Pip (cornnnmity of Go<l), 
 on whom positive laws were enjoined. But even 
 to this spiritual ])rivilege Gentiles were admitted 
 under certain restrictions (Deut. xxiii. 1-9^ ; 
 thus we find among the Israelites, JNIl, an 
 Edomite ( 1 Sam. xxi. 8.), as also HHIX, an 
 Hittite (a Canaanite). Tlie only nations that 
 were altogether excluded iVom the citizenship of 
 the theocracy by especial command of the Lord, 
 were the Ammonites and Moabilies, from a feeling 
 of vengeance against them ; and in the same situ- 
 ation were all castrated persons, and bastards, from 
 a feeling of disgrace and sliame (Dewt. xxiii. 1-6). 
 In ihe time of Solomon, lio less tlian 153,600 stran- 
 gers wore resident in Palestine (2 Chron. ii. 17). 
 
 Roman citizenship (iroAiTe/o, Acts xxii. 2*!, 
 j'js civitatis, civitas) wivs granted in tlie times 
 of tl»e Em|ierors to whole provinces and cities (Dio 
 Cass. xli. 2"> ; Suet. j4mj/. 47), as also to single 
 inii\iduals, for some service rendered to the state 
 :>r '.be imperial family (Suet. Aitfj. 47), or even 
 f'lr a certain sum of money (Acts xxii. 2S ; Dio 
 ('•ass. xli. 21). The Apostle Paul was a li4)man 
 citixen by family (Acts, l-c), and hence liis pro- 
 testing against coriniral or capital jjtmishment 
 
 (A'Jts xvi. 37 ; comp. Cic. VeiT. v. 57, 65 : Eiiseli. 
 
 EiM. E'jilea. v. 1, ett.V— L. M. 
 CITRON. fTAPiiCH.] 
 
 CLEOPAS. 
 
 4i» 
 
 CL.\UD.\ (KXai'Sr)), a small islanil )fr tb« 
 S.'VV. coast of Ciete, mentioned in .\«ls \\\\\. 16, 
 It Wii» also called Gamlos (M.hi, ii. 7; Pliu. 
 Hist. \at. 'V. 42), ami now U-ars tiie name o/ 
 Gozzo. 
 
 CL.\UDI.\ (KKavSla), a Chriftian female at 
 Rome, nii'niioned in 2 Tim. iv. 21. 
 
 CLAUDIUS (KXavSioi), the fifth Roman em- 
 peror, and successor of Caligula, a. u. 41-'>'l 
 (Acts xi. 2S ; xviii. 2). His full name was 
 Tilieriiis Claudius Nero (iermauicus. Pie\ iuiisly 
 to his accession he led lather a ilissolnle life, and 
 the throne waa in a great measuie secuieii to him 
 through tlie address and solicitations of HrriNl 
 Agrip|)a (Joseph. Aiiliq. xix. 2. 1, c. 3 and 4; 
 coiiij). Suet. Vhtwl. 10). This oliligation he 
 returned by great and pecr.har favoiiis to that 
 I personage ; anil the Jews were geiiei ally treated 
 with indiilgenre till the niiitli year of his reign, 
 wlicn those wiio abode at Rome weie all iMUiiitiied 
 thence (Acts xviii. 2 ; cunip. Suet. Clattd. 
 2.)). Several famines occurred under ('laiidiu*, 
 one of which, in the fouith year of liis reigii, 
 extended to Palestine and Syn.u and ap]^ears to 
 be that which was foretold l>y Agabus (Acts xi. 
 28. and Kuinoel, in loc. ; also Krebs, Obs. m 
 N. T. p. 210). 
 
 CLAUDIUS LYSIA9. [Lvsias.] 
 
 CLAUDIUS FELIX. [Fw.ix.] 
 
 (JL.A.Y, a substance frecpieiitiy mentioned m 
 Scripture, chielly with referenc:e to its f mjilnyment 
 by the potter, the elegant and useful forms assumed 
 by the rude material under liis haiiils sup|ily)ng a 
 significant emlilem of the Divine | ower over the 
 destinies of man (Isa. Ixiv. 8; Rom. ix. 21). A 
 remarkable allusion to tl>e ii'^e of clay in se^iling 
 occuis in Job xxxviii. 14, ' He fuinetii it as clay • 
 to the seal.' This may be exphiiiicd by lekrenca 
 to the ancient jiractice of impieising uidj<nii( 
 bii<ks with certain marks and inscriptions which 
 weie obviously made by means of a large .seal oi 
 stamp. We trace this in the liricks of Egyjit and 
 Babylon [BiiicKs]. Modern Oiieiital usages 
 suj)]dy another iil.istration. Traveller*, Vifhen 
 entering the khans in towiis, often observe tlie 
 rooms in which goods have been left in charge ol 
 t\\t khanjee sealed on the outside with claj. A 
 piece of clay is placed over the lock, and imjiressed 
 by a large wooden stamp or seal. 
 
 ('L1"".MENT {KKTifx-qs), a. pi'rson mentioned by 
 Paul (Phil. iv. 3), as one whose name was in th« 
 book of life. For the meaning uf this jjliriise, see 
 Book of Life. This Clement wiu«, by the ancient 
 cliurcii. identified with the bishop of Rome of the 
 same name (Euseb. Ui»t. Eccle». iii. 4 ; ComtitiU. 
 Apost. vii. 46); anil tiiat o|iinion hits naturally 
 been till lowed by Koinan Catholic exjiositors It 
 cannot now bo proved incorrect; but ilie suspicion 
 exists that the case here may be as with iiiimy 
 other names in the New Test.inierf. which liutc 
 been assigned to celebrated lu'r-oiis of a latet 
 period. Clement is said to lm\ e lived to the tliiid 
 year of the em))eror Trajan (a.d. 100), wlfen li« 
 sutlcrod martyrdom. 
 
 Tiiere is an ejii-itle of Clcninit to the ("orrn* 
 thians, which was higlily esteemeil by the un<:>fDt 
 church, and was publicly read in nianv chuicliM 
 [EplSTI.KS, Apos'roi.icAi.]. 
 
 I. CLEOPAS (KAfdiroj), one of the two d>» 
 ciples to whom Je.siis a})])eaied in the way ft 
 Eniroaiis (Luke xxiv. 18). Ileii not to (le 0(ai>
 
 446 
 
 CLOUD. 
 
 founded with tl e otlter Cleophas, who was abo 
 
 called AlpliiEJS. 
 
 2. CLEOPHAS (K\<»7ras), or rather Clopas, 
 who was also called AlpiiKus, which see. 
 
 CLIMATE. [Pvi.KSTtNB.] 
 
 CL0U1>. Tlie allusions to clouds in Scripture, 
 as well as their use in sj-mbolical languaa;e, must 
 be understo;id witli releience to the nature of the 
 climate, where tiie sky scarcel*y exliibitii the trace 
 Cjl' a chnid fn'tTi the lic^Muning of May to the end of 
 St'.temlier, diiiiug which period clouds so rarely 
 appear, and rains so seldom fall, as to be considered 
 phenomena — as was the case with the harvest rain 
 which Samuel invoked (1 Sam. xii. 17, 18), and 
 with the little cloud, not larger than a man's 
 hand, the apiK-aiaiice of whioli in the west was 
 immediately noticed as something remarkaiile not 
 tnly in itself, Imt as a sure harbinger of rain 
 (I Kings xviii. 44), 
 
 As in such climates clouds refreshingly veil the 
 oppressive glories of the sun, clouds often symbo- 
 lize the Divine presence, as indicating the splen- 
 dour, insupportable to man, of that glory which 
 they wliolly or jjartially conceal (Exod. xvi. 10 ; 
 xxxiii. 9; xxxiv. 5; xl. 34, 35; Num. xi. 25; 
 xxi. 3 ; Job xxii. 14 ; Ps. xviii. 11, 12; xcvii. 2; 
 civ. 3; Isa. xix. 1 ; Matt. xvii. 5; xxiv. 30, &c. ; 
 Acts i. 9; Rev. i. 7; xiv. 14, 16). Somewhat 
 allied to this use is that which makes clouds 
 the symbols of the Divine power (2 Sam. xxii. 12; 
 Ps. Ixvlii. 31 ; Ixxxix. 6 ; civ. 3 ; Nahum i. 3). 
 
 Clouds are also the symbol of armies and mul- 
 titudes of ])eople (Jer. iv. 13; Isa. Ix. 8; Heb. 
 xii. I). This is often very scientifically ex- 
 plained by the information that clouds are com- 
 jjosed of iimumerable drops of rain or vapour. 
 This, allhough true, is certainly not the truth 
 which the Hebrew p(jets had in view. Any one 
 who has noticed the efl'ect of a large and compact 
 body of men upon the surface of an extensive 
 plain, moving like a cloud in the clear sky, or 
 who has seen a similar body of men upon the 
 side of a distant liill, will Hnd a more obvious 
 Bource of the comjjarison. 
 
 There are many other dis[)ersed symbolical 
 alhisions to clouds inScriptui-e not coming under 
 these descripl ions ; but their purport is in every 
 case too obvious to need explanation ("see particu- 
 larly Prov. xvi. 15; Kccles. xii. 2; Isa. iv. 5 ; 
 xiiv. 22; 2 Pet. ii. 17; Jude 12). 
 
 CLOUn, PILLAR OF. [Exodus.] 
 
 CNIDUS (Ki/iSoj), otherwise Gnidus, a town 
 and peuiiisula of D iris in Carla, jutting out from 
 the south- west part of Asia Minor, between the 
 islands of Rliodes and Cos. It was celebrated 
 for the worsiiip of Venus (Strabo, xiv. p. 965 ; 
 Plin. Hist. Nat. xxxvi. 15 ; Hom. Odyss. i. 30). 
 The R jmans wrote to tl;is city in favour of the 
 Jews (1 Ma'-c. XV. 23), and St. Paul passed it in 
 his way to Rome Acts xxvii. 7). 
 
 CO.\L. It is general 1 y assumed that, in those 
 numerous passages of our version in which the 
 word coal occms, charcoal, or some other kind of 
 artificial fuel, is to be understood ; at all events, 
 that the word has not its English meaning. The 
 idea is founded ujion the supposition that fossil 
 coal was not known to the ancients as an article 
 j' fuel, and especially to the ancient inhabitants 
 »f Syria, wliose country it is generally imagined 
 did not produce it. It has inde* I been strongly 
 maintained that coal has not bee« used fur fuel, 
 
 COAL. 
 
 even in Ekigland, much mor,* than 400 yeaii* 
 
 notwith.standing the reasons alleged by Horslej 
 and otiiers that the Romans w()rke<l coal-mines iu 
 this country ; and by Whittaker, that it was used 
 as fuel by the Saxons. Truth, however, here, 
 jierbaps, as usually, lies in the miildle. Al- 
 though the ffetieral use of coal fur fuel is even Ik 
 this country of comparatively recent date, and • 
 certainly so in every other, yet tire conclusion 
 that it was totally unknown and unemployed for 
 any purjjose, either here or in other countries, in- 
 cluding even Syria, does not necessarily follow. 
 Tlie existence of cual in Syria is now placed be- 
 yond a doubt. Many indications of coal occur 
 in the Lebanon mountains ; the seams of this 
 mineral even protrude tiirough the superincumbent 
 strata iu various directions At Cnrnale, eight 
 hours from Beirout, at 2500 feet above the level 
 of the se.a, where'the coal-seams are three feet in 
 thickness, a mine is actually being worke<l by 
 order of Mohammed Ali, in which more than 100 
 men are employed. The coal is ofgood quality, 
 and mixed with uon pyrites. In 1837 tlie quan- 
 tity of coal extracted was 14,700 cantars of 217 
 okes, each making about 4000 tons. A furnace 
 for smeltmg the ore and a railroad to convey tlwi 
 coals to Beirout were then in contemplation. 
 (Elliot, vol. ii. 11. 257 ; and Dr. Bowring's 
 ' Rq:ort'). 
 
 The following passage from the Tlepl rSiv \iQa> 
 of Theophrastus, proves beyond a doubt, in the 
 Opinion of his learned translator and annotafoi 
 Sir John Hill, tliat fossil coal was employed at 
 least by ' the smiths,' ol xo'^fe'^, in tl'e time of 
 that ancient naturalist. Ous 5e KoXovaiv fvdi/s 
 &vdpaica^, rHiv OpvKTOfjL^vcDV, Sta t)]v xpeiat") «*Vi 
 y^ui^fis. iKKaiovTCLL 5t koL irvpovvTou KaOdirtp ol 
 &v6paK€s. fieri 5e -Kepi re Tijf KiyuariKTiv, oirou Kal 
 Tb ijKeKTpoy, Kal eV tt) 'HKela, Ba5i^6yTa>i' 'OAu/u- 
 TTiaft T^jV 5' opovi, oTs Kal ol xaA.(ce?s ■j^pcSj'Tni, (cij. 
 On tl.'is passage Sir John Hill observes, ' The 
 substance here detioted, whatever mistakes there 
 have been among authors since about it, appears 
 to me to be eviilently no other than the common 
 pit-coal ; unA I have made it appear as clearly 
 so in the translation, only by having properly 
 rendered the word SfSpct/cey, the carelessly mis- 
 understanding which word alone has been the 
 occasion of all the erroneous guesses about the 
 substance denoted. The authors of these seem 
 all to have understood the word avOpa^ as signi- 
 fying fossil or pit-coal ; and therefore as the author 
 compares the burning of this substance to that, 
 they were necessitated to think of some other S!ib- 
 stance that he might here mean, as it was impos- 
 sible he should compare a thing to itself, eKKal- 
 ovrat KaOdvep ol dvOpaKfs, evidently, " they kindle 
 and bum like wood coals," or, as we call it, char- 
 coal, for that is the genuine and determinate sense 
 of the word dpdpa^ in Greek and carbo iu Latin, 
 as is evident from the other works of Theophras- 
 tus, Pliny, and all the older naturalists. Even 
 the more correct of the moderns, when they would 
 express what we call pit-coal, the substance here 
 described by the author, never use the words 
 aydpa^ or carbo, but always XidavOpa^ or carb(> 
 fossil is (see Woodward, Ciiarlton, and Merritt). 
 The similar use of this bitumen got it the name 
 of coal, but always with an addition tliat distin* 
 guished it from what was more commonly and 
 properly so called, and expresaed its being not ol
 
 COAL. 
 
 vefrefj^lne but r f fossil orii^in" (London, 1774, pp. 
 64-66'i. So clear a testiniony to tlie use of pit- 
 coal l)v artilicers in Greece, neaily 300 years ij.c, 
 willi llie well-iiscertaincd existence of coal in 
 Syria, emericing to the very snrface, may, in con- 
 junction with some particnlais respectinj^ the 
 mention of coal in the ScriptMres, tend to sliow 
 fl'e possiliility that coal, in the proper sense, was 
 Hot wliolly unknown or unem])ioyed by the an- 
 cient Hebrew.*. &c. The llolirew words most 
 frequently and properl ' translated coal are two, 
 
 n#n!l and DHD. ThouLjli the Helnews seem to 
 nave frequently used the word n^TIJ in the same 
 generic sense as we lio when «e say a ton of coals, 
 meaning coals not yet buirit, a ])an of coals, 
 meani'ig coals on (ire, and as the (ireel;s, lliou;.i;h 
 not so loosely, apply avGpaKia, and the Romans 
 carbn, yet when jirecision lequiieil it, the Hebrews, 
 as well as ourselves and the (Jreeks and Romans, 
 knew how to express the d.ilTeience in the case of 
 ignilcd coals, which fhev mot commonly do by 
 the addition of t^N, a (li^ti!!(•tlon pveseived in the 
 Septiiajjiut by ttiH word itvp (though the Septua- 
 gint (jften introduces this word when the sense of 
 "lie single Hebrew word seems to require it, and 
 generally with great correctness); and which ds- 
 winctiiin is also generally preserved in tlie Vulgate 
 by tlie use of (lie appropriate word pruna : — .Seiv. 
 cut Ain. xi. 78'': 'D.icet hoc esse discrimen inter 
 prunam et caibunem, (piod, iila accensa sit, hie 
 vei5 extinctus, St-d eiiam diun ardet carbo dici- 
 tur' (Facciolati). The following classilication is 
 ottered, comprehending all the instances in which 
 the word Ti^nj occurs : — First, in its generic and 
 indefinite application, that is, meaning coal 
 whether ignited or not : 2 Sam. xiv. 7, ' they shall 
 quench my coal which is left;' Sept. 6.vdpaKa.\ 
 Vulg. scintillam ; evidently ignited, used tropic- 
 ally for posterity, like 1 Kings xv. 4, and several 
 other ])assages : Job xli. 21, 'his breath kindlotli 
 coals,' afdpaKes, prutias, i.e. coals not before ig- 
 nited: Isa. xlvii. 14, 'not a coal to warm at,' 
 but here the word QDH? derides the ignition, 
 HvOpaKas irvpos, prunaj : I's. xviii. S, 'coals were 
 kindled at it," ai'dpaicfs, carbones succensi sunt : 
 Ps. cxx. 4, ' with coals of juniper,' Sept. (rvw tois 
 &u6pa^i To7s ip7jf.uKo7s; Vidg. cum carbonibus 
 •iesolatoriis : Prov. \i. 2S. English version sup- 
 plies (Iwt) coals : Sept. adds irvphs to avQpaKtuu, 
 pruiias: Prov. xxv. 22, 'shall heap coals of fire 
 upon his head,' Sept. supplies irvp6s, prunas : 
 Tsa. xliv. 19. ' upm the coals,' a.vdp6.K<iiv, car- 
 bones : F^.ek. xxiv. 1 1, ' upon the coals,' dvOpaKas, 
 vvui.as. 
 
 Our second class consists of instances in which 
 the word B'N is added, in order to fix the sense of 
 ignition : — Lev. xvi. 12, 'a censer full of liuming 
 coals of die," avQpa.KCM)v irvpii, prunis: 2 Sam. 
 xxii. 9, 13, 'coals of lire were kindled at it." &i/- 
 dpuKis Tri)p6s, carljones ignis : Ps. xviii. 12, ' the 
 coals of fire passed,' avdpaKts Trvp6s. cai bones 
 ignis : Ps. cxl. 10, Met burning coals fall on them,' 
 dt'dpoiKes TTupSs, carbones: Ezek. i. 13, 'coals 
 of file," at'6pa,K0i!v nupos, carbonum ignis : E^ek. 
 X 2, 'coals of die,' o.vOpa.K(i)v wvpSs, prunis ignis. 
 
 The other Hebrew word translated coal is DflD. 
 It occurs ordy three times :— 'Prov. xxvi. 21, 
 DriD DvniT^. ' as awls are to burning coals, and 
 wootl tu fire,' &c., 'iisx<ipa avepa^t, sicul carbones 
 
 COAL. 
 
 4«7 
 
 ad ])nina5: here the wor'i DPID ])lain!y nirjins 
 unigiiittd roiil (Qu. mineral coal 0- "- •HM"^"^" 
 from the ;)arallel coinpariMm, ami ' a.n n-ouU tofiru.' 
 Isa. xliv. J2. • the«//u7/i Moikelh in the coals : llt# 
 Sept. has no coritsiKinding word, but old com- 
 mentators read t'v ivOua^t, in jminis.. I«u liv. 
 16, "the smith that bloweth the creil in tiie Hi^' 
 ii/fjpawas, iirunas. From the foregumg analysis it 
 apj>ears that the woid phui often me.in* coal* 
 thoroughly ignited ; b>it DHD, coal bi-/.ire beint; 
 ignilcd. 
 
 There are several instames in which the word 
 'coal' in our veislon is an imjiropi r transla- 
 tion. 1 Kings, xix. fi, D^3^*"> D^V " a cakebaken 
 on the coals,' (yKpmpias, subcinericius jianis. 
 nSVI liere properly means a hot slo:i<- ia pave- 
 ment, Esih. i. 6, and elsewhere), and CD'^fl Daj? 
 properly mean small cakes baked vnder ashes — 
 a common food to this day anion:,' the Oiientiil.*, 
 especially wlien travelling FBukau]. ?|i"1 is also 
 allot stone thrown into milk or Imitli in onler tij 
 heat it (GeseninsX Atiother mis-transiatior. oc- 
 curs (Hab. iii.5), ' l)urning coals went tiiirh at h's 
 feet' in the margin 'burning diseases' (l)eut. 
 XXX 2i). The Sept. varies widely; the Vulgate 
 still mi.re widely — 'egrediefur diabolus," whicii is, 
 however, exj)laincil as pestis by the commentators. 
 Another mis-lranslalion is (Lam. iv. '';, 'T.'ieir 
 visaire is blacker tlian a coal ;' margin, 'darker 
 than blackness;" "IIPIB^D It^TI, (nrip a..T^6\riv, su- 
 per cai bones. Another mis-franslation occurs 
 (Cant. viii. ()\ ' the coals theieof are coals of 
 fire ;" B'X ^SuH ^^Q'.^'"1, -ntpiintpa auri)i, trtplv- 
 repa Trvp6s, .\ld. &fdpnKes irvpSs, ut lampades 
 ignis. A questionable translation occurs (Is. vi. 
 6), ' a live coal," nS^'l &vepaKa Trvp6s, calciiltts ; 
 but the Rabbis vender it ' coal." The instances of 
 the word coal in the New Testament remain to lie 
 noticed: — (John xviii. IS), ' a lire of coals,' oj/flpo- 
 Kid, ad jnunas. The word hereeviilently means a 
 mass of live charcoal (so Suitl. avOpaKia Tr€(pvpaK- 
 Twfxevoi IxvdpaKes, who gives an adage which 
 makes a plain dilVerencc — /j,}] rijv rtrppav <piv- 
 ywv, els auBpaKiav ireVjjs,' which may be ex- 
 actly paralleled by a well-/cnou-7i¥.ngVi^U adage). 
 (Eccl. vi;i. 10; xi. 32, occur in the game sens* 
 in tiie Aj)ocryplia.) From the foregoing analysis 
 the following passages are selectcil as counte- 
 nancing the ideii that the ancient Hebrews weie 
 acquaintetl with natural coal. In the sublima 
 description of the leviathan (Job xli. 21), 'bis 
 breath kindleth coals,' the representation, though 
 highly hy])erbolical, is of course supported l)y a 
 consistency and proportion of idras. Kiit to 
 suppose that the word heie reiubred coals me;ui3 
 any kind of artificial fuel, reduces the whole 
 scene to an intolerable bathos ; wheieas if we refer 
 the word to the natural iiroduction, it is a<(rnir- 
 ably preserved. The association of charcoal 
 with a creature whicli ' makes the deep to bod 
 like a caldron,' and whicli, when on land, ' is 
 king of the children of pride,' is too incongruous 
 to be attributed to the sublimest of aiuient ^«H-ts ; 
 but it is a conception wortiiy of his powers to 
 represent a ma.ss of coal ignited by the breath of 
 leviathan. A similar remark is due fo the mag- 
 nilicent representation (2 Sam. xxii. 0, l.\ and 
 Ps. xviii. 8), ' through the briglitne.sa before Tim 
 were coals of lire kindled.' This oft-rrpecled 
 expression siiiits only, but it suits well, the idea tt
 
 <48 
 
 COCK. 
 
 a slrattim of rninpral matter as being ignited by 
 tl»e niiterial splendors afteiidiii!^ on the Divine 
 ftpj)paiaiice anil interposition. — J. F. D. 
 
 COCK (aKeicTQip ; it. Hebrew possibly "133 
 Gabn\ if Jerome's version of Isa. xxii. 17, 18 be 
 correct : our version of the passa;^e is oliscure). 
 It is somewhat sin,'ular that tliis bird anil poultry 
 in general should not be distinctly noticed in the 
 Hebrew Scriijtures; especially as rearing galli- 
 naceous fowls was an object of considerable eco- 
 nomical importance in K.^^ypt. ah I tlu-ir Hesli one 
 of tli« piii;ci|)al itsources for the taliie in every 
 part of Southern and Western Asia. It is tiue, 
 fSie date wiieii the practice of (.btaining tiiem by 
 artitici.il heat comnieticed in Egypt is sufficiently 
 disputable, aud birds of the genus Gallus, pro- 
 perly so called, are not indigenous in Western 
 Asia, but t)elong in their oiiginal condition to 
 lower India, Indo-Chiua, and the great islands of 
 Austra'-Asia. They were, it may be sin-mised, 
 unknown in Egypt when the Mosaic law was 
 |H-omulgated, and, tliough imported soon after, 
 they alwavs remained in an undetermined con- 
 dition, neither clean nor unclean, but liable to be 
 declared either by decisions swayed by prejudice, 
 or by fanciful analogies ; perhaps chielly the 
 latter; because poultry are devourers of unclean 
 animals, scorpions, scolopenara, small lizards, 
 ■ and young serpents of every kind. 
 
 But although rearing of common fowls was not 
 Micouraged liy the Helnew population, it is evi- 
 dently d] awing inferences beyond their proper 
 bounds, wlien it is asseited that they were un- 
 known in Jerusalem, where civil wars, and Greek 
 and Roman dominion, had greatly alTected the 
 national mariners. The excess of pharisaical 
 punctiliousness is evidence that opiidons and 
 customs widt'ly opposed to their own were pre- 
 valent, and, in the dependant state of the nation, 
 wei-e openly professed even by the numerous resi- 
 dCTit foreigners, the Pagan garrisons, and by many 
 Jews, miller the influence of the Epicurean plii- 
 losophy. 
 
 In the denials of Peter, described in the four 
 Gospels, where the cock-crowing is mentioned by 
 our Lor;!, f!ie words are plain and direct, not 
 we think admitting of cavil, or of being taken to 
 Mgnify anything but the real voice of the bird, 
 ^he aKeicrapocpcoyia, as it is exjjressed in Mark xiii. 
 85, in its liteial acceptation, and not as denoting 
 Mie sound of a trumpet, so called, because it pro- 
 claimed a watch in the night; for, to what else 
 tbaai a real hen and her brood does our Saviour 
 allude in Luke xiii. 34, where the text is 
 pi-oof that the image of poultry was familiar to 
 the disciples, and consecpiently that they were 
 not raie in Juda? ? To the present time in the 
 East, and im the ContJTient of Enroj.e, this bird 
 is still often kept, as amongst the Cilfa? (Caesar, 
 Beil. (Jall. iv. 12), not so much for food as for 
 the pni I'osp of announcing the approach and dawn 
 of dav.— C. H. S. 
 
 COCKATRICE. [Serpent.] 
 
 COCKCROWING. The cock usually crows 
 several limes about midnight, and again about 
 break of dav. The latter time, because he then 
 crows loudest, and his 'shrill clarion ' is most use- 
 ful by summoning man to his labours, obtained 
 the appellttion of the cockcrowing emphatically, 
 and by way of eminence; though sometimes the 
 distinctions of the ^rst and second cockcrowinK 
 
 COCKCRO'V'^TNO. 
 
 are met with in Jewish and neathen wrlten 
 (Bdchart, vol. iii. p. 119). Tnese times, an«l 
 these names for them, were, no doubt, some of th* 
 most ancient divisions of the night adopted hi 
 the East, where 'the l)ird of dawning' is rro8» 
 prot)ably indigenous. The latter aKiKTopocpuvla 
 was r«*tained even when artificial divisions of time 
 were invented. In our Lord's time the Jews had 
 evidently adojited the Greek and Roman division, 
 of the night into foui- periods, or walidios; each 
 consisting of three houis ; the first beginning at 
 six in the evening, eV rf) Seurepa (j>u\aKrj, koI if 
 Trj Tpirr) (pvXaKrj (Luke xii. 38); rfrdprrj Si 
 (pvAaia) Tjjs vvKTOi- { Matt. xiv. 25 ; Mark vi. 48). 
 These watches were either numbered first, second, 
 third, and fourth, as now specified, or were called 
 6\pe, fj.iaofvKTtof, a\(Kropo<puvia, -KpuL These 
 are all mentioned (Mark .xiii 35; Veget. Re 
 Milit. iii. S, ' In quatuor partes ad clepsydraro 
 sunt divisae vigilise, ut non amplius quam tribus 
 horis nocturnis, necesse est vigilare,' Censorin, d6 
 Die Natal. Tltp\ (p. TeTdprr^v, vide Josepii. Antiq. 
 xviii. 9, C. n^p\ (p. SevT^pav, Diod. Sic. IS. 40 ; 
 Xen. Aiiab. iv. 1. 6). 
 
 It has been considered a contradiction that Mat- 
 tliew (xxvi. 31), records our Lord to have said ts 
 Peter, irplu d'AfKropa (pwvriffai, rph dTrapyrja-p ^e, 
 whereas St. Mark (xiv. 30), says, Trplj/ fj 51s (poovrf 
 crai. But Matthew, giving only the general sense 
 <j( the admonition (as also Luke xxii. 34 ; John 
 xiii. 38), evidently alludes to that only which was 
 customarily called the cockcrowing, but Mark, 
 who wrote under Peter's inspection, more accu- 
 rately recording the very words, mentions tiie 
 tioo cockcrowings (W^etstein on Mark xiv. 30 
 Scheuchzer, Phys. Sacr. on Mark xiii. 35 
 Whitby's Note on Malt. xxvi. 34). Another ob 
 jection to this part of tiie Evangelical history ha/ 
 been founded upon an assertion of the Mischna 
 in Bava Kama, vii. 7, l^'^JU^H ]'''?12» fh 
 Q''l^*)lp "-aStt D'?K'n''3,' They do not breed cocks 
 at Jerusalem because of the holy things' : becaus« 
 it is interpreted, cocks turn up tlie dunghills, 
 and set free the reptiles by which the sacrifices 
 might be polluted which were eaten as food; and 
 that, consequently, Peter could not hear one crow. 
 But this is sufficietitly answered in the preceding 
 article. Even the traditions themselves on this 
 subject are not uniform; witness the story in 
 Ei'iibin, p. 26. 1, of a cock which killed a child, 
 and was stoned by order of tlie council. Other 
 instances are given l)y Reland, which show tliat 
 the cock might crow, though not in tlie city, and 
 yet be heard by Peter in the stillness of the night, 
 especially as the jjalace of Caiaphas stood oil an 
 elevated situation, at the distance of scarcely 100 
 yards from the city walls. At the same time the 
 word dXiKToop, being everywhere aiiarthroxts in 
 the New Testament (excei)t Luke xxii. 60, where, 
 however, the article is rejected by Griesbach upon 
 tlie autliority of a multitude of MSS.). ir may be 
 inferred from this indefiniteness. that cocks, if at 
 all tolerated in Jerusalem, were far less common 
 than with us. Ai's, in Mark, is for tV Seurepow, 
 and rpis is explained, semel iterumque, pin* 
 simplici vice, a certain for an uncertain number, 
 as 1 Cor. xii. 28. So Eusth. ap. Schl. Lex. say« 
 Tpis is for iToWaKis. Thus the seeming cimlradic- 
 tion, at least, between Maik and the other Evan- 
 gelists i» leiKoved TLi^btfcx^t, Hor. Ileb ; B>n'jea|
 
 CCELESYRIA. 
 
 ie morts Ch\-isti,'u. 6; Ri'laml, Oral, da Gall. 
 Cantu; Altmann De Gallicin. ; li\e\, A iiimad. 
 ad J. G. Alfinaiin; Ansaldi Comment., llie lour 
 last in Uffolliii, T/i/smir. vol. xxvii. Wn. 1763; 
 Adam's Roman Antiq.\>. 3o ; Winer, Bihltschcs 
 Beal-Worlerbuoh, Leipzig, 1833, art. Iluliner). — 
 
 COCKLE. [Besha.] 
 
 CCELKSYRIA (i? Koi\n 2upfa\ the Jwlloio 
 Syvia. This name, which is evidently ofGre- 
 sian origin in the times of the Seleucid.T, was 
 ©riginally apjilied to the valley lyin^' lietweeti 
 the mountain-ranges of Lihaiitis and Anti'^Lihanns. 
 It was also useil to denote the whole tract of 
 countrj' (with tiie exce])tion o( Jiuhea and PhcB- 
 nicia) reaching from Seleucis to Arabia and tlie 
 confines of Egypt (Sirabo, xvi. 2, vol. iii. p. 30.5, 
 ed. Taiich. ;' Polyb. lUst. v. 80, § 3). In the 
 time of David, Ccelesyria was piobably inchidcd 
 ill ' Syiia ot Damascus," which was conquered by 
 that monarch (2 Sam viii. 6),' but recovered from 
 Solomon by Rezon the son of Eliadali (1 Kings 
 xi. 2i^. The possession of it was an object of 
 many struggles between the SeleucidsE and the 
 king« of Egypt (Polyb. i. 3; ii. 71; iii. 1; 
 V. it); xvi. 39; xxvii. 17). Amyce, tlie name of 
 the ])]ain Tl);oug]i wiiich the Orontes (lowed {rh 
 ^AfivK7]s Tib'.or Polyl). v. 59), is derived by 
 Bochart from the Syriac Xp''?DJ? Arnica, wliich 
 means dcp, and is nearly synonymous with the 
 Greek Caele (vid. Geogr. Sac. Pars poster, i. 
 L) The same learned writer supposes that 
 Syropha-nicia is tlie same as Cadesyria. Scytho- 
 poHs and Gadcua are mentii)iied by Joseplius as 
 cities of Coslesyria (^4/;??'5. xiii. 13 ^2, § 3). 
 The name frequently occurs in tlie Apocrvijha 
 (I Mace. X. 69; 2 Mace. viii. 8; x. 11 ; Esdr. 
 ii. 17, 24; iv. 48; vii. 1); in Esdr. vi. 3, it is 
 ealletl simply Syria. Under the emperor Diocle- 
 tian, Phcenice and Ca-lesyria formed one pro- 
 vince, called Phoenicia Lilianica. Under the 
 ])resent Turkish government the western part of 
 Cifilesyria is in tlie Paslialic of Saide, and the 
 eastern in tiie Pashalic of Damascus. — J. E. R. 
 COFFIN.. [BuRiAi..] 
 
 COLONY {KoKwuio). Tins distinction is 
 applied to Philippi in Macedonia TActs xvi. 12). 
 Augustus Ca;sar had deported to Macedonia most 
 of the Italian communities which had espoused the 
 ' cause of Antony ; by which means the towns of 
 Philippi, Dyrrachium, &c., acquired tiie rank of 
 Roman colonies (Dio Cass. ]). 4.55). They ])os- 
 sesseil X\\e jus colomarium (Plin. llist. Nat. v. 1), 
 »'. e. so-called JUS ItuUcum {Digest. Leg. viii. 8), 
 consisting, if complete, in a free mvniicipal con- 
 stitution, sucli as was customary in Italy, in 
 exemption from personal and land taxes, and in 
 the commerce of tlie soil, or the riglit of selling 
 the land. 
 
 COLOSS.4^ (KoAocro-oi), a city of Phrygia, on 
 the rivei Lycus (now Gorduk), not far from 
 its confluence wiih the Mseander, and near the 
 towns of Laodicea, Ap:imea, and Hieropolis (Col. 
 ii. 1 ; iv. 13, 1.5;'comp, Plin. Hist. Nat. v. 41 ; 
 Strabo, xii. j). 576). A Christian ciiurch was 
 formed here very eaily. probably by Ejiaphras (Col. 
 i. 7; iv. 12, s(j.), consisting of .lews and Gentiles, 
 to whom Paul, who does not appear to have ever 
 visited Colosssc in person (Col. ii. 1) addressed an 
 Xpistle from Rome. Not long after, the town 
 was, together witl Laodicea and Hierapolis, de- 
 
 COLOSSIANS. 
 
 44S 
 
 sfroyed by an earthquake. This, accorditig to 
 Ku.sebiu3, was in the nintli year of Nero; bi>c th« 
 town must liave been imniediutely rebuilt, Ic/r io 
 his twelftii year it continue. I to be named aa a 
 nourishing ]ilace (Nicet. L'hron. j). 115). U 
 ■till subsists as a village named Kliona*. Tk« 
 
 S34. [Oblossao: Klionas.] 
 
 huge range of Mount Cadmus rises immedi 
 ately behinrl the village, close to which there it 
 in the mountain an immense iierjienilicnlar 
 chasm, ailbrding an outlet lor a wide mountain 
 torrent. The ruins of an old castle stand on 
 the summit of the rock forming the left side of 
 this chasm. There arc some traces of ruins and 
 fragments of stone in the neighliourhood, but 
 barely more than sufficient to attest tlie existence 
 of an ancient site; and that this site was that 
 of Colossne is satisfactorily established by the 
 Rev. F. V. .1. Arundel], whose book (Discoveries 
 in Asia Minor) contains an ample description of 
 the place. 
 
 COLOSSIANS, Epistle to tiik.— TJiat this 
 Epistle is tlie genuine production of the apostle 
 Paul is proved, by the most satisfactory evidence, 
 and lias never indeed bPen seriously called in 
 question. It is less certain, however, wfien and 
 where it was composed by him. The common 
 opinion is that he wrote it at Rome (hiring his 
 imprisonment in that city (Acts xxviii. 16, 30) 
 Erasmus, followed by others, supjioses that Ejihesiis 
 was the ])lace at which it was comi>osed ; but 
 this suggestion is obviotisly nntenalde from its 
 incompatibility with the allusions contained in 
 the Epistle itself to the state of trouble anil im- 
 prisonment in which the A])osfle was whilst con-- 
 posing it (\. 2t; iv. 10, 18). In Germany, tlie 
 opinions of theologians have been divideil of late 
 years between the common hyjwthesis and one 
 nro))oseil by Dr. David Schulz in Ullmann and 
 tlmliriMt's Thcologischc Stuclien uud Krifikeit for 
 1829, s. 612 ff., viz., that this Epistle, with tliose 
 to the Ephesians and Philemon, was written 
 during the Apostle's two years' imprisonment at 
 C^aarea previous to his being sent to Rome. 
 This opinion has been adopted and defended by 
 Schott, Bottger, and Wiggers, whilst it has bt-eu 
 opposed by Meander, Steiger, ILirle.ss, Rijcltert 
 
 2 a
 
 t50 
 
 C0L0S3IANS. 
 
 COLOSSI/VNS. 
 
 Credner, ami others. Ttie following is a synopsis 
 of tlie leading arguments in ia.vour of tliis opi- 
 nion, anil of tlie counter-arguments of tliose who 
 oppose it: — 1. It is highly im})robal)le that Paul 
 would allow two years of easy imprisonment 
 (Acts xxiv. 23-27^ to pass auay without writing 
 to some of tlie cliurches at a distance, especially 
 as he tells us that upon liim ' came daily the 
 care of all the churches' (2 Cor. xi. 2'^), and as 
 we find tliat he secured time ibr this even when 
 most actively employed in his public ajwstolic 
 labours. To this it is replied that, admitting the 
 i'acts here assumed, tliey only prove that i:*aul 
 mixjht have employed himself during these two 
 years in epistolary correspondence witli distant 
 ihurciies, but aflbrd no certain evidence that he 
 really did s;), far less tliat lie wrote then the very 
 epistles in question. 2. These epistles bear evi- 
 dent marks of having been written in consequence 
 of commimications made i^ersonally to Paul by 
 ])arties connected with the churches to which 
 tliey Afere addressed ; and there is greater proba- 
 bility of his receiving such communications at 
 C;Csaroa than at Rome, especially during the 
 earlier pait of his residence tliere, to which these 
 epistles (if written at Rome) must be ascribed. 
 But it is replied to this tliat. distant as Rome was 
 from llie churches of Asia Minor, there is nothing 
 unlikely in the supposition that Epaphras and 
 others may have undertaken a journey thither to 
 onsult the Apostle about the state of these 
 diurclies, threatened as they were with danger; 
 and, for anything we know to the contrary, 
 many of the Asiatic Cliristians may have had 
 occasion to 1)6 at Rome at any rate on affairs of 
 their o.vn. 3. There is no small difficulty in 
 supposing ti)at in the early part of the Apostle's 
 residei.ce at Rone, all the parties mentioned in 
 these epistles, viz., Timothy, Aristarchns, Mark, 
 Jisus- Justus, Epaphras, Luke, Demas, Onesimus, 
 Tychicus, should be found there with him, espe- 
 cially as we are told (Acts xxvii. 2) that only 
 .\ristarciius accompanied Paul and Luke from 
 tJaesarea. and as, in the epistles known to have 
 been written from Rome, only two of the parties 
 above-mentioned, Timothy and Luke, are referred 
 to as with the Apostle (Pliil. i. 1 ; ii. 19 ; 2 Tim. 
 iv. 11); whilst, on the other hand, from Acts 
 XX. 4, we learn tliat some, at least, of these parties 
 v/ere witli Paul at CiBsarea, In answei to this, 
 it is said that it does not appear other than 
 natural that Paul should have gathered around 
 iiim in his imprisonment those yoimg men who 
 nad elsewhere been the companions and instru- 
 ments of his operations, and have used them for 
 tine purpose of maintaining a continual inter- 
 course with distant churches according to their 
 circutnstances and wants. 4. The ajipearance of 
 l)nesimii», the slave of Philemon, at the place 
 where Paul was, very soon (ivphs upav) after he 
 Had left his master at Colossas (j" iiiletn. ver. 15), 
 agrees better with the supposition that Paul was 
 at Ca;sarea, than with the supposition that he was 
 at Rome. To tiiis it is replied, tliat Rome was 
 tiie most likely of all jjlaces for a fugitive slave 
 to betake liimself to, and that with respect to the 
 expres.sion nphs Sipav, it is so \'ague, and is used 
 so obviously as an antithesis to aiuivLov in tlie 
 game \ erse, tnat nothing certain can be argued from 
 it. 5. The rec^aest of Paul to Philemon (ver. 22), 
 tiiat be would p ovide him a lodguig at Coiossae, 
 
 as lie hoped to visit that place shortly, agree* 
 better with the sujiposition that this epistle waa 
 written at Ca;sarea, whilst yet hopes might be 
 entertained of his liberation, than that it was 
 written at Rome, v/iien his expectations of free- 
 dom must have become faint, and whence, ac- 
 cording to his avowed purpose (Rom. xv. 2^), he 
 was more likely, in case of being lib'.ratecl to 
 travel westwards into Spain, than to return to Asm. 
 Tlie answer to this i,, that though the Apostle had 
 originally designed to journey from Rome to 
 Spain, the intelligence he received of the state of 
 things in the churches of Asia Minor may have 
 determined him to alter his resolution ; and ujion 
 the whole, we know so little of the Apostles rela- 
 tions during his imprisonment at Rome, that it is 
 not safe to build much upon any such allusions 
 (Schulz, loc. ctt ; Neander, Hist, of the Apos- 
 tolic (.'hxirches ; Eng. Transl. vol. i. p. 373; 
 Credner, Einleit. in das N. T. s. 390 ; SchotI, 
 Isagoge in N. T. § 66 ; Steiger, Dei' Br. Pauli 
 an d. Kolosser u. s. w. s. 335 ; Harless, Com- 
 ment, iib. d. Br. Pauli an d. Epheser. u. s. lo. 
 s. 63 ; Riickert, Dcr Br. Pauli an d. Eplies. 
 u. s. w. s. 305 ; Bbttger, Beitraffe, Sfc. 3 Aljib.) 
 In a very able article in a recent number of tlie 
 Studien und Kritiken, the whole question has 
 been subjected to a new investigation by Dr. 
 Julius Wiggcrs of the University of Rostoch, who 
 comes to tlie concludon, that of the facts above 
 appealed to, none can he regarded as deciiive for 
 either hypotliesis. He inclines, however, to the 
 opinion of Schulz, chieHy on the grounds that 
 Paul, in writing to the Ephesians, makes no men- 
 tion of Onesimus, who accomnanied Tychicus, 
 the bearer of his epistle to that church, and that 
 both in this epistle and in that to the Colossians, 
 he states tliat he had sent Tychicus els alnh 
 TOVTO, 'iva yvure to. Trepl Vf^ocv, koI TrapaKaXerrg 
 ras KapSias vjxwv (Eph. vi. 22; Col. iv. S [ac- 
 cording to the best MSS.]) The former of these, 
 Wiggers tliinks can be accounted for only on the 
 supposition tliat Tychicus and Onesimus having 
 to set out from Cajsarea, would reach Coiossae _/!';".s7;, 
 where the latter would tarry, so that he did not 
 need to be commended to the church at Epliesus ; 
 the latter of these, lie thinks, indicates tliat the 
 place whence Tychicus \ya.i to set out was on« 
 from which he might proceed eit/ier to Coiossae or 
 to Epliesus first, not one from which he had, as a 
 mere matter of course, to pass through Ephesus in 
 order to reach Colossse ; and hence he infers that 
 Caesarea, and not Rome, was the place whence 
 these epistles were despatched (Stud. u. Kril. 1S41, 
 s. 436). We cannot say that tb.ese two considera- 
 tions appear to us so cogently decisive of tiiii« 
 question as they do to Dr. Wiggers. For, not tt, 
 insist upon the olivious incoherence of the one with 
 the other, it does not by any means apjiear neces- 
 sary that Paul should have coinnien(h><l Onesi- 
 mus to the care of the church at Ephesus in case 
 of his passing through that city, seeing he was the 
 companion of one whose introduction would lie 
 enough to secure their kind offices on his behalf; 
 anil surely tlierc is nothing improbable in the su]> 
 position that Paul should have sent Tychicus on 
 the same errand both to Colossfe and to Ejilitsiis, 
 even though he must needs pass througli the one to 
 reach the other. In a case wheu the internal 
 evidence produces so exact an equipjise, the te»ti- 
 mjny of triditiun may fairly be uei milted to
 
 COLOSSIANS. 
 
 COLOSSI VXS. 
 
 4.M 
 
 Mttle Xh'^ question; and this is unequivocally 
 in favour ot' tlie opinion that tliese epistles uoie 
 written from Rome during tiie earlier jwrt of tlie 
 Ajwstle s confinement there. 
 
 In what order the e three epistles were written, 
 it is not possible clearly to determine. Between 
 that to the Colossians and that to the Ephesians 
 the coincidences are so close and numerous (.-ee 
 ilorne's Introduction, vol. iv. p. S^^lj that the 
 O.'ie must liave been written immediately after the 
 other, whilst the mind of the Ajiostle was occu- 
 pied with tiie same leading train of thouijht. 
 By'the greater jiart the priority is assigned to the 
 Kpistle to the Colossians ; though Uir this no 
 more convincing argument has been adduced 
 than tiiat which Harless, Steiger, and Wiggers 
 have urged, viz. : tliat this supposition best ex- 
 plains the force of the conjunction koI before I'/xe?! 
 in Eph. vi. 21. The exi)ression 'that you also 
 may know, &c.,' seems to imply that the same 
 knowledge had been conveyed to others ; and as 
 Paul makes the same statement to the Colossians, 
 but witiiout the Koi u/xeis, it is argued that the 
 recollection of having made that statement being 
 in his mind when he was writing to the Ejjhesians, 
 lie expressed himself in the manner above noted. 
 This, it must be allowed, is not very satisfactory, 
 for, us an argimient, it liolds good only on the 
 supposition either that the Epistle to the Colossians 
 was to be read also and Jirst liy the Ephesians, or 
 that the Apostle fell unconsciously into the mistake 
 of supposing that because what he had written to 
 ihe Colossians was fresh in his own recollection, 
 it must be as well known to the Ephesians. The 
 Epistle to Philemon being a mere friendly letter, 
 intended chiefly to facilitate the reconciliation of 
 Onesimus to his master, was probably written 
 immediately before the departure of the party by 
 whom it was to be carried. 
 
 The Epistle to the Colossians was written, ap- 
 ijarentU', in consequence of information received 
 hy Paul tlirough Ejjaphras concerning tlie inter- 
 nal state of their cliurch (i. 6-Sj. Whetlrer the 
 Apostle had ever himself before this time visited 
 Colossae is matter of uncertainty and dispute. 
 From cli. ii. 1, where he says, ' 1 would that ye 
 knew what great conflict I have for you and lor 
 them at Laodicea, and for as many as have not 
 seen my face in the flesh," &c., it has by some been 
 very conlidently concluded that he had not. To 
 this it is replied by Theodoret, Lardner, and 
 others, that Paul does not intend to include tlie 
 Colossians ami Laodiceans among those who had 
 not seen iiis lace, but s])ecifies the latter as a 
 trwtinct class; as is evident, lliey fliink, from his 
 using the third pei^n-in ver. 2. Tiiis latttr con- 
 sideration, however, is of no weight, for the use of 
 the third jieistJn here is easily accounted for on tiie 
 principle that the pronoun takes the person of tlie 
 nearer noun rather than that of the more lemote 
 (cf. Gal. i. 8); and it certainly would be absurd 
 to maintain that all contained in the second verse 
 ha^ no relation t« the Colossians and Laodiceans, 
 «otwitiistanding the reference to them in ver, I, 
 and again in ver. 4. As respects the words in 
 ver. I, tl ey ui'l, in a mere jihilological point of 
 TJew, bear to be understood in eitlier way. It 
 has been urged, liowever, that when, in ver. f), tlie 
 Apistle says, though lam alisent in the flesh, 
 yet am I with you in the spirit,' &c., his language 
 Is itronyly indicative of his liavii^^ formerly been 
 
 amongst the Colossians, for the veib i.- nixi ii 
 used proiierly only of such absence as ari>eji fum 
 the person's havtuiiffone aicaij from the place of 
 wliicii his absence is predicated. In Rii]i|Hirl of 
 the same view have been adiliii;ed Paul's having 
 tu'ice visited and gone through PInygia (.\c;.'< 
 xvi. 6; xviii. 23j, in which Colossie was a chief 
 city: his familiar acciuaintance willi so many of 
 the Colo-sian Christians, Epaphras, Aiclnppii-, 
 Philemon (wiio was one of his own convPifs. Phil.' 
 13, 19), and Ajipliia, proliably the wifeof Piiilrmon 
 [Ai'I'Kia] ; his apparent acijuaintance with One- 
 simiis, the slave of Philemon, so that he icct'g- 
 nised him again at Rome; the Cdidiality if 
 friendship and interest subsisting between the 
 Aposlle and the Colossians a-; a body (Col. i. 21, 
 2.5; ii. 1; iv. 7, &c.) ; t!ie .\poslle"s fami'iar ac- 
 quaintance with tiieir stiite and relations (^i.6; 
 ii. G, 7, &c.); and their kiio\vledi:e of so many tjf 
 his companions, and especlally.of Timothy, whi'-.o 
 name tiie AjKistle associaies willi his own at llie 
 commencement of the ejiistle, a circumstance 
 which is worliiy of consideration from this, that 
 Timothy was the companion of Paul dining his 
 (irst four througii Plirygia, w iien juobably the 
 Gosjiel was first pieaclied at C^olossa'. Of these 
 considerations it must lie allowed that ti:e cimni- 
 lative I'orce is very strong in favour of the oiiinion 
 that the Christians at ColossiE had been piivilegeii 
 to enjoy the personal ministrations of Paul. At 
 the same time, if tlie Colossians and Laoih'ceuns 
 are not to be included among those of wlioni Paul 
 says they had not seen his face, it seems uiiac- 
 couiitalile that in writing to the Colossians he 
 siiould liave referred to this class at all. If, 
 moreover, he had visited the Colossians, was it 
 not strange that he should have no deetier feeling 
 towards them than he had for tlie multlludes o( 
 Christians scattered over tiie world whose faces he 
 had never seen? In tine, as it is quite /(Oii/iZ-e 
 tliat Paul may have been twice in Phiygia with- 
 out being once in Colossae, is it not easx also to 
 account for his interest in the church at Colossie, 
 his knowledge of their afl'airs, and his acquaint- 
 ance with individuals among them, liy supjmsiug 
 that memlieis of that clinrch had freipienlly visited 
 him in difleieiit places, though lie had nevL-r visited 
 Colossal'? (Lardner's Credibility, SuppL, ch. xiv.; 
 Schulz in Stud, mid /vV(7., Jahrg. 1S2!', s. J3(j ; 
 Wiggers, Jbi^L ?ahrg. l«3R, s. i6.j; Steiger, Co- 
 losnerbr. s. 20ll , W liidiy, I'ref. to Coloss.) 
 
 A great part o\' tills Epistle is directed ug.ii.Mst 
 certain false teaciiers who iiad cre]>t into tiie church 
 at Colossae. To what class these te;i;hers be- 
 longed has not been fully deteimineil. Heinriciu 
 (.Vcif. Test. Kojypinn. vol. vii. jiait ii. n. lo6) ciin- 
 irnds that they were ilisciii!e.s of John the Uiptist. 
 Micliaelis and Storr, with more show of rea~«n, 
 conclude that ihey weie Essenes. Ilug {hitrcd. 
 vol. ii. p. 149, E.T.) traces their system to tlie 
 Magian philosojihy, of wliich the outlines are fur- 
 nished by lambliciius. But the best ojiiuion .=eems 
 to be that of Ne;uider (lib. cit. i. 37 1,.//'.), by w lioui 
 they are rejiresenled as a party of spenilati'its wlio 
 endeavoured to combine tiie dociilnes of Oriental 
 theosojihy aiul asceticism wit!. Christianity, and 
 pnmiised thereby to tlielr disciples a ileeper insight 
 into the spiritual woild, and a fuller a]iproxiiiia. 
 tion to hea\enly purity and intelligence tiian 
 simple Christianity could yield. Against thii 
 party tlie Ajiostle arg^ies by reminding the C»-
 
 *r)2 
 
 COLOSSIANS. 
 
 los'ians th:it in Jesus Christ, as set. before them in 
 tiie Gosiw!, they had all that they required— tluit 
 lie w;i9 the ima2;e of the invisil)le God, that, he 
 was l>efore all tlnngs, that by him all things con- 
 sist, that they were complete in liim, and tliat he 
 woi.ld y.reaent them to God holy, unblamalile, 
 an 1 unreprovable, provided they continued sted- 
 /as' in the faith. He then shows that the pre- 
 scriptions of a mere carnal asceticism are not 
 worthy of being sul)tnitted to by Christians; and 
 concludes by directing their attention to the ele- 
 vated principles which should regulate the con- 
 science and conduct of such, and the duties of 
 .social and domestic life to which these would 
 prompt. 
 
 In the conclusion of the Epistle, the Apostle,^ 
 after sending lo the Colossians the salutations of 
 oimself and otliers who were with him, enjoins 
 the Colossians to send this Epistle to the Laodi- 
 ceans, and that they likewise should read tV tK 
 AaoBiK^ias- It is disjjuted whether by these con- 
 cluding words Paul intends an Epistle from iiim 
 to the Laodiceans or one from the Laodiceans to 
 him. The use of the preposition e« favours the 
 latter conclusion, and this has been strongly urged 
 l)y Theodoret, Chrysostora, Jerome, Phllasfrius, 
 CEcumenius, Calvin, Beza, Storr, and a multi- 
 ♦ude of other interpreters. Winer, however, clearly 
 shows that the jjreposition here may be under 
 the law of attraction, and that the full force of 
 the jiassage may be tlius given — 'that \yriften 
 to the Laodiceans and to be brought frotn Lao- 
 dicea to you' {Gramniat\k d. Neutestamentl. 
 Sprachidioms, s. 434, Leipz. 1830). It must be 
 alio'.ved that such an interpretation of the Apostle's 
 words i.". in itself more jnobaljle'than the other; 
 f;;i' iiupposing him to refer to a letter from the 
 Lr.svliceans to him, the questions arise, How were 
 th«^ Colossians lo procure this unless he himself 
 »«rrjt it to them ? And of what use would such a 
 docu nent lie to them'? To this latter question it 
 has been replied that ])robably the letter from the 
 Laodiceans contained some statements which in- 
 fi\-ienc?d the Apostle in writing to the Colossians, 
 and which required to 1)6 known before his letter 
 in reply could be jierfectly understood. But this 
 is sa'd without the slightest shadow of reason from 
 the Epistle before us ; and it is opposed by the 
 fact that the Laodicean epistle was to be used by 
 the Colossians after tney had read that lo them- 
 selves (orav avayvciiffdrj, k. t. A.). It seems, upon 
 the whole, most likely' that Paul in this passage 
 refers to an ejiistle sent by him to the church in 
 Lftodicea at the same time with that to the church 
 at ColossBB. It is probaWe also that this Epistle 
 is now lost, thougli the suggestion of Grotius tliat 
 it was tlie same with the Canonical Epistle to the 
 Ephciians has found some advocates [Ephesians, 
 Ei>).sri.E TO the]. Tlie extant epistle to the 
 Laoiiiceans is on all hands allowed to be a clumsy 
 l.orgerv ( Michaelis. Introd. vol. iv. p. 124, fl'.; 
 Wwi, Introd. ii. 436; Steiger, Colosserbr. in loc. ; 
 Heim ichs, ;n Zoc. : Rapliel. in /oc). 
 
 Besides the commentaries mentioned in this 
 wticle the following are deserving of notice : — 
 D.ivenant, Expnsitio Ep. D. Pauli ad Colossen- 
 $68, Cantab. 1627, fob, translated by the Rev. 
 J. Al'.port, 2 vols. 8vo. L«nd. 1S31-32; Bohmer, 
 Isar/oqe in Ep. a Paulo ad Coloss datam, &c. 
 /vo. Berol 1S29: Bahr, Commcntar ub. d. Br. 
 Paul an die Kolosucr Svo Basel, 1830; Ston-, 
 
 COMMENT-iliY. 
 
 Infcrprntatio Ep. ad Coloss. (in Opuse. Aoad. U. 
 120).— W. L. A. 
 
 COMFORTER [Pahaci.etu.s.] 
 COMMENTARY. In tlie discussion tf thii 
 subject we propose to jiursue the following ar- 
 rangement : — 
 
 1. To inquire what is meant by commentary. 
 
 2. To notice different kinJs of commentary. 
 
 3. To mention the prominent lefects of existing 
 commentaries. 
 
 4. To review the leading and best known com- 
 mentaries. 
 
 1. By commentary, in its theological applica- 
 tion, is usually meant an exhibition of the mean- 
 ing which the sacred v/rilers intended to convey j 
 or a devel(>])ment of the truths wliich the Holy 
 Spirit willed to communicate to men for theii 
 saving enlightenment. Tliis is usually efi'ected 
 by notes more or less extended — by a series of 
 remarks, critical, philological, grammaticjil, or 
 popular, whose purport is to bring out into view 
 the exact sentiments which the inspired author? 
 meant to express. The ideas contained in the 
 Old and New Testaments are thus transferred 
 into other languages, and rendered intelligible by 
 the help of oral or written signs. There is a high 
 and holy meaning in tlie woids of holy men who 
 spake as they were moved. To adduce this in a 
 perspicuous form .is the imjiortant office of the 
 commentator. As there never has been, and from 
 the nature of the case there never can be, a uni- 
 versal language, God .selected for the revelation 
 of his Vv-ill those languages which were in all re- 
 sjjects iheiirtest media for such a purpose. Hence 
 arises the necessity of transplanting from these in- 
 dividual dialects the momentous truths they were 
 selected to exjiress : and of clothing in the cos- 
 tume of various people, as far as that costume can 
 be adajited to such an object, the precise senti- 
 ments which were in the minds of the inspired 
 writers. It is true that this can only be imper- 
 fectly done, owing to the various causes by which 
 every language is affected ; but the substance of 
 revelation may be adequately embodied in a great 
 variety of garb. The frutlis that make wise unto 
 salvation are capable of being fairly represented 
 in every tongue and dialect under heaven. There 
 is an adaptation in their nature to the usage of 
 every language that can possibly arise. The re- 
 lation of immortal beings to their great Creatoi is 
 every where the same; and the duties consequen. 
 upon such a relation are also identical. Their 
 wants and necessities, too, are essentially alike. 
 Hence there is a peculiar fitness in divine truth 
 for appearing without injury in the linguistic 
 costumes of different trilies. 
 
 The characteristics of < ommentary are, — 
 
 (a.) An elucidation of tlie meaning belonging 
 to the words, phrases, and idioms of the original. 
 
 The signification of terms is generic or sjiecific, 
 A variety of signilications also belongs to the 
 sarhe term, accoiding to the jwsition it occupies. 
 Now a commentary p^iints out tlie particular 
 meaning belonging to a li rni in a particular 
 jilace, together with the reason of its bearing such 
 a sense. So with phrases. It should likewise ex 
 plain the construction of sentences, the ]iec-4. 
 liarities of tlie diction employed, the difTiculties 
 belonging to ceitain combinations of words, and 
 the mode in which they alVec the general mean- 
 ing. But this is only a small part of tee bu»ine«
 
 COMMENTARY. 
 
 Wonwinw to a commentator. lie may l)c able (o 
 unfold tlie significations of words with discriini- 
 oating nicety ; witii the genius of languajje lie 
 may be familiar; he may clearly ]K'r<-,five all its 
 idioms, and rij^htly a|i])iehend its dillicult phriises. 
 In short, as far as verbal criticism is concerned, 
 he may be a consummate master, while yet he 
 may prove an imlillerent commentator. True 
 Commentary embraces much more than an ac- 
 quaintance with isolated words and phrases, or 
 with the grammatical principles of the Hebrew 
 andXrreek languages. It fills a more extended 
 and elevated sphere than simple ])hilology. It 
 takes a higher range than grammatical minutide 
 or rhetorical adjustment. These, indeed, form one 
 of its eleaxnts, but they are far from being the 
 only feature by which it is distinguished. 
 
 (6.) An.ther characteristic of conunentary is 
 an exhibition of the writer's scojje, or the end he 
 has in view in a particular place. It ascertains 
 the precise idea he intended .to inculcate in a 
 given locality, and how it coiitributes to the ge- 
 neral truth entorced. Every particle and word, 
 ev-ery phrase and sentence, forms a link in the 
 .chain of reasoning drawn out by an inspired 
 author — a step in the progress of his holy revela- 
 tions. It is therefore essential to perceive wljat 
 contribution it makes to the irnjvnt of an entire 
 passage, whether in the way of enriching or qua- 
 lifying tlie sentiments embodied. A commentary 
 should thus exhibit tlie design of a writer in a 
 certain connection. — the arguments he employs 
 to establish his positions, their coherence with 
 one unotlier, their general harmony, and the 
 degree of importance assigned to them. The 
 drift of a discourse should never be lost sight 
 of, else an author will be misunderstoo'' and mis- 
 interjjreied. 
 
 (c.) In addition to this, the train of thought or 
 reasoning pursued throughout an entire book or- 
 epistle, the various topics discussed, the great end 
 of the whole, wirli the subordinate particulars it 
 embraces, the digressions made by the writer, — • 
 these, and otlier jtarticulars of a like nature, 
 should be pointed out by the true commentator. 
 The connection of one argument with another, the 
 consistency and ultimate bearing of all the state- 
 ments advanced — in short, tlieir various relations, 
 as far as these are develojied or intimated by the 
 author, should be clearly apprehended and intel- 
 ligently stated. There is a plan or purpose tliat 
 pervadvjs every book, epistle, or prophecy of the 
 •acred writers; a plan which does not, indeed, 
 wholly exclude, but which usually takes pre- 
 cedence of, other objects to which the book may 
 be subservient. To trace such a plan, as it is 
 canied out by the original writer, and to unfold 
 the precise mode in which it promotes the highest 
 interests of mankind, is one of the chief charac- 
 teristics of commentary. 
 
 (d.) Another characteristic of commentary is, 
 that it presents a comparison of the sentiments 
 roTitained in one book, or one entire connected 
 portion of Scrijiture, with tiiose of another, and 
 witii the general tenor of revelation. A beautiful 
 harmony jicrvades the Bible. Diversities, indeed, 
 it exhilii^s, just as we should exjjoct it <t priori 
 to do ; it presents difficulties and mysteries which 
 we cannot fathom; but, with this variety. tJiere is 
 % uyil'oruiity wort'iy of the wisdom of God. All 
 «is works are distijjguished by tlie same beautiful 
 
 COMMENTARt. 
 
 4AI 
 
 arrangement; and the revelation of iii« will fjrmt 
 no exce])tion. .\ connuentator should therel'ore 
 bring into juxtajiosition the various portions of 
 the divine word, and ]ioint out their di\ ine sym- 
 metry. He should lie able to account for diver- 
 sities of sentiment, in rel'erence to 'he same topic, 
 that apjx'ar in the i\ages of books written at dif- 
 ferent pericds, and addressed fo intlividuals or 
 communities whose circumstances, intellectual 
 and ]ihysical, were dissimilar. An exjs)sitinn 
 that fails to do this is deficient in one of its 
 highest qualities. Without it, religious truth 
 will lie seen in disjointed frai^ments ; no c<in- 
 nected system, compact and harmonious in its 
 parts, will meet the eye. The adaptati<in of liie 
 entire scheme of revelation to the salvatiiin <>f 
 mankind will be dimly apjirehended. wliile 
 there is no comprehensive survey of its fair pro- 
 port ions. 
 
 From what has been stated in regard to the 
 constituent.s of commentary, it wili also U' seen 
 that it dilVers from trnnslatiun. The latter en- 
 deavours to find in another language eqnicaJtnt 
 terms expressive of the iileas which (he words .)f 
 the Hebrew antl Greek languages were framed tf 
 convey. It seeks to embody the same ser.iimenrj 
 as are contained in the Scriptures, by means of 
 phraseology closely corresponding in its sym- 
 bolical character to the diction of the Bilile. It 
 is tasy to see, however, that in many c;ises this 
 cannot be done, and that in >)thers it can ite 
 effected very imperfectly. There are and must 
 be a thousand varieties of concejition expressed in 
 the original languages of Scripture, of which no 
 other can atVonl an adequate representation. The 
 inhabitants of the countrie-s wlieie the sacred books 
 were written lived amid circunislances in manjr 
 respects diverse fiom those of other people. These 
 circumstances naturally gave a colouring to their 
 language. They affected it in such a way as ij 
 create tenins for which there are no ecpiivalents in 
 the languages of tribes who are conversiuit with 
 dillierent objects, and live amid ditVerent relations. 
 Translation fails in munerous iiistances, jus' i»^ 
 cause the language of one ]M?ople contains worilu 
 and idioms to which that of none other presents 
 tit counterparts. In such a case, no ex])edient i< 
 left but circumlocution. By tiic help of .veivTtt/ 
 phrases, we must try to approxiuiate at least th* 
 sentiment or shade of thought which the inspiied 
 writers designed to express. Where exact repre- 
 sentatives cannot be f.iund, we bring together 
 various terms which may give as vivid a repre- 
 sentation of the original as can be etTected through 
 the medium of the language in which the inter- 
 pretation is given. Conimrnlari/ is thus more 
 dilVuse tlxan translation. Its object is not to find 
 words in one lanu^uage corresponding to those of 
 the original languages of the Scriptures, or nearly 
 resembling them in signilicance, liut to set forth 
 the meaning of the writers in notes and remark.4 
 of con.>iderable Hngth. I'araplirasc occupies a 
 middle place between translation and com- 
 mentary 5 pariaking of greater il i llliseness than 
 the former, but of less extent than the latter 
 It aims at (i: .'ling equivalent terms to those which 
 th% sacred writers emijloy, accompanied with 
 others that ui)pear uecetisary to till up the .^ense, 
 or to 8prea<l it on* before the miiid of the leailer 
 in sucfi a form as tlie authors themselves n.ight 
 be supposed to have employed in reference to tlM
 
 ii 
 
 co.mam:ntarv. 
 
 COiMMENTARY. 
 
 people to, who ni the piraphrast belongs. Scholia 
 dill'er fVoin cominmTary only in brevity. They 
 are sh.nt nolcg rni jjassages of Scripture. Some- 
 times (liilicult places alone are st-lecteti aa their 
 (Aijeirt; at other times they embrace continuously 
 an entire l.iook. In every case brcvitij is, or ought 
 to be, tl;eir distingoishing feature. 
 
 i. There are two kinds of commentary which 
 ■VK shall notice, viz. the critical and the popular. 
 Tiie former contains grammatical a7)d philo- 
 logical remarks, unl'old;i tlie general and sjjecial 
 .sigoiiicatiiiirs of words, points out idioms and pe- 
 culiarities of the original languages, and always 
 brings inro view the Helirew or Greek ))hraseology 
 emj)loyed by the sacred writers. It dilates on the 
 peculiarities and ditliculties of construction which 
 may present themselves, jeferring to various read- 
 ings, and occasionally bringing into comparison 
 tiie sentiments and diction of profane writers 
 wliere they rest-mbie those of the Bible. In a 
 word, it takes a wide range, while it states the 
 processes which lead to results, and shrinks not 
 from employing the technical language common 
 to scholars. In this way the meaning of the ori- 
 ginal is brougtit out. Extended dissertations are 
 sometimes given, in which the language is made 
 the direct subject of examination, and the aid of 
 lexicons and grammars called in to sujijwrt or 
 coniirm a certain interpretation. Pojnilar com- 
 mentary states in purspicuous and untechnical 
 phraseology the sentiments of the holy writers, 
 usually witliout detailing the steps by which tliat 
 meaning has been discovered. It leaves philo- 
 logical observations to those whose taste leads 
 them to such studies. All scieiitihc investigations 
 are avoided. Its great oliject is to present, in an 
 attractive form, the thoughts of the sacred authors, 
 so that tfiey may vividly impress tiie mind and 
 interest the heart. It siiuns all peculiarities that 
 alight repel the simple-minded, reflecting reader 
 of the Bib'e, and endeavours to adduce the truth 
 of (rod with.out riiinnte details or tedious di- 
 gie.*>ions. It avoiils every thing that a reader 
 unac.'juainteti with Hebrew and Greek would not 
 understand ; and ocx-upies itself solely with the 
 theohiiii of the inspired autliors -that holy sense 
 wiiich enlightens and saves mankind. Tiiis, 
 however, is ratlier what popular commentary 
 should do, than wliat it ha& hitherto done. ^V'e 
 have described the appropriate sphere of its duty, 
 rather than tlie province wiiich it has actually 
 oc.nipied. 
 
 Thij limits of critical a.w\ popular commentary 
 are not so wide iis to })revent a ])artial union of 
 bvith. Their ultimate object is the same, viz. to 
 present the exact meaniiig wiiich tlie Holy Spirit 
 iiilmded to ex])ress. BoUi may state the iruiiort 
 of words and phrases; both rnay investigate the 
 ( on rse of thought jjursued by propliets and a]x>stles. 
 Tiiey may develo;;e processes of argumentation, 
 .he scojie of the writers' remarks, the bearing of 
 3<ich particular on a certain purpose, and the 
 .'Kiniuction liel.veen dilVerent ]ioitli)iis of Scripture. 
 In these resjydcts critical and popular commentary 
 may subs'-aritially coincide. Perhajis the union 
 of lioth presents the best model of commentary, 
 provided the f'oimer be divested of learned narade 
 and repiiUive technicalities, aiid the latter be 
 perspicuously full. Yet there is much dilliculty 
 in combining their -espective qualities. In pojju- 
 larising the critical, and in elevating the popuW 
 
 to the standi.nl of intelligent interjiretafion, then 
 is room tiir the exercise of great talent. The formci 
 is a])t to degenerate into philological sterility ; 
 the latter into trite reflection. But by vivifying 
 tlie one, and solidifying the other, a good degree 
 of allinity would be etVected The results which 
 learning has attained, liy jirocesses unintelligiirle 
 to all but the scholar, might surely be presented 
 to the unlearned reader so as to be perceived and 
 relished. And what are the results, which it is 
 the great object of every commentator to realise"? 
 They are simply the ideas which the insjiifcd 
 writers designed to set forth. These constitute 
 theology. Tliey are emphatically ^/ic i!n<^A. They 
 are tlie holy mind of God, as far as he has thought 
 fit to reveal it to men — the pure a.nd paramount 
 realities which metamorphose the sinner into the 
 saint. The commentator who comeg short of this 
 imjiortant end, or fails in exhibiting the whole 
 counsel of God in its harmonious ]iro]iortions, ia 
 not successful. It matters little whether he be 
 ])ossessed of jirofound learning, if he cannot e.x- 
 liibit in all their strength and richness the exact 
 thoughts of the holy men who wrote. To this all 
 his erudition should be subordinate. Critical and 
 antiquarian knowledge should only be regarded 
 as a mean of arriving at such an object. Geo- 
 graphical, chronological, and historical remarks 
 should solely subserve the educement or confirma- 
 tion of Jehovah's will. The building about which 
 they are employed they should raise, strengthen, 
 or consolidate. As long as they contribute nothing 
 to the rearing or cementing of its parts, they are 
 useless lumber. The grand question with e\eiy 
 commentator should be, what did the Holy Ghost 
 mean to express by such a phrase or sentence ? 
 What train of thoirght does the inspired writer 
 pursue? what truth does he design to teach, what 
 doctrine to eml)ody, what duty to inculcate'? Am 
 I exhibiting as the mind of the Spirit what I have 
 surticient reason to believe to be really such ? 
 Have I examined every thing within my reach, 
 which could be supposed to throw light on tne 
 original, or aid in understanding it? Has. every 
 known circumstance been taken into account? 
 These and similar questions should never be lost 
 sight of by the intelligent commentator; lor in 
 proportion as he is actuated !)y the motives tuey 
 imply will he produce a solid and safe exposition, 
 sucii as tlie sacred original was truly meant tc 
 exhibit. 
 
 3. Tlie prominent defects of existing c-'-oi- 
 mentaries. 
 
 (o.) Prolixity. This defect chiefly apjjib?. to 
 the older works : hence their great size. It is «iol 
 uncommon to meet with a large folio volume of 
 commentary on a book of Scriiitnre of moderate 
 extent. Thus Bylield, on the Epistle to the Co- 
 lossians, fills a folio volume; and Venema, on 
 Jeremiah, two quartos. Peter Martyr's ' mos< 
 learned and fruitfull commentaries upon the 
 Epistle to the Romans ' occupy a folio, and hia 
 ' commentarie ujion the book of Judges' another 
 tome of the same extent. But Venema on the 
 Psalms, and Caryl on Job, are still more extra- 
 vagant, the former extending to no less than sis 
 volumes quarto, the latter to two goodly folios, 
 It is almost superfluous to remark that such 
 writers wander away, without contining tliem- 
 selves to exjxisition. We do not deny that even 
 tlieir extraneous matter iwa.)- be good and edilyiny
 
 COMM ENTARY. 
 
 It) rhose wlio have the patience to wade tiirou;:;;h 
 its labyiintlis, but still it is luit coiiimcntiiri/. It 
 is Jiot a simj)le eluriilutioii of the meaning wl.ich 
 the sacred writers ip'eiided to exjiress. To say 
 irery thing (liat it is almost j)<)ssil)le to say iin a 
 passage, or to write t'.own what first conies up in 
 the mind, and nearly in the same form in winch 
 it suggests itself, is I'ar from giving tlie true sense, 
 wiiich ought ever to be the one object in view. It 
 is very easy to write, currente ca/a/tto, any tiling 
 however remotely connected with a passage, or to 
 not.? down the thoughts as fhey rise ; but to t/u'ii/c 
 Oil-, the meaning of a place, to exercise inde- 
 j)endent mental eH'ort upon it, to apply severe 
 and rigid examination to each sentence and 
 j)aragraph of the original, is quite a dilleient 
 jjrocess. To exhibit in a lucid and self-satisfying 
 manner the results of deep thought and indoniit- 
 alile industry, is far from the intention of tiiose 
 jnolix interpreters, who, in their apparent anxiety 
 \o compose a. full commentary, present the reader 
 with a chaos of aimotations, and bury the holy 
 seiise of the inspired writers beneath tiie rubbish 
 ef their ]jrosaic musings. 
 
 (6.) Some conmientators are fond of detailing 
 various opinions, without sifting them. This also 
 we reckon a defect. Tliey procure a number of 
 former expositions, and write down out of each 
 what is said upon a text. They tell what one and 
 another learned annotator affirms, but do not 
 search or scrutinise his affirmations. No doubt 
 an array of names looks imposing; and the reader 
 may stare with surprise at the extent of research 
 displayed ; but nothing is easier tlian to fill up 
 pages with such patchwork, and to be as entirely 
 ignorant of the nature of ctimmentary as before. 
 The intelligent reader will be inclined to say, 
 What matters it to me what this rabiji has said, 
 ar that doctor has stated? I am anxious to know 
 the trice settle of tiieScriptin-es, and not the vary- 
 ing opinions of men concerning them. 1 long to 
 nave the refreshing truths of the Bible ijrcsenteil 
 to me ill their native purity, just as they aie found 
 in the jKiges of inspiration. Do not i^rjilex me 
 with tiie notions of numerous conunentarors, 
 many of whom were utterly incompetent for tlieir 
 task ; but let me see the mind of the Spirit fully 
 and fairly exiiibited, without the aititicial techni- 
 calities of scholastic theology. It is a work of 
 supererogation to collect a multitude of annota- 
 tions from various sources, most of wiiich the in- 
 dustrious collector knows to be improbable or 
 CTroneous. It is folly to adduce and combat 
 interpretations, from wiiich the common sense and 
 simple j)iety if the unsophisticated reader turn 
 away with "nstinctive aversion, li' plausible views 
 be stated, they should be thoroughly analysed. 
 But in all cases the rir/ht inemtlnrj ought to be a 
 prominent thing with tiie commentator, and pro- 
 minently should it be manifested, surrounded, if 
 possible, with those hues which Heaven itself has 
 given it, and qualified by such circumstances as 
 tlie Bible may furnish. 
 
 (c.) Anotiier defect consists in dwelling on the 
 easy, and evading the difficult passai/cs. This 
 feature belongs especially to tlitise English com- 
 mentaries wiiich are most current among us. By 
 a series of appended remarks, plain statements 
 are expani'ed ; but wherever there is a real jier- 
 plexity, il is glozed over with marvellous super- 
 ficiality. It may be that much is said about it, 
 
 COMMENTARY. 
 
 4» 
 
 but yet tliei-e is no penetration beneath IJie fur- 
 face; and when tiie reader asks hiiiuielf wiut ii 
 the true iinpoit, he/inds himself mi the saojie sraie 
 of ignorance its wlien he (iist tiHik up tJie Coni- 
 mentaiy in question. J'iotts rcjlcction-s, and mul- 
 titudiniius inferences enter largely into our |"> 
 pular ixMiks of exj)ositioii. IlUvs spintuulisc, biit 
 they do not exputuid. They sermonise u)mmi u 
 book, but flicy do not catch its spirit, or compre- 
 hend its meaning. All this is out of place. A 
 preachinif, spiritualising coiiinienlary dots not 
 deserve the appellation of coinnient<ii<j ut all. 
 When a writer undeitakes to eiiiice ami exhibit 
 the true sense of the Bible, he should not ^\\* 
 forth his own meditations, however just and pro|it;i 
 in themselves. Put in the rooAi of exjtosiiion, 
 they are wholly out of [dace. The simple por- 
 tions of the Bible are piecisely those HJiicii re- 
 quire little to be said on tliem, while to the more 
 diflicult superlative attention should be |»aid. 
 But the reverse order of procedure is followed by 
 our popular comnientatois. They piously de- 
 scant on what is well known, leaving the reader 
 in daikni'ss where he most needs assistance. 
 
 The intelligent part of the public are beginning to 
 see that no one man, be his industry what it may, 
 is competent to write a commentary on the whole 
 Bible. Let him [xissess vast learning, gieat abi- 
 lities, sound judgment, mental acumen, and ill- 
 defatigable zeal, lie will still tind it imjxissible U> 
 produce a solid commentary on all the canonical 
 books. It is true tliat one person may write 
 what is commonly styled a commentary em- 
 bracing the entire Bible, but how little of imle- 
 pendent inquiry does such a work jiresent ! How 
 feebly docs it trace out the course of thought pur- 
 sued by each of the inspired writers, the numer- 
 ous allusions to manners and customs, the whole 
 meaning of the original. Mucli, very iiiiah is 
 left by it untouched. It lairsiies an easy ]:alh, 
 and dithculties vanish before it, because the 
 highest object of the right-miniled inteipieter, so 
 far from being attained, is not sough; to be leal- 
 ized. There may lie a great LUnounl of writing 
 — the thoughts of preceding comiiientators may 
 be given in another costume witii appciideil le- 
 iieclions; but, in all tliis, there is no profound or 
 .satisfying investigation. The mere sin face ol 
 revelation is skimmed. The woik is peri'oimed 
 perfunctorily. Nothing of value is added to 
 former interpretations. The essence and spirit of 
 the original are to a great extent unperceived. 
 The shades and colourings of tli. night aie un- 
 reilected. Two or three books are quite sullicient 
 for one man, to whatever age he may attain. By 
 intelligently ejcjMunding liiem, he will do more to 
 advance the cause of sacred interpretation, than 
 if he were to travel over the entire lield ol' tlw 
 Bible. We had rather see a sound and able com- 
 mentary on one book, than a jirosing expansiiui 
 of stale remarks on all. It displays more real 
 talent, as it exhibits more independent tliouglit. 
 We value highly the labours of those men whc 
 devote fliemselves to a few bo.>ks, \t itii an honest 
 determination to a<ceitain their true meaning, 
 and with such qualilications intellectual, moial, 
 and literary, as have been already noticed. If 
 they be men tif the right stam]i, we may exj)ect 
 great benefit from their invest i^'iit ions. As fgi 
 fliose who have the sell'-coiilideiice to undeilakc 
 tiie exposition of all Scripture, we ate inclined to
 
 4GP 
 
 COJBIKNTARY. 
 
 pass by tlieiv harmless drudj^fry, never looking to 
 It for true exposition. Tliey aie mere liewers of 
 wood anil drawers of water. Tliey collect the 
 observations ot' others; hut it will 1)6 found that 
 tef/nonifiiii;/ and ciiscursive annotations lill up 
 their ]eii:-;thened pages. 
 
 4. We shall \ ery briefly refer to the principal 
 isommentators on the Bible. 
 
 C'ahi/i. — In all thy higher (jualifications of a 
 commentator Calvin is jMe-eminent. His know- 
 ledge of tlie orii,n!jal lani,'ua^es was not so great as 
 that ofmany later e.KjMbitors; but in developing the 
 meaning of the sacred writers, he has few e<|uals. 
 It has l>een well reniarkeil that he chielly at- 
 tende<l to the /«(/j'c of commentary. He [lossessed 
 singular aciiteness, vuiitetl to a deep acquaintance 
 witii the human heait, a coiii])iehension of mind 
 by which lie uas able to s)nvey revelation in all 
 its features, anil an eiilighteneil understanding 
 competent to perceive sound exegetical jjrinciples, 
 and resolute in adhering to them. He can never 
 be consulted without advantage, although all his 
 opinions shovild not be followed. His woiks jae- 
 gent specimens of exegesis tJiat deserve to be 
 rankeil among the best extant, because they arc 
 occupied with the spiritual essence of the Bible — 
 with Ike theology of the inspired writers. 
 
 Beza. — Be/.a"s talents are seen to great advan- 
 tage in exjxiunding the argumentative parts of 
 die Bible. He possessed many of the best exe- 
 getical qualities which characterized his great 
 master. In tracnig the connection of one part 
 with another, and the successive steps of an argu- 
 ment, he displays much ability. His acuteness 
 and learning were considerable. He was better 
 acquainted with the theology tlian the criticism 
 of the New Testament. 
 
 Ila mmond. — This learned annotator was well 
 qualitied for interpretation. His jmraph rase and 
 annotations on the New Testament possess con- 
 aiderable value; and many good specimens of 
 criticism aie i'ound in his notes. Yet he has not 
 entered deeply into the spirit of the original, or 
 developed with uniform success tiie meaning of 
 the inspired writers- Many of tlie most difficult 
 portions he has superficially examined, or wholly 
 mistaken. 
 
 'Poole. — Poole's annotations on th.e Holy Bible 
 cmitain several valuable, judicious remarks. But 
 their defects are numerous. The pious autlior 
 had only a partial acquaintance witii the original. 
 He was remaikable neitiier for profundity nor 
 acuteness. Yet he had piety and good sense, 
 amazing industry, and an extensive knowledge of 
 the older commentators. 
 
 PoU Synopsis Criticorum. — In this large 
 work, the annotations of a great immber of the 
 older conunentators are collected and condensed. 
 But they are seldom sifted and criticised, so that 
 the reader is left to choose among them for himself. 
 Such a chaos of remarks is apt to confuse the 
 mind. V^'hoever has time, and patience, and 
 discrimination, may find correct exegesis scat- 
 tered through the wliole: but simpler and more 
 direct commentary is much to be preferred. 
 
 Grotiiis. — This very learned writer investigates 
 the literal sense of the Scriptures with great dili- 
 gence and success. He had conside.able exe- 
 (jeti-'al tact, and a large acquaintance with the 
 keath'^n c assies, from uhicli he was accustomed 
 to adduce parallels. His taste was good, and 
 
 COMMENTARY. 
 
 his mode of unfolding the meaning of a f asaag* 
 simple, direct, and Inief. His judgment was 
 Sound, free from prejudice, and liberal beyond 
 tlie age in which he lived. As a commentatoi 
 he was distinguished foriiis iiniibrujly gi>od sense. 
 But he wanted the depth and acuteness of Calvin. 
 It has been said without reason, tiiat lie found 
 Christ iiowliere in the Old Testament. It is true 
 that he opposed the Coeceian method, but in this 
 he should be commended. His cliief deiiict is in 
 spiritiial discernment. Hence he rests in the 
 literal meaning in many cases, where there is a 
 higher or ultetior reference. 
 
 Le Clerc. — Excellent notes are interspersed 
 throughout the commentaries of this author, which 
 the younger Rosenmiiller transcribed into hia 
 Scholia, His judgment was good, and his mode 
 of interjiretation perspicuous. Fioin his richly 
 stored mind lie could easily draw illustrations of 
 the Bible both peitinent and just. Yet he was 
 very defective in theological discrimination. 
 Hence, in the projihctic and doctrinal books, he 
 is unsatisfactory. It has been tliought, not with- 
 out truth, tiiat he had a rationalistic tendency. 
 It is certain that he exalted his own judgment too 
 highly, and pronounced dogmatically where he 
 ought to have manifested a modest diffidence. 
 
 Calmet. — Calniet is perhaps the most distin- 
 guished commentator on tlie Bible belonging to 
 the Roman Catholic Church. In the higher qua- 
 lities of commentary his voluminous work is very 
 deficient. It contains a good collection of histo- 
 rical materials, and presents tlie meaning of the 
 original where it is already plain ; but his histo- 
 rical apparatus needs to lie purified of its irrele- 
 vant, erroneous statements ; while on the difficult 
 portions no new light is thrown. 
 
 Patrick, Luivth, Arnald, and Whitby. — • 
 Bishop Patrick had many of tlie elements belong- 
 ing to a good commentator. His learning wiw 
 great when we consider tlie time at which lie 
 lived, his method brief and perspicoous. Lowtb 
 was inferior to Patrick. Whitby presents a re- 
 markable compound of excellences and imper- 
 fections. In philosophy he was a master. In cri- 
 tical elucidations of the text he was at home. Nor 
 was he wanting in acuteness or philosojjhical 
 ability. His judgment was singulaily clear, and 
 his manner of annotating straightforward. Yet 
 he had not much comprehensiveness of intellect, 
 or a deep insiglit into the spiritual nature of re- 
 velation. The sublime harmony of the New 
 Testament was but dimly seen by him. In the 
 spirit of a high relish for the purity of the Gospel 
 he seldom niounts up into its mysteries. Deejily 
 baptized in the Spirit's iiilluences he could not 
 have been, else many of his expository notes would 
 have been diO'erent. 
 
 Henry. — The name of this good man is vener 
 able, and will be held in everlasting remem- 
 brance. His commentary does not contain much 
 exposition. It is full of sermonising. It is sur- 
 prising, however, to .see how far his good sense and 
 simple piety led him into the doctrine of the 
 Bible, apart from many of the higher qualities 
 belonging to a successful' commentator. In 
 thoroughness and solidity of exposition he is not 
 to be named with Calvin. His prolixity ia 
 great. Practical jjreaahing is the hunlen ofhu 
 voluminous notes. 
 
 GUI. — The prominent characteristic of Uiir*
 
 COMMENTARY. 
 
 •ommentary is heaviness. It lacks condensation 
 ind brevity. '1 he meaning of the inspire*! aiitliors 
 is often vnuleveloped, and more frei(uently dis- 
 M)rred. It has tlie limilier and nihbisli of leani- 
 ing, without learning itself. 
 
 Doddridge. — The taste of tliis pious commen- 
 tator was good, anil his style rcniarkably |nire. 
 He had not much acumen or coinprelii'nsion of 
 mind ; l)ut he hail an excellent judijnient, and a 
 ealm candour of inquiry. His paraphrase leaves 
 much unexplained, while it dilutes the strenj^lh 
 of (he original. It is too discursive and ser- 
 monising. The notes are few, and ordinarily 
 correct.' 
 
 Scoti. — The ))revaillng characteristic of 
 Scott's commentary is juiiiciousness in the opi- 
 nions advanced. The greater poition of it, how- 
 ever, is not proper exposition. Tiie pious author 
 preaches about and paraphrases the original. His 
 simplicity of })urpose generally preserved him 
 from mistakes ; but as a commentator he was 
 aeither acute nor learned. He wanted a com- 
 petent acquaintance with th? original, power of 
 analysis, a mind imprepossessed by a doctrinal 
 lystem, and penetration of spirit. 
 
 A. Clarke. — In most of the higher qualities by 
 which an interpreter should be distinguished, tiiis 
 man of much reading was wanting. His histo- 
 rical and geographical notes are the best. Eut 
 He had no philosophical ability. His prejudices 
 iirarped his judgment. His jihilology is not un- 
 frequently puerile. Acuteness and jienetratiori 
 ate not seen in his writings. There is no deep 
 .iisight into the niir.d of tlie sacreil writers. 
 
 The modern Gcimans, prolilic as they are in theo- 
 logical works, ha'.'s seldom ventured to undertake 
 an exposition of (he whole Bible. Each writer 
 usually confines himself to the task of commenting 
 on a few books. In this fiieir wisdom is mani- 
 fested. Yet they do not excel in good sjsecimens 
 of commentaiy. They are ivord-explaiticrs. In 
 pointing out various readings, in grammatical, 
 historical, anil geographical annotations, as also 
 in subtle speculations respecting the genius of tlie 
 times in which the writers of the Bible lived, 
 tliey are at home. In the lower criticism we 
 willingly sit at their feet and learn. But with 
 regard to the hie/her, in all that pertains to the 
 logic of commentary, in development of the sense 
 in its holy relations, they are lamentably wanting. 
 Refined notions usurp the place of practical piety 
 in their minds ; and the minutiae of verbal cri- 
 ticism furnish them nutriment apart from the 
 rich rep'ast of theological sentiment and sanctify- 
 JDg truth. But there are some noble exceptions. 
 
 E. F. C. Hosenmii Her. — The Scholia of this 
 laborious writer extend over the [greater part of the 
 Old Testament. Looking to the last editions, 
 tlicy are imquestionaiily of high value. They 
 bring together a mass of annotation such as is 
 sufficient to satisfy the desires of must Biblical 
 students. Yet the learned author undertook loo 
 much to perforni it in a masterly style. Hence 
 his materials are not projierl) sifted, the chaft' 
 from the wheat. He has not drunk deeply into 
 tJie spirit of the inspired authors. He seems in- 
 deed not to have had a soul attuned to the s])i- 
 titualitv of tiieir utterances, or impregnated with 
 tne celestial lire tl'at touched their hallo\M'd lips. 
 His father, the author of tlie Scholia on the New 
 Teetament, is a good ward-explainer for students 
 
 COM. MERGE. 
 
 ibl 
 
 beginning to read the original. He has not pio- 
 duced a m.i^lerly .specimen of commentary uq 
 any one Uiok or epistle. 
 
 OUIiauscn. — The best example of comniea- 
 tary on tlie New Testament with wiiicli we ar« 
 accpiiiinted has been given by this writer. It is a 
 model of exposition unrivalled in any langua^. 
 Verbal criticism is but sparingly introduced, al- 
 though even here tlie haiid of a master is apiMt- 
 rent. He is intent, liowe>er, on higher thing*. 
 He investigates the thought, tracer the connection, 
 put.s himself in the .same pasition as tliewiiters, 
 and views wiili ])hilosophic ability the holy leve- 
 lations of Christ in their compreuensive tenden- 
 cies. The critical and the popular are admiialily 
 mingled. Greatly do we lament th.it the wiiler 
 was cut oil' before he completed so excellent a 
 performance. 
 
 Tholuck. — The commentaries of this eminenl 
 writer on various books of the New Testamen!, 
 especially those on the Epistles to tke Romans aiiU 
 Hebrews, exhibit the highest exegetical excellen- 
 ces. While he critically iiivegtigatiy pliiases 
 and idioms, he ascends into the pure legion of tlie 
 ideas, unfolding the sense with nmth skill and 
 discernment. His commentary on John is of a 
 more popular cast. His interpretation of tlie 
 Bergjircdiyt, or £>ermon on the Mount, is very 
 valuable. 
 
 In addition to these, Gennany has produced 
 other specimens of commentary that occupy a 
 high place in the estimation of comjietent judges. 
 Liicke, on John's writings, especially in \\\e third 
 edition now in progress; Geseiiius, on Isuiali ; De 
 Wette, on the Psalms ; Havernick, on Ezekiel and 
 Daniel ; Billroth, on the Coriiithiiins •, Harle.ss, oo 
 Ephesians ; and Baehr, on the Colossians, possess 
 niucii merit, accompanied, it is true, with some 
 serious faults. As examjijes of thorough and 
 solid commentary, the Englisli lanfjuage jiresente 
 none equal to those of Professor Stuart on the 
 Epi-tks to the Romans and Hebrews. The learned 
 author has fully entered into the spirit of the 
 great Apostle, evading no diiliculty, and tracing 
 the course of his reasoning with consideiable suc- 
 cess. He has consequently llirown more light on 
 these ditiicult Epistles than many are willing to 
 allow. A valuable commentary on the Epistle 
 to the Romans we also possess in that of Professor 
 Hodge, although the author cannot be said Cu 
 have gone far beyond Calvin, in whose steps b» 
 has closely trod. 
 
 Our space will not allow us to mention otlier 
 ex])ositoiy treatises. Those we have noticed are 
 best known iu this country, and most perused. 
 
 S. D. 
 
 COMMERCE. The idea conveyed by liiig 
 word is represented in the sacred, writings by 
 the word trade; the Hebrew teim 721 ;t'/it/ big- 
 nifying literally 'trade " or ' tiallic' 
 
 CA>iiimerce, in its usual acceptation, means the 
 exchange of one thing for another — the exchange of 
 what we have to spare ("or what we want, in whatever 
 countiy it is produced. The origin of commerce 
 nmst have been nearly coeval with the world. Aj 
 pasturage and agriculture were the only employ- 
 ments of thelirst inhabitants, so cattle, llocks, aiic* 
 the fruits of tiie earth were the only objects of lite 
 first commerce, or tliat species of it called baiter 
 It would appear that some progress had brea 
 made in nianufactare^ in tiie a^ei l>et'oru the Ik*^
 
 458 
 
 COMMERCE. 
 
 Tlie building of a city or viliag* Uy v,ain, how- 
 erer insiguilicaut the houses may have been, sup- 
 poses the existence of some meciianical know- 
 led?e. The musical instruments, su(;h as harps 
 and organs, the works in brass and in iron exhi- 
 bited by the succeeding generations, confirm the 
 Ix-lief that the arts were considerably advanced. 
 Tlie construction of Noah's ark, a ship of three 
 decks, covered over with pitch, and much larger 
 than any moileni elTort of architecture, proves 
 that many separate trades were at that period 
 carried on. There must have been parties who 
 supplied Noah and his three sons with tlie great 
 quantity and variety of materials which they re- 
 quired, and this they would do in exchange for 
 other commodities, and perhaps money. That 
 enormous pile of building, the tower of Babel, 
 was constructed of bricks, the process of making 
 which appears to have beSn well understood. 
 Some learned astronomers are of opinion tliat the 
 cek's ial observations of tlie Cliinese reach back to 
 2219 years before the Christian era; and the ce- 
 lestial observations made at Babylon, contained 
 hi a calendar of above nineteen centuries, trans- 
 mitted to Greece by Alexander, reach back to 
 within fifteen years of tliose ascribed to the Chi- 
 nese. The Indians aj)))ear to have had observa- 
 tions quite as euly as the Babjdonians. 
 
 Such of the descendants of Noah as lived near 
 tiie water may be presumed to have made use of 
 vessels built in imitation of the ark — if, as some 
 ^link, that was the first floating vessel ever seen 
 in the world — but on a smaller scale, for the pur- 
 pose of crossing rivers. In the course of time 
 the descendants of his son Japhet settled in ' tlie 
 isles of the Gentiles,' by wliich are understood the 
 inlands at the east end of the Mediterranean sea, 
 aud those between Asia Minor and Greece, whence 
 their colonies spread into Greece, Italy, and other 
 western lands. 
 
 Sidon, which afterwards became so celebrated 
 for the wonderful mercantile exertions of its in- 
 habitants, was founded about "2200 years before 
 the Clnistian era. The neighbouring mountains, 
 being covered with excellent cedar-frees, furnished 
 the best and most durable timber tor ship-build- 
 ing. The inhabitants of Sidon accordingly built 
 numerous ships, and exported the produce of the 
 adjiiiniug country, and the various articles of their 
 O'-vn manufacture, such as fine linen, embroidery, 
 tapestry, metals, glass, both coloured and figured, 
 cat, or carved, and even minors. Tiiey were un- 
 rivalled by the inhabitants of tlie Mediterranean 
 coasts in works of taste, elegance, and luxury. 
 Tlieir great and universally acknowledged pre- 
 eminence in the arts procured for the Plicenicians, 
 whose principal seaport was Sidon, the honour of 
 being esteemed, among tlie Greeks and other na- 
 tions, as the inventors of commerce, ship-building, 
 navigation, the ayiplication of astronomy to nau- 
 tical purposes, and particularly as the discoverers 
 of several stars nearer to tlie north pole than any 
 tliat were known to other nations; of naval war, 
 writing arithmetic, book-keeping, measures and 
 weights: to which it is probable they might have 
 added money. 
 
 Egypt apj'iears to have excelled all the neigh- 
 bouring countries in agriculture, and particularly 
 in its abundant cro])s of corn. The fame of its 
 fertility iniluced Ab/aham to remove thither with 
 bis uumer'is family (Gen. xii. 10). 
 
 Cv. MAIERCE. 
 
 Tlie earliest accounts of bargain and sale T'ac.t 
 no higher tlian I lie lime of Abraham, and his trans 
 action with Ephroii. lie is said to have weigheU 
 unto him ' 400 shekels of silver, current money 
 with tlie merchant' (Gen. xxiii. 16). The word 
 merchant implies that the standard of money wa« 
 fixed by usage among merchants, who comprised 
 a numerous and respectable class of the com- 
 munity. Manufactures were by this time so far 
 advanced, that not only those more immediately 
 connected with agriculture, such as flour ground 
 from corn, wine, oil, butter, and also ttie most 
 necessary articles of clothing and furniture, but 
 e\en those of luxury and magnificence, wera 
 much in use, as apiiears by the ear-rings, brace- 
 lets of gold and of silver, and other precious 
 things presented by Abraham's steward to Re- 
 becca (Gen. xxiv. 22, 53). 
 
 In the liook of Job, whose author, in the ojiinion of 
 the most learned commentators, resided in Arabia, 
 and was contemporary with the sons of Abraham, 
 much ligitt is thrown upon the commerce, manu- 
 factures, and science of the age and country in 
 which )ie lived. There is mention of gold, iron, 
 brass, lead, crystal, jewels, the art of weaving, 
 mercliants, g->ld brought from Ophir, which im- 
 plies commerce with a remote countr)', and to- 
 pazes from Ethiopia; sliip-bullding, so far im- 
 proved that some ships were distinguished for the 
 velocity of their motion ; writing in a book, and 
 engraving letters or writing on plates of lead 
 and on stone witli iron pens, and also seal-or- 
 graving ; fishing with hooks, and nets, and spears ; 
 ;nusical instruments, the harp and organ ; astro- 
 nomy, a: u names given to particular stars. These 
 notices tend to prove that, although the patri- 
 archal system of making pasturage the chief 
 object of attention was still maintained by many 
 of the greatest inhabitants where the author of the 
 book of Job resided, the sciences were actively 
 cultivated, the useful and ornamental arts in an 
 advanced state, and commerce prosecuted witl» 
 diligence and success ; and this at a period when, 
 if the chronology of Job is correctly settled, the 
 arts and sciences were scarcely so far advanced 
 in Egypt, from whence, and from the other coun- 
 tries bordering u])on tlie eastern part of the Medi- 
 terranean Sea, they afterwards gradually found 
 their way into Greece. 
 
 The inhabitants of Arabia appear to hava 
 availed themselves, at a very early period, of tbeii 
 advantageous situation between the two fertile 
 and opulent countries of India and Egypt, and to 
 have obtained the exclusive monopoly o! a .'ery 
 profitable carrying trade between those countries. 
 They were a class of jieople who gave their whole 
 attention to merchandise as a regular and esta- 
 blished profession, and travelled with caravans 
 between Arafiia and Egypt, carrying ufon the 
 backs of camels the spiccries of India, the oalin 
 of Canaan, and the myrrh produced in their own 
 country, or of a superior quality from the ojiposite 
 coast of Abyssinia — ^all of which were in great de- 
 mand among the Egyptians for embalming the 
 dead, in their religious ceremonies, and tor mi- 
 nistering to the pleasures of that superstitious and 
 luxurious people. The merchants of one of tnes« 
 caravans bought Joseph from his brotlw:*'s foi 
 twenty pieces of silver, that is abo.it 21. lis. Scl- 
 sterling, and carried him into Eg•y^t. The soutlw 
 era Arabs were eminent tiaders, and enjoyed a
 
 COJIMERCE. 
 
 large projKirtion, and in general the entire mo- 
 no\)oly, of till' trade between India and the west- 
 ern wotKl, from the earliest ages, until the system 
 of that iinportant commerce "vas totally over- 
 tunip.d when tlie inhabitants o*" Kurojje discovered 
 a direct route to India by Jie Cape of Gooil 
 Hope. 
 
 At the period when Joseph's brethren visited 
 Egypt, inns were estabiislied for tlie accommo- 
 dation of travtllers in that country and in tlie 
 northern parts of Arabia. The more civilizeil 
 southern parts of the peninsula would no doubt 
 be furnished with caravanserais still more com- 
 modious. 
 
 During the residence of the Israelites in Egypt 
 maimfactures of almost every description were 
 carried to great perfection. Flax, fine linen, gar- 
 ments of cotton, rings and jewels of gold and 
 silver, works in ail kinds of materials, cliariots for 
 pleasure, and cliariots for war, are all mentioried 
 by Moses. Tlioy had extensive manufactories of 
 bricks. Literature was in a flourisliing state ; 
 and, in onler to give an enlarged idea of the 
 accomplistimcnts of Moses, it is said he was 
 ' learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians' (Acts 
 xii. 22). 
 
 The expulsion of the Canaanites from a great 
 part of their territories by the Israelites under 
 Joshua, led to tlie gradual establishuient of co- 
 lonies in Cyjjrus, Rhodes, and several islands in 
 the j^gean Sea ; they })enetrated into the Euxine 
 Of Black Sea, and, sjjreading along the sliores 
 »f Sicily, Sardinia, Gaul, Spain, and Africa, 
 established numerous trading places, wliich gra- 
 dually rose into more or less importance. At 
 this period mention is first made of Tyre as a 
 »lrong or fortified city, whilst Sidon is d.^iiitled 
 with the title of Great. 
 
 During the reign of David, king of Israel, that 
 powerful monarch disposed of a part of the wealth 
 obtained by his conquests in ]mrcl)asing cedar- 
 timber from Hiram, king of Tyre, with wliom he 
 kept up a i'riendly correspondence while he lived. 
 He also hired Tyrian masons atid carjjenters for 
 carrying on his works. Solomon, the son of David, 
 cultivated the arts of peace, and indulged his taste 
 for magnificence antl luxury to a great extent. 
 He employed the weallJi collected by his father in 
 works of arciiitecture, and in strengtliening and 
 improving liis kingdom. He built llie famous 
 Temple and fortifications of Jerusalem, and many 
 cities, among which was the celebrated Tadmor 
 or Palmyra. From the king of Tyre he ob- 
 tained cedar and fir, or cy])ress-timbers, and large 
 stones cut and prepared for buililing, which the 
 Tyrians conveyed by \vater to the most cou- 
 , veirient landing-place in Solomon's dominions. 
 Hiram also sent a vast numl)er of workmen to 
 SLSsisl and instruct Solomon's peojjle, none of 
 whom had skill ' to hew timber like the Si- 
 donians.' Solomon, in exchange, furnistied the 
 Tyrians with corn,- wine, and oil, and received a 
 balance in gold. Solomon and Hiram appear to 
 liave subsequently entered into a trading specu- 
 lation or adventure upon a large scale. Tyrian 
 shipwrights were accordingly sent to build vessels 
 for both kings at Eziongeber, Solomon's ])ort on 
 the Red Sea, whither he himself went to animate 
 Uiem with hisjircsence (2 Ohron. viii. 17;. These 
 rfups, ciinducted by Tyrian navigators, sailed in 
 outnpany to some rich countries called Ophir and 
 
 COMMERCE 
 
 at 
 
 Tarshish, regarding the |«>sitioii of wrich tha 
 learned jiave mullijjlied conjectures Id little pur- 
 p)se. Tiie voya;je occui)ied liiiee years J yet tha 
 returns in this new found trade were very great .ind 
 profitable. Tliis fieet took in ajies, el)uny, and 
 {larrots on tlie coasts of Etiiiopia, gold at Ophir, 
 or the place of tiallic whitlier llie people of 
 ()(ihir resorted ; it tratled on botli sides of tiie Red 
 Sea, on the coasts of Ar.ibia and Ethiupia, in all 
 j)arts of Ethio])ia beyond the straits when it had 
 entered tiie ocean ; thence it passed up tiie Persian 
 Gulf, and might visit the places of trade ujjon 
 both its shore-!, and run up tlie Tigris or the Eu- 
 phrates as far as tliese rivers were naviijable. 
 
 After the reign of Solomon tlie commerce of 1h« 
 Israelites seems to iiave very materially declined. 
 An attempt was made by Jelioshaphat, king of 
 Judah, and Ahaziah, king of Israel, to ell'ect ita 
 revival ; but the ships wliich they built at Ezion- 
 geber having been wrecked in the harbour, the 
 uiulertaking was abaiuiuiied. It does nut appear 
 tiiat they hail any assistance from the PiiceiiiciiUig 
 in fitting out this fleet. Greaft efforts were made 
 by the Egyptians to extend tlie commerce of 
 their country, among which, not the least coiisi- 
 derable was the unsuccessful attemjit to constriuit 
 a canal from the Nile to the Arabian Gulf 
 
 Tlie rising prosjieiity of Tyre so.^n eclipse<l the 
 ancient and long-flourishing commercial city of 
 Sidon. About COO years before Ciirist her com- 
 mercial splendour appears to have been at its 
 height, and is graphically desc.-ibed by Ezekiel 
 (xxvii). The imports into Tyre were line linen 
 from Egypt ; blue and purple fioni the isles of 
 Elisiia ; silver, iron, tin, and lead from Tarshish- — ■ 
 the soutii part of Spain ; slaves u;id brazen vessels 
 from Javan or Greece, Tubal, and Meshech ; 
 horses, slaves bred to liorsei:ianship, and mules 
 from Togarmah ; emeralds, parple, embroidery, 
 fine linen, corals, and agates iVom Syria ; com, 
 balm, honey, oil, and gums from the Israelites; 
 wine and wool from Damascus ; polislietl iron- 
 ware, precious oils, and cinnanicin from Dan, 
 Javan, and Mezo ; magnificent carpets from De- 
 ilan ; sheep and goats from the jiastoial tribes of 
 Arabia; costly spices, some the proiluce of India, 
 precious stones, and golii from the merchants of 
 Shelia or Saliaea, and Ramah or Regma, countries 
 ill the south jiart of Arabia; blue cloths, em- 
 broidered works, rich a])paiel in corded cedar- 
 chests, su])posed to be original India packages, 
 and other goods from Sheba, Ashur, and Chilmad, 
 and from Haran, Canneh, and Eden, trading 
 ports on the south coast of Araliia. The vast 
 wealth that thns Huweil into Tyre from all quar- 
 ters brought with it its too general concomitants 
 — extravagance, dissipation, and relaxation of 
 morals. 
 
 Tiie subjection of Tyre, ' the renowned city 
 which was strong in tiie sea, whose meudianta 
 were jirinces, whose trallickers were the honour- 
 able of the earth,' by Cyrus, and its subsequ'ent 
 overthrow by Alexander, after a determined and 
 most formidable resistance, tennina'ed alike 
 the grandeur of that city and the history of an- 
 cient commerce, as far as they are albidetl to in 
 Scripture (Anderson's Ilisfori/ of Comincrci' ; 
 Vincent's Commerce and Navigation of llie In- 
 dian Ocean ; Heeren's lie.icarches ; liarnes's 
 Ancient Commerce of Weitcrn .-isia, in Anieri' 
 can Biblical Jiepositori,; IHCI). — G. M. B.
 
 «Q0 
 
 COMMON. 
 
 COMMON (Koivii). The Greek term proi>erly 
 »ignilies u-hat bidomjs to all (as in VVisil. vii. 3, 
 K9i.vhs ai')p),,l)ut the Hellenists a])()lied it ("like 
 tlifc Ileluew 7n) to what was prulanf, i. e. not 
 holy, and theielbie ol" commoii or promiscuous 
 'ise (Acts X. li). They also applied the term 
 to what was impure, whether naturally or legally 
 (as in Mark vii. 2, compared with Mace. i. 47, 
 62). And, finally, it was used of meats for- 
 bidden, or such as had been partaken of by ido- 
 laters, and wliich, as they rendered tlie partakers 
 thereof impure, were themselves calkvi koivo. 
 (common), and aKaQapra (unclean) (see Kuinoel 
 on Acts X. 14). 
 
 COMMUNIOX {Koivtavia), a fellowship or 
 agreement, when several persons join and partake 
 togetiier of one thing (2 Cor. vi. 14 ; 1 John i. 3) ; 
 hence its application to the celebration ofthe Lord's 
 supper as dn act of fellowship among Christians (1 
 Cor. X. 16) : and it is to this act of participation 
 or fellowship that the word 'communion' is now 
 restricted in the English language, tlie more fami 
 liar ap])lication of it having fallen irito disuse. 
 
 CONCORDANCE, the name assigned to a 
 book wliich gives (he words contained in the Holy 
 Scriptures in alphabetical order, with a reference 
 to the place where each may be found. This is 
 the essential idea of a concordance ; other ancil- 
 lary information may be presented in concord- 
 ances, such as a separate order of proper names, 
 the meanings whicli in the compiler's opinion im- 
 portant words are found to bear, and the etymolo- 
 gical signification of appellatives, &e. There are 
 two great distinctive principles on whicli con- 
 cordances may be constructed — either to present 
 every word found in the Bible, or only the lead- 
 ing and most important words. The adoption of 
 the iirst necessarily swells a book to inconvenient 
 dimensions, and renders its use in the ordinary 
 purposes of study somewliat onerous and incon- 
 venient. But great judgment is requisite in 
 compiling a concordknce on the other principle, 
 lest words of less imjjortance should be preferred 
 to those of greater ; and as importance is alto- 
 gether a relative matter, the selection made by 
 the author may omit words which some, if not 
 many, readers wouhl desiderate. The Germans 
 also make a distinction between concordances of 
 things and concordances of words : the first com- 
 prising in detailed and alphabetical form the 
 eubject-matter of the sacred volume; the second 
 corresponding with the ordinary English notion 
 of a concordance. Concordances, too, vary with 
 the languages in which, or for which, they are 
 constructed, as for the original Hebrew and 
 Greek, or for tiie several versions of the Scrip- 
 lures, such as the Vulgate, the German, the 
 English, &r 
 
 It is not. ..ere intended to present a full or a 
 «bronological history of all the concordances 
 which have been produced, but to put down those 
 ptarticulars which seem to combine interest and 
 utility. 
 
 Writings of this kind imply that the sacred 
 Scriptures are regarded with reverence, held to be 
 authoritative in religion, and are made the subject 
 of a]jj)eal alike in learning, teaching, and dispu- 
 tation. So long therefore as the Bible was scat- 
 tered niecemeal up and down the world in con- 
 vents and libraries, and so long as it was rarely 
 •(udjxi even by the professed ministers of religion, 
 
 CONCORDANCE. 
 
 concordancea were neither needed nor produced f 
 yet there never ceased, in the darkest ages of tiM 
 Church, to be some who felt a profound interest in 
 the study of tlie veneral)le liook, and consequently 
 some rude essays ajipear to have been made in 
 this way before the age in which concordances 
 may properly be said to have had their origin. 
 It is to the Reformation and the deep and general 
 concern which it awakeiwed touching the trutlis 
 contained in the .Scriptures ; it is to the primary 
 principle of the Reformation — the ap))eal from 
 tradition to the Bible, from the Churcn to th« 
 word of God ; it is to the wide-spread conviction 
 of the plenary and even verbal inspiration of the 
 Bible, that the world is indebted for the care, 
 diligence, learning, and self-denial which have 
 been employed in constructing anil perfecting tli« 
 concordance. 
 
 The utility of concordances in the way of ex- 
 egesis, tliat is, to assist the student in the disco* 
 very and explanation of the meaning of tha 
 sacred writings, is based on the position that the 
 several jjarts of divine revelation are coi^sistent 
 with each other and tbrm harmonious elements ia 
 one grand system of spiritual truth, so tliat by 
 comparing together parallel passages wiiat is clear 
 may be exemplified and confirmed, and what is 
 dark may be expounded. Books of this sort, (oo, 
 are of service to the Christian teacher, as afford- 
 ing facilities by means of those fragmentary re- 
 collections of words and things which the mere 
 hearing of the Scriptures read leave in the mind, 
 for readily discovering the particular book and 
 verse where any desired passage is to be found ; 
 and also as enabling him, with comparatively 
 little trouble, to take a survey of what the Bible 
 contains in regard to any particular subject whic'n 
 he may have to liandle. 
 
 Antony of Padua (born a.d. 1195, died 1231) 
 is said to have ])roduced the first work of the kind, 
 entitled Concordantice Morales, which was formed 
 from the \"ulgate translation. Hugo de Santo 
 Caro, better known as Cardinal Hugo, a Domi- 
 nican monk, who died about 1262, followed iVn- 
 tony in 1244, by compiling for tlie Vulgate a con- 
 cordance of the Scriptures. Having given himself 
 sedulously to the study of holy writ, with a view of 
 writing a commentary thereon, he was, in order to 
 facilitate his labour, led to project and undertake 
 to form a concordance, calling to his aid his brother 
 monks to the number of no fewer tlian five hundred. 
 Tlieir labours have been a rich storehouse for sub- 
 sequent compilers. The concordance thus made 
 was improved by Conrad of Halberstadt, who 
 flourished about 1290, and by John of Segovia ia 
 the ensuing century. 
 
 These works seem to have led to tlie first He- 
 brew concordance, which was produced by Rabbi 
 Mordecai Nathan, whicli he began in 1438, and 
 finished in 1448, after ten years' hard labour by 
 himself and some assistants. It was first printed 
 at Venice in 1523, fol., by Dan. Bomberg, then 
 in Basle in 1581, and afterwards at Rorlie iu 
 1621. It is entirely Hebrew, and entitled Tlie 
 Light of the Way. In 1556 it was translated 
 intft Latin by Reuchlin, but both the Hebrew 
 and the Latin editions are full of errors. 
 
 These errors were for the most part corrected 
 and other deficiencies sup])lied by Calasio, a 
 Franciscan friar, wlio published Concordantitt 
 Sacr. Bibl. Hebr. et Latin. Romx, 1621, i.
 
 CONCORDANCE. 
 
 roU fol. Rffeninu; the rpader fur details respect- 
 ing tliis ivork to Oniie's BibUulheca liiblicii. )). 
 112 we dwell a little nicire on a work wlvicli is 
 fouiiil less seldom than the I'oiuier in piivale liieo- 
 io^ical liliravies — (Uincordautur Bihl. F.bniicee, 
 nova et ariijiciosa mcthodo disposittr, Hasil, 1(532, 
 fol. This is the pmduclion of John Buxlorf, the 
 father, h\it was piil)lishi'<l liy his son. It takes 
 for its h.isis tlie work of llahbi Nathan, though it 
 is nmcii better arranged, more correctly ]irinted, 
 tiie root^ more distinctly ascertained, iind the 
 meanings more accurately given ; but as t lie re- 
 ferences are made by Hebrew letters, and relate to 
 tiie Ralibinical divisions of ihe Old Testament, 
 it is of little service, unless the student istamiliar 
 witli tlie Masoretic system. This work was 
 abridged imder the title of Fo7is Leonis, &c., Be- 
 rolini, lCy\l, Svo. The concordance of C.'alasio 
 Wi:s republished in London under the direction of 
 W. Romaine, 1747-9, 4 vols, fol., and under the 
 patronage of all the nionarchs.in Europe, not ex- 
 cepting the pope himself. Before this republica- 
 tion, however, there appeared, in 1679 (Kopenh. 
 fol.), Ch. Nolde Concor. particularum Ebr. 
 Chaldaicarum. Reference niay also be made to 
 Simonis Onomasticon V. T. Halle, 1741-, fol. 
 But the best and, at least to the Enijlish reader, 
 most important work on tliis subject is, The He- 
 brew Concordance, adapted to the English Bible, 
 dis])osed after the manner of Buxtorf, by John 
 Taylor, D.D., London, 1751, 2 vols. fol. Dr. 
 Taylor was an eminent Presbyterian divine at 
 Norwich, the author of several publications which 
 ^low great industry and learning. His concord- 
 ance is by far the most complete work of the kind. 
 It was tlie fruit of many years' labour, and has 
 left little room lor improvement The patronage 
 of all the English and Irish bisliv,ps recommended 
 the work to tlie world. 
 
 An edition of Buxtorf's Hebrew Concordance, 
 which has received so much care and attention on 
 the part of the aullior, as nearly to deserve the 
 name and bear the character of a new work — 
 Hebriiisclten und Chalditischen Concordanz zu 
 dtn Heiliyen Schriften Alien Testaments, von 
 Dr. Julius Fiirst (Leipzig, Tauchnitz ; London, 
 Nutt) oilers one of the most useful aids to the 
 study of the Bible (hat have ever appeared. 
 The necessity of such a work as the jnesent 
 arises not only iVom the errors found in Buxtoif 
 and the comparative rarity of the work, but also 
 from the great advances which, since the time 
 when Buxforfs work ajipeared (a.d. 1G32), have 
 been made both in the knowledge of the Shemitic 
 languages, in the general science of theology, and 
 liie particular department of Biblical exegesis. 
 We may specify one or two of the advantages 
 ollered by this woik. In addition to those of a 
 more meclianical kind, such as a good type and 
 clear ariangpiiient, there are, 1. A corrected text, 
 founded on Ilahirs Vandirhooi/t i 2. The Rab- 
 binical significations; 3. Explanations in Latin, 
 giving the etymolo^'y of the Ral,bini(:al ; illustra- 
 tions from the lliice Greek Versions, the Aramaic 
 Paraphrase, the Vulgate, &c. ; the Greek words 
 employed by the Seventy as renderings of the 
 He))rew ; together with philological and arthao- 
 ^ogical notices, so as to make the Concoidance 
 eontain an amiile Hebrew lexicon. This work 
 i« far irefeiable to Taylors Hcbnxo ('oncordaiice, 
 which is now not easily met witli. Every tlieulo- 
 
 CONCORDANCE. 
 
 461 
 
 gical library which has not a copy of Fiirst mual 
 be consiiitred as wanting an cs-iential recjuisita. 
 The woik. when known, will, we are assured, be 
 welcomed by English scholais. 
 
 The lii'st (xreek concoidance to the Sejituagint 
 is that wiiich bears the title — A. Trommii Con. 
 Gra-c. Vers, vtilgo dic. LXX. Intcrjyre. Amst 
 17iS, 2 vols. fol. The author of this learned and 
 most laliorious work was minisler of Groningen, 
 and ))nblished the concordance in the eighfy- 
 i'ouitli year of his age. He was born in 16"^3 
 and died in 1719. It follows the order of tlie 
 Greek words of which it first gives a Latin trans- 
 lation, and then t!ie Hebrew word or words fijr 
 which Ihe Greek term is used in the Seventy. 
 Then tlie differer.t j.Jaces in which the words 
 occur follow in the order of the several b(K)l<s and 
 chapters. When the word occurs in any of the 
 ancient Greek translalors, Aquila, Symmaclius, or 
 Theodotion, the places where it is found are re- 
 ferred to at the end of the quotations from the 
 Sejit. The words of the Apocryjiha are jjlaced 
 at the end of each enumeration. There are two 
 indices at the end of tlie work : one Hebrew and 
 Chaldaic, by examining which tlie Greek term 
 used in tlie Septuagint for any Hebrew or Clialdee 
 word is seen at once, with the Latin version and 
 the place where it is found in the concordance, so 
 that Tromm serves in a mi?asure for a Ileljrew 
 concordance; the other index contains a lexicon 
 to the Hexapla of Origen, and coiri])rehen<ls (be 
 Greek words in the fragments of the old Gre«k 
 translators publisheil by JMonlfaucon. 
 
 Tlie first Greek concordance to the New Testa- 
 ment, now exceedingly rare, is entitled Xysti 
 Betuieii Concordantiw Grceca Xovi Tcitamenti, 
 Basil. l.^Jf), fol. The author, wiiose real name 
 was Bi-rck, was a minisler of the Lutheran church; 
 he was born in 1500, and died at Augsburgin 1554. 
 A concordance to the Greek New Testament, pri>- 
 jected and paitly executed by Robert Stephens, 
 and com])leted and published by his son Henry 
 (Genev. 1594, fol.), is too inaccurate to merit 
 more than a passing notice. The ensuing is the 
 work which tlie divine should possess — Erasmi 
 Schmidii jVoii Tcstamcnti J. C. Grcpci; hoc est, 
 originalis lingua; Tai/.ie7ov, &c. Vetemb. 1638, 
 fol. The author, a Lutheran divine, was a jiro- 
 fessor of the Greek language in the university of 
 Witlemberg, where he died in 1637. In 1717 a 
 revised edition was published at Gotha, of which 
 a handsome reprint, in 2 vols. Svo.. was issued 
 from the Glasgow University press in 1S19. Tlie 
 same work, edited by Greenfiehl, has been printed 
 ijy tlie Messrs. Bagsler of London, in a thin, (lal 
 pocket volume, ami in another form, 32mo., Iiein" 
 one of their ' Polymicrian Series." By omitting 
 the unimj-ortant jirojier names, tlie indiclinable 
 particles, the pronouns and iht.' verb substantive, 
 by substituting simple references for cltatioH 
 under such circumstances as allow of the change, 
 the ponderous labours of the Stephenses and 
 Schiiiid are in these editions comjiressed inti) 
 neat, low-priced, and convenient |Micket volumes, 
 without any detraction from utility. 
 
 A new and very sujjerior edition of Sclimid's 
 rafMlov huS recently been jiut forth by C. H. 
 Binder, who has improved the work so iis to brhig 
 it into accordance with the advanced and cu- 
 lighlened views on critical and iiemieneulical 
 sulgects which cbaiacteriie w^t may be terOMd
 
 -162 
 
 CONCORDANCE. 
 
 d«e sjientific tlici)logy of Germany in the present 
 day. Among the advanta,'es of tliis edition, let 
 it 3'jflicc to sjwcify, 1. Fulness, accuracy, and cor- 
 r?9()ondence with Griesbach's edition; 2. Regard 
 nas Ijeen paid to the editions of Lachmann and 
 Schcl,! ; all the readings of the Klzovirs, Mill, 
 Bengel, Kuapp, Tittmann, Scliolz, aiul also of 
 Era^^mus, Roliert Stephens' third edition, and of 
 Schmid himself, are either given or pointed out. 
 The student is presented also with a selection of 
 readings from the most ancient MSS., from the 
 interpreters of Scripture who lived in the earlier 
 ages of the chur:h, and the works of the eccle- 
 wastical lathers : no various reading possessing 
 critical value is omitted. This, indeed, is a work 
 of so much value, that no good theological library 
 can be without it ; and when its worth and utility 
 CLtnie to be known in tlii.? country, it will soon 
 supersede the ordinary editions and reprints of 
 Si timid's Concordance. It is put forth under the 
 S Tj:ices of that spirited jjublisher Tauchnitz of 
 Lcipsic. 
 
 ()iie of the most valuable aids for the general 
 study of the New Testament which modern times 
 ha\e j)r()duced is ' The EngUfihmaii's Greek Con- 
 cordance of the New Testament; being an at- 
 tempt at a V^erbal Connexion between the Greek 
 and the English Texts. London, 1839.' The work, 
 which is carefully compiled and beautifully got 
 up, takes Schmid as its basis. Tiie plan is to 
 present in alphabetical succession every word which 
 occurs in tlie Gieek New Testament with the 
 series of passages (quoted from the English trans- 
 lation) in which each such word occurs; the word 
 or words exhibiting the Greek word under imme- 
 diate consideration l)eiiig printed in italic letters. 
 The utility of such a work is various. We will 
 give one instance. Let it be supposed tiUt the 
 student is engaged in endeavoin-ing to learn the 
 import of the words ' that it might be fulfilled.' 
 If his acquaintance with Greek is small, he has 
 to refer to an index at the end of the volume in 
 Older to ascertain what is the Greek word which 
 (TJr translators have rendered by ' fulfilled.' If 
 lie is familiar with the Greek New Testament, he 
 at once tiuiis to the word Tr\rip6(u, which he finds 
 in both Greek and Englisii chaiacters, immediately 
 fidlowed by the several passages in English wliich 
 are renderings of ir\r]p6cii in the original. For the 
 sake of completing our illustration, we transcribe 
 several of these renderings, taking them in the 
 jrder in which they are foiuid in this Concordance 
 --the order, that is, in wliich the books of the 
 New I'estament stand in the Common Version : 
 these renderings are, ' fulfilled,' ' to fulfil,' ' was 
 full,' ' fill ye up,' ' filled,' ' had ended,' ' full 
 Clime,' ' make full," ' were (years) etcpired,' ' were 
 ended,' 'fulfil ye my joy,' 'God shall supjly,' 
 ' ye are complete,' ' woiks jierfect.' Now uiough 
 of t!ie Ciiitext is given to enable a diligent reader 
 of the English New Testament to learn, as his eye 
 »niis down the column of citations, on which sub- 
 ject each quoted ))assage bear;, and generally 
 which .therefore is the general import and bearing 
 ol" each rendering of the Greek original. First 
 irrpressioris are thereby at once gained — perhaps 
 ieiiuite convictions as well — vvithout once re- 
 ferring to the Greek Testament itself, though the 
 citations may extend throughout the volume, and 
 require hours to be consumed had they to be 
 «9ught without aid. These first impissions may 
 
 CONCORDANCE 
 
 lead to sustained thought or careful investigation : 
 indeed, the most profound study of the New Tes- 
 tament may, with the assistance here provided, b« 
 carried on with no less ease than satisfaction, by 
 any one who is intent on learning ' the mind ol 
 the Spirit,' though but scantily provided with 
 erudition. 
 
 In consequence of the revived study of the 
 Bible and of the Cliristian fathers, as well as -the 
 . greater interest felt in religion and religious in- 
 quiries whii.'h the last quarter of a century has 
 witnessed in France, and especially in Paris, a 
 new Concordance to the Latin Vulgate has re- 
 cently been proiluced : ' Concordantia liiblior. 
 Sacr., Vulgatae Editionis, Recensita;, multoque 
 prioribus auctiores, emendanle, accuratius denuo 
 colligente et cum oinnibus Bib. textibus con- 
 ferente T. P. Dutrijion." London, Nutt, Fleet- 
 street. This work is founded on that of Car- 
 dinal Hugo, which, though executed by fifty dif- 
 ferent compilers (chiefiy Benedictine monks), is 
 far from being either accurate or complete. The 
 editor apjiears to have discharged his duty with 
 great care and labour ; and the printer has well 
 performed his part. The points in which this 
 edition contains imjnovements, in comparison 
 with the last of those which preceded it, are 
 numerous and important. It may be sufficient 
 to state that it contains 22,000 passages not to be 
 found in previjus Concordances to the Vulgate. 
 Some of the additions, indeed, seem rather suited 
 to the peculiar condition of Biblical study in the 
 Catholic communion than to the requirements of 
 the general theologian ; nevertheless, the work is 
 a valuable contribution to Biblical literature, and 
 must in this country be regarded with peculiar 
 pleasure, as both a result and an instrument of an 
 increase of Scriptural knowledge on the part of out 
 Catholic l)retliren. The Archbishop of Paris has 
 accepted the dedication of the Concordance to 
 himself: and it has been approved by most of 
 the archbislio))s and liishojjs of France and Bel 
 gium. 
 
 The work of Andrew Synison, Lexicon Anglo- 
 Grceco-Latin. N. T., London, 1658, fol., is rather 
 a dictionary than a concordance, and formed on 
 so bad a ])lan as to be of little service. A much 
 better book is A Concordance to the Greek Testa- 
 ment, rcith the English Version to each Word, 
 the princijxtl Hebrew roots co/Tespondmg to the 
 Greek tcords of the Se}ituagint,wit/i short Critical 
 Notes, and an Index, by John Williams, LL.D., 
 Lond. 1767, fol. 
 
 The first concordance to the English version of 
 the New Testament was publisheil without date, but 
 certainly before 1510. by 'Mr. Thomas Gybson,' 
 being chiefly, as appears probable from the pre- 
 fatory ejii-tle to the reader, the work of the famous 
 printer John Day. It is entitled The Concord- 
 ance of the New Testament, most necessary to 
 be had in the hands of all soche as desire tJie 
 communicatio7i of any i^lace contained in the 
 Netc Testament. The first English concordance 
 to the entire Bible was by John Marbeck — A 
 Concordance, that is to saic, a Worke wherein 
 by the order of the letters of the A., B, C, ye 
 maie redely find any trorde conteigned in the 
 •whole Bible, so ofte^i as it is there expressed or 
 mentioned., Lond. 1550, fol Till the year J 555, 
 when Robert Sfejihens publish.ed bis concordanc**, 
 it was not customary to mark the verses in booki
 
 CONCORDANCE. 
 
 tl this sort. At first it was thouglit sufficient to 
 ipecify the chapter with the letters n. ft, r, if, as 
 narks to noint out the hegintiiii!^, iniiUlle, and 
 Mil of each chapter. But in 1515 Uohert Ste- 
 phens divided the Hilde into verses, thus preparing 
 die way for a more exact reference in concord- 
 ances, &c. ; but Marbeck does not appear to have 
 been under tlie iidloence of this improvement, as 
 Uis work refers merely to the chajitcrs. In Town- 
 ley's Bib. Lit. vol. iii. ];. 11"^, may bo found 
 some interestiniJ^ particulars respect inn' Marbeck's 
 aondition in lite, laboms, and ill-treatment. 
 
 The following work, which appeared in the 
 same year as the last, is a translation from the 
 German — A Bricfe and a Compendious Table, 
 in maner of a Concordance, openung the watje to 
 ihe jyyincipall Histories of the whole Bible atid 
 the inost comon articles {/rou/ided and compre- 
 hended in the Neuc Testament and Olde, in 
 maner as ainjoly as doeth the great Concordcmce 
 of the Bible. Gathered and set forth by Henry 
 liuUingcr, Leo Jude, Conrade rellicane, and by 
 the other tninistcrs of the Church of Liywie. 
 Translated from the HygJi Almayne into Eng- 
 lysh by Waller Lynne. To ichich is added, a 
 Translatinti of the Third Bo/ce of Machabees, 
 Rvo. K'50. Lynne, the translator, was an En;j;lish 
 printer, who flourished about the middle of the 
 Bixteenth century, a scholar, author, and trans- 
 lator of several books. Bullinp^er, the author, 
 was a Swiss refornner, born near Zurich in Swit- 
 zerland, 1504. 
 
 Several English concordances of greater or less 
 value were superseded by the correct and valu- 
 able work of Alexander Cruden, entitled A Cotn- 
 2>lete Concordance to the Holy Scriptures of the 
 Old and New Testament, ^c. ; to rchich is added, 
 a Concordance to the books called Apocrypha, 
 1737, 4to. Three editions were published by the 
 author during; his life, and many have appeared 
 since his death. Tlie London edition of 1810 is 
 the best standard edition. The work is com])lete, 
 the detinitions accurate, and the references cor- 
 rect. Several useful editions of Cruden have 
 been put foith by the Messrs. Bagster, wliich are 
 worth far more tliaii their cost. The same pub- 
 lisV'srs have issued An Alphabetical Index of tlie 
 Holy Scriptures, comjirising the Names, Charac- 
 ters, and Subjects, both of the Old a.nd Neir 
 Testament, in two dill'erent sizes, wiiicli the Bib- 
 lical student will find very serviceal)le. In a 
 ' Memoir of Mr. Alexander Cruden,' prefixed to 
 an edition publ shed in 1823, and since, are given 
 some interesting but ]iainful ])aiticnlars respecting 
 this v/orlhy ami industrious man, to whom the 
 religious world is so deeply indelited. 
 
 At a time when German theological literatiue 
 IS beginning to receive some of its merited atten- 
 tion, it may not be unaccejitable to mention a 
 valuable concordance for the German Bible — 
 Biblische lland-Concordanz fir Ilelii/ionslehrer 
 vnd alle Freunde dcr Heiliyen Schrift, Leipzig, 
 1''41. The work is more comjirehensive tlian 
 similar writings in the English language. It is 
 divided into three parts: — 1. A full and com- 
 plete register of all the words found in the Bible; 
 2. An index oi' the ;T)ost important things, sub- 
 ject. , ami ideas foiuid in the Bilile, with refer- 
 ences to the ])laccs where tiiey lie in the sacred 
 volume; is lor instance, under the liead — ' Lord's 
 Supiier — a meal commemorative of tiie dealt of 
 
 CONCUBINAGE. 
 
 463 
 
 J#stis — it brings us into intimate fdlc wsiiiji with 
 Christ; — the worthy jiarticipation of (he .tame; 
 spiritual enjoyment of the llesh and liluod of 
 Christ," &c. The third part gives tiie leadiai; 
 doctrines of Christianity systematically arrangtd, 
 drawn u]) according to Lutiu-r's ('atochism, and 
 accompanied by Scriptural |)roofs. (Oniie g ii<6- 
 liothecu Biblica ; VN'atts's liibliothcca Brilan- 
 nica; Winer's Handbtuh ; Hi'ilir's Kritische I're- 
 diyer-Bibliothek, 1S41.)— J. R. B. 
 
 CONCUBIN.\GE, In a scriptural sense, means 
 
 the state of cohabiting lawfully with a wife of 
 
 second rank, C'37S/"/y««A, who cjijoyed no other 
 conjugal right but that of cohabitation, and wlioni 
 the husband could rei)udiate, and send away with 
 a small jjresent (Gen. xxi. 11). In like man- 
 ner, he could by means of presents, exclude his 
 children by her from the heritage (Gen. xxv. 6). 
 Such concubines, CJ^'i^D. had Nahor (Gen. xxii. 
 24), Abraiiam (xxv. (>), .Jacob (xxxv. 22), Eli- 
 phas (xxxvi. 12), Gideon (Judg. viii. 3), Saul (2 
 Sam.iii. 7), ])avid(lSam.v. 13; xv. 16; xvi. 21), 
 Solomon (I Kings xi. 3), Caleb (1 Chron. ii. 4ti), 
 Mana-sseh (ib. vii. 14), Rehoboam (2 Chrou. xi. 21), 
 Abiah (2 Chr. xiii. 21 ), and Belshazzar(I)an. v. 2). 
 To judge from the conjugal liistories of Abraham 
 and Jacob (Gen. xvi. and xxx.), tlie immediate 
 cause of concubinage wa'^ the barrenness of the law- 
 ful wife, who in that case introduced her maiil-ser- 
 vant, of her own accord, to her husband, t'or tlie 
 sake of having children. Accordingly we do not 
 read that Isaac, son of Abraham, had any concu- 
 bine, Rebecca, his wife, not being barren. In 
 process of time, however, concubinage appars to 
 have degenerated inti) a regular custom among 
 the Jews, and the institutions of Moses were di- 
 rected to prevent excess and abuse in that respect, 
 by wholesome laws and regulations (Exod. xxi. 
 7-9; Deut. xxi. 10-14). It would seem that the 
 unfaithfulness of a concubine was not regarded as 
 an act of real adultery (Lev. xix. 20). To gnaid 
 adult male offspring from debauchery bel'ore mar- 
 riage, their parents, it a]ipcars, usid to give tlum 
 one of their female slaves, as a concubine. She 
 was then considered as one of the children of tl>e 
 house, and she retained her rights as a concubine, 
 even after the marriage of the son (Exod. xxi. 1), 
 10). When a son bad intercourse with the "on- 
 cubine of his father, a sort of family punishnitiit, 
 we are inrormed, was inf!i('ted on him (Gen. xxxv. 
 22 ; 1 Chron. v. 1). 
 
 In the Talmud (tit. Cetttboth), the Rabbins 
 differ as to what constitutes concubinage; some 
 regarding as its distinguishing feature the absence 
 of the bptrolhiiig ceremonies (sjKiiisalia), and of 
 the n^iriD (iibellus dotis), or portion of pro]ierty 
 allotted to a woman by .sjiecial engagement, ami to 
 whicli s'.ie was entitled on the marriage day, al'tei 
 the decease of the husband, or in case of lepudia- 
 tion ; others, again, the absence of the latter uloiie. 
 
 The Roman law calls concubinage, anallowd 
 custom (Helta consuetudo). When this e^iuvs- 
 sioii occurs in the constitutions of the (Jhiistiau 
 emperors, it sigiiilies what we now s iiuetimes rail 
 a marriage of conscience. The concubinage tole- 
 rated among ihe Romans, in the time of the Re- 
 public and of the heathen eminirors, was tiial 
 between persons not capable of coijtrai ting !e,'al 
 mainagc. Inheritance* mijlit d»ser inl to cliihun' 
 that spr mg from such a telwated coiiabiianto
 
 464 
 
 CONFLAGRATION. 
 
 Concal)ina;4e between such jxTsons tlicy loolced on 
 as a kind of inaniai(e, and even allowed it several 
 Tv-ivileges; Imt tlien it was confined to a single 
 person, and was of jierpetiial obligation, as much 
 as marriage itself. Hottoman observe^ that the 
 Romans had allowed concubinage long before 
 Julius CiEsar enacted the law by which every one 
 was at lilierty to marry as many wives as he 
 pleased. The emperor Valentinian, Socrates tells 
 us, allowed every man two. Concubinage is 
 also used to signify a marriage with a woman of 
 inferior condition, to whom the hu5l)and does 
 not convey his rank. Dajos (Panitilla) observes, 
 that the ancient laws allowed a man to espouse, 
 wnder the title of concubine, certain persons who 
 were esteemed unequal to him. on account of the 
 want of some qualities requisite to sustain the full 
 honour of marriage; and he adds, that though 
 sjBch concubinage was beneath marriage both as 
 .o dignity and civil rights, yet was concul)ine a 
 icputable title, and very different from that of 
 ' mistress' among us. The connection was consi- 
 dered so lawful that the concubine miglit be ac- 
 cused of adultery in the same manner as a wife. 
 
 Tliis kind of concubinage is still in use in some 
 countries, particularly in Germany, under the 
 title of halb-ehe (lialf-marriage), or left-hand mar- 
 riage, in allusion to the manner of it.s being con- 
 tracted, namely, by the man giving' the woman 
 his left hand instead of the right. Tliis is a real 
 marriage, though without the usual solemnity, and 
 the parties are both bound to each other for ever, 
 though the female cannot bear the husband's 
 name and title.— E. M. 
 
 CONEY. [Shaphan.] 
 
 CONFLAGRATION, GENERAL. The 
 opinion that the end of the world is to be effected 
 by the agency of fire is very ancient, and was 
 common amongst heathen philosophers (Ovid, 
 Metamorph i. 250). Other testirnonies are quoted 
 by Grotius (De Veritate Bel. Chr.. lib. i. § 22). 
 It is not easy to discover the origin of this opi- 
 nion ; it can scarcely be traced to tradition de- 
 rived from revelation, since there is no distinct 
 reference to such a catastrophe in the Old Testa- 
 ment. It is, moreover, remarkable, considering 
 how universal and definite is the ordinary belief 
 on the subject, that tliere is only one passage in 
 the New Tpstament, viz., 2 Pet. iii. 7-10, which 
 can be adduced as sj)eaking distinctly of tliis 
 event. This passage is, indeed, very explicit, 
 but it should not be forgotten that some learneii 
 and able expositors have referred it altogether to 
 the destruction of Jerusalem and of tlie Jewish 
 polity. Amongst those who have held this 0])i- 
 nion are Dr. Lightfoot (Ilorce Hehr. in Joh. 21, 
 2"1) aiid Dr. John Owen (<deoKoyo\)ixeva, ed. Bre- 
 men, !6S4, p. 147, quoted by Dr. Pye Smith, 
 Scripture and Geology, sect. 6, p. 23^, 1st ed.). 
 If. however, with the ma.jority of inteqoreters, we 
 refer the prediction to the end of the world, to 
 whic;h it seems most naturally to apply, we could 
 not have a more distinct statement of the fact 
 that the present order of things is to be terminated 
 hy the world we inhabit and all the works of 
 insin it contains being ' burnt up." There is no 
 reason for assuni'ng that the whole material uni- 
 yeise is to be involved in tliis catastrophe; the 
 itiention of the heavens leads our thoughts no 
 Aulher than the atmos]ihere and vapours sur- 
 ivuiidiag thi» planet. Nor should we regard this 
 
 COPPER. 
 
 conflagration as involving the alieolute rfes^rwfion 
 or annihilation of the world : it is more consistent 
 with the narrative itself, as well as with physical 
 science, to consider it as introductory to a new 
 and l.-etter state of things — ' new leaveris and a 
 new earth wherein dwelleth righteousness' (ver. 11), 
 By what means the conflagration is to be effected 
 we are not informeil, and all attempts to explain 
 how this is to be accom])lished must be mere spe- 
 culation, into which we do not think it necessary 
 or advantageous to enter. We have only at pre- 
 sent bj remark that such an event is not incou 
 sistent with physical facts. We know that th« 
 temperature of the earth increases gradually and 
 with considerable regularity as we descend below 
 the surface (Phillips, Geolor/ij, vol. ii. p. 232), 
 and have every reason to believe that the central 
 mass is intensely hot. We know, moreover, that 
 there are subterranean fires of great extent, if not 
 forming part of this heated central mass. The 
 means, therefore, of combustion are near at hand. 
 But even if there were no such cential heat, che- 
 mistry points out very easy means by which the 
 conflagiation may be effected through the agency 
 of various elementary substances (Phillips, Geo- 
 logy, vol. ii. p. 211). We find evidence also ia 
 the pyrogenous rocks which forni so large a part 
 of the crust of the earth, that the world has al 
 ready been subjectetl, if not to conflagration, yet 
 to a more intense and general action of heat than 
 any which is now observed on the surface of the 
 earth ; and it is clearly not impossible that the 
 action may be yet more intense and more general. 
 In speculating on this subject, however, the cau'' 
 tion of Calvin should not be disregarded — 'Mali 
 ergo sunt intt'ppretes, qui in arguti* speculationi- 
 bus multum consumunt opers, quum apostolua 
 totam banc doctrinam ad pias exliortafioncs ac- 
 commodet' (Cilvin, Co/iim. in 2 Pet. iii. 10). — 
 
 F. W. G 
 
 CONIAH. [Jeconiah.] 
 
 COOS (Kcis), Cos or Co (now Stan-Co or 
 Stancliio), a small and fertile island in the vUgVjaf 
 Sea. near the coast of Caria, in Asia Minor, al- 
 most between the promontories on which the cities 
 Cnidus and Halicarnassus were situated. It was 
 celebrated for its wine, silks, and cotton of a beau- 
 tiful texture; The island is mentioned in 1 Mao*:. 
 XV. 23 ; Acts xxi. 1. 
 
 COPPER (nC?*in3). Tubal-cain is recorded 
 as the first artificer in brass and iron (Gen. iv 
 22). In the time of Solomon, Iliram of Tyre 
 was celebrated as a worker in brass (1 Kings vii- 
 14; comp. 2 Chron. ii. 14). To .judge from 
 Ilesiod (Op. et Dies. 134), and Lucret. (v 
 1285), the art of working in copper was even 
 prior to that in iron, probably from its being 
 found in larger masses, and from its requiring .esi» 
 labour in the process of manufacture. Palestine 
 abounded in copiier (Deut. viii. 9), and Davio 
 left behind him an immense quantity of it to be 
 employed in building the temple CI Chron. xxii. 
 3-14). Of copper were made all .sorts of vessels 
 in the Tabernacle and Temple (Lev. vi. 2S ; 
 Num. xvi. 39; 2 Chron. iv. 16; Ezr. viii. 27), 
 weapons, and more especially helmets, armour, 
 shields, spears, (1 Sam. xvii. 5, 6, 38 ; 2 Sun. 
 xxi. 16), also chains (Judg. xvi. 21), and miiTors 
 (Exod. xxxvili. S). The larger vessels were 
 moulded in fouiideries, as also the piDatt
 
 CORA L. 
 
 for arnlnfechiral ornanicnls (1 Kln.,'S vii.) It 
 wouM liowever a])])ear (_l Kings vii. I'l) tliat t'le 
 arf of co]n)er-fouiidiri^ w;us, even in tlip tim< of 
 Solomon, liut little known among (lie Jews, roiil 
 was peculiar to foreigners, pruticularlv the Pluini- 
 cians. Mi-liaelis (>/o?. Rvcht, iv. 217, ;5lJ)ol)- 
 sprves, that JIosm seems to !:?.'. e given to cop- 
 per vessels the preQ-ience over earthen, and on that 
 ground endeavours to remove the common pie- 
 
 1'iidice ai^aiiist their use for culinary piirjiosts. 
 •'rom copper, also, money was coined (Matt. x. 
 9).— E. M. 
 
 CORAL, a liard, cretaceous marine production, 
 arising from the deposit of calcareous matter by a 
 minute jwlypous animal, in order to form the cell 
 or poly[iidom into whose hollows tiie tenant can 
 wholly or partially i-etire. The corals thus pro- 
 duced are if various shapes, most usually liranched 
 like a tiee. The masses areoftc-n enormous in the 
 tropical seas, where they to]) tlie reefs and cap the 
 submarine mountains, frequently rising to or near 
 the surface so as to form what are calle<( coral 
 islands and coral reefs. These aiiound in the Red 
 Sea; from wliich, most prohaldy, was derived the 
 coral with which the Hcbre.vs were acquainted ; 
 but coral is also foun.l in the Mediterranean. It is 
 of diflereiit coloius, white, black, red. The led 
 kind was anciently, as at ])resent, the most valued, 
 and was worked into vaiious ornaments. Coral is 
 usually understood to be tlenoted l)y the word 
 niDXT ramnth, in Job xxviii. IS; Ezek. xxvii. 
 lf> ; and this interpretation is nut unsuitable, al- 
 (hougli the etymolo^^y is not well made out, and 
 the dialects afford little support. Tlie ancient 
 translators were evidently much perplexed to deter- 
 niinewliellier'^he word ^''^i'D peninim (Job.xxviii. 
 18: P:ov. iii. 15 : viii. 11; xx. 15; xxxi. 10; 
 Lam. iv. 7) meant corals or pearls. Tliis will 
 always be doubtful : but the text in Lament, iv. 
 7, by descriliing tiie aiticle as red, suggests a pre- 
 ference of the former. Winer indeed remaiks 
 ( Ilealioortcrbuch, s. v. Korallen i, that it is scarcely 
 credible such a jjroduct should have circulated 
 •iniier two different names (if /(f'HO^/t also means 
 coral) : l)ut surelv theie is no difKculty in con- 
 -.eiving that one word may have denoted coral 
 generally, wiiile another may iiave distinguished 
 ilial red coral, which was the most esteemed and 
 the most in use for ornament. 
 
 CORBAN r|3"ni^: N. T. KopjSSA a Hebrew 
 word em))loye:l in the Hellenistic Greek, just as 
 the ronpsjionding Grrek wntd i upov was em- 
 [iloyed m the Rabljinical Hebrew ( Huxtorf, Lex. 
 fiab. col. 579) to designate an oblation of any 
 kind to (lOtl. It occurs only once in the New 
 Testament (Mark vii. 11), where it is exjjlarned 
 (as also b}' Josepiius, A/itiq. 1. 4, c. 4, {» 4, Contra 
 Ap. 1. I, ^ '22) by tlic word dwpov. There is 
 S'lme diiliculty in tin; construction and exact 
 meaning of this ijassagc and the corre.sponding 
 one. Matt. xv. H Tiie grammatical difficulty 
 wiises from the sentence being apparently incom- 
 plete. This diiliculty our translators, following 
 lieza., fHilve by su] plying the words 'lie shall lie 
 fiw (itisottx eril). Most ciitics, however, regard 
 »he follo'.vitg voisc (Malt, xv.fi, Mark vii. 12) 
 (IS the a(rtid«sis of the sentence, th( kcI being re- 
 dundant 'moie Hebrav),' a<:cordirig to Giotius, 
 or rather serving to inilicafe tiie concl us' Hi (I)e 
 \\ette, Kitrze Erkldrnng dcs llv. Mitt., p. 151 ; 
 «t« also V\' ijier. Gram, dcr N. T. Spiacftidiotns, 
 
 CORINlvf. 
 
 ♦6f. 
 
 ^ GG, p. 537). The more important ixiiiil, howr- 
 ever, is to ascertain the jirecise meaning of tlie 
 expression icop0av ("> fVri Swpov) t> taf ^^ iftoC 
 uxpfKridiis. Many inttrjireters, at the heatl of 
 wl.om stitJ ids Bez<L, sr.jjily fVri after th« word 
 Kop^au, and suppose that a gift ol tlic projierty of 
 the son iiatl actually b( \'n made to the service of 
 Goil (see Olshausen, liiblisrhcr Cominvntar. on 
 Matt. XV. 5). The sei se is then, ' Whatever or 
 mine mig-Jit I'cnelit thee is corban, is already de- 
 dicated to (iod, and I have tiiereforc no powrv 
 over it.' Others, more coiTeclly, as we tliink. 
 supply fcrTO) rather than icrrl, and translate, 'Be 
 it corbai. (tJiat is, devoted) wiiatever of mine 
 shall profit thee' (Campbell's translation, see his 
 note on the passage) Light foot (Ilor. llcbr. on 
 Matt. XV. 5) notices a foi nulla of fre(juent occur- 
 rence in the Talnnul (in tlie treatises Nedarini. 
 and Na/.ir) whicli seems to be exactly that quoted 
 
 by our Lord, -^ n^HJ ''3NC^' pip, ' [Be it] cor- 
 ban, [as to] which I may be profitable to thee.' 
 He, as well as Giolius, shows tiiat this and similar 
 t'ormulae were not used to signify that the thing 
 was actually devoted, Init was simply intended 
 to jjrohibit the use of it from the iiaity to whoin 
 it was thus made corban, as thougli it weie said. 
 If I give you anything or do anything for you, 
 may it lie as though I gave you that which is de- 
 voted to God, and may I be accounted ])erjur<Hi 
 and sacrilegious. This view of the ])assage cer- 
 tainly gives much greater force to the charge 
 made by our Lord that the command ' Whoso 
 cursetli father or mother let him die the aea'h' 
 was nullified by the tradition. It would, indeed, 
 seem surprising that such a vow as this (closely 
 analogous to the modern profanity of imprecating 
 curses on ones self if ceitain conditions be not 
 fulfilled) should be considered to involve a reli- 
 gious obligation from which the paity coulil not 
 be freed even if afterwards he re];ented of his 
 rashness .ind sin. It ajipears, however, from 
 Ralibinical authority that anything thus devoted 
 was irreclaimable (Grotius, Annntatioiies in Matt. 
 XV. 5), and that even the hasty utterance of a 
 word imjjying a vow w;is e(pii\alent to a vow 
 formally made (Lightfcwt. Ilor. llebr.). This, 
 indeed, seems to be the force of the exjiression 
 used in Mark, koX oukcti a<pieT(, k. t. A., ' y« 
 suffer him no more to do aught for his father or 
 his mother.' A more striking instance of the sab- 
 version of a command of (iod by the tradition of 
 men can hardly be conceived. — F. W. G. 
 
 CORIANDER. [Gad.] 
 
 CORINTH, a Grecian city, placed on Ine 
 isthmus which joins Pelojionnesus (now called 
 the Miirea) to tlie continent of (ii-eece. \ lofty 
 rock rises above it, <in which was the citadel, or 
 the Acrocorinthus (Livy, xlv. 2S). It bad two 
 iiarbours: Cenchreae, on the eastei:i side, abonl 
 70 stadia distant ; nnd-LechiBuni, on the modern 
 Gulf of Lepanto, only 12 stadia from the city 
 (.Stralio, viii. *>). Its earliest name, as given by 
 Homer, is Ephyrc ; and mysterious legends con- 
 nect it with Lycia, by means of the hero Belle- 
 ropiion, to whom a })lot of ground was conseciati'd 
 in front of the city, close to a cypress grove (Pau 
 sanias, ii. 2). Owing to the gu-at diiliculty of 
 weathering Malea. the southern jirornonlory oi 
 Greece, n erchundise passed tlir;:iigh (;or:ntli t'lrm 
 sea to sea : the citv bec<imiiig an en repi'it for ;hz 
 
 2 H
 
 46« 
 
 CORINTH. 
 
 goods of Asm and Italy (Strabc, viii. 6^. Af fFi# 
 same time it commanded the tiiiflic l)y land ftom 
 north to south. An attempt made to dig through 
 the isthmus was frustrated by the rocky nature of 
 the soil ; at one jieriod, liowever, they had an 
 invention for drawing galleys across from sea to 
 sea on tnicixs. AVith such advantage? of position, 
 Corinth was very early renowned for riches, and 
 teems to have been made by nature far the capital 
 lA' Greece. The numerous colonies which she 
 sent furth, chiefly U) the west and to Sicily, gave 
 her points of attachment in many parts ; anil the 
 good will, which, as a mercantile state, she care- 
 fully maintained, made her a valuable link be- 
 tween the various Greek tribes. Tiie public and 
 foreign policy of Corinth apjiears to iiave been 
 generally remarkable for honour and justice 
 '^Herod. and Thucyd. passim) ; and the Isthmian 
 
 COlZINTXIIANSu 
 
 gaiwtjs, whicli were celebrated there every "yihet 
 veai', might have been converted into a nafJical 
 cottgress, if tiie (Hninthiains iiad b«K» Itess peu«e« 
 ful and more amL)irioMs. 
 
 When the Acuacan league wa» rallying th« 
 chief jwwers of soudiern Greece. Corinth becarr.e 
 its military centie ; and as tlie spirit of IVeedom 
 was active in that cordederacy, tltey wey« certain, 
 sooner or later, to give the Romans a jireterice 
 for attacking them. The fatal blow fell on Co- 
 rinth (b.c. 1 IC), wiien L. Mummius, by order oJ 
 the Roman Senate, barl;arously destroyed that 
 beautiful town (Ciceio, Ferr.\. 21), eminent even 
 in Gieece for jjainting, scnl[)ture, and all work- 
 ing in metal and jjottery ; and as the teuitory 
 was given over to the Sicyonians (Strabo, I. i\ , 
 we must infer that the whole popdaiiou was «•:>>■' 
 itif.i sl.nci V. 
 
 235. [Sottuth.] 
 
 The Corinth of which we read in the New Tes- 
 tament was quite a new city, having been rebuilt 
 and established as a Roman colony, and peopled 
 with freedmen from Rome (Pausanias atid 
 Strabo, M. s.) by the dictator Csesar, a little before 
 ids assassination. Although tiie soil was tw 
 rocky to be feitile, and the territory very limited, 
 Corinth again ijtcame a great and wealthy city 
 in a short time, especially as the Roman j^-o- 
 consuls made it the seat of government (Acts 
 xviii.) lor southern Greece, which was now called 
 tiie prov-Mce of .-Vchaia. In earlier times Corinth 
 iiad been celebrated for tlie great wealth of its 
 Temple of \'enus, which had a gainful trallic of 
 a most dishcnouralde kind with the numerous 
 merchants resident there — supjdying them with 
 harlots under* the forms of religion. The same 
 phenomena, no doubt, reappeared in the later and 
 Christian age. The little which is said in the 
 New Testament eeetns to indicate a wealthy and 
 
 luxuriojis community, prone to jmpnrity d 
 
 mtTials; nevertheless, ail Greece was so contann- 
 natcd, that we may easily oveicharge the accusi*- 
 tion against Corinth. 
 
 Tl»8 Corinthian Chu-rch is remarkable in th« 
 Epistles of the Ajiostle Pan! by the variety of it^» 
 spiritual giftSj which seem f<jr the time to have 
 eclipsed or superseded the office of the elder oi 
 bishop, which in most chujciies became ffom tlie 
 beginning so prominent. Very soon, however, 
 this peculiarity was lost, and the bisiiojjs of Co- 
 rinth take a place coordinate to those of other 
 capital cities. One of them, Dionysiu*, appears 
 to have exercised a great inlluence over many and 
 distant churches, in tlie latter part of the second 
 century (Eu»ebius,7/is^ Ecclcs. i v. 23). — K. W. N. 
 
 CORINTHIANS, EPISTLES TO TIIE.— 
 First Episti.e. The testimony of Christian a»»- 
 tiquity is full and unanimous in ascribing this in* 
 spired production to the jien of the Apostle Paoi
 
 CORINTHIANS. 
 
 (Lardner''s Credibilitij. Works, vol. \\. plur.loc ; 
 wee also Hfydcmel';!!, ('umment. in priortm D. 
 FauU ad Cor. enist. I 'role;/, p. 30 ; SclK)tt, Isagoge 
 in A'. 7'. pp. 236, 2J0, sqq.), and with this the in- 
 ternal evidence ajisii";^ fiom allusions, undcsii^iied 
 coincidences, style, and tone of thoiif^ht, fully 
 accords. The epistle seems to Lave \)Cvn occa- 
 •i(>ne(l jvirtly hy some intelligence received by 
 tlw A(iostle concerning; the Corinthian cUurcli 
 from tlie duniestics of Chloe, a pious female con- 
 Dected with that church (i. 11), and, prohahly, 
 also from common rcjiiirt (aKoyeroj, v. i.); and 
 pntly hv an e|>istle vvhicli tlie Corinthians them- 
 selves had addressed to the .\postle, askinjj advice 
 uikI instruction on several jwints (vii. I), and 
 which prohalily was conveyed to him by Ste- 
 phanas, Foitunatus, and Achaicus (xvi. 17). 
 Apollos, also, who succeeded the Apostle at Co- 
 rinth, hut who st'ems to liave been with him at the 
 time this epistle was written (xvi. 12), may have 
 given him inforniiitioii of the state of thinu;s 
 among the Cluistlans in that city. From these 
 sources the Ajvistle had become acquainted with 
 the painful fact that since lie had left Corinth 
 (Acts xviii. IS) the church in that ])lace had sunk 
 into a state of great corrujition and error. One 
 prime source of this evil state of thini^s, and in 
 itself an evil of no inferior magnitude, w;is the 
 existence of schisms or party divisions in the 
 cliurcli. ' Every one of you," Paul tells them, 
 'saith I am of Paul, and I of Apollos, and I of 
 Cepiias, and I of Christ' (i. 12). This has led to 
 tlie conclusion that four gieat parties liad arisen 
 in the church, which l)oasted of Paul, Apollos, 
 Peter, and Christ, as their respective heads. By 
 what j)eculiarities of sentiment these parlies may 
 Ite supjiosed to have been distinguished from each 
 otiipr it is not dillicult, with the exception of the 
 last, to conjecture. The existence in many of 
 the early churches of a strong tendency towards 
 the in,.;rafting of Judaism upon Christianity is a 
 fact well known to every reader of the New Tes- 
 tament; and tliough the churcii at Corinth was 
 founded by Paul and afterwards instructed by 
 Apollos, yet it is extremely probable that as in 
 the churches ol'Galatia so in those of Athaia this 
 tenilency may have been strongly manifested, and 
 that a paity may have arisen in the church at 
 Corinth opjx)sed to the liberal and spiritual sys- 
 tem of Paul, and more inclined to t)ne which 
 aimed at fettering Christianity with the restric- 
 tions and outward ritual of the Mosaic dispensa- 
 tion. That this ])aity received any countenance 
 from Peter cannot for a moment lie supposed ; 
 but that they might, for the sake of giving greater 
 authority to their own doctrines, have made use 
 of the name of the great ' Apostle of the circum- 
 cision ' bj' a'^signing it t^i their party, a])[)ears 
 extremely jirobab'ie. The vehement opposition of 
 this ]iarty to Paul, and their pointed attack upon 
 his claims to the ADostolic ofhce, would naturally 
 lead those wno had been Paul's converts an<l wlio 
 probably formed the major ])art of the church to 
 rally round iiis iiretensions and the doctrines of a 
 pure and spiritual Christianity which he taught. 
 Closely alii**!! with this party, and in some re- 
 spects only a subdivision of it, was that of 
 A{)ollos. 'li:is distinguiihed individual was not 
 only tlie friend of Paul, but had followed up 
 Paul's teaching it Corinth in a congenial spirit 
 ud 'a a harmon 3us rt.sult (iii. 5, &c.). Between 
 
 CORINTHIANS. 
 
 «61 
 
 the paity, therefore, assuming his name and tluU 
 ranking itself under the name of the AjKiille there 
 could iie no substantial ground of dill'erence 
 Perhaps, as A|x))Io$ liad the advantage of Paul 
 in mental polish, and especially in facility in 
 public speaking (.-Vets xviii, 24 ; comj). 2 Ck)r. 
 X. 10 \ the sole ground uii which his paity injy 
 have preferi-eil him w;is the liif;her gratilicaiion he 
 alVoixled by his addresses to their educated taste 
 tlian was derived from the simple statements of 
 the Apostle concerning ' Christ and him cruci- 
 lied.' Thus far all, though almost puri ly conjec- 
 tural, is easy and probable; but in nlation to tie 
 fourth jiarty — that which .said, ' 1 am of Christ. 
 — it has be(!n found extremely dillicult to deter 
 mine by what jx'culiar sentiments they were dig- 
 tinguished. The simplest hypothesis is that o( 
 Eicliliorn (^Einleit. iii. 107), "AcW^tt {Isagoge in 
 Nov. Test. p. '2S,i), Pott (A'od. Test. Koppian. 
 vol. v. part i. p. 2.")), and others, viz. that this 
 party was comjiosed of the better .sort in the 
 church, who stood neutral and ilid not mingle in 
 the contentions of the other jiarties. Tliis opinion 
 is chielly based on 1 Cor. iii. 22, 23, where it is 
 supposed the four jiiirties are alluded to and that of 
 Chiiit altme commended. But this .seems a forced 
 and improliable interpretation of that pas.sage ; 
 the words vp.eis 5e Xpurrov being mucii moie na- 
 turally understood as ajjplying to all the Corin- 
 thians, than as describing only a part of them. 
 This opinion, moreover, haidly tallies with the lan- 
 guageof the A]iostleconceining tlie Christ-pai'ty, in 
 1 Cor. i. 13, and 2 Cor. x. 7, where he evirlently 
 speaks of them in terms of censure, and as guiltv 
 of dividing Christ. Another hy[)othtsis is that 
 suggested by Storr yNotiti/s Uistorico' ejyisloll. ad 
 Cor. intcrprctationi servientes. Opusc. Acad. 
 vol. ii. p. 212), antl which has been followed, 
 among others, by Hug (Introd. II. j). 371, Eng. 
 Tr.), Bertholdt {Einl. s. 3320), and Krause 
 (Paidi ad Cor. Epistolce Grave. Pcrpctiia an- 
 not. illi>.str. Proleg. p. 35), viz. that the Christ- 
 party was one which, professing to follow James 
 and the other hiethien of the Lord, as its heads, 
 claimed to itself, in cons<queiice of ih's relation- 
 ship, the title ol tov Xpiarov, by way oC eminence. 
 To tins it has been olijected, that had the party in 
 question designed, by the name they assumed, to 
 express the relationship of their leader to Jesus 
 Christ, they would have employed the words o.' 
 ToC Kvpiov, not 01 TotJ Xoiffrov, the t'oriner being 
 more correctly descriptive of a personal., ami the 
 latttr of an official, relationship. Besides, as 
 Olshausen remarks, 'the jaity of James could 
 not be precisely distinguished from that of Peter; 
 both must have been composed of strenuous Jew- 
 Christians. And, in line, there is a total absence 
 
 of all positive grounds fiir this hyjiothesis 
 
 The mere naming of " the biefhien of the Lord " 
 in 1 Cor. ix. 5, and of James in I Cor. xv. 7, can 
 prove nothing, as tliis is not in connection with 
 any strictures on the Christ-party, or indeed on 
 any })arty, but entirely incidentally ; and the ex- 
 pression yiviiffKfiv Xpurrhv Kara aipKa ( 2 Cor. 
 V. 16) refers to something cpiite dillcrent from th« 
 Ikmily-relations of the iSaviour : it is dcsi^rned to 
 contrast the purely human asjject of his existence 
 with his eternal hciivenly cKsence ' (Biblischs 
 CommetU. bd. iii. abt. 1, s. 4.57 ; Comj). Billioth's 
 C'onimeiilary on the Coriiithians, vol. i. u. 11, 
 Eng. Tr.}. Ill an able treatise which auiieaiad
 
 mn 
 
 CORINTHIANS. 
 
 in 1 he Tubingen ZeitscJtrift fiir TJieohgie for 
 1831, pat iv. p. 61,Piofi'ssor Baiir lias siiL^gested 
 that, properly speaking, there were only (iiw j)ar- 
 ties in the Corinthian Church — the Pauline iind 
 the Petrine ; and tliat, as that of AjjoUos was a 
 mlidivision of the former, that of Ciirist was a 
 sulidivision of the latter. Tiiis snlxlivision, he su))- 
 ji(«es, arose from the opjiosition olffred hy th*^ 
 Petrine jiarty to Paul, which led some of them to 
 call in question the right of the latter to the apos- 
 fleship, and to claim for themselves, as followers of 
 Peter, a closer spiritual relationship to the Saviour, 
 t:;e honour of being the aloue genuine and apos- 
 t-olically-de^igMated disciples of CIn ist. This opi- 
 nion is follov, eil liy Billroth, and has much in 
 its favour; l,iit the remark of Neander, that 
 ' accordintf to it the Clirist-party would be dis- 
 crim\:iuted from tlie Petrine only in name, which 
 is iicrc in keeping with the relation of this ]iarty- 
 fcppellation to the preceding party-name.*,' has 
 ooi'.sideraiile weiglit as an ohjection to it. Nean- 
 der himself, followed by Olshausen, supposes that 
 the Christ-party was composed of persons 'who 
 repudiated the authority of all these teachers, and 
 independently of the apostles, sought to construct 
 for themselves a pure Christianity, out of which 
 ]>robably tl.ey cast everything that too strongly 
 opposed their philosopliical ideas as a mere 
 foreign addition. From the opposition of Hel- 
 lenism and Judaism and from the Helleoo-jihi- 
 losophical tendency at Corinth, such a party 
 
 tiiight easily have arisen To such the 
 
 Apostles would seem to have mixed too much that 
 was Jewish with tiieir system, and not to have 
 presented the doctrines of Christ sufficiently pure. 
 To Christ alone, therefore, would they professedly 
 appeal, and out of the materials furnished them 
 by tradition, they sought, l)y means of their philo- 
 Eophic criticism, to extract wliat should be the 
 |,ute doctrine of Clirist ' (ApostoL Zeifalt. s. 205 ; 
 vol. i. ]). 273 of Jing. Tr.). The reasoning 
 of the Apostle in the 1st, 2nd, 12th, 13th, 14th, 
 and IStii chapters of the 1st Epistle seems 
 clearly to indicate that some sucli notions as 
 these had crept into the Church at Corinth ; 
 and, upon the whole, this hypothesis of Nean- 
 der commends itself to our minds as the one 
 which is best maintained and most proijable. 
 At the same time, we have serious doubts of the 
 soundness of the assumption on which all these 
 liypotheses proceed, viz. that there really were in 
 the Corinthian church sects or parties specifically 
 distinguished from each other by peculiarities of 
 doctrinal sentiment. That erroneous doctrines 
 were entertained by individuals in the church, and 
 tliat a schismatica! sjiirit pervaded if, cannot be 
 ^juesfioned ; iiut that tliese two stood formally con- 
 nected with each other may fairly admit of doubt. 
 Schisms often arise in churches Irom causes which 
 have little or nothing to do with diversities of doc- 
 triniu sentiment among tiie members; and that 
 gucli were the schisms which disturbed the church 
 at Corinth appears to us probable, from the circum- 
 gtance that the existenceof these is condemned by the 
 AjKistle, without reference to any doctrinal eiTors 
 out of wliicli they might arise ; whilst, on the other 
 hand, the doctrinal errors condemned by him are 
 denounced witli(;ut reference to their having led 
 to jarty strifes. From this we are inclined to the 
 Opinion that the schisms arose merely from quar- 
 rels among the Corinthians as to the comjarative 
 
 CORINTTIIANS. 
 
 excellence of their respective teachers — those wSt 
 had learned of Paul boa^l'ng fiiat he excelled alj 
 others, and the converts of Apollos and Peter a»l« 
 vancing a similar claim f^iir them, whilst a fourth 
 party haughtily repudiated all subordin.tte teach- 
 ing, an'j. pretended tliat fliey derived all their 
 religious knowledge from the direct teaching o^ 
 Christ. The language of the Apostle in the first 
 four chapters, where alone he sjieaks directly of 
 these schisms, and wheie he resolves their cri- 
 minality not into their relation to false doctrine, 
 but into their having their source in a disposition 
 to glory in men, must lie regarded as greatly 
 favouring tliis view. Comp. also 2 Cor. v. 16. 
 
 Besides the schisms and the erroneous opiniong 
 which had invaded the Church at Corinth, tlie 
 Apostle had learned that many immoral and dis- 
 orderly practices were tolerated among them, and 
 were in some cases defended l)y them. A con- 
 nection of a grossly incestuous character had been 
 formed by one of the members, and gloried in by 
 his brethren (v. 1, 2); law-suits before heathen 
 judges were instituted by one Cliristian against 
 another (vi. 1) ; licentious indulgence was not sc 
 firmly denounced and so carefully avoided as th* 
 purity of Cliristianity required (vi. 9-20); fhf; 
 jaii)lic meetings of the brethren were brought into 
 disreimte l)y the women ajipearing in them un- 
 veile<l (xi. 3-10), and were distuibed by the co'v 
 fused and disordeily manner in which the persons 
 possessing spiritual gifts ciiose to exercise them 
 (xii.-xiv.); and in fine the dyairai, which were 
 designed to be scenes of love and union, became 
 occasions for greater contention througli the sel- 
 fishness of the wealthier members, who, instead of 
 sharing in a common meal with the jioorer, 
 brouglit each his own repast, and partook of it l)y 
 himself, often to excess, while his needy brother 
 was left to fast (xi. 20-34). Tlie judgment of 
 the Apostle had also been solicited by the Co- 
 rinthians concerning the comparative advantages 
 of the married and the celibate state (vii. 1-40), 
 as well as, apparently, the duty of Christians 
 in relation to the use for food, of meat which 
 had been ofl'ered to idols (viiit 1-13). For 
 the correction of these errors, the remedying of 
 these disorders, and the solution of these doubts, 
 this epistle was written by the Apostle. It con- 
 sists of fi)ur parts. The first (i.-iv) is designed to 
 reclaim the Corinthians from schismatic conten- 
 tions ; the second (v.-vi.) is directed against ilie 
 immoralities of the Corinthians ; the third (vii. - 
 xiv.) contains replies to the (jueries addressed to 
 Paul by the Corinthians, and strictures upon the 
 disorders which prevailed in tlieir worsJiiji; and 
 the fourth (xv.-xvi.) contains an elaborate defence 
 of the Christian doctrine of the resurrection, fol- 
 lowed in the close cf tlie epistle by some general 
 instructions, intimations, and greetings. 
 
 From an expression of the Apostle in ch. v. 9, 
 it has been inferred by many that the present wti 
 not the first epistle addiessed liy Paul to the Co- 
 rinthians, f)ut that it was iireceded by one now 
 lost. For this opinion, however, the words in 
 question af^hnl a very unsati-ifactory basis. They 
 are as follows : — typw\ia v/mv iv rij iiriirroK^, 
 K. T. A. Now these words must be rendered either 
 ' I have written to you in lAis epistle,' or ' I wrote 
 to you in that epistle ;' and our choice between 
 these two renderings will dejiend partly on gram- 
 matioal and partly on bistoiical grounds. As th(
 
 <;ORINTHlANS. 
 
 ftorist typa^a niay mean cither I wrote' or ' I 
 dave written," notliing can lie coucluiled IVoin it 
 in either way. it may be doubted, however, 
 whether, had tlic Apostle iirtended to refer to a 
 former ej)istle, he would liave used the article rij 
 simply, without adding Trporepa; whilst on the 
 other hand there are cases whicli clearly show 
 tliat had the A[X)s11e intended to refer to the pre- 
 •ent epistle, it was in accordance with his practice 
 tu use liie article in the sense of 'this' (coinp. 
 17 tVicTToA'}; Coluss. iv. 1(5, t]^v iiricrT. 1 Thess. 
 V. 27). In support of this conclusion it may be 
 added, 1st. that the Apostle liad really in this epis- 
 tle given the prohibition to which he refers, viz., 
 in the verses inunediately preceding that under 
 notice ; and that his design in the verses which 
 follow is so to explain that pmhibifion as to pre- 
 clude the risV of their supposing that lie meant by 
 it anything else than tiiat in the church they 
 should not mingle with immoral ))e>sons ; 2n(i.tiiat 
 it is not a little strange that tiie Apostle should, 
 only in this cursory and incidental manner, refer 
 to a circumstance so imtwitant in its bearing 
 upon the case of the Corinthians as his having 
 •already addressed them on their sinful practices; 
 and 3rd. that had such an epistle ever existed, it 
 ina,y be supposed that some Idnt of its existence 
 would have been found in the records of the pri- 
 mitive Church, which is not tlie case. On these 
 grounds we strongly incline to the opinion that 
 the present is the first epistle which Paul ad- 
 dressed to the Corinthians (Bloomtield, Ilecensio 
 Synoj'/t. in loc; Biliroth"s Co)7imentary, Eng. 
 Tr., "ol. i. p. 4, note a). 
 
 From 2 Cor. xii. 14. and xiii. 1, compared with 
 2 Cor. ii. 1, and xiii. 2, it aj)pears that before the 
 w;iting of tJiat epistle Paul had ttoice visited Co- 
 rinth, fcnd that one of these visits had been alter 
 the Cliurch there had falhn into an evil state; for 
 Jtherwise his visit could not have been described 
 as one iv Kvirrj, und one duiing which God had 
 iiumbled him before them. Did this second visit 
 to Covinth precede also the writing of the first 
 e()istie? Ou thi^ pjint the Acts give us no help, as 
 tiie writer is totally silent concerning this second 
 visit of Paul to Corinth. But we may safelv infer 
 from 2 Cor. i. 15, 16, 23, that Paul had nJt l)een 
 at Corinth between the writing of the tiist and 
 second epistles, so tliat we must place his second 
 visit befoie tiie writing of the first epistle. When 
 tins second visit took place we tan only conjec- 
 ture; but Billroths suggestion that it was made 
 «o«ie time during the period of Paul's residence 
 •if thre^- years at Ki'hesus (Acts xx. 31), perhaps 
 on the fiist recc|ition of unpleasant news from 
 Coiinth, is extremely piobable. Supposing the 
 Ajiostle to have mauetliis short visit ami to have 
 returned to Epiiesus, this first episile may have 
 been written either in that city or in M.icedoiiia, 
 through which Paul probably joiniieyed 011 his 
 way from Corinth to E|)hesiis. This latter is t'e 
 traditional c-;)inioM (see the addition to cli. xiii. 
 in some MSS.', niid is greatly favouicd liy the 
 way ill whic!) Paul s .eal<s of Epiicsus (I Cor. xv. 
 32) as a place in \vliich he had bt eii laiLer than 
 one in which he tc<u when wiiting this epistle. 
 From the allusion to the Passover in ch. v. 7, 8, 
 most have inteired that the epistle was written at 
 the time «f Easter ; but this does not necessarily 
 follow from the Apostle's allusion. As to the 
 year, g; eal diversity of opinion prevails, but most 
 
 CORINTHIANS. 
 
 4(j:) 
 
 are agreed that it was not earlier Uian 56 noi 
 later than 59. 
 
 The subscrijition above referreil to intimalet 
 tliat this ejiistle was conveyed to Coriniii by 
 Stephanas, Fortuiiatus, Achaicus, and Timothy. 
 As respects the last named there is evidently a 
 mistake, for from ch. xvi. 10, it appears tiiaC 
 Timothys visitii.g Corinth wiis a thing nut cer- 
 tain when this letter was finished, and from 
 2 Cor. viii. 17, IS, it appears that Timothy did 
 not visit Corinth till aftei wards. Conip. also Acts 
 xlx. 22. As respects the others, this tradition is 
 probably coriect. 
 
 Second Episti.e. Not long after tlie trans- 
 mission of the fiist e-;Mstle, the Apostle lelt Ephesus 
 in consequence of the uproar excited against him 
 by Demetrius the silversmith, and betook himself 
 toTiiias (Acts xix. 23, .scj.). Here he expected to 
 meet Titus with intelligence from Corinth of the 
 state of things in that cliurch. According to the 
 common opinion Titus had been sent by Paul to 
 Corinth, partly to collect money in aid of the 
 distressed Christians in Palestine, partly to ob- 
 serve the ellect of the Ajiostle's first epistle on the 
 Corinthians; but Billroth, Ruckert, and otliers, 
 rather suppose him to have been sent before the 
 writing of the first epistle solely for the former of 
 these purposes, and that he remained in Cormtb 
 till after the reception by the church there of that 
 epistle, while Bleek [studien mid Kritikeii, 
 Jahrg. 1*30, s. 025 ; comj). Neander's Hist, of 
 the Apostolic Age, vol. i. p. 312, Eng. Tr.) sug- 
 gests that Titus may have been despatched with 
 an epistle now lost, and written between the first 
 and second of those' still extant. This hypo- 
 thesis of a ' lost epistle" seems to be the convenient 
 resource of the German critics for the removal of 
 all dilliculties. but in the absence of any direct 
 evidence in its support, it cannot, in this case, be 
 admitted to be worthy of consideration. Billroth'a 
 hypothesis rests also upon a very unstable basis, 
 as Neander shows, by whom the common o^iinion 
 is espoused and defended (vol. i. ]). 312). In this 
 expectation of ineeting Titus at Troas, Paul was 
 disappointed. He accordingly went into Mace- 
 donia, where, at length, his desire was gratilieil, 
 and the wisiied-for iidbrmation obtained (2 Cor. 
 ii. 13 ; vii. 15, sip). 
 
 The intelligence brought by Titus conceming 
 the church at Corinth was on the whole favourable. 
 The censures of the (iirmer epistle had produced 
 in their minds a .godly sorrow, had awakened in 
 tlieni a regard to the pro[)er discipline of tlte 
 church, and had led to the exclusion from their 
 f';llowship of the incestuous [jerson. This had so 
 wroui;ht on the mind of tlie latter that he hail 
 repented of his evil courses, and sliowe I such 
 cintrition that the Apostle now pities -sni. and 
 exhorts the church to restore him to their com- 
 munion (2 Cor. ii. 6-1 1 ; vii. 8, s*^.). A cordial 
 response had also been given to the appeal that 
 had bteii made on behalf of the saints in Pale*, 
 tine (ix. 2). But with all the^e ])lea.sing sym!>- 
 toms there were some of a painful kind. The 
 anti-Pauline infiuence in the church had in- 
 creased, or at least had become more active; and 
 those wli(i were actuated by it had been seeking 
 by all means to overturn the authority of tb^ 
 Apostle, and discredit Vu claiius as an aniba*> 
 sador of Cliiist. 
 
 This intelligence led lire A|JOstle to compoM
 
 170 
 
 COKN 
 
 his second ;pisl1e, in which thelanfpia^e of i.oni- 
 meniiation anil love is iniii;;lf(l will) that of cen • 
 »uie. ami 'ven oi' fhreateniiif!;. Tills episrle may 
 f)e divided into tiiree sections. In tlie tirsf (i.-iii.) 
 the Apostl; chielly dwells on the ctVects ])rodnced 
 by his tiisl epistle and the matters tlievewilh con- 
 nected. In the iiecond (iv.-ix.) he discourses, on 
 the snhstanceand ellects of the rclij,'ion which he 
 pr« claimed, and turns from this to an appeal on 
 {(fjhalf of tlie claims of the ))0()r saints on their 
 liberality. And in the third (x.-xiii.) he vindi- 
 cates liis own dii^nity and authority as an apostle 
 against the parties by whom these were opposed. 
 The divided state of feeling in the Aijostle's 
 rnind will account sufficiently for tiie difl'erence 
 of tone perceptible between the earlier and later 
 parts of this epistle, without our having recourse 
 to the arbitrary and capricious hy])othe3is of 
 Semler (Dissert, de duplice appendice Ep. ad 
 Rom. Hal. 1767) and Weber {Prog, de mimero 
 epp. ad Coi: rrctixs constituendo, Vitem. 1798) 
 whom Paulus follows, that this epistle has been 
 extensively inferpolateil. 
 
 Besides the commentaries of Pott, Krause, Hey- 
 denreicli, Bdlroth, RiJckert, and Olshausen, to 
 which reference has already been made in this 
 article, that of Emmerliiig on the Second Epistle 
 \Ep. Pauli ad Cor. Posterior Greece. Perpet. 
 Comment, ilbtst. Li))s. 1&23); that of Bames 
 on the First Epistle (New York, 1838, 12nio. ; 
 Lond. 1S41, 8vo.); and that of Flatt on both 
 Epistles ( Vorlesunr/eii ub. die Br. an d. Corinther. 
 Tub. 1827) deserve to be noticed.— W. L. A. 
 
 CORMORANT. [Sai.ach] 
 
 CORN. The word IJ'I dagan, which is ren- 
 dered ' grain,' 'com,' and sometimes 'wheat in 
 the Autiiorized Version, is the most general of the 
 Hebrew terms representing ' corn,' and is more 
 comprehensive than any word in our language, 
 seeing that it probably includes not only all the 
 proper corn-grains, but also various kinds of pulse 
 and seeds of plants, which we never comprehend 
 under the name of ' coin' or e\'en of ' grain.' JUT 
 may, tlierefore, be taken to reviesent all the com- 
 modities which we describe by the difl'erent words 
 corn, grain,, .seeds, pease, beans. Among other 
 places in whicli this word occurs, see Gen. xxvii. 
 28-'57; Num. xviii. 27 ; Deut. xxviii. ^\ ; Lam. 
 ii. 12. &c. There is another word, ^11 bar, which 
 denotes any kind of cleansed coin, tliat is, 
 corn purified fiom the chalfand fit for use ((ien. 
 xli. 35-49; Pro*, xi. 20; Jer. iv. 11 ; Joel ii. 
 24). The same word is more rarely used to de- 
 icribe corn in a growing state (Ps Ixv. liJ), in 
 which sense it may be compared with the Arabic 
 
 iJ, and the i^atin far. The word "12K* shebeo; 
 
 whic'n is sometimes rendered corn, denotes in a 
 general sense ' ])rovisions" or ' victuals,' and by 
 consequeuce 'corn,' as the princi])al article in all 
 provision^ (Gen. xlii. 1, 2, 20; Exod. viii. .'i ; 
 Neh. X. 32, &c.). 
 
 The dilVerent products coming under the de- 
 n )iiriinatioii of corn, are noticed under the im al 
 iicails, cVS Bari.ry, Wheat, ike. ; their cultme, 
 under Agiucui.ture ; their preparation, uuder 
 BiiEAD, Foou, iVIu,]., &c. 
 
 CORNELIUS. The centurion of this name, 
 whose liistiiry occurs in Acts x., most pr()l)al)iy be- 
 .xjnged ti; the Cornclii, a noble and distiii^:uished 
 
 CORNELIUS. 
 
 family at Rome. He is reckoned by .)oliiUi th« 
 Apostate as one of tie few persons of disli/iction 
 who err.bracrd Christianity. His statioji in s.)- 
 ciety will ajipar * ui)on considering that the 
 Roman soldiers were divided into legions, each 
 legion into ten cohorts, each cohort into three 
 bands, and each band into two centvnies or hun- 
 dreds ; and that Cornelius was a commander of 
 one of these centuries (e/caToj/Ta/>X'';s)) belong- 
 ing to the Italic band; .so called from its con- 
 sisting chielly of Italian soldiers, formed out of 
 one of the six cohorts granted to the procurators 
 of Judaea, five of which cohorts were stationed at 
 Caesarea, the usual residence of the procura- 
 tors (Jahn, Biblische Archao/ogie, ii. Th., s. 215, 
 Wien, 1821). The religious position of Corne- 
 lius, before liis interview with Pe'er, has been tha 
 subject of much debate. On tie one side it is 
 contended, tliat he was what is called a proselyte 
 of the gate, or a Gentile, who, having renounced 
 idolatry and worshipping the true God, submitted 
 to the seven (supiwsed) piecepts of Noah, fre- 
 queuteil the synagogue, and ofl'eri d sacrifices by 
 the hands of the jiriests; but, not 1 aving received 
 circumcision, wa; not reckoned an ong the Jews. 
 In sujjjxirt of this ojiinion it is ], leaded that Cor- 
 nelius is styled <pn0ovjxevo$ tIv &ihv (a man 
 fearing God), ver. 2, the usual appellation, it is 
 alleged, for a proselyte of the gate, as in chap, 
 xiii. 16, 20, and elsewhere ; that he ])rayed at tlie 
 usual Jewish hours of prayer (x. 30), that he 
 read the Ohl Testament, l)ecause Peter refers him 
 to the prophetji (x. 43), and that he gave much 
 alms to tl>e Jewish jjeople (x. % 22). On tl>e 
 other side it is answered that the plu'ases (po^ov- 
 jxivoi rhv &€/iv, and the similar phrases ivKafiiiS, 
 and €vff€Pi7s, are irsed resi^ecting any persons im- 
 bued with reverence towards God (x. 35 ; Luke i. 
 50; ii.25: Col. iii. 22; Rev. xi. 18); that lie is 
 styled by Peter d.^A<{<^yAos (a man of another "ace 
 or nation), with whom it was unlawful for a Jew 
 to associate, whereas the law allowad to foreigners 
 a perjx'tual residence among the Jews, provided 
 they would renounce idolatiy and abstain from 
 blood (Lev. xvii. 10, 11, 13), and even com- 
 manded the Jews to love them (Li^v. xix. 33, 34) ; 
 that they mingled with the Jews in the synagogue 
 (Acts xiv. 1), and in jnivate life (Luke vii. 3); 
 tliat, had Cornelius been a proselyte of the gate, 
 his conversion to Christianity would not have 
 occasioned so mucli surprise to the Je.vi.sh Chri.s- 
 tians (Acts x. 45), nor would ' they tliat were of lite 
 circumcision' have contended with Peter so much 
 on his account (xi. 2); that he is expressly classed 
 among the Gentiles by .lames (xv. 14), and by 
 Peter himself, when claiming the honour of having 
 first preached to the Gentiles (xv. 7); that the 
 remaik of the opixis'ng ))arty at Jerusalem, when 
 convinced, ' then harh God als.) to the Gentiles 
 granted repentance unto life,' would have l)een 
 inapplicable upon the very jirinciples oi those 
 who asseit that Cornelius was a proselyte, since 
 they argue from the ti-aditions of modern Jews, 
 tlie most eminent of whom, IVIaim niides, admits 
 a sincere ])roselyfe to be in a stale of salvaft07i. 
 The other arguments, deiived from the observance 
 of the Jewish hours of prayer by Cornelius, and 
 his acoualntance with t!:e Old Testament, are all 
 resolvable into a view of his religious position, 
 which will shortly be stated. The strongest ob- 
 jection agaiiist the supjx)sitlon that Cornelius wal
 
 COKNELIUS. 
 
 COHNULltJS. 
 
 47I 
 
 r proselyte of the gate arise from the very reason- 
 able doiil)t whftlier any sucli distinction existed 
 in the time of the apostles. JVIaimonides, indeed, 
 speaks of it, tiut the hifeiicss of the jx'riod at which 
 he flourished, *.o. 1161), an<l tlie *hse.nc« of any 
 scriptural authority, j^ecjuire us to consider his 
 assertloeis as leferrluig to a time Riuch later tliaw 
 that of tlie apostles. ' According to my idea,' 
 says Kstwp Tomllne, ' proselytes were those, and 
 those euly, wti» took upon tljcniselves tlie ohli^a- 
 tiou »f the whole Mosaic law, i«nt i-etained that 
 name tin they were admitted into the constellation 
 of the Lord, as adopt^ed childion. Grentiles were 
 allowed te worship and otfcr sacrifices to tlie 
 Crod of israel in the outer comt of the temple; 
 and some of them, jHa'suatted of tlie sole and uni- 
 versal sovei'eignty of the Lord Jehovah, migiit 
 renouiKje ido'latry w ItdiOTiit enibracwig the Mosaic 
 law ; but such jiersous apjjear to me never t« he 
 called i)roselytes in Scilptuie, w In any ancient 
 Christian wiitev' (Elenteiits nfChiistian Theology, 
 vol. i. pj). 26(5, '^1). Dr. Lardner has retnaiked 
 that the nstiou of two sorts of poselytes is not to 
 ■be found in awy Cliristlan writw before ihe J'ou>'~ 
 teenth oeatary ( H'tsv^s, voL vl. pi). 52"2-533, Svo. 
 and vol. xi. pp. 31-3-321. See also Jennings's 
 Jeioisk Antiqzdtie^, liook i. chap, llu) The argu- 
 ments on ^tie cdiei- side are ahly stat-sd in Towrts- 
 end's 'Chronoiogical Ammgements of the Neio 
 Testament, vol. il. p. 115^ &c. London. On the 
 wiiole, the positioji of CeiTiellus, in i«gard to i>e- 
 ligioo, appears t« us to have been in tlw last class 
 of persons described by Bisliop Tomli{»e, consist- 
 ing of Gentiles who had so ilir benefited by their 
 ■contact wltfa tl«e Jewreh jjeople as, to have become 
 -convinced tliat tlielrs was the tiife religion, who 
 consequently wMship|Ted tlte true God, were ac- 
 quainted with tbe Scriptures of the Old Testa- 
 ment, Kitfstproibaiily in the Gi-cek tran^.atlon, and 
 observeil several Jewish cu^oms, as, for instance, 
 their horns of prayei', oranythliig else that did not 
 involve an act of special jn-rfesslon. Tliis class 
 of persons seeiws referred to lia Acts xiii. 16, wheie 
 they ai* plainly distinguished from the Jews, 
 though certainly nilwgled with tiietai. To tlte 
 same class is to l)e r-eferred Candaoe's treasui^er 
 (Acts viii. 27, &c.); and in ■ea^rller times, the 
 midwives of Egy]]t (Exod. i. 17), Rahab (Josh. 
 vi. 25), Rutli, Araunaii the Jebuslte (2 Sam. xxlv. 
 18, &c.), the persons mentioned I Kings viii. 41, 
 42, 43, Naaman (2 Kings v. 16, 17). See also 
 Josephus, ArUiq. xlv. 7, § 2, and his account 
 of Alexander the Great going into the temple, 
 and otl'ering sacrifice to God, according to the 
 direction of the High Priest, (ibid. xi. 8, §&); 
 of Antiochus the Ghreat (ibid. xil. 3, § 3, 4), and 
 of Ptolemy Philadelplins, (ibid. xii. 2, § I, &-c. ). 
 Under the influence of these facts and aigntnents, 
 we regard Cojnelius as liaviug been selected of 
 God to become tli^ Jintfruits of Vie Getiiil-es. 
 His character apjiears sulteil, as mucli as jwssible, 
 to abate tlie prejudioes of the Jewish converts 
 ^.gainst what appealed to them so gi«at an in- 
 oovation. It is well observed by Tlieophylact, 
 that Cornelius, tliough neither a Jew nor a Cliris- 
 tian, lived the life of a good Christian. lie was 
 eiir«y8ijy, influenced l)y sjiontaneous reverence to 
 God. He piactic.illy obeyed the restraints o( 
 religion, i\ r he feared God, and tills latter pait of 
 Ihe description is extended to all his family or 
 Lousehold (ver. 2). He was liberal In alms to the 
 
 Jewish px'o'ple, w'hich showed Ids resjiecl fm- them 
 and he ' prayed to God aWays,' at all tiie liouri 
 of ])rayer observed by tire Jexisli «ialioii. Siicli 
 piety, obedience, fallli, and cliaiity, i«<'jiare<l hii« 
 for sujKTior attainnients and bi'nedls, and secniied 
 to hlnj tiieir bestowtn« it (Ps, x.vv, 9; I. 23 • 
 Matt. xlii. 12; Luke viii, 15; Jolin vli. M). 
 
 Tlie remarkable clrcximstaiires tinder wliich 
 tl>?9e beiielils wci'e conferretl upon him arc to(» 
 plainly and forctlily i-ehiteil in Acts K. to lequire 
 Tnu>«}i c-*mi«!eiit. While it! jaayer, at the ninth 
 hcwr <yi the day, Ife bel>eld, in waking vision, an 
 ajig<'l of 'God, wtio <!tet;iarcd that ' his ]irayers and 
 alms had ceene wp fin- a memorial belbie God,' 
 and dliected him to scfpid to Jop[ia fi«- Peter, who 
 was then abiding ' at tlte liouse of or*".' Siirawm, a 
 tanner.' Cwnellu* sent acoorilingly 4 aud when 
 his iscessengier had neaily Tcachcd llwit place, 
 Peter was pre|)ared by the symbolical rcvelatiinis 
 of a noiciday ec^acy, or trance, to nndwstand that 
 nothing whichGod liad cleansed was to l)e regarded 
 as common or uncleMi. 
 
 It is well iieinavked by Palcy, that tlie circum- 
 stances of tlie two visions aiv such as to take them 
 ■eutli<ely out of the case of momentary miracles, 
 or of such as niaj- be accounted for i)y a false p^r- 
 oeptiofu 'Tlie vision might be a iliK'atn ; the 
 Twessage coiild not. Eitliea- cowimunlcatlon taken 
 separately inlgfet be a delusion; tlie concurwiice 
 of the two was imjxsssibie to hapjien without a 
 supernatural cawse.' (Eviric/H-es, j^rop. i. chajj. "2). 
 Tl>e inquiries of the messengers from Cornelius 
 suggested to Pet»er the applic^atlon «<" iiis vssion, 
 and lie readily accompanied tin in to Jo])])a, at- 
 tended by six Jewish biethrtti, and hesitated not 
 to etiter the liouse of one whom he, as a Jew, 
 v/ould regard as unclean. Tlie Ajmstle waived 
 the too fervent reverence oi' Coriieliiis, which, 
 although usual in tl>e East, was Tetiilwixl by Ro- 
 mans only to their gods ; and niuK-ial explana- 
 tions then took ]ilaoe between him imd the centu- 
 rion. After this tlie Apostle jvi>c«eded to addi'ess 
 Cornelius and hisassembled friends, andexp^essed 
 his conviction tliat the Gentiles weie no longw to 
 be cal'ed unclean, and statx^l tlie k>adingevideiice 
 and chief doctrines of the Gosjx'l. While he was 
 discoursing, tlie miraculous gifts of tlie Holj 
 Spirit, contrary to the order hltheito observed of 
 being preceded by baptism and imposition of 
 hands, fell on his Gentile auditors. Of this fact 
 Peter and his companions were convinced, for thry 
 heard them speak with tongues, foielgn iuid befowr 
 unknown to them, ar.d which Peter and his com- 
 panions knew to be such by tlie al<l of tiielr own 
 miraculous gifts, and, under divine impulse, 
 glorify God as the authoj- of the GosikI. TIte 
 Jewish brethren who accomi)anied Peter weie 
 astonlslied upon jiercelvitig, liy these Indubitable 
 indications, tliat tlie Holy Spirit was poured out 
 upon the Gentiles, as ujkmi ll«eiii>elves at tlie 
 beginning (x. 45). Peter, already prepared by 
 his vision for the event, anil rememlHM iiig (bat 
 baptism was by the command of Jesus, a^ssuciatea 
 with tliese miraculous endowments, salil, ' Can ;uiy 
 man foiidd water that tliese shoukl lie baptized, who 
 liave received tlie Holy Ghost as well as we ?' and 
 yet, agi-eeably to tlie apostolic rule of rouunlttinj; 
 the admlnlstiatioit of b'a])tlsm to others, and, con- 
 sidering (liat the consent of the Jewish brethren 
 wotild bs more exjilicit if they jKTlbrnied the 
 duty, he ordered thc/n to baptize Cornelius and
 
 4T2 
 
 COKNKR.STONE. 
 
 corroN. 
 
 his friends, bis honseliolil. wliose acceptance as 
 meuibeis of flie Ciiristian cliuicli hiU been so 
 abuti<liirifly testiKt'd. — J. 11. F. 
 
 C;t)RXKR-STt)NE. The synroi;i:cul title of 
 ' chief coiner stone' (\idos rj<po'yc,:yia,7oi) is aj)- 
 plied toClnist in Eph. ii. "iO, and 1 Pet. ii. 8, Ki, 
 whicii last I'.assaK*? 'S''*q""f^'i^>n from Isa. xxviii. 
 16, wlieve tiie Septuagint lias the same words for 
 die Heluevv HjD pN- There seems no valid rea- 
 ajiifoi dlsting'uiahini^ this from the stone called 'the 
 iiead of the corner' {Ke<pa\r] ywvlas. Matt. xxi. 42 ; 
 wliicii is the Sept. translation of n3D S'iit in Ps. 
 ixviii. 2i), althoujjli some contend tliat the latter 
 is file top-stone or coping. Tlie \iOos aKpoyuvt- 
 fuos or ' corner-stone ' was a large and massive 
 stone so formed as when ])laced at a corner, to 
 bind together two outer walls of anedilice. Tliis 
 ]>ro]jeily makes no part of tlie J'ounddtion, fiom 
 which it is distinguislied in Jer. Ii. 5G ; though, 
 as tlie etlifice vests thereon, it may be so called. 
 Sometiinei it denotes those massive slabs which, 
 being placed towards the bottom of any wall, 
 serve to bind the work togellier, as in Isa. xxviii. 
 16. Of tiicse tiiere were often two layers, without 
 cement or morlar (Blooinheld, Recens. Sijnop. on 
 Eph. ii. 20). This explanation will sufficiently 
 indicate the sense in which the title of ' chief 
 comer-stone ' is applied to Christ. 
 
 COITON. On account of the uncertainty 
 attending the sniiject, and tlie dilVerence of opi- 
 nion among writiers who have discvissed it, 
 reference was made from Byssus to tliis aiticle, 
 in order that we might proceed i'roin a know- 
 ledge of the article itself to its history in early 
 ages, and tlius endeavour to iliscover the names liy 
 whicli it was iirst known. Cotton is well known 
 to lie a wool-like substance which einelojjes the 
 seeds, and is contained witliin the roundish-pointed 
 capiule or fiuit of" the cotton-shinb. f- very one 
 also knows that cotton has, from the earliest ages, 
 been characteristic of India. Indeed, it lias beeu 
 well lemarkedjthat as from early times sheeij's wool 
 has beeu principally employed for clothing in Pa- 
 lestine and Syria, in Asia .Minor, (ireece. Italy, and 
 Spain, uemijinthenoi them countries of Em ope, and 
 tlax in Egypt, so cotton has always been employed 
 for the same purpose in India, and silk in China. 
 In the present ilay, Cotton, by the aidof machinery, 
 h.as been manufactuitd in this countiy on so ex- 
 tensive a scale, and sold at so cheap a rate, as to 
 iiave driven tlie manufacture of India almost 
 entirely out oi the market. But still, until a very 
 recent period, the calicoes and chintzes of India 
 formed very extensive articles of commeice from 
 that country to Europe. For the investig.ition of 
 riie early history of cotton, we are chiefly indebted 
 to the earliest notices of this commerce; before 
 adducing these, however, v?e may brielly notice 
 the particular plants and countries from which 
 cotton is obtained. India possesses two very dis- 
 tin?;t species: 1. K. Gossipiicm herbaceum of bo- 
 tanists, of which there aie several varieties, some 
 of which have spr ad north, and also into the soudi 
 »f Europe, and into Ai'rica. 2. Gossipium arbo- 
 reuin,o\ cotton-tree, which islittlecultivafed on ac- 
 count of its small );roduce, but which yields a line 
 kind of cot on. Tiiis must not be confounded, as 
 it often is, with the silk-cotton tree, or Bombyz 
 heptaplnjUum, which does n)t yield a cotton lit 
 for spinning. Cotton is now chletly cultivated in 
 Central India, from whence it is carried to and 
 
 exjwiitfil from Broach. It is also largely cultivated 
 in the district.^ of the Bonibaj Piesidency, as alM 
 in that of Madias, but less in Bengal, except ion 
 home manufacfuie, which of course retjuires a 
 large sujiply, where so large a jiopulation are all 
 clothetl in cotton. The supplies of cotton which 
 we derive from America are olitainetl from two 
 entirely di.stinct species — Gossipium liarbtidenae, 
 of which different varieties yield the Sea Island, 
 U[)lunil, Georgian, and the New Orlean.^ cottons; 
 while G. Peruviutnini yields the Brazil, Periiam- 
 buco, and otlier South American cottons. Tiiese 
 sjjecies are original natives of America. 
 
 In the tirst place we must notice the names by 
 which cotton is Icnown in the East. — ' The Euro- 
 pean names have evidently been derived from 
 
 ,,f9S qiUii, kutn, or kootn, which is the most 
 
 common Arabic name, though others are assigned 
 it in that copious language. Tlie other Asiatic 
 names do not a[)pear to have any connection with 
 this, or with one another; as Peisian poombet, and 
 Ilindee, the plant (as well as cotton with its see-l j, 
 kupas, the cotton ruse; Bengalee, kdpase, tula, 
 banga ; Sanscrit, karpasec. From tiie last, ttws 
 Hindee and Bengalee have, no doubt, had their 
 origin; and the resemblance between the.se and 
 the term Gossipium, which has been considered 
 of Egyptian origin, from being written with so 
 many of the same consonants, is remarkable' 
 (Royle, Himal. Botany, p. 86). To tliese may l>e 
 added that the Tamul name of cotton is purtie, 
 and that at Bombay it is known as kapoos. We 
 may now proceed to the eailiest distinct notice 
 of tlie export of cotton goods from India. 
 
 236. [Gossipium Ut-rbaceuni.} 
 
 Arrian, who is supposed to have been an Egyp 
 tian Greek, who lived in the lirst or second cen 
 tury of the Chiistian era, arid who was Iwth a mer- 
 chant and a navigator, gives, in his Peripius of the 
 Erythi-aean Sea, an account of the articles ot corn- 
 xncrce to be met with at the difl'erent ports; taA
 
 COTTON. 
 
 It is to Lie K maikcd, that on reucliiii,^ Ine innts of 
 Iik1:;i and Bailiaiike, cotton clollis of vaiiuiis 
 kinds (oOiyiuv) an- nicnlioneil as articles of ex|K)it. 
 Sjnistrene, ur ('utcli, is desciibed as jiroducing 
 cotton fur ordinary manufacture, l-'ioni O/cne, 
 the modem Ou^em, l,ivS6i>is 'IvStKai, line mus- 
 lins ; :S,ti-S6yfs .Ao\6x"'ai, muslins of the co- 
 lour of melons ; 'iKafbi/ x^^'"'^'''' oQiviov, a laifie 
 'juantity of oiilinaiy cottons (^Vincent, ii. 
 p. 407 ; al Baiy .^'a/.a, L e. Baioch) ; oQiwiov irav 
 Totov, cottons ol' all soits. Both in the Peii- 
 (ilus and in the Digest of the lionum Law the 
 word KapTraous, or Karpasus, occurs, and is trans- 
 lated 'line muslins' hy Dr. Vincent; and there 
 can be no doubt that the cloths were niaimfactureil 
 of cotton then, as ihey are i.ow, in India. Pliny 
 mentions cotton in several passages ; in one of 
 which lie says, that the inhabitants of Tylos called 
 I) eir coX^on-Unci yossympiiii ; in another he gives 
 [he Indian name, • ibi primum carbasis repcrtis ;' 
 and in a third he represents cotton to be the 
 native growth ol' Egypt, and says that it is called 
 gossipion. Mr. Yates, in his 'J'extrinuin Antiquu- 
 >M»i, adduces these passages, but doubts of their 
 all being genuine. There is no doubt, however, 
 that cotton was known by its Indian name long 
 previously, as Mr. Yates himself traces it to Sta- 
 tius, and infers ' that the Greeks made use of 
 muslins or calicoes, or at least of cotton cloths of 
 some kind, which were brought i'rom Iniliaas early 
 as 200 years B.C.' {I.e. p. 311). Subsequent to the 
 expedition of Alexander, the Greeks first became 
 well iicquainted with the cotton plant. Near- 
 chus, the admiial of his fleet, reported that there 
 were in India trees bearing, as it were, flocks or 
 bunches of wool ; that the natives made linen 
 garments of it, &c. Quiiitus Curtius, speaking of 
 liie Indian.', says, ' Corjwra usijue pedes carbuso 
 i'elant, soleis jiedes, capita linteis vinciunt.' 
 riieophrastus, the disciple of Aristotle, says.— 
 ' The trees frcnu which the Indians make cloths 
 have a leaf like that of the black mulberry ; but 
 the whole ])lant resembles the dog-rose. They 
 set them in rows so as to look like vines at a dis- 
 tance." In atiothcr part of the same book he thus 
 v. rites of the island of Tylos — 'The wool-bearing 
 flees, which grow abundantly in this island, had 
 a leaf like that of the vine, but smaller; they 
 bore no frui', but the cap'^ule, containing the wool, 
 was. when closed, about the size of a quince ; when 
 rl|e. It exjiaiided so as to emit the wool, which 
 Was vvoieii into cloths, either cheap or of great 
 ^alue^' (iii. 106;. 
 
 Ileroilotus, however, gives the earliest notice of 
 the cotton of India, as he stales that the wild tiees 
 ill ibat country bear lleeces as their i'ruit, surpass- 
 ing those of sheep iii beauty and excellence ; and 
 iial the Indians use cloth made from those trees. 
 .So the tlK)ia.\, or cuirass, sent by Amasis, king of 
 Kgypt, to Sparta, • wiis adorned with gold and 
 rich fleeces fiom trees.' This probably refers to 
 the practice of the Indians wearing coats, some- 
 thing of the foiin of frock-coats, which are padded 
 with cotton, so as often to be sword-proof 
 Ctesias, who resided so long at the Persian court, 
 and was contenijjorary with Herodotus, was also 
 acquainted with Indian wool of trees, as he men- 
 tions their (^uAii'a i/xario. That this was meant 
 to refer to cotton ' may be inferred from the testi- 
 tnuny of Vairo, as we lind it in Servius (^Co)inii. 
 in Virg. Jb,n. i. G49) ; ' Ctesias ait in India 
 
 COTTON. 
 
 47a 
 
 es!4€ arbores qua- lanam feianl * (Yates, /. c. p. .I.'W). 
 As Ilerodiitus and Ctesias were con(eni|Kirario*, 
 years u.c. 401), they are not far renuned fmm tba 
 time when the cailie.st extra-Indian iiutiee ol the 
 name of cotton occuis, u.c. . "ill) ; and tii.,t ig in 
 the Book of Esther, i. (5, where the word corre- 
 siionding to 'green" in tlie Authorized Version is 
 DsilD karpas, and which no donl)t me.ms cotton 
 I KaupasJ. (See Baines's History of Cotton Mu^ 
 imjHcturc ;• Yates's Te.ctriinun Anti'pioTuin, l>. 
 '6o^-i; Royle, lUustr. of lliinal. j!ot., p. R4.) 
 
 Having thus traced cotton uj.waids from tlie 
 time of the Periplus of Ariian to that of Hero- 
 dotus and Ctesias, theie is no dilMculty in con- 
 ceiving that its Indian name (kaijias) n-.av 
 have reached the Persian conit of Susa in tlie 
 time of Aiuusuerus, whose dominions e\tende<l to 
 India, and between which country and Persia there 
 was constaiit communication at a much earlier 
 jieriod. Heeien has cleaily shown the course of 
 the Indian trade, both by caiavans from Northern 
 India, and by boats up the Eu])hiate.s, whence 
 the commodities of Inula ciossed over to Syria 
 by Tadmor, or Palmyia (2 Cliron. viii. 4). In 
 like manner there was early communication by 
 the Red Sea between Egypt and the countries of the 
 South. Among these Inulia must be included, from 
 the various jiroducts wliich reached the West, and 
 which are described or cleaily indicated by Greek 
 authors, and in the earliest jjarts of the Bibh, as the 
 piesentwriter has endeavoured to pioveizi his/i'ssay 
 0)1 the Antiquity of Hindoo ilcdiciiie. In the time 
 of the Periplus of Arrian, it is very evident that 
 the communication between India and Egypt waa 
 frequent and extensive, and that cotton cloths at 
 that time formed an aiticle of export from the 
 latter to the former. That they did so at still 
 earlier periods we cannot but believe probable • 
 for the muslins of India, though stigmatized by 
 one as only 'the shadow of a commodity,' yet 
 having early earned lor themselves the poetical 
 description of ' webs of woven air,' could not have 
 escaped the scrutiny of those who sought in the 
 countries of the South ibr agile wood -uui almug 
 Uees, and who brought from India ciiiiia;:;on and 
 cassia, spikenard and sweet cane, all well-known 
 products of that far-famed country. 
 
 Though it is jirobable that cott(<n v/as imported 
 into Egypt and known to the Hebrews, j'; is ex- 
 tremely dillicult to jirove the fact. Thus Mr. 
 Yates, the most recent writer on the subject, is ol 
 opinion, with Celsius and others, that bad,\aiz 
 shcs/K and byssos, all mean linen ; while Eoister* 
 in his work L)e Bysso Antiquorum, jiroved to the 
 satisfaction of many that shesh and bymius both in- 
 dicate cotton. In this discrepancy it is dillicult 
 to come to a satisfactory conclusion. Prom the 
 time that the mummies of Egypt w ere found to 
 be enveloped in pieces and lolis of cloth, dilVereot 
 authors have adduced these as evidence that tlie 
 ligy])tians were acquainted with cotton. Thus 
 Ilouelle ill 1750, and Dr. Forster, with Dr. S<>- 
 lander, were of opinion that the cloth was cotton 
 So also Blumenbach and others. Previous to the 
 time of Rouelle, and by some subsequently, the 
 cloth wiis thought to be linen. Tiiis que.-tion waa 
 settled by J. Thomson, Esq. of Ciiiheioe, who 
 obtained a gi eat vaiiety of specimens of mummy- 
 cloth, and employed Mr. Bauer to examine them 
 \viih his excellent microscopes, aided by his un- 
 rivalled skill in using them. The result was to
 
 m 
 
 COTTON. 
 
 prove that all the specimens were of linen, and 
 aot of cotton; and there can be no doubt 
 about the correctness of liie lext as tlie ultimate 
 tibre of covton is a transparent flattetied tube, 
 without joints, ar.d twisted like a corkscrew; 
 wliilst the tibi'es of linen and of the various 
 mummy-cloths were transparent cylinders jointed 
 like a cane, and neltiier (lattened nor spirally 
 t.vistcd. Henr^, ds Mr. Thomson concludes his 
 piper, ' Hen)ilot!;s states that the Egyptians 
 wrapped tlieir dexd in cloth of the hyssus. It 
 has been shown tliat, without exception, every 
 specimen of irnmmy-cloth yet examined has 
 proved to be li:ien. We owe, tlierelore, the satis- 
 factory e5<^ab!isliment of the fact, that the hyssus 
 of the ancic-uTs wa^Jlax, to the microscope of Mr. 
 Bauer.' This niij,'iit be supposed to have settled 
 tlis question for t-ver ; but Roselini has since 
 ' found tlie seeds of the cotton-])lant in a vessel' 
 in the tombs of Egypt, and Dr. Bowring has 
 ascertained that ' the mummy-cloth of a child 
 was formed of cotton, and not of linen, as is the 
 case with adult mummies." The question, there- 
 fore, remains still unsettled. We knew before 
 that the cultivation of flax and the use of linen 
 among tise Egyptians were very general ; and the 
 doubt was whether they were acquainted with 
 cotton or not. Cotton is found ajiparently wild 
 in Upper Egypt ; it is cultivated on the west 
 coast of Africa, but it has not yet been settled 
 whether these are indigenous or introduced plants. 
 If these should be proved to be African plants, 
 the production of the above seeds would l)e easily 
 accounted for ; and cotton might have been cul- 
 tivated in the remote parts of Egypt without its 
 being recorded by the earliest writers. Tliat it was 
 not employed as mummy-cloths for adults might 
 have arisen from ])rejudice or some religious 
 scruple; for we are told that persons were not 
 allowed to be buried in the woollen cloths which 
 they wore outside of their linen garmeot.s. 
 
 The diiliculty of ascertaining whether cotton 
 was known to tlie Egyjjtians having been siiown 
 t.) be suthciently gre.it, even when we have such a 
 substance as mummy-cloth to deal with, it. is 
 hardly necessary to add that it is still more difii- 
 cult to say whether it is mentioned in the Scri])- 
 tures elsewhere than in the Book of Esther, because 
 we have only the Hebrew names to assist us in 
 our iuquiiies; because the same names ha\ e 
 been applied liy the ancients, and by writers in 
 later times, sometimes to cotton and sometimes to 
 linen ; and becaues weare unable to ascertain whe- 
 ther the earher authors weie more precise than their 
 su :cessors. Thus, fine linen was called oQovt). 
 Tois is considered by Celsius and Foisterto be an 
 Egyptian word, ami to correspond to ptiN athon 
 or ethon ; which, when ' put into Greek letters 
 and with (ireek terminations, beconies oQovq and 
 odifiov' (Yates, p. 265 J. But we have seen that 
 odoyiov was, in the ti ne of the Periplus, applied 
 to what must have lieen cotton goods exported 
 iVom Indian ports. Sindon (o'tfSwv) also is thought 
 to 1)6 of E-cy])tian origin, as Coptic scholars in- 
 f.irni us that it is found in the modern Shento, 
 which has tiie same signification. Although 
 (TivSi)!/ originally denoted linen, we find it ap- 
 plied, like ddovT], to cotton-cloth likewise ' (Yates, 
 I. c. p. 26G). BvatTos or hyssus, until the time of 
 Forster, was always considered to indicate linen. 
 Mr. Yates continues to be of this opinion (p. 267 J, 
 
 COVENANTS. 
 
 and objects to the argument of Dr. Forster(p. 274)i 
 The passage of Julius Pollux, which states th*t 
 Byssus is a kinil of flax among the Indians, 
 he considers with Celsus to be an incorrect 
 reading; that, acconiing to tlie current text, 
 Pollux only asserts that ^mffos is a kind of flax, 
 without adding that it giew among the In- 
 dians. With respect to Ptiilostratus, who men- 
 tions cotton in two pa:5sages, he admits that he ■ 
 uses fivarros to denote cotton, and says ' besides 
 its proper and original sen-se, this word was occa- 
 sionally used, as \lvov, odovT), Sindon, Carhasus, 
 and many others were, in a looser and more gene- 
 ral apjilicatioii," and considers the eviderice of 
 Philostratus as being of too late an age i^the third 
 century), to deciile the original meaning of the 
 term. But to us it apjiears equally doubtful 
 whether some of the older authors did not use the 
 same terms in an equally loose maimer, for wher- 
 ever the new ])roduct appeared it would be desig- 
 nated by an old name, as few woulit be able to 
 distinguish the material of which a ne.v or a 
 fine kind of cloth was made. This looseness of 
 expression has descended to modem times, as 
 authors might be cited who, even when writing on 
 the subject of cotton, sometimes use the inconect 
 term of linen. Thus Orme, a writer well ac- 
 quainted with India, in liis Hist. Frag, of the 
 Mogul Empire, p. 413, says ' the rigid clumsy 
 fingers of an European would scarcely be al>le to 
 make a piece of canvas with the instruments which 
 are all that an Indian employs in making a pieceof 
 cambric,' where he no doubt means muslin, though 
 using a word which designates a manufacture of 
 flax. Considering, therefi>re, that ditlerent name.i 
 are ap])lied in the Scriptures to the liner kinds of 
 cloth ; that cotton was certainly known in the 
 time of Esther (u.c. 500) ; that the term Buta 
 does not occur until the book of Chronicles, at A 
 lime when the commerce with India was well 
 establislied ; and that Byssus was undoubtedly 
 applied in later times to cotton-cloth ; we are not 
 satisHed that Butz. at least, does not signify cotton- 
 cloth in all the passages referred to under By.ssus, 
 as well as th,)se where the word Butz occur.* 
 [Fi.AX and ShksiiJ. — J. F. R. 
 
 COUCH. [Bkd ; Seat.] 
 
 COVENANT.S. Among other instances of 
 anthropomorphic forms of siieech [Anthropo- 
 moijphis.m] employed in Scripture is the us€ 
 of the term gov nant, to designate the divine 
 dealings with mankind, or with individuals of the 
 race. In all such cases, the proper idea of a cove- 
 nant or mutual contract between parties, each ot 
 which is bound to render certain benefits to the 
 other, is obviously excluded, and one of a merel-y 
 analogical nature substituted in its place. Where 
 God is one of the parties, and man the other, in a 
 covenant, all the benefits conterred must he on the 
 part of the former, and all the obligations sustained 
 on the part of the latter. Such a definition, there- 
 fore, of a divine covenant as would imply that both 
 parties are under conditions to »ch other is obvi- 
 ously incorrect, and incompati' ^e with the relative 
 ])osition of the parties. Ever jch a definition as 
 the fallowing : — ' Foedus D? cum hominibus est 
 promissio bonorum cum con (itione,' which is that 
 given by Morus {Epitom. Theol. Christ, p. 160), ik 
 objectionable, on the ground of its imjjlying thai 
 the exercise of Gods grace to man is dependent 
 u^ion something which man has to render to Qed.
 
 COVENANTS. 
 
 CRANK 
 
 474 
 
 We si imlil prefer (lefiiiiii!^ Goil's covenant with 
 man as a pvacioiH eii'^agement on the part of Gwl 
 to conimiinicate certain nnmeritt'd favou^^ fonien, 
 iic connection witii a particular constitution or 
 iystem, thrvingli means of wliich ttiese favonrs are 
 to be enjoypil. Hence in Scriplure ttie covenant of 
 Goil is called li's 'counsel,' liis 'oath,* liis 'pro- 
 mise' (Ps. Ixxxix. 3, 4; cv. 8-11: Heb. vi. 
 13-20; Luke i. 68-75; Gal. iii. 15-lS &c.); 
 ai;d it is deacrihl^d as consistin<; wholly in the 
 gracious bestowal of blessing on men (Is. lix. 21 ; 
 Jrr. xxxi. 33, .'M). Hence also the application of 
 the term covenant to designate such fixe<l arraniije- 
 ments, or laws of nature, as tlie regular succession 
 of day and night (Jer. xxxiii. '20\ and such reli- 
 gious institutions as the Sabbath (Exod. xxxi. 16) ; 
 circumcision (Gen. xvii. 9, 10) , theLevitical in- 
 stitute (Lev. xxvi. 1')) ; and in general any pre- 
 cept or ordinance of God (Jer. xxxiv. 13, 11); 
 all such ajipointments forming i)art of that system 
 <ir arrangement in connection with which the 
 blessings of God s grace were to be enjoyed. In 
 accordance with this is the usage of the verbs 
 Q'pn, |n3, and DVC to denote the forming of a 
 divine covenant with man, all of which indicate 
 the perfect sovereignty of God in the matler. 
 
 The divine covenants were ratified with the 
 sacrilice of a piacnlar victim, the design of wliich 
 was to show that without an atonement there cotild 
 lie no connnun'cation of blessing from God to 
 man. Tlius when Gcd made a covenant with 
 Abraham certain victims were slain and divided 
 into halves, between which a smoking furnace and 
 a burning lamp, the symbols of tiie divine pre- 
 sence, passed, to indicate the ratification of the 
 promises conveyed in that covenant to Abraham ; 
 and here it is deserving of notice, as illustrating 
 Ihe definition of a divine covenant above given, 
 that the divine glory alone passed between the 
 pieces ; whereas bad the covenant been one of 
 mutual stiimlation, Abraham also would have 
 perfomied the same ceremony (Gen. xv. 1-18; 
 of Rosenmuller, in locJ). In like manner, the 
 Levitical covenint was ratified by s.icrifice (Exod. 
 xxiv. 6-S) ; and the Apostle expressly afllrms. on 
 this ground, tlie necessity of the death of Christ, 
 as the mediator (if the new coveisant ; declaring 
 that where p covenant is, there also of necessity 
 must be the death of the appointed victim (Heb, 
 ix 16; cf Mdcknight, m loc). With this ac- 
 ovdi the etymology of fT'lIl, tlie Hebrew word 
 for ' covenant,' which, by tlie I, est lexicographers, 
 is di rived from iTt^ cecidit, secuit ; and the 
 usage of the phrase T\''~\1 TTO, fwchts sccare, 
 perrntere (comp. Gr. 'of>Kia T(fivetv). 
 
 Of the divine covenants mentioned in Scrip- 
 Hue the lirst place is due to that which is empha- 
 tically styled by Jehovah, ' .17?/ covenant.' This 
 is God s gracious engagement to confer salvation 
 anil eternal glory on all who come to him 
 through Jesus Christ. It is tailed sometimes ' the 
 everlasting covenant ' (Isa. Iv. 3; Heb. xiii. 20), 
 (o distinguish it from those more temporary ar- 
 rangements which weie confined to puticnlar 
 individuals or classes ; and t\ie se(:o7it/, oryirir. or 
 setter cove7i(nit.to distingiiish it iVom the Levitical 
 covenant, which wasjirst in order of time. I>ecause 
 first latified l)y sacrifice, and l)e<:ame old, and wa» 
 bKo vn to be i'»_/t'riO>-, because on the a])pparanceof 
 the Christian dispensation it was snjierseded, and 
 pasi'id away ("Jer. xxxi. 31 ; Gal. iv. 24; Heb. 
 
 vii. 22 ; vili. 6-13 ; ix. 1.5-21 ; xii. 24). Tliwigh 
 this covenant was not, strictly S]>eaking, ratifted 
 before the death of (jhrist, the great sacrificial 
 victim (Heb. xiii. 20), yet it was revealed totlie 
 aiints who lived liefore his advent, and who en- 
 joyed sanation through the retrospective )x)wer of 
 his deatli (Rom. ili. 2.> ; Heb. ix. 15). To the 
 more highly favoured of these (iixi gave specific 
 assurances of his gracious pnrito-se, an<l on such 
 occasions he was said to establisli or make his 
 covenant with them. Thus he pstal)llslied his 
 covenant with NiMih (Gen. ix. 8, 9); with Abra- 
 tiam 'Gen. xvii. 4, 5); and with David (P*. 
 Ixxxix. 3, 4). These were not dt.stlnct covenants, 
 so much as renewals of the pn/mlses of the ever 
 lasting covenant, coupled with certain temnora 
 favours, as types and pledges of the fulfilment ol 
 the<;e promises. 
 
 Tlie old or Sinaitic covenant was that given by 
 Gird to the Israelites through Moses. It re.sjwcted 
 esjiecially the inheritance of the land of Canaan^ 
 and the temporal blessings therewith connected] 
 but it stood related to the new covenant, as em- 
 bodying a typical representation of those great 
 truths and bh ss'ngs which the Christian dispensa* 
 tion unfolds anil conveys. 
 
 In ttie system of a certain cla.ss of theologians 
 great importance is attached to what they have 
 technically called 'the covenant of woiks.' 13y 
 this they intend the constitution estal)lish»l liy God 
 with Adam, during the period of his innocence 
 So far as this phraseology is not understood to 
 imjily that man, even in his sinless state, was 
 competent to bind Jehovah by any conditions, it 
 cannot Vie objected to. It seems also to have flM 
 sanction of one passage of Scrijitnre, viz. Hos. vi» 
 7, which Montanus, Grotius, Casfalio, iJurk, 
 Rosenmiiller, Newcome, Hitzig,and almost all the 
 best interpreters, agree in rendering thus : ' But 
 they like Adam have transgressed the covenant.' 
 
 Theologians have also spoken of ' the covenant 
 of redemjitlon," by which they mean an engage- 
 ment entered into between God the Father and 
 God tlie Son from all eternity, whereby the. former' 
 secured to the latter a ceifain number of ransomed 
 sinners, as his clnircli or ele<'t body, ami the latter 
 engage'! to become their surety and sulrstitutew 
 By many the propriety of this doctrine has been 
 doubted ; but the refeiences to if in Scrijiture are 
 of such a kind that it seems unreiLsonable to refuse 
 to admit It. With it stand connectwl the subjects 
 of election, predestination, fl»e sjiecial love of 
 Christ to bis people, and the certain salvation of 
 all that the Father hath given hlin. 
 
 Sometimes a mere human ci infract is called 
 God's covenant, in the sen.se of involving an 
 ajipeal to the .\lmighfy, who, .as the Jiidge of the 
 whole earth, will hold iMrth ]>arties bound to fid PI 
 their engagement. Comjiare 1 Sam. xx. ^ ; Jer. 
 xxxlv. l-^. 1!>; Kzek. xvii. IS, 19. (Witsiu.*, D* 
 (Economia Fccderum ; Russell, On the Old 
 and New Covenants, 2nd edit. 1843).— "VV.L .\. 
 CR.\NE (Isa. xxxviii. 14, Jer. vili. 7) DID 
 aus. and ^Ijy 'af/iir, occur in these passages as 
 names of birds, and have been generally consiilered 
 as denoting the 'crane' and 'swallow;' lut trans- 
 lators are by no means agreed as to the aj projiria- 
 tion of these names to the Hebrew ternii. Our 
 version renders sis bv 'crane,' but Kocharf, more 
 correiitly, as we think, decides in favour r.f 'swaV 
 low;" while Lother, rejcting both, prefers 'heron.
 
 «76 
 
 CRANE 
 
 Wli«re so inucli diversity oropir.ioii leij^iis, it will 
 be m.Ht sa(e lo seaicli for tlie tnie meiiiiili^ l)y 
 exaitiiiiii^ tlio internal eviilence riiiriisliHd l)y tiie 
 texts ill (luestioii, the two names occuiririi^ in no 
 oilier iiisLmce hi ls;iiaii, alliisinn is made to 
 tlie voice ol" lulli tlie species, whicli is described 
 Ly the veil) ' to chatter," in accordance, or nearly 
 go, wi(h all the critical authorities that we have 
 coeisulted. In Jeremiah, where both na;nes occur 
 in the same order, the birds are represented as 
 'obaerving the time tl' tlieir coming.' Now, if tlie 
 
 837. [Numidian Crane : Grus Virgo.] 
 
 'crane' of Europe had been meant by either deno- 
 mination, tlie clamorous habits of tlie species would 
 not have been expressed as ' chattering ;' and it 
 w mo:;t j-robable that tlie striking characteristics 
 of that bird, which are so elegantly and forcilily 
 displayed in Hesiod and Aristojilianes, would have 
 Bupplieil the lofty diction of prophet-ical inspira- 
 tion with associations of a character still more ex- 
 alted. ' Sus ' or ' Sis ' is the name of a fabulous 
 long-legged bird in Arabian legends, but it also 
 indicates ihe expressive sound of iiie swallow's 
 voice; while 'agur' is transfened with slight 
 alteration to (he stork, iu those noitliern tongues 
 which have similarly altered the Chaldee version 
 (K''D"10) kurkeya^ into kurg and curki (see 
 NeniJiich, s. v. Ardea). The Teiitnnlc Aiber, 
 Dutch Oycvaer, Esthonian Aigr and Ali/ro, there- 
 fore, su[)port the view that, Agur is a tiibal a]> 
 jjellation of one of the great wading birds ; but 
 neither the Hebrew text nor the Teutonic names 
 point to the crane of Europe {Ardea Grus, Linn., 
 Grus Ccuerea oi' later (luiithologists) ; since that 
 species has a load trunijiet voice, and theiefoie 
 does not 'chatter;' but e-jiccially, because in its 
 migrations it crosses the Mediterranean into 
 Africa, and does not appear in Palestine, unless 
 by accident 'driven thither jwssibly by a western 
 stoim of wind) ; and, when a troot) of cranes 
 alight under these circumsiajices, it is onl}' for 
 a moment; they do nit gi\e evidence of pur- 
 jiosely assembling like the swallow. Thus the lew 
 cliaracteristics indicated might seem to point out 
 the stork, which does assemble in Syria in 
 (locks, before its departuie, and is not a cla- 
 inoions bird, having little or no voice. 'But as 
 the stork is clearly designated by a diH'ereiit ajj- 
 jiellation in the original, we must search for 
 another rpecies as the representative of ayur ; and 
 we fortuniUely find one which completely answers 
 to the conditions required; for, lieing neither a 
 genuine crane, a stork, nor a herdii, having a 
 feeble voic^, and strikirig but distinct manners; 
 it is remarkable for beauty, numbers, residence, 
 and jieriodical arrival and departure. The 'Ardea 
 rirgu ' uf Liau. the ' Grus virgu ' of later writers, 
 
 % 
 
 cri:ation, 
 
 and ' Anlliropoides viigo' of some, is tlie bird, v/# 
 have eveiy icison to conclude, intendcrl by agiu 
 though not coming from the north, but fnim Cen- 
 tral Afiica, down the Nile(thevery circumstance 
 which puzzled Hasselquisi), and in the Spring 
 arriving in Palestine, while troops q( them proceeil 
 to" Asia Minor, and some as far north as tlie 
 Caspian. They aie frb^uently found portrayed 
 on Egyptian monuments, and die naturalist jiiisi 
 quoted, who saw them on the Nile, afterwards sliot 
 one near Smyrna : they vixit the swamp above thai 
 city, and the lake of Tiberias, and depart in the 
 fall, but do not utter the clangor of tiie crane, nor 
 ad-opt its flight in two columns, forming an acute 
 angle, the better to cleave the air. This liird is 
 not more than three feet in length ; it is of a 
 beautiful bluish grey, with the cheeks, ttiroat, 
 breast, and tips of the long hinder fe.iUiers and 
 quills black, and a tuft of delicate white plumes 
 behind each eye. It has a [leculiar dancing walk, 
 which gave rise to its French denomination oJ 
 'demoiselle." — C. li. S. 
 
 CREATION. In the ideas implied by 
 this term a subject of vast extent and most jiro- 
 found interest is suggested ; at the same time, 
 one in reference to which but little can Ije said to 
 be so certainly known or distinctly understood, as 
 to afford adequate satisfaction to that curiosity 
 which is so naturally excited in tlie human mind 
 with respect to it, and which has evinced itself in 
 all ages by the discussions, whether of a theo- 
 logical or of a philosophical nature, which ha\ e 
 so largely occupied the attention both of reli- 
 gious and scientific writers. 
 
 \n the piesent aiticle, on a point of so much 
 imjKirtance in Biblical literature, we shall en- 
 deavou*- to give as comprehensive a sketch of 
 existing views as our limits will permit; and to 
 do this the more satisfactoiily we must, in the 
 first iiistance, observe the due distinction between 
 the several branches of the inquiry, and the 
 att.iinable s.nnces of knoivledge on the subject. 
 Tiiese are, of course, comprised under the two 
 main heads oi' reason and revelation. We shall, 
 in the first instance, otVer some elucidations of the 
 views derived from each of these sources sepa^- 
 rately, and then advert to the degree in which 
 they bear rtpon each other, and to the connection 
 and degree of accordance or discord^ince between 
 them, real or ajiparent : and though, in so doing, 
 we must necessarily touch upon some points on 
 which considerable and even violent controversy 
 has been called forth, yet we shall endeavour 
 must strictly to avoid all discussion in a po- 
 lemical spirit, and to confine ourselves to the 
 dispassionate statement of what appears tc be fie 
 best estalilished views of the actual facts. 
 
 In the first place, then, the doctrine of reve- 
 lation on this point, in the most general view, is 
 chiefly founded on the simple ascriptivin oi the 
 original formation of all things to Divine povvec 
 and on the title of the ' Creator' ap))lied to the 
 Deity. Tiiis is the constant language of all jiaita 
 of Scripture, both of the Old and New Testa- 
 ments ; and in the meaning of the term ' create' 
 we must geek the origin of those views which con- 
 stitute the theological and revealeil belief respect- 
 ing the mode in which the world had its beginning. 
 
 The meaning of this word has been commonly 
 associated with the idea of ' snaking out of 
 Clothing." But wh«n we cuiue (4 int^uiie muit
 
 CREATION. 
 
 precisely infn tlip subject, we can of course satisfy 
 ourselves as ( ) the mciiiiiiij; only iVoin an exanji- 
 nation of tlic orij^iiial phrases. 
 
 Now, in the Hebrew Scriptures three distinct 
 rerbs are in dirt'erent ])]acf's employed witli 
 referenre to Irie same ilivine act, viz. N13 create, 
 MtJ'J,' make, "1^' f'oyin or fashion : now, tlioMf^li 
 eacii of tliese has its shade of distinction, yot the 
 bp.st critics understand them as so nearly syno- 
 nymous that, at least in regard to the iilea of 
 mal^ini^ out of nothing, little or no f)uniiation 
 for that doctrine can be olitaiiicd from the use of 
 the first of th(?se w.)rds. They are used indif- 
 fi^reuthj ivruX intercJiaiigvahly \\\ many passaj^es ; 
 as, e. (J. in Isa xliii. 7, wheie they all three occur 
 ajjpiied to the same divine act. Tiie Sei)tuaiTint 
 renders ^<^2 iiKlirt'erently by TroieTv and kt'i^hv. 
 But especially in the account of the Creation in 
 Gen. i. tiie veihs are used irrespectively in verses 
 7, 16, 21, 25. &c. ; and, comparing Gen. i. 27 
 and ii. 7, man is said to have been created, yet 
 lie is also said to have l)een formed nut of the 
 ground. Ag.iin, in the Decalogue (Exod. xx. 
 11), the veib is HC'V, made, not creatfd. In 
 Gen. i. the Septuagint has eTroi-qaev tliroughout. 
 
 )n such a ])oint much weiglit will be ascribed 
 to ihe opinion of Dr. Pusev, professor of Hebrew 
 at Oxford, who has distinctly stated his view that 
 the woril J<"13 inplies neither jwsitively, on the 
 lie hand, a formation out of nolliing, nor, on the 
 other, positively a formation out of existing ma- 
 terials, but that it is absolutely ind"'iinite and 
 neutial as to either of these conditions (Buck- 
 land's Bridijewatcr Treatise, note, j). 22). Thus 
 he oi;3erves that the oiiginal expression • let there 
 be light' (Gen. i. 3). by no means neccssarilij 
 i.Tiplies that liglit hail never l)eli)re existed (ibid. 
 note, 20 I. Upon the wlwle, he considers the only 
 difference between the thiee veibs to lie in the 
 d-egree of firce m the expression ; Nl^, create, 
 being simply tlie stronger and more emphatic 
 word to express more forcibly the absolute power 
 of tlie Creator. 
 
 in the New Testament we have a similar in- 
 dilferent use of the words kti'^eiv and iroielv in a 
 great numijer of pa^.sage-s. Tlie former is applied 
 to the origin of the world in Mark x-li. ]9, and 
 to the fi)iniati(in of man in 1 Cor. xi. d, and in 
 some other places; but most remaikably in Col. 
 i. 16. The same word is also applied in a spi- 
 ritual sense in Eph. ii. 10 and other jiassages, 
 in which the ligure clsarly involves formation out 
 of what existed before ; as also in Ejjh. iv. 2i, 
 C')l. iii. 10, &c. It manifestly implies pre- 
 vious materials in Heb. ix 11, as in the Septua- 
 gint veision of the corresponding ])assage in 
 Lev. xvi. 16. But more j^articularly in Rom. 
 i. 20. tlie expression to 70^^ Mpcera avrov airt 
 K^imies KOLTfxov rois iroirifxaat voovfx^va. pLices in 
 synonym the sulistantlves corresix)ndv*ig to the 
 verlis ' create" and ' fashion" or ' foim." This 
 appears to lie nearly the whole substance of what 
 we can cillect from the Scriptures, whether 
 Jewish or Clirisflan. as to the force of the verbal 
 exprisnoiis and the idea implied by the term 
 'Creation.' 
 
 If fiom the subject of tbc ginetul idea oi 
 rreatio'i we turn to that of t!ie ]:articular mode 
 in wh'ch tie ' formation" of existing things 
 fwhcUin- the ciuile material e:;istcd picviously or 
 tjot; "!» leprtsented to have taken place, we find 
 
 CiiEATION. 
 
 «n 
 
 more ev'ensive and exjircss declara Ions in varioua 
 jiarts ot the Bilile, It is not our ]Mir|Hvi«< to fur- 
 nish a concordance of texts, nor to in'roduM 
 quotations of all that bear upon the subject, any 
 more than our leaders ]irobably would look for it. 
 It v.'ill sufiice to obseive that we have many 
 general statements of the kind, and one or twc 
 very circtimstantial lepresnitations. Of the 
 former kind we may remark that alm«)st all refer 
 to the attributes and perfections of tlie Deitv 
 evinced in llie woik of creation, rather than lo 
 any jirecise explanation of lioro it was accom- 
 jilisheil. The sacred writers also rrf'r largely to 
 the Divine trill and the announcement of that 
 will liy His xcord as the immediate agent, as in 
 Ps xxxiii. 6, 0, and cxlviii. o; Rev. iv. 11, and 
 many other places; and this lefc-ienco to the 
 Divine xcord is considered by many to be in 
 effect the same with the mcjie direct ivscrijition of 
 the work of creation to the Divine \6yos in John 
 i. 3; wliich again is exjdicitly refeircii (o the Son 
 of God in Kiih. iii. 9, and Hcl>, i. 2, 3 ; and 
 again, Col. i, 16. It would lead us too far from 
 our immediate object here to discuss more mi- 
 nutely thepiecise doctrinal liearing of the passages 
 last rtfened to, and others of similar imjioif ; and 
 our reaiiers v-dll linii full infoiination on these 
 tojiics under other move appropriate heads. We 
 will merely observe further, that liiese (^tncrai re- 
 presentations of the cieation all agree in speaking 
 o\' it in terms of the most unbounded extent and 
 unicersulity of operation : this is observable in the 
 last cited texts, and not less pdintedly in Acts 
 xiv. 15, and xvii. 2-1; Rev. x. 6; besides nany 
 others; but it is to tie observed, it is not exp.^es.scd 
 that this universal act took place at one and the 
 same time, net whether it was instania7i(ctis a 
 gradiml. 
 
 We come nest to those Scri]itural represents 
 tions of the Cieation, which are more piecise anfi 
 ciicumstantial. Of these the earliest in order of 
 time is that stated to have been announced by the 
 Divine voice from Mount Sinai, in the delivery 
 of the law to the Isiaelites (Exod. xx. 11), where 
 tlie entile and comjilete w(>rk of Creation is de- 
 scribed as caiiied on and ended in six days. The 
 description pointedly applies to the whole uni- 
 verse: and the Great Work was sncceeded by a 
 seventh day, of rest or cessation, in)])Iying, that 
 is, \\tejinal perfection of the wocess. 
 
 WIkti the liooks of the Old Testament wer« 
 afterwards written, the Mosaic history natur.ally 
 opened with a general slalemciit to the sameen'e<:t. 
 It is well known to be the ojiinion of some of the 
 most learned critics, that the luok of Genesis, in 
 its existing form, is properly a compilation of 
 more than one ancient docunKjit, paili, iis of eacli 
 being mixed in dilVerent jiaitsof llif narrative. 
 Thus the short account of the Creation in Gen. 
 ii. 4, is considered to have been tlie commence- 
 ment of the most ancient record, while the more 
 ex])anded and circunisfanlial account in Gen. i. 
 and ii. 1-3, was preiixed fiom a later docimienf 
 (See Bauer's Theology of the Old Text. p. 11. 
 Kng. Tr. 1S3S.] But it will not lie mateiia"! to 
 onr present puijHise to follow Ihi.s «li»iinclion. We 
 aie jiiinclpally concerned with tiieA;7«(s»f the 
 de^ciiption, from whatever soii'ce its mateiiul* 
 may ha\ e been ileiived. 
 
 Tlie points most impoitanf to be noti-ed art 
 the follow ng. — The liist sen'tnce i.< lukui 1 1
 
 178 
 
 CREATION 
 
 mar.y lo stand distinct from wLvt follows, as a 
 first general aiiriouucein^ut, ir title, as it were; 
 then, after a break, tiw account of the six days' 
 work is supposed to begin. The description in 
 the se<'(ind verse (commonly conveyed l)y the 
 term Ciiaiis) is supposed liy some connected with 
 tlie liist verse; by others, with the sultsequent. 
 Either way it positively expresses a state of uni- 
 versal ruin, disorder, and darkness. Out of 
 this chaos tlie divine word evokes light, and, by 
 degrees, order and organization; but by se\eral 
 Buccessive and beautifully appropriate stages, di- 
 vided into periods called nighfs and days; in 
 which first llie grander distribution of the inert 
 maierials of the universe into (heir respective 
 places occurs, and then, progress! \' el y, tlie stages 
 of organized existence from the lower *up to the 
 higher form? : until at length the whole is crowned 
 by the introduction of man, who is constituted 
 ford of the inferior world, and the spirit of life 
 tireatlied info him : — when the majestic scene 
 closes with the Hnal cessation put to the work in 
 the Divine rest on the seventh day, and the jiro- 
 nouucing of a jieculiar benediction and sanclili- 
 cation of it. 
 
 On the sublime and unapproachable magnifi- 
 cence of this desciiption it is not to our present 
 purpose to dilate ; but there is a peculiar character 
 of unity of design and subordination and connec- 
 tion of parts oliservable throughout it, which, in 
 anj' human coinposition, we should instantly refer 
 to the most exalted jtoetical genius, and recognize 
 as marking tlie in(»st profound skill in the com- 
 position and invention of the narrative, the dispo- 
 sition, as it were, of the wliole machinery of the 
 great drama. 
 
 Very dirterent is the view which some modem 
 commentators have been induced to take of it. 
 It will neither be necessary nor pleasing to enter 
 into detailed descriptions of them. But the fol- 
 lowing very brief sketch of some of ihem is neces- 
 sary:— Some do not make the separation of the 
 first verse, before alluded to, but, taking the whole 
 to reler to one single creative process, stretch that 
 nrocess out t.) a vast, and, in i'act, unlimited 
 Jpngth of time, by inlerprefirig each of the six 
 days (thiHigh most expressly described as altema- 
 tions of day and night) as meaning periods of 
 thousands or millions of years; and alleging, as 
 their authority, that in certain |)arts of the pro- 
 phetic writings, the term *day" is used for an iu- 
 delinitely long period, and that it is said with 
 God ' a thousand years are as one day !' When, 
 tiowever, they come to the seventh day at the 
 close (which is, nevertheless, obviously spoken of 
 in the very same terms), ihey then go back to the 
 ordinary sense of a natural day. 
 
 Others suppose tie first verse, or the first two, 
 to rei<;r to an original formation of all things, the 
 time, manner, and circumstances of which are 
 left wholly undetermined. Then, after an in- 
 definitely long interval, this original universe was 
 totally overwhelmed and destroyed; and then, in 
 six n.itural days, the wiiole existing world called 
 into being in its place, in accordance with tlie 
 literal terms of tlie remainder of the narrative. 
 
 A dillierent class of interpr<;ters contend that 
 ♦ho whole account is to be taken together, as in the 
 drfi of the instances just staled, but the days 
 understooa literally ; the whole however is to be 
 iBterureted as rifeirirg to a more remote period 
 
 CREATION. 
 
 than is commoidy imagined, and as not intendso 
 to descrii)e the existing species of |)lanf3 and ani- 
 mals, but vaiious other species, now extinct, which 
 have been, liy subsequent convulsioiis of nature, 
 destroyed, while others .lave been successively, 
 by fiesii acts of creation, introduced in their place. 
 We will allude only to one other interpreta- 
 tion, the most recent which has been projwsed, 
 and which possesses every claim to attention 
 which can he commanded by piety, learning, and 
 devotedness to the sole cause of truth on the part 
 of its author, Dr. J. Pye Smith, whose volume on 
 the Relations of Scripture to Geology, &;c., we 
 earnestly recommend to tlie attentive perusal of 
 all wiio wish to acquire a comprehensive know- 
 ledge of the wliole subject, as well as to be en- 
 lightene<l by the jihilosophical views and scrip- 
 tural eloquence of the venerable and excellent 
 writer. 
 
 His interpretation is briefly of this kind : the 
 se])aratioTi (>f the first verse he adopts as above . 
 this refers to the original universal creation : and 
 in the vast undefined interval, an almost uu- 
 llmiteil series of changes in the structure and pro- 
 ducts of the earth may have taken place. Alter 
 this, at a comparatively recent epoch, a small 
 portion of the earth's surface was brought into a 
 state of disorder, ruin, and obscuration; out ol 
 which the creation of the existing species of things, 
 with the recall of light, and the restored presence 
 of the heavenly bodies, took place literally, accord- 
 ing to the Mosaic narrative, in six natural days. 
 All this is supported by profound critical distinc- 
 tions as to tlie sense of tlie original words. The 
 brevity of this sketch we trust will be jiroductive 
 of no misconception, as we hope all our reader* 
 will satisfy themselves out of the original work. 
 
 In this cursory review of dillerent interpreta- 
 tions we have made a passing allusion to geologv, 
 and the changes which it indicates as having taken 
 place at remote periods on the earth's surface. 
 We shall presently recur particularly to this sub- 
 ject. But it will be evident to most of our 
 readers that some consideration of these scientific 
 conclusions has been the main motive which sug- 
 gested the various interpretations, some few of 
 which we have mentioned. Our present concern 
 with them is, however, on purely critical and 
 philological grounds. And in this point of view, 
 with the utmost respect for the se\eral authors, 
 without going into any details of controversy, we 
 would wish simply to put all such interpretations, 
 on their own intrinsic merits, to the judgment of 
 any perfectly unbiassed inquirer. Yet for our- 
 selves (without wishing to press any decision), we 
 must confess they all appear to suggest senses 
 which are of a very dillerent nature from any 
 which the plain tenor of the nauative would 
 seem almost unavoidably to convey. We cannot 
 here go into details of verbal criticism : but we 
 are fully disposed to grant all that may be urgej 
 as to the precise signification of some of the terms ; 
 which may doubtless, by long established custom 
 and association, have tjeen commonly received in 
 senses which a more exact knowledge of the 
 original language may not warrant. At the same 
 time we <lo not think anything of this kind can 
 materially ad'ect the broad view of the subject. 
 We are disposed to look at the narrative as a 
 vohole : — and even allowing the greatest latitude 
 as to the precise shades of meaning in its particuUl
 
 CREATION. 
 
 features, to ask Mliether the (/eneral impression of 
 tt3 ilt'sigp. can be vatiiiiia.lly aiiic-ivnl to fall in 
 witli these vie>vs of it Y VVhethe", nither, any 
 such sigiiilicatiuii iiiipoied on it does not seem to 
 Uo jialpahle violence to its integrity, its distinct- 
 ness, its majestic sublimity, its special purport, 
 l)ejiiing, and tnanil'est object? 
 
 We will, however, add one general remark 
 aj)i)licable to all such interpretations in a philo- 
 logical point of view. In attempting to ascer- 
 tain the true sense of a passage in any ancient 
 book, we ought surely to decide in our own minds 
 distinctly what it is at which we aim, whether to 
 find some SL'nse, to our a])prehensions consistent, 
 and such as the teims of the jiassage in question 
 tnaij he made to bear, - or to seek, as well as we 
 can, what ireaning it was tiie probable intent>07i 
 of the tofiter to convey These two considerations, 
 it should be observed, though really very distinct, 
 are too often cni'ountied together: or rather, the 
 latter is almost wiiofly lost-sight of. 
 
 In the case Ijcfuie us, we cannot helji thinking, 
 there has been geneially a great want of attention 
 to this distinction. Some of the commentators 
 indeed appear to allow that Moses himself may 
 have individua'Iy intended to convey only that 
 meaning which, t.liey seem to conf ss, appears 
 n])>)n the face of his narrative, liut at the same 
 time they c.mceive there was a hidden sense really 
 designed, accoidant with the views they su^'gesf, 
 and which hai not leally been developed till the 
 jiresenl day. The probability of such a doctrine 
 in geneial it wonhl he beyond our limits to dis- 
 cuss. But in leference totiie immediate subject, 
 we must confess, it appears to us yet more in- 
 volved in complexity than the difticulties it is 
 called in to solve. 
 
 Lastly, others have thought that the whole 
 description must be taken literally as it stands; 
 but yet, if I'ound contradicted by facts, may, with- 
 out violence to its obvious design and construc- 
 tion, be rej;arded as rather intended for a mythic 
 poetical composition, or religious apologue, than 
 for a matter-of-fact history. 
 
 To these points we shall recur ; meanwhile, to 
 follow the order of our discussion, we must here 
 advert to another question. 
 
 Tlie idea of ' cieiition,' as meaning absolutely 
 ' making out of notJiing,' or calling into existence 
 that which did not exist before, in the strictest 
 sense of the terms (as we have seen), is 7iot a doc- 
 trine of !>crijiti(re, but it has l)een held by many 
 on the grounds of natural theologtj, as enhancing 
 the ideas we form of the divine power, and more 
 especially since the contrary must imply the 
 belief in the eternity and self-existence of matter. 
 It has hence bueir a point largely discussed by 
 those who have gone into the metaphysical argu- 
 ments in supjmrt of the existence and attributes of 
 the Deity. To maintain the eternity of matter is 
 held to lie the basis of materialism : and the side 
 self-existence of God ha,s been upheld as essential 
 to our idea of di\ inity, and the belief in a similar 
 quality in matlci .'-tienuousiy objected to as either 
 investing matter with the attributes of Deity, and 
 thus iinotving us in Pantheism, or else derogatory 
 from the divine peifections so entirely, as to leave 
 w \\ a stale of opiniim dilVering little from atheism. 
 Inns Dr. S. Cl.ul"' has aigued at length against 
 the self-existence of ir.at**r, on the grounii that 
 •elf-existence implies necessari' existence; and 
 
 CIlEATlOiN. 
 
 479 
 
 this again implies that it would be roiilradiclory 
 to sui'jHise the world not to exist; which it d e» 
 not, since we can conceive Hie jiossibility of iti 
 non-existence (see Dcnionstndion of the Being 
 and Attrib. iicc., jjrop. iii.). In general, we 
 would observe that the abstract belii I' in a crea- 
 tion, as a calling into exislenci; of the material 
 world out of nothing, according to the ilelinition 
 of ihe schoolmen, 'Dicitur aliqnid esse factum de 
 nihil cum intelliginnis esse qiiidem factum, .seil 
 non esse aliquid unde sit factum ' (Anseliii, 
 Mujtol. c. 8), must be regarded m an opinion 
 which rests wholly upon m-guniei.ts of a meta- 
 ])hysical kind. It must, on the one hand, be dis- 
 tinguished clearly from ihe creation spoken of in 
 the Bilile. and, on the other, fiom the piocess by 
 whicii the present order of physical existence was 
 introduced, .so far as it may be disclosed to us l)y 
 the evidence of physical science. Tlie metaj)liy8ica) 
 arguments will of course possess different degree! 
 of weight to diflerent minds : at all events they 
 should be most carefully examined. And tliough 
 Scripture and nauredo not absolutely assert tin* 
 view of the matter; ^et they offer nothing a» vari- 
 ance with it. 
 
 The creation, or origin, of the world, in a jjhi- 
 losophical sense, is a subject which, as miglit be 
 expected, has engaged tiie atlention of philosophers 
 of all c'asses and sects from tlie eailie.st tinie.s. To 
 attempt to give any coucct account of the in- 
 numerable theories and speculations which have 
 been started on this subject would l^e beyond ou .• 
 design ; but some few remarks by way of illustiii- 
 tion may be desiralde. 
 
 In general, we may observe that of these theorie.s, 
 many which have jjassed current as philosophical 
 sjieculations have been framed nut wipurilij phi- 
 losophic grounds, but on a mixture of ]ihiloso- 
 phical with legendary and fabulous systems 
 among the heathen writers of aniiquity ;— and, 
 among the moderns, with an attempt to combine 
 the deductions of physical science with the real 
 or supposed statements of revelation. All such 
 speculations ajipear to us essentially faulty. ]ii 
 all such inquiries we should jireserve a distin.^t 
 idea of the ground on which we are jjroceeding. 
 In the attempt to mix up considerations yf .so 
 veiy diflerent a nature in one view we shall pcr- 
 veitand injrne both. Let the inductive conclu • 
 sions stand on their own ground, and revelation 
 on its jnoi'er evidence, then bith will obtain llieir 
 proper and distinct authority. 
 
 Those theories in earlier times, which were pro- 
 fessedly based on purely philoso[)hical grounds, 
 were most frequently of an extremely hypothetical 
 character. Such were tlie speculations i^l most 
 of the ancient piiilosopliical .sects; they rather 
 .sought to make out some plausible system conciicd 
 in the technical language of their schools, than 
 fairly to trace what was really the order of natnie, 
 and follow by the humble but sure jjatti of in- 
 duction, the actual laws by whicli she is regu- 
 lated, and which, wiieii diligently studied, nexer 
 fail to lead us on from one stej) of generalization 
 to anotiier, until we arrive at tliesuitst conviction 
 of that universal order and jirofoundly-regulated 
 unity and harmony of ])hysical causes, whicli fi.ini 
 the irresistil)le e\ idence of the all-jiervading ii> 
 fluence of the one great moral cause of the univeise, 
 We will, however, just mention one or two illu»> 
 trative instances : —
 
 480 
 
 CREATION. 
 
 Amonj tlie ancient philosnpliers, Plato dis- 
 tinctlv asciiljcil the (jrinatiuri of all things to 
 B gu])n?me liein;;;, liut seems also to have held 
 t^^e independent existence of matter ; that is, 
 he maintained three principles — God, matter, 
 idea: the idea beins^ an ii corporeal avcliolyiw 
 existent in the Divine triind, according: to which 
 matter was moulded and fashioned (Hliitarcli, 
 I)e Plncitls. i. 3). This doctrine, indeed, se*>ms 
 to he nearly the sar.ie with that of Thales and 
 Pytha^'dras, from whom it was ])rol)ahly l*or- 
 Towed. Cicero ex])ressly tells us that ' Tlialcs 
 held water to Ise the princip'e of all thinijs; 
 and (rod, that miiid which fasiiioncd all things 
 out of water' {Dc Nat. Dear. u). Aristotle 
 held the pre-existence of nwtter ; and observes, 
 ' It is the c<»nimon opiniot :>f naturalists that 
 nothin:,' can l»e made out of nothing;' and that 
 it is impossible that it should be otlievwise {Phys. 
 i. 4. 8). And further : ' neitiier can everytiiing 
 he made out of everything, but out of some 
 subject lifted thereto; as animals and plants out 
 of their seed" {I. c. 9). Here, indeed, he seems to 
 be a]ii)roacliing the argument of sim])le physical 
 induction, tlie legitimate result of which ought to 
 he to remind us of the jiroper boundaries of all 
 physical argument, and to sIiok' that the questi'on 
 of the original constitution of matter is one which 
 no such induction can ever solve. And though 
 probably they did not view the subject in tliis 
 philosophical light, yet some of tlie fathers of the 
 Christian Church, in their discussions of these 
 speculative questions, have expressed the truth iii 
 terms exactly harmonising with the most rigid 
 modern philosophy 'It is impossible,' says St. 
 Chrysostom, ' f/r man's nature by curious inquiiy 
 to penetrate into tiie woikmanship of God' {In 
 Gen. \oy. /3') : and Lactantius observes, 'His 
 works are seen with the eyes, but how he made 
 them, the mind itself cannot see' (§ 2). There 
 are those who condemn all such speculations as 
 evincing but the empty presumption of human 
 reason : but they do not jierceive that the real 
 fault lies, not in the use of reason, but in the /)er- 
 versian of it; n<it in trusting to its guidance, but 
 in refusing its caidions, and arrogantly imagining 
 that v/e can penetrate regions where the only safe 
 path of induction is manifestly closed to us. 
 
 In modern limes theie have not been wanting 
 those who have pmsued cosmogonical sjieculations 
 on what they considered purely jtliilosophical 
 grounds: {hough to the adheients of strict induc- 
 tive science their philosophical ch.aracter will ap- 
 pear to stand (jn no better ground tiian the reveries 
 of the ancients. For the sake of those readers who 
 may feel interested in such theories, we may just 
 name some of th.e most celebiated of these au- 
 thors : — UutTori, in his Hisfoire Naturcllc; Wolfe, 
 in \\\s Cosmolagia; Holbach, in his Sy^tcme de 
 to A'rttffre (incorrectly asciilied to Miruband or 
 to LagiungeV, and the disciples of Kant, as 
 Hegel, Okcn, and others, among whom the most 
 prominent is J. MiiUer. As a specimen of the 
 kind of siwculation pursued, we may brieHy state 
 that his work, Ceher die EnUcIiimg der Welt uiic 
 Nichts, is founded on the old maxim, ' ex niiiilo 
 tiihil tit ;' from, wlience he deduces the existence 
 oC an ori;.Mnal governing power possessing omni- 
 tsreaence and omniscience. Bi\t the production 
 of a woiid could only take place in one of two 
 ways, ' eitJipJ- in a jvintheis'ical or a spiritual 
 
 CREATION. 
 
 mode;' that is, the original power might create » 
 world of which lie, or an emanation fn m him, 
 is the all-pervading soul, or might jjart with por 
 fionsof iiis own intelligence, which might animate 
 portions of the creation. Miiller adopts the se- 
 cond of these, and contends that this distribution 
 of the divine intelligence is what jiroduces dura- 
 tion or time : the continued existence of time is 
 the evidence of the continuance of divine power. 
 This power (if we have the least idea of the an- 
 thor's meaning), by indefinite conti/uiance alone 
 Incomes concentrated, as it were, in some kind ol 
 etliect, which jiroduces, or at least brings togetht'-, 
 a sort of origi) al matter or ether, which sulise- 
 quently undergoes changes owing to three prin- 
 cljial forces or forms of power — attraction, rejiul- 
 sion, and inertia; after which, rotation being 
 communicated, worlds and systems may result. 
 But as we cannot pretend to say that from any 
 statements we have seen we can render the sub- 
 ject at all more intelligible, we must hope this 
 specimen may suffice. 
 
 If we tiun to the more strict and proper investi- 
 gation of physical science, it will be important to 
 inquire what amount of testimony with respect tc 
 tlie origin of the world they may be able to 
 supply. 
 
 The science of astronoim/ has sometimes been 
 apjiealed to as liaving reference to the probable 
 oiigin and antiquity of the solar system ; but on 
 a closer examination the degree of evidence which 
 it furnishes will be found little more than con- 
 jectural. 
 
 The most recent and complete investigations of 
 the theory of gravitation have totally excluded all 
 idea of i\ie action of adventitious causes in sus- 
 taining or disturbing the system. Its apparent 
 irregularities have been all analyzed and reduced 
 to calculation, to system, and order, and shown 
 to be, in fact, but portions of the exact regularity 
 by which the whole fabric is sustained, and whicli 
 recur in a jierfectly determinate cycle through 
 determinate periods, though some of them are of 
 immense length. 
 
 All this does not, however, prove that the uni- 
 verse has existed through those immensely long 
 periods : astronomical science does not show us 
 any commencement; but there is no evidence _ 
 whatever at variance with it. 
 
 Observations on the motions of Encke's comet 
 liave disclosed the high probability of the exist- 
 ence of a certain extremely rare medium through 
 the celestial sjiace, which ofiers a certain resist- 
 ance to that small comet, itself composed of ex 
 tremely raritied matter. This nieduim, or ether, 
 must therefore ojijiose some resistance, however 
 inexpressibly small, to the solid planets; and the 
 result must be, in an inconceivably long perifKl of 
 time, that they will approach, and finally fall 
 into, the sun. 
 
 Astronomy, then, may point to the termination 
 of the present order of things. It has been argued, 
 as a sort of analogous presumption, that that which 
 will have an end had also a beginning ; but this, 
 considered in the light of evidence of creation, is 
 surely tiir too slight and inconclusive to be ot 
 much value. Another argument has been some- 
 times <iwclt on to which we must refer rathor- 
 more paiticularly. This is what is terme<l'tiie 
 Nebular Hypothesis,' which may bo thus very 
 briefly explained : La Place sugg«v«ted it (purely
 
 CREATION. 
 
 u ai: hifpcthesh), \v\i\ch mi^^ht ?ive a plansini* 
 representation iVoin aiiali»:,'y (if the oriffin of tlie 
 motioii3 i/f the sular sj'stem. In all parts of the 
 heavens |ionerful telescopes show us star-like 
 oojects which are not, like llie oilier stars, brilliant 
 liiiTiiiious points, but extemieil bodies of compara- 
 tively little lustre. These ai-e called nehuhe, and 
 manifestly appear to lie in various stages of coji- 
 dmsation, I'loin great dill'useness up to actual 
 stars, and niany of thetn having within tiie^n 
 points of greater brightness. La Place perceive*! 
 an analogy between these and the solar system : 
 he conceived that our whole system was once in 
 the state of a nebula; that it has undergone gradual 
 condensation, the sun being tiie central star; and 
 that in this process each of the planets also formed 
 a distinct centre of condensation, while in and by 
 the [Tocess their respective motions were communi- 
 cated to them, supposing the whole mass to have 
 had originally itu])ressed upon it a general rotatory 
 motion, witliout which, and tlie centrilVigal force 
 resulting, all its jwrticles must at once have been 
 attracted together into one central mass. Thus 
 other planetiiry masses would be found revolving 
 round that centre at dill'erent distances. As the 
 cooling and consequent condensation advanced, 
 similar efl'ects on a smaller scale would take 
 place in each of those planetary masses, until 
 thej' formed solid planets acconipanied by rings 
 ir satellites. The resulting motions would be 
 orbits not mudh dill'ering fruin circles, and in 
 planes not greatly inclined to each other, which 
 accords generally well enougii with the actual 
 constitution of the solar system. 
 
 All tiiis was ^as we have saidj thrown out merely 
 as a mechanical hypothesis : it does 7wt C as has 
 been sometimes represented) account for the crea- 
 tion of the solar system ; but merely shows how, 
 on mechanical supjiositions, we may explain its 
 |)ossible formation, in conformity with moie gene- 
 ral prc-existent biws. So far then as the evidence 
 of Creation is Cv.i.cejned, it anioimts to this, tiiat 
 •Jie same eviilence which we iiave of inKnite power 
 and wisdom in the actual adjustment of the exist- 
 ing system, by certain fixed laws of inimitalde 
 unity and simplicity, is by prvbabiliti/ carried a 
 step fuither biick into past time ; and the sufK- 
 riency of the same unvarying principles not only 
 «o the prescrcatioii but to the original arrangement 
 of tlie system, may yet more widely extend and 
 enlarge our notions of tiie same sublime inferences, 
 wiiich the contemplation olthe system, in its exist- 
 ing relations, is so transcendenlly calculated to 
 "each. 
 
 While S]ieaking of astronomical evidence we 
 must not omit to notice an idea, which often pre- 
 vails, of some conned i.m lietween astronomical 
 •uuchs and events on our glolie; or, at least, a dis- 
 position to attach imiMatance to coincidences of 
 tiiis kind. Thus some have dwelt upon the cir- 
 cumstan*" tliat by calculation of ihe motion of 
 apsides of llie earth's orbit. La Place founil that the 
 mdj(.T axis of (he orbit coincidtHl with the line of 
 the equinoxes in the year lOlU h.c. [Mec. Cel. 
 iii. Ho], which, accoidiiig \u Archbishop Usher's 
 system, is the date assigneil to the Mosaic Crea- 
 tioai. Uut it is dillicull to see any pliysical rc:»8on 
 why tlie glolje should lie moie lik«lv to be iHought 
 into its present state, or man placed upon it, un- 
 der that particular coinbination -if circi.msl.jii''"'^ 
 ratber lliaji anv utiier. 
 
 CRK.\TI()X. 
 
 481 
 
 mere is. lioirever, another branch of scienoa 
 from which information of a more jiositive kind 
 may be extracted. 
 
 In releiring to the evidence which Gkoi.ooy 
 mav give on the subject (;f the oriijiii of the world 
 we ic\ust premise, 1st. That the (i/ycii of this science 
 is not that of atteir.])ting any sm<mi discovery : the 
 testimony wiiich it may alVord is but inciilental. 
 'ind. The science itself is but of veiy modern oii- 
 gin, and its researches liave as yet iieen carried bi*. 
 a little way, compared with wliat we must leason- 
 abiy expect they will lie: yet to that small extent 
 its foundations liave been laid in absolutely deter- 
 mined I'ai-ts, and general lesidts, which aie real, 
 settled, iniluctive tiiiths, which no subsefpient in- 
 vestigations can <i\ei throw : which, in fact, can 
 only be called in question on grounds which, if true, 
 must overthrow not only ge.ihigy, but all iniluc- 
 tive science wliate\er, that is, the whole extent of 
 human knowledge, ami render our reasoning fa- 
 culties useless, and all philos!;p!iy a mere illusion. 
 •' rd. The evidence to which alone we can look on 
 such a (pie^tioii as the |)iesent must be re-vtricteil 
 to those poitions of the subject which are of this 
 strictly inductive character, and we must not tnix 
 up with them those conjectural hypotheses (how- 
 ever just and valuable for their projur pnqioses) 
 in which geologists of all schools occasionally 
 indulge. 
 
 In very briefly statinii the general results of this 
 evidence, which, little as it is, is yet un<leniably 
 certain, we shall, of coinse, nwt attempt any thing 
 like geological discicsxioii, or elementary explana- 
 tion : we shall piesunie that the reader is either 
 moderately ac(puiiiile(l with the elements of the 
 science, or at least can have recourse to the works 
 of tne most eminent geologists, in which he will 
 find ample jaoof of the asseitions we biii.,i;' for- 
 ward, which in our narrow limits, of course, ])re- 
 tend to be no inoie than a recapitulation or 
 snnimarv of the evidence. For our facts then we 
 simply rel'er ihe letnler to Mr. Lyell's Priiicij)lea 
 of Geology, 4 vols. ; his Elements of (leoloyy, 
 1 vol. ; Professor Phillip s Treatise on Geology 
 (extracted from the Encyclopiedia hrita)inicd) ; 
 Sir II. De la Heche's Geological Manual ; Dr. 
 Buckland s Bridgeicater Treatise ; and, for moie 
 gejieral discussion, to Dr. J. Pye StnitlTs work 
 before named, and to Professor PowelFs Connearivn 
 of Natural and Divine Truth. 
 
 The pursuit of geological inquiry discloses (he 
 evidence and monuments of successive changes 
 which have occurrei) in tt)* s'aie of the eaitir<« 
 surface ^incln.(iiif{ i4nilei ttiat term the solid jmr- 
 tioii ex>eni(ii>){ to some ile| th iielow). In tlie 
 a"eiin' «. 'race ftiese to ttien causes, sound induc- 
 tion »»cogtnses ' tie otie grand (.run-iple of referring 
 to "ti .«e wilier are riotti r.me and 'sufficient ' (o 
 eXfMrt.ii n.e pheiu'ineiia. We cannot find true 
 cause?* ex< epi in such as are really jiroved to exi.-t, 
 <ind are found by experience to be in ojH'iation. 
 The action of the waters on tlie land (whether the 
 continual action of the rivers antl the ocean, or 
 the occasional force of inundations ^uhI torrents!, 
 the subterianean force of eartlKjuakes, and the 
 external ojierations of volcanoes ; tlie contractions 
 and 'ex ) mils ions which must a<c-onipiiny changen 
 in the temperiiture of any ronsiileiable tliickiiew 
 of the eailh's crust ; tlie Iractines, llexiires, aii'i 
 varieties of foiin which must arise from suJc 
 eiTonean ujihearir^ finces; — tiiese and the liK« 
 
 3 i
 
 482 
 
 CREATION. 
 
 are tlie real causea to wliich alime tlio sound geo- 
 logist refers. 
 
 The accumulation of soil at tlie bottom of the 
 watet's, the imtieldiiig of animal and ve/ela'ole 
 remains in those d(>|)ositions, tlie elevations of jmr- 
 tions of the land ont of the sea, are operations 
 reallj' and continually going on. \Vlieii there- 
 fore we lind fossil remains of ori^;inized heings 
 imiiodde.l i'n rorl<s, bearing also marks of a similar 
 mode of ilejiosition, we refer to such operations as 
 tliose just mentioned as true causes to explain the 
 phenomena : and numerotu series and succes- 
 sions of sucii depositions, containing tlie remains 
 of species now extinct, and successi\'ely, in the 
 order of deposition, containing fewer of recent and 
 more of extinct lunds. even to whole general 
 chisses and oiders of being, call for the like re- 
 leience to tlie continued action of similar causes 
 thn)ugh ;)eriods of countless duration. 
 
 Numerous large districts of the eartli contain 
 immense deposit.s of marine shells, wliich must 
 therefore once have formed the bed of the ocean 
 a'love which they aie now elevated; and as they 
 exhibit an unbroken level, we infer that they were 
 gradually elevated without disturbance by simi- 
 lar slowly-acting subterranean causes, such as 
 have been shown to produce elevating forces now 
 gradually raising ])arts of existing cimtiiienta. 
 
 Again ; in other districts we trace the marks 
 of sudden and violent local inundations at remote 
 epochs : precis^jly such inundations have been 
 known to be prodticei] by submarine volcanic 
 action. Such etlects may clearly be supposed to 
 nave taken place upon a larger scale where the 
 phenomena indicate it, but we are still not de- 
 parting from just analogies. 
 
 All the changes of which we have evidence in 
 past epochs have been manifestly local ; just as 
 the operation of existing causes is confined to a 
 se-ies of the like partial and local alterations. 
 Thus no sound inductive geologist at the jiresent 
 day can admit anything like a universal simul- 
 taneous formation, or sudden action, applying at 
 once to the entire surface of the present dry land. 
 One small poition after another has been suc- 
 c ssi\ely deposited, elevated, peopled with animal 
 and vegetable life, again m the course of pro- 
 founiUy-adjusted changes to be obliterated and 
 overwhelmed, while another has been in pro- 
 gressive advance. 
 
 Just and sober inductive science, applied to 
 the examination of the actual structure of the 
 earth's crust, enables us with satisfaction anil cer- 
 tainty to trace the clianges which have taken 
 ])la(e on the surla(;e of a globe possessing the 
 same general natine as the existing earth, and in 
 the structure and habits of organized lieings ana- 
 logo^is to those now inhabiting the world. It 
 investigates tlie alterations which have been ef- 
 fected liy physical agents resembling tiiose now 
 in operation, and in accordance with general 
 laws tlie same as those now recognised in the 
 economy of nature. But it does not and cannot 
 rise to the disclosure of what might have occurred 
 under a dill'erent state of things, or owing to the 
 action of causes of a dillerent order fiojii those 
 now discovered by physical research. It cannot 
 show a chaos, or trace the evolution of a world 
 out of it. It cannot reason ujwn a sujiposed state 
 t)f iiniver«al confusion and ruin, and the imme- 
 liatc teauiition of it into order and arrangement. 
 
 CREATION. 
 
 It can Investigafe the changes of filings, bnt fitrt 
 their origin. In a wor.l, .sound (/eolot/y will 
 never aspire to the character of ro.'iJ/for/owy. Ye*. 
 geology is peculiarly ilistinguislitnl from other 
 branches of physical science, in this, that, while 
 they teach us only the cxistiiKj oriier of nature, 
 it carries us back in time, an<l shows a period 
 when the present races of organized lieings <lid 
 not exist, and by conseipicnce establishes the fact 
 of their having ni some icay received a cwri- 
 mencement of being, and in truth the occiirience 
 of marig such events ; and these not brought about 
 at any one marked period, or extending lo all 
 animated nature at once, but liy the slow and 
 gradual introduction of each new sjiecies wliile 
 yet the older partially remained ; and eacii in 
 turn thus progressively yielding its place to be 
 filled up with fresh forms of organization. All 
 that geology establishes in respect to organized 
 lifis is the fact of the gradual origination of new 
 .species, but tiy no means the paHicular ?neChud 
 or process liy which it was brought about. 
 
 It is true there have not been wanting theories 
 to explain these processes on supjiosed natural 
 principles : yet these have not been altogether sa- 
 tisfactory or free from mateiial objections. Phy- 
 sical research, indeed, in its nature, cannot bring 
 us to any distinct cance]>tion of what we term an 
 act of creation. If we consider the simjile case 
 of the introduction of a single syjecies, or even au 
 individual of a new species, there is an obvious 
 limit imposed on our speculations. On the otlie/ 
 hand, it is certainly quite open to the piiysiolo- 
 gical inquirer to trace, as closely as he can, the 
 secondary means, if any, as far as the nature ot 
 thecase admits, by which it is conceivable that such 
 changes may have been brought about or modi tied. 
 Such inquiries may pnxluce no satisfactory ic- 
 sulfs, but certainly it is the oiili/ legitimate chan- 
 nel ojien to the inductive inquirer, to examine 
 carefully all tlie possible etVecte which dillerent 
 combinations of natural coiiditions, as tenipera- 
 ture, donrestication, crossing of breeds, and the 
 like, may ]>roduce. Theoiies, intleeil, of this kind 
 have been pioixised and carried out by same to 
 a most singular anil preposterous estent, and a 
 series of transmtitatfons of species imagined wiiicl* 
 seem more like the hallucinatioTis of insanity than 
 the sober deductiois of science. Yet the broad 
 question resyiecfing the immutability of sjiecies, 
 and the abstract pissibility oi' a Taiisition from 
 one into another, of the modific itioiis of interme- 
 diate races being peqietuated, of netr species 
 being thus eventually ir.iroduceil, have fairly 
 formed subjects of debate among jihysiologists. 
 At all events, if natural science ever should be 
 able to conduct us to any satisfactory knowledge 
 on such a subject, it can only be by some such 
 route as this. Bnt in comparing wiiat ynay have 
 occurred in remote e]H)cli3 wifii the analogous 
 facts of mixlern observation on the niiHiilications 
 of species, there is one ]ioint most carefully to b« 
 remembered — the limited time during which ex- 
 isting operations have been contemplate I — from 
 which it would he unsafe to argue what may have 
 taken place in the vast and abrupt .unlimited 
 periods of past duration. 
 
 In those rocks, tyi' whatever date, which are of 
 igneous origin, or show marks of lia\ ing onder' 
 gone fusion^ if organic remains ever existed, 
 it is clear they must have iiecii iLestioyed, nr
 
 CREATION. 
 
 CREATION. 
 
 i%Z 
 
 lliat we call ariijue notliiii^ fiom llnjir iion-apiK-ar- 
 ancc. 
 
 With reference to the present (]ucstioii, it will 
 be readily appaient that our knowludire of" the 
 suhjcot can go no liigher than tlie evidciica ot 
 fi/B»il remains cuixies us. 
 
 In tlie earliest rock in which any organic 
 remains iiave ijeC been J'onid, fiiese lemains are 
 not those of plants, Imt of animah, and these 
 not absoluiely of the loicesC kind ; and firom 
 tills tirst observed origin of organic life there 
 is no bieak in the vast chain of org-anic deve- 
 lc}Hnent till we reach the existing order of things 
 —no one geological peiio<l. long or short — no 
 one series of slratitied rocks everywhere ilevoid 
 of traces of life : the world, once inhabited, ha.s 
 Jipjjaieiitly never, for any a.sceitainah!e period, 
 been totally despoiled of its living wonders; but 
 there have been many changes in individual 
 form-s, gi«at alterations in generic assemblages, 
 entire revolutions in tlie relative number and de- 
 velo|wnenf of the several classes. The systems 
 of life iiavc been vaiied from time to time, to suit 
 the altered condition of the globe, but never ex- 
 tinguished. 
 
 The proportionate number of species has gone 
 on increasing in the successive generations up 
 to the multitudes of existing species. The 
 change in organic structure also has been in 
 some degiee proportioned to the time elapsed; 
 but we Ciinnot lay down any distinct principle as 
 to the law by wliich its jiiogression, its greater or 
 less complexity or peifection in the scale of exist- 
 ence, can be decided , "hough generalbj we may 
 Kay that the higher forms of life are not foiuid till 
 we come to the more recent strata. 
 
 Torougliout the whole we trace one unbroken 
 continuity of plan and design : ditleient races of 
 animals and ])lauts have successively arisen as 
 others disappeared, the disappearance of the one 
 and the introduction (if the other lieing eacli co- 
 incident with chan;;es in the state of the nlobe. 
 
 The existing forms of life resemble those of 
 times gone by, as the general asjiect of the phy- 
 sical conditions of the world has always been 
 analogous; and they di^'cT from them as the 
 co-relatioiis of life and phvsical conditions are 
 strict and necessary: so that all the \ariatioiis 
 of these conditions are represented in the [ihases 
 of organic structure, while all their general agree- 
 ments are also represented by the confoimity of 
 the great princi])les of structure in the cieatines of 
 every geological age, and tlie often-repeated ana- 
 logies and parallelisms of series of forms between 
 dillercnt geological jieriods, which we (ind as a 
 law of nature, when comparing the most distant 
 regions with each other. We are not then in a 
 different system of nature, ])roperly so called_ 
 from those which have lieen cieated and have 
 been siiHiered to pass away liefore the origin of the 
 human race ; but in an advanced part of the 
 same system, whose law of jnogression is fixed, 
 though from time to time the signification of the 
 term varies. The full and complete system of 
 orga:iic life now on the glolje includes all the 
 efl'ects of sea and land, warmth and cold, divided 
 regions, and all other things which are the di- 
 versit'ying causes of nature; and it is no wonder 
 if, before the piescnt land was raised from the 
 deej), and the )jresent di-tinction of natural re- 
 gions was producei , there wa? not the same ex- 
 
 treme variety of natural productions which we 
 now witness, and which is not without its end is 
 rendering the glolie a moie fitting residence foi 
 intellectual beings. 
 
 L(K)kiiig to the vei-y latest periods to which 
 Geology refers, we find detachetl i^ortions of the 
 surface atniposed of beds containing rciriains of 
 species nearly the same as those now existing; 
 and every indication jire^ented by the nature, 
 form, structure and obvious mo<le of formation, 
 deposition, and elevation of thee beds, is precisely 
 similar to what is now found actually going on, 
 and especially to the results of exactly similar 
 modes of action which we trace in ojjciaiions 
 which have gone on within the piriod of the exist- 
 ing order of things. The imbedding of existing 
 races of animals and plants in ancient ]ieat bogs, 
 in diied-up lakes, in new-formed deltas and 
 shoals, and the desfinction of other poitions of the 
 actual surface and its productions, by the action 
 of the sea, landslips, and subniergencies ; as well 
 as, above all, tiie exact identity of the action of 
 modern eartlupiakes and volcanoes with those of 
 old fonnations— all attest the unbroken uniform- 
 ity of the chain of causation which unites the 
 present state of things with all those varying con- 
 ditions which we trace in earlier epochs, and 
 which have only ajipeared to some to present so 
 much more strongly-rnarked vicissitudes, because 
 we are apt to crowd those events together in the 
 perspective, and measure them too much accord 
 ing to our narrow ideas of duration. Thus, 
 whether we look at these changes in time or in 
 space, we finil in the one no delinile assigtiable 
 period at which «e can fix any one grand revolu- 
 tion or distinct era — no one portion of the earth's 
 surface which we can say was all jiroduced, with 
 its organized inhabitants, at one firr.e. All the 
 ejwclis of change were gradual ; the dilVeient orders 
 of things passed by insensible gradations from one 
 into another; all jiarts of the globe weie brought 
 into their jiresent state by small local instalments. 
 
 In the tertiary strata (anil to some extent in 
 the older also) it must be borne in mind that the 
 precise line of demarcation is by no means so 
 absolute as is often imagined. The broad classi- 
 fication into ilill'eien' periods, according as a ma- 
 jority or a minority of existing species mav ap- 
 pear in the several beds, is, in a great degree, 
 conventional: e. ff., we cannot positively fix on 
 any one epoch when the meiocene jeriod ended 
 and the pleiocene began ; and as those changes or 
 modes of physical action which produced the 
 tertiary lieds were manifestly of exactly the same 
 nature as tlio.se now going on ujion the eni-th's 
 surface, and as those clianges were at least the 
 accompanying conditions of the extinclion of 
 seme species and the introduction or creation o! 
 others, so we can b)- no means infer that we have 
 now arrived at a stationary or permanent condi- 
 tion, whether of utjorganized or .of organized ex- 
 istence. '^ 
 
 The more Ihe details of the latest geological I 
 phenomena are studied, the less shall we be able 
 to imagine that there has been, at any com]iara- 
 tively recent period, a clearly dej>ned cpocli at 
 which what we call the jiresent oider el' things 
 was completely and at once established, and a 
 cessation of all change has occuned : or that 
 further exam[)les of creative power may not again 
 take place by tlie same glow and ^ladual piocrsi
 
 4S4 
 
 CREATION. 
 
 Iiy w'lucli they proliably were carried on in past 
 eraa. The more tlie examination of tlie most 
 Buperlicial parts of the earth's surface is extended, 
 the m;ire eviilenoe is accumulated of partial and 
 local changes exactly similar to those wl ich dis- 
 linjjuish the tertiary functions, goin<; on nriinfer- 
 luptedly up to the j)re3ent time ; and it u clearly 
 contradictory to all principles of ii uctive 
 
 I analogy to assert that ni the ]irogress it these 
 changes new modifications of Lical temper ituie, 
 moisture, and other ]}hysical conditions, will not 
 (Hvur, and tliat (lieir occurrence will not l)e ac- 
 companied l)y the extinction of races of l)eings to 
 which the localities will then he unsuitcd, and 
 that fresh instances of providential adaptation, in 
 
 • the creation of new species, titled to supply their 
 places, will not he displayed. With regard to 
 the m(.5t material point, the origin of the Hainan 
 race, the evidence is chicjlij negative. It is 
 positive only thus far: that in the earlier forma- 
 tion the {)hysical conditions of the globe, and 
 tlie nature of the animals whicii did exist on it, 
 concur in showing that it would have been im- 
 ])03sibls for the human race to have been sustained 
 in life or well-being. In the latter stages of 
 things there is no such reason why man might not 
 have existed. liut the f.ict is, no luiman remains 
 have been found. In the tertiary strata tlie 
 nearest approach has been the distinct discovery 
 of remains of tlie monkey tribe. It is clearly 
 impossible, then, on geological grounds, to affirm 
 that human remains may not be discovered in 
 the latest tertiary beils, or to place any such 
 piisiiive limit of antiquity to the ^70.ss(7;fe existence 
 of the human species. It can only be assorted, 
 at present, that, as far as research has get gone 
 (l^43J, it has detected no human remains older 
 than those deposits which are probably witliin 
 the period of history. 
 
 As bearing, then, on the subject of creation, or 
 the origin of life and organized structures, the 
 whole evidence which geology furnishes is cer- 
 tainly irreconcilable with the idea of (/?ie simul- 
 taneous 5re?ie?'aZ development of organized exist- 
 ence. It points, indeed, to a commencement of 
 organized life; but shows that as successive forms 
 and species of organization from time to time dis- 
 appeared, Naw forms and new species were 
 PRODUCED to supply their places ; that these 
 changes corresponded to ntheis in the physical 
 
 ■ conditions of the glotie ; but that iTone of them 
 were at once universal in extent and simultaneous 
 in time ; lastly, that ttie human race {prohablg^ 
 did not come into existence till the period to 
 which the present state of things lielongs. 
 
 In offering tliis imperfect summary of the 
 general results derivable from gcologrj \v\nc\\ bear 
 upon the sui)ject oi' creation, we conceive enoiigli 
 may have ijeen stateil to enable the discerning 
 reader at once to perceive the nature and extent 
 of the discrepancy which exists between the 
 ciiangeR, thus incontestably disclosed to us by 
 the existing monuments of jiast nges of terrestrial 
 
 I existence, and the entire ciiaracter and scope of 
 ♦1;? descriptive narrative of the Creation in the 
 Ilefjrew Scriptures. We referred to certain in- 
 terpretations of that narrative which have, in truth, 
 been framed expressly with the view of attempting 
 to reconcile the contradiction. After all we have 
 before said, we shall nut tiiink it necess.uy here to 
 press the matter much further oa the notice oi' our 
 
 CREATION. 
 
 readers : they have liefore them the rcaterials tat 
 forming their own judgment. We will merely 
 say for oiir own jraits ti),it we fail to ]/erceive how 
 those interprelalioiis can be suppoiied on any 
 rational basis so ai really to explain the discrft 
 jiancy, or elfecfually to ih;fend the cauie to wliose 
 aid they are summoned, since the main jwints of 
 the discrepancy .still remain unt, inched, viz., tliat 
 there are no traces of any such catastro])he as n-ust 
 be supposed, even over a limited ]ioiticn of the 
 e iith's surface, subsequent to the hitest tertiary 
 formation ; and any of the other interpretations 
 are absolutely contradicted by tiie whole tenor ol 
 the facts in releience to the suddenness and uni- 
 versality implied in the description, if natural 
 (lays are maintained, and in long periods tlie total 
 want of corres])ondence between those periods and 
 any ordir of succession whicli can be made out 
 from geological evidence. 
 
 With regard to the nature and extent of the dis- 
 crepancy tins disclosed, we would observe, that it 
 is not a case merely involving the question of thi. 
 literal a<;ceptation of a word or a phrase — it is 
 wo< a parallel case (e.g.) with that of the inci- 
 dental scriptural exjjiessions, implying, in their 
 letter, the motion of the sun, or the existence of a 
 solid firmament — nor is the difiiculty of the 
 same nature with any sceptical objections to a 
 supernatural narration : but it is the contradiciion 
 of existing monuments of past events with the 
 obvious sense of what is recorded as a part o/ 
 Di\ ine revelation, in the form of a ciicumsfantial 
 narrative of the same events. Anil tlie discre- 
 pancy is not one with any theory, or partial dis- 
 covery of science, which is not yet thoroughly 
 made out, and which future investigations may 
 modify or set easide; but with broad primary 
 facts which involve nothing hypotlietical, and 
 which are in reality identified with the first prin- 
 ciples of all inductive truth. It is also a ciicum- 
 stance wh;<di, taken any way, involves a train of 
 consequences. It is not an fsolated dilliculty 
 like that attaching to some single detached point, 
 whicli we can pass over and not allow to weigh 
 against the evidence preponderating on the other 
 side; but it essentially involves a broad princijile 
 and must affect, in its consequences, the eiitiit 
 view we take of the authority and application o{ 
 the Old Testament. 
 
 That the existence of a discrepancy or difficulty 
 of this kind, especially at the first announcement 
 of those discoveriei which di3"!osed if, sliould 
 have been viewed by many vvitli astonishment 
 and alann, is no more than might have been 
 expected. That in the first instance the whole 
 weigtit of censure should have been directed 
 against the science of geology, is wliat numerous 
 and somewhat parallel cases in fbinier times 
 would have letl us to anticipate. It would oe 
 imjiroper in this [I'ace to advert even remotely to 
 topics of dispute or iriitation. We shall merely 
 ol)serve that, at thu jre^ent day, a happier spirit 
 seems beginning to [. -evail. Tliere are few now 
 •ivho venture upon o|.^n expressions of hostility; 
 and tills is no doubt t om the simple cause that 
 earnest attention and diligent examination have 
 been called forth: the ubject is beginning to b« 
 generally uiideistood ; misconception and acri- 
 mony, alann and stHpii 111, have f(een gradually 
 set to rest ; and those wl. feel most forcilily the 
 amount anrl nature of thi contradiction are mo«*
 
 CREATION. 
 
 lead'/ (X) confess the unsalista.ctory cliaiacter of 
 tiiose solutions of it to wliicli we have a.(lvei-ted, 
 and which ratlier gli<ss over and elude the real 
 difficulty than fairly niei^t it. The nrain source 
 of objection and oiVence has dotil>fless been tiie 
 prevalence of certain views of the tenor and de- 
 sign of the Old Tejt«iment. which have by loni^ 
 custom passed current, among certain classes of 
 Christians nioie esiwcially, and in virtue of whicli 
 the particular points involved in the narrative of 
 the creation have cotne to bear a meaning and 
 application connected directly with the existing 
 institutions of religion. On the other hand, a 
 ni()re careful view of tlie actual design of the 
 Hebrew Scriptures may do much towards remov- 
 ing this source of embarrassnient* 
 
 In ^jieaking of the Scripture narrative we have 
 already remarked its striking characteristics as a 
 composition— tins of course applies in detail to 
 the narrative in Genesis ; but the brief statement 
 in the I)ecalo,-ue preserves also, as far as it goes, 
 the same features. No leader of the Scriptures, 
 especially of the Old Testament, can be otherwise 
 than aware of the entire system which jjervades 
 %ll its representations, more or less, of adaptation 
 in the manner of exjiression, form of imagery, and 
 the like, to the ap])rehensions, the prejudices, anil 
 previous belief of the Jewish people; nay, the 
 whole dispensation, in all its parts and institu- 
 tions, is but one grand exem|)lification of the 
 same thing. And this character in it we find 
 expressly recognised and dwelt upon l)y our Lord 
 and his apostles, in addressing that jieople, as the 
 very ground of argument for introducing to those 
 who were then living under the law a belter and 
 mo-e spiritual religion : ' Moses, because of the 
 hardness of your hearts,' gave you this precept 
 (Matt. xix. ^); ' The law was a schoolmaster to 
 bring them to Christ " (Oal. iii. 2t) — a scheme 
 of instruction and education (as it were) suited to 
 their capacities and accommo<ialed to their ajn)re- 
 hensions. And not to dwell on instances which 
 can only be accounted for as adaptations of this 
 kind, such as the various sanguinary enactments, 
 the visitation of sin on the jwsterity of the of- 
 fender, the toleration of polygamy, the extreme 
 facility of divorce, and the like, we (cannot but 
 recognise a similar object, as well in the general 
 anthrojK)pathism of the Old Testament, as in 
 more sj)ecial instances of many parts of those 
 compositions in which jjoefic imagery, j)arable, 
 and apologue were cm[)!oyed ; and it is therefore 
 nothing at variance with the na'ure or design of 
 that re» cilation, but rather eminently conformaiile 
 t<» it, to suppose that in ofher instances similar 
 forms of nan at ive xnay have been adopted in like 
 manner as tl.e vehicles of religmus iristru 'tion: 
 dtill less to admit that tiiey may nave long l)een 
 iriistaken for histoiical m.itter-uf-fact sraiements. 
 
 In the present instance the adajitation to the 
 people of Israel was manifestly of the greatest im- 
 oortance, iii order to seiure their attention to 
 floints of vital moment in connection with the 
 worshii) of the one true God, and their renunci- 
 ation of idolatrous superstition. With this end, 
 the first great truth witli which they were to be 
 impressed was the unity, omnipotence, and bene- 
 ficence of tlie Cieator : but these f^reat doctrines 
 were not put before them as abstract philosuphical 
 pio[X)sition-, which tlieir narrow and uncultivated 
 nainda would have been who\ ■ incapable of 
 
 CREATION. 
 
 4K 
 
 com|)relieiiding : they were therefore emlxxi'wl 
 and illustrated in a narrative, ])roce«iiing step hy 
 step, in a minute detail, to assert, in each indivi- 
 dual instance, the ]K)wer ami goodness which tliey 
 were liius led to recognise in every familiar ile- 
 taii of (he natural world, and which could thus 
 alone be ellectually impressed ujmiii their minds. 
 
 Another very material object was to lemind 
 them, in like manner, that those very beings, 
 the animals which formed the olijects of tlie 
 idolatry of the Egyptians, to which they were so 
 prone, were in truth but the creatures of the true 
 God: hence the imixirtaiice of dwelling, witli 
 minute paiticularity, on their creation and subor- 
 dination to man; as well as the express prolii- 
 bition of worshipping even the images of them, or 
 so much as making such images. In all this we 
 cannot but trace the same wise system of exact 
 accommodation to the peculiar ca])acity and 
 condition of this pi\)ple, so little advani;ed al 
 that time in moral or intellectual cultivation, 
 and even cxhiljiting at all times a considerable 
 national and constitutional incapacity for higher 
 views, as the tvnor of their after-history abun- 
 dantly testifies. To this ' hard h.aarted and sfifl- 
 necked generation,' then, so necessary was the 
 utmost condescension and adaptation of all in- 
 stitutions (especially of a neligious nature), and 
 of the language and illustrations in which the 
 communication of religious truths and precepts 
 was t.i be made, that we liiid a reterence to this 
 princi[)le perpitually jiressed upon us to interpret 
 much which otherwise seems singular in flieir 
 sacred books, aii<l which, unless so considered, is 
 almost inevitably liable to be greatly misunder- 
 stood ; and whicii from want of attention to this 
 distinction has been, and continually is, misaji- 
 plied, and even made a ground of sce])tical objec- 
 tion. 
 
 These remarks refer yet more directly to what 
 doubtless was the third and chief object in this 
 representation of the creation — the institution of 
 the Sabhatii. This lemarkable observance — the 
 ])eculiar badge of the chosen people, to distinguish 
 them froin all other nations (Kxod. xxxi. 13; 
 Ezek. XX. 12) — was appointed them before the 
 delivery of the rest of the law (Kxod. xvi. 2.')); 
 and as die work of creation, with reference to the 
 difterent classes of beings, \ras associated in their 
 minds with each of the six days, so the Seventh 
 was identified, in the order of the narrative, with 
 the entire completion of the woik, the Divine 
 rest and cessation from it, and the solemn sancti 
 tication of it jironounced, to consist in a precise 
 abstinence from any kind of labour Ijy tiiemselves, 
 their household, and even cattle. They were 
 thus led to adhere to this duty by reflections con- 
 nected with the highest trutlis im[)ress('il tinder 
 the most awful sanctions; and the wisdom of flie 
 injunction, iiot less than the means thus taken to 
 promote and secuie itii fulfilment, cannot but the 
 more fully apjiear tlie more we examine the cha- 
 ra<*?er and genius of this singular peojJe, for 
 whom it was ordained, and to whose jieouliar con- 
 dition it was in every svay so remarkably ail.ijited 
 
 The narrative, then, of six periods of creation, 
 followed by a sevtnth similar i)eriod of rest and 
 olessing, was clearly ilesigned, by a<iaptation to 
 their conceptions, to enlbice ujKin the Israelites 
 tlie instituiion of the Sabbath : and in v.halever 
 way its details may be interpreted, it clearly CAlt-
 
 4S< 
 
 CREATION". 
 
 not be Tegarded as an historical statement of a 
 primeval institution of a subl)atli : a su|)po3ition 
 wliicli is, intlceil, on other grounds, suiliciently 
 improbable, tliougli often adopted. But on tliis 
 subject we refer tlie reader to our article ' Sab- 
 bath." 
 
 if. then, we would avoid tlie alternative (pother- 
 wise inevitable) of being compelled to admit 
 wiiat mu3t, amount to impugning tlie trutli of 
 these portions, at least, of the Old Testament, we 
 surely are bound to give fair consideration to the 
 dnly suijgestion uliich can set us entirely fiee 
 from all tlie dilliculties arising from the geolo- 
 gical contradiction which does and must exist 
 against any conceivaljle interjiretation which re- 
 tains the assertion of the historical character of 
 tlie details of the narrative, as referring to the dis- 
 tinct transactions of each of the seven periods. 
 
 The one grand fact, couched in tiie general 
 assertion that all things were created by the sole 
 power of one Supreme Being, is tlie whole of the 
 representation to which an historical character 
 can be assigned. As to the particular form in 
 which the de.scriptive narrative is conveyed, we 
 merely affirm that it cannot be history — it may , 
 be poetry. 
 
 But there is one consideration further, to which 
 we must advert in connection with (his tonic, viz. 
 that in the rejietition which JVIoses gives of the De- 
 calogue (I)eut. v. 14, 15), the latter part of the 
 fourth commandment relative to the Creation is 
 omitted, and a ditierent reason for the observance 
 of the sabliatli inserted. This has led some com- 
 mentators to supjiose that in neither case is tliat 
 latter clause ti> be considered as having really 
 formetl a portion of the commandment as de- 
 livered from Mount Sinai ; but that it was in 
 both cases added as a sort of comment by Moses 
 'limself. This, if it b« so, will manifestly on 
 reflection be seen to remove some ])ortion of the 
 dilliciilty of conceiving the poetical nature of the 
 di'scri])tion. The Divine command may have 
 lieen given simply to the Israelites; and Muses 
 may have been authorized to recommend and 
 impress it further by the addition of such topics 
 as would liest coincide with the preconceptions of 
 popular belief, where it was not at variance with 
 any real truth of religion. 
 
 In regard both to this and many otlier diifi- 
 culties of the Old Testament, there has been too 
 great a proneness to overlook the consideration of 
 its original e.KclusIve design of adaptation to the 
 purposes of a limited dispensation addressed to 
 one peo()le only. When we bear this more dis- 
 tinctly in mind, many of those difficulties are in 
 a very great det'ree removed. And this is surely 
 the true view to be taken of it by Gcntilu Chris- 
 tians, to vviiom it is only a guide and instructor 
 tecond and subordinate to the Neio Testatnent — 
 a dead letter without it; but 'able to make us 
 wise uriti) salvation •'only'" through faitli whicii 
 is in Christ .Jesus' (2 Tun. iii. 1.5). 
 
 Anotiier otijection cf a very dilferent ki/id has 
 been started with lelerence to this subject, which 
 it certainly would not Imve occurred to us to 
 notice, iiad it not really been entertained as a 
 serious ditilculty by many ; and so much so as 
 lo liave called forth a jjrinted discour.se from 
 «o 'listingi.'siied a person as Dr. Bu;:kiand — the 
 alleged objection, rhat the existence oi death in 
 he animal world (of which certainly the whole 
 
 CREATION. 
 
 scries of organic remains famishes un'ntemi} te! 
 evidence thioiigh all ejiochs) is at variance wlfli 
 the Scriptuie docirine tliat death was fir.st intro- 
 <luced as the penalty attached to sin in the 
 instance of Auam's transgiessiun. We can only 
 say that to us it w:is a new idea that the inl'erio 
 animals were in any way involved in tlie conse- 
 quences of man's obedience or disobedience. To 
 tiiose who really feel any degree of difficulty on 
 the subject we can only recommend a perusal of 
 what Dr. Pye Sniilh has leniarked upon it in his 
 work before referred tt) (p. 2S{), &c.). 
 
 We must also a<ld a brief remark on one 
 further point which h.is sometimes formed a topic 
 of controversy, closely connected with the subject 
 oi' Creation — the origin of the iiuman race from a 
 single piimeval pair. 
 
 Viewed as a question of natural history 
 simjily, all the dilleient races of men are but 
 varieties of one species; since the physiological 
 distinction of a species is that any of its varieties 
 are capable of producing a jnixcd ollsjiring which 
 shall be itself jnolijic ; with the mixtine of 
 species it is not so. A species, therefore, however 
 widely sjiread, and however distinct its subordi- 
 nate varietiis, may in theory have originated 
 from a single pair. Physiology, then, tlius far 
 shows nothing at variance witli the belief that the 
 human species did thus derive its origin. 
 
 There may, hou'ever, obviously be questions of 
 another kind, such as the existence o\' hical 
 obstacles, the piobable rate of increase, and the 
 like, which must iniluence our belief as to the 
 fact. These a))])arent difficulties, such as the 
 peopling of Ameiica, and of the multitudes of 
 islands especially in the midst of the Paoilic 
 Ocean, together with the length of time necessary 
 for the spread and growth of such immense 
 populations as even at very remote epoci.s must 
 have inhabited many large districts, where we 
 trace remains of higli civilization of unknown 
 antiquity, have induced many to adopt the idea 
 that tl-.ere must have been original creations of 
 man in many diilerent paits of the globe; and 
 this, too, subsequently to tlie Mosaic deluge, if 
 we are to understand it in a strictly universal 
 sense [Dui.uge]. 
 
 It seems also incumbent on those Nvho adhere 
 so strictly to the letter of the Scrijitural narrative 
 to bear in mind that the existence of other races 
 besides the family of Adam seems to be almost 
 unavoidaljly implied m several paiticulars of 
 that narrative. Tlius in Gen. iv. 14, Cain com- 
 plains that when he wanders forth on the earth, 
 ' every one that (indelh me shall slay me," and 
 accordingly a mark is '■et uoon him, ' lest ajiy 
 finding him should kilj nim." Again Tver. 17^ 
 C'l r'.-'ug forth with his wife and child only, 
 l<uiit (J c-iiy, which at least must imply some <x>l- 
 lected number o'' persons. When Cain's wift ti 
 mentioned (ver. 17), it is without the slightest al- 
 lusion to her origin ; and the extraordin.iry n.ture 
 of the vulgar belief on that subject ought ceitajily 
 (on all grounils) to be laiily balanced along with 
 tiie alleged religions necessity for imagining oiily 
 oiie descent for the human race To these may 
 be added the consideration of the very obscure 
 ]iassage (Ge". vi. 2, 4) respecting the progeny of 
 ' the sons o! God" and ' tiie daughters of men.' 
 
 These and other topics, though we can <lo tvi 
 more tiian tlius briefly allude to them, niii»1
 
 CRESCKNS 
 
 Be\'«r1heTess i>e carefully fakeri into considoiatlon 
 in w!iiU«;v«i' o[)iiii()n we t'orxu on the subject. It 
 is iloulit.less a question ol' groat iliiliculty, in 
 whatever light we view iv ; l*nt more )ia.itii;ulurly 
 so Aunt tlte connection which it holds in tite 
 minds of many with the doc(rijie of orijcsiml sin 
 as connected witli ti»e fall of Adam. But (or a 
 discussion of so vwy wiiie and iii.iportaut a jioiut 
 ;we must refer tlie reader Ut other heads. — B. P. 
 
 CRKSCKNS (K^<r«i3$), an assistaiit of St. 
 Paul's, and generally sujiposed to have lieenoneof 
 the seventy disciples o<' Clirist, It is alleged in 
 the Apostolical Const/.tutions (vii. 4(!), and hy 
 the fall.'eis of tlw church, that tie preached the 
 Gosjiel it; Galatia, a fact jM-ohatJy deduced con- 
 lecturaJly from the only text (2 Tim. iv. 10) 
 in which liis name occurs. Thei'e is a less ancient 
 traditioa (ira So[>iuonitis), according to wliich 
 Crescens pi-eaclied, went into G.iul, and becaire 
 the founder of the chuicli in .Vienne ; l)ut it de- 
 serves no notice, having probably no other founda- 
 tion than the resemblance of the names Galatia 
 and Gallia. 
 
 CRETE (Kp^TTj), one of the largest islands in 
 tlie Mediterranean, now called Candia, and by tlie 
 Turks, Kirid. It is 160 miles long, hut of very 
 unequal width — vaiying from thirty-five to six 
 miles. It is situated at the entrance of the Aichi- 
 jjelago, having the coast of the Moiea to (he south- 
 west, tliat of -Isia Minor to the north-east, <uid that 
 of Lib^'a to the south. Great antiquity was 
 affected by the inhabitants, and it has been sup- 
 posed by some that the island was originully 
 (peopled from Egj'pt ; but tiiis is foimded on 
 <l:e coiv .usion that Crete was the Caphthor of 
 Deut. h. 23, &c., imd the country of the Philis- 
 tines, w 'ich seea.s move than doubtful [C.ti'ii- 
 THoRj. Surrounded on all sides by the sea, 
 the C<'-?tans weie excellent sailors, and their 
 vessels visited all the neighbouring coasts. The 
 island was highly. prosjjerous ind full of people in 
 very ar.cient times : this is indicated l)y its 
 ' hundred cities' alluded to in the epithet tna- 
 rd/xiroXii, applied to it by Homer (//. ii. 640). 
 The chief glory of the island, however, lay in its 
 having produced the legislator Minos, whose insti- 
 tutions had such important iidluence in softening 
 the manners of a barbai(jus age. no* in '^'^^.c n)j 
 but also in G'\' "•?„ where li;ese institutiov *«♦ 
 imitated. Th<; ..atives were celebrated as arctiers. 
 Their character was not of the most f'avouiable 
 description ; the Cretans or Kretaus being, in fact, 
 one of the three K's against whose unfaithfulness 
 the Greek proverb was intended as a caution — 
 Kappadokia, Krete, and Kilikia irpia Koarva 
 KCLKiova, KainradoKla, kou Kprjrr), Kcd KiKikIc). 
 In short, the ancient notices of their character 
 fully agree with the quotation wliich St. Paul 
 ])roduces from ' one of their own jioets,' in his 
 Kpistle to Titus (i. 12), who had been left in 
 charge of the Christian church in the island : — 
 ' The Cretans are always liars (\j/eua-Tat, eternal 
 liars), evil beasts (kuko. Qt)pia, Angl. ' brutes') 
 slow bellies' (yaarepes apyod, gorbellies, bellies 
 which take long to till). The quotation is usu- 
 ally supposed to have l>een from Callimachus's 
 Hymn ott Jove, R; but Callimacbus was not a 
 Cretan, and he Ijas only the first words of the 
 verse, vrhich Jerome says he borrowed fiom Kjii- 
 aaenides, w!io was o Crete. Ample corroboration 
 
 CRITICISM, BIBLICAL. 
 
 181 
 
 of the description wiiicli it gives ma> be iiee:» in 
 the com men I at ujs. 
 
 Crete is nanitHl in I Mace. x. <>7. But it <te« 
 rives its wrongest scriptural inteiest from tJie cir- 
 cuinstaii(,es connected with Si. PaulV voyage to 
 Italy. The \esset in which lie sailed, being forced 
 out of lier course iiy contraiy winds «as driven 
 round the islaiui, instead of keeping llie direct 
 course (o the jiorlh of it. lu doing this, the 
 ship (irst made the pioinojitory of .S,tlniocie on 
 the eastern side o<" (lie island, which they jKisseU 
 with liilliculty, and took shelier at a jilace called 
 Fair-Havens, neai- to which was tlie city Laisca. 
 But after spending some time at ihis ]ilaci!, and 
 not iindiiig it, as they sujiposed, sutlicienlly 
 secine to winter in, they i^esulved, CiUJir;.- *o the 
 advice of St. Paul (the season tjeing Ja.i au- 
 vanced), t<i «nake for Pli<Enice, a nK/ra connno- 
 dioui harbour («i the westejn part of tlie island; 
 in altempMjig wiiicii tlicy were dnveu Ikr out ot 
 their course by a furious east wind calle*! Enro- 
 clydon, and wrecked on the island of Melita 
 (Acts xxvii.). 
 
 CIllMSON. [PuiifLE; Scarlet.] 
 CRISPUS (Kfta-wosi, chief ol' the .Jewish 
 Synagogue at Corinth (Acts xviii. 8), conveited 
 by St. Paul (I Cor. i. li^. According to tra- 
 dition {ConstttiU. Apost. vii. 46) lie was after- 
 wards bishop of yligina. 
 
 CRITICISM, BIBLICAL. This phrase m 
 employed in two senses. Some lake it to signify 
 r,o* only the restoration of the text of Scripture 
 to its original state, but tire principles of inter- 
 pretation. This is an exterisive and inipro|jer 
 application. The science is strictly occujjied 
 with the text of the Bible. It is limited to those 
 principles and ope.'-ations which enable the reader 
 to detect and remove corruptions, to decide upon 
 the genuineness of disputed readings, and to 
 obtain as nearly as possible the original woids o/ 
 inspiration. Its legitimate object is to ascertain 
 tlie puiity or corruption of the text. It judges 
 whether an alteration has been made in a jmis- 
 sage ; and when it discovers any cliaage, it 
 labours to restore the primitive readings that 
 have been displaced. There are three sources 
 from which Biblical criticism derives all its aid, 
 both in detecting the changes made upon tlie 
 wiginal text, and in restoring genuine reailings. 
 1st. MSS. or written copies of the Bible. 
 2nd. Ancient translations into various Ian 
 guages. 
 
 3id. The writings and remains of tiiose early 
 ecclesiastical writers who have quoted the Scrip- 
 tures. 
 
 Some add a fourth, viz., critical conjecture^ 
 but the authority of this we are disinclined for 
 the most part to allow. 
 
 Criticism employs the ample materials fur- 
 nished by these sources. To attain lis end it 
 must work upon them with skill and discrimi- 
 nation. They afford wide scojie for acuteiies.i, 
 sobriety, and learning; and long experience it 
 necessary in order that (hey may be used with 
 efficiency and success. 
 
 Tlie present article will contain a brief his- 
 torical sketch of Biblical criticism, or a history 
 of the texts of the tJld and New TestamenU; 
 the condition in which thev have been at dif- 
 tereiit periods; the evidences on wliich our know* 
 ledge of their purity or coiiuptiou re^ts, and ttM
 
 4M 
 
 t^KlTlCISM, BIBLICAL. 
 
 diiel <iltem( 's that have Jjeen made to rectify or 
 aiiiei i tlifin. A liistoiv of criticism iiiusl <le- 
 ocriUi. the vaiioTis sta^'es ami forms tlivou^'h wliicli 
 die texts i)ave passed. It will ite expedient to 
 reserve an ^iiiimeratioii of tlie causes wliicli gave 
 rise to vai-ious leadings to a Culure article [Va- 
 Kiuus RiiADiNus], and, on the jnescnt occasion, 
 to detail the ))hases which tlie Helirew and Greek 
 •exis of flie Uhl and New Testaments iiave jire- 
 •«iited l)Oth in their imprinted and prinieu state, 
 in connection with the lal>ours of scholars to 
 wiiom such texts presented an object of inter- 
 esting attention and dilii^ent inquiry. 
 
 We shall commence with the text of the Old 
 Testament. Theie are four marked periods in 
 the his' jij of the Hebrew text. 
 
 1. Thai period in the history of the nnjn-inted 
 text ichici preceded (he closing of the canon. — 
 Of this we know nothing excq)t what is containeil 
 in Sciipfure itself ^Die Jews Ijesfowed much 
 care on their sacred b(Kiks. They were accus- 
 tomed to bold them in great veneration even in 
 the darkest times of national ajiostacy from Je- 
 hovah. How often tlie sejiarate book, were trans- 
 cribed, or with what degree of correctness, it is 
 impossible to tell. Many German critics sup- 
 jwse that the Hebrew text met with very un- 
 favourable treatment; that it v.as early subjected 
 to the carelessness of transcribers and oHicious 
 critics. Hence tlicy assume that it suffered great 
 alteration and corruption. DilVerences, iiowever, 
 between parallel sections do not prove what 
 Neologists adduce tliem to demonstrate. They 
 ■how rather the gejiuineness and integrity of the 
 t.>oo>ks in which they occur. Had such para- 
 gra])li3 exactly harmonized, we might have sus- 
 pected design or collusion ; but their variations 
 discover the aitlessness of the writers. Vfe dis- 
 agree with Eichhom, Bauer, Gesenius, De Wette, 
 and others, who have given lists of parallel 
 passages in some books in order to show that 
 the text was early exposed to extensive altera- 
 tions. 
 
 The most important ywrticular in this [lart of 
 the history is the Samaritan reetDsion of the 
 Pentateuch [Pentateuch]. This edition (if 
 8o it may be called) of the Pentateuch is indeed 
 .uncritical in its character. While we freely 
 acquit the Jeics of tampering with the text of 
 the Mosaic hooks, the Samaritans cannot be so 
 readily exonerated from the imputation. As far 
 as the latter are concerned, we are compelled 
 to believe, that the wortls of the Most High were 
 not always treated by them with sacred resjiect. 
 Additions, alterations, and transjwsitions, aie 
 quite apparent in their copy of the Pentateuch. 
 A close alliance between tiie text which lies at 
 the basis of the Septuagint Version and that of 
 the Samaritan Pentateuch has been always no- 
 ticed. Hence some think that they flowed from 
 a common recension. One thing is certain, that 
 the Seventy agree with the Samaritan in about 
 2000 places in opp)3ition to the Jewish text. In 
 . other books, too, of the Old Testament, besides 
 the five books of Moses, the Seventy follow a 
 recension of the text considerably diiVerent from 
 the Jewish. Thus in Jeremiah and Daniel we 
 find a diiVerent arrangement of sections, as well 
 as a diversity in smgle passages. The books of 
 Job and Proveibs present a similar disarrange- 
 mcLii uid alteration, which must be put down to 
 
 CRITICISM, BIBLICAL. 
 
 the account ty{ the Alexandrian Jews and Greek 
 translators. Tar dill'pient was tl:e condiul of th« 
 ]'n/estini'tn Jevv.s in the tieatinent of the sacn'd 
 b.ioks. They were veiy scrupulous in guarding 
 the text from in))ovafii)n, altioui^h it is iiiH)ossible 
 that they could have preserved it fiom all cor- 
 ru|iti()n. But whatever eirors or mistakes had 
 ciept into dillerent copies were rendered apparent 
 at the time when the canon was fonned. We 
 lielieve with Hiivernick (Etnlcitunr/ in das Alia 
 Testament, p. 49) that ' Ezra, in unisim with 
 otliei- distinguished men of his time, completed 
 the collection of the .sacred writings ' He levised 
 the various books, corrected inaccuracies that liad 
 crept into them, and r»rndered the Old Testament 
 text jwrfecfly Wee from eiror. Thus a correct 
 and genuine cojiy wijs furnished under the 
 sanction of Heaven. Ezra, Nehemiah, and those 
 with whom he was associated, were infallibly 
 guided in the work of coinjileting the canon. 
 
 2, From the e»tablishi)tent of the canon to the 
 completion of the Talmud, i. e. the commence- 
 ment of the sixth centmy after Christ. — Tlie 
 Targiimists Onkelos and Jonathan closely agree 
 with the Masoretic text. The Gieek translations 
 of Aquila, Symmachus, aud Theotlotion, belong- 
 ing to the second century, deviate from the form 
 of the text afterwards called the Masoretic much 
 less than the Seventy. The Hebiew column o/ 
 Origen"s Hexapla presents a text allie«.l to the 
 Masoretic recension. Jerome's Latin version, 
 made in tlie Iburth centnry, is conformed to the 
 same Hebrew original. In the two Gemaras, 
 viz. the Jeiusalem and the Babylonian, belonging 
 to the fourth and sixth centuries respec'tively, w« 
 discern many traces of critical still ajjplied to 
 the preservation of a pure text. Diflerent read 
 ings in MSS. are mentioned, precepts are given 
 respecting Biblical calligraphy, and true readings 
 are restored By far the most important fact 
 which they present is the aihhicemeiit of f^as^es 
 of critical corrections made at an earlier period, 
 and wliich Moiinus (^Exercitationea Biblicre, 
 p. 108) justly calls the frac/ments or vestiges o' 
 recensions. These are— (I) D'"©"lD niDV At)- 
 latio scribarum. (2) D'")21D ppTl Co7rectio 
 scribarum. (3) Ptmcta extruordinaria. (4) 
 
 "•■•^-i k', ' '".P K'ri vlo K'thib. (5) n'p'J nTl^ 
 'T r-'?/J vlo K'ri. ^ b) The Taltnid also men- 
 tions dilfeient ri'ad ngs which tU .Masoietes call 
 
 n'ns^ np Kr, vk'thib. 
 
 The v«ritings of Jerome aftonl evidence, that, 
 in the fourth century, the Hebrew text waj 
 without the vowel-points, arid even the diacriUe 
 signs. 
 
 3. From the sixth ceiHnry, in which the Tal- 
 jniid teas completed, to the invent ion of printing. 
 — The learned Jews, especially those at Tiberias^ 
 where there was a famous scliool till the eleventh 
 century, continued to occiijiy themselves with 
 the Hebrew language and the criticism of the 
 Old Testament. The oliservations of preceding 
 Rabbis were enlarged, new remarks were made, 
 and the vowel-system was invented, the origin iA 
 which can hardly l>e (ilaced earl er than the 
 sixth century, llie name Masora has usually 
 been applied to that grammatico-historical tr.t' 
 dition, which, having been hamieil down orall 
 for some cei turies, became afterwaids sf> ex 
 tensive as to demand its ccmmiital to writinji;
 
 CRITICISM, BIBLICAL. 
 
 Much of what is contained in llie Musora exists 
 also in the Talniiul. Part of it, however, is 
 nliler tlian ihe Talinml, tiioujli not reduced to 
 its jiie^eiit Ibini till a iniicli later period. The 
 various observations cotii|)rised in the Ma^ora 
 were at first written in Fepaiale hooks, of which 
 there aie MSS. extant. Afterwards ihey were 
 ))ut in the margin of the Bii-de MSS. 
 
 Wiien we speak of the Masorctic recension of 
 the text. It is tiot nie.int tliat tiie Masoreles gave 
 a certain forin to the text itself, or that they 
 undertook and executed a new revision. They 
 made tiie textus reccptus of tiiat day the basis of 
 tlieir remarks, and gave their sentiments con- 
 cerning it. Had the text been altered in every 
 case where they recommend ; had it been made 
 conformable to their ideas of 'vhat it sliould he, 
 il would have been aupropriate to have called it 
 the MiisoretiC recension. The designation, how- 
 evei-, though not applicable in strictness, is cus 
 tomary. 
 
 The most important part of the Masora consists 
 of the marginal readings or A'Vj's, which tiie 
 Masoretes always preferred to tiie textual, and 
 which the later Jews have adopted. The K'ris 
 are critical, grammalical, orthographical, expla- 
 natory, and euphe/nistic. It lias been a suljject 
 of dispute among scholars from what source 
 the Masoretes derived the K'ris. It is highly 
 probable, that tliey were generally taken from 
 MSS. and tradition, thougli they may have been 
 in part the offspring of conjecture. It is but 
 reasonable to suppose that these scholars some- 
 times gave the result of their own judgment. In 
 addition to the K'ris the Masora contains an 
 enlargement of critical remaiks foun<l in the 
 Talmud. Beside-;, the verses, words, and conso- 
 nants of the dilferent books of the Bil)le are 
 coinited, a task unparalleled in point of minute 
 lalwur, thougti comparatively iui|)roHtable. 
 
 The ap[)liccition of the Masora in the criticism 
 of the Old Teitarwent is ditlicult, because its text 
 ha.«i fallen into gieat disorder. It was printed for 
 the first time in the first Rabbinical Bible of 
 Bomberg, superintended by Felix Pratensis. 
 In the second Rabbinical Bible of Bomberg, 
 R. Jacob Ben Cl:ayim l>estowed considerate 
 care ujjon llie printing of tiie Masora. At the 
 end of this second Ralibinical Bible there is 
 a collection of oriental and western readings, 
 or, in other words, Babi/lonian and Palestinian, 
 conniiunicated by rlie editoi, and the result of an 
 ancient revision of the text. The number is 
 about 216. Of tiie sources from wliicli the col- 
 lection was drawn we are entirely ignorant. 
 Judging by the coi.itents, it must be older than 
 many observations made by the Masoretes. It 
 should probably be leferred to a period anterior 
 to tlie introiluction of the vowel system, as it 
 contiins no allusion to tlie vowels. It is certainly 
 of considerable value, and proves that the oriental 
 no less than tlie ivestern Jews had always at- 
 'ended to the sta,te of the sacred text. 
 
 in addition to tiii§ list, we meet with anotlier 
 in the Rabbinical Bibles of Bomberg and Buxtorf, 
 dn«' in tlie sixth volume of tiie Lomlon Polyglott, 
 belonging to the eleventh r;entury. If owes its 
 origin to tfre lalKinrs of Ben .-Vslier and Ben 
 Naphtali, the res[)ective presidents of academies 
 in Palestine and Babyhrn. These readings, with 
 a single exception, refer to the vowels and accents. 
 
 CRI'lICISM, BIBLICAL. 
 
 48f 
 
 Tlie vowel system h.id, therefoie, been ci nipletw^ 
 when this collection was made. 
 
 Here tbe history of the iin|irinleil text may he 
 said to close. The old unvowelled copies jieribhed. 
 New ones furnished with points and accents cani« 
 into use. But allliou^di the ancient cojiies aie 
 now irrecoveraiily lost, llieii, "i no ivason f.ir sup- 
 [Kising timt their preservation to tlie present time 
 would have had any es-ential inlhience in altering 
 the form of the text. The text api ears to have 
 lieen eslalilished and settled when the punc- 
 tuation-system w;is completed. The laboins oi 
 the Masoretic doctors have lieeii of substantial 
 benefit in maintaining its mtegiily. 
 
 4. From the invention of printinr; to the 
 present time. — Tliere aie thiee early editions from 
 wliich all others iiave been taken. 1. That jiul)- 
 lislied at Soncino, a.u. 1 ISS, whicli wiis the firat 
 entire copy of ihe Hebrew Scriptures ever printed. 
 The text is furnished witli liie ])oinls and ,Lc.cent«, 
 but we are ignoiant of the MS.S. employed by 
 the editor. 2. Tlie second great edition was that 
 in the Comiilntensian Polyglott. 1.) 11-17, taken 
 from seven MSS. 3. Tlie tniid was tlie second 
 Rabbinical Bible of Bomberg, superintended by 
 R.Jacob Ben Ciiayim, Venice. ).52"). (5 \ ols. fol. 
 The text is formed chiefly after the Masoia, but 
 Spanish MSS. were used. Almost all modern 
 printed cojiies have been taken from it. 
 
 The .-Antwerp Polyglott has a text compounded 
 of those in the second and third recensions just 
 mentioned. 
 
 Among the editions furnislied with a critical 
 apjiaratus, tiiat of Buxtorf, publisheil at Basel, 
 ItilS), occu])ies a high jilace. It contains tlie 
 commentaries of the Jewish Rabbis, Jarclii, Aben- 
 esra, Kimclii, Levi Ben (ierson, and SiUidias 
 Ilaggaon. Tlie apjiendix is occupieU v.ith the 
 Jerusalem Targum, the great Masoia corrected 
 and amended, witli the various readings of Ben 
 Asher and Ben Naplitali. 
 
 The principal editions witli various readings 
 are those of Seb. MiJiisler, Jablonski, Van der 
 Hooght, J. H. Michaelis, C. F. Iloubigant, and 
 Benjamin Kennicott. 
 
 Miinster's edition ajipeared at Basel in 1536, 
 2 vols. ltd. The text is sup])osed to be founded 
 uj'on that of Brescia, 1494, 4to., wliich resolves 
 itself into the Soncino edition of 14SS. 
 
 Jablonski's edition was pulili.slied at Berlin in 
 1699, Svo., and again at tlie same place in 1712, 
 12mo. It is founded upon the best preceding 
 editions, but chiefly the second edition of Leusden 
 (1667). The editor also collated various MSS. 
 The text is remarkably accurate. 
 
 Van der Hooght's edition apj.ieared at Amster- 
 dam, 1705. The text is taken fioin Athias' 
 (1661 and 1667). The Masoretic readings are 
 given in l!ie margin; and at the end are collected 
 the various readings of the editions of Bomberg, 
 Piantin, Athias. and others. 
 
 Tlie edition published by J. H. Michaelis in 
 1720, is acconi|>anieil with the readings of twenty- i 
 four editions which the editor examined, Itesides I 
 those of five MSS in the libiary at Krfiirdt. 
 There is a want of accuracy in his collations. 
 
 In 1753, C. F. Hnubigant jiublishexl a new 
 edition in folio. The text is that of \'an de^ 
 Hooght, without till! poin;8. In the margin of 
 tlie Pentateuch, the Samaritan leadings are addeiL 
 For it he collated, but hastily, twelve MSS. He
 
 «90 
 
 CRITICISM, BIBLICAL. 
 
 «as been justly Matned for his rash iitdulgence in 
 ■conjectuial eineiidatiiin. 
 
 Dr. KeiinicDtt's edition, which is the most 
 tmpoitaiit liithi'ito jjuldisiieil, a])iieare(l at Oxford 
 — the first volume in I77(j, the second in \7^0. 
 The rnnvdicr of MSS. collated hy himself and his 
 associaii'S the chef of whom was Profes or Bums 
 of Helnistadt, amoiiiifed to (391. In addition to 
 his collition of MSS. and printed editions, he 
 followe.l ti e e.vample of various editors of the 
 Greek Testament in havinjj recoiuse to Rabbinical 
 writinLT^. especially the Tahnad. He h;is given 
 quotations fioin Jewish writeis. Tiie immense 
 inass of various readin^js here collected is unim- 
 portant. It serves, liowever, to show tliat, under 
 the infiaence of the JVIasura, the Hebiew text has 
 attaineil a coiisideriible degree of uniformity in 
 all existing MSS. 
 
 In 17nl-S-, John Bernard de Rossi puhlishetl 
 at Parma, in 4 vols. 4to., an important supple- 
 ment to Kennicott's collection. These various 
 readings were taken from R8 MSS. used by 
 Kenuicott, ami collate I anew by J)e Ro^si, fiom 
 479 in his own posicssion and 1 10 in other hands, 
 from many editions and Samaritan MSS., and 
 also frnm ancient versions. 
 
 In I7i'3, D.jederlein and Meisner publislied at 
 Leipzig an edition intended in some measnie to 
 supply the want of the extensive collations of 
 Kennicott and De Rossi. It contains the most 
 im]iortant readings. Tiie edition of Jahn, pub- 
 lished at Vienna in 1806, is very valuable and 
 convenient. 
 
 The most accurate edition of the Masoretic 
 text is that of Van der Ho.tght as lately edited by 
 Hahn at Leipzig, and stereotyped. The text of 
 Va;i der Iloo^'ht may now be reckoned the textia 
 recepliis. (For accuiate and complete lists of the 
 printed editions of the Hebrew Bible, the reader 
 is referred to Le Long's /Jibliotheca, edited by 
 Masch ; anil to Rosenmijller"s Ilandbuc/i f'tir die 
 Literatur der biblisckeii Kritik und E^egese, 
 i. pp. lS'J-277.) 
 
 Notwitiistanding all these editions, something 
 is still wanted. In the l)est of tliem lliere are 
 passages lequiring emendation. It is curious to 
 abser\e bow contradictions are allowed to remain 
 on the face of the Olil Testament iiistory. It 
 may be that the Masura has jnodi.ced so great 
 uniformity, as tiiat extant MSS. do not sanction 
 any depaituie from the present text ; but where 
 passages aie manifestly coiru))t, it is time that 
 they sliould be recvitipd. The criticism of the 
 Hebrew Bible is still behind that of the Greek 
 Testament. Tiie latter was earlier begun, and 
 has been more vigorously jirosecuted. We remain 
 nearly in the same state with regard fo the Old 
 Testament text in whicli Kennicott and De Rossi 
 left us, and it is time that some advance should 
 be maite in this departinent. 
 
 We shall now give a brief history of the New 
 Testament text in its ?<?^/>)'(/i^ef/ and ^jctnierf form. 
 The criticism of tiie New Testament is rich in 
 materials. esi)ecia!ly in ancient MSS. But, 
 althougli the Iiistory of New Testament criticism 
 records the industrious collection of a large 
 amount of materials, it is not eijually abundant 
 in iocll accredited facts, such as might be of 
 flssenriai benelit in enabling us to judge of tiie 
 vban^s made ii". the text. History is silent 
 
 CRITICISM, BIBLICAL. 
 
 respecting the period when the two parts Kf th« 
 New Testament, viz. the (vayy^Kiov and air6iF' 
 roKos, or, in other words, the fou^ Gospels and 
 tlie Pauline and remaining epistles, weie pui 
 togi ther, so as to form one trhole. About the 
 beginning of the tiiird century, it is certain that 
 all the books of the New Te.stament which we 
 now possess were acknowledged to be divine, and 
 regarded as canonical. 
 
 In the middle of the same century, Hesychiiis 
 and Liician uirdertonk to amend the MSS. of the 
 New Testament. Of their ciitical labours Jerome 
 seems not to have entertained a liigii opinion. The 
 MSS. they revised did not meet with general ap- 
 ])ioval, and Pone Gelasius issued a decree against 
 them. It is highly probable that they were not 
 the authors of recensions whicii were widely cir- 
 culated, or generally adojited. Origen did not 
 revise the text of the New Testament. 
 
 At a comparatively recent peiiod, certain in- 
 ternal maiks were obsei-ved to I'jelong to docu- 
 ments containing the same text. A similarity in 
 characteristic readings was noticed. Bengel ap- 
 pears to have been the first fo whom the idea 
 suggested itself of dividing the materials accoid- 
 iiig to the peculiarities which he faintly jieiceived. 
 It was afverwards taken up by Semler, and highly 
 elabora'ed by Griesbach. Later editors anil cities 
 have endeavoured to improve upon Giiesbaclrs 
 system. The dillijrent I'oims of text observed by 
 Semler and Griesliach tiiey called recensions, 
 although the appellation oi'/amili/ is more appro- 
 priate. Perhaps the data that have been so much 
 regarded in classifying the documents coiitainin| 
 tlie New Testament text are insutHcient to establisL 
 any system. The subject of recensions, tliougk 
 freipiently discussed, is not yet settled. In th« 
 history of the imprinted tex! it is the chief topic 
 which comes belbre the inquirer. Reserving il 
 for future notice [Recei*S>ions], we pass to tb« 
 history of the printed text, and the efforts mad« 
 to emend it. 
 
 The ichole of the New Te?tament was firs' 
 printed in the Complntensian Po'.yglott, 15! I 
 tliongli not published till 1517. The lirst pub 
 lished was that of Erasmus, at Bpscl, in 151C 
 Both were issued independently of one anothe». 
 and constitute the basis of the received tsxt. Yet 
 the best materials weie not employed iii preparing 
 them, and on both the Vulgate was allowed te 
 exert an undue inlluence. Even critical conjecture 
 was resoi ted to. by Erasmus. No less than five 
 impressions were published liy Erasmus, into the 
 third, of which 1 John v. 7 was Hist put. In the 
 last two he made great use ol' the Complutensian 
 Polyglott. 
 
 The third place among the early editors of the 
 Greek Testament has been assigned to Robert 
 Stephens, whose first edition was printed at Paris, 
 154(3, 12mo., chiefly taken from tlie Compluter^- 
 sian, and generally styled the Mirijica edition, 
 from the commencement of the preface. Hia 
 second edition was published in 1549; the third 
 in 1550, in folio. In this last he followed the fifth 
 of Erasmus, with whicli he comjiarcd fifteen MSS,, 
 and the Complntensian Polyglott. In 1551 ar^ 
 peared another edition, accompanied by the Vul« 
 gate and the translation of Erasmus. It ia 
 remai kable for being the first into which ti»e di» 
 vision of verses was intioduced. 
 
 The next [)erson that contributed to the jrit*^
 
 CRITICISM, BIBLICAL. 
 
 eigm of tlie Greek Testainrnt was Theotlore Beza. 
 
 T'ne text oC his Hist edition, 156"), folio, was the 
 Kline as that ot' tlie third of Stephens, altered in 
 all Hit fifty ))laccs, accompanied withthe Vidijale, a 
 Latin version of his own, and exeijfetiral remarks. 
 In his second edition, J5S2, he had the l>eiiefit of 
 \he Syriac version and two ancient codices. A 
 third impression !t])peared in 15S9. and a fomtli 
 in 1598. 1 lie i*!;/;er/r etlitions exliiliit jwrtly tlie 
 text of the tliird of Stephens, and jiartly that of 
 Be/a. The iiist apjieaied at Leydeii in 1024. 
 The second edition of lfi;5.'5 procrlaims its text to 
 be the textus receptvs, which it afterwaids he- 
 came. Subsequently thiee other editions issued 
 from the same press. The editor does iiot appear 
 to have consulted any Greek M-SS. All his read- 
 ings are either in Be^a or Stephens. 
 
 Brian Walton, the learned editor of the London 
 Polyglott, gave a more copious collection of various 
 readings in the sixth volume of that woik ihaniiail 
 before appeared; which was further enlarged by 
 Dr. Fell, in his edition, jiublished at Oxtbrd in 
 1675, and reprinted by Gregory in 1703, folio. 
 
 Dr. John Mill, encouraged and su})]>oited by 
 Fell, gave to the world a new edition in 1707, 
 folio. The text is that of Stephens' tiiird edi- 
 tion. In it the editor exhibited, from Gregory's 
 MSS., a much greater number of readings tiian 
 is to be found in any former edition. He 
 revised and increased the extracts formerly made 
 from ancient versions. Nor did he neglect 
 quotations from the fathers. It is said that 
 the woik contains tliirty thousand various read- 
 ings. This imjiortant edition, so far superior to 
 every preceding one, cost the laborious editor 
 the toilsome study of thirty yeais, and excited the 
 prejudices of many who were unable to appreciate 
 its excellence. It commenced a new era in the 
 criticism of the New Testament. Ludoiph Kus- 
 ter re])rinted Mill's Greek Testament at Amster- 
 dam, in 1710, enriching it with the readings of 
 twelve additional MSS. The first attemjit to 
 emend the textus .recephis was made by John 
 Albert Bengel. abbot of Alpirsjiach. His edition 
 apiieared at Tiibingen, quarto, 1734, to which was 
 j)refixed his '' Introductio in ciisin Novi Testa- 
 ment!." Subjoined is an apparatus criticns, con- 
 taining his collection of various readin.', chieflv 
 taken from Mill, but with inip.()rtant additions. 
 
 Dr. John James VVetstein lontributed, in no 
 stnall degree, to the advancement of sacred criti- 
 cism, by his large e<iition of the Greek Testament, 
 published at Amsterdam in 1751-2, 2 vols, tblio. 
 In 1730 he hael published prolegomena. It was 
 bis desire to give a new and corrected ttxt, iiut he 
 was comjieiled by circumstances to exliiliit the 
 textus recpptus. Yethe noted, partly in the text 
 itself, partly in the inner margin, such readings 
 as i-i^ iiiefe're<l. His collection of various read- 
 ings, witli tlieir respective authorities, far exceeils 
 all former woiks of the same kind in copiousness 
 and value. He collated anew many impoiiant 
 MSS. tliat had been superticially examined, gave 
 extracts from many for the first tiiiic, ».id made 
 use of the Harclean (imjirojierly called the 
 Philoxenian) version, hitlierto uncollated. For 
 convenience he maiked the vncial MSS. with the 
 letters of the alplialjet, and the titrsive with 
 numerical letters. His exegetical notes are 
 cbieily extracts from Greek, Latin, and Jewish 
 W'ters The edition of the Greek Testament, 
 
 CRITICISM, BIBLICAL. 
 
 491 
 
 under consi<lerati,)n, is indisjiensible tj every 
 critic, and will always be reckoned a tnarvi-iiutis 
 monument of iiidoniitable energy and unwearieii 
 diligence. The I'roU'gonnrnu contain a tre-asiire 
 of .sacred learning that will always be prized liy 
 the scliolar. They were rejinblisluil, with valu- 
 aiile notes, by Semler, in 1774, S»(>. 
 
 The scholar who is ])re-eniinently di.sfinguisbeil 
 in the history of New Testament critici.sm, is 
 Dr. John .lames Griesbach. He enriched the ma- 
 terials collected liy \\'et.stein with new and impor- 
 tant additions, by collating MSS., versions, and 
 early ecclesiastical writers, parlii iilarly Origen, 
 with great labour. The idea of rccotsimis, re- 
 commended by Bengel and Semler, he ado])te(l, 
 and carried out with much aciifeness and 
 sagacity. His liist edition ajijieared at Halle, 
 in 2 vols., 1774-5, Tiie liist thiee gosiiels were 
 synoptically arrangwl, but in 1777 he p'ibli.shed 
 them in their natural order. Tlie text is founded 
 on a com])arisoii of the copious materials which 
 he possessed. Nothing was ado])ted from con- 
 jecture, and nothing received which had not the 
 sanction of codices as well as versions. A select 
 number of readings is jilaced beneath the text. 
 In his Symbola ('riticir, he gave an account of 
 his critical labours, and of tl;e collations of new- 
 authorities he had made. Sucli was the com- 
 meiicement of Griesiiach's literary labours. 
 
 Between the years 1782-8S, C. F. Mattiiaei pul>- 
 lished a new edition of the Greek Te.stament in 12 
 vols. His text was i'ounded on a collation of more 
 than 100 Moscow MS.S., which he first examined. 
 It is accompanied with the Vulgate, sc/wiin, and 
 rzcarsus. He avowed himself an enemy to the 
 idea of- recensions, despised the ancient MSS. 
 (especially cud. Bezge), and the quotations of 
 the fathers, while he unduly exalted his Moscow 
 MSS. His cJiief merit lies in the careful colla- 
 tion he made of a number of MSS. hitheito 
 unknown. 
 
 Before the comjiletion of Matthaeis edition, 
 appeared that of Alter, 17-<i-7, 2 vols. The 
 text is that of the Vienna MS., with wnich he 
 collated 22 others in the luijierial library. To 
 these he added readings from tneCoptic, Slavonian, 
 and Latin versions. 
 
 In 17SS, Professor Birch of Coj-.enhagen en- 
 larged the province of sacred criticism by lii,'? 
 .sji'endid edition of the Ibur Gospels in folio and 
 tiuarto. The text is a reprint ot .Stephens' tliird, 
 but the materials ap|)endeil to it are highly valu- 
 a!)le. Tliey consist of extracts taken by him- 
 self ami iSloldeniiauer, in their travels, from 
 many MSS. not ex.rmincd by Wetstein. and of 
 Alter's selections fiom the Jeiu.-alem-Syriac 
 veision discovered ifi the Vati(^aii. Bird: was 
 tiie first who carefully collated tlie Codex yn/iea- 
 7nis. The publication of the second volume w;is 
 ]irevented by a tire that ilestroyed many of the 
 materials. In 17!)S, he publisJied his various 
 readings on the remainder of the New Testament, 
 except the .-\]iocalypse. In IfiOO he jmbjished 
 those relating to this book also. 
 
 In 179(3 ap])eared the first vohime of a new 
 and greatly-iin])roved edition of Griesbach's New 
 Testament, [""or it lie made extracts from the 
 Armenian, Slavoniv, Latin, Sahidiu, Cojitic, 
 and other version.s, besides incor))orati:ig into hia 
 coUt-ction the re.^ul's of the latMuis of Mat- 
 thaei. Alter, and Birch, The secojid volmn*
 
 iVil 
 
 CRITICISM, HIHLICAL. 
 
 aj>imarcd ill lf.O«. !»;)t.h pul,'ii!:eil at Ilalle. At 
 111* eiul ol' t'.if second volinne is a (liosei';;tJiiti 
 Ml \ Jolin V. 7. TliK woik was lepiintoil ju Lmi- 
 doii in 1H09, and again iu 1S18. Tlie j.imI.'- 
 g(i!nena aie excvc<;ln_,'ly valuable. Tins eciitioii 
 cann.it l)e too lii-lily rated. It is indispensalile 
 til eveiy critic and intelligent (ticologian. 
 
 In 182'', iiiarjy new matt rials iiavinij been 
 jirocitied Mince the date ol'Griesbacirs last edition, 
 il was tliouglit iiece8-ary to [inblisli a tliird. It 
 api eaied accordingly, under flie superintendence 
 'jl' Dr. Scluilz. The first volume contains the 
 pr(.lego:iiena, and tiie Gospels. It exhibits various 
 readings from aboul 20 new souices, many cor- 
 rections of Griesbacirs references and citaiions, 
 besides considerable im|)i()Vfments in oilier le- 
 Sfwcts. The second volume has not yet been 
 I)ul,lished (1843). 
 
 The editions of Knapp, Schott. Tittmann, Vater, 
 Naebe, and Goeschcn, are chielly founded upon 
 that of Griesbach. Of these the most esteemed is 
 that of Kiiapi>, which has ])assed through five 
 editions, and is characterized by sound judg- 
 ment, especially in the punctuation and accents. 
 
 In I'^JO appeared the first volume of a large 
 critical edition, supei intended by Dr. J. Mai tin 
 Augustus Scliolz, professor at Bonn, containing 
 the Gospels. The second volume, in lR3fi, com- 
 pleted the work. Both are in quarto. Tlie editor 
 sjient twelve years of incessant labour in collect- 
 ing materials for the worl<, and travelled into 
 many countries for the purpose of collating MSS. 
 The prolegomena prefixed to the first volume 
 occupy 172 jiages, and contain ample information 
 resj^ctiug all the codices, versions, fathers, acts 
 of councils, &c. &c., which are u.sed as authori- 
 ties, together with a history of the text, and an 
 exjx»sitiorj of his classification system. In the 
 inner margin are given the gei:;*rai readings cha- 
 racteristic of the three gieat families. The total 
 number of MS.S. which he has added to tliose 
 previously collated is 60G. Little reliance, how- 
 ever, ciin be placed on the accuracy ';f the ex- 
 tra.cts rtr.ich he lias given for the first time. His 
 researches hn-v 'ended to raise the texius receptus 
 higliei' tlian uric^bach ])laced it. In consequence 
 oi his preferring the Cuiistuntiaopolitan family, 
 iiis tex ! com"5 nearer the Elzevir edition tlian 
 that of (iriesbacii. The merits of this laborious 
 editor are considerable, ile uas greatly enlarged 
 our critical ajijiaratus. Yet in acuteness, saga- 
 city, and scholardiij) he is far inferior to Gries- 
 Lach. His collations apfiear to have been super- 
 ficial. Tiiey are not to be depended on. Hence the 
 text cannot command tlie confidence of Protestant 
 critics. We cannot believe, with the editoi, that 
 'iie Byzantine family is equal in value or autho- 
 rity to tJie Alexandiine which is confessedly 
 more ancient, nor can we put his junior codices 
 on a level v/ith the very xaluabie documents of 
 tiie Oriental recension. His text is, on the whole, 
 inferior to that of Griesbach. In a few important 
 {iassiiges a.lon€ it is sujierior. 
 
 Tlie edition of Liichmann, though small in 
 comiuiss, deserves to \ie mentioned. It was pub- 
 lished in lfi31, l2ino. The editor says that he 
 has nowhere followed his own judgment, but the 
 u^ayc of the Oriental cliurches. Tlie text of 
 Lachmann has been well received in Germany, 
 Uid much importance has been attached to it. 
 £'rom the authority it has obtained, it would ap- 
 
 CRITIC ISM, BIBLICAL. 
 
 pea; that the C.<nstantino}K)litan text of Scliole if 
 n»it very favourably legarded. De VVelte, in hin 
 Introductiun to the liibh, shows a leaning to- 
 wards the \ieft's of Lachinann. Rinck coincidfs, 
 on tiie whole, with the same. The last named 
 scholar has enlarged the critical apparatus of tlie 
 New Testament, by collating and describing se- 
 veral MSS. {Luciibratio Critica in Acta A post, 
 epp. Cath. et J'nuli/i., ^c. A,f., Basel, 1S30, /-vo.) 
 
 Since the apjiearance of Lachmann's edition, 
 another has been published in Geriiianj' by l)i 
 Tischendorf, which requiies some notice. It ex- 
 hibits a corrected text, taken from the most an- 
 cient and best MSS., with the principal varioui! 
 readings, together with the readings of tlie Elze- 
 vir, Knaj)p, Scliolz, and Lachniaim editions. 
 Great pi' ins have manifestly been bestowed on the 
 text and the critical apparatus subjoined to it. 
 The prolegomena, consisting of 85 pages, are ex- 
 ceedingly valuable. They treat of recensions. 
 with an especial reference to Scliolz's systeiv. ; 
 enumerate the readings peculiar to the tliird 
 edition of Stejiheiis and tliat of Mill, to the edi- 
 tions of Matthaei and Griesbach ; and specify tlie 
 critical materials employed in the elaboration of 
 a pure text. The work under consideration ap- 
 peared in 1811, 8vo., Leipzig. A careful perusal 
 of the editor's able preface, and a collation of his 
 text and critical apparatus beneath it, have con- 
 vinced us of the sound judgment, niinute dili- 
 gence, extreme accuracy, and admiraljle skill by 
 which this edition of the Greek Testament is cha- 
 racterized. 
 
 Very recently we have been favomed with the 
 fir.st volume of a large edition by Lachmann 
 ( NocuDi Testnmentum, Greece et Latine. Carolus 
 Lachiuanniis recensiut. I'hilippics Buttmannns 
 Ph. F. GroeecB lection is miclorit'Ues apposuit. 
 Tomus prior. Berolini, 1842, 8vo.). 
 
 This is by far the most important edition that 
 has appeared since the days of Griesbach, and 
 must produce results highly favouralile to the 
 advancement of New Tesia/nent criticism. Tlie 
 principles on which Lachni.mn [iroceeds were 
 expounded in the T/ieolog. Studeii und Kritikcn 
 for 1830, pp. 817-S4.5, and again in 1835, ji. 570, 
 sq. The path which he first pursued in his 
 smaller edition was indicated by Bentley, wh<> 
 jiurposed to publish the Greek Testament on si- 
 milar principles* 
 
 In order to discover his Oriental tex^ (a text 
 which is substantially the same as the Alexan- 
 drian), Lachmann makes use of the following 
 authorities :— 1. A. B. C. D., as also P. Q. T. Z., 
 in the Gosjiels, and in the Pauline epistles, H. iu 
 addition. 2. Latin interpretations, oiz. in the 
 Gospels the Vercellian, V'eroiiian, Colbertine, 
 Cambridge; in the Acts the Cambridge and 
 Laudian; in the Pauline epistles the Clp"»7»»nt, 
 St. Germains, Boeinerian ; in the A]X)calypse the 
 Primasian. In addition to these, the Vulgate, 
 
 * Hare wrote thus concerning Bentley, in 
 1724: — A.d novum Foedus ex antiquissiiiiig 
 edd. pristmo nitori restituendum animinn adjecit, 
 ut Graecum textum ab insana variarum lee 
 tionum mole quam recentiores edd. invexerunt 
 liberaret, et Hieronymi versionem ab erroribui 
 purgatam talem daret, qualis e doctissimi patrii 
 manu exiit ; opus profecto grande, et tanti virj 
 diligentia, acumine, iudicio iinprin is dignunu'
 
 CRITICISM, HlIiLICAL. 
 
 as ejited l)y Jerome, is everywhere employeil. 
 Of the fathers he consults Irenaeus. Ori:,'en, Cy- 
 jrian, Hilary, and Lucifer. Tiie immense mass 
 jf later MSS. and fatliers is entirely overli>i)ked 
 as useless 
 
 The authorities for the Greek readinjj^ are 
 given helow the text : and. when it is considered 
 lO.v few materials are enijiloyed, it will he readily 
 supposed that the various readings noted ure not 
 numerous. They are. however, most valuahle and 
 imiiortant. 
 
 In iiihlirion to the Greek text and critical 
 apparatus, the Ilieronymiau Vuli^ate is given, in 
 the same firm, as nearly as possihle, in wliich it 
 proceeded frojn Jerome, witii im|Hirtant readings 
 extracfeil from the Fuldensian codex, from the 
 same corrected hy Victor bisho]) of Capua, and 
 from tiie Laurentian codex. The i^reat aim of 
 the etlitor has been to exhibit a text in which 
 the most ancient adtliorities are entirely agreed. 
 \Vlierever tl)is caimot be done witli certainty, his 
 critical apparatus shows the degree of probability 
 attached to the text as given i)y iiim. To the 
 vohuue is prefixed a jireface of 5-5 pages (a few of 
 them from Butlmann), in which the learned editor 
 exiwunds his mode of procedure, and the autiio- 
 rifies consulted. Respecting the oi)i)onent.s of his 
 system, he does not speak in tiie most courteous 
 or becoming language, nor is his lyatinily ihf! 
 [lurest. Yet the preface is instructive witha', 
 and must be studied by him who uses Lacliinarin's 
 teKf. 
 
 We are inclined to attach primary imjiortance 
 !•) this eilition, the remaining vohime of wlilcli 
 we shall lo()i< for with anxiety. Were we dis[)o>eil 
 to follow the text of any one editor absohttebj, 
 w'e should fellow Lachmann's. But it may be 
 doubted whether he iias not cnnliiied liimself to a 
 range of authorities too circumscril>ed. By keep 
 ing within the fourth century, he has been occa- 
 sionally compelled to rest upon otie or two tes- 
 timonies. We shouhl therefore like to see more 
 authorities consulted. We are ])ersuailed, how- 
 ever, that til's au'lior has entered ujMm a right 
 path of investigation wiiich will lead to re.sult.s 
 lioth permanently useful and unusually suc- 
 cessful. 
 
 The operatior. \ of sacred criticism have esta 
 blished the genuineness of tiie Old and New Testa- 
 ment texts in every matter of importance. All 
 (he doctrines and duties remain unalTected liy its 
 investigati.ins. It lia* urovc-l thai .here is no 
 material corruption in tne insp./c;! records. It 
 has shown that dining the lapse of many cen- 
 turies the Holy Scriptures have been preserved in 
 a surprising (fegree of purity. The text is sub- 
 stantially in tlje same- condition as that in which 
 it was found seventeen hundred years ago. Let 
 the plain reader fake comfoit to himself when he 
 reHects that tlie received text which he is accus- 
 tomed to read is suhbtantiallij tlie same as that 
 which men ol* the greatest learning and the most 
 unwearied diligence have elicited from an im- 
 Dieiiae lieap of ilociunenls. 
 
 For a copious arco\uit of the various editions 
 of the Greek Testament the reader is referred to 
 Le Lcng's 7<j6//oC/.«'a, eiiited by Mascli : or to 
 RiweEmiiller's Ilaiidhacli fur die U'enititr der 
 hiblschen Kritik vnd Ej.-ef/f'sf, i. ]i]). 27-^--122. 
 S<;e ilso an article on the ' ManiHcripts and Edl- 
 lAiis of tlie New Testament,' by Moses Stuait, in 
 
 CROCDinLK. 
 
 493 
 
 Robinsoi s BibliolJicra Sacra, No. 2, May, IS 1.1. 
 l'\)r an account of tlie ])rinci|ial authois i>n 
 Bililical criticism, see David.M-n's Lecture* on 
 iJiblicalCriliciatii, frtmi which rhieily tliis article 
 is abridged and condensed. — S. 1). 
 
 CROCODIL?:. Although the term KpoKi- 
 Bei.\os occurs in the (iieek veision, there is )io 
 s])eciHc word in the Hebrew of which it is the 
 acknowlfdged rejiiesentative. Reserving, iiow- 
 ever, our remaiks on lliis sulijeet fi.r the articles 
 DitAooN, Lkviathan, and ^^ iiai.k, we shall in 
 this ])lace confine ourselves to .some notice of criv 
 codiles strictly .so called, ami, while we shall 
 endeavour to simjilify the discussion as much 
 as jjossible. we shall jioinf out some leading cha- 
 racters in the animal coinciding with allusi(<ns 
 to it in the Scriptures, wliicli could not be pro- 
 perly noticed elsewhere. 
 
 The crocodiles which we have to notice at pre- 
 sent consist of three varieties, or perhaps sj)ecies. all 
 natives of the Nile, distinguishable by the d H'ei- 
 ent arrangement of the sciitip or bony sfiids on 
 the neck, and the number of rows of the .same ))ro- 
 cesses along the back. Their general lizard form 
 is too well ktiown to need j>articular descrip- 
 tion ; but it may be remarked that of the whole 
 family of crocodiles, compreiieiiding the .shar])- 
 beaked gavials of India, the alligators of the 
 west, and the crocodiles projieily so called, the 
 last are supplied with the mti>t vigorous instru- 
 ments for swimming, both from the strength and 
 vertical breailth of their tails, and from the fingers 
 of their paws having deeper wel s. Although all 
 have from thirty to forty teeth in each jaw, shugipd 
 like spikes, without breadth so as to cut, or .sur- 
 fice so as to admit of grinding, the true crocodile 
 alone has one or more teeth oji each side in Ijoih 
 jaws, cxserted, that is, no' cl ising within but 
 outside the jaw. They have n,( external ear I.eyond 
 a follicle of skin, and the eyes have a |H>sition 
 aliove the jilane of the head, the pupils being 
 contr.actile, like those of a cat, and in .some 
 having a luminous irreenish tinge, which may 
 have suggested the alliuion lo "■ the lids of the 
 moining' (Job xli. IS), The npjier jaw is no< 
 movable, l>ut, as well as the I'oiehead, is ex 
 tremely dense and bony ; the ret of the n])|iei 
 siiifiice being covered with seveial rows of bo».sea;, 
 or ])luted ridges, which on the tail are at last re- 
 duced from two to one, each scale having a high 
 hoiny crc.sf, which acts as ])a)i of a great tin 
 Although dVt>iLtute i<r a real vuiue, ciucodile^ whuo
 
 i94 
 
 CROCODILE. 
 
 usigty proilnce a snorting sound, something like 
 a deep gio-vl ; and occasionally tliej' open the 
 mouth very wide, remain for a time thus exposed 
 feeing the liieeie, ami, closing the jaws witii a 
 sudden snap, cause a i-epoit like the fall of a 
 trap-door. Il is an awful sound, which we have 
 heard mure 'Jiau once in the stillness of the night 
 in tfcj.ical S )'ith Ameiica; and we aie informed 
 tliat the same pheiiomenoii occurs on the Ganges, 
 and on the west coast of Africa. Tiie gullet of 
 the crocodile is very wide, the tongue being com- 
 jtletely tieil to the lower jaw ; and beneath it are 
 glaniU exuding a musky substance. On land the 
 crocodile, next to tlie gaiial, is the most active, 
 and in the water it is also the species that most 
 readily frequents the open sea. Of the immense 
 number of genera which we have seen or exa- 
 mined, none reached to 25 feet in length, and 
 we believe the specimen in the vaults of tlie 
 British Museiun to be one of the Jar^'est. Sheep 
 are ohserved to be unmolested by these animals ; 
 but where they abound, no pigs can be kept, 
 perhaps from tlieii frequenting the muddy siiores ; 
 for we have knnwn only one instance of croco- 
 diles being encountered in woods not immediately 
 close to tlie water's side : usually they bask on 
 sandy islands. As their teeth are long, but not 
 fitted fm- cutting, they seize tlieir [irey, which tiiey 
 cannot masticate, and swallow it nearly entire, or 
 bury it beneath the waves to macerate. Having 
 very small excretory organs, their digestion re- 
 quires, and accordingly they are found to possess, 
 an immense bi I iary apparatus. They are ovi])arous, 
 burying tlie eggs in their sand; and the female 
 lennaiiis in the viciiiity to dig them out on the 
 day the young have broken the shell. What is 
 said in ancient history of the ear-lings fastened 
 to crocodile? must be understood of ornaments 
 fixed to follicles of the skin ; the Sudara-oron, or 
 man-croc(Klile of the Malays, and the sacred 
 otter of the ancient Iii3h,are described with similar 
 ornaments. Crocodiles are caught with hooks, 
 and iliey seldom succeed in cutting the rope 
 when properly prepared. Tliough a ball fired point 
 blank will })enetrate between the scales which 
 cover the body, tiie invulnerability of these great 
 Saurians is sufficiently exemplitied by the fol- 
 lowing occurrence. One being brought well 
 bound to the bazaar at Cawnpore on the Granges, 
 it was purchiised by the British officers on the 
 spot, and carried farther inland, for the purpose 
 olF being baited. Accordingly, the ligatures, ex- 
 cepting '.hoie which secured tlie muzzle, being 
 cut asunder, the monster, though it had been 
 tnanv hours exjjosed to the heat, and was aloolsi 
 8oftb<;ated with dust, fought its way throtigh an 
 immense tn/*d <j. assailants, soldiers and natives, 
 armed with staves, lances, swords, and stones, 
 and worried liy numerous terriers, hounds, and 
 curs; overturning all in its way, till, scenting the 
 river, it escajjed to the w-iter at a distance of two 
 miles, in spite of the most strenuous opposition! 
 
 According to Strabo, the crocodiles of Egypt 
 were known by the name of Suchus (SoCxos)' 
 from an K-ryptian word supposed to have been 
 Souch or Soucha, jierhaps applied solely to the 
 sacred animals of the sjjecies. Spanheim, in his 
 remarks on the life of Isidorus by Datnascius, 
 tliinks tliat l,ovxos may be referred to the monitor 
 Hzard known by the name of Waran : and it is 
 Qot improbable that tlie same laxity in the appli- 
 
 CROCODILE. 
 
 cation of proper names which is traceable in tW 
 Oriental languages, and in the Greek, where tlir 
 original meaning of KpoK65ei\os. in the Ionic, 
 is ' lizard,' and even in modern tongues, has al- 
 lowed the word to be vaguely employed to denote 
 Saurians. Herodotus says that the Egyptians 
 called crocodiles Xa/xi^ai, which, according to 
 Sir J. G. Wilkinson, is a corruption of Jl/saA, or 
 Emsooh. Tlie Arabic retains Teinsah, and a simi- 
 lar name, Tomsche or TcniescJie, was anciently 
 apjilied on the Danube and tlie Scheldt to the 
 sturgeon. Kimsak is the Turkish ; Kimbutii the 
 Ceylonese ; but the Leng of the Malays, still 
 venerated by them, is of the gavial subdivision 
 of the genus : it is the horned crocodile, or Ma- 
 kaira of Budha lore ; it figures in the zodiac of 
 the utmost east, and there becomes confounded 
 with the dragon — an emblem assumed by all the 
 nations of Mongolic origin. During the Roman 
 sway in E^ypt, crocodiles had not disapiieared in 
 the low"r Nile, for Seneca and others allude to a 
 great battle fought by them and a shoal of dol- 
 phins in the Heracleotic branch of the Delt^. 
 ])uring the decline of the state even the hippopo- 
 tamus le-appeaied altout Pelusium, anil was shot 
 at in the seventeenth century (Iladzivil). In the 
 time of the Crusades crocodiles were found in the 
 Crocodilon river of eirly writeis, and in the Cro- 
 codilorum laciis, still culled Moiat al Temsah, 
 which appear to be the Kerseos river and marsh, 
 three miles south of Caisaiea, though the na(tir» 
 of the locality is most appropriate at Nahr-el 
 Arsoof or el-Haddar. 
 
 The exploit of Dieudonne de Bozon, knighl 
 of St. John, who, when a young man, slevv thd 
 dragon of Rhodes, must be regarded as a combat 
 with a crocodile, which had pioljably been carried 
 northward by the regular current of the eastern 
 Mediterranean; for so the picture still extant in 
 the harem of a Turkish itihabitant rejiiesents the 
 Hawaii Kebir or Great Beast — a picture necessa- 
 rily painted anterior to the expulsion of the 
 knights in 1480. As De Bozon died Grand Mas- 
 ter of the Order at Rhodes in 135'3, and the sjwils 
 of the animal long remained hung up in a church, 
 there is not, we think, any reason to doubt the 
 fact, though most of tiie recortled circumstances 
 may be fabulous.* 
 
 That crocodiles and alligators take the sea, 
 and are found on islands many leagues distant 
 from other land, we have ourselves witnessed ; and 
 the f«'/ is particularly notorious at the (rrand 
 Caymsi- <* in the sea of '^exic's which is almost 
 destitute of fresh water, ^t is indeed owing to 
 this circumstance that the same species may fre- 
 quent all the rivers of a great extent of coast, as 
 is the case with some found in Africa, whence 
 they spread to India and the Malayan islands. 
 We have been thus explicit on the natural history 
 of these formidable Saurians, in order that we 
 may have less occasion to notice the mis-state- 
 ments of the ancients when we shall have to 
 
 * Other paintings by the same artist, said to 
 have been Sebast. de Firenze, pupil of Cimabue, 
 .show that he did not represent grand masters 
 later than Gio de Lartin, who w;is elected 14^)7, 
 and died 1454. All the ancient Greek and the latei 
 Mediterranean dragons, as those of Naples, Arle^ 
 &c., where they are not allegorical, are ik> doubt 
 derived from crocodiles.
 
 CROSS. 
 
 Oomtiient on tlie Hel row wurds wliicli are aiisumeil 
 to indicilte t'liein. \Vf omit fiii- tlio picsfiit all 
 porticulais resjjectiii};; the ciocoilile (li\iiiifio8, 
 th«ir woisliip and piesei vatiuii in tlif ininiiiny 
 •te.t«, which Sir J. G. Wilkinson's intciesiiiiLj 
 works have laiely made known to all readers. — 
 
 C. H. S. 
 
 CROSS. This word is derived from the Latin 
 erux. Respecting the origin of its Greek repre- 
 •entative there is some dixersity of opinion. Ac- 
 cording to Enstathius and Hesycnius, tlio Greek 
 oravpSs is so called Trapi ttjv els aepa ffTaTiv, t) 
 napa rh eis (6pos 'lfrTa(rdai, from its standing 
 erect, or from its standing with its arms hoi izontal. 
 Liitin etymologists also derive the word from 
 ToTrj/tti, to place. In its general acceptation the 
 cross ia an instrument of piudshment, and, meta- 
 phorically, pvmishment itself, as well as the pain 
 which it inflicts, and generally any severe sutfer- 
 ing or heavy trial. Instead of ffravpSs the Greek 
 word <tk6Ko-^ is sometimes (bund as equivalent to 
 the Latin crux. B:ith are in frequent use on the 
 jjart of tile writers who transferred the events of 
 Roman history into the Greek tongue. 
 
 In its simplest t'orm, consisting of two pieces of 
 wood, one standing eiect, the other crossing it at 
 liglit angles, the cross was kniiwn at an e irly age 
 ill the history of the world. Its use as an instru- 
 ment of punishment was prohalily suggested by 
 the shape s i often taken liy branches of trees, 
 whicli seem to have Ijeen the first crosses that were 
 employed. It was certainly customary to hang 
 criminals on trees — arbor infelix ; Cicero (Pro 
 Rabir. 3) awpears to consider hanging on a tree 
 and crucifixion as of the same import, and Se- 
 neca (Zs/7. 101) names the cross infelix lignum, 
 whicli may with no undue liberty be rendered 
 ' the accursed tret;.' Trees are known to have 
 been used as crosses (TertuU. Ap. viii. 16), and 
 to every kind o'" hanging v/hich bore a resem- 
 blance to crucifixion, such as that of Prometheus, 
 Andromeda, &c., the name was commonly ap- 
 plied. Among the Scythians, Persians, Carthagi- 
 nians, Greeks, Romans, and the ancient Germans, 
 traces are found of the cross as an instrument of 
 punishment. The sign of the cross is found 
 as a holy symbol among several ancient nations, 
 whr> may accordingly be named, in the language 
 of Tertullian, crucis religiosos, devotees of the 
 cross. Among the Indians and Egyptians the 
 cross often appears in their ceremonies, sometimes 
 in the shape of the letter T, at others in this 
 shape -f-. At Susa, Ker Porter saw a stone cut 
 with hieroglyj)liics and cuneiform inscriptions, 
 on which in one coiner was a figure of a cro.ss, 
 thus (^. The cross, he says, is generally under- 
 stood to be symbolical of the divinity or eternal 
 r.fe, and certainly a cross was to be seen in the 
 temple of Serapis as the Egyptian emblem of the 
 future life, as may be leanit in Sozomen and 
 Rutinus. Porter also states that the Egyptian 
 priests urged its being found on the walls of their 
 temple of Seiajiis, as an argument with the vic- 
 torious anny of Theodusius to save it from de- 
 struction. From the numerous writings on this 
 subject by La Croxe, .lablonski, Zoega, Visconti, 
 Pococke, Pluclie, Petit Radel, and others, the 
 symbol of the cross appears to have been most 
 various in iU significations. Sometimes it is the 
 Phallus, sometimes the planet Venus, or the 
 NL'.?nif»ter, or an emblem of the four elements, or 
 
 CROSS. 
 
 495 
 
 the seiisons (Cieu/.er"s Si/inbo/ik, pp. IfiS-I.^ It 
 is not theri'loie surpr'sing that ancient ami even 
 modem Chriifian writers should on this subject 
 have indiilgeJ in siiiiie degii-f ••(' refiiiciMcnl and 
 mysticism. Justin Mii\tyr (A/'ul. i. § 72) says. 
 ' The sign of the cross is inijuessed upon the 
 whole of iiatine. There is hamly a hanuiciafts- 
 man but uses the figuie of it among the iirijjle- 
 ments of his industry. It foinis a }»ait of man 
 himself", as niav be seen when he raises hi.s hands 
 in piayer.' In like maniu'i Miniitins Felix 
 (c. 29) : ' Even nature it.si If seems to haxe lijimed 
 this figure for ns. We have a natural cioss on 
 every slii[) who.se sails are sjiread, in every yiike 
 thai man forms, in every outspreading of his 
 amis in jnayer. Thus is the cros.s found both 
 in the arrangements of nature, and among tlw 
 heathen.' 
 
 According to Lipsius (De Cr%ice, i. 5-0 1 an'I 
 Gretser (De Ci-^r.cs Christi, vol. i. c. 1) there 
 were in general two kinds of crosses; — I, ciux 
 simplex ; 2. crux con:posita or com])ai:ta. The 
 first consi.sted of a st;ike on which the ciimiiial 
 was fastened or by which he was impaled. For 
 the first kind of punis!iii;ent a tree or a sjiecially 
 prepared stake was used, o.i which the ciiminal 
 was bound, and cither left to perish, or imme- 
 diately put to dealli. For impaling (infixio) a 
 long and sharpened piece of wood (p'lle) was em- 
 ployed, on which the criminal was put as on a 
 spit. Seneca desciibes this kind of execution 
 (Consolat. ad Marc. c. 20): '1 behold these 
 crosses, not of one kind, but made dilVereiiily by 
 dillerent people. Some suspended the criminal 
 with his lieaii turned towards the earth ; otheis 
 drove a stake through his body.' This cruel 
 mode of execution was formerly very customary 
 in Russia, China, Turkey, and other c luntries, 
 and is not yet universally abolished by law. 
 
 Of the crux comjiosita or compound cross there 
 were three sorts : 1, crux decussata ; 2, crux 
 commissa; 3, crux immissa. The cmx decussata 
 is also ca'fled .-Andrew's cross, because tradition 
 reports that on a cross of this kind the Apostle 
 Andrew sulTered death. Jerome {Comment, on 
 Jerem. c. 31) desciibes this cross in the following 
 terrs ; — Decussare est jier medium secave velut 
 si (I-iae regiilaj concurrant ad speeiem liteiae X 
 qupe figgra est crucis : saying in elVect that the 
 name indicates two lines cutting uach otlier after 
 the manner of the letter X. So Isidoius Ilisp. 
 {Orig. 1, 1. 3) says that the letter X d/-iiotes a 
 cross and the number ten (in Roman numerals). 
 
 The crux coinmissa, Lipsius states, was t'innied 
 by putting a <ro.s3 piece of wood on a perjien- 
 dicular one, so tliat no ]yMt of the latter may 
 stand above the fonner. This form is found in 
 tlie figure f". Of the crux immissa, or. as others 
 prefer to term it, crux capitata, the following is 
 given as the d«'scription : — 'acro-s in which the 
 longer piece of wood or jiale stands alH)ve the 
 shorter piece which runs across it near the top.' 
 It is distinguished from the preceding by the part 
 of the longer beam which is above the shorter or 
 
 transverse, tli is -1-. This form is found in paint- 
 ings more frequently than any other, and on s 
 cross of this kind our Saviour is believed to liav< 
 sufTered death. 
 
 Of the nature of the cross on which Jesus waa 
 crucified, and of every particular connected witk
 
 199 
 
 CROSS. 
 
 It, t^xact infonuatioti otiglit lo lie accessible, since 
 four ecclesiastical ii'stmiatis (Socrates, i. 13, So- 
 lomni. ii. I, Rulinus, i. 7, Tlieodoret, i. 18) con- 
 cur ill statin-,' tliat it was foniul liy the Empress 
 Helen;i, mother of Constautine the Great. This 
 event is as^igneil to the year of our Lm d 326. Eu- 
 Behiiis alone is silent on tiie discovery. The other 
 writers slate tiiat Helena, wlieii .seventy-nine years 
 of atre, w.is induced hy the warmth of her piety to 
 visit th ■ [jlaces which the Saviciur had i-endered 
 sacred by his presence .md sullerini^s. The 
 Hatred of tlte heati "ii had led them to obliterate 
 as mucti as possilile \\\ tiaces of (he memorable 
 events which the life .vnd deatli of Jesus had hal- 
 lowed ; and to cover Mount Calvary with stones 
 and eaith and raise thereon a temple to the 
 goddess Verms. A Jew, however, liad treasured 
 up wliat traditions he cou'd ^^atlier, and was thus 
 enaltlcd to point out to Helena the spot where 
 our Lord had been buried. The place being ex- 
 cavated three crosses were found, ■ and the title 
 wliich tliat of Jesus bore was also found lying 
 apart by itself. Tiie ciuestion arose how the cross 
 of Christ was to be distinguished from the other 
 two. Macaiiu.s, bisho-- of Jerusalem, suggested 
 that their resjiective efficacy should be tried as to 
 the working of miracles. Sick jjersuns wei-e 
 brought forward and t((uched bj each separately. 
 One only wrought the desired cures, and was ac- 
 cordingly acknowledged to be the true cross. A 
 full view of all the authorities on tliis matter 
 may be seen in Tillemont (Mem. Eccles. chapter 
 on Helena). 
 
 Having built a cburcli over the sacred spot, 
 Helena deposited within it the chief part of ttie 
 real cross. The remainder slie conveyed to Coti- 
 stanlinoplv, a [lart of which Coustantiue inserted 
 in the hea:! of a statue of himself, and the other 
 part was sent to Rome, and placed in the cliincli 
 of Sta, Croce in Gerusalemme, which was built 
 expresslj' t,i receive the precious relic. When sub- 
 Bequentiy a festival to commemorate tVie discovery 
 Iiad been established, the Bishop of Jerusalem, 
 on Easter .Sunday, exliibited to the grateful eyes 
 of eager pilgriins the object to .see which tiiey 
 had travelled so far, and endui-ed so much. Those 
 who were persons of substance were further grati- 
 fied by obtaining, at their full price, small pieces 
 of the cross set in guhl and gems ; and that wonder 
 might niit pass into incredulity, the proper au- 
 thorities gave the world an assurance that the 
 holy v/oiid jjossessed the power of self-rnultiplica- 
 tinn, and, Li;)twitlistanding the innumerable pieces 
 which had been taken IVom it for the pleasure and 
 service of the faithful, remained intact and entire 
 as at the (irst — ut detrimenta non sentiret, et 
 quasi intacta permanei-et^ (Pauiinus, Ep. xi. ad 
 Sev.) 
 
 The capture of Jerusalem by the Persians, 
 A.D. 6!4, placed the remains of the cross in the 
 Hands of ChosrcK-s II., who mockingly conveyed 
 them to Ids caiiital. Fourteen years afterwards, 
 Heracliu.s recovered them, and lia<l them carried 
 first to C iiistaiitinople, and then to Jerusalem, in 
 such pomp, tlui^ on liis arrival before the latter 
 city, he fieitui the gate barred, and entrance for- 
 bidden. Iislructed as to the cause of this liin- 
 derance, tiie Emperor laid aside the trappings 
 of his greatness, and, barefioted, bore on his own 
 •iioulders the 'Siicreil relic up lo the gate, which 
 tiicn opened of itself, and aKowed h'rr. to enter. 
 
 CROSS. 
 
 and thus jilace his chaiy.e beneath the dome Oi 
 the sepulchre. 
 
 From this time no more is hf.ard of the tni« 
 cross, whicii may have been destioyed by t.h« 
 Saracens on their conquest of Jerusalem, a.i>. 637. 
 The wooden title, however, is said to be still pre- 
 served in Rome, not eniire, itKh'ed, for only dimi- 
 nutive fragments lemain of the Hebrew letters, 
 so that no one can say what in reality tlie cha- 
 racters are. The Greek and Latin, excepting 
 the letter Z, are l)oth written after the Eastern 
 manner, from right to left. This is said to have 
 iiapjiened either because they were written Ity a 
 Jew, following a national custom, or from a de- 
 sire on the )]art of the writer, if a Roiuivn, to ac- 
 commodate himself to what was usual among 
 the Jews. Nicetus (Titulus Sni/ct. Cntcis) holds 
 that it is not all the work of one hand, since the 
 Roman letters are finnly and distinctly cut, b>it 
 the Greek letters, very badly. He thinks that a 
 Jew cut the Hebrew (or Aramaean) and Greek, 
 and a Roman the Latin. All that lemauisof the 
 Greek is Na^ap^yous 0, of the Latin, Nazareniis. 
 It is somew'iat extraordinary that there should 
 aj)pear in the sole Greek word, what some have 
 thought two mistakes, namely, e for 17, a short 
 for a long e ; and the termination ovs for 
 OS. The history of the discovery of this title 
 
 y / ji i> 
 
 mm%MA^^ 
 
 mvMaHAiAMl 
 
 «==== : — : — : rr-:= 
 
 is worthy of a brief not ice. When sent by Con- 
 stantine to Rome, it was deposited in a leaden 
 chest, above the vaulted roof of the Church Sta. 
 Croce, in a little window, and then bricked into 
 the wall ; its position being rec(}rded in a Mosaic 
 inscription without. Time rendered the iiiscrij>- 
 tion almost illegible; and the window, owing to 
 tiie carelessness of workmen engaged in rcpaiiing 
 the church, was accidentally broken open, when 
 the holy relic was discovered. Tliis discovery 
 and the geiniineness of the title, Alexander III. 
 authenticated by a Ijull. Tiie letters found on 
 the title, if taken according to their numerical 
 value, make 1532, a circumstance which led 
 Stifelius to (ix that as the year for the termination 
 of tiie world. 
 
 Jortin lias, in bis own manner ( Remarks, vriL 
 iii.), diicussed the ?vidence which bears on the 
 discovery and genuineness of the cross, to which 
 discussion tho.se who desire satisfaction may refer. 
 One or two remarks .seem required in this place. 
 None of the authorities give a close description 
 of the three crosses said to have been found in the 
 rulibish under the templf c-f Venus, which is the 
 less surprising, since they wcie ikpI eye-witnesses. 
 The three cross'j'i, it a]i])ears, were very much alikc^ 
 and nothing short of miracles could distinguish 
 and mark that of the Saviour ((rwrf/'ior ^ii\ot>). 
 That the crosses were of wood, all ileclare, but no 
 cue 3tate.s the iieciiliar kind of wood; no>' is ant
 
 CROSS. 
 
 menlior. found in tlie four liistofians of the tra- 
 litioii, wliicli may be traced back to the days of 
 Clirysostom, that the true cross consisted of three 
 kinds, cypress, jiinc, and cedar, or of four kinds, 
 cedar, cj*press, jalin, and olive. 
 Quatuor ex lij;nis Domini crux dicitur esse ; — 
 Pes crucis est cedrns ; -,or])iis tenet alta cupressus ; 
 Pdlnia maiius retinet ; tituh) hetatur oliva. 
 Lipsius (De Cnica) supposes that the cross was 
 made of oak, since it is likely it would he con- 
 structed of such wood as was most abundant, anil 
 therefore jjrobably nearest at hand, and oak };rew 
 plentifully in Judaea : the relics too are said to 
 -esenible o.ik. 
 
 According to Ambrosius ( Oratlo de Obitu 
 Thfodor. p. IDS), the ]nece wliich bore tlie title 
 stood on tiie top of the cross of our Lord (John 
 Kix. r.)-22, 6Tr} rov (Traipod ; comp. Matt, xxvii. 
 37; Mark xv. 2S ; Lulie xvili. 18): the form 
 
 llien would be somewhat thus x. This fact 
 
 would lead to the expectation of more accurate 
 information from those who are said to liave found 
 the cross. The langiia^^'C of the scriptural writers 
 seems to implj' that it was only on the cross of 
 Jesus that a title was placed; and it does not 
 therefore appear to be a case in which human sa- 
 gacity could have been so wholly at a loss as the 
 a(;counts imply; yet Rufinus says. Hie Jam hu- 
 mavcE ambiijuitatis incertinn, divinum fiiujitat 
 testimonium. Prol)al)ly a divine testimony was 
 requiied by other considerations than such as 
 arose from the essential ambiguity of the case. 
 Eut the cou.luct of Helena in dividing the cross, 
 setting aside! one part for Jerusalem, another for 
 Consfaiilini/jile, and another as a phylacterion for 
 her son, and the subdivisions thereof, whicii sub- 
 se.pienlly took place, rendered it impossiide to 
 ascoitain in any satisfactory manner, not only 
 whetlier the alleged was the real cross, but als(j of 
 what wood and in whit shape it had been made. 
 
 Tiiis only then as to the shape of the Saviours 
 ;ross can be determined, that the ]irevalent form 
 yas that of the crux capitata, and that this form 
 s generally found on coins and in the so-called 
 uonogram (Munter's Si/inbilder, 1. iv). 
 
 Much time and trouble have been wasted in 
 lisputing as to whether three or four nails were 
 ised in fastening the Lord to his cross. Nonnus 
 iflhms that thres only were used, in which he 
 >s followed by Gregory Nazianzen. The more 
 l^eneral belief gives four nails, an opinion which 
 is supported atm ich lengtli and by curious argu- 
 tneiits by Curtius, an Augustine friar, who wrote 
 a treatise De Clivis Dominicis, in the beginning 
 !if the seventeenth century. Others have carried 
 fhe niniiber of nails so high as t'ourleen. Of the 
 (•v-iir original nails, the Empiess Helena is reported 
 lo have thro-.vn one into the Adriatic, when 
 furiously raging, thereby jiroducing an instant 
 calm. The second is said to have been put by 
 riiinstautire into either his helmet or crown. This 
 nail, liowever, was afterwards to Ije found in a 
 mulilatod state in the church of Sta. Croce. In 
 the Duomo of Milan is a third nail, whicli Eu- 
 tropius affirms was driven thrmigli one of Jesus' 
 haixis, and whicli Constantine used as a bit, in- 
 tending there! ly to verify the prophecy of Zecha- 
 riah (xiv. 20) : ' In (iiat day shall be ujjon the 
 bells (maigin, bridks) oV the horses. Holiness 
 unto the Lord.'' Treves possesses the fourth nail, 
 
 CROWiNS. 
 
 437 
 
 which is alleged to have been d iven through tJie 
 sulferer's right foot. Those who maintain tJ;e 
 number of nails to have Wen more than four 'lave 
 hail nodilHculty in finding as many nails as their 
 hypothesis in each case iiwded, and as many 
 sacreil [ilaces for their safe kee])ing. 
 
 Another disiiute has l)eeii agitated relative to 
 the existence of a hi/popoditon oi tablet whereon 
 the feet were supported. Gregory of Tours, who 
 had seen the alleged true cro>s, afHrms that it had 
 such a footstool ; l)ut iiis di( turn has bf-en called 
 in question. It is, however, doubted whether ti.e 
 liands alone, without a prop beneath, could sus- 
 tain the weight of the body, aii.l some have suji- 
 {X)sed that a kind of seat wa.s placed, on which 
 the sutfeier may be said to have in some way «at. 
 The controversy is treated at lengdi in the lirst of 
 the four Hijpumnemata de Cmcc of Eartho'inus. 
 
 J. R. B 
 
 CROW. [Raven.] 
 
 CROWNS are often mentioned in Scriji'uic, 
 and in such a manner as in most cases to 
 indicate the circumstances under which, and 
 the persons by whom, they were worn ; i'or crowns 
 were less exclusively woin by sovereigns than 
 among modern nations. Perhaps it would be 
 better to say that the term 'crowns' wius ap[ili.'d 
 to other ornaments for the head than those exclu- 
 sively worn by royal personages, and to which 
 modern usage would give such distinctive names 
 as coronet, band, mitre, tiara, garlanil, &c. 
 
 The royal crown originatid in the diadem, 
 which was a simple (illet fist< ned round the head, 
 and tied behind. This obviously took its rise 
 among a jjeople who wore long hair, and used a 
 band to prevent it from falling over the face. The 
 idea occurred of distinguishing kings by a tillet 
 of din'eient colour from that usually worn: and 
 being thus established as a jegal distinction, it 
 continued to be used as such even among nations 
 who did not wear tl e hai long, or was employed 
 to confine the head-dress. We sometimes see 
 
 2)1'. [.\ncient Asiiilic Crowns.] 
 
 this diadem as a simple fillet, about two i-.chei 
 broad, fastened round the otherwise bare hciid ; 
 we then find it as a band of gold (Xc. 'llh, 
 figs. 2, 5). Ill this shaj'e it sometimes t'orTDt 
 
 2 K
 
 498 
 
 CROWXS. 
 
 the basis of rj-.ised ornamental woric (figs. 6, 7, 
 8, 10), in wliicli case it oecomes what we should 
 consider a crown ; and indeed the orit^inal diadenr. 
 may be tracetl in most ancient crowns. Fig. 10 
 is curious, not on!}' tVo n tlie simplicity of its form, 
 bnl on account >)t" tlie metallic loop 1o lie passed 
 under tlie chin — a mode of securing the cr()\»n 
 probably adopted in war or in tlie chace. Then 
 we find the diai'.em sorrounding tlie liead-dress or 
 cap (figs. J, 9, 13), and wlien this also is orna- 
 mented, tlie diadem may be considered as having 
 become a crown. The word "113 nczer is sup- 
 posed to denote a diadem. It is ajiplied to tlie 
 inscribed plate of gold in front of the liigh-priest's 
 mitre, wh'cli wos tied beliind by a ribbon (Exod. 
 xxix. 6 ; xxxix 30), and wliich was doubtless 
 sometliing of the same kind that we see in figs. 8, 1 1. 
 This word is also employed to denote the diadem 
 whicli Saul woie in battle, and wliich was brouglit 
 to David (2 Sam. i. 10), and also that which 
 was used at the coronation of the young Joash 
 (2 Kings xi. 12) : and, as another word is apjilied 
 elsewiiere to the crown used in this ceremonial, the 
 ;irobal)ility is that the Hebrew kings wore some- 
 times a diadem and sometimes a crown, and tliat 
 the diadem only was acce^sible to tlic high-priest, 
 by whom Joiisli was crowned, tlie crovvn itself 
 being most likely in tlie possession of Athaliah. 
 As Psalm Ixxxix. was certainly composed by 
 David, the regal use of the diadem is further 
 indicated in verse 30. 
 
 The more general word for a crown is mtDJ? 
 atarah'; ami it is applied to crowns and head 
 ornaments of different sorts, including those used 
 by the kings. When apjilied to their crowns, it 
 appears to denote tlie state crown as distinguished 
 from the diaxlem. This, the Rabbins allege, was 
 of gold set with jewels; sucii was the crown 
 which David tool^ irom the king of the Amo- 
 rites (2 Sam. xii. 30), and afterwards wore him- 
 self, as did probably his successors. Of its shape 
 it is impossible to form any notion, unless by re- 
 ference to tlie examples of ancient crowns con- 
 tained in the preceding cut. These figures, liow- 
 ever, being taken mostly from coins, are not 
 of that \ery renuite antiquity which we should 
 desire to illustrate matters peitaining to the 
 jjeriod of the Hebrew monarchies. In Egypt 
 and Persia there are sculptures of earlier date, 
 representing royal crowns in tlie shape of a dis- 
 tinguishing tiara, cap, or lielmet, of metal, and of 
 
 . .1^2: 
 
 CROWNS. 
 
 above engraving (No. 211). Fig. 1 is the CTUira 
 of Lower, and fig. 2 that of Upper Egypt ; ana 
 wlien iiotli kingdoms were under one sovereign, 
 the two crowns were united, as in fig. 3. Such 
 union of thf crowns of dillerent countries.upon one 
 head is matter of hist^orical record. Thus when 
 Ptolemy Philometer entered Antiocli as a con- 
 queror, he ])laced on his head the crowns of Egypt 
 and of Asia. This would, in fact, form three 
 crowns, as his previous one was •.oubtlcss tlie 
 douiile crown of Upper and Lower Egyjit. The 
 diadem of two or three fillets (figs. 3, 4,' No. 210) 
 may have been similarly significant of dominion 
 over two or three countries. Tliere are allusions to 
 this ciistom in Scripture (Rev. xii. 3; xix. 12). 
 Tliese Egyptian tiaras were worn in war. and on 
 occasions of state; but on ordinary occasions a 
 fillet or diadem was used, aflbrding corroboration 
 of a previous remark. 
 
 £11. [.\ncient Tgyptian Crowns.] 
 
 ci>:b, or jiartly cloth and partly metal. Such 
 •rf the Egyi tiiin crowns as represented in the 
 
 242. [Modem Asiatic Crowns.] 
 
 It is impoitant to observe that the mitre oi the 
 higii-priest, which is also called a crown (Exod. 
 xxxix. 30), was of similar construction, if not shape, 
 with the addition of tlie golden fillet or <liadem. 
 Similar also in construction and material, though 
 not in form, was the ancient Persian crown, for 
 which there is a distinct name in tlie ''ouk of 
 Esther (i. 2; ii. 17 ; vi. 8), viz. ~in3 cider, wnicn 
 was doubtless tlie cidaris or citaris (KiSapti or 
 Kirapis), the high cap or tiara, so often mentioned 
 liy the Greek liistorians. From the descriptions 
 given of it, this seems to have been a somewhat 
 conical cap, surrounded by a wreatli or lold ; and 
 this would suggest a resemblance to fig. 12, No. 
 240; which is in fact copied fn m a Parthian ct 
 later Persian coin. This one is worthy of very 
 particular attention, liecause it forms a connecting 
 link iietween the ancient a/e<l moilerii Oriental 
 crowns, the latter consisting either of a cap, witli u 
 fold 01 tuiban. variously enriched with aigrett*s, »»
 
 CRUCIFIXION 
 
 CRUCIFIXION. 
 
 499 
 
 t\m is; or of a stiff capof cli»th, studded wltli 
 precious stunes. It iiiMst oik'ii occur t<i tlie 
 student ol" liibHcal luitiqnitk'a tliiit the tuodwii 
 usages wl' tlje East liave niwe i«seiiibla.iice to iJie 
 fnost aiicieiit, than have those which jRcvailed 
 Uurins^ tiiat iiitcnnccliate or classical {>e4-iod in 
 which its (wculiar niamiei's and institutions wei* 
 «ubjt"ct t(t much extraneous iiiJlueuce i'viHxi tlie 
 duinitiation of lli« Greeks and lloni.uis. Siv, in 
 th^ jitesent instance, we are niwc.h impressed with 
 ihe conviction tiiat such iiead tii«s and c.ijis as 
 Ihuse repi'eseulcd \u Nos, 241 and 242, moix; 
 correctly represent the lejral ' crowns " oi the t)id 
 Testaiuent, tlian tiiose (igui«d in No. 2 JO (with 
 the exce{>tion of tig. 12, and the siin[)le diadems); 
 whicli however Wiiy tie taken to re[)rese<4t the style 
 of tlie crowns which jirevailetl in and beloix; tlnj 
 time of the New Testament. 
 
 Crowns were so o(ten used symtKdically to ex- 
 press honour and [lower, tliat it is not always safe 
 to infer national iisag^s from the passages in 
 which ttwiy tKCur. Hence we would scarcely con- 
 clude from Kzek. xxiii. 42, tljat crowns were worn 
 t)y Jewish fcjnales, although that they woie some 
 ornament which might he so failed is jiroiiutile 
 J'rom other sources. Mr. Lajie {Arabian Nights, 
 i. 424) meations that vmtil about two centuries 
 ago a kind of crown was worn hy AraJjian females 
 of wealth and distinction. It was generally a 
 circle of jewelled gold (the lower edge of which 
 was straight, and the n[i])er fajicifully heightened 
 to a mere jioint), swruiounting the lowei" part 
 t)i" a dome-shaped cap, with a jewel oi' some ether 
 ornaiweut at the summit. 
 
 It is certain ttit * crowns ' of this or some 
 similar kisid weie worn at maiiiages (Cant. iii. 
 11; Isa. Ixi. 10); aiul it wottld apjiea-r that a* 
 feasts and jHjblic lestivals ' crowns of rejoicing' 
 were custt«nary. These were jsobahly gailands 
 (Wisd. ii, 8; iv. 2; Ecclus i. U). Tlie-' crowns' 
 «r garlands which were given to \\ie victors \u the 
 public gatnes are more than once alluiled to m 
 the Epistles (i tJoi-. ix. 25; 2 Tim. ii. 5; iv. 8; 
 I Pet. V. 4). 
 
 CROWN OF THORNS [Thorns]. 
 
 CRUCIFIXI()N — in Greek ava<TTa.vpsiif ; in 
 Latin crtici affigere, in -criioeni ayet-e or tatler-e, 
 m later times crucijigere, whence our ciucihxion. 
 To describe this ])unishmejit the Jews used tije 
 
 general teiin 51^13, for crucifixion is a kind of 
 iiaiigiMs^ wlience Clirist in the ijolemical wntiai^ 
 
 L 
 of the Jews is designated ""l^il, ' the liangeil one.' 
 
 Crucifixion was a most cruel and disgraceful 
 punish«K;nt ; tlie terms applied to it by iuiciejit 
 writd's are, ' tlie most cj iiel mvX disgraceliil ' Ci(;. 
 Verr.; Lactan. liisiit. iv.2'(>); 'the worst possilile 
 punishment" (Uljiian); ■'tlie wos'st [wrnishiiKiit in 
 the world" (Paull. v. 17). It was the jKinish- 
 rtjent chiedy of slaves; accordingly tlie word^'(ir- 
 vifer, * cross-ljearer,' was a teitn of reproach foi 
 tlaves, and the punishment is teinied &s>^}iie svjh 
 plicium, ' a slave"? jiunishment' (fk- Iiifccmi quo 
 Chr adfcjtus est cru. tupp., in C. II. Lange's tih 
 tervatt. Sacr.), Free-boin ]iers<iws also suilie-rod 
 {rucitjxioii, but only iktimtles, those of low condi- 
 ion and jn-oviiicials. Citizens cwild uot ise crii- 
 ;ilied (Cic. J'evv. i. 5; Quintil. viii. t; Suet. 
 Galb.). This [Minisiiment was reserved for tlw 
 greatest crimes, as robbery, jiiracy (Sen. I.p. vii. 
 Cic. Pitron. 71); assassination, )>erjury (^Finnic. 
 
 vi. 26); sedition, ti-eason, and (in the case of sol- 
 diers^ de^sertiou (Dii-ii, v. 52 ; Joseph. Att-tiq. xiii, 
 22; .-Vpul. .-l*//*.. 3). Its origin is aj<cient In 
 Thucydides^i. IIU) we read of Inavus, an .\frican 
 king, wlio was crucilicd hy the Egyptians. Tlie 
 similar fate o( Polyciates, who sujl'eied under il/e 
 Persians, is iletailed by Herodotus (iii. \i^\ who 
 adds, iit tli« same hook (I'j^j, tlial no less than 
 300 pers<jns weie condemned to the cj'oss by 
 Darius, after iiis successl'ul siege of Jiabyloii. \'a- 
 leiius Maxiraus makes crucdixioit tli« ainemo'i 
 niilitaiy punishmejit o<' the CaJlh;igini<ins, Tlia* 
 the (rreeks adopted it is plain fiotn (he cueel exe- 
 cutions wiiicli Alex;uid<er ordeied after tJK? capture 
 of Tyre, when 2000 cajitives were naik'd to cn.sses 
 along the sea-shoiie (Q. Curtius, iv. 4; Justin, 
 xviii. '-ly. 'With tiie Romaiis it was u*h1 tindtr 
 their early uionaichicai government, and was the 
 death to which Horatius was adjudgtMl for tin' .s'ein 
 and savage murder o( his sister (Liv. i. 36). whire 
 the terms employed show that the punishment 
 was not at that tiwx; limited t« any rauk w coikH- 
 tion. If appeals also iiwn the passage that scoing- 
 ing (vcrherato) then jireceded crucilixion, as un- 
 dojdjteiily was custoir.ary iji latei- times. Tl< 
 column to whidi Jesus was fastened during this 
 cruel infliction is stated hy Jerome {Epht. ad 
 Eustack.) to Jiave e.visted lu his tijiw iu the jjoi- 
 tico of the holy sepulchre, and to liave retained 
 marks of his blood. The Jews received llie 
 punisliKient ot' ci-ucifixion from tlic Romans (Jo- 
 sejiii. Aiitiq. scii. 14, 2 ; xx. 6. 2; l)e liclL Jud. ii. 
 1 2). Though it has ln>en a mattei- of Ucbate, yet 
 it appeais clear lliat oruciiixion, 2iro]!eily siicalFi'd, 
 was not oiiginally a Hebrew jiunishnient (Bur- 
 ia\u\ de cruce rn/tn Ehrteo». eupp-ffu'rif). Tlie 
 conilemned, after having be«i scourged (Liv. 
 xxxvi. 2<5 ; Prud. Enckir. xli. 1), iiad to bear 
 their cross, or at least the tiiuisvei'se lieam. to tlie 
 place of executi(in (Pint. De T(u-d. D'ji Vlnd. 9; 
 Arteniid. 11, 41 j, wiiiclj was getKruHy iu some 
 fret^uented place wi.iliout the city (Cic, I'crr. v. 
 (»t>). The cj-oss ilsell', or the ujuight beam, was 
 fixed in tlie ground (C'lc. ad Uioint. Fr. i. 2 ; 
 Pro Rjxt. iv. 2). Aii'ived at tlie spot t!ie delin- 
 quent was supplied with an intoxicating diink, 
 made of Ml yri-tj and otlier hitter lieibs (Pipjiing, 
 Emrcit. A(xid. Iv.), and liaviiig been stiipt of his 
 clothing, was raised and allixed (o tlie cjos.s. by 
 nails driven into his hands, luid nioi>e rarely into 
 hts feet; swwetimes the feet weie fasteneii by on<; 
 nail driven through both (^Teitull. Ad-v. Jud. x. ; 
 Sen. De Vita Beai. 19; Lactan. iv. Vi). The feet 
 wei<e occasioniilly bound to tl>e cross by cords, 
 and Xenopluin asserts that it was usual among 
 the Egyptians to bind in this mannei- not only the 
 feet btjt the hands. A small tablet (titiUus,, ile- 
 ciaring the crin>e, was plawd on tlie top of the 
 CJ-OSS i^Sueton. Cal. 38 ; Dom. 10 ; EuseL Hist. 
 Eccks. v. I). The body of the crucilie<i ]K'isorj 
 rested on a so;t of seat ( xriyfiM ) (Iren . A dv. I hi: i i . 
 42). The criminal died under the most frigl.tf j1 
 sulleiiogs — so gieat that even amid the laging 
 passions of war pity was sometimes excited. Jo- 
 sephus (Dc Bell. J»d. v. xi. 1) narrates of caiitives 
 takeji at tiie siege of Jerusalem, that 'they weie 
 first whip]ied, and tor:nented witli ail s<.>ils of tor- 
 tuixis,imd thenc.rucifj<'d before tiie walls of the city. 
 The soldiers, out of tlie wrath and hatred they 
 boi* tiie Jews, nailed those tliey caught one aftei 
 one way and another after another to crosses, bv
 
 wo CRUCIFIXION, DEATH BY. 
 
 way of jest, when their ntiultifude was so ^rca.t tliat 
 room was wanting f.ir tlie crosses, and crosses want- 
 ing for the Iwiiies. This miserable ]>roce(liire 
 mail;; Titus greatly pity them.' Sometimes the 
 «iiircrini^ was shortened and abated by l)reA!<ing' 
 the legs of the criminal — crura frarta (Cic. 
 P/iil. xiii. 12). At>cr death, among the heathens, 
 the bodies commonly remained on the cross till 
 they wasted away, or were devoured by birds ot 
 prey (Horat. Epist. i. 16, 4.8; Non pascrs in 
 wntce corvos ; Phiut. Mil. Glor. ii. 4, 19; PI in. 
 Hist. Nat. xxxvi. 21). .\ military guard was 
 Sit ne.ir the cross, to prevent tlie corpse from 
 being talien awav for burial (Plut. Cleomen. 
 39; Petron fsatrj'r. iii. 6: Sen. Ep. lOI). But 
 among the Jews tlie dead body was customarily 
 liikeii down and buried. Josephus says {Do 
 Bell. Jud. V. 2), ' the Jews used \o talce so 
 much care of the burial of men tliat they took 
 dovn tliose that wore condemned and crucified, 
 ami binie<l fliem before tlie going down of the sun.' 
 Ill order that death might be hastene:!, and the 
 law might not be viola-ted, tlie Jews were accus- 
 tomed to break the legs (.fohn xix. 21 ; De-ut. xxi. 
 22; Cma.nh.Exerc.Antiharon.-[}.bZl\ Lipsius, De 
 Cr««c. lib. iii.). There was a biare possibility in some 
 cases of tliose wlio had suffered this pnnisliment 
 recovering after be'-ng taken down, under medical 
 treatment. Joseplius thus writes ( Vit. 75), ' I saw 
 many captives crucified and I ipmemliered three 
 of them as my former acquaintance. I was very 
 sorry at this, and went witli tears in my eyes to 
 Tilus; so he immediately commanded them to 
 lie taken down, and to receive the greatest care in 
 order to their recovery ; yet two of them died un- 
 der the physician's hands, wliile tlie third reco- 
 vered.' Compare Brefschneider, in d. Studien u. 
 Krit., 1832, vol. ii. p. 625. The execution took 
 plane at the hands of the carnifex, or hangman, at 
 tended by a band of soldiers and in Rome, undei 
 the supervision of the Triumviri Capitales (Tac. 
 Ann. XV. 60; Lactan. iv. 26). The accounts given 
 in the Gospels of the execution of Jesus Christ are 
 in entire agreement witli the customs and prac 
 tices of the Romans in this particular (Tholuck 
 Glmibwiirdigkeit der Evangel. Gesch. p. 361). 
 The punidimeiit continued in the Roman empire 
 till the time of Constantine, when it was abolished 
 through the iiiduence of the Clirisfian religion. 
 Examples of it are found in the early part of the 
 ernpvrors reign, Imt tlie reverence which, atalatei 
 period, be was led to feel for the cross, induced 
 liim to put an end to the inhuman practice. (Aur. 
 Vict. Cas. 41; Sozom. i. 8; Niceph. vii 46; 
 Firraic.Viii. 20). There is a classical work on 
 the subject by Lipsins, Antwerji, 1594 and 
 1637. Other valuable works, besides those which 
 \yA\^. been named in this and the article Cnoss, 
 are by Vossius, Gretser, Calixfus, Salmasius, and 
 Ki])ping. Sagittarius, Binaeus, Dilher, &c. have 
 treated specially on the application of this pun- 
 ishment in the case of our Lord. The more 
 ancient literature on the subject is detailed in 
 Fabric. BiU'ioyr. Anticjnar. Hamb. 1760, p. 755, 
 •.tq— J. R P.. 
 
 CRUCIFIXION, DE.\TH BY (physically 
 considered), is to be attributed to the sympathetic 
 ftr\-er which is excited by the wounds, and aggra- 
 vated bv ex))osure to the weather, privation of 
 water, and the painfully constrained position of 
 the b<xly. Traumatic fever corresponds, in in- 
 
 CRUCIFIXION, DEATH BY. 
 
 tensity and in character, to the local inflammation 
 of the wound. In the first stage, while the inllam. 
 mation of the wound is characterized liy heat, 
 swelling, and great pain, t!ie fever ia highly in- 
 flammatory ; an 1 the sutlVM-er complains of lieat, 
 tlinvbhing headache, intense thirst, restlessness, 
 and anxiety. As s(H)n aa suppuration sets in, the 
 fever somewhat abates, and gradually ceases as 
 suppuration diminishes and the stage of cicatrisa- 
 tion approaches. But if the wound lie preventfd 
 from healing, and supjiuration contiiuie, the fever 
 assumes a hectic cliaracter, and will sooner or 
 later exhaust tlie ])o\vers of life. When, how- 
 ever, the inflammation of the wound is so intense 
 as to produce mortification, nervous depression 
 is tlie immediate consequence ; and if the cause 
 of this excessive inflammation of the wound still 
 continues, as is the case in crucifixion, tlie sufferer 
 rapidly sinks. He is no longer sensible of pain, 
 but his anxie*y and sense of prostration are ex- 
 cessive; hiccup supervenes, his skin is moisteneii 
 with a cold clammy s>veat, and death ensues. Il 
 is in this manner that death on the cross must 
 have taken ]jlace, in an ordinarily healthy con- 
 stitution. Tlie wounils in themselves were not 
 fatal ; but, as long as the nails remained in them, 
 the inflammation must have increased in intensity 
 until it produced gangrene. De la Condamine 
 witnessed the crucifixion of two women of those 
 fanatic Jansenists called Convulsionnaires. One 
 o\' them, who had been crucified thrice before, 
 remained on the cross for iurec hours. They suf- 
 fered most pain from the ojieration of extracting 
 the nails ; and it was not unti'l then lliat they lost 
 more than a few drops of iilood from their wounds. 
 AfVer they were taken down, they seemed to 
 suffer little, and speedily recovered (^Correspond, 
 de Grim7n et Diderot, ii. 75). The probabilities 
 of recovery after crucifixion would of course de- 
 pend on the degree of constitutional irritation 
 that had lieen already excited. Josephus {Vita, 
 7i) relates that of three of l>is fiiends, for whom 
 he had olitained a release from the cross, only 
 one survived. The jieriod at which death oc- 
 curreil was very variable, as it depeiid'?<l on the 
 constitution of the sufferer, as well as on rhe de^/ee 
 of exposure, and the state of the weather, it may, 
 however, be as>serted that death would n'.>t take 
 place until the local inflammation had run ita 
 course ; and though this jirocess may be much 
 hastened by fatigae and tlie alternate exposure to 
 the rays of the sun and the cold night air, it is not 
 completed before forty-eight hours, under ordinary 
 circumstances, and in healrhy constitutions ; so 
 that we may considei' thirty-six hours to be the 
 earliest period at which crucifixion would occasion 
 death in a healthy adult. Many oi'tlie wounded 
 at Waterloo were l>rought into the hosjiitals after 
 having lain three days on the field, and even then 
 sometimes recovered from severe ojierntions. It 
 cannot be objected that the heat of an Eastern 
 climate may not have been «uly considered in 
 the above estimate ; for many cases are recorded 
 of ix'rsons having survived a much longer time 
 than is here mentioned, even as long as eight or 
 nine days. Enseblu.s (Hist. Eccles. iii. S) saya 
 that many of the martyrs in Egypt, who were 
 crucified with their heads downwards, jierished 
 by hunger. This assertion, however, must no* 
 be misunderstood. It was very natuial to su|> 
 pose that hunjjer was the c<iu»e of death, when il
 
 CRUSE. 
 
 was known that no food had born t;ikt>n, and wliei), 
 lis must have hapjiened in lingering c;ises of irii- 
 citixion, Iht; body was .seen to be eniaciateil. But 
 it n^s been shown above that the nails in the. 
 haiids and feet must inevitably have given rise to 
 such a degree of inllannnation as to produce nior- 
 tiiicatioa, and ultimately death ; <uid it is tvjually 
 certain that 'bod would not, under such circum- 
 stances, iiave conliibuted to su])(K)rt life. More- 
 over, it may be added that after the tirst lew 
 hours, as soon as fever had been fully excited, 
 the sulVerer would lose all desire for food. Tlie 
 want of water was a much more imiwrtaiit 
 privation. It must have caused the suflerer in- 
 exj)ressible anguish, and have contributed in no 
 slight degree to hasten death. As-Sujuti, a cele- 
 brated Arabic writer, gives an inli resting account 
 of a young Turk who was crucified at Damascus 
 4..D. 1247. It is particulaily menrioned that his 
 hands and feet were naileil, ami even his arms 
 (but not as if it was in any way remarkable). 
 He complained of intense thirst on tlie tirst day, 
 and his sutVerings were greatly increased by his 
 continually seeing before him tlie waters of tlie 
 Barada, on the banks of which he was crucilied 
 He survived two days, from the noon of Friday 
 to the noon of Sunday (Kosegarten,6'Arei'^o;«n^/i<a 
 Arabica, p. 63, scj.).— W. A. N. 
 
 CRUSE. Three Hebrew words are thus trans- 
 lated in the Authorlwjd Version (I Sam. xxvi. 1 1 ; 
 1 Kings xiv. 3 ; 2 Kings ii. 2'J^. Tliis now ob- 
 solete English word denotes a small \essel for 
 holding water or "other liquids. Sucli are noticed 
 under Bottle, Dish, Pitcheu. 
 
 CRYSTAL (nii5 kerac/i, and &-2I (jabish , 
 both rendered in the Sept. by KptaraWos, which 
 al>o occurs in Rev. xxi. 11). There seems to be 
 no doubt that crystal is intended by the Gieek 
 ord in Rev. xxi. 1 1, as indeed the plirase of com- 
 arison 'clear as crystal' would seem natuialiy to 
 suggest. It is not very ceitain, nor very likely, 
 that the Hebrew word (jabish (Job xxviii. 18) 
 means crystal ; but as the other wortl so rendered 
 {keravh) denotes ice, to which crystal bears so 
 much external resemlilance; and as in Ezek. i. 23 
 it occurs with an application so similar to (he 
 KpvGTaKKos of Rev. xxi. 1 1, we may with much 
 confidence take this to be its meaning. Indeed, tiiig 
 is the more ajiparent when we recollect that crystal 
 was anciently held to he only pure water, con- 
 gealed by great length of time into ice harder 
 than the common (Diod. Sic. ii. 52; Plin. 
 Hist. Nat. xxxvii. "?.), and hence the Greek 
 word for it, in its more [irojier signification, also 
 tignifies ice. From this it ncce,ssarily followed 
 that crystal could only be produced in tlie 
 regions of {lerjietual ice ; and this was accord- 
 ingly the ancient lielicf; but we now know 
 that it is found in tiie warmest regions. Tlieo- 
 phrastus (54) reckons crystal among the |«llucid 
 stones usei for engraved seals. In common par- 
 lance we HT)])1y the term crystal (as the ancients 
 apiiarently did) to a glass-like tjanspareiit stone, 
 commonly of a hexagonal form, which, frum being 
 found in rocks, is called by mineralogists rock- 
 rry.stal. It is a stone of the flint family, the most 
 refiuetl kind of quartz. 
 
 CUBIT is a word derived immediately from 
 the L;itin cubitus, the lower arm. Tiie length of 
 ixe cubit has vaiied in dillerent nations, and at 
 
 CUBIT. 
 
 301 
 
 dilTerent times. Derived as the me;isiire is from 
 a jwrt of the human body, and as the iiuman 
 stature has been of \ ery dissimilar length, ti.e 
 cubit must of necessity have been various. The 
 lower arm, moieover, nifiy fake in the entiie 
 length from the elbow to the tip of the third or 
 longest linger, or it may be consideie*! as extend- 
 ing (lom tlie elbow merely fo the root of the lianil 
 at the wrist, omitting the whole length of the 
 hand itself. If tiie dclinition of Celsus (viii. i) 
 is taken, and the culjit is identilied h i! a tlie Ulna, 
 the under and longer of the two hones of which 
 the arm consists, still a fixed and invannhfe 
 measure is not gamed. That the cubit ("SN) 
 among the Hebrews was derived as a measuie Ikjiu 
 the human body, is clear from Dent. iii. 11—- ;il!< r 
 the cubit of a man.' But.it is dillicnlt to deter- 
 mine whether this cubit was unilerstood as i x- 
 tending to the wrist or the end of the (iiiid 
 finger. As however the latter seems most natmal. 
 since men, when ignorant of anatomy, and seeking 
 in their own franits standavis of measure, we\e 
 likely to take both the entire foot and the entire 
 fore-arm, the probability is that the longer was tlie 
 original cubit, namely, tiie length from tiie eilicw 
 to the extremity of the longest finger. To this ojii- 
 nion W met (Ilandwi rtcrbuck, art. ' Elle')inclii;es. 
 and he denies that they aie light who make lie 
 cubit merely four hand-breadths. He nitntions 
 in corroboration that the Egyptian cubit, whidi 
 it is likely the Hebrews would adopt, consisting 
 of six hantl- breadths, is found on the ruins of 
 Memphis (Journal des Saocms, 1S22, Nov, 'Jev. 
 comp. Herod, ii. 149), The Rabbins also (Mi^c/i/i. 
 Ckelim. xvii. 9) assign six hand-bieadths to tiie 
 Mosaic cubit. By comparing .loseplius (Jiiliq. 
 iii. 6. 5) withExod. xxv. 10, it will, moreover. It 
 found that the weight of his authority is in (l.e 
 same scale. Accoriling to him, a cubit is equal 
 to two spans. Now, a span is equal to thiee 
 liand-"breadfhs (Schmidt, Bibl. Matluinat. p. 117 ; 
 Eisen-Schmidt. De I'o/ulcribus, ]>. 110); a cubit 
 thcrefiire is e(jual to six hanil-bieadths. 
 
 The harid-breailth (HDO) is found as a measuie 
 in I Kings vii. 2G, comp. Jer. Iii. 'il In the lat- 
 ter passage, the thiger-bieadth (y^^X) is anoihi'r 
 measure. The sjian (mt) »lso oi;curs Exod. 
 xxviii. 16. So that, it a)ipears, nieasuies <.f 
 length were, for the most part, iionowid by t! e 
 Hebrews from metnbers of the human liodv. 
 Still no absolute and invariable standaril presentu 
 itself. If the question, What is a lio.iid or a linger- 
 bieadth ? lie asked, the answer can be only an "S 
 approximation (o fact. It', however, the palm or 
 hand-breadth is taken at 3:^ inches, then tin- 
 cubit will amount to 21 inches. 
 
 In addition to tiie conunun cubi^, the Egyp- 
 tians had a longer one of G [jaln.s > inches. The 
 Hebiews also have been thought to have luid a 
 longer cubit; for, in Ezek. xl. 5, we lead of a 
 cubit which seems to be an ordinary 'cubit and 
 an hand-breadth;" see also Ezek. xliii. 13, wluie 
 it is expressly said ' the cubit is a cubit and ai" 
 haiid-bieadth.' The jirophet has been siip|;(i>ed 
 to refer here to the tlicn current Baliylonian cubit 
 — a UKUisure wliicli it is thought the Jews bor- 
 rowed during the jieriotl of their captivity. '1 lit 
 Rabbins make a distinction letweeii the curtiinoo 
 cubit of .5 liaiid-bieadtiis, and the saciejl culiit o/ 
 a haiulbieadths, a distinction which is iield to i^e in- 
 sufliciently supported bi'.h by Winer (J/u^id. ii
 
 003 
 
 CUCKmV 
 
 voc.janilDeWette (Archfiolof/i(!.\i. 17S). Consnlt 
 Laniy, f)e Tahernaatlo, c. 8; Carpzdv, Apparat. 
 »).G7G. In the New Testament, our Lord chaiac- 
 reristiciillv employs the term ciiljit ( Matt, xxvii.6 ; 
 Luke xii. 25) lor the eiilbrceinent of a moral and 
 siiiritiial lesson. The term also occurs in John 
 xxi. 8, and in Rev. xxi. 17. In Lev. xix. 35, 
 jusfice in measures, as vve'l as in weights, is 
 strictly enjoined. — J. R. B. 
 
 CUCKOW. P|n'^' sliachaph, occurs only in 
 Lev. xi. 16, amon.)- birds of prey not clearly iden- 
 tilied. hut ileda-ed to be unclean. Our version 
 and otheis nave rendered it ' cnckow,' vviiich, if 
 correet, stands certainly out of the order of all 
 affinity with the other Sjjecies enumerated ; and 
 .ilthoug-h the cuckow is a winter ami spring bird, 
 di.«tint:tiy heard, it ai)pei'fis, by Mr. Buckingham, 
 early in April, while crossing the mountains 
 betwej'n Damascus and Sidon, at that time co- 
 vered with snow, it could scarcely deseive to be 
 iiicludetl in tlie prohibited li.st — for the species is 
 every where scarce. Sliachaph may lie an imita- 
 tion of its voice, since the Arabs call it Teerel- 
 Yakaub, or the bird of Jacob, l)ecause in its scwig 
 it seems to repeat the patriarch's name. Richart 
 and Dr. A. Clarke derive Shachaph from Sache- 
 pe'h. ' a wasting," 'and thence ap])ly it to the 
 sea-gull or sea-mew, a bird ))reteuded to be in- 
 capable of becoming plump or (leshy. Etymology 
 thus applied cannot fail to lead to error ; for the 
 gull tribe, so far from being lean, are usually 
 very fat, but exceedingly oilv and redolent of 
 fish. 
 
 With regard to Dr. Shaw's proposed identifi- 
 cation of Sliachaiih with his Zaf Zuf or Rhaad, 
 it may be observed that hard-billed species feed- 
 ing on grain, like all gallinacea, are also very 
 prone to devour reptiles, and tiieiefore are not 
 necessarily clean birds; but, unfortunately, wlial 
 the Rtiaad may be is a question which the cha- 
 racters assigired to both the species leave undeter- 
 mined. Ttie iilack tuft of feathers beneath the 
 tliroiit, the white belly, and bulk of body, seem 
 to imply that he alluded to two sjiecies of smallei 
 Bustards or Pterocles, such as the Otis Torquata 
 Otis Kuha, Otis Hobd.ra. Tetrix Campestris, or tUi 
 Katfa, Pterocles Alrhata, all of whicli reside in o) 
 near Palestine, or make their jxissage through that 
 country in tiie proj)er season (Kitto's Pictorial 
 Palestine, i. 406): have a low Hight with beating 
 wings, and voices which may have suggested tlie 
 name Rhaad. And as for ' Zaf Z.if,' Hasselquist 
 notices a Salix, to which he has given the local 
 name of ' Saf Saf," ])roving that the same dis- 
 syllal)le_ by which Shaw designates a bird is 
 Lkeivise ajiplied to a tree of the willow genus, 
 ami tliat ])erhaps some mistake has been made in 
 rt'ffTring it lo the Rhaad. 
 
 U[ion the wliol* while so much obscurity stil] 
 remains on the suiiject, tlie interpretaii^i of Sha- 
 cliaph by Cuckow should, w.e think, remain undis- 
 turbed.— C H. S. 
 
 CUCUMBERS. [KisHuiM.] 
 
 CU.MMIN (|to3; N. T. /ctViiJ'oj'),or Kammon, 
 is an umbelliferous plant, mentioned both in the 
 Old and New Testaments, and which, like the 
 dill and the coriander, continues to be culti- 
 vated in modern, as it was in ancient times, in 
 Kastein countries. These are similar to, and 
 ased for many of the game purjwses as the 
 
 CUMMIN. 
 
 anise and caraway, which sup])ly their ylacf, 
 and are more common in Europe. All tiiew 
 2)lanl3 produce fruits, commonly called seeds, 
 which abound in essential oil of a more or lesj 
 grateful iiavour, and warm stimulafin;^ iiaturS j 
 hence they were employed in ancient as in mo- 
 dern times, both as condiments and as medicines. 
 So we tind the Cummin mcntioueil by Hip})0- 
 ciates, and also by Dioscorides, under the nami? 
 oi' Kv/xifoi'. Tlie latter wiiter distingui-shes several 
 varii'ties, but the ]irincipal is called 'ifixt^pov, or sa- 
 tivum, which the Arabs, following Dioscorides, 
 descrilie under the name of kumoon hatjhec. a g.ir- 
 den that cultivated cummin. The Arabic name 
 
 ^a«M kumon, is too similar to the Hebrew 
 
 Kammon to allow us to doubt t)»eir identity, 
 especially as we find it, in the Greek form of 
 Kv/xtvov, ein})loyed as early as the time of Hip- 
 pocrates. 
 
 Cntnmin is first mentioned in Isaiah (xx viii. 25): 
 'When he (the jdoughman) hath made jilain the 
 face thereof, doth he not cast abroad the tifcbe!,, 
 and scatter the cummin:" showing that it was 
 extensively cultivated, as it is in the present day, 
 in Eastern countries, as far even as India. Ir. 
 the south of Eurojie it is also cultivated to some 
 extent. Englanil is chietly sup])lied from IMalta 
 arrd Sicily ; 53 cwt. having been imjioited in the 
 year 1839 from these islands. In the above cha)>- 
 ter of Isaiah (ver. 27) cummin is again mentioned : 
 ' For tlie fitches are not thre.shed with a threshing 
 instrument, neither is a cart-wheel tinned alioiit 
 upon the cummin , but the fitches are l>ealeii out 
 with a stall', and the ciuiimin with a rod." 'Iliis 
 is most applicable to the fruit of the common 
 cummin, which, when ripe, may be sepavaftHl 
 from the stalk with the .slightest si rrike, and would 
 be com})letely ilestroyed by the turning round, of 
 a wheel, which, bruising the seetl, would press 
 out the oil on which its virtues depend. 
 
 In the New Testament, cummin is mentione<l 
 in Matt, xxiii. 23, where our Saviour desioi'iices 
 the scribes and Pharisees, who jiaid their • tithe ai 
 mint, and anise, and cummin, but neglected the 
 weighter matters of the Jau. In tue Talmi;dical 
 tract Z>ewtf{i, quoted by ('elsius '"i. p. 519V cum- 
 min is mentioned as one ol" the lliuigs regularly 
 tithed 'Resista' decimanti iubiae omni Icco
 
 CUSH. 
 
 CUSH. 
 
 5013 
 
 m'latha, dt.ctyli, siliqua', oryza et cuminum.' 
 Notwitlisrantlini^ the mimcroiis ilisfinct notices A' 
 cummin, anil its difl'eronce tVoni caraway, i'. is 
 curious how Celsius (/. c. j). 510) could havj ad- 
 duced the carum of Tlieoplii;istn.s and Dioscorides 
 as identical with the cunvmum. So in the transla- 
 tion of Rosenmiillei- {Bibl. Bot. \). 99) we have 
 earum Carvi s^iven as the systematic name of cu- 
 minum, making the latter the caraway plant, 
 which it is not. — J. F. R. 
 
 CUSH (C'-ID ; Xovs), the eldest son of Ham 
 (Gen. X. 6 ; 1 Chmii. i. H), from whom seems to 
 have been deriveil the name of the land of Cush, 
 which is commonly rendered hy the Sept., 
 AlOioTio, and hy the Vul^Mte, ^'Ethiopia; in 
 which they have hecn followed hy almost all other 
 versions, ancient and modern. Tlie German 
 translation of Luther has Mo/ueiiland, which is 
 equivalent to Negroland, or tlie Country of the 
 Blacks. A native was called Cushi, ''CMD, 
 Aidiorp, yEthiops (Jer. xiii. i''^), the feminine of 
 which was Cushith fT'C'ID. hlQwiriffffa, J¥A\n- 
 opis-ia (Niun. xii. \\ and the plural Cushiim, 
 D*'*5J'13. Aldtoire?, ^^thiiqjes (Amos ix. 7). 
 
 The locality of the land of Cush is a question 
 upon which eminent authorities have been divided ; 
 for while Bochart {Phale(/, iv. 2) maintained that 
 it was exclusively in Araljia, (iesenius (Lex. in 
 voce) held with no less pertinacity that it is to be 
 sought for no whore but in Africa. In this opinion 
 he is supported by Schulthess of Zurich, in his 
 * Paradies' (p. 11, 101). Others again, such as 
 Micliaelis {Spicile(j. Geogr. lleh. Ext. caj). 2, p. 
 237), and Roseruniiller (Bibl. Geogr. hy Morren, 
 vol. i. p. 80 ; vol. iii. p. 2S0), have supposed that 
 the name Cush was applied to tracts of country 
 both in Arabia and Africa — a circninstaucc which 
 would easily be accounted for, on the very probable 
 supposition, that the descendants of the primi- 
 tive Cusliite tribes, who had settled in die former 
 country, emigrated across the Red Sea to the latter 
 region of the earth, carrying with then: 'he name 
 of Cush, their remote progenitor. This idea had 
 been developed l)y Eichhorn, in his Dissertation 
 entitled Verosimilia de Cuscheeis, 1774. 
 
 The existence of an African Cusli cannot rea- 
 sonably be questioned, though the teim is employed 
 in Scripture with great latitude, sometimes deno- 
 ting an extensive but undefined country (Ethio- 
 pia), and at other times one particular kingdom 
 j'Meroe). It is expressly described by Ezekiel as 
 lying to the south of Egypt beyond Sycne (xxix. 
 1 5 conip. XXX. 4-6. — Slrabo, xvii. p. 817 ; Pliny, 
 Hist. Nat. vi. 35, Joseph. De Bell. Jud. iv. 10, 5). 
 Heucfi we llnd Miziaim and Cush (i. e. Egypt 
 and Ethiopia) so often classed together by flie jiro- 
 phets, t. g. Fs. Ixviii. 31; Isa. xi. 11; xx. 4; 
 xliii. 3 ; xlv. 14 ; Nahum iii. 9. Tlie inhabitants 
 are elsewhere spoken of in connecrion with the 
 Lubim oud Sukkiim (2 Chron. xii. 3; xvi. 8; 
 Jer. xlvi. 7 ; Dan. xi. 43), supposed to be the 
 Libyans a. «1 Eihiopic Troglodytes, and certainly 
 nations of Africa, for they lielonged to tlie vast 
 army with s.'hich Shishak, king of Egy|)t, ' came 
 out' of thai :x)untry, against Relioboam, king of 
 Judah. In these, and indeed in most other (jas- 
 sages where ' Cush ' occurs, Arabia is not to be 
 ttiougli*^ i}i'; the Ethiopia of Africa is beyond all 
 doubt exclusively intemled, and to the article 
 ' JfruiopiA. ' we refer the reader for the Scriptural 
 Boticetiiegai'diiig it. 
 
 That some of the ]ioslerity of Cush 8^•tll^^l in 
 the south of Arabia may readily l)e gianteii ; but 
 that he gave a ]iPiuiani'nt name lo any jiortion 
 either of the country or people, is by no means so 
 evident : it i.s, at least, mure a matter of infeiential 
 conjectiu'e than of hislorieal certainty. Almost 
 all tlie ])assages usually citeil in suppoit of tiie 
 avEiinent are susce])tible ofa dill'ereni interpreta- 
 tion. For exanq)le, in Num. i. 21, Miiiam 
 and Aamn are saiil to have taken oll'eiire at .Moses 
 for having married ' a Cusliitess ;' and u))oii Uie 
 presumption that this was tlie same ])eisoii as 
 Zipporah, daugliter of the priest of Midian i Exod. 
 ii. 10, 21), it is inferred that Midian was in Cush. 
 But to sav nothing of Zi[iporali s liigli rank. (>rof 
 the services other family to Isiviel, tliere would 
 have been something so grossly inccngriious and 
 absurd in Moses' brotlser and sister coni|)!aliiing 
 for the first time of li.is selec_tion of a wife, after 
 the marriage had subsisted tor more than foity 
 years, that it is evident Zip|iorah was now dead, 
 and this second wife, though doubtless a proselyte 
 to Judaism, was (whether born in Asia or .Africa) 
 a descendant of Cush, and therefoie a llamite, 
 and not one of the Midianites, who were of 
 Shernitic origin, being the ciiildren of Abraham 
 byKetiuah. Otiiers discover a supposed connec- 
 tion between Cush and Midian, because in Hal), 
 iii. 7, the clause, ' I saw the tents of Cushan in 
 affliction,' finds a paiallelism in ' the curtains 
 of the land of Miilian did tremble' — (Cushan 
 being held lo be the poetical and iiigh-sounding 
 form of Cush. But this idea is merely conjec- 
 tural ; and while it is acknowledged that ])art of 
 the sublime descrij)tion in that clid))ter refers to 
 the Exodus and the transactions at Sinai, other 
 portions (sucli as the passage of the Jordan, verse 
 8, and the staiuling still of the sun, verse 11) 
 have plainly a reieience to incidents in the biKiks 
 of Joshua and Judges. Now in the latter book 
 (iii. 10; viii. 12) we fii.d a record of signal 
 victories successively oiitained by Oihniel over 
 Cushan Risliathaim, king of Meso]H)tamia, and 
 by Gideon over the princes of Midiaa. .Again, 
 it has Ijeen rashly concluded that Zerah, the 
 Cusliite, wiio attacked Asa, king of Judah, will, 
 so immense a host (2 Chron. xiv. 9), could n(it 
 have been an Ethiopian of Afiica, and yet the 
 fact of his army having included Libyans 
 (xvi. 8) as well as Ethiopians, seems decisive of 
 the fact, that the latter weie of African uiigin. 
 Their ancestors may have belonged to the " jieople 
 without number,' whom Shishak had led foith 
 against Asa"s grandfather, llehoboam (xii. 3), 
 and these, their descendants, may have retaine<( 
 ))ossession of the north of Arabia Petia;a, between 
 Palestine and Egypt (see Bruce s Travel*, vol. i. 
 p. 30). 
 
 Yet, though there is a great lack ((f evidence lo 
 show that the name of Cush was ever a]iplieil toany 
 jxirt of Arabia, there seems no reason to doubt that 
 a Jiortion of the Cusliite race ilid early settle there. 
 According lo the ethnographic table in the lOtii 
 chapter of Genesis, Cush was the lather ol' .Seb.i, 
 Havilah, Sabta, Raamah (whose sons were Siielia 
 and Dedan), Sabfhecah, and also i.f Nimrod 
 (Gen. X. 7, 8; I C;liron. i. 9, 10). Tlie last men- 
 tioned apjiears to have moved noilhwaid, firs', 
 into Babylonia, and then into Assyria, but ll* 
 others seem lo have migrated lo the south, thougK 
 it is impossible accurately to trace ov% tlt-ir settle-
 
 601 
 
 CUSII. 
 
 CUTTINGS IN THE FLESH. 
 
 merits. Ye', even if we give Soha in Africa, and 
 pass over as iloiibtful f!ie names lA' IlaviJah, She- 
 La, and Dedaii (tor fliose v/ere also tl e names of 
 Shemttic trilies. Geii. x. 2'\ 2d : xxv. 3) still. 
 in Ezfk. -xxvii. 22, liaa-rriali is jjlaiiily classed 
 w.th tlic trilies of Aialjia, and uowlicie are any 
 traces ofSabtahand Sablheeali to [>e Jlnind l>ut in 
 the same country. By ie)erriii_:^, howevir, to the 
 relative geographical poiitions of the south-west 
 coast of Arabia and the east coast of Africa, it 
 will l>e seen that nothing separates them but the 
 Red Sea, and it is not vinlikelv tliat while a pait 
 uf the Cusliite jwpidation iinniigiated to Africa 
 others} remained behind, and weie occasionally 
 called by the same name. Tims in 2 CJliron. xxi. 
 }6, among those who were stirial nj) against the 
 Hebiews are mentioned tlie Philistines, and ' the 
 Arabs that were near the CtisliiU-g," and tlie ex- 
 nression ' ne;ir ' ("C 7j/j in this connection, can 
 scarcely apply to any but dwellers in the AraSiian 
 })eninsula. In the tilth century of our era the 
 Himaryites, in tiie south of Arabia, were styled by 
 Syrian writers Cushteans and Ethiopians ^Asse- 
 inanni, Ijibl. Orient, i. 360; iii. f-GS). The 
 Ciialdee ParajAnast Jonathan, at Gen. x.. 6, and 
 another paraphrast at 1 Chron. i. 8, explain 
 ' Cush' by Arabia. Niebuhr found in Yemen 
 a tribe called Beni Cluisi. Tlie l>ook of Job 
 (xxviii. 19} speaks of the topaz (pitdah) of Cush, 
 and there was a Topaz Island in the Red Sea 
 (Diod. Sic. iii. 39; Pliny, Hist. Nat. xxxvii. 8; 
 Strabo, xvi. 4. 6). Yet most of these are circum- 
 stances ujK)n which we can lay but little stress ; 
 and the passage in 2 Chron xxi. 16 is the only 
 ilirect evidence we possess of the name ' Cush' 
 being applied m Scripture to any part of Arabia, 
 and even that does not amount to absolute de- 
 monstration. 
 
 Some have sought for another Cusli in more 
 northerly regions of Asia, as in the Persian pro- 
 vince of Chusistan or Susiana, in Cuthali, a 
 district of Babylonia, &c. ; and as Nimrod, 
 the younge.st son of Cash, spread hi? conquests 
 in that direction, it is, no doubt, ]x>ssible that 
 his fathers name might be preservevi in the 
 designation of some part of the territory or jjeople. 
 But here again the data are very unsatisfactory ; 
 and, indeed, the chief thing which led to the 
 supposition is the mention in the description ot 
 the site of Paradise (Ge.n. ii. 13), of a land of Cush, 
 compassed by the river Gihon [Eden]. But 
 even though the name of Cush were more variously 
 applied in Scripture than it really is, it would not 
 be more so than was the corresponding term 
 Ethiopia, among the Greeks and Romans, which 
 comprisetl a great many nations far distant, as 
 well as wholly distinct from each other, and 
 haling nothing in common but their swarthy, 
 sun-burnt complexion — AiOioxf/ q. d. aldhs ttip 
 i-'^iv, i. e. 'burnt-black in the face.' Homer 
 [Od)/ss. i. 22)s{ieak3 cf. t5:em as ' a divided race 
 — the last of men — some of them at the extieme 
 west, and others at the exireme ea^t.' Stiabo (i. 
 p. 60) describes tliem as a ' two-fold j)eople, lying 
 extended in a long tract from the rising to the 
 .setting sun.' Herodotus (vii. 69,70) distinguishes 
 the eastern Ethio[>iai>s in Asia from tne western 
 Ethiopians in Afric.i, by the straight hair ^}^' the 
 former, and the curly hair of the latter The 
 ancients, in short, with the usual looseness of their 
 geographical detinitions, understood by Ethiopia 
 
 the extreme south in all the earth's longitude' 
 and which, lying, as tliey thought, close ujron the 
 fiery zone, expo.'*c'd the inhabitants to the sun a 
 scorching rays, which burnt them bhn k. It '\a 
 the mistaken idea of the Scriptural term ' Cu^ij' 
 being used in the same vague and indeterminate 
 manner, that, has led to so much confusion on 
 this sidiject ; and one writer (Buttmann, .^Itt. 
 Erdli. d. Morgenl. ]>, 40 note), in his desire tu 
 carry out the ])aiallel between E*hiopiaand Cush, 
 derives the latter word from the root HIS (kara, 
 kau, hu) 'to burn;' but that is opposed to all tliw 
 rules of etymological analogy in the formation oi 
 Helirew jnofjer najnes (comp. Ritter's Erdkmid-i 
 Th. i. p. 222 ; Hcei en's African Nations, Engl, 
 Transl. vol. i. p. 2S9).— N. M. 
 
 CUTHAH, (nn-13 : Sqit. XoyPi), a district in 
 Asia., whence Shalmaneser transplanted certain 
 colonists into the land of Israel, which he had de- 
 .solated (2 Kings xvii. 24-30). From the inter- 
 mixture of these colonists with the remaining 
 natives sjjrung the Samaritans, wi'o are railed 
 Cnlhites(D*n^3) in the Chaldee and the Talmud, 
 and for the same reason a number of non-Seniitic 
 words which occur in the Samaritan dialect are 
 called Cuthian. Tlie situation of the Cufhah 
 from which these colonists came is altogether un- 
 known. Josephus places it in central Persia, and 
 finds there a river of the same name (Antiq. ix. 
 14. 3; X. 9,7). Rusenmiiller and others ir::line 
 to seek it in the Aialiian Irak, where Abuifeda 
 and other Arabic and Persian writers place a 
 town of this name, in the tract near the Nahv- 
 Rlalca, or royal canal, which connected the Eu 
 ))lirates and Tigris to the south of the present 
 Bagdad. Winer seems to prefer the conjec- 
 ture of Stejihen Morin and Le Clerc, which 
 identifies the Cuthites with the Cossai in Susiana 
 (Airian, Indie, xl. ; Piin. Hist. Nat. vi. 31 ; 
 Diod. Sic. xvii. Ill; iVIannert, ii. 493). All these 
 conjectures lefer csientially to the same quarter, 
 and any ul them is jueferable to the one suggested 
 by Michaelis, that the Cuthites were Phoenicians 
 from the neiglibourhood of Sidon, founding it upon 
 reasons which no one regards as satisfactory, and 
 which it is therefore unnecessary to re-produce. 
 
 CUTHITES. [S.^iAuiTANs.] 
 
 CUTTINGS IN THE FLESH. Amongst 
 the prohibitory laws which God ga\e the Israel- 
 ites there was one that expressly forbad the prac- 
 tice embraced in those words, viz. ' Ye shall not 
 make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead ' 
 (Lev. xix. 2S). It is evident from this law 
 that such a species of self-injiicted torture ob- 
 tained amongst the nations of Canaan ; and it 
 was, doubtless, to guard His peojjle against the 
 adoption of so barbarous a habit, in its idolatrous 
 form, that God led Moses to reiterate the pro- 
 hibition: 'They shall not make baldness upon 
 their heads, neither shall they shave off the corner 
 of their tieards, nor make any cuttings . in theit 
 flesh' (Lev. xxi. 5; Deut. xiv. 1). 
 
 Investing his imaginary deities with the attri- 
 butes of cntelty., man has, at all times and in all 
 countries, instituted a ibrm of religion consisting 
 in cruel rites and bloody ceremonies. If then we 
 look to the practices of the heathen world, whe- 
 ther of ancient or modern times, we shall fo'l 
 that aliiiust the entire of their religion consiste*a 
 of rites of dcjjrecatioii. Feaf of ttie Diviiie tii*
 
 CUTTINGS IN THE FLESH. 
 
 pleasure \vo\i1d seem to have lieeii the leading 
 leatuie in iheir ieliL;ious iiiipiessioiis. The uni- 
 versal [irevalencc of human sacrilices throughout 
 tiie CientiL' worhl is. in itself, a decisive jjroof of 
 (lie lii^ht ill wliicii the human mind, unaided hy 
 revelation, is disposed to view the Divinity. 
 
 It was doubtless such mistaken views of tho 
 cliaracter of (Jod tliat led the ])rophets of Baal 
 (1 Kinpfs xviii. 2S) lo cut their boilies with lancet.s, 
 supposuig that, hy mingling .leir own blooii with 
 that of the oll'ered sacrifice, their god must he- 
 come more attentive to the voice of entreaty. 
 AgieeaLly to the inference wiiich all tiiis lur- 
 nisiies, we find Tacitus declaie (^Hist. i. 4), 
 ' Non esse curwDiis securitateni nosfram, sed 
 xUtvonem.' In fast it was a current opinion 
 amongst the anciei.t heathen that tlie gods were 
 jea'oHs of human iiappiiiess ; and in no part of 
 the heathen world did tliis opinion more pre- 
 vail, according to Sanchoniathon's account, than 
 amongst the inhabitants of those very countries 
 winch surrounded that land where God designed 
 to place his ])eople Israel. Hence we see wliy God 
 would lay them under the wholesome influence of 
 such a prohibitory law as that under consideration : 
 * Ye shall not make any cutting in your Uesh for 
 tije dead.' The ancients were very violent in 
 tlieir expression of soitow. Virgil represents the 
 sister of Dido as tearing tier face with her nails, 
 and beating her breast with her fists : — 
 
 ' Unguibus ura sorer fcedans et pectora pugnis.' 
 y^n. iv. 672. 
 
 Taic present writer h:is seen in India the 
 same wild exhibition of grief for the departed 
 relative or friend. Some of the learned think 
 that that law cf Solon's, whicli was transferred 
 by the Romans into the Twelve Tables, t/iat 
 icomen in mouming nhould nut scratch their 
 cheeks, derived its origin iVom tiiis law of Moses 
 (Lev. xix. 28) But, however this opinion may 
 be questioned, it would appear that the siinple 
 fearing of their flesii out of grief and anguish of 
 spirit is taken, in other parts of Scripture, as a 
 mark of affection : thus (Jer. xlviii. 37), ' Every 
 liead shall be bald, every Leaid clipped, and 
 upmi all cuitinys.'' Again (ch. xvi. 6) : ' Both 
 the great and the small shall die in the land : 
 they shall not be buried, neither shall men lament 
 for them, nor cut themselves.^ So (ch. xli. 5) : 
 ' TViere came from Samaria fourscore men having 
 their heads shaven and tlieir clothes rent, and 
 liaving cut themselves, with oillrings to the house 
 of the Lord.' 
 
 Tlie spirit of Islam is less favourable than that 
 of lieathenism to displays of this kind : yet ex- 
 amples of them are not of rare occurrence even 
 in tire Moslem countries of \\'estern Asia, in- 
 cluding Palestine itself. Tiie annexed figure is 
 copied from one which is represented in many of 
 :he books of travel in Egypt and Pale.sfine wiiich 
 were printed in the seventeenth century. It is 
 Jescribed l)y the iTiissionary Eugene Roger {La 
 Terre Sainc/c, &c. 1646, p. 252) as representing 
 ' one of those calenders or devotees whom the 
 Arabs name Bal'iioaua,' and whom the sini])le 
 peojile honour as holy martyrs. He a])iiears in 
 public with a scimitar stuck tlnough the Heshy 
 pan of his side, with tliree heavy iron spikes 
 Oinist through the muscles of his arm, and with a 
 feather inserted inro a cut in his forehead. He 
 «(uves ^I'jout with jjreat conrjosure, ;uid enduies 
 
 CYPRUS. 
 
 505 
 
 all these siifferings, hoping for reconi, .er.se i the 
 Para<lise of Moiiammeil — ' .-Vvengleinent digne 
 de hirmes (adds the monk), que ces miserabh'3 
 connnencent ici une vie pleine de soulVrance, 
 ]H)ur la continuer ctemelleuient deilans leu ge- 
 heunes de TEnfer!" Add to this, the comcnuu 
 
 accounts of the gashes whicli the Persian devoleea 
 indict upon themselves, in the i'ren/y of their love 
 and grief, during the annual mouming for 
 Hassan and Hossein (Morier, Mah-olm. &c.\ and 
 the curious particulars in Aaron Hill's AccouiU 
 of the Ottoman Ejnpire (ch. 13), rcsjjecting the 
 ]iroceedings of young Turks in love : — ' Tiie most 
 ridiculous and senseless method of exjiressing 
 their aflection is their singing certain amurous 
 and whining songs, composed on purjiose for such 
 mad occasions, between every line whereof tliey 
 cut and slash their naked arms with daggers, 
 each endeavouring in this emulative madness to 
 exceed the other by the depth and nund)er of the 
 wounds he gives himself.' 
 
 From the examples which have been produced, 
 we may very s.afely conclude that the expression 
 ^cuttings in the Jlesh,' in these passages of Scrijj- 
 ture, was designed, as already intimated, to 
 ileclare tlie feeling of strong affection ; as tiiough 
 the living would say, ' See how little we regaid 
 the jileasiues oi' life, since now the object of our 
 aflection is removed from us!' ^^e must there- 
 fore come back to our former [josition, that if was 
 agaiiist those self-inflicted tortines, by whicli the 
 unhajipy devotees vainly thought to deiirecafe 
 the wrath of their angry gods towards their de- 
 ceased relatives and friends, this law of Moses 
 was cspcciaUg aimed. — J. VV. D. 
 
 CYMB.ALS. [Mtsic] 
 
 CYPRESS. [Bekosii.] 
 
 CYPRUS (Kvwpos), tiie modeni Kehris, one 
 of the largest islands in tlie Mediterranean, 
 and next to Sicily In importance. It is about 
 140 miles in length, and varies in breadth from 
 50 to 5 miles. From its ninnerous lieadlands 
 and jiromontories, it was called Kipaaris, Kerastis, 
 or ilte Horned ; and from its exulierant fertility, 
 ViaKapia, Macai ia, or the blessed (beatam Cy- 
 prum: Hor. Carm. iii. 26. 9). Its ])roximity to .-Vsia 
 Minor, Piiopnicia, and Egypt, and its numerous 
 havens, made it a general rendezvous for mer- 
 chants. ' Com, wine, and oil,' whicli are so often 
 mentioned in flie Old Testament as the ciioicest 
 productions of Palestine (Deut. xii. 17 ; 1 Chron. 
 ix. 29; Nell. x. 39; Jer. xxxi. 12), were found 
 liere in the highest perfection. The forests also 
 furniahe^l large supplies of timber for shipbuild' 
 ing. wiiich lendeied the coiuiuest of the island a 
 favourite project of the Ejjypiian lin^js. It wai
 
 409 
 
 CYRBNE- 
 
 the boasl of the Cyprians that they could b»iild 
 and complete their vessels witliout any aid 
 from ibreigii countries (Ammian. Marcell. xiv. 8, 
 § 14). Among the mineral products were dia- 
 monds, emeralds, and other precious stories, alum, 
 ai:d asbestos ; besides iron, lead, zinc, with a por- 
 tion of silver, and, above all, copjier, the far-famed 
 sps Cyprium. The principal mines were in the 
 neighbourhood of Tamassus (Strabo, xiv. 6, vol. 
 iii. p. 245, ed. Tauchn.). ' In Cyproubi prima 
 fuit aeris inventio' (Plin.J\'«^. Hist, xxxiv. 2). 
 
 Cyprus vvas originally peopled from Phoenicia 
 [Chittim]. Amasis I., king of Egypt, subdued 
 the whole island (Hero.l. ii. 18'2). In tlie time of 
 Herodotus the population consisted of Atlienians, 
 Arcadians, Phcenicians, and Ethiopians (vii. 90). 
 Under the Persians and Macedonians the whole 
 island was divided into nine petty sovereignties. 
 After the deatli of Alexander the Great it fell to 
 the share of Ptolemy, the son of Lagus. It was 
 brought under the Roman dominion by Cato. 
 Under the Emperor Augustus it was at first an 
 imperial province, and afterwards, with Gallia 
 Narbonensis, made over to the senate (Dion Cass. 
 liv. iv.). When the empire was divided it fell to 
 the share of the Byzantine emperors. Richard I. 
 of England conquered it in 1191, and gave it to 
 Guy Lusignan, by wliose family it was retained 
 for nearly three centuries. In 1473 the republic 
 of Venice obtained possession of it ; but in 1571 
 it was taken by Selim II., and ever since has been 
 under tiie dominion of the Turks. The majority 
 of the population belong to the Greek church ; 
 the archbishop resides at Leikosia. Cyprus was 
 one of" the first places out of Palestine in which 
 Christianity was promulgated, though at first to 
 Jews only (Acts xi. 19), by ' those who were scat- 
 tered abroad' after Steplien's martyrdom. It was 
 visited by Barnabas and Paul on their first mis- 
 sionary tour (A'^ts xiii. 4), and subsequently by 
 Barnabas and John Mark (Acts xv. 39). Paul 
 sailed to the south of ttie island on his voyage 
 to Rome (Acts xxvii. 4). [Ei.ymas ; Paphos ; 
 Sergius Paulus; Salamis.] ( Mannert, Geo^ra- 
 phieder Griechen unci Rmner, vi. 2, pp. 422-454 ; 
 Penny Cyclopipdia, art. ' Cyprus ;' Dr. R. Po- 
 cocke's Description of the East, &c. Loud. 1745, 
 vol. ii. book iii. ch. i. pp. 210-235 ; Wilson's T>-a- 
 vels in the Holy Land, E(/ypt, &c. Loud. 1831 
 vol. ii. ch. xii. pp. 174-197).— J. E. R. 
 
 CYRENE (Kvf)^vri ; Ghrenna, in modern 
 Arabic), a city in Upper Libya, founded about 
 the year b.c. 632, by a colony of Greeks from 
 Thera (Santorini), a smf^il island in the 7Eigea.n 
 sea (Thirl walls History of Greece, vol. ii. ch. 12). 
 Its name is generally supposed to be derived from 
 a fountain (but according to Justin, Hist, xiii., a 
 mountain), called Kvpr], Cyre, near its site. It 
 was built on a table-land, 1800 feet above the 
 level of the sea, in a region of extraordinary ferti- 
 lity and beauty. It was the capital of a district, 
 called from it Cyreiiaica (Burca), which extended 
 from the Gulf of Platea (Bomba) to the Great 
 Syrtis (Gulf of Sidra). With its port Apollonia 
 (iVIusa Soosa), about 10 miles distant, and the 
 cities Barca, Teuchira, and Hesperis, which at a 
 later period were named Ptolemais, Arsinoe, and 
 Berenice (Strabo, xvii. vol. iii. p. 496, ed. Tauchn. \ 
 it formed the Cyrenaic Pentapolis. For above ISO 
 years the form of government was monarchical; it 
 th*n became republican; and at last, the country 
 
 CYRENIU8. 
 
 became tiibutary to Egypt, under Ptolemy Soler 
 It was bcqueatiiod to the Romans by A])ioi', iht 
 natural son of Ptolemy Physcon, about 97 h.c. 
 (Tacilus, A/inal. xiv. 18 ; Cicero, De ley. ..'Igrar 
 ii. 19), and vvas then formed into a province with 
 Crete (Strabo, xvii. 3). Strabo (quoted by Jo- 
 sephus, Aniiq. xiv. 7) says, that in Cyrene tliers 
 were four classes of persons, namely citizens, lius- 
 bandmen, foreigners, and Jews, ami tliat the lalter 
 enjoyed their own customs and laws. At the 
 commencement of the Christian era, the Jews of 
 Cyrene were so numerous in Jerusalem that they 
 had a synagogue of their own (Acts ii. 10 ; vi. 9 ) 
 Some of the first Christian teachers were natives of 
 Cyrene (Acts xi. 20; xiii. 1). Simeon, who was 
 compelled to assist in bearing the cross of tlie Sa- 
 viour, was a Cyrenian (Matt, xxvii. 32 4 Mark 
 XV. 21 ; Luke xxiii. 26). 
 
 The ruins of Cyrene and the surrounding coun- 
 try have been diligentlv explored witliin the last 
 few years; in 1817 by Dr. Delia Cella, in 1821- 
 22 by Capt. Beechey, and in 1826 by M. Pacho, 
 a French traveller. A very interesting accoun' 
 of the results of their investigations is given in the 
 Penny Cyclopaedia, under the article Cvrenaica, 
 
 ' J. E. R. 
 
 CYRENIUS (Kvprivios, or, according to his 
 Latin af)pellation, P. Sulpitius Quiuinius), go- 
 vernor of Syria (Luke ii. 1, 2). The mention of 
 his name in connection witli the census which was 
 in progress at the time of our Lord's birth, presents 
 very serious dilliculties, of wliicli, from the want 
 of adequate data, historical and critical inquiry 
 has not yet attained a satisfactory solution. The 
 passage is as follows : auTT) j] tzTroypapy TrpoiTt] 
 iyeviTo TiyefnovivovTos rrjs 'S.vpias Kvprjviov, trans- 
 lated in tiie Authorized 'Version thus : ' Now this 
 taxing was first made when Cyrenius was governor 
 of Syria.' Instead of ' taxing' it is now agreed that 
 the rendering should be 'enrolment,' or ' registra- 
 tion ' (of which use of the word d7roypi<pecr6at 
 many examples are adduced by Wetstein), as it 
 is clear from Josephus that no taxing did take place 
 till many years after this period. The whole pas- 
 sage, as it now stands, may be pro})erly read, ' This 
 enrolment was the first while Cyrenius was governor 
 of Syria.' 
 
 This appears very plain, and would suggest no 
 difficulty, were it not for the knowledge which we 
 obtain from other quarters, which is to the effect, 
 1. tliat there is no historical notice of any enrolment 
 at or near the time of our Lord's birth ; and, 2. 
 that the enrolment which actually did take jdace 
 under Cyrenius was not vnitil ten years after that 
 event. 
 
 The difficulty begins somewhat bet'ore the text 
 now cited ; for it is said that, ' in those days there 
 went out a decree from Casar Augustus that ths 
 whole world should be taxed' (enrolled). B'j.t since 
 no historian mentions any such general enrolment 
 of the whole empire, and since, if it had taken 
 place, it is not likely to ha"e been mentioned in 
 connection with the governor of Syria, it is now 
 usually admitted that Judaea oidy is meant by the 
 phrase rendered 'the whole earth' (but more pro- 
 perly ' the whole land'), as in Luke xxi. 26 ; 
 Acts xi. 2S ; and perhaps in xxi. 20. The 
 real dilnculties are thus reduced to the two now 
 stated. With regard to the enrolment, it may be 
 said that it was probaljly not deemed of sullicicnl 
 importance by the Roman historians to deserw
 
 CYRENIUS. 
 
 nenhon, beii.g confined to a remote and com- 
 patathel/ uniinjiortAnt province. Nor was it 
 perhaps nf such a nature as wouhl lead even Jo- 
 «ephu-i to lake notice of if, il it slioidd apju-ar, as 
 usually suj)posed, tiiat no trace of it can be found 
 in his writings. 
 
 Of the remaining difHcilties various solutions 
 have been ofl'ered ; and some, despairing of any 
 satisfactory solution, have supposed the verse in 
 question to have been a marginal gloss wliicli has 
 crept into the text ; while others have even ven- 
 tured to sugrrest that St. Luke must have l)een 
 mistaken. The following explanations are, how- 
 ever, those which are the most generally re- 
 ceived. — 
 
 1. Assuming, on the authority of Luke, tliat 
 an enrolment actually did take place at the time 
 of our Lord's birth, tlie hypothesis proceeds to 
 make out a prol>ab;lity that Cyrenius was tljen 
 joint-governor of Syria along with Saturniuus. 
 It is known that a few years previous to tliis date, 
 Volumnius liad been joined witli Saturninus as 
 the procurator of tliat province; and the two, 
 Saturninus and Volumnius, are rejieatedly spoken 
 of together by Josephus, who styles them equally 
 governors of Syria (^Antiq. xvi. 9, 1 ; xvi. 9, 8). 
 Josephus does not mention the recall of Volum 
 nius ; but there is certainly a possifiility that 
 this had taken place before the birth of Christ, and 
 that Cyrenius, who had already distinguished 
 himself, had been sent in his place. He would 
 then have been under Saturninus, a riye/xwy, 
 ' governor,' of Syria, just as \'olumnius had 
 been before, and as Pilate was aftersvanls, ot 
 Judaea. That he should here be mentioned as 
 such by Luke, rather than Saturninus, is very 
 naturally accounted for by tlie fact, that he re- 
 turned, ten years afterwards, as procurator oi 
 chie-f governor, and then held a second and more, 
 important census for tlie ]iurpo e of registration 
 and taxation, when Archelaus was deposed, and 
 Judaea annexed to the Roman province of Syria. 
 The only real objection to tliis solution is the 
 filence of all other history. But altliougii jjrofane 
 history does not aflirm the fact of Cyrenius 
 having formerly been procurator of Syria, yet it 
 does not in any way deny it : and we may there- 
 fore safely rest upon the authority of the sacred 
 writer for the truth of this fact, ju<t as we do for the 
 fact of tlie existence of the first enrolment itself. 
 
 2. Another explanation wouhl read the jiassage 
 thus : — ' Tliis enrolment was made before Cyre- 
 nius was governor of Syria." The advocates of 
 tliis view sujipose tHat Luke inserted this verse as 
 a sort of parenthesis, o jirevent iiis readers from con- 
 founding this enrolment with tiie subsequent cen- 
 sus made liy Cyrenius. The positive, or ratiiei 
 the superlative, irpdoTr}, is thus undijistood in the 
 sense of the comparative Trpanepa, and is made to 
 govern tlie following genitive. That lioth tlie 
 cositive and supei'lative are sometimes useil in 
 place of the comparative is doubtlessly true ; 
 but such a construction would in tiie present case 
 be very harsh, and very foreign to the usual sim- 
 plicity of Luke. 
 
 3. Another mode of getting over the difficulty 
 is sanctioned liy the names of Calvin, Valesius, 
 Wetitein, Hales, and others. First, changing 
 bCtt) into auTT} they obiain the sense : — ' In tiiose 
 liaya there went forth a decree from .\ugustus, 
 ihat the whole land should be enrolled ; but the 
 
 CYRENIUS. 
 
 501 
 
 enrolment itself was first made when Cyrenius 
 was governor of Syria.' The supjiosilion iiere i«, 
 tliat tiie census was commenced under Saturninus, 
 but was not coni]ileted till two years after, under 
 Qiiirinus. Dr. Robinson {^dilU. to ('iilimt, in 
 ' Cyrenius") objects to this view the entire absence 
 of any historical b:isis fo it. hut he must at 
 the time have been unniinilful of Hales, who, 
 in his ( 'A fowo/o/zy, has worked out this ex])hnia- 
 tion wiih more than his usual care and success. 
 
 Hales reminds us that a little bd'ore tlie birth 
 of Christ, Herod had marched an army into \\a- 
 bia to redress certain wrongs which he had re- 
 ceived; an I this jiroceeding had been so mis- 
 represented to Augustus that he wrote a very liar.sh 
 letter to Herod, the suljstance of which was, that 
 ' having hitherto treatrd him as a friend, he 
 rcotild now treat him as a suhject.'' And when 
 Herod sent an embassy to clear himself, the em- 
 peror repeatedly refused to hear them, and so 
 Herod v.as forced to submit to all the injuries 
 {■wapavofXias) ofl'ered to him (Joseph. Aidiq. xvi. 
 9). Now it may be collected tliat the chief of 
 these injuries was the performance of his threat 
 of treating him as a subject, by the degradatii;ii of 
 • his kingilom to a Roman jirovince. For soon 
 after Josephus incidentally mentions that ' the 
 whole nation of the Jews took an oath of fidelity 
 to Ca;3ar and the king jointly, except 6000 of the 
 Pharisees, who, through their hostility to the regal 
 government, re*'use:l to take it.' The date of this 
 transaction is determined by its having been 
 shortly before the death of Pheroras, anl coin- 
 cides with the time of this decree of enrolment 
 and of the birth of Christ. The oath wliicii Jose- 
 phus mentions would be administered at the same 
 time, accoriiing to the usage of the Roman cen- 
 sus, in whicii a return of persons, ages, and pro- 
 perties, wa.s requiieii to be made upon oath, under 
 penalty of confiscation of goods, as we learn from 
 Ul]iian. That Cyrenius, a Roman senator and 
 procurator, v.-as emjiloyed to make this enrolment, 
 we learn not only from St. Luke, but by the joint 
 testimony of Justin Martyr, Julian the Ajiostate, 
 and Eusebius; and it was made while Satuiiilnus 
 was president of Syria (to whom it was attiibutiMi 
 by Terfullian) in the tliiity-lhird year of Herod's 
 reign, corresponding to the date of Christ's birth. 
 Cyrenius, who is descjilied by Taidtus as ' im- 
 ])iger iniHtifB et acribus ministeriis, ' 'an active 
 soldier and rigid commissioner," was well quali- 
 fied for an eniployinent so odious to Heroil and 
 his subjects; and jirobalily came to execute the 
 decree with an aimed force. The enrolment of 
 the inhabitants, ' each in his own city," waa 
 in conformity with the wary policy of the Roman 
 jurisprudence, to prevent insurrections and to ex- 
 })edite the luisiiiess; and if this precaution was 
 judged jiiudent even in Italy, much more must 
 it have ajipeared necessary in turbulent provinces 
 like Judsa and Galilee. 
 
 At the present juncture, however,- it apiiear* 
 that the census proceeded no fiutiier than the (list 
 act, namely, of the enrolment of ]<ersons in the 
 Roman register. For Herod sent his trusty mi- 
 nister, Nicolas of Damascus, to Rome; wlio, by 
 his address and presents, fiiund means to mollify 
 and undeceive the emperor, so that he proceeded' 
 no further* in the design «hicli he had entertained. 
 Tiie census was consequently at this time sus- 
 pended ; but il was afterwards carrievl into sflect
 
 508 
 
 CYRUS. 
 
 upon the deposal and batiislnnent of Aixhelaus, 
 and the settlcniciit of.fudacaas a Roman province. 
 On this occasion the trusty Cvrenius was sent 
 again, as president of" Syria, with an armed force, 
 to confiscate the property of Archelans, and to 
 complete the census for the purposes of taxation. 
 Tiiis taxation was n jioll tax of two draclimaa 
 a-hcad upon males from fourteen, and females 
 from twelve to sixty-live years of age^equal 
 to about fifteen pence of our money. This was 
 the ' tribute money' mentioned in Matt. xvii. 
 24-27. Tlie payment of it became very obnoxious 
 to the Jews, and tlie imposition of it occasioned 
 the insurrection under Judas of Galilee, which 
 Luke liimself describes as having occurred 'in 
 the days of tlie taxing' (Acts v. 37). 
 
 By tiiis statement, connected with the slight 
 emendation of tlie text already indicated, Hales 
 considers that ' the Evangelist is critically recon- 
 ciled with the varying accounts of Josephus, 
 Justin Martyr, and Tertul Han ; and an historical 
 difficulty satisfactorily solved, wliich has hitherto 
 set criticism at defiance.' This is perhaps saying 
 too much ; but the explanation is undoubtedly 
 one of the best that has yet been given (^Analysis 
 of Chronology, iii. 48-53 ; Lardner's Credibility, 
 i. 2 18-329 ; Robinson, Addit. to Calmet, in ' Cy- 
 renius" ; Wetstein, Kuinoel, and Campbell, on 
 Luke ii. 2, &c.). 
 
 CYRUS (Bh3 Khoresh, Kvpos), the celebrated 
 Pei-sian conqueror of Babylon, who promulgated 
 the first edict for the restoration of the Jews to 
 tlieir own land (Ezra i. 1, &c.). We are informed 
 by Strabo that his original liame was Agra- 
 datej (xv. 3, p. 320, ed. Tauclin.) ; but he as- 
 sumed that of Kouros, or Khouresh (whichever 
 was the most accurate Persian form) doubtless on 
 ascending the tlirone. For Ctesias tells us iPho- 
 tius, Epit. Ctes. ch. xlix.) tliat the word means the 
 Sun. We may perhaps compare it with the 
 Hebrew D'lH kheres, which liears the same sense ; 
 ^nd witii the name of the Egyptian deity Horus, 
 or Apollo. 
 
 Tlie authorities on which we have to rest foi 
 our knowledge of the life of Cyrus are chiefly 
 three. First, Herodotus, who reported the tales 
 concerning him current in Asia a century later; 
 but selected from them with tlie taste of a Greek 
 epic or romance writer. Secondly, Xenophon, 
 wlio has made tlie life of Cyrus the foundation of 
 a philosophical novel, written in a moral spirit, 
 as unhistorical as that of Fenelon's Telemaque. 
 Thirdly, the ejiitome of Ctesias, preserved fur us 
 by the patriarch Photius. Ctesias was a Greek 
 physician, who stayed seventeen years at the Per- 
 sian court towards the end of the reign of Darius 
 Nothus, about b.c. 416-400. (.SeeBahr's Ctesias, 
 p. 15.) According to Diodorus, he drew his his- 
 tories from the royal arcliives ; and, in part, that 
 may be true. But a large number of the facta 
 recorded by him would certainly ne\ er have been 
 allowed a ]Jace in them ; and several great atia' 
 ohronisms which he commits are mistakes of a 
 kind which can scarcely ever occur in books 
 written in the form of annals. It would seem 
 then that his sources of knowledge were not much 
 better than those of Herodotus ; but his length- 
 ened stay in Persia so familiarized him with Per- 
 sian institutions, and multiplied his opportunities 
 of access to those sources, that, rieti ris paribus, 
 ue appears to be a better authority. Unfortu- 
 
 CYRUS. 
 
 uately, nothing remains to us but a mere epitom* 
 of ids work. 
 
 From these and a few subordinate autkoritiea, 
 we must endeavour to give as good a reply as we 
 can to the chief problems concerning the life oi 
 Cyrus. 
 
 On the parentage of Cyrus. — Herodotus and 
 Xenophon agree that he was son of Cambyse* 
 prince of Persia, and of Mandane daughttr oi 
 Astyages, king of the Median empire. Ctesias de- 
 nies that tliere was any relationship at all between 
 Cyrus and Astyages. According to liim, when 
 Cyrus had defeated and ca])tured Astyages, he 
 adopted\i\m as a grandfather, and invested Amy tis, 
 or Amyntis, the daughter of Astyages (wliose 
 name is in all probability only another form of 
 Mandane), with all the honours of queen dowager. 
 His object in so doing was to facilitate the sub- 
 mission of the more distant parts of the empiie, 
 which were not yet conquered ; and lie reaped 
 excellent fruit of his policy in winning the homage 
 of the ancient, ricli, and remote province of 
 Bactria. Ctesias adds, that Cyrus afterwards 
 married Amytis. It is easy to see that the latter 
 account is by far the mure historical, and tiiat the 
 story followed by Herodotus and Xenophon is 
 that which the courtiers published in aid of the 
 Persian prince's designs. Yet there is no reason 
 for doubting that, on the father's side, Cyrus be- 
 longed to tlie Achaemenida;, the royal clan of the 
 military tribe of the Persians. 
 
 On the elevation of Cyrus. — It was the fre- 
 quent practice of the Persian monarcbs, and 
 probably therefore of the Medes bel'ore them, to 
 choose the proi'incial viceroys from the royal fa- 
 milies of the subject nations, and thereby to leave 
 to the vanquished much both of the semblance 
 and of the reality of freedom. This will be suffi- 
 cient to account for the first steps of Cyrus towards 
 eminence. But as the Persian armies were at 
 that time composed of ruder and braver men than 
 the Medes — (indeed, to this day, the men of Shiraz 
 are proverbially braver than those of Isfahan) — 
 the account of Xenophon is credible, that in the 
 general wars of the emjiire Cyrus woir the attach- 
 ment of the whole army by his bravery ; while, 
 as Herodotus tells, the atrocious cruelties of 
 Astyages may have revolted the hearts of the 
 Median nobility. 
 
 0)i the transition of the empire from the 
 Medes to the Persians. — Xenojjhon's romance 
 omits the fact that the traiisferejice of the empire 
 was effected by a civil war; nevertheless, the 
 same writer in his Anabasis confesses it (iii. 4, 
 7, 12). Herodotus, Ctesias, Isociates, Strabo, 
 and, in fact, all who allude to the matter at all, 
 agree that it vvas so. In Xenophon (I. c.) we 
 find the Upper Tigris to have been the seat of one 
 campaign, where the cities of Larissa and Mes- 
 pila were besieged and taken by Cyrus. From 
 Strabo we learn that the decisive battle was 
 fought on the spot wliere Cyrus afterwartls built 
 Pasargadae, in Persis, for his native capital. 
 This agrees with Herodotus's account of two 
 armies being successively lost, which may mean 
 that the war was ended in two camj)aigns. Y«i 
 Ctesias represents Astyages as finally cajrtuied in 
 the palace of Ecbatana. Cyrus (says Herodotus^ 
 did Astyages no harm, but kept hirr by his side 
 to the end of his life. This is like tht, generosity 
 of tlie Persian kings to vanquished foreigners, bu'.
 
 CYRUS. 
 
 ▼fry cnlike tlie conduct oC foif-.mate usurpers, 
 .east or west, towards ii fallen su]H'rii)r. Tlie tale 
 in Ctesias is more like the current ini])erial cr.il't- 
 There we read tiiaf Clyrus at liisl niaile Asiyai;es 
 ruler of tlie liarcauians (sec Tzetzes, in liiilir's 
 Vies. )). 222), and yfterwards sent lor liini by tlie 
 eunucli Peti*icasto visit liis dauijliter and aon-in- 
 law, who 7 j;e longing to see him. The eunuch, 
 however, put him to death on the road ; and 
 Cyrus, iiuligiiunt at the deed, gave up the mur- 
 derer to the cruel vengeance ol the ([iieen. As- 
 tyagea had certainly lived long enough for the 
 policy of Cyrus; who, hy the Roman Cassius's 
 test of Cm* bono,' ' Who gained by it T cannot 
 be accounted innocent. 
 
 The Medes were liy no means made subject to 
 the Persians at llrst. It is highly probable that, as 
 Herodotus and Xenojjhon represent, many of the 
 noblest Medes sided with Cyrus, and dining liis 
 reign the most trusted generals oCthe armies were 
 Medes. Yet even this hardly explains the phe- 
 nomenon of a Darius the Mede, who, in the book 
 of Daniel, for two years holds the government in 
 Babylon, after the capture of the city by the 
 Medes and Persians. Indeed, the language used 
 concerning the kingdom of Darius might be ex- 
 plaineil as Oriental liyperhole, and Darius be 
 s;ipposed a mere satrap of Babylon, only that 
 Cyrus is clearly put forward as a succesnor to 
 Darius the Mede Many have been the attempts 
 to reconcile Uiis with the current Grecian ac- 
 counts; but there is one only that has the least 
 plausibility, viz., that which, with Xeno|)l'on, 
 teaches that Astyages ho.d a son still living 
 (whom Xenophon calls Cyaxares), and that this 
 son is no other than Darius the Mede ; to whom 
 Cyrus, by a sort of nephew's piety, conceded a 
 nominal supremacy at Babylon. Olyections to 
 tliis likewise are evident, t)ut they must be dis- 
 cussed under ' Darius the Mede,' or the book oi 
 ' Daniel.' 
 
 In the reign of the son of Cyrus the depression 
 of the Medes ]in»bably commenced. At his death 
 the Magian conspiracy look place ; after the de- 
 feat of which the Medes doubtless sunk lower 
 still. At a later time they made a general insur- 
 rection against the Persian power, and its sup- 
 pression seems to have lirought them to a level 
 with Hyrcanians, Bactrians, and other vassal na- 
 tions which spoke the tongue of Persia; for the 
 nations of the poetical Iran had only dialectual 
 variations of anguage (Strabo, xv. 2, ]). 311). 
 
 Conquests and liars of Cynis. — The descrip- 
 tions given us in Ctesias, and in Plutarch's Ar- 
 taxerxes (which probably are taken from Ctesias), 
 concerning the Persian mode of ligiiting, are (piite 
 Homeric in their character. No skill seems to 
 be needed by the general; no tactics are thought 
 of: lie does his duty best by behaving as the 
 bravest of common soldiers, and by acting the 
 part of champion, like a knight in the days of 
 vhivalry. We cannot suppose that there was any 
 fteattr advance of the military ait in the days of 
 Cyrus. It is agreed by all that he subdued the 
 LydiaiiB, tlie Greeks of Asia Minor, and the 
 Babylonians : we may doubtless add Susiiuia, 
 which must have lieeu incorporated with his em- 
 pire before he commenced his war witli Babylon ; 
 w'tiere also he fixed his military capital (Susa, or 
 Shushaii), as rrere central for the necessities of his 
 ^ministration fluui Pa^ar^adaj. Yet the latter 
 
 CYRUS. 
 
 S09 
 
 city continual to be the more sacre 1 and belovwi 
 home of liie Persian court, the phi'-e of coronation 
 and of sepilture (Strabo, xv. ;), p. 3U? •, and Pint. 
 Ar/ar. iiiit.). All SyrM and PhuMiioia ajipear 
 to have come over to tJynis peaceably. 
 
 In regard to the Persian ivais, the few facts 
 from Ctesias, which the fjjitomator has extiacied 
 as ditlering fiOin Herodotus, cany wilii them high 
 probaliility. He states that, aOer leceiving tho 
 subiiiissi,in of the Hadrians, Cyrus matle war on 
 the Sacians, a Scythian («'. e. a .Sclavonic) people, 
 who seem to have dwelt, or ].eiliaps rather roved 
 along the Oxus, from B.ikhaia to Khiva ; and, that, 
 after alternate successes in battle, lie attached the 
 M'liole nation to himself in faithful allegiance. 
 Their king is called Ainorges by (Jtesia-i. They 
 are undoulitedly the same ]ieople that Herodotus 
 (vii. (51) calls Ami/n/ian Sacians; and it is 
 highly probalile that tiiey gave to the district of 
 Margiana its name. Their won:t'ii fought in 
 ranks, as systematically as the men. Strabo has 
 cursorily told us of a Iiadition (xv. 2, p. 307) 
 that Cyrus escaped with but seven men tliroiigh 
 the deserts of (reJrosia, fleeing I'ldni the ' Indians' — 
 which might denote an unsuccessful war against 
 Candaliar, &c., a cmrntry which certainly was 
 iK^t reduced to the Persian empire until the reign 
 of Darius Ilystiispis. 
 
 The closing scene of the career of Cyrus was in 
 battle « Itli a )jeople living on one or both banks ol 
 the river laxartes, now the Syr-deria. Heiodnlus 
 calls the enemy the JMassagetans, who roamed 
 along the north bank of the river: according to 
 Ctesias it was the Derbices, who seem to have 
 been on the south. Both may in fact have com- 
 bined itii the war. In other respects the narrative 
 of Ctesias is beyoliii comparison more ciedilile, 
 and moie agreeable with otiier known tacts, e.\cej)' 
 that he introduces the fiction of Indians with ele- 
 2}hants aiding the enemy. Two ba'tlcs were 
 fought on successive days, in the I'lrmer of which 
 Cyrus wa? mortally wounded, but was cairied 
 off by his peojjle. In the jcJ'\ *he Sacian ",i>valry 
 and the faithful Amorges came to supi^.iv ,)im, 
 and the Derbices sustained a total anil bloody 
 defeat. Cyrus died the third day after his wound : 
 his body was conveyed to Pasargadae, and bu- 
 lled in the celebiated monument, which was 
 broken 0})en by the Macedonians two cei.tuiics 
 afterwards (Strabo, xv. 3; Airian, vi. 29;. The 
 inscription, reported liy Aristobulus, an eye- 
 witness, is this : — ' O man, I am Cyrus, who 
 acquired the em])ire for the Persians, and was 
 king of Asia. Grudge me not then this monu- 
 ment.' 
 
 Behaviour of Cynis to the Jews. — The kings 
 of Assyria and Babylon had carried the Jew? 
 into captivity, both to remove a di.sall'ecfed nation 
 from the frontier, and to people their new cities. 
 By jj/jdoing this work, Cyrus attached the Jews 
 to liimscll', as a garrison at an impoitant ]iost. 
 l?ut we may believe that a nobler motive con- 
 spired with this. The Persian religion was ])ii- 
 mitively monotheistic, and stiikiugly fiee fioin 
 idolatry ; so little Vagan in its spirit, that, what- 
 ever of the mystical and obscure it may contain, 
 not a single im))ure, cruel, o: otherwise immoral 
 jiractice was united to any uf it.s ceiemoni«*jj. 
 It is credilile, tlierel'ire, that a sin^'eie adir. nation 
 of the Jewish faith actuated the nnble Peisian 
 Vi'lien lie exclu ined, in tiie words of the book at
 
 510 
 
 DABERATH. 
 
 E«ra, 'Go ye up, and build in Jerusaletr. ttie 
 bouse of Jeiioviih, God of Isiael ; He is God ! ' — 
 and forced the Babylonian temples to disgorge 
 their ill-gotten 8])oil. It is tiie more remarkable, 
 since the Persians disapproved the confinement 
 of temples. Nevei*lieless, im[K.'diments to the 
 fortiftcation of Jerusalem afterwards arose, even 
 during; the reign of Cyrus (Ezra iv. 5). 
 
 Perhaps no gre.it conciueror ever left behind 
 him a fairer fame than Cyrus the Great. His 
 mighty achievements have been borne down to 
 us on the voice of'the nation which he elevated ; 
 tils evil deeds had no hislorian to record them. 
 VViiat is more, it was his singular honour and 
 pri\ilege to be the first Gentile friend to the 
 people of Jehovah in the time of their sorest trouble, 
 and to restore them to the land whence light 
 was to break forth for the illumination of all 
 nations. To this high duty he is called by the 
 prophet (Isa. xliv. 2S ; xlv. 1), and for perform- 
 ing it he seems to be entitled ' The righteous man ' 
 rxli. 2; xlv. 13).— F. W. N. 
 
 D. 
 
 DABERATH (nnn"^ ; Sept. An/SipcSfl and 
 
 Aey3/3(£), a town in the tribe of Issachar, assigned 
 to the Levites (Josh. xix. 12; xxi. 28; 1 Chron. 
 vi, 72). It is probably the same as the Dabaritta, 
 In the great plain, of Josephus ( Vita, 62 ; De Bell 
 Jud. ii. 21. ;5) : and the Dabira, which Eusebiiis 
 and Jerome ])lace by Mount Talior, in the region 
 (if Dio-Cffisarea. It is recognised in tlie present 
 Deburieh, a small village lying on the side of a 
 ledge of rocks, just at the base of Tal)oon on the 
 iioitli-west (Robinson's Researches, iii. 210). 
 
 DAGAN. [Corn.] 
 
 DAGON (]i3'n : Sept. Aaywv) is the name 
 of a national god of the Philistines at Gaza and 
 .'Vsh'' -d rJadg. XVI. 21, 23; 1 Sam. v. I sq ; 
 1 Ci..oti. X. 10). As to the meaning of the name, 
 the expres-sions of Philo Hyblius, £i.a.ywv, os tori 
 Uto^v, and Aayi'C eTreiS?) ei/pe a'iTov Kol ipoTpov. 
 iK\r)Oir} Zevs 'hp6rpios ( Sanchoniatlion, ed. Orelli, 
 p 28, 32 , show tiiat he assumed the word to be 
 derived from pi, corn. This derivation is ad- 
 mitted by Bochait, who argues tliat the fields of 
 the Philistines were laid waste hy mice, in order 
 t'j siiow that Dagon was not the true god of agri- 
 (,iiltore, as he was thought to be yllieroz. ed. 
 Rosenm i, 3SI"); and by Beyer, who makes the 
 extraordinary assertion that we may conclude, 
 from the sending of the five golden mice (to the 
 God of Israel! 1 Sam. vi. 4), that golden mice 
 were (/fl'ered to Dar/on as an acknowledgment of 
 iiis care in fieeing their fields from mice {Ad- 
 di 'amenta ud Selden. p. 285). Each of these 
 arguments is open to the objection that the five 
 golden piles — whi<'.li were sent at the same time, 
 ami which, if they l)ore anv reference to Dagon, 
 would possibly not be reconcilable with liis cha- 
 racter as the god of agriculture — are here alto- 
 gether disregarded ; when yet it is evident tiiat 
 no conclusions can be legitimately drawn from the 
 one unless they a])])ly with equal force to the 
 other. There are much better arguments, how- 
 ever, tor the other etymology, which deduces the 
 «ame fro^n iT. /!s/i, witli the ending 671 (Ewald, 
 
 DAMASCUS. 
 
 Hebr. hram. § 341). This derivation is nutonl^ 
 more in accordance with the principles of fornian 
 tion (for if Dagon comes from the root \i1, it 
 must loelong to thj adjective formation in ^ 322, 
 c, which does not appear so suitaljle for the force 
 of a projier name), but it is most decisively esta- 
 blished by the terms employed in 1 Sam. v. 4. 
 It is there said that Dagon fell to the earth before 
 the ark-, that his head and the mlms of his hands 
 were broken ofl", and that ^ only Daqon was left 
 on him.'' If Dagon is derived fiom y^,Jisl/, and 
 if the idol, as there is every reason to believe, had 
 the body of a fish with the head and hands of a 
 man, it is easy to understand why a part of the 
 statue is there called Dagon in contradistinction 
 to tlie head and hands; but not otherwye. T.iat 
 such was the figure of the idol is asserted l)y 
 Kimchi, and is admitted by most modern scho- 
 lars. It is also suppoited by the analogies of 
 other fish deities among the Syro-Arabians. Be- 
 sides tlie Atergatis of the Syrians, the Babylo- 
 nians had a tiadition, according to Berosus (Be- 
 rosi Qu€E superstmt, ed. Richter, p. 48. 54), that 
 at the very l)eginning of their kistory an extraor- 
 dinary being, called Oaimes, having the entire 
 body of a fish, but the head, hands, feet, and voice 
 of a man, emerged from the Erythraean sea, ap- 
 peared in Babylonia, and taught the rude inha- 
 bitants the use of letters, arts, religion, law, and 
 agriculture; that, after long intervals between, 
 other similar beings apfieared and communicated 
 the same jirecious lore in detail, and that the last 
 of these was called Odakon ('nSaKiuy). Selden is 
 persuaded that this Odakon is the Piiilistine god 
 Dagon (De Diis Syr is, p. 26.")). The resemblance 
 between Dagon and Atergatis, or Derketo, is so 
 great in other respects, that Selden accounts for 
 the only important difference betweeri them — that 
 of sex — by referring to tlie iindrogynous nature of 
 many he»then gods. It is certain, however, that 
 the Heljiew text, the Sept., and Philo Byblius, 
 mai<e Dagon masculine. The temple of Dagon 
 at Aslulod was de;troyed by Jonathan the brothei 
 of Judas the Maccabee, about the year B.C. 148 
 (1 Mac. x. S4).— J.N. 
 
 DALMANUTH.\ (AaX/j.avoveti), a village 
 near Magdala (Maik viii. 10; comp. JMatt. xv. 
 39) ; probably 011 the western shore of the lake of 
 Gennesareth, a little to the noith of Tiberias. 
 
 DALM.ATIA (AaAjuaria) a province of En- 
 rope on the east of the Adriatic Sea, forming part 
 of Illyricum, and contiguous to Macedonia. Titus 
 was sent into this region by Paul to spread the 
 knowledge of the Gospel. 
 
 DAMARIS (Aa/xapis), a woman of Athens, 
 who was led to embrace Christianity by the 
 preaching of St. Paul (Acts xvii. 34). Some 
 suppose she was the wife of Dionysius the Areo- 
 pagite, who is mentioned before her ; fnit the 
 constiuction in tlie Greek will not sanction this 
 conclusion. The name Damaris does i;ot occur 
 elsewhere, whence some suppose it a corruption of 
 Damalis (Aa./xa\is). which was not an uncommon 
 name: but the r and I are in Greek so con- 
 stantly interchanged as to render this emendation 
 superfluous. 
 
 DAMASCUS (p*^?|i"I; Aafiaa-K6s), called by 
 the natives Es-Sham, a city of S}-ria, capital of 
 an important pashalic of the same name, anc 
 indeed the chief or capital citv of Syria, lies in •
 
 DAMASCUS. 
 
 plain at the eastern foot of Anti-Libanus. If 
 was somHimcs spoken of by tlie ancients as an 
 Arabian city, but in reality it belouirs to Syria. 
 In 2 Sam. viii. .'), fi, ' the Syrians of Damascus ' are 
 spoken of, and the words, ' Syria v i" Dam;iscus ' 
 are found in Isa. vii. S. It is expressly said, 
 'tlie head of Syria is D.miasciis ;' also, Isa. xvii. 
 3, • t'.ie kingdom ' is to cease ' from Damascus.' 
 So tliat this place was obviously the metropolis of 
 a Syrian empire. It gave name (Syria Damas- 
 cene. Plin Hist. Nat. v. 13) to a district of Syria, 
 which, in 1 Cliron. xix. 6, is distinguislied as nS^D, 
 reniiered 'Syria-Maachali,' in the Common English 
 Version. The plain is about WO stadia from tht 
 Mediterranean, and from si.x to eight days" journey 
 from Jerusalem. It lies on the Clirysorvhoas ■ Bar- 
 rada), by which, and its oft- shoots, it is, with the 
 aid of canals, abun(ha)itly watered. Its celebrity 
 is of early date. Strabo (xvi. p. 7.56) speaks of it 
 in eulogistic terms. In a religious point of view 
 also its repute was great. Julian (En. 24.) 
 terms it ' the great and sacred Damascus, sur|)ass- 
 ing.. -very city both in the beauty of its temples 
 and the magnitude of its shrines, as well as the 
 limel'ness of its seasons, the limpidness of it.s 
 fountains, the volume of its waters, and the rich- 
 ness of its soil.' The locality would seem to have 
 been expressly created for a large, flomishing, and 
 durable city. 
 
 Damascus — by some held to be the most an 
 cient city in the world — is called by the Orientals, 
 *a pearl surrounded by emeralds.' Nothing can 
 be more beautiful than its position, whether a])- 
 proaciied from the side of Mount Lebanon, from 
 the Desert to the east, or b)' the high-road from 
 the north from Ale])p() and Hamah. For many 
 miles the city is girdled by fertile fields, or gar- 
 dens, as they are called, wliich, being vi'atered by 
 rivers and sparkling streams, give to the vege- 
 tation, consisting principally of olive-trees, a 
 remaikable freshness and beauty. Of all the 
 cilies of theTiast, Damascus is probably tlie most 
 oriental. 
 
 The plain of Damascus owes its fertility and 
 loveliness to the river Barrada, which is supposed 
 to be either the Alcana or Pharpar of 2 Kings v., 
 and has been noticed under another head [.\ban a] 
 
 The view of Damascus, when the travellei 
 emerges from Anti-Libanus, is of the most en- 
 chanting kind. ' One of the most magnilicent 
 jyrospects in the world," says Aildison (Damascus 
 atid ralmyra, vol. ii. p. 92), ' litnst upon my 
 sight : like the first view of Constantinople, it is 
 unique. We were looking down from an elevation 
 of a thousand feet upon a vast plain, iiordered in 
 the distance by blue mountains, and occupied iiy 
 a rich, luxuriant forest of the walnut, the Hg, the 
 pomegranate, the plum, the apricot, the citron, the 
 locust, the jiear, and the apple, forming a waving 
 grove of more than fifty miles in circuit; possessing 
 a va t variety of tint, a peculiar density and luxu 
 lianceof foliage, and i wildly -picturesque form, 
 from the l)ranches of the loftier trees throwing 
 tiiem elves uu above a rich underwood c/f pome- 
 granates, citrons, and oranges, with their yellow, 
 green, and brown leaves; and then conceive oui 
 tensatioris, to see grandly rising in the distance, 
 i?.!)oveihis vast superficies of lich luxuriant Ibliage, 
 the swelling lea<len domes, the gilded crescents, 
 >v.d the niiirlde minarets of Dauiascus : while in 
 Uh' ctot-e of all, iv'nding towards the '-ity, ran 
 
 DAMASCUS. 
 
 ft!) 
 
 the main stream of the river Barrada. As we 
 descended, here and there the openings in iii#; 
 trees displayed little patches of green venUire or 
 a glimpse of richly-cultivated gardens : the wlwjie 
 of the rich tract was surrounded by a mud-wall, 
 beyond which all was arid and desert." A more 
 amjde description to the same elVect is given by 
 Lamartine (Travels m the East). 
 
 The interior of the city does not corresiponrt 
 with the exquisite beauty of its environs. In the 
 Armenian quarter the houses are liuilf with mud, 
 and jiierced towards the street l)y a very few small 
 grate<l windows wilh red j)ainled .«i|iutters. They 
 are low, and the flat arched doors resemble those 
 of stables. A filthy dunghili and a po(d of 
 stinking water are almost invariably before tht 
 doors. In some of these dwellings, belonging to 
 the princi])al .Armenian merchants, there is great 
 internal richness and elegance. The furniture 
 consists of magnificent Persian or Bagdad car- 
 pets, which entirely cover the marble or cedar 
 floor, and of numerous cushions and mattresses, 
 spread in the midille of tiie saloon, for the mem- 
 bers of the family to sit or lean against. There 
 is a fine wide street, formeil by the palaces of liie 
 agas of Damascus, who are the not)llify of the 
 land. The fronts of these palaces, however, towaids 
 the street, air like long jirison or hospital walls, 
 mere grey niud walls, with few or no windovs, 
 whilst at intervals is a great gate opening 07. a 
 court. But the interior is magnificent. The 
 ornaments of many of their saloons alone cost 
 upwards of IllOO/. sterling. The bazaai-s are vciy 
 striking. The gieat bazaar is about half a league 
 long. They are long streets covered in with 
 high wood-work, and lined with shops, stalls, 
 magazines, and cafes. The shoi)s are nairow, 
 and go only a shoit way Itack. The merchant is 
 seated in front, with hi's legs doubled up below 
 him, and the pipe in his mouth. The magazines 
 are stored with nierchamlise of all sorts, and par- 
 ticularly with Indian manufactures, which are 
 brought in great profusion by the caravans from 
 Bagdad. In the mi.lst of the bazaars stands the 
 finest khan in the East, that of H;\9san P.i«lia. 
 It is an immense cujxjla, whose bold springuig 
 arch recalls that of St. Peler at Rome; it is in 
 like manner borne on granite piilais. The gate 
 of this khan is a ]iiece of Moorish architectine, 
 the richest in detail and most imposing in effect 
 that can be seen in the world. The khan h:i3 
 been built only about fifty years. Not far dis- 
 tant is the principal mosque, fiu nerly a chuich 
 consecrated to St. John, whose skull and se- 
 pulchre, found in this holy place, give it «'jc;. a 
 sanctity that it is death for even a Mohammedan 
 to enter the room where the relics, aie kept. Situ 
 afed at the edge of the desert, at the mouth of (Ik 
 plains of Cade-Syria and the valleys of (ialilee, 
 of Iduma'a, anil ol' the coasts of the Sea of Syria, 
 Damascus was needed as a res ing-])lace for the 
 caravans to India. It is essentially a com- 
 mercial town. Two hundred merchants are ]ier 
 maneniiy settled in it. Foreign trade is carrieti 
 on by the (ireat Mecca caravan, the Bag<laii ca- 
 ravan, the AlejijH), anil by seveial small ones to 
 Bt-irout (its sea-port), Tripoli, Arte, kc . Lamar- 
 tine makes its ixijiulation to be some 300.000, o{ 
 whom 30.000 are Christians. Annli'er eslimate 
 fM{'idbi<h. (ii-oqtaph. Diet.) gives onlv from 
 120,00 I to l.'iiV'OO inhabitants, (•omprising'l2,000
 
 611 
 
 DAMASCUS. 
 
 ('hiistians and as many Jews. Damascus is an 
 eininently interesting town. It is tliorouglily 
 Oiiental, tlwugli now reprcsentiitives, in person 
 ami costume, of most otlier distinguished coun- 
 tries of die world may be seen in its sheets. 
 Ita proximity to BaaU)ec and Palmyra, which 
 are mere ruins, and its still liighly nourishing 
 condition, after having existed for perhaps a 
 longer jteriod than any other city on the face of 
 Ihe earth, combine, widi many facts connected 
 with its liistory, to tlnow around it a calm and 
 attractive, not to say sacred, light. 
 
 Political changes and social influences have 
 lessened and mitigated tlie proverbial bigotry of 
 t!ie Damascenes. Tiie lower classes, indeed, are 
 still fanatical, but a better feeling on religion 
 prevails in the higher. All Christians in Da- 
 mascus were, wlien Lamarline visited the city, 
 compelled to wear black turbans. He states that 
 on his last day's journey towards Damascus he 
 and his companions assumed the complete Turk- 
 ish costume, to escape being recognised as Franks, 
 adding, 'the fanatical population of Damascus 
 and the surrounding country rer.der tliese pre- 
 cautions necessary. The Damascenes nourish 
 iiatred of the European name and costume. They 
 alone amongst tlie Orientals have refused to ad- 
 mit consuls or even consular agents for Christian 
 powers. Damascus is a holy, fanatical, and free 
 city — notliing must pollute it.' Till within tlie 
 last few years the appearance in the city of a 
 Frank costume was a signal for a riot. Clnistians 
 and Jews were alike forbidden to ride any beast 
 but an ass. Addison, however (in 1835), found 
 a greatly improved state of feeling. The inso- 
 lence ol' the Damascenes was curbed. He and 
 ills companions used horses, and saw Christians 
 in great numbers mixing with others, and pur- 
 suing tlieir business or taking recreation in tlieir 
 own garb unmolested. ' Here and there,' he 
 says, ' a scowling look or a smothered cry of 
 Yavor, or " intidel," after we had passed, were 
 all the tokens of discontent we perceived.' Tlie 
 in.provement Addison ascribes ii. part to the re- 
 side. i<'.e in tlie place of a British consul. He 
 odds : — ' As " tlie gate of Mecca,"' the place of 
 rendezvous for the great caravan of pilgrims, Da- 
 mascus has always been considered one of the 
 most sacred of the Moslem cities ; and, being an- 
 nually filled with a vast crowd of religious fana- 
 tics, hurrying on to the tomb of the prophet, it is 
 not stiK ge that the population has always been 
 80 remaikable for it.s fanaticism and bigotry to- 
 wards Cl.riitians. Even now, at the jieriod of 
 the assembling of the gi-eat caravan, it would 
 hartlly be prudent for Franks to exhibit themselvea 
 in their hats and coats before the crowd of bald- 
 lieaded wretches which then throng all the tho- 
 rouglifares, burning with religious zeal" (vol. ii. 
 p. 440). 
 
 Mr. Addison was conducted to the spot where, 
 according to tradition among the Christians, Saul 
 saw the light from heaven. Winding round tlie 
 walls ,.a the outskirts of (he city, he and his 
 companions came to a point wliere they were 
 broken at tlie top, at which Paul is said to have 
 fxeii let down in a basket, to escape the indigna- 
 tion of the Jews, when (Acts ix.) 'the disciples 
 took him by niglit, and let him down by the wall 
 ill a basket.' From hence, passing on through 
 lome inetty lane^, they came to an open green 
 
 DAMASCUS. 
 
 spot, surrounded by trees, over the tops of whic* 
 were seen the distant summits of Mount Heitnon. 
 At this ))lace they were ' informed Saul had ar- 
 rived when (Acts ix. 3) as lie journeyed he cani« 
 near Damascus, and suddenly there sinned round 
 about him a great light fiom heaven.' These 
 localities are pointed out with tlie greatest con- 
 fidence by tlie Damascene Christians of all sects, 
 and are held in great veneration ; nor is it djlfi- 
 cult to suppose that the :."ue sjiots have been 
 handed down by tradition ■^moiig the followers 
 of the cross. 'The street which is called Straight' 
 (Acts ix. 1 1) is still found in Damascus, or at 
 any rate a street bearing that name. Addison 
 says it is ' a mile in length,' and ' so called be- 
 cause it leads direct from the gate to the castle or 
 palace of the Pasha.' The house of Judas, also, 
 to which Ananias went, is still pointed out, as 
 well as that of Ananias himself. How much 
 credulity may have had to do in fixing on and 
 perpetuating the recollection of these localities, it 
 is probably easier to suspect than to ascertain. 
 
 Of the origin of Damascus nothing certain is 
 known. The building of it has been ascribed 
 both to Abraham and-to his 'steward, Eliezer of 
 Damascus." That the city existed as early as the 
 days of Abraham is clear from Gen. xiv. 1-5; 
 XV. 2; but the way in which it is spoken of in 
 these jiassages shows that even at the time to 
 which they refer it was not a new nor an un- 
 known place ; for Abraham's steward is charac- 
 terized as being of Damascus, and (he locality of 
 another town (Hobah) is fixed by stating tliat it 
 lay 'on tlie left hand of Damascus.' L. Miiller 
 (Ad Orig. Reg. Dmnas.) has undertaken to show 
 that it was even tlien governed, by its own rulers. 
 How long it may have retained its independence 
 cannot be delermined ; but it ajipears (2 Sam. 
 viii 5, 6 ; 1 Chron. xix. 4) that its monarch having 
 unadvisedly attacked tlie victorious David, the 
 Hebrew sovereign defeated the Syrians, makini^ 
 a great slaughter of them, and, in4iis turn, suu- 
 nued Damascus, and exacted tribute from its 
 inhaiiitants. This subjection was not of long 
 duration, fur under his successor (1 Kings xi. 21) 
 one Rezon, a servant of Hadadezer, king of Zobali, 
 made himself master of Damascus, and, ruling 
 over Syria. ' was an adversary to Israel all the 
 daj's of Solomon.' After Rezon, Hezion occupied 
 the (lirone; he was succeeded by his son Tabri- 
 nion (1 Kings xv. 18, 19), who was in alliance 
 with Asa, king of Judaii. Preserving the same 
 direct line, the crown then fell to Beniiadad, who, 
 liaving licen in a league with Baasha, king of 
 Israel, was bribed by Asa to desert nis ally, and 
 join himself in attacking Baa.slia, on whom the 
 united forces indicted great injury (1 Kings xv. 
 19, 20). Ill (lie time of Benhadad, s*n\ of (he 
 preceding monarch. Damascus was the head of n 
 very poweiful empire, since it appears (1 Kings 
 XX. 1) (hat 'thiity and two kings' (doubtless 
 petty princes or jiashas, governors of provinces) 
 acconijianied him in a campaign which be un- 
 dertook against Samaria. Of Aliab, its king, he 
 insolently demanded, ' thy silver and thy gold, 
 thy wives also ami thy childien, e\'en the goodli- 
 est.' The Israelitish monarch saw no al(ernativc 
 but oliedience : — ' I am thine, and all that I have.' 
 This yieldingness sharpened (he iapaci(y of Ben- 
 hadad, who ])Voceeded to take tl e most ofl'ensive 
 me*«uies, which hatl their natural eflect in r jusiug
 
 DAMASCUS. 
 
 DAMASCUS. 
 
 flUI 
 
 AhaK The kinjj of Israel fhf>rpfore took couii'sel 
 of 'al. tile eliiers of tiie Uiul,' ami, lieiii;^ advised 
 to lesisf, met tlie tliieats of Henliailail with these 
 famous words : — ' Let not hiiii liiat ic'i'lelli on 
 bis harness Ixiast liimself as lie tliat putteth it 
 otf." The Damascene king, undismayed, i^ave 
 himself n[i to drinkini^ and revelry. Aliab was 
 under reliyjious inlliiences. The battle took jdace ; 
 the Sy.ians were defeated, and tlieir kioa; ellectetl 
 bis retreat with ditlicnlty. The sulxetiiieiit o))eia- 
 tijns c/ the Damascenes, inider their kiiiir. have 
 already heen slated [Jir.NHADAo]. Hazael, the 
 wiccessor of Benhadad. unvvillin;,' to <^ive up hope 
 of Ijciiig master of Riinioth-Gilead, was attacked 
 by the united forces ofJudali and Israel, whom 
 he vanquislieii, wounding Joiam , 2 Kings viii. 
 2S); and. at a later pciiiul, under Jehu (2 Kings 
 X. 32), laid waste a large ]Kntioii of the Israelitish 
 kiagjom, and 'threshed Gilead with threshing 
 
 hnfviimriits of iron' fAmos i. 3). Detrrmine'l nn 
 reven^^e (2 Kings xii. 17), Hazael niairheti to 
 .Jenisahm. ai>(l was l)onght c./f hy kini: JehcMsli 
 ijy a most costly sacrilire. He, however, took 
 the kingdom of Isiael (2 King* viii. 3), and, 
 fhongh he tifa!e(' the, people opjnvssivelv. he wna 
 able to liaiid ihe^n over in siiiijection to li's son. 
 Ijenhadad III.. « ho was thrice I.ealen (2Kini.'« 
 xiii. 2t) by the I-raelitish king Jelioash, and de- 
 I rived of all his conciuests. Jeroboam II. 2 
 Kings xiv. 2r.) pursued these udviintugcs, an<l 
 captured Dainascus itsell'. Sukseijuenily a junc- 
 tion took place l)etween Israel and Damascus, 
 when (2 Kings xv. 37) Rczin, king of the latter, 
 and I'ekah. king of the former, entc red into a confe- 
 ileiacy, and undeitook anexj^dition against Aha^ 
 king of .Fudah t Isa. vii. 1). They sncceetled in 
 * recovering Klath to Syria,' but could not prevail 
 against Jerusalem (2 Kings xvi. 6). Ahaz, how- 
 
 245. [Damascus.] 
 
 ever, urged by necessity, ajjjilied for aid to Tig- banesia (Hierodes, !>%»(«£•.). From the time of Ha- 
 
 lath-pileser, king of Assyria, who, being brilied drian it l)ore the hciiorary title of Mefrojiolis, wifh- 
 
 by a munificent prest^nt, fell on Damascus, took out enjoying the rights of a metrojiolis (W'esseling, 
 
 it, carried the jieo[ile of it c.-ipTive to Kh- fori the ad IJurocl. ji. 717). Under the(ireek emiierors of 
 
 river Kur), slew Re.in, and united the Dama.scene Constantitiop'e Damasrus was the most celel.r.aleil 
 
 teiritory with his own kingdom (2 Kings xvi. 9: city of the Kast. remaikahle for its wealth, luxnn , 
 
 I a. viii. 4; x. 9 ; xvi.i. 1). Damascus after this 
 fell under the jxjwer of the BabyKinai s and Per- 
 sians, from whom it was taken by .\lexander the 
 (ireat, as one coii!«<iuenct: of his victory at I-^sus 
 (Airi.m, hltped. Ak-x. ii. 11, I.t; Curt, lii 12). 
 
 niagnilicti'.re, an«l its numerous Christian pojm- 
 iatioii. A gifat era in its hisiory is its coiKjuet 
 by the Saracens, t}f which an account may I*- 
 f„uiid in the Aiabic h'.storian .Mwakid! (0<kley"s 
 Uixf. of tlic SoyiKctix). The war was !«•;;> ii 
 
 Then it made a p;iit of the kingdom of tlie alioiil a.d. 0,33, by tie celel.iated Abiil.i-ker. ti:e 
 
 Seleucidae, from whom it piissetl ii.fo tlie han<is successoi of Mohummed ; and ended in the captuic 
 
 o<' the Romans (I'Mor. iii. .'), Diod. Sic. xxxix. 311). of the city, and ttie sultstitution of Islami.sm fur 
 
 111 the time ff the A](ost\" Paul it belonged to the C'tiii.sti.mity. It th<'n bec:mie the capital of (he 
 
 dejiendeJit kingdom of tlie Auabian ])rince .Xietas. whole Mussulman woild, till the Caliphate wus 
 
 At a later ];erio<i it was ie< kiried among tlie removed fuim it to Kagdad. The city continued 
 
 cities of Decapolis (Plin. llixt. ^at. v. IC); then under the sway of the ealipis of Hagdad, till :t 
 
 it was addeil to the pioviiice of Phanice (.-\nim. came into the hands of the Tin ks, and was held 
 
 Marc. xiv. S; TeitulL Contra Maix. iii 13 : arxl an<l M-ndeied famous by Nouieiulin and Siladin. 
 
 al last ma<iea{)ait of the province of rha'uicia Li- In !."t'l Tiinoui tlie Tartar cajjtnied the city an-J
 
 fl4 
 
 DAN, 
 
 harl.arously (r»ai«^l its inhal)itanf3. From Jo 
 tephui (I )e Bell. ,herl.\. 2; xxv 2; xx.2: comp. 
 Acts ix 2) it appears that its jiopulatioji con- 
 tained great muTiljers of Jews. 
 
 Damascus is famous in tlie first age of Chris- 
 tianity for the conversion and (irst ))reaching of 
 die Apostle Paul (Acts ix. 3, 20; Gal. i. 12), 
 The cou.sequonces might liave tieeii fatal to the 
 Apostle, for his life was endangered in this fana- 
 tical city. ' In Damascus the governor under 
 Arefa.s, the king, kejit the city of the Damascenes 
 with a garrison, de.sirous to apjirelieiid me ; and 
 through a window in a basket was I let down 
 Uy the wall, and escaped his hands' (2 Cor. xi. 
 32-3). (Walch, Antiquitates Danias. illustrates, 
 1757; Phot. Bih. p. 318; Burckhardt, Arabia, 
 J). 191; Lamartine, Travels in the East; Ad- 
 dison's Damascus and Palmyra, ii. 100 ; Bow- 
 ring's Report on Syria.) — J. R. B. 
 
 DAN (]''J, a judge ; Sept. Aav), son of Jacob 
 by the concidiiue Bilhali (Gen. xxx. 3 ; xxxv, 
 25), and foimdcr of one of the tribes of Israel. 
 Dan had liut one son, called Hushim (Gen. 
 xlvi. 23) : notwithstanding which, when the 
 Israelites came out of Egypt, tliis trilie con- 
 taineil 62,700 adult males (Num. i. 39), which 
 made it tlie second of the tribes in number, Ju- 
 dah only being alcove it Its numliers were less 
 alVected in the desert than those of many other 
 tribes; for at the census, before entering (Janaan, 
 it mustered 64,100 (Num. xxvi. 43), being an 
 increase of 1700, which gave it still the second 
 rank in population. But there is nothing in the 
 history of the tribe corresponding to this eminence 
 in pojjulation : the most remarkaiilt circum- 
 stance in its history, however, is connected with 
 this fact. Tlie original settlement assigned to 
 the tribe in soulh-western Palestine being too 
 small for its large population, a boily of them 
 went forth to seek a settlement in the remote 
 north, and seized and remained in permanent 
 occupation of the town and district of Laish, the 
 inhabitants of which dwelt in greater security 
 and were more easily conquered than the neigh- 
 bours of the tribe in its own proper territory (Josh. 
 xix. 47; Jiidg. i. 31; xviil.). The district regu- 
 larly allotted to the tribe, although contracted, 
 was very fertile. It had the country of the 
 Philistines ou the west, part of Judah with Ben- 
 jamin on the east, Ephraim on the north, and 
 Simeon on the south. The territory proved inade- 
 quate chiefly from the inability of the Daniles 
 to expel the Philistines and Amorites, who occu- 
 pied [larts of t!ie land assigned to tiiem. There is 
 no doul)t that the territory as allotted, but not 
 possessed, extended to the Mediterranean through 
 the country of the Philistines. Samson was of this 
 tribe, and its proximity to the Philistines explains 
 many circumstanctes in the history of that hero. 
 It appears from that history that there was an 
 under-current of private and social intercourse 
 between the Pliilistinss and the Danites, notwith- 
 atauding the pulilic enmity between Israel and the 
 former (Jiidg. xiii.— xvi.). 
 
 DAN, the town, anciently called Laish, or 
 LeisHEM, mentioned in the preceding article as 
 having been conquered by a warlike colony of 
 Danites, who named it after their tribe. The 
 terms ill which the condition of Laish is de- 
 •cril)e<l, previously to the conquest, indicate that 
 
 DANCE. 
 
 the place I> longed to the Sitloniavis, iinil that th« 
 inhabitants Itved quiet and secure, ' after the man 
 ner of the Siddniai.s,' enjo\ ing alninilaiKte of al> 
 things (Judg. xviii 7). They sef-.n to liave tle« 
 rived tlieir seciuity fr.)nr> the aiiieiice of any ad- 
 verse ])<nyeis in their neigl)bouih;)<>il, and from con- 
 fidence in the [jrotection of Siiloii, which was, how- 
 eve:-, loj far olT to render aid in th<» case f>' 
 such a sudden assault as that by which they 
 were overpowered. This distance of Sidon was 
 carefully noted by tlie Daiilte sjiies as a cir- 
 cumstance favourable to the enterprise; and it 
 does not appear that Sidon ever made any eflbrt 
 to dispossess the intruderi. Dan al'terwards be- 
 came a chief seat of Jeroboam s idolatry, and one 
 of the golden calves was set up there (I Kings 
 xii. 28, 29). It was coucpieied, along with other 
 towns, by tlie Syrians (1 Kings xv. 20); and the 
 name is familiar from the recurrence of the pro- 
 verbial ex])ressiun, ' fioin Dan to Beeisheba," to de- 
 note the extent ol tlie Promised Lanl (Judg. xx. 1 ; 
 1 Sam. iii 20; xvii. 11). [13ekuisiikba.] In the 
 days of Eusebius, Dan was still a small village, 
 which is ])]aced iiy iii n four miles f.oin Paneas, 
 towards Tyre. As this distance conesjioiids to 
 the ])osition of the fountain at Tel el-Kady, 
 which foims one of tlie sounes ol' the Jordan, and 
 is doubtless that v.liich is called Dan byJosephua 
 (Autiq. i. 10. 2), the situation of tlie city of Dan 
 could not therefore have been that of Paneas itself 
 with which it has been in later times confounded. 
 [C.5:sAUEA Pnn.ipi'i] Tiiere are no longer any 
 ruins near the spring at Tel el-Kady, but at a!)out 
 a quarter of an hour north, Burckhardt noticed 
 ruins of ancient haliitations; and the hill wliicli 
 overhangs tiie fountains apj)ears to have been built 
 ujxm, though nothing is now visible (Burckhardt, 
 Syria, p. 42; Robinson, Researches, iii. 351-3")8). 
 
 DANCE. The words in the original, rendered 
 in our translation by tliis ternij denote, properly, 
 U) leap for joy ; and this radical signification, 
 suggesting the idea of alirupt and boisterous gesti- 
 culations rather than a seiies of regular and taste- 
 ful movements, seems well t<> con>jioit with wliat 
 we may suppcise to liave bean the primitive cha- 
 racter of the (lance. On the other hand, some 
 writers of great eruililion h.ive maintained that no 
 allusions whate\er aie to he found in the Old 
 Testament hisfoiy to this kiri.d ol' bodily exercise; 
 and that in most, if not in all the passages, where, 
 in our version, dancing is mentioned, the etymo- 
 logy of the Ilebre.v, stijjji.nfe 1 in some places by 
 the strain of the context, seems 'o jxiiiit to some 
 kind of musical instrvnnent as ^)ein^ intended liy 
 the insiiired penmen. Tims, in Exod. xv. 20, 
 
 where the first notice is t.iken of dancing, nPHD, 
 coming as it does from ??n. ' to pierce" or ' ])er- 
 forate,' and applied naturally enough as the name 
 of any tube that may be l>lown l)y the breath, is, 
 according to them, used to descrilie some instru- 
 ment of tiie pipe or flute clas.s. as conjoined wita 
 timbrels : and in this interpretation they are sup- 
 ported by the Arabic and Persian version.s. But 
 this word, or some deiivati\es from the same root, 
 occurs in Exod. xxxii 19; Judg. xvi. 21.23; ISam. 
 xviii, 5; Jer. xxxi. 4, 13; where dancing alorje 
 can be intendeil. Moreover, in t!ie Sept-iagint 
 XopSs, a dance, is employed in all the jjassages o/ 
 tlie Old Testament just referred to, and in .several 
 others; and it is no small rA)llateral uronf tiiat
 
 DANCE. 
 
 thb is t!»e riglit iritripretiitioii, that people in 
 eaateni conritiies :ir<^ ucciHtoinud to mingle tlie 
 dance uitli taltrets <<> tliis day. 
 
 Tlie ciiaiaclcr of ilie ancient dance was very 
 diU'ereiit IVntu lli.it of ouis, as appears from lli« 
 conduct of Mi/iam, wlio ' took a titnhrcl in 
 her hand, and ill liie women went out after 
 Ler willi timbrels antl with daoces." Precisely 
 similar is the Oriental danf.*; of the present 
 day, which, accompanied of course with ma- 
 lic, is led l»y the priniMjxil jierson of the com- 
 pany, the rest inutating Uw. stejis. The evolutions, 
 as well as the son,,'.s, are extemporaneous — not 
 confined to a (ixed rule, hut vurieil at the 
 pleasure of the leading dancer ; and yet they are 
 generally executed with so much j^race, and the 
 time so well kept with the simple notes of the 
 music, that tlie group of atfentlants show wondcr- 
 fid address and jirojiriety in folh)wing the varia- 
 tions of the leader's feet. The missionary Wolff 
 descritjes a festival of sorneEaiteni Cliristians, 
 where one eminent individual, who led the song 
 as well as the dance, conducteil through the streets 
 of the city a numerous liand of people, who 
 leaped and danced in imitation of the gestures 
 used hy him. When the late deputation of the 
 Church of Scotland were on their way ihiough 
 Palestine, their young Arab guides, to lelieve the 
 tedium of the journey, sometimes ' commenced a 
 native .song and dance; one of them ailvancing a 
 little before the rest, began the song, dancing for- 
 ward as he repeated the worils; when the rest, 
 following him in regular order, joined in the cho- 
 rus, keeping time liy a simultaneous clapping of 
 hands. Thej- sang several Arabian songs, resjjond- 
 ing to one anotlier, dancing and clapping their 
 hands.' 
 
 At a very early period, dancing was enlisted 
 into the service of religion among the heathen ; 
 the dance, enlivened by vocal and instrumental 
 music, was a usual accompaniment in all the 
 processions and festivals of the gods (Strabo, x.); 
 and, indeed, so indispensable was this species 
 of violent mervi merit, that no ceremonial was 
 considered duly accomplished — notriumph rightly 
 celebrated, without the aid of dancing. The 
 Helirews, in common with other nations, had their 
 sacred dances, which were performed on their 
 solemn anniversaries, and other occasions of com- 
 memorating some sjK'cial token of the divine good- 
 ness and favour, as means of drawin.^ foith, in 
 thfi liveliest manner, their expressions of joy and 
 thanksgiving. Tlie performers weie usu.iUy a 
 band of females, who, in cases of jiublic rejoicing, 
 V(dunteered their services (Exod. xv. 20 ; Sam. 
 xviii. fi), and who, in the case of religious observ- 
 ances, compo.se<l the regular chorus of the temjjle 
 (Ps. cxlix. 3 ; cl. 4), altliough there are not want- 
 ing instances of men also joining in the dance on 
 these seasons of religious festivity. Thus David 
 deemed it no way derogatory to liis royal dignity 
 to dance on the auspicious occasion of the ark 
 being brought up to Jerusalem. The word used 
 10 describe his attitude is 'ID'IS, in the redupli- 
 cate form, intimating violent ellorts of leapicg ; 
 and, from the apparent impropiiety and inde- 
 cency of a man ailv»inced in life, alaive all a 
 king, exhibiting such freaks, with no other cover- 
 ing than a linen ephod, many learned men 
 ha»'e declared theinsel 'cs at a loss to accoimt for 
 •o stringe a Bjjectacle. If was, unquestionably, 
 
 DANCE. 
 
 .'M» 
 
 done as an act of religious homage: and when it 
 is remeniljered that the ancient ,\siati<s were ue^ 
 customed, in many of their religious festivals, (o 
 thix)w olV (heir garments even to perfect nudity, ai 
 a symbol sometimes of j)eniteiice, sometini<s of 
 joy, an<l that this, together with many other ob- 
 servances that bear the stamj) of a ri-mofe anti- 
 quity, was adopted by Mahomet, who hasenjoineu 
 the pilgrims of Mecca to encompass the Kaalvi, 
 clothed only with the ihram, we may [R'rhaiis 
 consider the linen ephod. which David ))ut on 
 when he threw off his garments and damed U- 
 fore the ark, to be symliolic of the same objects 
 as the ihram of the Mah(imme<lans (aee Fostci s 
 Mahommedanisni Unveiled). The comlnct of 
 David was imitated by the later Jews, and the 
 dance incorporated among their favoinile •■.sages 
 as an appropriate close of the joyous occasion 
 of the feast of Talteinacles. 'The memliers 
 of the Sanhedrim, the rulers of the syn;'.go"ues, 
 doctors of schools, and all who were eminent for 
 rank or piety, accomjKinied the .sacred mnsic with 
 their voices : and leajed and danced with torches 
 in their hands, for a gre<it ])art of the night ; while 
 the women and common people looked on." This 
 strange and riotous kind of festivity was kept up 
 till exhaustion and sleep dismissed ihem to their 
 homes (Buxturf. Dc Stjnag. Jiid. cap. 21). 
 
 From being exclusively, or at le;ist principally, 
 reserved for occasions of religious woiship and 
 festivity, dancing came gradually to be practised 
 in common life on any remarkable seasons of 
 mirth and rejoicing (Jer. xxxi. 4; Ps. xxx. 11). 
 In early times, indeed, those who j)erverted the 
 exercise from a sacred use to purposes of amuse- 
 ment were considered profane and infamous ; 
 and hence Job intr(kluces it as a distinguishing 
 feature in the character of the ungo<lly lich, that 
 they encouraged a taste for dancing in tiieir fami- 
 lies (Jol) xxi. 11). During the clas.sic ages of 
 Greece and Rome society underwent a comjlete 
 revolution of sentiment on this srdijccf ; inssomuch 
 that the Grecian p.ets represent the goils them- 
 .selves as passionately fond of the diveision (Pot- 
 ter's Grec. Antiq. ii. 4'tO), and that not only at 
 Riime, but through all the provinces <jf the eni- 
 jiire, it was a favourite paslime, resulted to not 
 only to enliven feasts, but in the celebration of 
 domestic joy (Luke XV. 2.5; Matt. xiv. 6). Nol- 
 withstanding, however, the strsng ))artiallty che- 
 rished for this inspiriting amusement, it was con- 
 sideied beneath the dignity of |h;i.s(iiis of rank aiul 
 character to jiractis*' if. The well-known words 
 of Cicero, that ' no one dances unless he is either 
 drunk or mad,' express the prevailing sense as to 
 the impropiiety of resjK>ctal)le individuals taking 
 part ill it; and hence tlu gay circles of Rome 
 and its provinces derivetl all their entertainment, 
 as is done in the Ka.st to this day. from tlie exhi- 
 bitions of jirofessional dancers. Uiulor the palion 
 age of the emperors^ and of their luxurious ui- 
 butaries, like Hero<l. (he art was carried to the 
 utmost perfection, the favourite mode being pjin- 
 tomime, which, like that of the modern .\hucli«, 
 was often of the most licentious dcscrijrtion. A 
 Btory of love was chosen— generally an adventure 
 of the gods — as the plan of the dance, and the 
 address of the performer consisted in rciiresenling, 
 by the waving of his hands, the agility ol' hit 
 limbs, and the innumerable attitudes into which 
 he threw himself, all the various passions of 1ot«
 
 516 
 
 DANIEL. 
 
 )«iilousy, disgust, that sway the human breast. 
 (See at large Luciaii's Treatise on Dancing.) 
 
 Amateur danciriji; in hi^h life was, as that 
 writer informs us. l)y no means uncommon in 
 the voluptuous times of the later emperors. But 
 ill the a;;e of Heroil it was excee(lini(ly rare and 
 almost unheard of; and therefore the condescension 
 oi Salome, who volunteered, in lionoiir of the 
 anniversary of that monarcli's hirlhday.to exhibit 
 her handsome jierson as she led the mazy dance 
 in the saloons of Macha^rus — for thoufrh she was a 
 cliild at tliis lime, as some suppose (Micliaelis, 
 Introd), she was still a jnincess — was felt to be 
 a compliment tliat merited the highest reward. 
 The folly and rashness of Herod in giving her an 
 unlimited piomi.se, great as tliey were, have been 
 equalled and even surpassed by the munificence 
 which many other Eastern moi;archs have lavislied 
 upon favourite dancers. Shah Ahlias (to mention 
 only one anecdote of the kind), having been on 
 a particular occasion extremely grit^ilied with a 
 .voman who danceil before him, and being at the 
 time much intoxicated, made iier a present of a 
 inagnilicent khan that yielded him a consideralde 
 revenue. Next morning his minister reminded 
 him of his extravagant lit)erality, whereujwn, 
 being now cool and ashamed of his folly, he sent 
 for the dancer, and obliged her to lie contented 
 with a sum of money (Thevenot's Tvar. ew Persia, 
 p. 100). It \-i liy no means impiobahle that 
 Herod, too, was (luslied with wine; and that it 
 was from fear he should retract his promise, if 
 she delayed till the morning, that Heiodias sent 
 immediatchj for the head of the Baptist. 
 
 It remains to noti(;e further that the Jewish 
 dance was performed by tlie sexes sejiarately. 
 Tliere is no evidence from sacred history that the 
 diversion was promiscuously enjoyed, except it 
 might be at the erection of the dellied calf, when, 
 in imitation of the Egyptian festival of Apis, all 
 classes of tlie Hebrews intermingled in tlie frantic 
 revelry. In the sacred dances, although both 
 sexes seem to have frequently l)Oine a part in the 
 procession or chorus, they remained in dis'inct 
 and separate companies (Ps. Ixviii. 25; Jerem. 
 xxxi. 13) — R. J. 
 
 DANIEL (^?<''3'7, i. e. God is my judge), 
 a celebrated propliet in the Chaldssan and Persian 
 period. There are in tlie Bible two other persuns 
 of the same name : a son of David (1 Chron. iii. 
 1), and a Levite of the race of Ithamar (Ezra viii. 
 2; Neh. x. 6). The latter has bee i confounded 
 with the ]m>phet in the apociyjihal Addenda to 
 the Septuaginr (Dan. xiv. 1, Sept.), where lie is 
 called Ifpevs uyofxa AavL/jA vlhs 'A$5a. (Kieronym. 
 Prcefat. in Daniel. ). 
 
 Daniel was descended from one of the highest 
 families in Judah. if not even of royal blood (Dan. 
 i. .3; comp. Josejih. Antiq. x. 10. I). Jerusalem 
 was thus probably his birth-place, though the pas- 
 sage (Dan. ix. 21) quoted in favour of that opi- 
 nion, is considered liy manj' commentatoi"s as not 
 at all conclusive. 
 
 We find tlie lad Daniel, at the age of twelve or 
 ■ixteen yeai-s. already in Babylon, whither lie had 
 been carried togetlier with three other Hebrew 
 youths of rank, Ananiah, Misliael, and Azari.ih, 
 At the first deportation of tlie people of Judah 
 in the fourth year of Jehoiakim. He and his com- 
 ptnions were obliged to enter the service of tlie 
 
 DANIEL. 
 
 royal court of Babylon, on whi-i. ocoagion h« 
 received the (;halda;.in name of lielshatzar (i t, 
 Beli priiueps, princcps cui Belns favct), acco.-tl- 
 ing to eastern custom when a ciiange takes ])lac# 
 in one's condition of life, and moie esjiecially if 
 his personal liberty is thereby alfected (comp. 
 2 Kings xxiii. 31 ; xxiv. 17; Eslh. ii. 7; Ezra 
 V. 14)! 
 
 In this tiis new career, Daniel received that 
 thorough ])olisli of education which Oriental eti- 
 quette renders indisjiensable in a courtier (comp. 
 iii. 6 ; Plat. Alcib. ^ 37), and was more especKilly 
 instructed ' in the writing and speaking Chal- 
 daean" (Dan. i. 4), that is, in tlie dialect peculiar 
 to the Chaldaans [Chai.dee Language]. In 
 this dialect were composed all the writings of the 
 ecclesi<istical order, containing the substance of all 
 the wisdom and learning of the time, and in the 
 knowledge of which certainly but few favoured 
 laymen were initiated. ' That Daniel had distin- 
 guished l.'imself, and already at an early period 
 acquired renown for high wisdom, piety, and strict 
 observance of the Mosaic law (comp. Ezek. xiv. 
 14, 20; xxviii. 3; Dan. i. S-16), is too evident 
 from passages in the truly authentic Scriptures 
 to require any additional support from iha ill- 
 warranted Apocryphal stories concerning the de- 
 livery of Susannah by the wisdom of the lad 
 Daniel, etc. A proper opportunity of evincing 
 both tlie acuteness of his mind, and his religious 
 notions, soon presented itself in tiie custom of the 
 Eastern courts to entertain the officers attached 
 to them from the royal table (Atlienaeus, iv. 10. 
 p. 145, ed. Casaub.). Daniel was thus exjiosed 
 to the temptation of partaking of imclean food, 
 and of participating in the idolatrous ceremonies 
 attendiint on heathen banquets. His prudent 
 proceedings, wise beaiing, and absolute refusal 
 to comiily witii such customs, vvere crowned wit! 
 the Divine blessing, and had the most splendid 
 results. 
 
 After the lapse of the three years fixed for his 
 education, Diniel was attached to the court o( 
 Nebuchadnezzar, where, by the Divine aid, he 
 succeeded in interpreting a dream of that prince 
 to his satisfaction, by which means — as Joseph 
 of old in Egypt — he rose into high favour with 
 the king, and was entrusted witli two impoitant 
 offices — the governorship of the province of Ba- 
 bylon, and the head-insj^ectorship of the sacerdotal 
 caste (Dan. ii.). 
 
 Considerably later in the reign of Nebuchad- 
 nezzar, we find Daniel inter])ieting another dieam 
 of the king's, to the effect that, in punisliment 
 of his pride, lie was to h.se, for a time. Ins throne, 
 but to t)e again reitoied to it after his humiliation 
 had been completed (D.in. iv ). Heie he dis- 
 plays not only the Uiost touching anxiety, love, 
 Ijyalty, and concern for his pipncely benefactor, 
 but also the energy and solemnity iiecoming Lis 
 position, pointing out with vigour and power the 
 only course left for the monaich to pursue for 
 his neace and welfare. 
 
 llnder the unworthy successors of Nebuchad 
 nezzar, Daniel and his deservings seem to have 
 lieen forgotten, and he was removed from his 
 high posts. His situation at court appears to have 
 been confined to a very inferior office (romp. 
 Dan. viii. 27); neither is it likely that he should 
 have retaineil his rank as head inspector cf the 
 order of the magluns in a country wliere tliea*
 
 DANIEL. 
 
 were (lie jpiiiicipsil actors in ellectiiiH; changes in 
 the administration wlieuever a new succession to 
 ihe throne took place. 
 
 We thus lose s:giit of Danifl until the tirst and 
 third year of kin.; Bclsliaz/.ar (Dan. v. 7, 8), gene- 
 rally undeistixid to have been tiie last king of Ba- 
 bylon (called hy profane wrilers Naljotmedus), but 
 who— to judge from Dan. v. 11, 13, l8, 22 — was, 
 more probalily, the son and successor of Nebu- 
 chadnezzar, usually c.illed Kvil-Merodach, thougli 
 passing ill Daniel l)y his Chaldasan title and 
 rank. After a reiyn of two years, this iiioiiarch 
 was assassinated by his brother-in-law Neri- 
 glissar (Beiosus in Joseph, contra Apion. i. 20). 
 Shortly bef.re this event Daniel was again re- 
 stored to the royal favuur, and became moral 
 preacher to the king, wiio overwhelmed him with 
 honours and titles in consequence of his being 
 able to read and solve the meaning of a sentence 
 miraculously displayed, which tended to rouie the 
 conscience of the wicked prince. 
 
 Under the same king we see Daniol both 
 alarmed and comforted by two lemaikable visions 
 (Dan. vii., viii.), which disclosed to him the fu- 
 ture course of events, and the ultimate fate of the 
 most powerful empires of the world, but in parti- 
 cular their relations to the kingdom of God, and 
 its develojjment to the great consummation. 
 
 After the conquest of Babylon by the united 
 jiowers of Media and Persia, D.miel seriously 
 busied himself under the short reign (two years) 
 of Darius the Mede or Cyaxares II. with the 
 affairs of his jieople and their possible return from 
 exile, (he term of which was fast approaching, ac- 
 conding to the prophecies of Jeremiah. In deep 
 humility and prostration of Sjiirit, he then prayed 
 to the Almighty, in the name of his people, for for- 
 giveness of tneir sins, and for tlie Divine mercy 
 in their behalf: and the answering promises he 
 received far exceeded the tenor of his prayer, for 
 die visions of the Seer were extended to the end 
 of time (Dan. ix.). 
 
 In a jiractical point of view also Daniel ap- 
 |x'ared at that time a highly-favoured instrument 
 of Jehovah. Occupying-, as he did, one of the 
 highest posts of h ii:our in die state, tlie strictness 
 and scrupulousness with which he fulHlled his 
 ollicial duties coulii not fail to rouse envy and 
 jealousy in the breasts of his colleagues, who well 
 knew how to v/in t le weak monarch, whom tliey 
 lit last ii.duced to isuie a decree imposing certain 
 acts, the performance of which, they well knew, 
 was altogether at variraice with the creed of which 
 Daniel was a zealous professor. For his disobe- 
 dienc^e the ]irophet sull'ered the penally s])eci(ied 
 ill the decree : he was thrown into a den of lions, 
 but was miraculously saved by the mercy of God 
 — a circumstance which enhanced his reputation, 
 and ag<iin raised him to the highest {Kists of honour 
 I'tider Darius and Cyrus (Dan. vi.). 
 
 He had, at last, the happiness to see his most 
 ardent wi-.lies accomplished— to behold his jieople 
 restored to tiieirown land. Though his advanced 
 age would not allow him to lie among those who 
 returned to Palestine, yet d d he never for a mo- 
 ment c^ase to occupy his mind and heart with his 
 jieopli- and tlieir concerns (Dan. x. 12). 
 
 In the til rd year of Cyru.s, he had a series of 
 visions, in which he was informed of the minutest 
 I'fetails lesjKJct'.ng the futuie liist*iry and sulferings 
 Bl' liis natic i, tc the period of their true rcdeuip- 
 
 UANIEL, BOOK. OF. 
 
 »17 
 
 tivin ti.A .;f;li Christ, as also a consolatory notice 
 to himself to proceed calmly and ] eaceably to th« 
 end of his days, and then await |'aiiently tlic resur- 
 rection of ihe dead at ihe end of time. 
 
 From that |K'r'od the hccoiiiiIs respecting hiii* 
 are vague, sometimes confused, and even strange; 
 and we hardly need mention the various fables 
 wliicii report his death to have taken place in Par 
 lestine, Babylon, or Snsa.— H. A. C. II. 
 
 DANIKL, HOOK OF. This important and 
 in many resjK'cts remaikable book takes its name 
 not only fiom the principal person in it, but also 
 and chiefly from him as its real author; iheie 
 being no doubt wliatever that, as the book itself 
 testifies, it was comjHi.se<l by Daniel (comp. vii. 
 1, 2S ; \iii. 2 ; ix. 2). It occupies, however, but a 
 tliiid lank in the Hebrew canon ; not among the 
 Proplu'ts, but in the Haf/iotjrapAa, owiTig, no 
 doubt, to t!ie correct view of the coin|)osers of the 
 canon, that Daniel did not exercise his )irophetic 
 ollice in tli5 iiioie restricted and proper sense of 
 the term ' pionhecy ;' but stood to the theocracy 
 in a dilleieiit relation from those leal pro[ihet« 
 whose calling anil jiiol'essioti consisted exclusively 
 in declaring the messages they received, and in 
 the communion which they held with God. These 
 latter are termed, in the aiicient Hebiew idiom, 
 D'N'33, prophets, in conlradistinttion to D*tn, 
 iccrs, who, though they were equally favoured 
 with divine revelations, were nevertheless not pro- 
 phets by profession, a calling tliat claimed the 
 entire service of a man's whole life. 
 
 The book of Daniel divides itself into two 
 [lait-s, historical (cli. i.-vi.) and prophetic (ch 
 vii.-xii.), airanged respectively in chionological 
 Older. Its object is by no means to give a sum- 
 mary historical account of the period of the 
 exile, or of the life of Daniel liimself, since it- 
 contains only a lew isolated points both a.s to 
 liistoiical facts and propiietic revelations. But 
 the plan or tendency which so consistently runs 
 through the whole book, is of a far different cha- 
 racter; it :s to show the extraordinary and wonder- 
 ful means which the Lord made use of, in a period 
 of the deej est misery, when the theocracy seemed 
 di,ssol\ed anil fast approaching its extinction, 
 to afl'ord assistance to his peo])le, proving to the.n 
 tliat he had not entirely foisaken them, and 
 making them sensible of the fact, that His merciful 
 piesence still contiiuied to ilwell with them, even 
 without the Temple and beyond the Land of 
 Promise. In this way alone was it possible to 
 render the time of punishment also i. j)eriod of 
 rich blessing. The manifestations of the Lord to 
 that effect consisted, among others, of the won- 
 ders recorded in this Ixiok, and tiie glorious pro- 
 phecies of the seer. The book thus sets forth a 
 series of miraculous tokens, by which (iixl pro- 
 claimed amidst the heathen world, and in a 
 period of abject .legiadation, that Israel was still 
 (lis ])«>ple, the nation of liis covenant, still 
 marching steadily onward to the goal market! 
 out for them by the Lord. 
 
 The wondois related in Daniel (ch. i.-vi.) are 
 thus mostly of a peculiar, prominent, and striking 
 character, anil resemble in many res])ecfs those jier- 
 formed of old time in Egypt. Their divine ten- 
 dency Wiis, on the one hand, to lead the lii-atiien 
 power, which proudly fancied itself to be the con-, 
 queror of the theocracy, to the acknowledgment 
 tliut there was an essential ditl'ereuce between tlie
 
 918 
 
 DAPJIEL, BOOK OF. 
 
 tPorUl and the kinr/dom of God ; and, on the other, 
 to inipiesi de;;eneiate ;iiid callous Isiael with the 
 full conviction, that the power of God was still tlie 
 same as it vv;is of old in Kgypt. 
 
 Neither do the prophecies contained in the book 
 (eh. vii.-xii.) hear a le;s peculiar and striking ciia- 
 nicter. We cannot, indeed, fail to discover in the 
 v/riter, to a very great extent, a jierson of vast in- 
 foimation. and well-versed in the management of 
 |x>litical allairs, these prophecies having for their 
 ohjet, — more than ai'y other in tiie Old Testa- 
 ment — tlie political vicissitudes of the empires of 
 the workl. Noi- are we less reminded of Daniel's 
 domicile in Chaldae i, by the colouring imparted 
 to his visions, by their symbols, and more espe- 
 cially by those drawn from beasts (Dan. vii. 8), 
 the grotestjue manner in which the figures are put 
 together, and the colossal majesty imprinted on 
 those sketclies. .\11 these peculiarities belong to 
 the tiulividualiti/ of tlie jMOphet himself, which is 
 Conspicuous even in the accounts he gives of tlie 
 revelations iinparted to him, though that indi- 
 viduality is then greatly modified by the sanc- 
 tified, exalted, and glorified state of his mind. 
 
 Tiie language of the book is partly Clialdaean 
 (ii. 4 ; vii. 2S) and piitly Hebrew. The latter is 
 not unlike that of Ezekiel, though less impure 
 and corrupt, and not so replete with anomalous 
 grammatical forms. Tlie Chaldaean is noways 
 that of the Clialda;ans jn-oper, but a coirnpt 
 vernacular dialect, a mixture of Hebrew and 
 Aramaic, formed during the period of the exile. 
 It resembles mostly the Clialdssan pieces in Ezra, 
 but ditli?r3 greatly from the dialect of the later 
 Targums. 
 
 The style is, even in the prophetic parts, more 
 prosaic than poetical, as Lowth has already ob- 
 served : ' Totnm Danielis Librum e Poetico- 
 rum cet»su excludo.' The historical descriptions 
 are usually very broad and prolix in details; 
 but tlie prophecies have a moie rhetorical cha- 
 racter, and their delivery is frequently some- 
 what abrupt; their style is descriptive, painting 
 with the most lively colours the still fiesh impres- 
 sion which the vision has made on tlie mental eye. 
 
 The following are the essential features of the 
 projihetic lenor of the book of Daniel, while the 
 visions in ch. ii. and vii., together with their dif- 
 feren*^ symbols, may be considered as embodying 
 the leading notion of the wh»le. The development 
 of the whole of the heathen power, until the com- 
 jdetion ai.d glorification of the kingdom of God, 
 appeared to the jiropliet in the shape of four powers 
 of the world, each successive power always sur- 
 jiassing the preceding in might and stiength, 
 riamely.the Babylonian, Medo-Persian,Gietk, and 
 Roman. The kingdom of God proves it.self con- 
 queror of them all ; a power winch alone is ever- 
 lasting, and sli iwing itself in its utmost glorifica- 
 tion in the appearance of the Messiah, as Juilge 
 anil Lord of the woild. Until the coming of the 
 Me.ssiah, tlie people of God have yet to go tiirough 
 a period of heavy tiials. That period is particulaily 
 descrilied, cli. viii. and xi , in the struggles of the 
 Maccabaean time, illustrative of the hvsr and hea- 
 viest combats wliich the kingdom of God would 
 have to endure The period until the ajjiiearance 
 of the Messiah is a fixed and sacied number : 
 seventy weeks of years (ch. ix.). After the la]i3e 
 of that period ensues the death of the Messiah ; 
 the expiation of the jieople is realised ; true justice 
 
 DANIEL, BOOK OF. 
 
 i» rerealed, but Jerusalem 'diid the Tem])l«> 4r« 
 in punishment given up to destruction. The t -ue 
 rse from tl is fdl and conuption ensues only al 
 the end of time, in the general resurrection 
 (ch. xii.). 
 
 The unify of the book has been disputed by 
 several critics, and more especially by Eichhorn 
 and Beriholdt, who conceived it to have been 
 written by more than one author, on account of 
 some con trad i lotions which they though-t thev 
 had discoveied in if. such as in i. 21, comjiared 
 with x. 1 ; and in i. b-\'^, amipaied with ii. 1. 
 With regard to the first supposeii contradiction, wfl 
 consider the meaning of i. 21 to be, that Daniel 
 had lived to see the first year of the reign of 
 Cyrus, as a particulaily memorable, and, for the 
 exiled people, a very important year. This doea 
 by no means exclude the possibility of his havinj 
 lived still longer than up to that (leiiod. 
 
 Respecting the second presumed contradiction, 
 the matter in ch. i. 5- IS belongs yiroperly to thb 
 eorege«cy of Nebuchadnezzar, which term i? 
 there added to his period of government, while 
 in ch. ii. 1 his reign is counted only from the 
 year of his actual accession to the tiiione. These 
 attem])ts to disturb the harmony of the work are 
 also discountenanced iiy the connecting tliread 
 which evidently runs tiirough llie whole of the 
 book, sett ng the s'ngle parts continually in 
 mutual relation to each other. Indeed, most 
 critics have now given up that hypothesis, and 
 look at the book as a closely connected and com- 
 plete work in itself. 
 
 Much greater is the difl'erence of opinion re- 
 specting the auihtnticity of the book. The oldest 
 known opponent of it is the heathen philosopher 
 Porphyry, in the third century of the Christian 
 era. The greater the authoiity in which the book 
 of Daniel was held at that time liy both Jews 
 and Christians in their various controversies, the 
 more was he anxious to dispute that authoTity, 
 and he did not disdain to devote one whole book 
 (the trtrelftli) — out of the fifteen which he had 
 coirposed against the Chiistians— to that subject 
 alone. He there maintains that the author of 
 the book of Daniel was a Palestine Jew of the 
 time of Antiocbus Epiphanes, that he wrote it in 
 Greek, and fraudulently gave to ;jfls< events Hie 
 form of prophecies. Porphyry has been answered 
 by Euseliius of Ca>saiea, iVIethodius of Tyre, 
 and Apollinaris of Laodicea. But their woiks, 
 as well as that o( Porj.liyry himself, are lost; 
 and we know the latter only from the numerous 
 quotations and refutations in the Commentaiy of 
 Jerome. 
 
 Porphyry found no successor in his views until 
 the time of the English deists, wiieii Cell n.i 
 attempted to attack the authenticity (.f Daniel, 
 as was done by Semler in Germany. Aflei 
 this a few critics, such as J. D. Michaelis and 
 Eichhoin, disputed tlie authenticity of the six 
 first chapters. The learned Swiss, Corrodi, went 
 still faither, and, reviving the views of Por- 
 phyry, questioned the genuineness of the zonule 
 book. The strongest, most ekiboiale, and eruilite 
 attacks against the book, came from the jtens ol 
 hieitl'.oldt, Bleek, De Wette, Lengerke, ard others. 
 But theie have also not heen wanting voices in 
 its defence, such as those ot LUdeiwaid, Staiidrii, 
 Jahn, Lack, Steiidel, Hengstenberg, liavernick, 
 and otheis.
 
 DANIEL, BOOK OF. 
 
 Tie argntiwiifs fli'vaiiccd against flic gtrmine 
 chardcte) ol° IVaiiifl are more diioctctl agaiii^ the 
 internal tluin «xt4:rnai evidence of tlie work. 
 
 The wonders and projihec.iis recorded in it are 
 ■Iways (lie fuieinost stutnLling-block, and iniicli 
 i>bjection is made to tlieui. Tl>e coirtents of the liis- 
 torical jiait is declaied \o lie lictitions and replffe 
 with ituju'olialiilities — nay, e\en witli liistwical 
 inaccuracies; su<-ij as tlie sketches regarding tlie 
 relations of tlee sacerdotal order, the sages and 
 aslrologws (ii. 2; iv. 7; v. 7-15), the mention of 
 DariMs tlie Mede 'vi. I ; ix. 1 ; xi. I), and tlie 
 regulatkuis coiiceruing the &atra|)s (iii. 3; vi. 2, 
 &c.). 
 
 Li the pi-oi^hetic part, particular objection is 
 taken to the ajiocalj'ptic character of the bixik, 
 by which it dillers frmir all the other hooks of the 
 Prophets. Not less suspicious, in their eyes, is 
 tlie circumslaiice that all the accwuits in it re- 
 lating to very remote future events, and the fate 
 of empires which liad not then yet risen into 
 existence, are descriljed ui so positive and exact a 
 manner, and with so much circumstantial detail, 
 even ia the very date of their occurrence. Yet, 
 as tiiis does not extend farther tlian the time of 
 Antiochus Eiiiphanes, it will naturally lead to the 
 conclusion of ' vaticiiiia jx)st eveiitum." Other 
 ohjeciioits a^uinst the gpuuineness of the liook 
 are, «hat J)aniel is frequently spoken of in it in 
 L\gh i«nns of respect and honour (i. 17, 19, sq. ; 
 V. 11, sq.: vi. 4; ix. 23; x. 11, &c.) ; that tlie 
 language, both Hebrew and Chaldsean, is very 
 corrupt, aiid that the Greek words occurring in 
 (hem (iii. 5, 7, 10) naturally l>etray the book to 
 have been written in a later age, at least the 
 Alexandrian, when Greek words began to be 
 introduced into .\sia ; that the doctrines in tlie 
 bjok, the Angelology (iv. 14 ; ix. 21 ; x. 13, 21), 
 Christology (vii. 13, sq. ; xii. 1, sq), the ascetic 
 discipline (i. 8, sq.), also betray a later age ; that 
 Uie book stands in the canon in the Hagio- 
 grapha, a proof that it had become known oidy 
 after the collection of the Prophets had been 
 completed ; a suspicion which is still more 
 strengthened by the circumstance that the name 
 of Daniel is wanting in the book of Sirach, 
 ch. xlix., probably because the book of Daniel 
 did not then exi.st. 
 
 These few objections have been variously met 
 and confuted. They rest, to a great extent, 
 partly on hiitorical eirors, partly on the want of a 
 sound exegesis, and, lastly, on the perversion of a 
 fe.v pas.sages in the text. Tims it lias turned out 
 that seveial of the arguments have led to a far 
 different and even opposite result from what was 
 originally meant, namely, to the defence of the 
 authenticity of 'lie book. The existence, ex. gr., of 
 a king Darius of ttie Medians, mentioned in ch. vi., 
 is a thorough historical fact ; and the very circum- 
 taiice that such an insignificant prince, eclipsed 
 as his name was by the splendour of Cyrus, 
 and tlierefoie unnoticed in the labulous and his- 
 torical chronicles of P<!rsia, sliould be known and 
 menJioned in this book, is in itself a proof of the 
 high historical authority of Daniel. Nor does the 
 whole dogmatic tenor of the book speak less in 
 •■favovy: of its genuineness, since the dogmatic 
 spirit of tlie Maccaba'an period is essentially dif- 
 ferent from tliat which it exhibits, as, fj;. gr., in 
 the Christology, which forms the substance and 
 basis of Daiiieh 
 
 DANIEL, BOC K OF. 
 
 61ft 
 
 The ft»llowing are the more imjiortant of the 
 arguments which evidence the genuineness of lii« 
 book. 
 
 1. The existence and authority of the liook are 
 most decidedly lestihed Ity the New Testament. 
 Christ himsielf refers to it (Matt. x\iv. 15), siid 
 gives himself (m virtue of - tlie expression in 
 Dan. vii. l'J)(iie name of >^n of Man; while 
 the Apostles lejiealedly apjieal to it as an au- 
 thority («jc. gr., 1 Cor. vi. 2; 2 Tliess. ii. 3; 
 Heh. xi. 33, sq.) Tii the objection that Christ 
 and the writers of tire New Te.tameiit are here 
 no real authority, inasmuch as they accom- 
 modate tliemselves to tlie Je\vi>h notions and 
 views, we reply tliat the genuineness of tlie book 
 of Daniel is so closely connected with tiie tnith 
 of its contents — in otlier words, that the aut/ien- 
 ticiiy of tlie look is so immediately cnnnected 
 with its authoritij — that it is im]i05sil)le to doubt 
 tlie genuineness, without stisj)ecii:!g at the same 
 time a wilful fraud an<l cheat in its contents; 
 so that the accommodation in this case to na- 
 tional views would be tantamount to wilfully 
 continning and sanctioning an unpardonable 
 fraud. 
 
 2. The period of the exile wmild \ye altogether 
 incompiehensible without the existence of a man 
 like Daniel, exercising great iniluence wvon hi.s 
 own fieople, and whose return to Palestine was 
 ellecled by means of his high station in the slate, 
 as well as through the jieculiar assistance of God 
 with which he was fa\ouied. Without this as- 
 sumption, it is imjicissible to explain the con- 
 tinued state of indejiendence oi the people of 
 God during that period, or to account for the 
 interest which Cyrus took in their aHairs. The 
 exile and its termination are in<licative of un- 
 common acts of God towards highly-gifted and 
 favoured men ; and the apjjearanct? of such a 
 man as Daniel is described in that Iwok to have 
 been, is an indispensable requisite for the right 
 understanding of this poition oi the Jewish 
 history. 
 
 3. An important hint of the existence of the 
 book in the time of Alexander is found in Joseplius, 
 Anfiq., xi. 8, 4, acconling to which the prophecies 
 of Daniel had been jwinted out to that kiiig on 
 his entrance into Jerusalem. It is tine that the 
 fact may ha\e been somewhat embellislied in its 
 details by Josephus ; yet is it hi.'?toiically unde- 
 niable that Alexander did bestow j;reat favouu 
 on the Jews, a circumstance which is not ejisily 
 explained without granting the fact recorded by 
 Josephus to be true in the main. 
 
 4. The first book of the Maccabees, which is 
 almost contemporary with the events related in it, 
 not only pre-supjioses the existence of the book of 
 Daniel, but actually liitiays acquaintance with the 
 Alexandrian version of the same ( 1 Mace. i. 51 ; 
 comp. Dan. ix. 27; ii. 59; comp. Dan. ili.) — a 
 proof that the book must have been written long 
 before that period. 
 
 5. If the book ha<l been written in the Mai 
 cabacaii ] eriod, there would probably have beer 
 produced in that period some similar projiliPtic 
 and ajiocalyjitic productions, composed by Pales- 
 tine Jews. Of such, however, not the slightest 
 notice can anywhere be found ; so that our Iviok 
 — if of the Maccabsean time — thus forms an iso 
 lated enigmatic phenomenon in the later Jvwiab 
 literati \re.
 
 sao 
 
 DANIEL, BOOK OF. 
 
 DANIEL, liOOK OP. 
 
 6. The reception of tlie bnok into the canon \» 
 rIso an evidence of itj avittieniicit y. Iti the 
 MaccahaMii aij;e the canon hud lou^ Ux;n com- 
 pleted iinil clo-.ed ; Out even liouUtiiig that jioinf, 
 if is ii.it likely that, at a time when so mncii 
 scrupulous a .iievence was showi> towards all that 
 waa liallowed liy lime and old usa^e, and when 
 Scriptural literature was already nourishing— it 
 is not ])r.)hatjle, we say, that a [jiodnction then 
 
 (lie A.exanilrian versJoi) of the canonical I>iK)« al 
 Daniel. Nut only has it fallen lilH'rfits witti re- 
 gaid to s'ngle exjaessions and Bcntences, liut I;a9 
 ttcliialiv daied to re-nioiiel tiie text alfOL;»fther in 
 ch. iii-vi , either hy nimieron* ati<t(fiori3 (as ni. 24, 
 Bq., the jnayer of Azaiiah ; iii. 51, S(]., the soijt? of 
 the Three Childien)()r I ly omissions and deviafionu. 
 There aiP, hesides two gieat sii|i])leineiits to that 
 \ersion — the story of Susaiiiiah (xiii.). and of Bel 
 
 recent sliould have heeii laised to the rank of a and the Drai^on in IJalw^l (xiv.). li./th apocry])lia} 
 
 canciiic.al book. 
 
 7. We have an imjwrtant testimony for the 
 authenticity of the hook in Eaekiel xiv. 14, 20 j 
 xxviii. 3. Daniel is there lepie ented as an 
 onusual character, as a model of justice and 
 ffisdoin, to wlioni had U;en alhitfed sujierior 
 iivine insight and revelation. Tois bkefch per- 
 I'ectly agrees with that contained in our Iwok. 
 
 stories were originally wiitten ii: Greek ; a 
 elusion drawn already hy Purphyiy from 1'he 
 qiiihl.les in xiii. 51, 5-^, 5S, 5"). who at the 
 5aH»e f inre deiided the Cliristiaus for considering 
 tiiose stories as geiiniue writin^js uf D.iiiiel. Th* 
 aufbeuticify of the two stories was, however, 
 alieady i>€fore him questioived liV the fathers of 
 the churcii ; and a very inteiesfing disciissioii 
 
 8. Tiie book lietrays sucii an intimate accjUiiint- took place between Ori.,'en and JuUus Africanu« 
 
 ance with Ciialda}j.n manners, customs, history, legarding the autlipnticity of the story of Su- 
 
 aud religion, as none but a contem;ioiary writer sannah. Jerome condenmrs the two *torie» in 
 
 could fairly be su;)posed to jwjsesj. Thm, ex. gr., plain terms as fables, and as additions not be- 
 
 the descrijiiion of the Clraldaeaii niagiaiis and tlieir longing to the Hebrew text. Some eironeonslj 
 
 regulations perfectly a,'reas with the accounts as.snme that, besides our canonical tsxt, there also 
 
 of the classics respecting theoc. Tlie account existed a sort of critical revi-ion of the former in 
 
 of the illness :ir.d insanity of Nebuchadrrez&ir is the Chaldaan language, which the Seventy hut! 
 
 confirmed by Berosus (in Joseph, c. Apion. i. 20). consulted in their translation. But the mistakes 
 
 The edict of Darius the Mede (Dan. v.) may be ivi the translation, which are brought forward ni 
 
 satisfactorily explained fi our the notions jjeculiar favour of that view, cannot stand a strict cii- 
 
 to tlie Medo-Persiair religion, and the importance ticism, while tlie atx)ve-name<l peculiarities may 
 
 attached in it to the king, who was considered as be satisfactorily explained fiom the character of 
 
 a soit of incarnate deity. tluit translation itself. It plainly shows that th« 
 
 9. The religious views, the arderit belief in the writers had endeavoured themselves to furnish » 
 Messiah, the purity of that belief, ti>e absence of collection of legends, and a pecnliar recast of the 
 all the notions and ceremonial practices of later book, in accordance with the spiiit of the age and 
 Juuaism, &c., the agreement of me l)ook in these the tasteof Judaism then pevailhrg at Alexandria. 
 rei(>ects witii the genuine piopheilc books, and The wonderful character of the liook, and the 
 more esj)ecially with the prophets in and alter lire many ol.'scure and enigmatic accounts in it, were 
 exile, — all this testifies to the genuineness of the rocks on vrhich the fanciful. si)ecnlative, and 
 Daniel. lefiuing minds of the Ale.xandiiaiis ran foul. 
 
 10. The linguistic character of the book is No book was ever more favourable to the inter- 
 most decisive for its autlien;icity. In the (irst mixture of legends, disfigurations, and miscon- 
 insfance, the language in it, by turns Hebie.v and ceptlons of all sort*, than Daniel ; while the pe- 
 
 Aramaean, is jiarticulaily reinaikable. In that 
 respect, the book bears a close analogy to tliat of 
 Ezra. The author must certainly have been etpi.illy 
 conversant with b.ith languagv.'s— an attainment 
 exactly suited to a Hebrew living in the exile, Lot 
 not in the least so to an author in the Maccabeau 
 age, when tiie Hebrew had long since ceased to be 
 lanLTuaje. 
 
 iod of the exile was generally a favoinite topic tor 
 the fantastical embellishments of the Alexandrian 
 Je.vs. In like maimer may also lie explaiiied the 
 mutilationswhich the l>Oiiksof Estiiei aiul Jeremiah 
 lia\e received at the hands of the A'exandrians, 
 to whom heimeneutic «;ruples were of but little 
 moment. The more imp irtant the book of Daniel 
 
 a living language, and had been su|)j>l anted by was to the Christian clunch, ai>d the more arbi 
 
 the Aram<ean vernacular- dialect. Tne Hebrew trary the re-modelled S*'pt.. version of it was, the 
 
 in Daniel bears, moreover, a very great aliiniiy more concei\alde is it why in the old church 
 
 to that in the other later books of the Old Tes- the version of Thodotion became moie general 
 
 tament ; and has, in particular, idioms in com- than that of the Sept. It is tiue that some of the 
 
 mon with Ezekiel. The Aramaic, also, in the fathers still made use of the A'exaiidiine versi(.n; 
 
 b(x>k differs materially from the [iievailing dialect but, in the time of Jerome, Theodolion was 
 
 of the later Chaldtean paraphrastic versions of the alreaily read in neaily all the churches; and 
 
 Ohl Testament, and has much more relation to that this custcm had been introduced long be- 
 
 the idiom o'l the book of Ezra. 
 
 With regard to the Oi.u V'ehsions of the book 
 of Daniel, we must in the fir^t place observe that 
 there is not extant, or even known ever to lia»e 
 existed, any Chaldsan paraphrase (Targum) of 
 
 fore him is evident from the circumstance that 
 Jerome was ignorant of the historical princiiiles 
 by which the church was guided in adopting tliai. 
 version. For a long time it was believed that tne 
 version of the Seventy had lieen lost, until it v/aa 
 
 Daniel, any nrure than of E/.ia. The rejison of discovered at Rome, in tlie latter half of the Ijwi 
 
 this lies, no doulit, in the scrupulosity of the later century, in the C'dex Chi-ianus. It was jiuj- 
 
 J«,vs, who lielieved that the Ciialdaean version of lislied at Rome, 177:J, in fo'i.i, from the MS. copy 
 
 the two books might afterwaids easily be con- of Blancliiui, with a translation by P. de Magistri», 
 
 .'bundetl witii the oiiglnal texts, and thus ])rove which edition is. however, \ eiy defectiie and in- 
 
 Lnjurijui! to the pure pieservation of the latter, correct, thou,'li it v.as al'terwanls leijeatf^lly re- 
 
 J^ere is something peculiar- and remaikable in published. The version of Theod< tivu, geiiFrai!?
 
 DANIEL ADDENDA TO. 
 
 publ'jhe.l tw^ctJier witli lliat of the Septiiagiut, 
 of wliicli it is a levLsion, i;> u|)un tlie wliule 
 liteial and cone<:t. in I lie present copies of 
 Theo'hition, however, are already found tlie apo- 
 cryphal interpulalious anil addit.ons of llie Sept. 
 This is owiiijf to llie fact tliat Tlieodotion's ver- 
 •ion has in later limes lieen re-modelled, inter- 
 polated, and f.iUiiieil afUT that of the Seventy, so 
 tliat it would now be altogether an iiile task to 
 attempt to restore the original text of Tlieodutinn. 
 A very useful guide for the criticism of the Greek 
 versions, is the Syriac Hexaplavian version, pub- 
 lished by Buggati, at Milan, in 178S. The Ara- 
 bic Polyglott version is an otlspriiig of Theodo- 
 tion's, which it follows with literal exactness. 
 
 The Syriac veisiiui in the Feschito does some 
 good service in exjilainlng tlie words iri Daniel, 
 Imt is, nevertheless, not tree from gross mistakes. 
 The apocryphal parts it has copied fiom the later 
 interpolated Theodotion. The Vulgate also has 
 these additions translated after Theodotion. 
 
 The most im|)iirtant commentators on Daniel 
 are, among the fathers, Ejjhia?m Syrus, Jerome, 
 Theodoret ; among the rabbins, Jaichi, Kimclii, 
 Abenezra, Joseph Jacchiades; among the Pioles- 
 tant theologians, Melaiicthoii, Calvin, Martin 
 Cieier, de Dieu, Venema, Chr. Bened. Michaelis, 
 J. D. Michaelis. In more recent times, critical 
 works on Daniel have appeared by Bertholdt 
 aSOC), Rosenmiiller (1832), Havernick (1>'323, 
 Lengerke rJS35), Maurer (183b). In Englisir 
 there are many works on tlie pinpliecies and vi- 
 sions of Daniel, but those which take the cha- 
 racter of commentaries are, the Six-fold Com- 
 mcntart/ by Willet (IfilO); the Ti'anslation and 
 Co?>4/>ie?ii!a?'y by Hugh Broughfon (1611); theZ?n- 
 f»-uved Version by Wintle (1807).— H A. C. H. 
 
 D.INIEL, .\i)ocryphal Addenda to [Deu- 
 tkiio-Canunicai.]. In the version of the Seventy,. 
 and Uiat of Theodotion, are found some consider- 
 able additions to the book of Daniel which are 
 wanting in the Hebrew canon. These are, 
 
 1. The Prayer of Azarias, &c. (Dan. iii. 24-51j ; 
 
 2. The Song of tlie Tliree Children (Dan. iii. 52-90, 
 i. e. according to Ri»bert Stejihen's division into 
 verses, which has been adojjted into the Latin 
 Vulgate). [Vkusics]. 
 
 3. Tile History o I' Susanna (Dan. xiii.). 
 
 4. TheNair.itive of Bel and thel)ragon(Dan. xiv.). 
 '^Viese aie in our .\uthorized English Bible printed 
 sejiaratfly, and numbeied accordingly, thePiayer 
 of A/.arias and the Song of the Three Children 
 niak ng si.\ry-eight verses. 
 
 St. Jerome, who translated these together with 
 the canonical jiaits of the book of Daniel from the 
 (iieek veision ol Tlie.idotion, ob-erve> : ' Daniel, as 
 received am.mg the Hebiews, contains neither the 
 History of Su.saiiiia. nor the Hymn of the Three 
 Childien, nor the Fables of Bel and the Dragon, 
 all of which, as they aie dispeised throughout the 
 world, we have added, leit to the ignorant we 
 should s««m to have cut oil' a consieleiable part of 
 tik« book, trauslixing them at the same time with 
 a dagger (veru auejiosito. easque jugulante)."* 
 
 * This Latin phrase is translated by the .\meri- 
 can editois o;" Jalin's Introducliun thus: 'but we 
 have given the ]iiece>leiice in ordei, to that part 
 which is true, and evinces the falsity of these.' 
 Tbey evidently mistiok the word vuru, an obelisk 
 vr dagger, [■[ for vero. 
 
 DANIEL, ADDENDA TO. 
 
 5^1 
 
 Jerome gives us the following account of thes« 
 additions to the Helnew text : — ' We ought to 
 know tliat Porphyry, atlac^king the aiitheiiii-.-ily of 
 the book of Daniel, niaiiitaiiis that it is a forgery 
 unknown to the Hebiews, and entirely of Gieek 
 origin, inasmuch as in the stoiy of Sti^annali (fa- 
 iiulii Susanna'), Daniel says t' tlie elders, in allii- 
 5ion to the word (rxiyos Iv^itiscui or a niiistii li tiee), 
 anlaii se, &c., and to the word Tplvov {ilex, a 
 holm), TTpiffai at, whicli etymological allusion is 
 Greek and not Hebrew. To whom Uilh En-ebius 
 and ApoUinariiis, svitli oi.e voice, replied, (i.at the 
 fables of Bel and the Diagon are nut coiifained in 
 the Hebrew, but that they are jiait t<f the piiijihei-y 
 of Habakkuk, son of Joshua, of the trilie of Levi, 
 as is stated in the Septuagint Version in the title to 
 this same fable of Bel." . . . ' Tlie;vforf, wlieii 
 I translated Daniel many y/ars ago, i inaiked 
 these \ isions with an obelus, in order to intimate 
 that they aie not in the Hebieiv, and I am not a 
 little surprised that ceitain faulilinders aie of- 
 fended with me, as if I had cuitailed the book, 
 fur both Origen, Ensebius, .-VpoUinaiius, and other 
 cluiichmen and (iicek docluis, confess, as I liave 
 said, that these visions aie not in the Hebrew.' And 
 again — ' I liearil one of the Jewish teachers, derid- 
 ing the history of Su anu.ih, and as.-eiting it to be 
 the fable of some (iieek, make the same objection 
 which was made to Origen by .^fiicanus, namely, 
 that the etymological paronomasia lit-tween axtfos 
 and a)(iaai, ■irp7i'ns and Tr^iiVoi, was deiived from 
 the Greek language. The ol.jeclion may lie 
 rendered intelligible to those acipiainled only with 
 the Latin language, by siip])osing that from the 
 answer of one elder undir an ilex tree (sub ilii:c), 
 Daniel had taken occasion to say to liinr, illico 
 pereas, and that to the answer of the otheis undtr 
 a lei.tisk-tree (sub lentisco'), the leply had been, 
 in lente te comminuat angelus, or, non lente 
 pereas, or lenlus, id est fiexibilis, ducaris ad 
 mortem.' 
 
 Eusebius and the others who replied to Por- 
 phyiy, niaintaineil that Da'iiel the projihet 
 was a dilTerent person from the Daniel of the 
 Se\enty, which commences with the words, 
 'There was a certain priest, name<l Daniel, son 
 of Abdias, who ate at the table of the king of 
 Babylon." 
 
 The other objections made by the Jewish teacher 
 to St. Jerome consisted in his ridiculing the idea 
 of the three youths in the tiery furnace having 
 leisure to compose a metrical hymn ; in asking 
 what miracle or niaik of insjiiratioii it was in 
 Daniel to kill a serpent with a cake of pitch, or 
 to detect the frauds of the priests of Bel, such 
 sagacity being rather the ell'ect of common pru- 
 dence than of a prophetic spirit. But his chief 
 nlijection referred to the idea of HabaKkuk (ver. 
 36) being carrieti by an angel througli the air to 
 Baliylon, with regard to which he cha'lenged 
 liiin to show a similar miracle recorded in the 
 Scriptures; and when a young man pi esent ad- 
 duced the case of Ezekiel, he at once pointed I 
 out that this is said to have taken [ihice in the * 
 spirit i and Jerome observes tliat he did not ven- 
 ture to refer to St. Paul, who would not say of 
 himself whether he was ra]it up in the spirit or 
 in the body. This Jew emle.ivoured to main- 
 tain by such arguments the a]iociyphal character 
 of these ])ortions of Daniel. Jeiome further oIh 
 serves that the history of Susaniiali \a considered
 
 522 
 
 DANIEL, ADDENDA TO. 
 
 by nearly all tlie Hebrews as a fUlde; and that 
 it is not lead in the svna^oi^iies : for who, say 
 they, could lielitsc that captives had the power of 
 •tiirvin^ thfir [iiiiices and jutlges ? {^I'raf. ad 
 Daniclem). 
 
 The sulijert of the Prayer of Azaiias, and of 
 (he Son.' of tlie tlnee youths, Azaiias, Ananias, 
 and Miri.iel (Hie Hebrew names of Shadiach, 
 Mesliacb, and Al;ed ne^jo), consists in a petition 
 fill- ileliitraiicc fiom the furnace, and a hymn of 
 thanks^'ii in ,', on tlie part of tiie young men, for 
 their pre-ervation in tiie midst of the flames. De 
 WeUe ( I.ehrbuc/i) conceives that the Prayer and 
 the Hymn betray maiks of two dillennt authors 
 (Dan. iii. 3S ; comp. with 53, 55, 81, P5, 
 St(?pben's Division), and that the latter has the 
 appea.ance of bein.^ written with a liturgical 
 object. Certain it is that, from a very early 
 period, it formed put of the church service (see 
 Rufinus, in Symbol. Ajiost., who observes that 
 this hymn was tli n sung throughout tiie whole 
 church^; and Athanasiirs (/Je virginit(ite) ; it is 
 one of the canticles still sung on all festivals in 
 the Rom.in, and retained in the daily service of 
 the Angli(;an chinch. In its metriciil arrange- 
 ment it resembles some of the ancient Hebrew 
 compositions. De Wette adduces (loc. cit ) 
 several proofs fioin the style to show that it had 
 a Cliahletf ori.;iiial, and had undeigone the la- 
 bours of various hamls. It is maintained by 
 those who contend for the divine authority of 
 this Hymn that tlie context requires its insertion, 
 a* withc/iit it there .vould be an evident hiatus 
 in the narrative (Dan. iii. 23). ' Then these 
 men, Sliadrach, Mvsliach, and Alied-nego, fell 
 down liouiid into the midst of the burning Sery 
 furnace,' after which, we tind immediately (ver. 
 24, Heb.) 'then Neliuchaunezzar was astonished,' 
 &c. Tlie cause of this a-ironishrneni is said to be 
 supnlied liy the Greek translation. — ' And they 
 walked in the midst of tiie tiie praising God, and 
 l^essing the Lord (ver. 1, Aufh. Vers. Apiicr.) 
 .... but the angel of tiie Lord came down 
 into the oven.' he. (ver. 27). But this aildition 
 seems by no means necessary in order to account 
 for Nebnchadnez/,ai's astonishment, as the cause 
 of it is given in Daniel, ver. i)2 (\er. 25 in the 
 Heb. and Anth. Vers.). 
 
 The Uistnrij nf Susanna is probably a moral 
 parable, f ainded jieiiiapi on some fact, and af- 
 fording a lieautil'ni le-tson oi' chastity. 
 
 Tlie ol'ject of tlie Jewisli autlior of the hishiry 
 of the destruction of Bel and the Dragoti was, 
 according to Jahn, ' to warn against the sin of 
 idolatry some of his brethren, who had eml)raced 
 Egyptian superstiti.ins. The bouk was, therefore, 
 well adapted to tiie timp, and shows that jihi- 
 lo?ophy was not sufficient to keep men from 
 ajK>statising into the m ist absurd and degrading 
 »uperstifi;ins.* The time of the writing .lahn 
 ascribes to tiie age of tlie Ptolemies, when ser- 
 {lents were still worshipped at Tlu4ie8. 
 
 Among the ditlicuities attending these Deutero- 
 canonical portion* of Daniel, Jahn enumerates the 
 denominarltig Daniel a priest (xiv. 1), which he 
 c>nceives t i iiea coiif lundmg of D iniel the projihet 
 with Daniel the priest (Ezra viii 2: Neh. x. 7) ; 
 tl e oidei- of the king to destroy the idol of Bel, 
 dnd the ass'ition tli.it serpents were woishiiiped at 
 Babyljii; but he conceives all these ililliculties 
 t} lie removfd liy regarding the whole as a 
 
 DANIEL, ADDENDA TO. 
 
 parable, pointing out the vanity of idols, and tbt 
 impostines of the jiriest;. We are informed by 
 Herodotus that the temple of Bel was destroyed 
 by Xerxes. 
 
 De VVette (^Lehrbuch), while he jioints out some 
 Heliiaisms in Susamiali. considers the etymolo- 
 gical allusions aheady noticed as decisive of itj 
 having been originally written in Greek. Be* 
 •in d the Dragon has no marks whatever of anj 
 other than a Greek original. It is no doubt re- 
 markable that we should iiave a version of the 
 deutero-caiionical as well as of the canonical 
 poitions of Daniel, from Theodotion as well as 
 from the Seventy. This is accounted for liy Biip« 
 posing tliat Ttieodotion only altered and corrected 
 the version of the ^seventy in these parts. The 
 discrepancies are very greiit betwein these two 
 versions, so much so, as almost in some instances 
 to give the appearance of a dill'erent narration. 
 It is well known that so early as the second cen- 
 tuiy the Septuagint version of Daniel was sujier- 
 seded bv that of The^idotion, and that it was 
 supposed the foimer had been lost, until it was 
 discovered in Riime, and published in 1772. De 
 ^Vette consideis the deutero-canonieal portions 
 to be interpolations in Theodoiion's translation. 
 These additions aie also found in the Syriac anU 
 old Latin versions. 
 
 Professor Alber of Pe^th (who contends against 
 Jahn for the historic tiutli of these narratives), 
 in reference to the term fables bestowed by Je- 
 rome on some of the deutero-canonieal portiorM 
 of the b. ok of Daniel, endeavours to maintain, 
 from the fact of Jerome having used the word 
 fiihula (a fando) of a true na-.rative, ' Tibi 
 fabulam leferam, qua; infantiae meae temporibus 
 accidit;' that he employs it here in the same 
 sense; but it is evident from the whole context 
 (in which he had been already spaking of 
 apocryphal fables), that Jerome, who also ap- 
 plies these Greek ailditions to the book of Daniel, 
 iHintiasts them with the autliority of the canonical 
 Scriptures, ' nee se debere respondere Porphyrio, 
 pro his quae imllam Scrijiturae sacrae anctori- 
 tatem habeant.' {Vraf. ad hanielem.) Jerome, 
 however, observes, that with a due regard to 
 the order of time, Theodotion hail placed the 
 history of Susannah at the head of the book of 
 Daniel, and it is thus placed in the Cod. Alex., 
 kc. 
 
 Bel and the Dragon is read in tlie Roman oflice 
 on .A.sh-'VVednesday, and in the Church of Eng- 
 land on the 23rd of November. Susanna is read 
 in the Anglican Church on the 22nd of November, 
 and in the Roman on the vigil of the fourth Sun- 
 day in Lent. 
 
 VVe shall conclude with the following observa- 
 tion of Erasmus. ' It is astonishing that what 
 Jerome stabbed with his dagger is now every- 
 where read and sung in the churches ; nay, we 
 reid, without any mark of distinction, what Je- 
 nime did not fear to call a falile, the history of 
 Bel and the Dragon, and which he would not 
 have added, had he not been apprehensive of 
 seeming to have cut olf a considerable portion of thg 
 sacreii volume. But to whom ditl he fear to pf>»m 
 to do so ? To the iynorant, as he himself observes. 
 Of so much more weight to the ignorant multi- 
 tude is custom, than the judgment of the learned !' 
 {Schol. super Vrcvf Hieron. in Daniel.) .\ijd 
 a 'ain, ' Wlictlier the churcli receives these Uockt
 
 DAR. 
 
 DARKNESS. 
 
 Sti 
 
 Inth the same authority as the otliers, the spirit 
 ot tlie cliurcli kiiowelh.' (De ISymbol. el Decalog.) 
 
 vv. w. 
 
 DAR ("1*1). Tliis word occurs in Estli. i. 6, 
 as the name of one of the stones in tlie ])avcment 
 of the m.ignifictTit h;ill in which Ahasiienis feasted 
 the jirinces of liis empire. Tliis wouM sni^jjest 
 that it must h.ive denoted a kind of marl)le. 
 Some tal<e it to signify Parian marble, others 
 white maihle j hut nothing certain is known 
 about it. In Arahic, tlie word dar signifies a 
 large peail. Now jiearls were certainly en)])loyetl 
 by tlie ancients in decorating the walls of apait- 
 meiits ni royal palaces; hut that pearls were also 
 used ill the pavements of even regal dining- 
 rooms is improhaljle in itself, and unsuppiutod 
 by any known example. The Septuagint refers 
 the Hebrew word to a stone resembling jivarls 
 (■mvyivov \iOov); by which, as J. D. Michaelis 
 conjectures, it inlends to denote the Alabastrites 
 of Pliny (Hist. Xat. xxxvi. 7, S), which is a kind 
 of alabaster with the gloss of mother-of-pearl 
 [Alabaster]. 
 
 DARCMONIIVI. [Adarconjm.1 
 
 DARJCS. [Adarconim.J 
 
 DARIUS, or rather Daujavesh (tfVn'l), is 
 the name under which three Medo-Persian kings 
 are mentioned in tlie Old Te.stament. Tiie ori- 
 ginal form of the name, to which tlie Hebrew ;ijid 
 Greek words are only approximations, ha.s been 
 read by Giotefend, in the cuneifmm inscri]itions 
 of Persepolis, as Darheusli, or Darjeush (Heeien's 
 Idecn, i. 2. p. 350). Herodotus assigns to the 
 name the sense of ep^iris, or, according to another 
 reading, «p|€i7)s (vi. 98); the former meaning 
 coercito); the latter man of great achievements. 
 Tiie foimer accoi<ls with holding fast, which is 
 tlie sense of Dara, the modern Persian name of 
 Darius. 
 
 The first Darius is ' Daijavesh, the son of 
 Acliashverosh, of the seed of the Medes,' in the 
 book of Daniel (ix. 1). Much ditltjience of ojji- 
 nioii lias ])ievailed as to the ];eison here intended ; 
 but a strict attention to what is eitlier actually 
 expressed in, or fairly deduced fioni, the terms 
 used in that jiropliet. tends t<i narrow the field ibr 
 conjecture very considerably, if it iloe? nut decide 
 the question. It ap; ears, namely, i'roin the pas- 
 sages in cli. v. 30. 31 ; vi. 28, that Darjavesh, 
 the Me.ls, obtained the dominion over Baliylon on 
 the death of Bel^hazzar, who was the last Chaldaan 
 king, and that he was the immediate ]ncdece?sor 
 of Koiesh (Cyrus) in the soveieignty. Tlie his- 
 torical juncture heie defined belongs, therefore, to 
 the ]ierioii when the. Medo-Peisian aimy, led liy 
 Cvrus, tucik liabylon (a.». 5.)S^ ; and Daijavesh, 
 thf Mfde, must denote the tiist king of a foreign 
 dyi,.*sty, who assumed the dominion over tlie 
 Babylonian cmpiie, before (^yrus. Tlie.se indica- 
 tions all concur in tiie peisoii of Cvaxarei the 
 Second, the son and successor ot Astyages 
 [Ahasuerus], and the immediate predecessor of 
 Cyrus. It may be objected to tliis view that 
 Herodoms. Cte.sias, and other pagan histoiians 
 who peiha]is chiefly lely en their authority, make 
 no mention of any sucii person Bur, it may be 
 answered, Xenophon states that Astyages did 
 oave a son of that name who succeeded him ; by 
 describing him as a piiiice given up to sensuality, 
 .re eXL'lains how he came to surieniier all autho- 
 
 rity socntirely into the handset i.is enterprising 
 son-in-law and nephew Cyrus, trial ids reign waj 
 naturally sunk in that of his distinguished suc- 
 cessor ; and he dates the coniinencenient oi iIm 
 reign of ('yrus tVom the death of this Cyaxa.es 
 (Ci/rop. i. 5 ; viii. 7j. More.iver, a |)as.sage in 
 ./4ischyl.is {I'ersrr, /GJ-.'Jj, sc«'nis to I/ear an ol>« 
 scuie liut intelligible testimony to the *iiiie ac- 
 count. Josephiis also, when speaking ot the Mime 
 person, whom he calls Dariu.s, adds, ' lie was th? 
 son of Astyages, but w^vs known to the Gie«ks 
 by another name (Anltq x. II). Lastly, an 
 im|)ortant chmnological ditHculty is best ad- 
 justed by assuming the existence and leign ui 
 this Cyaxaies, ;is is shown in Clintons Fasti 
 Ilellenici, p. .'iOl, sq. Ijeitholdt has written a 
 satisfactory ' Excnrs iiber den Dariuit Mediu* 
 in his Cmnmentary on Du7iiel. 
 
 The second 'Darjavesh king of Persia' is 
 mentioned in the book of Ezra \\\ -vii.) in 
 Haggai, and in Zechanah, as the king who, in 
 the second year of liis reign, etlected the execu- 
 tion of those decrees of Cyrus which granteii the 
 Jews the lilierty to rebuild the tcmjile, the fullil- 
 ment of which had l>een ol)Stiucted bv the ma- 
 licious representations which their enemies had 
 made to the mmeiliate successors of Cyrus. It 
 is agreed that this prince was Darius Hystaspis, 
 who succeeded the u.sur]ier Smerdis b.c. 521, 
 and reigned thirty-six years. For some argn- 
 ment.s to show that he is not mentioned in the 
 Old Testament l)y any other nanie than that of 
 Darjavesli, see the article Ahasueuus. 
 
 Tlie third, ' Darjavesh the Persian,' occurs in 
 Nell. xii. 22, in a ))assage which merely states 
 that the succession of priests was registered up to 
 his leign. The question as to the person here ir» 
 tended bears chielly on the autiiorship of the 
 passage. It maybe biieily stated thus: — If, as 
 is more commonly Ijelitved, this king be Dariua 
 Notiius, who came to the throne (u.c. 42;j), luid 
 reigned nineteen years, we must (assuming that 
 the Jaddua here mentioned is the liigh-jniest 
 who went out to meet .-Vlexander the tiieat on 
 his entry into .Jerusalem ; .Josephus, Aiitiq. xi. 8) 
 conceive, eitlier that Jaddua leached an age ex- 
 ceeding a century — lor so long he must have 
 lived, if he was already liigli-];rie.st in the leign 
 of Darius Notlius, and saw Alcxaniler s entry ; 
 or that the Jaddua of Nehemiali and of Josephus 
 are not the same person. Carijzov has tiie«i to 
 show, tVom this very cliaj)ter, that the Jaddua 
 uf ver. 22 was a Levite, and not the higli-priest 
 {Introduct. ad Lihr t et. T'.-st. p. 317). If, 
 on the other hand, this king Ih; Darius Codo- 
 mannus, who came to the throne a.c. 33(5, and 
 reigned ("our years, then we must either assume 
 that Nehemiali liiniself attained the age of 130 
 years at least, or thai this pa.ssage is an interjHila- 
 tiun by a later hand (Bertholdt, Einleit. iii. 
 1031). 
 
 Darius Codomannus is evi<lently the Persian 
 King alluded to in 1 Mace. i. 1. — J. N. 
 
 DARKNESS. In the Gospels of Matthew 
 (xxvii. 45j and Luke (xxiii. 44) we read (hat, 
 while Jesus hung i.pon tlie cio.s3, ■' iVoni the sixtli 
 hour there was darkness over all the land unto 
 the liiiith hour." Most of the ancient cummei)- 
 talors believed that this uaikness extended to llie 
 whole world. Uut their arguments are now 
 seldom legaided as satisfactory, and tlieir proofr
 
 ■sr 
 
 DARKNESS 
 
 DAUGHTER. 
 
 even less so. Of the latter the stmn^-fst is llie 
 meiifiuu oC an eclipse t)f' tlif sun, which is rclVnvil 
 <o tliis lime by Phlegori Tralliaiiiis, and, nf'ter 
 aim, liy Tliullns, aj). AlVicaiimn. But even an 
 i'cli|ise of tiie sun could not lie visilile to the 
 whole v^oiUl ; and neither of these wiitcis names 
 the place (if tlie eclijisc. S;inie think it was 
 Rome; but it is impossiljle that an ecli|)se could 
 have happened from the sixth to the ninth hour 
 both at Rutne and Jerusalem. It is, theiefore, 
 higlily prohable that the stattmcn' of Phlegon, 
 which in the course of lime has come to be quoted 
 as indeptnclent autliority, was tuken from the 
 relation of the CInistiaris or from (lie Scriptures. 
 That the darkness could not have ])ro(eeded from 
 an ecli]ise of the sun is further placi'd beyond all 
 doubt by the fa.ct that, it being tiien the time of 
 the Passo^^r, the moon w:Vs at the full. This 
 darkness may therefore be ascribed to an exfra- 
 or<linary ami preteriMtural obscuration of the 
 solar light, which mij^ht jirecede and accompany 
 the eartiiquake which look place on the same 
 occasion. For il h <s been noticed that often 
 before an eartiiquake such a mist arises from 
 sulphureous vajjours as to occasion a daikness 
 almost nocturnal (see the authors cited in 
 Kuinoel ad Matt, xxiv, 29, and compare Joel 
 iii. 3; Rev. vi. 12, sq.). Such a darkness might 
 extend over Judaea, or that division of Palestine 
 in which Jeuisalem stood, to which the liest 
 autiiorities agree that here, as in some other 
 places, it is necessary to limit the phrase Tracrav 
 tV y^Jfi rendered ' all tlie land.' 
 
 Darkness is often used syir.bolically in the 
 Scriptuies as opposed to light, whicli is the 
 symbol of joy and safety, to express misery 
 and .adversity (Jol) xviii. 6; Ps. cvii. 10; 
 cxliii. 3 ; Isa. viii. 22; ix. 1 ; lix. 9, 10; Ezek. 
 XXX. 16; xxxii. 7, 8; xxxiv. 12). • He . . 
 that maketh the morning darkness," in Amos 
 iv. 13, is supposed to be an allusion to the 
 den-;e black clouds and mists attending taith- 
 qnakes. ' The day of daikness,' in Joel ii. 2, 
 alludes to the obscurity occasioned by the Hight 
 of locusts in compact masses [ Locust], I:i 
 Ezek. viii. 12, darkness is described as the ac- 
 companiment of idolatrous rites. Darkness of 
 the sun, moon, and stars is used figuratively to 
 denote a general darkness or deficiency in the 
 government or body politic (Isa. xiii. 10; Ezek. 
 xxxii 7; Joel ii. 10-31). In Eph. v. 11, the 
 exjiression * woiks of darknes-;' is applied to 
 the heathen mysteries, on account of the im- 
 pure actions whicli the initiated performed in 
 them. ' Outer daikness' in Matt. viii. 12, and 
 e sewiiere, lelers to tiie darkness outside, in the 
 streets or open country, as contrasled with the 
 bhi^te of cheerful light in the house, esyjecially 
 when a convivial ])arty is hehl in the night time. 
 Anil it may be observed tiiat the sfreels in the 
 East aie utterly dark after nightfall, there being 
 no shops »vith lighted windows, nor even public 
 or private lamps to impart to (hem the ligiit and 
 • heerfultiess to which we are accustomed. This 
 give< the mote force to the contrast of the ' outer 
 darkiiesii' with the inner light 
 
 li.»:icness is used to represent the state of the 
 (lea<i (Jul) X. 21; xvii. 13). It is also em- 
 plovcil as the jiroper an<i significant emldein of 
 ignor.iti-^e (Isa. ix. 2; Ix. 2 ; Matt. vi. 23; John 
 iii. 9; 2 Cor. iv. 1-6). 
 
 DAROM (DTf^). This word means ' toe 
 south,' and as a pioper name is usually under- 
 stood to be applied te the southernmost part of 
 Judaea, in Job xxxvii. 17; Deul. xxxiii. 23; 
 Eccles. i. G; Eiiek. xxi. 2; xl. 21. Hence the 
 name of ' Daroma ' is given by Eu.'-ebius and 
 Jeiome to the legion which they de.iciil.'e as 
 extending about twenty miles from Eleutheiopojis 
 on the way towards Aiabia Petiaa, and from 
 east to west as far as fiom the Dead Sea lo 
 Gerara and Beersheba. A little to tlie south ol 
 Gaza theie "is now a spot called Babed-Daron, 
 a name probably ilerived fiom the foitiess Daron, 
 celebrated in tiie lime of the Crusades That 
 fortress was built on the luins of a (ireek convent 
 of the same name, which, being traced so far back, 
 may well be iiientilied withDarom as the ancient 
 name of this ttiritory. 
 
 D.VTES. [Palm Tiiek.] 
 
 DATH.4.N (|n'1, fontanus ; Sept. AaOdv]^ 
 one of the chiefs of Reuben who joined Korah in 
 the revolt against the authority of Moses and 
 Aaron (Num. xvi. Ij [Aaron J. 
 
 DAUGHTER. In the Scriptuies the word 
 daughter is used in a variety of senses, some of 
 which are unknown to our own language, or have 
 only become known through familiarity with 
 Scriptural forms of speech. This amounts to 
 saying that the Hebrew word Di bath, iias more 
 extended applications than our word daughter. 
 Besides itsusual and proper senseof — l.Adaughter 
 sent or adopted, we find it used to designate — 
 2. A uterine sister, niece, A- any female descendan' 
 (Gen. XX. 12; xxiv. 48; xxviii. 6; xxxvi. 2 
 Num. XXV. 1 ; Dent, xxiii. 17). — 3. Women, a» 
 natives, lesidents, or professing the religion ol 
 ceitain places, as 'the daughter of Zioii (Isa. iii 
 16); 'daughters of the Philistines" (2 Sam. i. 
 2()j; ' daughter of a stiange God ' (Mai. ii. 11); • 
 ' daughters ol' men,' i. e. carnal women (Gen. 
 vi. 2); &c. — 4. Meta])horically, small towns art 
 called daughters of neighbouring large cities — 
 nietiopoles, or mother cities — to which they be- 
 longe'.i, ;;:■ fzK.ivx .v!;ich they were derived, as ' He«li- 
 bon and all the daughters [Autii. 'Vers, villai/es'^ 
 theieof (Num. xxi. '25); so Tyre is called tli« 
 daughter of Sidori (Isa. xxii. 12), as having been 
 originally a colony from thence; and iience alsu 
 the town of Abel is called ' a mother in Israel' 
 (2 Sam. XX. 19) ; and Gath is in one plac« 
 (comp. 2 Sam. vii. 1 ; 1 Chron. x\ iii. 1) called 
 Gath-Ammah, or Gath tiie inother town, to distin- 
 guish it from its own dependencies, or from anothei 
 place called Gath. See other instances in Num. 
 xxi. 32; Judg. xi. 26; Josh. xv. 46, &c. — a. The 
 people collectively uf any place, the name ol 
 which is given ; as ' the daughter (i e. the peojile) 
 af Jerusalem hath shaken her head al: thee' (l.sa. 
 xxxvii. 22; see also Ps. xlv. 13; cxxxvii. 8; 
 Isa. X. 30; Jer. xlvi. 19; Lam. iv. 22 ; Zech. 
 ix. 9). This metaphor is illustrated by the 
 almost universal custom of representing towns 
 under the figme of a woman.- G. The word 
 'daughter' liallowed by a numeial, indicates a 
 woman of the age indicated by the numeral, as 
 when Saiah (in the original) is called ' the 
 daughter of ninety years" (Gen. xvii. 17). — 7. Tho 
 word 'daughter" is also applied to the ■produce of 
 animals, trees, or piants. Thus, ' daughter <A 
 the she-ostrich" (supposed) for, ' female ostrich *
 
 DAVID. 
 
 (T.ev. xi. 16); Josopli is called 'a fniifful hon;»li 
 wiiose tlaiii,'liti"r3 (Inaiiches) run ovvt tlie wall," 
 (Gfn. xlix. 22). 
 
 Tlie si,i;ni(icafi(>ns of the word ' (lant;1iter' in its 
 scriptural use m.glit be more ininufely distin- 
 giiislicd ; but they niav all be relVrred to one or 
 «jllier of ili^se beads. 
 
 Resjiecfin^ the condition of (l.ini,'li(prs in fa- 
 milies, see art. Women and iVlAiiiiiAtti;. 
 
 DAVID 0)1; Cliron. "IMl ; Sept. AavlS; 
 New Toit. Aa,3i5. The word probably means 
 bchri'd : Gesenius). The reign ol' Daviil is the 
 great critical era in the history of the Ili'brews. 
 It decided that they were to have for nearly five 
 centuries a n.itional monarchy, a fixed line of 
 priesthood, and a solemn religious worship by 
 music and psalms ot exquisite beauty; it finally 
 separated Israel fiom the surnumding heatiien, 
 ami gave room for prod'.icing those noble moiin- 
 menrs of sacred writ, to the influence of which 
 (n er rhe whole world no end can l)e seen. His 
 predecessor, Saul, had many successes against 
 rlie Philistines, but it is clear that he made little 
 impression on their real power ; for he died fight- 
 ing against them, not on their own border, liut at 
 the o))posite sitle of his kingdom, in Mount Gilboa. 
 As for all the other ' enemies on every side " — 
 Moabites, Ammonite-;, Eilomites, and the liiTigs 
 ofZobah. — however much he may have 'vexed 
 them (1 S.nn. xiv. 47), they, as well as the 
 .\inalekites, remained unsubdued, if weakened. 
 The real wo: k of estaljlisliiiig Israel as lord over 
 llie whole soil ot Canaan was left for David. 
 
 Ample as are at first sight the materials for his 
 Jiistiry, a closer examinativin sliows that great 
 judgment and caution are needed in the use of 
 them. His battle with Goliath, it h «ell Known, 
 involves diHiculties of an embarrassing kind. In 
 fact, it represents Saul and .\bnpr as unacquainted 
 with the person of David (I Sam. xvii. . 5.5-58), 
 while the preceding chapter makes David the 
 favourite attendant and musician of Saul. Tlie 
 Vatican Sept. employs the bold remedy of cut- 
 ting out from ch. xvii. the twenty verses, 12-31, 
 and the last four, 5)-.5S, as well as the five first 
 verses of the next chapter. But even so, David's 
 unacquaintance with arms find jjreference oi' tlie 
 sling to th« fword and spear, which remains in 
 veis. 33-40, is in conilict with ch. xvi. IS, which 
 represents iiim as 'a mighty valiant man, and a 
 man of war,' and Saul's ' armour-bearer ' (ver. 21). 
 It is, moreover, morally iiiqwssible that the verses 
 wanting in the Vatican Sept. can have been 
 added to the Hebrew text fif/er its liist translation 
 into Greek. The same codex has extii])ated vers. 
 y-ll of ch. xviii, and has re-modelled ver. 2'"', 
 oi)viou3ly in order to give continuity and consist- 
 ency to the nairative. We must, then, look on 
 tlie te.\f here contained in our common version as 
 lia» Ing neitiier more nor less external authority 
 than all the le^t of the first book of Samuel. \s 
 a ,sufl<'r remedy, mere trans])osition may l>e at- 
 ti mpted : but it will not succee<i. The jealousv 
 instantly kindled in Saul s bosom by the songs of 
 the women when David was returning from .nlay- 
 iiig the Philislinr's, is inconsistent with the unsu.s- 
 pecting all'ection felt oy Saul towards ihw sim])le 
 lliepherd in cli. xvi. ll'-22. It hixs been argued 
 froTn rh. xvii. 12-14, where David is introduce<l 
 b> us as if anew, that tlie original writer of thfcje 
 
 DAVID. 
 
 515 
 
 word* du not also jjen tlic ].r"cetling chapter. 
 There is .si me weight in this; yet it is not so de- 
 cisive as the contradictory representation of David 
 above alluded to. On the other hand, ch. x\ii. 
 l.") was wiitten by one who had ch. xvi. before 
 his eyes, and wished to accomit for David's ni.* 
 being with .Saul, though he was his arniotir-bearci. 
 So, iuileed, .Iose))hus distinctly jx'iceived. • Saul," 
 says he, ' aviit David to his f.ither Jesse ; beini/ 
 siiti.s/ie<l tcilh his three .sons,' &r. &c. (Josejih. 
 Antiq. vi. 9, 2). Once more, even the Vatican 
 codex of the Se])t. leaves, in xvii. .51, tiie start- 
 ling statement that David brought the head of the 
 Philistine to Jeru»ctle)n. At that time not Jeru- 
 salem only, but its suburbs also, were in the i)ower 
 of the Jcbusites, who, in 1 Chron. xi. I, are called 
 'the inhabitants of fiie land.' Now, evwi allow- 
 ing that in time of peace Isra'-lites wer'.'a<lmi.ssible 
 into .lerusalem, there is no i^oiiceival)!* reason why 
 David should have carried his .lojhy thif'.ier, 
 while it was a foreign and lieathenisl, cfty. On 
 the other hand, a late writci who wa^i accustomed 
 to tliink of Jerusalem as tlic mefi-cpol's t»f -lud-Tca, 
 might easily introduce sueh a statem 'nr. These 
 dithculties, collectively, have in-tuc'd some to 
 regard the whole seventeenth chaptr.' as from a 
 later hand than the rest; but it is ov:tl?nt tliat if 
 we omit it, we lose the clue to tlie vaj i I elevation 
 of David and the jealousy of Saul, to b^y notbing 
 o!' ch. xix. 5 and xxi. 9. Kvery the(;ry, in short. 
 is intrinsically unj)hiloso])hical, which fancies 
 that it may cut tut what it finds to be inconsistent, 
 arid then imagines that the authority of what is 
 left is unimpaired ; for the same hand which has 
 introduced the ))assage3 wliicii «e leject, may 
 have taken many libertie.s with that which we 
 receive. 
 
 We learn from 1 CliTon. xxix. 2t) tiiat the life 
 of David was written by Sanmel, Natt.an, and 
 Gad ; also, from 2 Sam. i. 18 it may be piobaldy 
 inferred that otlier information concerning liim 
 was contained in the poems of Jasher. None ot' 
 these works are before us in thinr (jriginal form. 
 Materials from fliem ha\ e, however, been worked 
 up by a later hand, which, it would seem, has 
 sometimes adojjted whole passages from them, 
 sometimes has modified them and added con- 
 necting paits and cxjilanations. Such, at least, 
 is the conclusion to which e\ery one will thid 
 himself strongly pressed l)y a close criticism of 
 the whole narrative. The change of name fiom 
 Jshui to Ishbusheth (1 Sam. xiv. 49 and 2 .Sam. 
 ii. 8, ^c.) appears to inilicate that C(mi{X)Sit)ons 
 by did'erent hands have been ])nt together. That 
 a du])licate account is found of fl-'^ origin of fiie 
 proverb, ' Is Saul also among the ],v')))hets.'' seems 
 unileiiiaiile (ch. x. 1-12 and xix. 2')-21}i and if 
 a single clear case of this sort is admitted to exist, 
 various others must probably fall um.'er the smie 
 head On this ground, doubtless, it 's, tiiat the 
 Vatican Sept. has omitted di. xviii. Iff 11, since 
 this attack of Saul on David's life " on the .morrow 
 is hard to reci.ncile with all that Ibllow-i, jnd the 
 verses appear to be a dujdicate of ch. xix. }', 10. 
 Less ceitaiii duplicates, and vet not free t'rom 
 ditliculty, are the following. The men of Zi].h 
 tw ce betrav David to Saul (ch. xxiii. 19 and 
 xxvi IV, David twice spares Sauls life under 
 cin-umstaiiies liighly unlik.'ly to recur ( ch. xxiv. 
 and xwi.i, and t/ii each occasion Saul is melted 
 int.) tenderness. Th<" foinrer event ends «itli ao
 
 (M 
 
 DAVID. 
 
 oath of Dav kl To Saul, wliicli ajipears like a final 
 teitniiiatiiin of hostility ; wliile the ojK-ning of ch. 
 xxvii. einbaiiussei us liy its extreme uiiruptness, 
 vvlwtJ the veiy opjxisite result might have been 
 expected (Vom that which immediately precedes. 
 Comparing also i^h. xxi. 10-15 with c!i. xxvii., it 
 may seem that David's sojourn at Gath has been 
 tt)ld twice over ; for though each pair of events 
 separately might, without ))hysical imjwssihility, 
 hapjien twice, yet, viewed collectively, the rejie- 
 (ilion of so many pairs surpasses all hnniati pro- 
 baliilities. It has been necessary to piemise so 
 much, to show why we are disposed to lie satisfied 
 with rough results from tlie accounts of David's 
 earlier life; which, as hapjiens with all celebrated 
 men who rise from a humble station, can hardly 
 liave been chronicled witli the same precautions 
 as tiiose (if his reign. 
 
 Even in i-egard to matters properly public, ob- 
 scurity attaches both to the numbers wUich we 
 read in our text, and occasionally to the order of 
 events. Ou tlie difficulties found in the chrono- 
 logy of this period some remarks will be needed- 
 under the article S.vui.. It more properly belongs 
 to tiiis jilace to observe that David is made thirty 
 years old, and Ishbosheth forty, when Jonathan, 
 elder brot'tier of Ishbosheth, dies (2 Sam. ii. 10, 
 II); which ujr,<ears to make toi) great a disparity 
 of age between Jonn.<'riau and David. A sort of 
 fatality seems attaciietl to the number forty, which 
 constantly occurs very inopportunely. In 2 Sam. 
 sv. 7 this number is extravagantly erroneous; 
 yet the reading is at "least older than the Sej)!. ver- 
 sion, and Van der Hooght gives no various reading 
 of the Hebrew. We seem justified in douljting 
 whether forty years can have l^een the real age of 
 Ishbosheth : twenty would agree better witli the 
 ^JTobabiliiies of tlie case. Again, Ishbosheth reigned 
 ":wo years, though David reigneil over the tribe of 
 Judali alone in Hebron for seven years and a half ; 
 where is the interval of fi.'e years and a half to be 
 jilaced? Since it is ceiti^'n that apart of David's 
 reign over all Isriiel was sjient liy him at Heliron 
 (for Jerusalem was not con(j'iieied by him til! after 
 all the tribes had joined iiiin, 1 Chron. xi. 4). The 
 easiest and perhaps a necessary solution is tliis, 
 that tlie words in 2 Sam. ii. II and v. 5 are lax, 
 and ought to l>e re-writlen thus : ' In Hebron he 
 reigned seven years and six months, atjirst over 
 the tribe of JudaJi only [viz. for two or three 
 years], and afterwards over all Israel.'' 
 
 Tliiee chapters in the second book of Samuel 
 chiefly cor.t^un the military successes of David: 
 l)ut (here is s<ime reason to lielieve that we cannot 
 adhere to the ortler of the events there given. The 
 mention of the Ammonites in ch. viii. 12 seems to 
 lie by anticipation; for in the opening of ch. x. 
 we find that lelations of jiersonal friendship still 
 subsisted between David and the king of the Am- 
 monites. Re:isons will shortly be stated for 
 thinking that his first campaign against the king 
 of Zoliali has been placed too early ; and the 
 numl)ers of the chariots and horsemen engaged in 
 tlie war can scarcely bedefenued. Of this further 
 nctir* will be taken. Again, when the tiibes of 
 Israel came to Hebron to welcome David to tiie 
 kingd >m, his own tribe of Judah, in the midst of 
 wliicli Heiiron lay, brought only 68(10 men, less 
 thaji those of the insigniticant tribe of Simeon, 
 who are leckoned there at 7100(1 Chron. xii. 24, 
 26). while of the equally petty trilje of Dan there 
 
 DAVID. 
 
 are 2S,600. It has been said in defence of tlie» 
 numbers that Judah had been miserably reduced 
 by the proximity of the Pliilistines; but why 
 should Simeon and Dan have suffered lessV No» 
 would that account for the fact, that in the cele- 
 brated numbering ii^ the fieople by Joab (2 Sam. 
 xxiv. 9) there are SO'),OUO warriors in Israel, and 
 500,000 in Judah alone; or, according to 1 Chron. 
 xxi. 5, in Israel 1,100,000, and in Judah 470,OfiO. 
 The two results in Kings and in Chronicles are 
 here inconsistent; in both also we see the marks 
 of a later narrator, who is accustomed to use tlie 
 words Israel and Judah to mean the ten and tJie 
 two tribes. Afiundant illustration might be ac- 
 cumulated to tiie same efi'ect, if this were the 
 proper place for it. 
 
 The life of David naturally divides itself into 
 three portions : — I. The time which he lived under 
 Saul. II. His reign over Judah in Heljron. 
 III. His reign over all Israel 
 
 I. In the first period we may trace the origin 
 of all his greatness. His susceptible temperament, 
 joined to his devotional tendencies, must, at a very 
 early age, have made him a favourite pupil of the 
 prophets, whose jieculiar mark was the harp and 
 the psalm (1 Sam. x. 1-12 and xix. 20-24; see 
 also 2 Kings iii. 15). His hospitable reception, 
 when in distress, by Ahimelech the priest, and the 
 atrocious massacre innocently brought by him on 
 Nob, tlie city of the priests (1 Sam. xxi. and xxii. 
 9-19), must have deeply uflected his generous 
 nature, and laid the foundation of his cordial 
 affection for the whole priestly order, whose minis- 
 trations he himself helped to elevate by his devo- 
 tional melotlies. At an early period he attracted 
 the notice of Samuel ; and if we are to arrange 
 events according to their probable connection, we 
 may believe Ihat after David had been driven 
 away from Saul and his life several times at- 
 tempted, Samuel ventured on the solemn step of 
 anointing him king. Whenever this took place, 
 it must have jiroduced on David a pr -found im- 
 jiression, and prt'j)aied him to <hi tl.it in which 
 Saul had s<j eminently failed, viz. to .reconcile 
 his own military gcvernineiit with a tiiial iespect 
 for the prophets and an tionourable .atronage of 
 the priestliood. Besides this, he b*c: me knit into 
 a bond of brotherhood with tiis hen 'c comra<le9, 
 to whom he was eminently endeared by his per- 
 sonal self-denial and liberai-i- (I Sam. xxx. 
 21-31; 1 Chron. xk 18). This, i;.deed, diew 
 after it one most painful result, viz. t.ie necessity 
 of enduring the turbulence of h:s vio'-n* but able 
 nephew Joab ; nor could we exjiect that of a band 
 of freebooters many should be like David. Again, 
 during his outlawry David became acquainted 
 in turn not only with all the wild country in the 
 land, but with the strongholds of the enemy all 
 round. By his residence among the Philistines 
 he must have learned all their aits and weajions 
 of war, in which it is reasonable to believe the 
 Israelites previously inferior (1 Sam. xiii. 19-23). 
 With Nahash the Ammonite he w.is in intimatf" 
 friendship (2 Sam. x. 2) ; to the king of Moab 
 he entrusted the care of his parents (1 Sam. xxii. 
 3) ; from Achish of Gath he received the im- 
 portant ))resent of the town of Ziklag (1 Sam. 
 xxvii. 6). It must, however, be confessed that the 
 details of the last passage, witliout prifessing to 
 be miraculeu*, go beyond the limits of proba- 
 bility; for if we even suppose tliat David could
 
 DAVID. 
 
 eommit the massacres fhire ilescrlhtd, merely 
 in order to lilile his own jifHiily. U is still 
 tncrcuihle that the secret could have been kept 
 tiid Achisli continue to trust him (xxviii. 2, and 
 xxix. 3). Thai Zikhi;^ was a stronj^ place n.ay 
 be inferri^d from 1 Chron. xii. 1, 20. Tlie cele- 
 brity acquiied in successful guerilla warfare, even 
 'n modern daj s, turns the eyes of whole nations 
 on a cliieftain ; and in an age which reganlod 
 personal heroism as the first qualification oC a 
 general (1 C'lron. xi.G) an<l of a king, totiiumph 
 over the {)ersecutious of Saul gave Daviil the 
 fairest prospects of a kingdom. That he was able 
 to escape the malice of his enemy wastluei/i part 
 *•« the ilirect help given him by the nations round, 
 wlio were ghid to keep a thorn rankling in Saul's 
 side ; t.v part also to the indirect results of tlieir 
 invasions (1 Sam. xxiii. 27). 
 
 Tlie account transinitted tons of David's dan- 
 gers and escapes in this fir-it jjcriod is too fiag- 
 mentary to work iqi into a iiistory : ne\ ertlieless, 
 it seems to be divisible into two parts, diuering in 
 cliaracter. During the former iie is a fugitive 
 and outlaw in the lami ..f Saul, hiding in caves, 
 liitchiug in the wilderness, or occasionally with 
 great risk entering walled cities (I Sam. xxiii. 7) : 
 in the latter be aiiandons his native s.iil entiiely, 
 a'.id lives among tlie Philistine? as one of their 
 chieftains (xxvii. I j. Wliile a lover in the land 
 of Judaii, his position (to our eyes') is anything 
 but honourable; being a focus, to wliicli 'all who 
 were in distress, in debt, or discontented gatlieied 
 themselves ' (xxii. 2). Yet as the number of his 
 followers became large (six hundred, we read, 
 xxiii. 13), and David knew how to conciliate the 
 neighbouring sheep-masteis by his urbanity and 
 kind services, he gradually felt himself to be their 
 protector and to have a right of maintenance and 
 triliute from them. Hence he resents the refusal 
 of Nabal to supply his demands, as a clear 
 injustice; and, after Davhl's anger lias been 
 turned away by the prudent policy of Abigail, 
 in blessing her for saving him from slaying 
 Nabal and every male of liis family, the 
 thought seems not to liave entered his xnind 
 tliat the intention of such a massacre was more 
 guilty than Nabals refusal to ))ay bin. tribute 
 (xxv. 31). This whole narrative is chaiacier- 
 istic and instructive. By his marriage v,ith 
 Aliigail he afterwards proliably became rich (for 
 giie seems to have been a widow at her own dis- 
 posal), and on passing immediately after iiito tlie 
 land of the Philistines, he was enabled to assume 
 \ more dignihed place. Becoming pos essed of 
 the stvonghohl of Ziklag, he now appeared like a 
 legitimate chieftain with fixed possessions, and no 
 longer a mere vagabond and freebooter. Tliis 
 was accordingly a transition-state in wliich David 
 was prepared lor a.ssuming the kingdom ovei 
 Judali. In Ziklag he was joined, not, as before, 
 by mere outciists from Israelitish life, but by men 
 of consideration and tried warriors (I Chron. xii. 
 1-22), not only of the tribe of Judah, but from 
 Gad, Manasseli, and even ' from Saul's brethren 
 of Benjamin.' Re.specting the arms of these some 
 remarks will be made at the close of this article. 
 
 II. Immediately up;iri the death of Saul the 
 tribe of Judah invited David to iiecume their 
 prince. Internal probabilities lead us to belie\e 
 that this was acceptable t ) the Philistines, who, 
 it woi Id sitem, must liavi had the moans of hin- 
 
 DAVID. 
 
 »rj 
 
 dering it, if they had been disjMised. W'e are nJ 
 informed why they neglected lo iu.iii-.ive '.he U<?- 
 cisive vlctoiy which tliey iiad gained in Mi>ulll 
 Gilboa. They vanish from the so nc, and .Abiier 
 quietly hands <iver the kingiiom of tiie elevi-n 
 trilips to Uhbottheih, son of Saul. Among many 
 conjectures wliicli n.ay lie made, one is llial they 
 despaired of keeping the wliole land under su!>- 
 jection, since their ruunbers were loo few to keep 
 up all their gairisons ; and tlieir su):eiii)rity must 
 have been that of wea))ons and discipline only. 
 They may, therefore, have glaillv accpiiesced in a 
 l)artition of the monarchy, foresieing that the 
 lame and popularity of D.ivid v.'ou! ^ soon biing 
 on a civil war lietiveen him and the house of 
 Saul ; and as he was on excelhiit teims with 
 Achish, and bad long been ostensildy an adherent 
 of the Philistine cause, it is not wondeiful tliat 
 during his early reign David was able to main- 
 tain peace with iiis m. st dangeious neighlxiurs. 
 
 His first sle]), alter bis election, was to lix on 
 Heltron as the centre of his ailminis'ratiou — an 
 ancient city, honourable l)y its association with tbe 
 name of Abraham, and in the middle of his own 
 tribe. He then strengthened himself by a mar- 
 riage witli IMaacah. daughter of Tit'mai, king of 
 Geshnr (2 Sam. iii. 3); a ])efty monaich whose 
 dominions weie mar tiie souiccs of the Jordan, 
 and whose iiilluenceat llieop])os te end ol the land 
 must liav e added a gieat weight into David's scale. 
 Fnim Abigail, widow of the cbiulish Nabal, 
 David, as we have already observed, seems to 
 have received a large jjriv ate foilune. Concerning 
 his other wives we know nothing in ])aiticular; 
 <inly it is mentioned that he had six sons by six 
 dill'erent mothers in Hebron. The chief jealousy 
 was between the two trilies of Benjamin and , 
 Judah, as Saul had belonged to the former; and 
 a tournament was turned by mu'ual ill-will into 
 a battle, in which .Abner unwillingly slew young 
 Asahel, biother of Joab. (On the synchionism of 
 Abnerand Asabel,see Saui,.) ' Long wai," after this, 
 was carried on between 'the house of Saul and the 
 house of David.' We may infer that the rest of 
 Israel took little i)art in the contest ; anil although 
 the nominal possession of the kuigdom enaljled the 
 little tribe of Benjamin to struggle for some time 
 against Judah, the skill and age of Abner could 
 not prevail against the vigour ami ])oj)ular fame 
 of David. A (juanel between Abner and IshUi- 
 <hetli decidetl tlie former to bring the kingdom 
 jver to David. The latter refused to treat 
 unless, as a j)reliminary proof of Abner's sin- 
 cerity, Michal, daughter of .Saul, was restored 
 to David. The possession of sucli a wife was 
 valuable to one who was aspiring to the kingdom. 
 Accordingly, the unhapjiy Michal was toin away 
 from a most all'ectionate iiusband, and jjas-sed over 
 into the increasing harem of the man to whom in 
 iiis earliest youth she had been a viigiu briite ; 
 but who now cared not for ficr, but for her name 
 and its political uses. It is not wondeiful that 
 she could not adapt herself to her new lord, and 
 that as soon as he was linn in the kingdom he 
 disgraced her. After giving her back, Abnei 
 proceeded to win the eldeis of Israel over to 
 David ; but Joab discerned that if this should be 
 so brought about, Abner of necessity would di»- 
 jilace him from his post of chief captain. He, 
 therefore, seized tlie op[xirtunity of murdering 
 him when he was come ou a i>eaceful embassy,
 
 •28 
 
 DAVID. 
 
 DAVID. 
 
 and coveied tlic atrocity liy i.liading tlm July 
 «f rererii^mu !iis lirothei's Mood. This deed was 
 |>erhii])S David's fiist ta.sfe of tiie misoiies of royal 
 |>ower. He dared not pnicp^d acti\ely against 
 his nrtliless nephew, Itiit lie vexito<l his ahhonenre 
 in a solemn curse on Joah .tnd his posterity, and 
 fcilloaed Ahticr to the grave witli vreeping. 
 Anxidos to p«rg« himself of ll>e guilt, he ordered 
 J a pvihtic wearing <if sackci<»lti, and refused to 
 oucli food al\ the day. His sincere yet oston- 
 .nfioos gri^f won tlie heart of all Israel. The 
 feeble Ishhoshetlt, left alone, was unequal to the 
 government, and shoitly snffeivd the same fate -if 
 Bssassinalion. David, Ibllowiiig the universal 
 policj" of sovereigns (Tac. Hist. i. 41), and Iris 
 own profound sense of the saciedness of royalty, 
 tiK)k vengeance on the murderer^, and huiied 
 Ishhoshedi in Aimer's tomh at Ile'iion, Dining 
 this jieriod, it is not stated against wnai people 
 his maiauding excursions were diiecteil. It is 
 distinctly alleged (2 Sam. iii. 22) that his men 
 broiight in a great spoil at the very time at which 
 he had a truce with .\hner ; possihly it may have 
 been won from his old enemies the Anialekites 
 (1 Sam. XXX.). 
 
 3, The death of Ishlxisheth gave to David 
 supremacy over all Isiael. The kingdom was 
 not at first a des])()tic, hut a constitutional one ; 
 for it is stated, * David m<ide or lea<ji(e with the 
 elders of Israel in Hehron t>efove Jehovah ; and 
 they anointed David king over Israel" (2 .Sam. v. 
 3). This is maiked out as the eia wliich deter- 
 mined the Philistines to hostility (ver. 17), and 
 ■ may cotdirio our idea, that tl.eir jioliry was to 
 hinder Israel iVom becoming united under a single 
 king. Two victories of Dav id over them f ilhiw, 
 both neir tlie valley of Rejihaiin : and these we.e 
 prohahly the dist battles fouglit hy David after 
 oeci.iniing king of all Israel. 
 
 Perceiving that Heliron was no longer a suit- 
 able capital, he resolved to (ix his lesidence far- 
 ther t/> the north. On the very iwder o\' the trihes 
 of Judah and Benjamin lay the town of .lehns, 
 which will) its neighltouiliood was occupied by 
 Jebusites, a remnant of the olil Canaanitish na- 
 tion so called. In spite of the great strength of 
 the fort ol' Zioti, it was captured, and the Jebusites 
 were ei^'irely expelled or subdued; after which 
 David a(h)[ teil the city as his new cajiital, greatly 
 enlarged the fortification=!. and ga\e or restored 
 the name of Jeiusalem [Jkrl's.^i.km]. In the 
 account of this siege, some have imagine;! the 
 Ciiror.icles to contradict the book of Samuel, but 
 there is no ie;ii inc'mpatibility in tlie two narra- 
 tive-. Joali was, it is true, already David's chief 
 captain ; but David was heartily disgusted with 
 lijm, anil may have sought a jiietence for super- 
 seding iiini, by oflering the j'ost to the man who 
 should Hi.st scale the wall. Jtwib would t>e ani- 
 mated by the desire to reta'n his oflice, at least as 
 keenly <is ollieis liy the desiie to get it; and it is 
 eiedib'e (hat he may actuallv have l)een the sue- 
 ' cessful Ix'ro ni tiiat siege also. If this was the 
 case, it wdl further explain whv Davi<l, even in 
 tiie fulness of ) power, made no further effort to ex- 
 pel him until he had slaughtered Absalom. After 
 lieconiing master of Jerusalem, David made a 
 U'ague with Hiram, king of Tyie. who supplied 
 l»im witii skilfid artificers to build a splendid 
 ^lace at (lie new capital. That the mecha- 
 nical arts should have i/een in a very low state 
 
 among the Israelites, was to be exiiocted; since, 
 beliiie the reign of Saul even smii'lis' forges were 
 not allowed am>.ng them by the Phdistines. No- 
 thing, however, could have Ix-en more jjrofitable 
 for the Phfleniciaiis than the security of cultiva- 
 tion enjoyed by the Israelites in tlie reigns o< 
 D.ivid and Solomon. Ti.e trade be1<*'een Tyre 
 anil Isiael became at (jnce extremely lucrative to 
 both, and the league lietween the two stares was 
 quickly very inilsriafe. 
 
 Once settled in Jeiusalem, Davin proceeded to 
 inci-ease the number of his wives, perhajis in part 
 from the same political motive (hat actuates other 
 Oriental monarchs, viz. in order to take hostcaea 
 from the chieftains round in (he least offensive 
 mode. This exjilanation will Jiot apply to the 
 concubines. ^Ve know nothing further concerning 
 David's family relations, than the names of eleven 
 sons born in Jerusalem (2 Sam. v. 14, 1.5), of 
 whom four wei-e children of Rithsiieba (1 Chron. 
 iii 5), and therefor* much younger (fiaii the elder 
 sons. 
 
 Jerusalem, mw liecome (he civil nietio])olis of 
 the nation, was next to be made its leligio-.is 
 centre; and the king applied himself to elevate tlje 
 priestly order, to swell the ranks of attending Le- 
 vites and singers, and to firing the ark to Jeru- 
 salem. The priests or Aaronites must, for a long 
 time, have had little occupation in their sacred 
 office; for the aik was at Kirj.ith-jearim, under 
 the care of a private family. Imleed. during the 
 reign of Saul, •."e find shewbread to have Iwen set 
 f^^ith at Nob (I Sam xxi. 4-G), by Ahimelech the 
 priest; and it is possible that many other ceremo- 
 nies were performed by them, in sjiite of the alt- 
 sence of the aik. But after the dreadful massacie 
 peijtetrated on the priestly order by Saul, few 
 Aaionites are likely to have felt at ease in their 
 vocation. To wear an ephod — tlie maik of a 
 priest who is asking counsel of Jehovah — had 
 almost liecome a crime : and even after the death 
 cfSaul, it may seem that the .Aaronites, like the 
 other Israelites, remained organized as bands of 
 s<;ldiers. At least Jehoiada (wiio, according to I 
 Cliron. xxvii. 5, wsis high-jiriest at this time, and 
 joined David at Hebron with 3700 Aaronites) was 
 father of the celebrated warrior Benaiah, after- 
 wards captain of David's body-guard; a man 
 whose qualities were anything but priest-like: 
 and Zadok, afterwards high-priest, who joined 
 David ' with twenty-two capta lis of his father s 
 house ' at the same time as Jeliolda, is described 
 as 'a young man mighty of valour ' (1 Chron. xii. 
 27, 28). How long Jehoiada retained the place ot 
 liigh-] riest is nncpitain. It is prol)able tiiat no de- 
 firl'^te conception then existed of the need of having 
 otic liigh-piiest ; and it is certain that Davi'l'i 
 artection for .-Vbiathar, because of tiis father's fate, 
 maintained him in chief jila'-e through (he gieutri 
 part of his reign. Not until a later time, it would 
 seem, was Zadok elevated to a co-ordina'». posi- 
 tion. (AdiOiculfy, indeed, ex i.sts aliout Aliiatliar, 
 which can haidly be removed, exCejit by suppos- 
 ing that 'Ahimelech, son of Abiathat,' has several 
 times been i:iadverfently written foi; ' Ahiatiiar, 
 son of Ahimelech;' viz. in 2 Sam. viii. 17; 1 
 f'hron. xxiv. 3, (5, 31. A similar error of 'J-* 
 hoittda, the son of Benaiah,' we shall afterwards 
 have to remaik on, in 1 C^liron. xxvii. 34. We 
 find Aliiathar in the place of chief-priest in I 
 Ki igs i. 7, Kc, witiiout ary notice of his haru^g
 
 DAVID. 
 
 a »Jii called Aliimdecli.) Any fmtlier remarks 
 conceiniiig tlie orders and courses o" flie Phiksts 
 will be better reserved fi)r tlie article on that 
 subject. It is emaigh liere to add, that the 
 slaugiiter sntTered from Saul l)y tlie Aaronites of 
 the line of Ithamar, whom Abiathar now repre- 
 senletl, natvirally gave a threat preponderance of 
 numbers and power ti^tlie line of Kleazar, to which 
 Zaddk belonged. We must also refer to the ar- 
 ticle Lkviths for fnilher information concerning 
 them. The briiii^ing of the ark from Kirjatli- 
 jearim to Jerusalem established the line of liigli- 
 prie-ts in direct service before it; and from tliis 
 time we may piesume that the ceremonies of the 
 great day of .\tonement began to be oliserved. 
 Pieviously, it would appear, the connection be- 
 tween the priesthuod and tiie tabernacle had been 
 8 very loose. The priests fixed their abode at Nob, 
 when the ark was at Kirjath-jearim, a very short 
 distance; y^t there is nothing to denote that they 
 »t all interfered wilh Abinadab in his exclusive 
 care of the sacred deposit. (Concerning the chni- 
 lological ditKculties involved in the stay of the 
 a.'' at Kirjath-jearim, see the article Sali..) 
 
 'Vheii the aik entered Jerusalem in tiiumph, 
 Da\ d put on a priest's epliod and danced before 
 it. 'j his proved the occasion of the rupture be- 
 tween im and his royal spouse, Michal, which 
 sooner v • later was inevitable. Accustomed to 
 see in he. 'ather's court a haughty pre-eminence of 
 the moni. '.h over the priest, she could not sym- 
 j)athi2e wi» the deeper piety which led the royal 
 Psalmi.?t tt forget his dignity in ])resence of the 
 ark. The wi -ds of David to her, ' Jehovah chose 
 m^ before th^ faf/ter awi before all his house' 
 (2 Sam. vi. 21^. sullicicntly show Michal to have 
 felt that she ha \ been taken from her husiiand 
 Phaltiel, merely 'o give colour to David's claim 
 to the kingdom, a d that David scorned to allow 
 that he was in ai; r way indebted to her for it. 
 After this event, I -e king, contrasting his cedar 
 palace with the cu tains of the tabernacle, was 
 desirous of buildiii;^ a temple for the ark; 
 such a step, moreover, was likely to prevent any 
 future change of its abode. The prophet Nathan, 
 ?iowever, forbade it, tn pious and intelligible 
 grounds. The prohibi^'on has been ascriiied by 
 Some learned men toa cu.ining jiolicy in Natlian : 
 luf. it is not cle.ir how the building of a temple 
 •»oi:i<l have injiued the interest of the prophets. 
 There are no indications that the ])rophets as yet 
 regarded the jn'iesis with jealousy, nor that it was 
 likely to increase the king's power over both. 
 Great as might ajipear the advantage of establish- 
 ing the same city as the leligious and civil metro- 
 polis, the efl'ect was. in one respect, most unfortu- 
 nate : it oll'endfj the powerful and central tribe of 
 Hphraim. Tliey had been accustomed to regard 
 Shiloh as the rightful abode of the iik. Ag.T.inst 
 Kirjath-jearim no envy was felt, esp^ecially while 
 the aik ar.d its priests weie in obscurity. But when 
 so much honour attended it; when it became a 
 peculiar glory to Judah and lienjamip — tribes 
 already too much favoured ; when a magnificent 
 edifice was erected to receive it ; the seeds were 
 sown of that disall'ection which ended in a rend- 
 ing of the triljcs apart. Nor was the argument 
 uineasonable. that a more central spot was needed 
 for Israel to assemble at ye.ar by year. 
 
 David's further victories are narrated in the 
 fc)IIowing order —Philistines, Moab, Zubah, V lorn, 
 
 D.VVID. 
 
 'iO.'t 
 
 Northern League stirred up by liie .'Vmmonites, 
 Ammon. 1. Theshoit and diy riot ice concerniiiK 
 the Philistines just gives us to uiidcrsland that 
 this is the era of their decisive, though not final, 
 subjugation. Their towns were des|ioiled ^ their 
 wealth (2 Sam. viii., xii.), and doubtless all their 
 aims and munitions of war passed over into the 
 service of the conqueror. 2. The Moabites werea 
 pastoral (leople, wliose general relatiMis witii Israel 
 a))par to ha\e been jieaceful. The slight notica 
 of SauFs hostilities wilh ihem (1 Sam. .\iv. \1 
 is the only breach recorded since the time o( 
 Eglon and Khud. In the book of Kulh we see 
 them as fritndly neighbours, and much more re- 
 cently (I Sam. xxii. 3, A\ David committed li.'s 
 parents to the care of tlie king of Moab. \\'e know 
 no cause, except David's slrengtii, which now 
 drew liis arms upon them. A people long accus- 
 tomed to peace, in contlict wilh a veteran army, 
 was struck down at once, b'lt the fierceness of his 
 trium])h may surprise us. Two-lhinis of the po- 
 pulation (if we rightly inteipiet the words, 2 Sam. 
 vi!i. 2) wei-e put 'o the sword ; the rest liccame 
 tributary. 3. Wno are meant by the Syriins of 
 Zobah, is still a problem [Zobah]. ^Vt here 
 follow the belief that it was a power of nor; hem 
 Syria, then aiming at extensive emijire, which had 
 not only defea'ed and humbled the king of lla- 
 math, but had obtained homage beyond the La- 
 phrates. Tiie trans-Joidanic tril'cs in the time f 
 Saul had founded a little empire for themselves b/ 
 conqueiing their eastern neigh bour.«,t he Hagarcnes, 
 and, jierhaps, occasionally overran the district on the 
 side of the Euphrates, which Hadadezer, king of 
 Zobah, x:onsidered as his own. His ellbrts ' to reco- 
 ver his Ijorder at the i i\ er Euphiates ' first brought 
 him into collision with Daviil, jjcrhaps by an 
 attack which he made on the roaming Eastern 
 tribes. David defeated not merely his army, but 
 those of Damascus too, which came, too late, with 
 succour ; and put Israelite garrisons into the towns 
 of the Damascenes. In tins career of success, we 
 see, for the first time in history, the uniform supe- 
 riority over raw troops of a jjower which is always 
 fighting; whose stairdlng aimy is ever gaining 
 experience antl mutual confidetjce. Nevertheless, 
 the details of this victory over Hadadezer exceed 
 all oidinary possil ilities. It is not easy even to 
 form a conce))tibn of the irature of the war. As 
 the Eastern tribes of Israel had camels in abun- 
 dance (fca- they are said to have taken 50,000 from 
 tlie Hagarenes, 1 Chron. v. 21), David did not 
 want the means of transporting an army of infantiy 
 and its l)aggage (see I Sam. xxx. 17). But wilii 
 what tio(j})S are we to suppose him to fight against 
 the powerful cavalry of the enemy? We mav 
 imagine horsemen to have been rcptihcd i''\\\\er by 
 archi rs or by a jrhalanx of spearmen ; of which, 
 however, no mention is made, nor does it appear 
 pr-obable that the Israelites fought in ].ihalanx. 
 But neither by these nor by a squadron of camels 
 — if any one sujiposcs Da\id to have used such a 
 force, as Cyrus against Ciopsus — can 1000 cha- 
 riots and 700 horsemen (which the (.'iironiclcr 
 makes 7000, I Chron. xviii. 4) have been defeated 
 and captured ; to say nothing of the 20.000 cap' 
 tive footmen, or of the 22,000 Damascenes slain 
 immediately after. 4. Another victory, gaine<l 
 'in the valley of saU," ought, peiha]is, to be read, 
 as in 1 Chron. xviii. 12, and in the sujierscnpi-.oii 
 ol Ps. Ix., ' over tire 1 dumites,' ni>t ' over uie
 
 »3C 
 
 DAVID. 
 
 DAVID. 
 
 Syrians' Tfie difference of the Hebrew textual 
 letters is very slii^lit. DIN an<l DnX. The verse 
 whicli follows (2 Sam. viii. 1-1) seems to tell llje 
 result of tliis victory, viz.. the complete snl)iu.ira- 
 tioii^ml g-arrisonin'j^ of Edom, wliicli, like Moab, 
 was incorporated witii David's empire. Immedi- 
 ately liefoie th's List conquest, as would a;ij)ear, 
 lie wrote the COth Psalm ; and as that Psalm 
 gives no hint of his achievements against the king 
 of Zohah aiid tiie Damiiacene?, tliis is a strong 
 gioiiiid for lielieving that those snccesses were 
 not gained till somewhat later in lime. 5. After 
 David had Lectmie master of all Israel, of tlie Phi- 
 listine towns, of Kdom, and of Moab, while the 
 Eastern tribes, having conquered the Hagarenes, 
 threatened the Am.nionites on the north, as did 
 JToab on the soutli, the Ammonites were naturally 
 alarmed, and called in the powers of Syria to 
 tlieir help against a toe who was growing dan- 
 gerous even to them. The coalition against 
 David is described as consisting of tiie Syrians 
 4>f Bethrehob and of Maacah, of Zobah and of 
 Tob. The last country appears to have been i;i 
 the district of Trachoriitis, the two first imme- 
 diately on the north of Israel. In this war, 
 we may believe tliat David enjoyeil the im- 
 jxirtant alliance of Toi, king of Hamath, who, 
 having suffered from Ha<ladezer's hostility, courted 
 the iiiendship of the Israelitish monarch (2 Sam. 
 \iii. 9, 10). ^Ve are barely informed that one 
 division of the Israelites under Abisliai was posted 
 agai'.ist the Ammonites ; a second undc'r Joab met 
 the confederates from the north, 30,000 strong, 
 and ])revented their junction with the Ammonites. 
 In b.)rli jilacfcs the enemy was repelled tl.ough, it 
 would seem, with no decisive result. The spirt 
 uf exaggeration is certainly displayed in the state- 
 ment — -whoever is answerable for it — (1 Chron. 
 xix. 7j. that the Syrian confederates brouglit with 
 them 32,000 cl'.ariots, which are not noticed in 
 the parallel place of 2 Sam. Perhaps the text 
 is corrupt; for 1000 talents of silver (ver. G) ap- 
 pears a small sum to iiire such a iorce with. A 
 Decond campaign took place. The king of Zobah 
 brouglit in an army of Mesopotarnians, in addition 
 folds former troops, and David found it necessary 
 to make a levy of all Israel to meet the pressing 
 danger. A pitched battle on a great scale was 
 then fought at Flelam — far lieyond the limits of 
 the twelve tribes — in which David was victorious. 
 Ha is said to have slain, according to 2 Sam. x. 
 18, the men of HO chariot^ and 40,000 horse- 
 men; or, according to 1 Chron. xix. IS, the men 
 of 7000 chariots, and 40,000 footmen. Here, as 
 (Ml the former occasion, the Chronicler multiplies 
 by 10 tiie number found in the older bodk. If we 
 iiad access to the court-records of Hamath, we 
 sliould ])robahly fiiiil that Toi had assembled lijg 
 whole cavalry to assist David, and that to him 
 was due the important service of disabling or de- 
 Ktroy ing the enemy's horse Such foreign aid may 
 ex'ilain the general result, witiiour our obtruding 
 a miracle, for wiiich the narrative give^ us not the 
 least warrant. The Syrians henceforth left the 
 Ammonites t(, their fate, and the petty chiefs who 
 Lad been in allegiance lo Ka<ladezer hastened to 
 lio 1 (image to David. 6. Early in the next 
 season Joab was sent to take vengeance on the 
 Ammonites in their own home, byal:";king their 
 coiel city, or R.d)bah of Ammon. The natural 
 «r«ngfli of I eir border could not keep out \eteiaii 
 
 froojis and an experienced leadei-; and thoiiga 
 the siege of the city occupied many montlu (if, 
 indeed, it was not prolonged info the next year), 
 it was at last taken. It is characteristic erf 
 Oriental desjiotism, that Joaii, when the city was 
 nearly reduced, sent to invite David to command 
 the final assault in jierson. David gathered a 
 large force, easily captured the loyal town, and 
 despoiled it of all its wealth. His vengeance 
 was as much more dieadful on the unfortunate 
 inhabitants than formerly on the Mnabites, as th« 
 danger in which the Ammonites had involved 
 Israel had been more imminent. Tlie persons 
 captured in the city were jiut to death by toituie, 
 some of them being sawed in pieces, others 
 chopped up with axes or mangled with harrows, 
 while some were smothered in brick-kilns (2 Sara, 
 xii. 31 ; 1 Chron. xx. o). This cruelty was perhaps 
 effectual in quelling futuic movements of rev(jlt 
 or war; for, until insurrections in Israel emboldeo 
 them, foreign foes after this remairt quiet. 
 
 During the campaign against liabbah of An> 
 mon the jiaint'iil and never-to-be-forgotten otitrage 
 of David against Bathsheba and her feusband 
 Uriah the Hittite took jilace. It is principally 
 through this narrative that we know the tedious- 
 ness of that siege; since the adulte y with Balh- 
 sheba and the birtli of at least one child took 
 place during the course of it. 
 
 The latter years of David's reign were afflicted 
 by the inevitable results of polygamy and despot- 
 ism, viz. the quarrels of the sons of ditfereiit 
 mothers, and their eageiTiess to seize the kingdom 
 before their father's death. Of all his sons, 
 Absalom had naturally the greatest pretensions, 
 being, by his mother s side, grandson of Talmai, 
 king of Geshur; while through his personal beauty 
 and winning manners he was high in popular 
 favour. It is evident, moieover, that he was ihs 
 darling son of his father. AVhen his own sister 
 Tamar had lieen dishonoured by iier half-brother 
 Amiion, the eldest son of David, Absalom slew 
 him in vengeance, but, in fear of his father, then 
 fled to his grand tVithfi at Geshur. Joab, dis- 
 cerning David's longings for his son, eft'ected his 
 return after three years ; but tlie contiict in tlie 
 king's mind is strikingly shown by his allowing 
 Absalom to dwell two full years in Jerusalem 
 before he would see his face. 
 
 Tiie inmrrection of Absalom against the king 
 was the next important event ; in the course of 
 which there was shown tlie general tendencj' of 
 men to look favourably on young and untried 
 princes, rather than on those whom they know tor 
 better and for worse. Absalom eiected his royal 
 standard at Hebron first, and was fully prepared 
 to slay his father outright, which might probably 
 have been done, if the energetic advice of Ahi- 
 thoiihel had been foUoweil. While they delay«<l, 
 David escaped tieyond the Joidan, and with all 
 his troop met a most friendly reception, not only 
 from Barzillai and Machh', wealthy chiefs of 
 pastoral Gilead, but fiom Sliobi, the son of the 
 Ammonite king N abash, whose jiower he ImQ 
 destroyed, and whose peojde he had hewed ir 
 ])ieces. We likewise leain on this occaiion 
 that the fortunes of David had been all along 
 attende<l liy GOO men of Gath, who now, umier the 
 command of" Ittai the Gittite, cio«ed the Jordan' 
 with all their liou.sehohls, in spite ol' David'i 
 geneiouj a,lvice tiiat they would reiuin U( tneu
 
 DAVID. 
 
 own coniifry. Stren^'flK^ned by tlie wirlike 
 eastern trilies, 'iiid suiiiiinuled l)y liis exjierienoed 
 ca])(aiiis, tli« klny: no U)ny;er liesitiited to meet 
 Alisiiloni in flic tit-Id. A derisive victory w;is 
 won at tJie wood of" Ejihraim, and Altsalotn was 
 slain l»y Joah in tlie retreat The old king was 
 heart-stricken at tiiis re»iilt, and, ignorant of his 
 own weakness, su])erseded Joah in the eommand 
 ol'the host by Amasa, Al)siilom's captain. Perhaps 
 Joat) on the former occasion, when he innrdered 
 Atiner, had liliniled the king by plciidiiij,' re- 
 venge for the Ijlood of Asaliel ; but no sucii pre- 
 tence could here avail. The king was now pro- 
 bably brouj^ht to his determination, jwrtly by his 
 disgust at Joab, partly by his desire to give the 
 insmgents contidewce in his amnesty. If Amasa 
 is the same as Amasai, David may likewise have 
 retained a yratefid remembrance of the cordial 
 greeting with which he had led a strong band to 
 hit assistance, at the critical period of his abode 
 in Ziklag (1 Chron. xii. IS); moreover, Amasa, 
 equally with Joab, was David's nephew, their two 
 mothers, Aliigail and Zeruiah, being sisters to 
 David by at least one parent (2 Sam. xvii. 25; 
 1 Cliron. ii. 13, 16). The unscrupulous Joab, 
 however, wa^ not so to be set aside. Before long, 
 catching an op}/Orti;nity, he assassinated his un- 
 suspecting cousin with his own hand ; and Daxid, 
 who had used the instrumentality of Joab to 
 murder Uriah, did not dare to resent the deed. 
 
 A quarrel which took place between the men 
 of Judah and those of the other tribes in bringing 
 the king back, had encouraged a Benjamite 
 named Sheba to raise a new insurrection, which 
 8prea<l witli wonderful rapidity. ' Every man of 
 Israel/ are the strong words of the text, ' went up 
 from aftt-r David, and followed Sheba, the son of 
 liichri,' a man of whom nothing besides is 
 known. This strikingly shows that the later 
 despotism of David had already exhausted the 
 enthusiasm once kindled by his devotion and 
 eliivalry, and that his throne now rested on the 
 rotten foundation of mere military superiority. 
 Amasa w;is collecting troops as David's general 
 at the time when he was treacherously assassi- 
 nated by his cousin, who then, with his usual 
 energy, pursued Sheba, and l)lockaded him in 
 Beth-maaciiah before he could collect his {)arti- 
 ^aiis. Sheba's hea<l was cut otl", and thrown over 
 the wall ; aud so ended the new' rising. Yet this 
 was not the end of trouble; for the intestine war 
 s«'nis to have inspired the Philistines with the 
 hope of tlirowing off the yoke. Four successive 
 Ijattles ai-e recorded (2 Sam. xxi. 15-22), in the 
 first of which the aged David was nigh to being 
 slain. His faithful officers kept him away from 
 all future risks, and Philistia was once more, and 
 Ijnally. subdued. 
 
 Tne last couunotion recorded took place when 
 Daviifs end seemed nigh, and Adonijah, one of 
 his eluer sons, feared that the inttuenre of Bath- 
 sheba might gain the kingdom for her own son 
 Sohimou. Adiinijah's conspiiacy was joined by 
 ALiattiiU!, one of the two chief priests, and by the 
 redoulitwl Joab ; u)u>;i which David took the de- 
 cisive measiue of raising Solotnon at once to tlie 
 ihrone. Of two young monarchs. the younger 
 and the less known was easily preferred, when the 
 sanction of the existing government was thrown 
 info his scale; and the cause of Adonijah innne- 
 «liately fell to the giounil. Amnesty was pro- 
 
 DAVID. 
 
 6St 
 
 mised to the conspirators, yet it was not yerf 
 faithfully ol)ser\ed [Solomon^. 
 
 Numerous indications lemaiii 1o us that, how- 
 ever eminently- Da\ id was imbued with faith ill 
 Jehovah as the national (rod of Isiae!, and how- 
 ever lie strove to unite all Isiael in conuimn 
 woi ship, he still had no sympathy with tii«; later 
 spirit which re])elled all foreigneis from co-r)]/e- 
 ration with Jews. In his eaily years necessi'y 
 made him intimate with Philistines, Moabi'es, 
 and Ammonites : policy led h in into jea.jue with 
 the Tyrians. lie himself took in mairia.'t a 
 daughter of the king of Geshur : it is the less 
 wonderful that we find Uriah the Hittite '2 Sam. 
 xi.), Gefiier the Islimaelite (1 Chron. ii. 17), and 
 otheis, married to Lsraelitish wives. The tiilelity 
 of Ittai the (iittite, and his six hundred ir.t^n. \\,ii 
 been already alluded to. It would apnear. (u 
 the whole, that in tolerating foreigners Solomon 
 did not go l)eyonil the principles established by 
 his father, though circumstances gave thciii a 
 fuller development. 
 
 It ha-5 lieen seen that the reign of David be;:an, 
 as that of a constitutional monarch, with a lea^'ue 
 between him and his people : it ends as a piue 
 despotism, in which the moi-iarch gives his king- 
 dom away to whomsoever he pleases, imd Ids 
 nominee stcjjs at once mfo power without entering 
 into any public engagements. The intensity c.f 
 the despotism is strikingly shown in the indiiect 
 and cautious device by which alone Joab uaieil 
 to hint to the king the suitableness of lecallisig 
 Absalom from banishnie'it, though he believed t!ie 
 king himself to desire it (2 Sam. xiv.;. All u.se 
 necessarily out of the standing army which l)a\ id 
 kept up as an iiistiument of conquest and i,( 
 p(nver, by the side of wliich constituti(inal lil)eity 
 could not stand. The maintenance of this large 
 force perhaps was not oppressive, since lich tii- 
 butes were received from tlie suirouiidiiig naticjns, 
 and the civil government was not yet become 
 very expensive [Soi.ojion]. We neveithelers 
 need not wonder that those who joyfully wel- 
 comed David as their heroic dellvejer were sick 
 of heart when forced to addre->s him with uu 
 manly adulation. 
 
 One more dieadful tragedy is recorded in tiiis 
 reign — the immolation of seven sons of Saul (2 
 Sam. xxi.), on the occurrence of three years' bad 
 harvests. A priestly ie]ninse imjiuted the fa- 
 mine to Sauls violation of the oath of Joshiia 
 with the Gibeonites, anj used the name and au- 
 thority of Jeliovah in proof. It has lieen sus- 
 pected that the whole was contrivetl by tlie 
 revenge of the priesthood for the barbarous mas- 
 sacre perjielrated l)y Saul on the priestly city ol 
 Nob ; and that David the nioie easily acqiucsced, 
 since it was desirable, for the peace of bis suc- 
 cessois, that the house of Saul should be extci rui- 
 nated. Both suspicions are too pmbable to t;« 
 easily set aside; and the latter receives jia'iiful 
 continnation from the cold injustice of David 
 towards Mephibodieili, -son of Jonathan, wh' u- 
 he first stripped of his whole jiatiinumy, on a fa!s' 
 and most improbable accusation, and alterwaidt 
 instead of honourably retlussing tiie injury, re 
 stored to him the half only of his estate (2 Sam. 
 xvi. 3 ; xix. 24-30). Such conduct prov es that 
 he was conscious of his own wiong. but was toe 
 desirous ()f weakening the house ol" Said to r»s 
 nounce entirely the opportunity of damagmg it, ut
 
 532 
 
 DAVin. 
 
 DAVIW. 
 
 wliicli lie had snapt. That David did not give ap 
 Me;)liil)03beth to be hangod \>y tiic Glheonites is 
 irniinted to the '>at!i l;etvveeii liim and Jonathan; 
 biif it does not aiijiear that tlieir covenant was or 
 ci)\ 111 he more binding than his most ex])licit 
 oadi to Saul on the very same matter (1 Sam. 
 xxiv. 21, 22). Five of the innocent men tlius 
 Miinged up before .Teliovah ' as if lie had been a 
 Moloch, are stated in the common Hebrew and 
 (■irreck text, and in our received version, to be 
 children of Michal, David's youthful s])oiise; 
 and Jose[)hus imagines that they were born of iier 
 after a second divorce from David. But it is 
 certain, from 1 Sam. xviii. 10, that Michal is 
 here a mistake for Merab ; which name De Wette 
 has introduced into his version. The touching 
 description of the other bereaved mother, Rizpah, 
 (!ie (laughter of Aiah, is in refreshing contrast to the 
 rest of the history, and shows tlie symj)athy of the 
 narratoi"s licart, while he had evidently no sus- 
 picion that tlie name of Jehovah could have been 
 wrongly used to command the deed. Even after 
 this atonement, it was thou/'-.i, that a thorough 
 cleansing of the land was not yet effected. The 
 bones of Saul and his three sons were disinterred 
 from Jahesh-Gilead, and were buried in the sepul- 
 chre of Kish, in Benjamin ; as if to obliterate 
 every monument that Saul and his sons had ever 
 been leaders of the hosts of Israel. AOer this the 
 famine was removed. 
 
 li has been seen that, on one occasion (2 Sam. 
 viii. 3), David foug'.jt against Hadadezer alx)ut a 
 tilstrict on the river Euphrates. Yet it is not to be 
 imagined that he had any fixed ])ogsession of ter- 
 ritory so tlistant, which indeed could have had no 
 value to liim. A warrior from his youth, beseems 
 to have had little ])erce))tion of the advantages of 
 commerce ; and although the land of Edom was 
 long under his power, he made no etVort to use its 
 port5 of Kziongeher and Elath for maritime traffic. 
 Mucii less was he likely to value the trade of the 
 Eiiphrates, from which river he was separated by 
 8 tedious distance of desert land, over which, 
 without the possession of superior cavalry, lie 
 could not maintain a permanent sovereignty. 
 No attempt seems to have been made in D.ivid's 
 reign to maintain horses oi chariots for military 
 purposes. Even chieftains in battle, as Absalom 
 on his fatal day, appear mounted only on mules. 
 Yet horses were already used in state equipages, 
 ap[)arently as a symbol of royalty (2 Sam. xv-1). 
 
 That in the opening of Saul's reign the Philis- 
 tines !iad deprived the Israelites of all the most 
 formidable arms, is well known. It is probable 
 that this may have led to a more careful practice 
 of the sling and of the bow, especially among the 
 southern trilies, who were more immediately pressed 
 by the power of the Philistines. Such weapons 
 cannot be kept out of the hands of rustics, and 
 must have been essential against wild beasts. 
 Hut, from caiises unk<iowii, the Benjamites were 
 [jeculiarly celebrated as archers and siingers 
 (Jiidg. XX. 16; 1 Chron. viii. 40; xii. 2; 2 
 Chron. xiv. S; xvii. 17), whilethe jiastoral tribes 
 Deyond the Jordan were naturally able to escape 
 ail attempts of the Philistines to deprive them of 
 shield, r.pcar, and sword. Hence the Gadites, 
 who caine to David at Zikliig, are described as 
 fi)rniidal:le and full-armed warriors, ' with faces 
 like lions, and swift as mountain roes ' (I Chron. 
 KJi. 8). 
 
 Tlie standing army which Saul had begun tt 
 maintain was greatly enlarged bv Dax'id. All 
 account of this is given in 1 Chron. xxvii. : frum 
 which it would seem th;it 21,l!00 men were con- 
 stantly maintained on servije, though there was 
 a relieving of guard every month. Hence, 
 twelve times this number, or 2S8,0l)0, were un lei 
 a permanent military organization, with a general 
 for each division in his month. Besides this host, 
 the register proceeds to recount twelve priiice* 
 over the tribes of Israel, who may perhaps be com 
 paied to the lord -lieutenants of English counties 
 The enumeration of tiiese gieat oHicers is remark- 
 able, being as follows: — Ti, of the Reubenites; 
 2, of the Simeonifes ; 3, of the Levites ; 4, of the 
 Aaronltes; 5, of Judali ; fi, of Issachar; 7, of 
 Zel)ulon ; 8, of Naphlhali ; 9, of Ephraim ; 10. of 
 Manasseh; 11, of Manasseh beyond the Jordan ; 
 12, of Benjamin; 13, of Dan. Here the names 
 of Gad and Asher are omitted, without explana- 
 tinn. On the other hand, the Levitesand Aaron- 
 ites are recounted as though they were tribe? 
 coordinate to the rest, and Zadok is named &s 
 prince of the Aaronites. It is not to l>e supposeci 
 tliat the Levites or Aaronites were wholly forbid- 
 den from civil and military duties. It has beer 
 already remarked' that Zadok (here cliief of the 
 Aaronites) was described, in the beginning of 
 David's reign, as 'a mighty man of valour' (1 
 Chron. xii. 2S). and the same appellation is given 
 to the sons of Shemaiah, a Levite (xxvi. 6). Be- 
 naiah also, now captain of David's body-guard, 
 was son of the late high-priest Jehoiada (xxvir. 
 .5, and xii. 27). 
 
 The body-guard of David, to which allasion has 
 just been made, was an impoitant a))|)endage to 
 his state, and a formidable exhibition of the actual 
 des]X)tism under which, in fulfilment of the warn- 
 ing of Samuel, Israel had now fallen. [Chk 
 
 RETHITES and PBI.ETHrrES.] 
 
 The cabinet of David (if we may u.?e a moderj. 
 name) is thus given (1 Chron. xxvii. 32-34) witi 
 reference to a time which preceded AI)salom's re 
 volt: — 1, Jonathan, Davids uncle, a counsellor 
 wise man, and scribe ; 2, Jehiel, son of Hacb- 
 moni, tutor (?) to the king's sons ; 3, Aliithophel, 
 the king's counsellor; 4, Hushai, the king's com- 
 panion ; 5, after Ahttho))liel, Jehoiada, the son of 
 Benniah ; 6, Aliiathar the priest. It is added, 
 ' and the general of the kings army was Joab.' 
 At this period Benaiah was in the early prime of 
 his military ))rowe3»; and it is incredible that he 
 can have had a son, Jehoiada, old enough to be 
 the second counsellor of the king, next to the 
 celebrated Ahilhophel. If the text is here corrujrt, 
 the corruption is older than the time of the Sept. 
 However, De Wette has introduced, Benaiah the 
 smi of Jehoiada. We cannot look on this as cer- 
 tain ; for Benaiah may have been the name of the 
 father as well as of the son of Jehoiada the high- 
 priest. Yet as it was very rare with the Hebrews 
 for names to recur in alternate geneiations, De 
 Welte's reading is at least highly probable. If 
 80, it is striking to observe tliat Benaiah, as cap- 
 tain of the life-guards, is reckoned next to Ahi- 
 thopliel in rank as a counsellor; while Joab, 
 general of the army, scarcely seems to have been 
 a member of the cabinet. Zadok was above named 
 as prince of (he Aaronites; but was not yet m 
 closely connected with tlie administration at 
 Abialliar.
 
 DAY. 
 
 Twelve royal bailiffs are recited us a part of 
 David's establisliment (1 Chron. xxvii. 25, '51), 
 haviiijf the following depirtnit'iits uruU'r tliuir 
 charge: 1, The treasures of goKl, silver, &c. ; 
 2, tlie magazines; 3, the tilla.i^e (wheat, &c. ?) ; 
 4, the vineyards ; 5, the wine-cellars ; 0, the olive 
 and sycamore trees , 7, the oil-cellars ; 8, tiie 
 herds in Sharon; 9, the herds in the valleys; 
 10, the camels; 11, tiie asses; 12, the (locks. 
 The eminently prosperous state in wiiich David 
 left his kingdom to Solomon appears to prove 
 that he was on the whole faithfully served, and 
 tliat his own excellent intentions, patriotic spirit, 
 and devout piety (measured, as it must be tnca- 
 suretl, by the standard of those ages), leally made 
 nis reign Iteufficial to his subjects. If it reduced 
 them under des])otistn, yet it freed them from a 
 foreign yoke and from intestine anarchy ; if it 
 involved them in severe wars, if it failed of unit- 
 ing them j)ermanently as a single people, in 
 neither of these jxtints did it make their state 
 worse than it found them. We must not exact of 
 David eitiier to reign like a constitutional monarch, 
 to ujihold civil liberty, or by any personal piety 
 to extract from despotism its sting. Even his 
 most reprobate otlence has no.small palliation in 
 the far worse excesses of other Oriental sovereigns ; 
 and his great su[)eriority to his successors justifies 
 the high esteem in which his memory was held. 
 Concerning the closing scenes of David's life no 
 more neeil here Ije said : the celebrated enume- 
 ration of the people by Joab, will lie noticed 
 undev t^■e article Population. — F. W. N. 
 
 DAY. The earliest measure of time on record 
 is the day : — 'The evening and the mornuif/ were 
 tiie first c?ay' (Gen. i. 5). Here tlie word 'day' 
 denotes the civil or calendar day of twenty-four 
 hours, including ' the evening,' or natural night, 
 and 'the morning,' or natural day. It is re- 
 markable that in this account ' the evening,' or 
 natural night, precedes ' the morning,' or natural 
 day. Hence tiie Hebrew compound "Ip3"2"iy, 
 ' evening-morning,' which is used by Daniel (viii. 
 11) to denote a civil day. In fact, the Jewish 
 civil day Ijegan, as it still d(jes, not with the 
 morning, but the evening — thus the Sabbath com- 
 mences with the sunset of Friday, and ends with 
 the sunset of Saturday. Indications of tiiis pri- 
 meval order exist among many nations, aiid even 
 we have 'seven-night,' 'fortnight,' to signify 
 seven days and fourteen days. Under this ar- 
 rangement the night seems to have been regarded 
 not as belonging to and terminating the preceding 
 day, but us l)elonging to and ushering in the day 
 tiiat follows — Nox ducere diem videtur (Tacit. 
 Germ. ii.). 
 
 Tiie inconveniences resulting from a variable 
 commencement of the civil day, earlier or later, ac- 
 cording to the dillereiit seasons of the year, as well 
 as the equally va-ying duration of the natural day 
 and i:ight, must have been very considerable, and 
 are sensibly felt by Europeans when travelling in 
 the East, where the ;incieiit custom in this matter 
 is still observed. These inconveniences must be 
 {ess jbvious to the iieople themselves, who know 
 no better system ; yet tliey were apparent to several 
 ancient nations— the Egyjitians (Plin. Hint. Nat. 
 ii. 77), the Ausonians, and others — and induced 
 !hem to reckon their civil day from midnight to 
 midnigiit, as from a (rxetl invariable point; and 
 luis usage h%s been adi/pttd liy £iiosl of (he modern 
 
 DEACON. 
 
 3M 
 
 nations of Eurojie. We thus realize tlie advaniai^ 
 of having our divisions of the day, the hours, o< 
 equal duration, day and night, at all times of the 
 year; whereas among liie Oriintals the hours, and 
 all other divisions of the natural day and night, 
 are of constantly varying iluration, and the divi- 
 sions of the day vary from those of the night, 
 excepting at the ecj^uinoxes. 
 
 Tlie natural day was at first divided into three 
 parts, morning, noon, and evening, which are 
 mentioned by David as hours or times of jiraver 
 (Ps. Iv. 17). 
 
 The natural night was also originally divitled 
 into three parts, or watches(Ps. Ixiii. 6; xc. -1). 
 The _;?/A'^, or beyinniiKj of the wu/chcs, is nitn- 
 tioned in Lam. ii. 19 ; tha mkUle watch, in Jiidg. 
 vii. 19 ; and tlia mornitif/ watch, in Exod. xiv. 21. 
 Afterwards the strictness of military discipline 
 among the Greeks and Romans introduced an 
 additional night-watcii. The second and tliiid 
 xratches of the night are mentioned in Luke xii. 
 38, and the fourth in M.itt. xiv. 25. Tlie four 
 are mentioned together by our Lord, in Maik xiii. 
 35, and described by the terms oi^/e, ' the late 
 watch ;' fieaoyuKTiov, ' t/ie midnight ;' cAe/cro- 
 po<pwvias, ' tfie cock-crowing ;' and irpaii, ' the 
 morning.' The precise beginning and ending of 
 each of the four watches is thus determined : 
 
 1. *0>fe', the late, began at sunset and ended 
 with the third hour of the nigiit, including the 
 evening dawn, or twilight. It was also called 
 oi^ia u-'pa, ' even-tide" (Mark xi. 1 1), or simply oifi'a 
 'evening' (John xx. 19.) 
 
 2. Mecroyy/cTioy, ' tlie midnight,' lasted from 
 the third hour till midnight. 
 
 3. 'AXfKTopo(^<iii/ia,s, ' the cock-croioing,' lasted 
 from midnight till the third hour after, or to the 
 niii-tli hour of the night. It included the two 
 cock-crowings, with the second of which it emleil. 
 
 4. Tlpwi, ' early,' lasted from the ninth to the 
 twelfth hour of the night, or sunrise, including 
 the morning dawn, or twilight. It was also called 
 vpuiia, ' morning,' or ' morning-tide,' wpa being 
 understood (John xviii. 28). 
 
 The division of the day into twelve hours was 
 common among the Jews after the captivity in 
 Babylon. The woid hour first occurs in t!ie 
 book of Daniel (iv. 19); and it is adinitled liy 
 the Jewish writers that this division of the day 
 was borrowed by them from the Babylonians. 
 Our Lord appeals to this ancient, and then long- 
 establishetl, division, as a matter of public noto- 
 riety : ' .A-re there not twelve hours in the day ?' 
 (Joiin xi. 9). 
 
 This, however, was tlie division of the natural 
 day into twelve hours, which were theiefore vari- 
 able according to the seasons of the year, ai all 
 places except the equator; and etiual, or of the 
 mean length, only at the vernal and autumnal 
 equinoxes; being longer in the summer half vear, 
 and shorter in the winter. The inconvenience of 
 this has already been intimated. 
 
 T\\ejirst hour of the day began at sunrise ; (he 
 sixth hour vnilcd at mid-day, or noon ; xhaeveuth 
 hour began at no-jn ; anil tlie twelfth liour ended 
 at sunset. 
 
 The days of the week had no proper namet 
 among the Hebrews, but were distinguisheil only 
 by their numeral order [We kk]. 
 
 DEACON. This Wiird is derived from the 
 Greek term Aiciko^'ot, and m its more rvteatleci
 
 t>S4 
 
 DEACON. 
 
 Knsp is iisel, both in Sc;i]itine and in ecclesi- 
 astical writers, to ilesitfiiate an]/ person who mi- 
 nhters in God's service. In 2 Cor. vi. 1, the 
 A])ostle says, ' J3nt in all tiiin;^s ajjproving our- 
 selves as the ministers CSiaKovoi, ileacons) of 
 (v)(i.' Again, Kph. iii. 7, ' Wiieieofl was ninde 
 a in'nister {piaKovos, deacon) ; and in Col. i. 2, 
 3, he employs the same epitliet to express the cha- 
 racter of ills othce. In Rom. xv. 8, St. Paul 
 c.ills onr Lord SidKovof Trfpirofxris—i- e. deacon 
 ul' the '•'rciimtisioii ; and. in his Kpistle to the 
 P iilippians, he ad(hesse.s himseil' to the bishops 
 and deacons '^Phil. i. \). 
 
 Clirys^istom, in commenting upon these words 
 of the Apostle, exclaims, 'What! has a city 
 niore bisliops than one? By no means ; hnt wlien 
 tlie .'Vpostle wiote. tlie teims deacon and bishop 
 were used indillVrcntly the one for the otiier.' 
 ' Hence,' he adds, ' tlie Apostle Paul, writing to 
 Tiriiotliy, who yet was a b-isliO]), says, " Fulfil 
 tiiy ministry {SmkoAo)." ' Tiiet>pliyhict, writing 
 lijion tlie sauio subject (p. 577), calls the bishops 
 ■fireshyfers ; not, however, that tiiere were in one 
 •city mantj bisliops, but because bishops were in- 
 discrh^iiaatebj called deacons and presliylers. 
 
 But it is in its more confined sense, as it ex- 
 prewes the third order of the ministry of tlie pri- 
 mitive Church, tliat we are to examine the mean- 
 Jnj; if the word Deacon. 
 
 Some suppose that the office of deacon had an 
 existence before the election of the seven jwrsoiis 
 oi" whom we read in Acts vi. The words Neorrepot 
 and 'HeaviffKoi are sometimes used to designate 
 the function as well as the age of man, by the 
 same rule of inlerpietalion which diversifies the 
 sense of the word Up^a^vi-fpos. As, therefore, 
 by tlie title Presbyter, the head or ruler of a so- 
 ciety is meant, williout regard to his age; so, by 
 tiie term young man, we are often to understand 
 Minister, or servant, Ijecause such ])ersons are 
 usually in the fiower of youth. Christ himself 
 seems to attribute this sense to the word Nedrepos. 
 Luke xxii. 26 : '6 fifi^'^v 4v vfj.7v, yeveffSai ws 6 
 viiaTepos.' Our Lord explains the word ix^i^wv 
 by the word riyovj-uvos, which signifie-! a Pres- 
 bi/tor or ruler. He also substitutes, a little after, 
 6 hioxoviiv in place of vetiiTepos, whicli con nns 
 our inr^rpretation ; so that fjni^uiv and vearrtpos 
 refer not lo age, but to ojfice. 1 Pet. v. 5 con- 
 ftrius this view very remarkaldy : 'Ofj.oiws yfwTc 
 poi v-n-oTayrjTi Tvp^a^uripois — ' Likewise, young 
 men, lie ye sniiject to the elder;' or, ye Deacons, 
 be subject to the Piesbyters. Now the yewTipoi, 
 or ynung men (who. we are told in Acts v. 6, car- 
 ried out and buried tlie dead bodies of Ananias 
 and Sa]ipliira), are supposed t.i have been tlie very 
 persons iigainst whose partial distribution of the 
 Ciiiuchs b.iunly the complaint was m^ide to the 
 Apostles. To avoid even the appearance of par- 
 tialdij in a matter of this kind, six of the seven 
 newly-elected deacons were taken from amongst 
 ih.e complaining Grecians. Tliis would seem to 
 be .siithciently indicated by their names. 
 
 That the duties of the seven deacons were not 
 of an e.Nclusivelv secular character is clear fioni 
 ll'.e act that iKith Philip and Stephen preached, 
 and that one of fh«m ii\so baptized. It is strange, 
 llierefore, that the ISth Canon of tiie Council of 
 Constantinople, in ' Trullo,' should declare, re- 
 ferring to Acts vi., that the seven deacons liad no 
 l^Lrituul function assigned tliem. CEcumenius 
 
 DEACON. 
 
 (a celelirafeil (xreek writer of the fenti f cnfiiry^ 
 gi\es his testimony to the saine efiecl I /?j A:t, 
 Ap. vi. ]). 4;J3). Bui opposed to this ojiiniois 
 is that of some of the Fathers of the Cliristiaii 
 Church. Ignatius, a martyr-discijile of St. John, 
 and bishop ofAntioch, a.o. (58, styles them at 
 once 'ministers of the mysteries of Ciirist;' adding, 
 tliat tliey are not ministers of meats and drinks, 
 but of the Chiucli of God (Ignut. Ep. ad Trail. 
 n. 2). Again, he says (A;>. ad Trail, n. 3), 
 'Study to do all things in Divine concord, under 
 your bishop jiresiding in the ])laee of Ciod, and 
 tlie presbyters in the place of the a)io<lolic senate 
 and the deacons most dear to me, as liiose to whom 
 is commitleil the ministry of Je.iJis Ciuis'.' 
 
 Cyjirian, i)i.shop of Carthage, a.d. 2.')0 (whilst 
 referring their oiigin to Acts vi.), styles them 
 ministers of episcopacy and of the Church 
 (Cyjir. Ep. 65, al. 3, ad Rogat.): at the same 
 time he asseits that Ihey were called ad altaris 
 7niniste7-iuni — to the ministry of the altar. 
 
 TertuUian, a celebrated Father of the second 
 century, classes them witli bisliops and jiresiiyters 
 as guides and leaders to tlie laily. He asks 
 (Tertul!. Dc Fur/a, c. ii.) : ' Quuni ipsi aiictores, 
 id est, ipsi Diaconi, Presbyteri, et Ep-scopi fugi- 
 unt, quomodo Laicus intelligeie poterit'; — Cum 
 Duces fugiiint quis de greg.aiio numero susti 
 nebit?" 
 
 Though Jerome in one place speal?s of then* 
 (Ep. ad Evamj. et Coin. Ezek. c. 18) a-i servants 
 of tables and widows; yet, again, he ranks them 
 amongst the guides of thepeo le: still he distin- 
 guishes them from the priests of the second order, 
 that is, from the jaesbyters, liy the tirleot'>e>t!i(!es. 
 And so, frequently, in the Councils, ihe names 
 Succrdos and Levita are used as the distinguish- 
 ing titles of presbyter and deacon. The fourth 
 Council of Cartilage expressly forbids the deacon 
 to assume any one function peculiar to the priest- 
 hood, by declaring, ' Diaconus nnu ad sacerdotium, 
 sed ad ministerium consecratus.' (See also IStii 
 Can. Con. Nic.') 
 
 His oidination, moreover, differed from that oJ 
 presbyter. l)oth iu its form and in the pioweis 
 wliich it conferred. For in the ordination of a 
 I)resl>vter, the presliyters who were present were 
 required to join in the imjwsition oi' liands willi 
 the bisho]); but the oidinalion of a deacon might 
 be performed by the bishoji alone, because, as the 
 4th Can. of the 4tli Conned of Carthage declares, 
 he was oidained not to the jniesthood, luit to the 
 inferi'jr services of the Cliurch. We now jiroceed 
 to notice what these services specilically were. 
 
 1. The deacon's more ordinary duty was to as- 
 sist the bishop and presbyter in the service of the 
 sanctuary; esjiecially was he charged with the 
 care of the utensils and ornaments appertaining 
 to the holy table (Isidurus, Epislola ad Lmide- 
 
 fredum). 
 
 2. In the administration of the Eucharist, fhaj 
 it was theirs to hand the consecrated elements to 
 the [leojde, is evident from Justin Martyr (Apol 
 ii. J). 1)2), and fiom (Jyprian (Strtn. v. ' D« 
 Lapsis '). Not, lunvever, that the ileacou had. 
 any authority or power to consecrate the elements, 
 for the 15th Can. of the Council of Aries, a.d 
 312, tbibids this. And the IRtli Can. of th« 
 Council of Nice ordeis the deacons not even ti 
 administer the Eucharist to priests because 
 theit inferiority.
 
 DEACON. 
 
 8. Deacons had ^xiwer to administer the sacra- 
 ment of baptism (Teitnll. l)e liapt. c. 17; aho 
 Hieron. Diul. contr. lAicif. c. 4, p. 130). Tlie 
 Council ofKliheiis, Can. 77, plainly acl<nowleili;i'S 
 tliis right, althoiigli the aiithnr of the Apost. Cun- 
 Stitiitions, and Kpijihaiiius ilso, would seem to 
 deny it. 
 
 4. The office of the deacon was not to preach, 
 BO much as to instinct and catechise the cate- 
 chnmens. His p.ut was, when the bishop or 
 presbyter did not preach, to read a homily fiom 
 one of the Fathers. St. Ambrose, Bishop of 
 Milan, A.D. 380, says expressly, that deacons, in 
 his time, did not preach, though he thinks tiiat 
 they were all originally Evangelists, as weie 
 Philip and Stephen. 
 
 5. It was the deacon's business to receive the 
 offerings of the people ; and having presented 
 them to the bishop or jiresbyter, to gi\ e expression 
 in a linid roice to the names of the otferers (see 
 Cypr. Ep. 10, al. 16, p. 37 (Hieron. Coyn. in 
 Ezak. xviii. p. 537). 
 
 6. Deacons were sometimes authorized, as tlie 
 bishops' special deleg;ites, to give to penitents the 
 solemn imposition of hands, which was the sign 
 of reconciliation (Cypr. Ep. 13, al. l^, ad Eter.). 
 
 7. Deacons had power to sus|)end the inferior 
 clergy; this, however, was done only when the 
 bishop and ]iresi)yter were absent, and the case 
 urgent (Constit. Apost. viii. 'iSj. 
 
 8. The ordinary duty of deacons, with regard 
 to general Councils, was to act as scribes and 
 disjaitants according as they were diiected by 
 their bisho]5S. In some instances they voted as 
 proxies for bishops who could nc^t attend in per- 
 son ; but in no instance do we find them voting 
 in a general Council by virtue of their office. 
 But in ])rovincial synods the deacons were some- 
 times allowed to give their voice, as well as the 
 prestjyters, in their own name. 
 
 9. The author of Apostol. Constitut. (ii. 57, 
 p. 875) informs us that one of the suijordinate 
 duties of the deacon was to provide places in the 
 church for persons as they entered— to rebuke any 
 that might either whisper, talk, laugh, &c. during 
 divine seiTJce. This w;is a duty which, however, 
 usually devolved upon the sub-deacon. 
 
 10. But, besides tiie at»ove, there were some 
 other offices which tiie deacon was called upon to 
 fill abroad. One of these was to take care of the 
 necessitous, oqihans, widows, martyrs in prison, 
 and all the poor and sick who had any claim 
 upon the public resources of the church. It was 
 also his espet^ial duty to notice the spiritual, as 
 well as the bodily, wants of the people; and 
 wherever he detected evils which he could not by 
 his own power and authority cure, it was for him 
 *o refer tliem for redress to the bishop. 
 
 In general the numl)er of deacons varied with 
 the warits of a particular church. Sozoinen 
 (vii. 10, p. 100) informs us that the church 
 of Rome, alter the a])ostolic model, never had 
 more than seven deacons. 
 
 it was not till the close of the third century 
 that deacons were forl)idden to marry. The Coun- 
 cil of Ancyra, ad. 314, in its 10th Can., ordains 
 tliat if a deacon declared at the time of liis ordi- 
 itatiou that he would marry, he should not be ile- 
 prive<l of his function if he did marry ; but that 
 if he married without having made such a decla- 
 latioa, ' he must tall into the rank of laicksl' 
 
 DEACONESS. 
 
 S33 
 
 The (/r^aii/tcations refpiired in deacons by tli* 
 primitive church were the same that were re- 
 quired in bisho])s and piesl)yleis; and the '-ha* 
 racteiistics of a deacon, given by St. Paul in hia 
 Second Epistle to Timothy, were the rule liy 
 which a candidate was judged lit for such aJi 
 office. The second (!ouncil of (.'artliage, 4tli C'an., 
 forbids (he ordination of a deacon before the age 
 of twenty-live; and both the Civil and C'.i-ion 
 I-aw, as may be seen in Jnslinian"s Aoi'dn, \ iU, 
 c. 14, lixed his age to the same ] eriod 
 
 The Council of Laodicea, a.u. 3^1, forbids u 
 deacon to sit in the presence of a ])resbyter, and 
 the llthCan. of the lirst Canaicii of Carthage 
 regulates the mmibor of judges to sit upon li 
 clergyman — three bishojiS ujjon a ileacon, six; 
 upon a presbyter, anil twelve u])onabi hop. This 
 would mark the rank of each of the parties 
 
 The ])iimitivc church had its archdeacon, though 
 when the c.flice was lirst instituted is a m.iiter of 
 dis])ute with learned men. He was not in piicsl* 
 orders ; but was selecteil from the deacons by the 
 bishoj), and hard considerable authmily over the 
 otlx-r deacons and inferior orders. — J. W. i). 
 
 DEACONESS. This word is derived from 
 AiaK6yi<T(ra, or t] Amkovos. That the order of 
 Deaconess existeil in the Clii istian church, even in 
 Apostolic dayx, is evident, from Rom. xvi. I: 
 ' 1 commend unto you Phebe, our sister, which 
 is a servant {oixrav hiaKovov, a deaconess) of the 
 church which is at Ccnchrea.' 
 
 The earliest Fathers of the church, moreover, 
 speak of the same order of persons. Ignatius, 
 writing to the church at Antioch--of which he 
 himself was bishop— says, ' Salute the deaconesses 
 in Christ .fesus.' Some sujtpose that it is to sucli 
 offices of the church that the younger Pliny 
 refers when he thus expresses himself in his letter 
 to the emperor Trajan : ' Qui magis necessarium 
 credidi ex duabu.s ancillis qute niinistra; dice- 
 baritur, quid esset veri et per tormenta quareiv.' 
 
 Theodoret {Eccles. Hist. iii. H, p. t)'>;ij call* 
 Publia, who lived at the time of Julian, ?; Aia- 
 Kovos — deaconess. Again, we lind Sozomen (iv. 
 14, p. 59j speaking of a certain deaconos who 
 had been excluded church fel!owshii> because of 
 shaving broken her vows. Thewjihylact informs 
 us that some Supposed that the npfufiiTiScs o( 
 Tit. ii. 3 meant the deaconesses. But houever 
 this may be, we do kiKnv that the eleventh Can. 
 of the Council of Laodicea calls the deaconesses 
 of the church i)y the very teim Xlpicr^vrihtxi, 
 intimating that none but elderly persons were 
 admitted to this office. 
 
 Certain qualilications were necessary in tluise 
 who were taken into tliis order. 
 
 1. It was necessary that she should I)e a 
 xcidoto. On this Tertullian (^Ad Uu-orem, i. 7, 
 ]). 275) thus expresses himself: ' The disrijiliiie 
 of the church ami ajiostolical usage (^allu<ting to 
 1 Tim. v. 0) forbid that any widow he elected 
 unless she have married but one husband.' V ir- 
 gins, it is true, were sometimes admitted ir.to lJi< 
 onier of deaconesses ; but this was the exception, 
 and not the rule. 
 
 2. No widow, unless she had borne children, 
 could become a deacu7iess. Thi.s rule aiose out 
 of a belief that no jerson but a mother cau 
 jiossess those symiialhizing an<l tender feelintts 
 which ought to animate the deaconess in the di*- 
 charge of her peculiar duties.
 
 53« 
 
 DKATH. 
 
 l)EATH. 
 
 3. Till" early clir.icli v.as very strict in exacfing^ 
 the rule wlilcli ]>rc>iiiLiit8 the election of any to lie 
 deaconesses vvlio had leen twice married, tliough 
 lawfully, and snccessivcly to two husbands, one 
 after the other. Thus Teitullian (Ad Uxorom, iv. 
 7) says, 'Trie a]n>slle lequires them (deiicouesses) 
 to be imirira — ' the wnes of one inau.' Others, 
 however, s^ive U> these words ol the apostle another 
 sense. They siijijiose the apostle to exclude only 
 those widows wlio, having divorced themselves 
 from their tonner husbands, had married again 
 (See Suicer's Thesaunti, torn. i. p. '?G6). 
 
 It is a disputed point vvith some learned men 
 whether deaconesses \yere ordained by im)Msition 
 I'f hands. However, the lifteeiifl; Can. of the 
 Council of Clialceiion expressly declares that 
 deaconesses were so ordained, an;l this is fully 
 coiilirmed by the a thor of the Apost. Constitu- 
 teo7is. viii. 19. Still, deaconesses were not con- 
 secrated to any pricsily function. Some heretics, 
 indeeil, allowed women to teach, exorcise, and to 
 administer baptism; hut all tljis he sharply re- 
 lukes as ben)g contrary to the -apostolic rule 
 '^Tertullian, De Prccscript. 41). 
 
 5. One of the jieculiar duties, then, of the dea- 
 conesses was at the baptism of women. Tlie custom 
 *)i' the early church being to bajitize all adult 
 2)erson3 by immersion (see Suicers Tliesaur, 
 l<«n. i. p. 634), it was necessary to have the assisi- 
 ince of this order of jjersons. Epiphanius speaks 
 of this practice in his Exp. Fid. xxi.; also Justin. 
 Novel, vi. ]). 6. 
 
 C. Another duty the deaconesses had to jjer- 
 form was to instruct and prepare the catechu- 
 mens for baptism. 
 
 7. In times of danger and persecution it was 
 the duty of the deaconesses to visit the martyrs 
 in prison, because they could more easily gain 
 access to them, and with less suspicion and 
 hazard tliiin the deacons. 
 
 8. Tlie deaconesses stood at the entrance of the 
 church in order to <iirect the women as to the 
 jdace each one should occupy during divine ser- 
 vice. Hence Ignatius calls them ^poopous riiv 
 ayiccv ivvhduujv (Epist. ad Antiochoias, p. 96). 
 
 How h)ng this order contintied in the Christian 
 church is not quite certain (Suicers Thesaurus, 
 torn. i. p. (59). It was not however discontinued 
 everywhere at once. In the Gieek church, up 
 to the time of Balsamon, 2. e. to the close of the 
 twelfth century, deaconesses were found to mi- 
 nister in Constantino])le (See Balsam. Resp. 
 ad Interrog. Marci, Patriarchcc Alexayidrini ; 
 Suicer, Thesaur. torn. i. p. 8G9.) In tlie Latin 
 cluirches, as early as the middle of the fourth 
 century, we (ind some Councils setting the order 
 aside. But it was not till the tenth century 
 that it was wholly abrogated (See Bona, Rep), 
 hiturg. i. 25, 15>— .1. W. D. 
 
 DEAD SEA. [Sf.a.] 
 
 DE.\TH. No logical definition of death has 
 been generally agreed uiiuii. Tliis point was 
 mucti conte>ted in the seventeenth century liy the 
 Cartesian and other theologians and philosophers. 
 Since deatii can be regarded in various ])oiiits of 
 view, the descriptions of it must necessarily vary. 
 It we consider the state of a dead man, as it 
 strikes the senses, death is the cessation of natural 
 life. If we consider the cause of ileath, we may 
 place it in that ])eriTianent and entire cessation 
 ot tlie feeling and motion uf tlie >ody which 
 
 results from the destruction of the body. Among 
 theologians, death is commonly said to consist iii 
 tlie separation of soul and body, implying that tlie 
 soul still exists Vv'lien the body jieiishes. Among 
 the ecclesiastical fathers, Tertullian (De Aniiiue^ 
 c. 27) gives this delinition ; ilorg — disjunctio 
 corporis aninueqite ; vita —conjunctio corporis 
 animceque. Cicero (T'msc. />««. i.) deljnes deatli, 
 discessua animi a corpore. The jiassage Heb. iv. 
 12, is sometimes cited on this subject, but has 
 nothing to do with it. Deatii does not consist in 
 this separation, but this separation is the conse- 
 quence of death. As soon as the body loses feel- 
 ing and motion, it is liencel'orth useless U> tlie soul, 
 vvlilch is therefore separated from it. 
 
 Scriptural representations, names, and modes 
 of speech respecting death : — 
 
 (a). One of the most common in the Old Tes- 
 tament is, to return to the dust, or to the earth, 
 Hence the phrase, the dxtist of death. It is founded 
 on the description Gen ii. 7, and iii. 19. and 
 denotes the dissolution and destruction of th« 
 body. Hence the sentiment in Eccles. xii. 7, — 
 'The dust shall uelurn to tlie earth as it was, the 
 spirit unto God, who gave it.' 
 
 {b). A withdrawing, exhalation, or removal oJ 
 the breath of life (Ps. civ. 29). Hence the 
 common teims acprjKe, xape5ce;cs rh Tryev/na, red- 
 didit animam, e^eTrj'euire, cxspiravit, &c. 
 
 (e). A removal from the body, a being absent 
 from the bwly, a departure from it, &c. This 
 description is foundetl on the comparison of the 
 body with a tent or lodgment in which the soul 
 dwells during this life. Death destroys this tenl 
 or house, and commands us to travel on (Job 
 iv. 21 ; Isa. xxxviii. 12; Fs. liii. 7). Whence 
 Paul says (2 Cor. v. 1) 'our earthly house of this 
 tabernacle' will be destroyed; and Peter calls 
 death a ' putting olf of this taliernacle' (2 Peter i. 
 13, 1 1). Classical wi iters sjieak of the soul in the 
 same manner, as KaraaKTivovv iv lu <ru>ij.aTi. 
 They call the body oKr]vos. So Hipiwcrates and 
 jlischines. Compare 2 Cor. v, 8, 9 — ittSuffjiriaou, 
 CK roil ffcifiaros 
 
 (d). Paul likewise uses the term e/cdv^ffdai, in 
 reference to death (2 Cor. v. 3, 4) ; l>ecause the 
 body is represented as the garment of the soul, as 
 Plato calls it. The soul, therefore, as long as it 
 is in the body, is clothed ; and as soon as it is 
 disembodied, is naked. 
 
 (e). The terms which denote sleep are applied 
 frequently in the Bible, as everywhere else, to death 
 (Ps. Ixxvi. 5 ; Jcr. li. 39; John xi. 13, sqq.). 
 Nor is this language used exclusively for the 
 death of the pious, as some pretend, though this is 
 its prevailing use. Homer calls sleep and death 
 twin-brothers (Iliad, xvi. (372). The terms also 
 which signify to lie down, to rest (e. g. I3DLJ*, oc- 
 cunibere), also denote death. 
 
 (/)■ Death is frequently comjiaretl with and 
 named from a depai ture, a going aivay. Hence 
 the verbs eundi, abettndi, disccdcfidi, signify to 
 die (Job X. 2! ; Ps. xxxix. 4). Tlie case is the 
 same with inrdyu and iropfvopai in the New Tes- 
 tament (Matt. xxvi. 24), and even among tht 
 classics. In tiiis connection we may mention the 
 terms ayaKveiv dud dvaKvats (Phil. i. 23; 2 Tim. 
 iv. G), which do not mean dissolution, but dis' 
 cessns (cf. Luke xii. 36). Vid. Wetstein OB 
 Phd. i. 
 
 Death, when jicrsoniticd, is described as a ruHi
 
 DEBltt 
 
 wiJ tyrant, having vast power and a great kin^^- 
 dom. over ui ich lie reigns. But the ancients also 
 represented it under some figmes which are not 
 conrnno!! among us. We represent it as a man 
 with a scythe, or as a skoloton, &c. ; but the Jews, 
 before the exiU% iiequeiitly represented death as a 
 hunter, who lays xiuires for men (Ps. xviii. o, 6 ; 
 xci. 3). After the e.\ile, they represented hini as 
 a man. cr sometimes as an angel (the ani;,el of 
 Death j, with a cup of ])oison, which he reaches to 
 men. From this representation a])pears to have 
 arisen the jjhrase, which occurs in the New Testa- 
 ment, to iasle death (Matt. xvi. 28 ; Heb. ii. 9), 
 which, however, in common speech, sigiii ties merely 
 to die, williout reminding one of the origin of tlie 
 phrase. The case is the same with the phrase to see 
 rfeaiA (Ps. Ixxxix. -IS ; Luke ii. 26). See Knapp's 
 Christian Theology, by Dr. Leonard Wood. 
 
 DEBIR O'^yi ; Sept. Aa^i'p), a city in the 
 tribe of Judah, about thirty miles south-west 
 from Jerusalem, and ten mile.5 west of Hebron. 
 It was also called Kirjath-sepher (Josli. xv. 15), 
 And Kirjath-sannah (xv. 49). The name Debir 
 means ' a word' or 'oracle,' and is applied to that 
 most secret and separated pait of the Temple, or 
 of the most holy place, in which the aik of the 
 covenant was placed, and in which responses were 
 given fropi above the clierubim. From this, 
 coupled with the fact that Kirjatli-sepher means 
 ' book-city,' it has been conjectured that Debir 
 was some particularly sacred place or seat of 
 learning among the Canaanites, and a repository 
 of their records. ' It is not indeed probable,' 
 as Professor Bush remaiks, 'that writing and 
 books, in our sense of the words, were very com- 
 mon among the Canaanites ; but some method of 
 recording events, and a sort of learning was, 
 doubtless, cultivated in those regions.' Debir 
 was taken by Joshua (xi. 38) ; but it being after- 
 wards retaken by the Canaanites, Caleb, to 
 whom it was assigned, gave his ilaughter Achsah 
 in marriage to his nephew Othniel for his bravery 
 in carrying it by storm (Josh. xv. 16). The town 
 was afterwards given to the priest* (xxi. 15j. No 
 trace of it is to be found at the present time. 
 
 There were two other places called Debir : one 
 l>elonging to Gad, beyonil Jordan (Josli. xili. 26) ; 
 the other to Benjamin, though originally in Judah. 
 
 DEBORAH (n-jhl, a bee; Sept. A€;8/3cipa), 
 a propiietess. wile of Lapidoth. She dwelt, pro- 
 bably, in a I'enl, imder a well-known jjalm-tree 
 between Ramah and Bethel, where she judged 
 Israel (Judg. iv. 4, 5). This probably means 
 that she was the organ of communication between 
 God and his jieople, aud probably, on account of 
 the influence and authority of her character, was 
 accounted in some sort as the head of the ivation, 
 tx) whom questions of doubt and difficulty weie 
 relerred for decision. In her triumphal song she 
 gays — 
 
 ' In the days of Shamgar, son of Anath, 
 
 111 the days of Jael, (he ways lay ilesert, 
 
 And high-way travellers went in v/inding by- 
 paths. 
 
 Leaders failed in Israel, they failed, 
 
 Until that 1 Deborah arose, 
 
 That I arose, a mother in Israel.' 
 From the f'lrther intimations which that song 
 contains, and fi.im other circumstances, the peoj)le 
 WOuM appear tc have sunk into a state of 
 
 DECALOGUE. 
 
 itSl 
 
 total discouragement under tiie ojjprc.ssion of iha 
 Canaanites; so that it was diflicult to rouse them 
 from their des])ondency anil to induce them to 
 make any exertion to burst the fetters of llieir 
 bondage. From the gratitude whicli Deborah 
 exjiresses towards the people tor the ell'oit which 
 they linally nrade, we aie warranted in diawing 
 the conclusion that she had long endcavouicd to 
 instigate them to this step in vain. At hnglh 
 she summoned Barak, the son of Abinoam, t'loni 
 Kedesh, a city of Najjhtali, on a mountain not 
 far I'rotn Ilazor, and made known to him the « ill 
 of (iod that he shoidd imderlake an enterprise fur 
 the dfliverance of his country. But such wa,^ his 
 disheartened state of feeling, and at the same time 
 sucli his contidcnce in the superior cliaraoter and 
 aiitliority of Delwrah, tliat he assented to g.j only 
 on tlie condition that she would accompany h:in. 
 To this she at length consented. Tliey then re- 
 paired together to Kedesh, and collected tlieie-- 
 in the immediaite vicinity of Hazor, the capital 
 of (he dominant power — ten thousand men, witli 
 whom rhey marched southward, and encam]ietl 
 on Mount Tabor. Sisera, the general of Jabin, 
 king of Hazor, who was at the head of the Ca- 
 naanitish confederacy, immeiliately collected an 
 army, pursued tljem, and encamped in face of 
 them in the great plain of Esdraelon. Encou- 
 raged by Deborah, Barak boldly descended from 
 Tabor into the plain with his ten thousand men 
 to give battle to the far superior host of Sisera, 
 which was rendered the more formidaiile to the 
 Israelites by nine hundred chariots of iron. The 
 Canaanites were beaten ; and Barak jiur.bued thun 
 nortluvaid to Haroshelh. Sisera himself, being 
 hotly j)ursued, alighted from his cliariot anil 
 escajjed on foot to the tent of Heber the Kenite, 
 by whose wile he was slain. This great victory 
 (dated about B.C. 1296), which seems to have 
 been ibllowed up, broke the power of the native 
 })rinces, and secured to (he Israelites a rejwse of 
 foity years' duration. Daring pait of this time 
 Deborah probably continued to exercise her for- 
 mer authority : but nothnig more of her history is 
 known. 
 
 The song of (riumph, which was composed in 
 consequence of the great victory over Sisera, ig 
 said to have been 'sung by Deborah and Barak.' 
 It is usually regarded as the composition of 
 Deborah ; and was probably indited iiy her to be 
 sung on the return of Barak and his warriore 
 from the ])ursuit. Of this jjeculiarly fine speci- 
 men of the earlier Kelirew ])oetry, tiiere is an ex- 
 cellent translation by Dr. Robinson in the 1st 
 vol. of the American Biblical Repository, fiom 
 the introductory matter to which this notice of 
 Deborah is chieilv taken. 
 
 2. DEBORAH. The nurse of Rebekah, 
 whom she accompanied to the land of Canaan ; 
 she died near Bethel, and was buried muler an oak, 
 which for that reason was thenceforth called Allon- 
 bachuth — 'tlie oak of weeping' (Gen. xxxv. 8). 
 
 DECALOGUE (Dngi.n T\-^;V.; Sept. <,. 
 Sexa \6yoi. and to. Seica ^TJ/xora; V'ulg. decern 
 verba, (he (en words. Exod. xxxiv. 28 -, Dent, 
 iv. 13; X. -1). This (AfKa\oyos) is (he name 
 most usually given by (he Gieek Fathers to the 
 law of (he two tables, given by God 'o Moses on 
 Mount Sinai. The decalogue was written oQ 
 two stone slabs (Exod. xxxi. 18), which, having
 
 638 
 
 DECALOGUK 
 
 been broken by Moses (xxxii. 19), were renewed 
 by G-od (xxxiv. 1, &c.)' Tbey are said (Deut. 
 ix. 10) ti) have been written by the finger of God, 
 an expression which always implies an imme- 
 diate act of the Deity. Tlie decalogue is five 
 times alluded to in the New Testament, there 
 called fvro\ai, commandments, but only the 
 latter precepts are s{)ecitically cited, which refer 
 tij our duties to each other (JMatt. xvii. 18, 19, &c.; 
 Mark x. 19; Luke xviii. 20; Rom. xiii. 9; vii. 
 7, 8 ; Matt. V. ; 1 Tim. i. 9, 10). Those which 
 refer to God are supposed by some to be omitted 
 from the circumstance of their containing pre- 
 cepts for ceremonial observances (Jeremy Taylor's 
 Life of Christ, and Ductor Dubitati.i Rosen- 
 miiller's Scholia in Exod.) [Law]. 
 
 The circumstance of these precepts being called 
 the ten uwrds has doubtless led to the belief that 
 the two tables contained ten distinct precepts, tive 
 in each table ; wliile some have supposed that 
 they were called by this name to denote their per- 
 fection, te7i being considered the most perfect of 
 numbers (Philo-Judseus de decalogo). This dis- 
 tinguished philosopher divides them into two 
 pentads, the first pentad ending with Exod. xx. 
 12, ' Honour thy father and tliy mother,' &c., 
 or the Jifth commandment of the Greek, Re- 
 formed, and .A-iiglican churclies ; wiiile the more 
 general opinion among Christians is that the tirst 
 table contained our duty to God, ending with 
 the law to keep the sabbath holy, and the second, 
 our duty to our neighbour. As they are not 
 numerically divided in the Scriptures, so that 
 we cannot positively say which is the tirst, which 
 the second, &c., it may not prove uninteresting to 
 tlie student in Biblical literature, if we here give 
 a brief account of the ditferent modes of dividing 
 them which have prevailed among Jews and 
 Christians. These may be classed as the Tal- 
 mudical, the Origenian, and the two Masoretic 
 divisions. 
 
 The case cannot be more clearly stated than 
 in tlie worils of St. Augustin : 'It is inquired 
 liow the ten commandments are to be divided? 
 whether there are four which relate to God, end- 
 ing with the precept concerning tlie sabbath,— and 
 the other six, commencing with '• Honour thy 
 father and thy molher,"' appertaining toman, — or 
 whether the former are three only, and the latter 
 seven. Tliose who say that the first table contains 
 four, separate the command " Thou shalt have 
 no other Gods but me" (Exod. xx. 3 ; Deut. v. 
 7), so as to make another precept of " Thou shalt 
 not ma^e to thyself an idol' (Exod. xx. 4; 
 Deut. V. 8); in which images are forbidden to be 
 worshipped. But they wish "Thou shalt not 
 covet tliy neighbour's house'" (Exod. xx. 17 ; Deut. 
 V. 21 ), and " Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's 
 wife" (Exod. XX. 17 ; Deut. v. 21), and so on to 
 the end, to be one. But tliose who say that there 
 are three only in the tirst table, and seven in the 
 second, make one commandment of the precept of 
 tlie worship of one God, and nothing beside him 
 (Exod. XX. 3 ; Deut. v. 7), but divide these last 
 into two, so that one of them is "Thou shalt not 
 covet thy neighbour's wife," and the other "Thou 
 slialt not covet thy neighbour s liouse." There is 
 no()uestion among either about the correctness of 
 the number ten, as for this there is the testimony 
 of Scrijiture' {Qiiestions on Exodus, qu. 71, 
 WoTM, vol. iii. Palis, 1G79, p. 443). We shall 
 
 DECALOGUE. 
 
 liereafter give Augustin's own view of the subject 
 but here we shall commence with the U'visioi 
 contained in the Talmud {^Mukkoth, xxiv. a), 
 which is also that of the modern Jews. 
 
 According to this division the lir.st conimand- 
 ment consists of the words ' I am the Lord thy 
 God, who brought tliee out of the land of I'jgypt, 
 out of the house of bondage' (Exod. xx. 2; Deut. 
 V. 6); the second (Exod. iii. 4), 'Thou shalt 
 have none other Gods lieside me; thou shalt not 
 make to thyself any graven image,' Sec. to ver. 6 ; 
 the third, 'Thou shalt not take (iod's name in 
 vain,' &c. ; the fourth, ' Remember to keep holy the 
 sabbath day,' &c. ; the lil'th, ' Himour tiiy f.ither 
 and thy mother,' &c. ; the sixth, ' Thou shalt not 
 kill ;' the seventh, 'Thou shalt not commit adul- 
 tery ;' the eighth, ' Thou shalt not steal ;" the 
 ninth, ' Thou shalt not bear false witness,' &c. ; 
 and the tentli, 'Thou shalt not covet," &c. to the 
 end. This division is also snjiported by the 
 Targum of the Pseudo-Jonathan, a work of the 
 sixth century, by Aben Ezra,. in his Commen'ary, 
 and by Maimonides {^Sepher Hammizvoth). it 
 has been also maintained by the learned Lutheran, 
 Peter Martyr (Loci Co7n7nunes, Basle, 1580, loc. 
 14, p. 684). That this was a very early mode of 
 dividing the decalogue is further evident from a 
 passage in Cyril of Jerusalem's treatise against 
 Julian, from whom he quotes the following invec- 
 tive : ' That decalogue, the law of Moses, is a 
 wonderful thing; thou shalt not steal ; thou shalt 
 not kill ; thou shalt not bear false witness. But 
 let each of the precepts which lie asserts to have 
 been given by God himself be written down in 
 the identical words, " 1 am the Lord thy God, 
 who brought thee out of the land of Egypt ;'' the 
 second follows, "Thou shalt have no strange 
 gods beside me; thou shalt not make to thyself 
 an idol." He adds the reason, " for 1, the Lord 
 thy God, am a jealous God, visiting the sins of the 
 fathers upon the children.'" "Thou shalt not take 
 the name of the Lord thy God in vain. Remem- 
 ber the sabbath day. Honour thy father and thy 
 mother. Thou shalt not commit adultery. Thou 
 shalt not steal. Thou shalt not bear false wit- 
 ness. Thou shalt not covet thy neiglibouTs 
 goods." What nation is there, by the gods, if you 
 take awav these two, " Thou shalt not adore other 
 Gods,'" and "Remember the sabbath,"' which dues 
 not think all the others are to be kejit, and which 
 does not jiunish more or less severely those who 
 violate them V 
 
 The next division is the Origenian, or that ap- 
 proved by Origen, and is that in use in tlieGieik 
 and in all the Reformed Churclies, except the 
 Lutheran. 
 
 Although Origen was acquainted with the dif- 
 fering opinions which existed in his time in regard 
 to this suhje >t, it is evident fiom his own vvoiils 
 that he kiiei nothing of that division by which 
 the number ten is completed by making the [iro- 
 hibition against coveting either the hcuse or the 
 wife a distinct commandment. In his eighth 
 Homily on d'enesis, alter citing the words, 'I am 
 the Lord thy God, who brought thee out of the 
 land of Egypt," he adds, ' this is not a part of the 
 commandment." The first commandment i.s, 
 'Tliou shalt have no other (xods liiit me,' and 
 then follows, ' Thou shalt not make an idol." 
 The-e together are th.iught by some to make on« 
 commandment ; but in tliis case the numi/er ten
 
 DECALOGUS. 
 
 DECALOGUE. 
 
 53« 
 
 will not be complete — where then will he tlie 
 truth of he decalogue ? But if it be divided as 
 we have lone in the last sentence, the full num- 
 ber will be evident. The first coinniandmeiit 
 therefore is, ' Tliou shalt have no other Gods but 
 me," and the second, ' Thou shalt not make to 
 thyself an idol, nor a likeness," &c. Origen jiro- 
 ceeds to make a distinction between Go'U, idols, 
 and likenesses. Of Gods, he says, ' it is written, 
 there are gods many and lords many' (1 Cor. 
 viii. 5); but of idols, 'an idol is nothing;' an 
 image, he says, of a quadru])ed, serpent, or bird, 
 in metal, wood, or stone, set up to be worshi))pe<l, 
 is not an idol, but a likeness. A picture made 
 with the same view comes under tlie same iletio- 
 mination. But an idol is a representation of what 
 does not exist ; such as the figure of a man with 
 two faces, or with the liead of a dog, &c. The 
 likeness must be of something existing in heaven, 
 or in earth, or in the water. Jt is not easy to 
 decide on the meaning of things in heaven," unless 
 i^ refers io the sun, moon, or stars. The design of 
 Moses he conceives to have been to forl)id Egyptian 
 idolatry, such as that of Hecate, or other fancied 
 demons. — Opera, \'o\. ii. p. 156, De la Rue"s ed. 
 
 The Pseudo-Athanasius, or the author of tlie 
 Sytiojisis ScripturcB, who is the oracle of the Greek 
 church, divides the commandments in tiie same 
 manner. ' This book [Exodus] contanis these 
 ten commandments, on two tables : first, I am 
 the Lord tliy God. Second, Tliou shalt not 
 
 make to thyself an idol, nor any likeness 
 
 Niuth, Thou slialt not bear false witness against 
 I'hy neighbour. Tenth, Thou shalt not covet tiiy 
 neighljour's wife, nor any thing tiiaf is thy neigh- 
 bour's.' — Athanasii Opera, fol. Paris, 1698. 
 
 Gregory Nazianzen, in one of his poems, in- 
 • ■-ribed 'The Decalogue of Moses,' gives the 
 following division : 
 
 Tiiese ten laws Moses formerly engraved on 
 tables 
 
 Of stone ; but do thou engrave them on thy 
 heart. 
 
 Tliou g'nalt not know another God, since wor- 
 ship belongs to me. 
 
 Thou shalt not make a vain statue, a lifeless 
 image. 
 
 Thou shalt not call on the great God in vain. 
 
 Keep all sabbatlis, the sublime and the shadowy. 
 
 Happy he who renders to his parents due honour. 
 
 Flee the crime of murder, and of a foreign 
 
 Bed; evil-minded theft and witness 
 
 False, and the desire of another's, the seed of 
 death. 
 
 Opera, ed. Caillaud, Pari.?, IS 10. 
 
 Jerome took the same view with Oiiiien. In 
 his commentary on Epiiesians vi. he thus writes: 
 ' Honour tiiy lather and thy motlier," &c. is the 
 fifth commandment in tlie decalogue. How then 
 are we to understand the Apostles meaning in 
 calling it the first, when the tirst commandment 
 is "Thou shale liave no Gods l)ul me," where some 
 read thus, ' wliich is the first commandment with 
 jiromise,' as if tlie/ow?- jjrevious commandments 
 
 [lad no promise annexed, &c ' But 
 
 they do not seem to me to have observed with 
 suflicient accuracy that in the second conniuind- 
 ment there is also a promise: 'Tliou shall not 
 make to thyself an idol, nor the likeness of any 
 thing in heaven above, or in tlie earth beneath, or 
 in the water under the earth ; thou shalt not adore 
 
 them, nor sacrifice to them ; f<ir I If.e Lot) thy 
 God am a jealous (iod, visiting the sins . . but 
 shewing mercy unio tliousands . .' (observe these 
 words of promise — shewing mercy unto thousands, 
 &c.) — Hieronyini Opera, vol. iv. l^ari-i, U)i>H. 
 
 The Pseudo-Ambrose al.so writes to the same 
 effect in his Comincntarij on Epiiesians : ' How 
 is this the lirst commandment, when the tir>t com- 
 mandment says, Thou shalt have no other (jotls but 
 meV Then, Thou shalt not makea likeness of any- 
 tiling in heaven above, or in the eaith beneath, &c. 
 The th.rd, Thou shall not take the name of the 
 Lord thy God in vain ; the foitrtli. Keep inv 
 saiiliaths; th-- Ji/l/i, Honour tliy lather and tl:y 
 motlier. As the first four a))j.'eitain to (sod, they 
 are contained in the first tal)le: the otheis, ajijier- 
 taining to men, are contained in the second, 
 such as that of honouring jiarents, not romrp.;f*ing 
 murder, adultery, theft, false witness i>r '•.cneii- 
 piscence. These six seem to bew^il^e7l.)n the 
 second table, the first of which is called the tirst 
 with promise' (Ambrosii Opera, vol. ii. Paris 
 edition; Append, pp. 2iS, 249). 
 
 To these testimonies from the fsrhr-.rs mav lie 
 added that of Clemens Alexandrinm: < Sh-omata, 
 vi. p. 800j; but this writer is so co.iiuied anil 
 contradictory in reference to the nubji-ctj that 
 some have sujijiosed the text to have been cor- 
 rupted. 'The lirst precept of the decalegue," he 
 observes, 'shows that one God only is to lie wor- 
 shipjed, who brought his peojile out of Egyjit . . 
 . . . and that men ought to abstain iVom the idol 
 atiy of tlie creature. The second, that we ought 
 not to transfer his name tocieatures; the third 
 signifies that the world was made by God, 
 who has given us the seventh day to rest; the 
 Jifth follows, which commimds us to honour oin 
 parents: then follows the piecej)t about adultery, 
 after this that concerning ihef't ; but the tenth is 
 concerning coveting." 
 
 But the strongest evidence in favour of the 
 Origenian division is that of the learned Jews 
 Philo and Josephus, who speak of it as the re- 
 ceived division of the Jewish Church. Philo, 
 after mentioning the division into two pentads 
 already referred to, ]rroceeds: 'The tirst jientad 
 is of a higher character than the second : it tieats 
 of the monarchy whereby the whole world is go- 
 verned, of statues and images (^oavuiv koI 070A 
 paToiv), and of all torru])t representations in 
 ger.eral {a.(pihpvfjL6.r'j>v); of not taking the iiam« 
 of God in vain ; of the religious observance of the 
 seventh day as a day of holy rest; of honouring 
 both ])aients. So that one table begins with <iocl 
 the father and ruler of all things, and ends with 
 j)arents who emulate him in perjietiiaiing the iiii- 
 nian race. But the other pentad cont^'ji.s ♦.'ose 
 commandments which forbid adultery, manler, 
 theft, false-witness, concu]>iscence" {l>e ik-caloffo, 
 lib. i.). The j(?J's< ])rece]it, he afterwards ot>- 
 serves, enjoins the belief and reverent worship of 
 one supreme (iod, in opj)osition to those who wor- 
 shi]) the sun and moon, &c. Anil alter condemn- 
 ing the aits of sculjituie and painting, as taking 
 off the mind from admiring (he natural beauty ot 
 the universe, he adds: 'As I have said a goinl 
 deal of the second commandment, 1 shall now 
 proceed to the next, "Thou slialt not take the 
 name of God in vain." . . . The fourth com- 
 mandment resjiects the sabbath day, to be devoletl 
 to rest, the study of wisdom, and the contetnpla>
 
 »40 
 
 DECALOGUE. 
 
 lion of nature, with a revision ol'our lives during 
 She past week, in order to the correction of our 
 transgressions : the lil'th speaks of iionouring pa- 
 rents. Here ends tiie first, or more divine pentad. 
 The second i)entad begins wilh tlie precept re- 
 S])ecting a<iuitery ; its second jnccept is against 
 murder ; its third against stealing, the next against 
 false- witness, the last against coveting' (lib. ii.). 
 Til is division seems to have been followed by 
 Irenaeus : 'In quinque liliris, &c., unaquaeque 
 tal)ula quam accepit a Deo praecepta habet quin- 
 que.' And Joseplms is, if possible, still more 
 clear than Pliilo. • ' The first commandment 
 teaiilies us that there is but one God, and that we 
 ought to worship him only ; the second com- 
 mands us not to make tlie image of any living 
 creature, to worship it ; the third, that we must 
 not svvear by God in a false matter; the fourth, 
 that w<' must keep the seventh day, liy resting 
 from ali »orts of work ; the fifth, that we must 
 honour uu- (,£.rents ; the sixth, that we must ab- 
 stain from ii'uri!ef ; the seventh, that we must not 
 connnit adultery ; the eighth, that we must not 
 be guilt.- "f il;<?ft; the ninth, that we nmst not 
 bear false- -v i i.ncis ; the tenth, that we must not 
 a Imit ll;o .;c>iie uf that which is anotlier's' (^Antiq., 
 iii. 5. 5, ^Vll;ston's translation). 
 
 This divi.>i.in, which ap]iears to have been for- 
 gotten ia the Western Church, was revived by 
 Calvin in 1536. and is also received by that sec- 
 tion of the Lutherans who I'ollowed Bucer, called 
 the Tetrapolitans. It is adopted by Calmet 
 {Dictionary of the Bible, French ed., art. Loi.) 
 It is supported by Zonaras, Nicephorus, and 
 Petrus Mogislaus among the Greeks, and is that 
 followed in the present Russian Church, as well 
 as by the Greeks in general (see the catechism 
 published by order of Peter the Great, by Arch- 
 bisliop Resensky, London, 1753). It is at the 
 Banie time maintained in this catechism that it 
 is not forbidden to bow bel'ove the representations 
 of the saints. This division, which appeared in 
 the Bishojjs' Book in 1537, was adopted liy the 
 Anglican Church at tlie Reformation (1548), 
 substituting seventh for sabbath-day in her for- 
 mularies. The same division was published with 
 ap])iobation by Bonner in his Hojnilics in 1555. 
 
 We shall next proceed to describe the two Ma- 
 soretic divisions. Tlie first is that in Exodus. 
 We call it the Masoretic division, inasmuch as 
 the commanUinents in the greater number of rna- 
 nnscripts and printed editions are separated by 
 a Q or D, which mark the divisions between rlie 
 smaller sections in the Hebrew. According to 
 this arrangement, the two first commandments 
 (according to the Origenian or Greek division), 
 that is, the commandment concerning the worship 
 of one God, and that concerning images, make but 
 one; the sfecond is, ' Tliou slialt not take the name 
 of the Lord thy God in vain,' and so on until we 
 arrive at tlie two last, the former of which is, 
 ' Thou .shalt not covet thy neighbour's house,' and 
 tlie last or tenth, ' Thou siialt not covet thy neigh- 
 bour's wife, nor his servant,' &c., to the end. 
 This was the division approved by Luther, and it 
 h.is been ever since his time received by the Lu- 
 theran Church. The correctness of this division 
 has been at all times maintained by the most 
 learneil Lutherans, not only from its agreement 
 with the Hebrew Bibles, but from the internal 
 itructiue of the commandments, especially from 
 
 DECALOGUE. 
 
 the fact of the two (list commandments (accolA 
 ing to Origen's division) forming but one subject. 
 If these form but one commandment, the recessit J 
 of dividing the precept, ' thou shalt not covet,' &c., 
 into two is obvious. (For a learned defence ot 
 this division, see Pfeifi'e-"s Opera^ vol. i. loc. I'O 
 p. 125.) Pfeill'er considers the accentuation als 
 of tlie Hebrew as equally decisive in favour <)• 
 tnis division, notwithstanding the opposite view 
 is taken by many others, including the learned 
 Buxtorf. This division is also followed in the 
 Trent catechism, and may therefore be called the 
 Roman Catholic division. The churches of this 
 communion have not, however, been consisfi'ut 
 in following uniformly the Tridentine division, 
 having revived, as in this country, the second 
 Masoretic division, to which we sliall presently 
 allude. In the Trent catechism the first com- 
 mandment is, ' Ego suro Dominus Deus tuns, qui 
 eduxi te de terra vT>gypti, de domo servitntis; 
 non liabeliis Deos alienos coram me. Non facies 
 tibi sculptile, &c." ' Ego sum Dominus Deus tuus, 
 fortis, zelotes,' &c., to ' praecepta mea." The two 
 last commandments (accord ir\g to the Roman 
 division) are, however, in the same catechi-sm, 
 combined in one, thus : ' Non concupisces domum 
 proximi tui ; nee desiderabis uxorem ejus, non 
 servum, non ancillam, non bovem, non asinum, 
 nee omnia quae illius sunt. In his duobus prae- 
 ceptis,' &c. It had appealed in the same form 
 in England, in Marshall's and Bishop Hilsey's 
 Primers, 1531, and 1539. 
 
 Those wh;) follow this division have been accus- 
 tomed to give the decalogue very generally in an 
 abridged form : thus the first commandment in the 
 Lutheran shorter catechism is simply, 'Thou shalt 
 have no other gods but me;' the second, 'Thou 
 shajt not take tiie name of thy God in vain ;' the 
 third, ' Thou shalt sanctify the sabbath-day' 
 (^Feyertacf). A similar ]iractice is followed by 
 the Roman Catholics, although I hey, as well as 
 the Lutherans, in their larger catechisms (as the 
 Douay) give fhein at full length. This practice 
 has given rise to the charge made against those 
 denominations of leaving out the second com- 
 mandment, whereas it would have been more cor- 
 rect to say that they had mutilated the first, or at 
 least that the form in which they give it has the 
 effect of concealing a most important paitofit 
 from such as had only access to their shorter cate- 
 chisms. 
 
 The last division is the second Masoretic, oi 
 that of Deuteronomy, sometimes called the Au 
 gustinian. This division dilVeis from the foimei 
 simply in placing the precept ' Thou shalt not 
 covet thy neighbour's wife before ' Thou shalt not 
 covet thy neighbour's house,' &c. ; and for this 
 transposition it has the authority of Deut. v. 21. 
 Tlie authority of the Masorites cannot, however, be 
 of sufficient Ibice to supersede the earlier traditions 
 of Philo and Joseplius. 
 
 This division was that approved by Augustin, 
 who thus expresses himself on the subject, — ' Fol- 
 lowing up what he had said (supra, p. 538), he 
 observes, ' but to me it seems more congruous to 
 ilivide them into three and seven, inasmuch ai 
 to those who dili^gently look into the matter, those 
 which appertain to God seem to insinuate tfio 
 Trinity. And, indeed, the command, ' Thoit 
 shalt have no other gods but me' is more {«rfectljf 
 explained when images are forbidden to be woe
 
 DECAPOLIS. 
 
 rt;i])])eJ Besides, the sin of coveting' anotlior 
 man's wile dilVers so much from covetiii!j his 
 noiise, th»t to tlie house was joined his tiehl, his 
 servant, his maid, his ox, his a<s. his cattle, and 
 all that is liis. ]Jut it seems to divide the co\ et- 
 ii>g of the house from the coveting of the wife, 
 when each l)egins thus : ' thou shalt not covet thy 
 neig'il>ovir's wile, thou shalt not covet thy neigh- 
 bo'u's liouse,' to which it then begins to athl the 
 rest. For. wlien lie had said, ' tliou shalt not covet 
 thy nei^hhoiu's wife, he did nr>t ad<l the rest to 
 this, saying, nor his liouse, nor his Held, nor iiis 
 servant, &c.,.lnit these seem ])lainly to heiuiited, 
 which a])pear to l)e contained in one ])rece])t, aiid 
 distinct from that wherein the wife is named. 
 But when it is said, ' tliou shalt have no otlier gods 
 but me,' there appears a more diligent following 
 up of this in what is subjoined. For to what ])er- 
 (ains, ' thou shalt not make an idol, nor a like- 
 ness : tliou shall not adore nor serve them," unless 
 to that which had been said, 'thou shalt have 
 none other gods but ine.' The division of Angus- 
 tin was followed by Bede antl Peter Londuud. 
 
 The learned Somitag has entirely followed 
 Augnstin's view of this subject, and has written 
 a dissertation in vindication ol" tliis division in 
 the 1 hcologische Studien vnd Kritiken, Ham- 
 burg, 1S36-7; to which there has been a reply 
 in the same miscelliny from Ziillg, in vindica- 
 tion of what he terms the Cahinistic dicision, 
 or that of Origen, which is followed by a re- 
 joinder from Sonntag. Soniitag is so convinced 
 of the necessity of that order of the words, accord- 
 ing to which the precept against coveting the 
 wife preceies (as in Deuteronomy) that against 
 coveting the house, &c.. that he puts down the 
 Older of (he words in Exodus as an oversight. The 
 order in the Septuagint version in Exodus agrees 
 with that in Deuteronomy. The Greek church 
 Ibllows this order. Sonntag conceives that the 
 Mosaic division of the decalogue was lost in the 
 period between the exile and the birth of Ciirist. 
 
 ^v. w. 
 
 DECAPOLIS {r, AeKaTToMs, al 5eKa TrSKfn). 
 This ajipears to denote not, as is frequently 
 stated, a particular province or <iistrict, but 
 certain Te}i Cities, including the adjacent vil- 
 lages (ras Kw/ias avrHov, Joseph. Vit. § 65), which 
 resembled each other in being inhabited mostly 
 by Gentiles, and in their civic institutions and 
 jirivileges. In Matt. iv. 2.), it is said ' multi- 
 tudes followed Jesus from Galilee, and from De- 
 cajiolis, and from Jerusalem, and from Judea, 
 and from beyond Jordan." This must be con- 
 sidered as a popular mode of expression, just as, 
 in describing a public meeting in this country, it 
 might be said, ' numbers attended it from Kent 
 and Sussex, and from the Cliiujue Ports.' We, 
 therefore, cannot agree with ])r. Lightfoot in 
 thinking it * absurd to reckon the most famed 
 cities of Galilee for cities of Decapolis, when, 
 both in sacred and profane authors, Galilee is 
 jjlainly distinguished from Decapolis" (^Choro- 
 graphical iJecad. th. vii. ^ 1 ; ]Vor/cs, x. \>. 23S). 
 One at least of the Decujioliian towns (Scytho- 
 polis, formerly Hethslian) was in (Jalilee, anil 
 several, if not all the rest, were in the country 
 beyond Jordan. Pliny gives the following list, 
 but allows that i ditl'ereiice of opinion existed as 
 t»» it8 coirectncss ( — liumero oppidorum, ili quo 
 ••on omiies ead« m observant, A'ai.'. Hist. v. 16, 
 
 DEI/IC.VTK^X. 
 
 64 k 
 
 IS): 1. Damascus; 2. I'hiladelphia; :], Rajihanaj 
 4 Scj thopolis : .5. Gadara ; (!. Hipixis; 7 J>ioii' 
 8. Pi'll.i; !». Galasa; 10. Canallia. Josejiiiiis 
 s])eaks ot' (tadara and Hippos as (ireci.in cities 
 ('EAATji'ioer ua\ TroAfii, Antiq. xvii. 11.^4). and 
 calls Scythoiiolis the greatest c:ty of tiie De- 
 cajiolis (lie/l. Jiid. iii. 5'. t}7\ from which it may 
 («> iiiferrei that he ex<dudeil Damascus from tlie 
 number. For Damascus and Rapiiana, (^ellaiius 
 substitutes CrTsarea Philipin and (iergesa, and 
 Ptolemv C-ajiitolias (Winer's liciil-wortrrhiich, 
 i. oOS). The name Decajio'is was in coinse o! 
 time apjilied to more than ten t(iwn<, a ciicuni- 
 stance which may in part account l"or the discie- 
 jiancies in the lists given by various writers. 
 Stephen of Byzantium. t"or instance, enumerates 
 fourteen Deca])olitan cilies, ami thus in our o.iii 
 country, as far back as the reign of Ilcniy HI., 
 the Ciiintie Ports inchuled seven ]iiinci])al places, 
 besitl'-s subordinate towns. TheDecapolitan towiig 
 refeneil to in the Gospels were evident'y situated 
 not far fiom the sea of G.ililee (Maik v. 20; 
 vii. 31). The name Deca])olis does not occur in 
 the Ajiocrypha, and, according to Maniiert, it is 
 only found in writers of tlie first centuiy; in 
 later times there is scarcely an allusion to it 
 (^Gcof/raphie der Grieclien und homer, vi. I, 
 p. 241).— J. E. R. 
 
 DEDAN (p'^. ; Sept. AaiUv). Two jieisons 
 of this nime are nienfioned in Scri])tuie: one the 
 son of Cusli (Gen. x. 7), and tlie other the serond 
 8»n of Jokshan. Abraham s sou by Kelurali (Gen. 
 XXV. 3). Bothweie founders of tribes, aftei wards 
 repeateilly named in. Scripture ; and (iesenius, 
 W iner, and others, are of opinion that these were 
 not really difl'erent trilies, but the same tribe de- 
 rived, according to dilleient tradirions, I'vom dif- 
 ferent progenitors. It seems better, iiowever, to 
 adhere to the usual view, by which they aie dis- 
 tinguished from each other. 
 
 Of the ilesccndants of the Cushifc Dedan, very 
 little is known. It is supposed that they settled 
 in .southern Arabia, near the Persian (iulf; but 
 the existence in this quaiter of a place (fiilied 
 Dadan or Dadena, is tlie chief ground for this 
 conclusion. 
 
 The descendants of the Abrahamite Jokshan 
 seem to have li\(>d in the neighbourhood of Idu- 
 m.xa ; for tlie prophet Jeieiniali (xlix. S) calls on 
 them to consult tlieir safety, because the calamity 
 of the sons of Esau, i e. the Idiima'ans, was at 
 hand. The same prophet (xxv. 2'i) connects them 
 with Thema and Buz, two other tribes of Arabia 
 Petraea, or Arabia Deserta, as does Ezekiel (xxv. 
 13) with Tlieman. a district of Eiloin. It is not 
 always clear when the name occurs which of 
 the two Dedans is intended ; but it is probably 
 the Cushile tiibe, which is described as addicted 
 to commerce, or rather, peihaps, engaged in the 
 carrying-trade. I>s 'travelling com]ianies,' or 
 caravans, a.-? mentioned by Isaiah (xxi. 13); in 
 Ezekiel (xxvii. 20), the Dedaniles are discribed 
 as supplying the markets of Tyre with (lowing 
 riding-cloths ; and elsewhere (xxxviii. 13) the 
 same ])ro]ihet •laines them alonjj with tlie mer- 
 chants of Tarsl'ish. 
 
 DEDICATION, a rel'gioi'« Cfremony, where- 
 by anything is ('edicaied or consecrat(d tq the 
 service of God ; mv) it aiiMoa's to haie originated 
 in the desire to comiKVw<, will' pe''>iliar solemnity.
 
 &n 
 
 DELILA. 
 
 DELUGE. 
 
 ♦he practical use and api)lica!ion of whatever had 
 D€eii set apart to the divine service. Thus Moses 
 dedicated the Tabernacle in the Wilderness 
 (Exod. xL ; Num. vii.) ; Solomon his temple 
 (1 Kinj^s viii.) ; the returned exiles theiis (Ezra 
 vi. 1(5. 17); Herod his (Joseph, yln^/i;. xv. 11. 6). 
 The Maccabees having cleatiseil the temple I'rom 
 Hs jiollutions under Antiociius Kpipliaiies, again 
 dedicated tlie altar (I Mace. iv. 52-9), and an 
 /junual t'esiival was established in commemora- 
 tion of the event. Tliis feast was celebrated not 
 only at Jerusalem, l)ut everywheie throughout the 
 cou-itry ; in which respect it ditl'ered from the feasts 
 of the Passover, Pentecost, and Tabernacles, which 
 could only be observed at Jerusalem. 
 
 la John X. 22. 23, we are told that Jesus was 
 at Jerusalem, walking in Solomon's porch at the 
 time of Mlie feast of the dedication, and it was 
 winter.' Tiiis is usually supposed to have been 
 ihe feast comm.emorating the dedication by Judas 
 Maccabaeus, which was celebrated in the month 
 Cislev, al)out the winter solstice (answering to 
 the 15th of December). There seems no re;ison 
 to disturb this conclusion; for the dedication of 
 Solomon's temple was in the seventh month, or 
 autumn; that of Zerubbabel's temple in the 
 niontii Adar, in the spring; and, although that of 
 Herod's temple was in the winter, we know not 
 th.it it was celebrated by an annual feast, while 
 the Maccabnean dedication was a festival much 
 observed in tiie time of Christ (Joseph. A)itiq. xii. 
 7, 7) in Joseplms, this feast is called (puna, since, 
 for eight days, lanterns and torches weie lighted 
 up in the houses in token of joy. Many com- 
 •nieiitatois of rejiutation take x^'f^'^" ^o signify, 
 like the Latin hicms, not merely winter, l)ut in- 
 clement, rainv, wintry weather. In this latter 
 sense it would supply a reason why Jesus was 
 walking in the poich; but as the time of the year 
 woidd equally account f.ir the f.ict, and as, more- 
 over, theie is at Jerusalem no wintry weather ex- 
 cept in winter, it is l»etter to take the word in its 
 usual sense, and to understand the clause ' it was 
 winter' to have been inserted for tlie information 
 of tiiose who might not know at what season the 
 Jewish feast was celebrated 
 
 Not only were sacred places thus dedicated ; 
 jut some kind of dedicatory solemnity was ob- 
 served with respect to cities, walls, gates, and 
 even jirivate tiouses (Deut. xx. 5; Ps. xxx. title; 
 Neh. xii. 27). VVe may trace the continuance 
 of these usages in tlie custom of consecrating 
 or dedicating churches and ch ipels ; and in the 
 ceremonies connected with the 'opening' of roads, 
 markets, bridges, &c., and with tlie launching of 
 ships. 
 
 DEEP. [Abyss] 
 
 DEFILEMENT. [Pollution.] 
 
 DEGREES, PSALMS OF. [Psalms.] 
 
 DELIL.'V, tlie woman whom Samson loved, and 
 who betrayed him to his t^iemies (Judg. xvi.) 
 [Sa.wso.nJ. 
 
 ] "ELUGE. The narrative of a flood, given in 
 the boi'k of Genesis (vii. and viii.), by which, 
 according to the literal sense of the description, 
 the whole wo>ld was overwhelii ed and every ter- 
 restrial creature destroyed, with the exception of 
 (.me huiiiati family and the representatives of each 
 ipeciea of animal, snpernaturally preserved in an 
 irk, coiiatriictetl by divine appointment for the 
 jjur<»vise. Be« I not he'e be follu'.v«d in detail. The 
 
 account furnished by the sacred historian is cif 
 cumstantially distinct ; and the whole is expressly 
 ascribed to divine agencv : but, in several of th« 
 lesser particulars, secondary causes, as lain, ' th« 
 opening of the windows of Heaven ' (vii. 1 1), and 
 the ' breaking up oi the fountains of the great deep,' 
 are mentioned, and again the ellect of wind in 
 drying up the waters (viii. 1). It is chielly to be 
 remarked that the whole event is represented as 
 botii commencing and terminating in the most 
 gradual anil quiet manner, without anything at 
 all resembling the cata-strojihes and convulsions 
 often pictured in vulgar imagination as accom* 
 panying it. When the waters subsided, so little 
 was the surface of the earth changed that the 
 vegetation continued iminjiired : the olive-trees 
 remained from which the dove brought its token. 
 
 We allude particularly to these circumstances 
 in the narrative as being those wliicli bear most 
 u])on the probable nature and extent of the event, 
 wiiich it is our main object in the present article 
 to examine, according to the tenor of what little 
 evidence can be collected on the subject, whether 
 from the terms of the narrative or from othei 
 sources of information whiciimay be opened Xo us 
 by the researches of science. 
 
 Much, indeed, might be said on the subject in 
 other points of view; and especially in a more 
 properly theological sense, it may be dwelt ujion 
 fvo a jiart of the great series oi divine interjxisi- 
 tions and dispensations which the sacred history 
 discloses. But our present oliject, as well as 
 limits, will restrict us from enlarging on the.se 
 topics; or, again, upon the various ideas which 
 have prevailed on the sabject apart from Scripture 
 on the one hand, ox science on tlie other. Thus, 
 we need merely allude to the fact that in almost 
 all nations, from the remotest periods, tiiere have 
 jirevailed certain mythological narratives and 
 legendary tales of similar catastrophes. Such 
 narratives have formed a part of tlie rude Itelief 
 of the Egyptians, Chaldseans, Greeks, Scythians, 
 and Celtic tribes. They have also been disco- 
 vered among the Peruvians and Mexicans, and the 
 South Sea Islanders. Eor details on these points 
 we refer our readers to tlie work of Bryant 
 {Ancient Mythology), and more especially to the 
 treatise of the Rev. L. V. Harcourt on the Deluge, 
 who appears to have collected everything of this 
 kind bearing on the subject. 
 
 With reference to our jiresent design the most 
 material question is that of the existence of those 
 traces which it might be supposed would be dis- 
 •.overed of the action of such a deluge on the 
 existing suiface cf the globe; and the consequent 
 views which we must adojjt according to the de« 
 gree of accordance or discordance wliich such 
 evidences may oiler, as compared with the written 
 narrative. Even in this point of view much 
 speculation of a very vague and rmsatisfactory 
 nature has been occasionally indulged in ; indeed 
 the most purely gratuitous speculations were, for 
 a long time, the only attempts towards any in- 
 quiry into the subject ; nor can we say that th< 
 spirit of f.iHowing them is even yet extinct. 
 
 It will, howeve'-, be little to our purpose to en- 
 large upon the crude concept ons and ov er-hasty 
 generalizations of the earlier ccsmogonisfs and 
 geologists, as, besides the visidiiary character at- 
 taching to the theories of the former, several oi 
 tlie most eminent of the latter cltiss have, with t!3»
 
 DELUGE. • 
 
 ingeni.ousncss of true ])liiloso))liers, candidly ac- 
 knowledired tlie enois into wliicli tlioy luid once 
 been led, at periods when the conect iiatiae of 
 inductive reasoning in theology was less attended 
 to than it has heen of late; wlien the science 
 having settled into a move firm and compact struc- 
 ture, and a more rigid scrutiny liavins^ lieen aj)- 
 plied to all it5 defective jiarts, its real conclusions 
 nave been (ixed upon an enduring foundation, and 
 visionary s{)eculation from henceforth banished 
 from its jjrecincts. 
 
 Tlie evidence which geology may disclose atid 
 «vhich can in any degree bear on our present sub- 
 ject must, from the nalure of the case, be conlined 
 lo indications of superficial ac'jon attrll)utable to 
 tlie agency of water, subsequent to tlie latest 
 period of the regular geological format inns, and 
 corresponding in character to a temporary inun- 
 dation of a quiet and tranquil nature, of a depth 
 sufficient to cover the highest mountains, and, 
 lastly (as indeed this condition' implies), extend- 
 ing over the whole globe; or, if these conditions 
 sliould not be fulfilled, then, indications of at 
 least something approaching to this, or with which 
 the terms of tlie description may be fairly under- 
 stood aiid interpreted to correspond. 
 
 Our object, then, will be to jiresent, in as 
 brief a summary as posslliie, what and how much 
 of evidence of the kind here described geological 
 research does really put before us; and then to 
 ofl'er some remarks on the reference it may bear to 
 the terms in which the sacred narrative is con- 
 veyed. 
 
 Of tliose geological facts which seem to bear at 
 all upiin such an inquiry, the first, perhaj)?, which 
 s'rikes us is the occurrence of wiiat was formerly 
 all included under the common name oi diluvium, 
 but which more modern research lias separated 
 into many distinct classes. The general term 
 may, however, not inaptly describe sujieificial 
 ar-.cumulations whether of soil, sand, gravel, of 
 loose aggregations of larger blocks, wliich are 
 found to prevail over large tracts of the earth's 
 surface, and are manifestly superinduced over the 
 de])0sit5 of dilTerent ages, with which they have no 
 connection. 
 
 An examination of the contents of this accu- 
 mulated detritus soon showed the diversified nature 
 )f the fragments of which it is composed in 
 dilferent localities. Investigations were made by 
 comparing the transported I'ragments with the 
 nearest rocks from which they could iiave been 
 derived. Hence was inferred the direction of the 
 current which transported them, and tlie degree of 
 force necessary for such transport, according to 
 their siy and naluie and the character of the inter- 
 venin( -onnd. Hence the conclusion v.as in- 
 evitabi nat many such cunents in dilferent 
 diiections and acting with different de,i.'ree3 of 
 force must have occurred to produce the observed 
 results. It was soon found from the like infallible 
 indications that these dilVerent instances of diluvial 
 action were of veiy different ages, and none of 
 more than local extent, though some must have 
 acted over considerable tracts of country. In 
 Slime instances the most paljiable evidence has 
 neen furnished in one such stratum cnwsing and 
 overlying anotlicr. 
 
 In odiei instances (peihajis the greater number) 
 tiieie is equal evidence of the ojieraiioii having 
 f one on at ii.e bottom of deeji water, as it dv,es 
 
 DELIGE. 
 
 543 
 
 at present, by currents, eddies, tides, &c. Again, 
 in some cases, masses of what liad cnce forine«l 4 
 diluvium have tiiemselves been cleared off by 
 some new current, and lieajied up, leaviiiir the 
 substratum bare. In a word, with reference lo 
 cases of this kind, the most recent researches sim- 
 ])ly point to a continuation of the same great 
 series of long-sustained natural action in the de- 
 positiiin of detritus and the grailual elevation of 
 coasts, covered with the ordinary accumulations of 
 mud, sand, and shingle, which have been referred 
 to as the analogous causes of the earlier forina- 
 tioris. 
 
 Geologists have collected numerous instances 
 in which such currents are shown lo iiave acted 
 on the surfiice of many paits of Europe, in 
 ditVeient diiections ; and otlier results, such as 
 the transportation of blocks over intervening high 
 ridges, have been referred to the float ing of ice; 
 while other similar lesults have been traced up lo 
 the action of glaciers in many instances, whatever 
 may be the probability of such action in others. 
 
 We will very briefly allude to another branch 
 of the evidence. The extinct volcanoes in th* 
 south of France show no indications of having 
 been active at any period of which we can obtain 
 an idea from the surrounding state of things. In 
 several instances rivers have cut their channels 
 through tlie solid masses of lava of 100 feet in 
 thickness; the lime requisite for this is hardly cal- 
 culable. Other portions of these mountains con- 
 sist of light pumice and aggregations of cinders 
 'which have nevertheless remnined wholly undis- 
 turbed. The arguments for the antiquity of Etna 
 are of the same kind : tke succession of ernptinn* 
 which have contributed lo tbiTii the Hanks of the 
 mountain by accuiniilatii/ns of lava must have 
 been carried on through an almost inmie.isurable 
 antiquity. The dilferent numerous extinct cra- 
 ters on its sides present masses of loose scori;eand 
 ashes. Precisely tlie same ilesciijition is found to 
 aji))ly to extinct volcanoes in Asia Minor and 
 other regions. For authorities and details we refer 
 our readers generally to Mr. Lyells Principles 
 of (jeologij, and the ilistract.s of Proceedings of 
 the Geological Society, es]iecially those relating 
 to the researches of Messrs. Haniilton and Strick- 
 land, in Asia Minor; also to Sir II. de la Btches 
 Geological il/«'aw/ (esjiecially ji. 172, 3rd edit.). 
 
 The general result, as Ijearing on our pre- 
 sent suliject, is obviously this: the traces of 
 currents, and the like, which the sorlace of the 
 earth does cxhiliit, and which might be asciibed 
 to diluvial action of some kind, are certainly not 
 the results of one tinicersnl simultaneous sub- 
 mergence, but of inany, diatinct, local, a(]ueou8 
 forces, for the most jiart continued in action 'or 
 long ])eriods, and of a kind precisely analogiua 
 to such agency as is now at work. While, fur- 
 ther, many parts of tiie existing surface show no 
 traces of such o]ierations; and the plienoniena of 
 the \olcariic districis pr''ve distinctly that during 
 the enormous jieriods v jch have elaps( d since the 
 craters were active, no deluge could possilily have 
 passed over them without removing all lliose 
 lighter portions of their exuvia- wliicli have e\ i- 
 dentlv remained wholly untouched since lliey 
 were ejected. 
 
 U]ion the whole it is thus apiiarent. that wf 
 have no evidence whatever of any gieat aijueoua 
 revolution at any coir.parauveiy recent jteriud
 
 6H 
 
 DELUGE. 
 
 havinij affected tlie earth's surfiicc over any con- 
 siderable tract : chalices, doulilless, may liave 
 been produced on a small scale in isolated dis- 
 tricts. The phenomena presented liy caves con- 
 taining bones, as at Kirkilale and other localities, 
 are not of a kind forming any breach in the 
 continuity of the analogies by which all the 
 changes in the surface are more and more seen to 
 have bee.n carried on. But a recent simultaneous 
 influx of wafer covering tlie globe, and ascending 
 above the level of tlie mountains, must have lelt 
 indisputable traces of its inllueiice, which not 
 only is not the case, but against which we have 
 seen positive facts standing out. Apart from the 
 testimonies of geology there are other sciences 
 which must be interrogated on such a subject. 
 These are, chiedy, terrestrial physics, to assign the 
 possibility of a supply of water to stand all over 
 the globe five miles in de))th above the level of the 
 ordinary sea ; — natural history, to count the my- 
 riads of species of living creatures to be preserved 
 and continued in the ark ; — mechanics, to con- 
 ' struct such a vessel ; with some others not less 
 necessary to the case. But we have no disposition 
 to enter more minutely on such points : the reader 
 will find (hem most clearly and candidly stated 
 in Dr. Pye Smith's Geology and Scripture, &c. 
 p. 130, 2nd edit. 
 
 Let us now glance at the nature and possible 
 solutions of the difHcult} thus })resented. We 
 believe only two main solutions have been at- 
 tempted. One is tliat proposed by Dr. Pye Smith 
 (lb. p. 294), who expressly contends that there is 
 no real contradiction between these facts and the 
 description in the Mosaic record, when the latter 
 is correctly inlerprcted. This more correct inter- 
 pretation then refers, in the first instance, to tlie 
 proper import of the Scripture terms commonly 
 taken to imply tlie titiivcrsality of the deluge. 
 These the author shows, by a large comparison of 
 similar passages, are only to l)e understood as 
 expressing a great extent; often, indeed, the very 
 s.inre phrase is applied to a very limited region 
 or country, as in Gen. xli. 56; Dent. ii. 25; 
 Acts ii. 5, &c. Thus, so far as these expressions 
 are concerned, the description may ap])ly fo a 
 local deluge. 
 
 Next, the destruction of the whole existing 
 tiuman race does not by any means imply this 
 universality, since, by ingenious considerations 
 as to the multiplication of mankind at the alleged 
 era of the deluge, the author has shown that they ■ 
 probably had not extended beyond a compara- 
 tively limited district of the East. 
 
 A local destruction of animal life would also 
 allow of such a reduction of the numbers to be 
 included in the aik, as might obviate objections 
 on that score ; and here again the Oriental idiom 
 may save the necessity of the literal supposition 
 o( every actual Sjoecies being included. 
 
 Again, certain peculiar difliculties connected 
 with the resting of the ark on Mount Ararat are 
 combated by supposing the name incorrectly 
 apjilie'' fo the mountain now so designated, and 
 really /b belong \i3 one of much lower elevation. 
 
 Lastly, this author suggests considerations tend- 
 ing to fix tlie region which may have been the 
 icene of the actual inundation described by Moses, 
 ia about that part of Western Asia where there is 
 a large district now considerably depressed below 
 the level of tlje sea : this might have been sub- 
 
 , DELUGE 
 
 merged by the joint action of rain, and an elevai 
 tion of the bed of the Persian and It.dian Seas. 
 And, finally, he quotes the opinions of several 
 approved divines in coiiUniiation fif sucli a view, 
 especially as bearing ujion all tlie essential re'l' 
 gious instruction v/liich the narrative is calculated 
 to convej'. 
 
 Other attempts have been made with more oi 
 less probability to assign particular localities as. tiiC 
 scene of tlie Mosaic deluge, if understood to have 
 been partial. Some diluvial beds posteiior to 
 the tertiary formations have been occasionally 
 pointed out as otl'ering some probability of such 
 an origin. Tims, e. g. Mr. W. J. Hamilton, 
 secretary to the Geological Society, in his Tour 
 in Asia Minor (vol. ii. p. 386), found in the 
 plains of Armenia, especially in some localities 
 near Khoiassan and on the banks of the Arpachai 
 or Araxes, a remarkalile thin bed of marl con- 
 taining shells of tertiary (gw. recent?) s]3ecies : 
 these he attributes to a local deluge occurring (as 
 the position of the bed indicates) after the ces- 
 sation of the volcanic action which has 'aken 
 place in that district. He expressly adds that 
 he regards this deluge as probably coincident 
 with the Mosaic; understanding the latter in a 
 restricted or partial sense, and imagining it ex- 
 plained by physical causes which might have 
 followed the volcanic action. 
 
 How fiir this or any such phenomenon is recon- 
 cilable with the terms of the Mosaic narrative, 
 we leave our readers to decide for themselves; for 
 our own part, we can see but little probability in 
 such suppositions. 
 
 Again, with respect to any hypothesis of local 
 action, we may observe that the Sciipture nar- 
 rative dwells emphatically on the destruction of 
 the ichole existing human race. Wherever, there- 
 fore, we look ibr the evidences of a local deluge, 
 it must be shown to extend to all the then inha- 
 bited part of the world. This might, certainly, 
 be of contracted extent : but the more contracted 
 it might be, in proportion the rnore full must it 
 have been, of huma?i remains. Now it is quite 
 notorious that no bed attributable to diluvial 
 action has ever been found containing a single 
 bone or tooth of the human species. We must 
 therefore contend that no evidence has yet been 
 arfc/i/fcrf of any deposit which can be identified 
 with the Noachian deluge. 
 
 The only other mode of viewing the subject is 
 that which, accepting the letter of the Scriptural 
 narrative, makes the deluge strictly universal ; 
 and allowing (as they must be allowed) all the 
 difficulties, not to say contradictions, in a natural 
 sense, involved in it, accounts for them all by 
 sxipernatm-al agency. In fact, the terms of the 
 nairati\e, strictly taken, may }:)erhaps be under- 
 stood throughout as representing the whole event, 
 from beginning to 'nd, as entirely of a miracu- 
 lous nature. If so, it may be said, there is an 
 end to all difliculties or question, since there are 
 no limits to omnipotence ; and one miracle is not 
 greater than another. Thus, Mr. Lyell {Prin- 
 ciples of Gcol. iv. 219. 4th ed.), after ably re- 
 capitulating the main points of evidence, as fai 
 as physical causes are concerned, remarks, ''It 
 we believe the flood to have been a temporary 
 suspension of the ordinary laws of the natural 
 world, requiring a miraculous intervention of tht 
 divine power, then it isevident that the credibility
 
 DELUGK. 
 
 <rf such an event cannot lip eiilmticetl liy any series 
 of iininduTious, lioweipr analojous. of wliicli tlie 
 geologist may imagine lie lias dlscnvereil the 
 proofs. For my own paif. I have always consi- 
 (lereii the (loud, when its imiveisality, in the 
 strictest sense of the term, is insisleil on, as a pre- 
 ternatural event far heyond the reach of ))hiloso- 
 jihical inquiry, whether as to the causes employed 
 to produce it, or the cfl'ecls most likely to result 
 from it.' 
 
 In a word, if we supj)cse the flood to have lieen 
 miraculously produced, and all the didiculties 
 thus overcome, we must also suppose tliat it was 
 not only miraculously terminated also, hut every 
 trace and mark of it su2)ernaturally effaced and 
 destroyed. 
 
 Now, consideiiUg the immense amount of su- 
 f>ematural ajjency thus rendered necessary, this 
 hypothesis has ajjjieared to some quite untenalile. 
 Dr. Pye Smith, in jiarticular (whom no one will 
 suspect of any leanini^ to scepticism), enlarges on 
 the difficulty (p. 157, and note), and oilers some 
 excellent remarks on the general quesion of mi- 
 racles (p. S4-R9) ; and there can be no douht that, 
 however plausible may he the assertion that all 
 miracles are alike, yet the idea of supernatural 
 agency to so enormous an amount as in the pie- 
 sent ii'.stance, is, to many minds at leas', very 
 str-iggering, if not wholly iiiadmis-iihle. In Tict, in 
 stretching the argument to such an extent, it must 
 he home in mind, that we may he tienching upon 
 dilliculties in another quarter, and not suHiciently 
 regarding the force of tlie evidence on which ani/ 
 miracles are supported [Miraci.e]. 
 
 In any such discus, ion with regard to the 
 deluge, we cannot avoid taking info account its 
 hearing upon the early history of mankind, the 
 prop;igation of the race, and the progress of arts 
 and civilization, coupled with the comparatively 
 recent dute commonly assigned to this event, 
 viz. aht'Ut 2100 u.c. On such a subject we can 
 only he guided by the testimony of universal his- 
 tory anil exjierience as to the rajjidity of the 
 spread of population, and the jirotiable causes 
 wliich could lead to advance in civilization 
 among some tribes, and flie deteiioration, or e\en 
 total loss of it (as originally possessed by Noah) 
 among others. If, then, we are to date IVom the 
 Noachian deluge, it is eviilent that such con- 
 siderations with regard to the antiquity of the 
 human race must at least claim our serious 
 attention, in connection with the Scripture nar- 
 rative. 
 
 As to the date sim])ly, the great disc.re]iancy 
 m the chronology of the jiatriarclis, lietueeii the 
 pxiiting Hebiew, the Samaritan, and the Sejitua- 
 gint versions, has, with uiaiiy, te:ided to throw 
 doubts upon all the comtnitutions alike, as more 
 or less corrupted or interpolated. 
 
 Ajrain, there are circumstances connected with 
 the early history of seveial nations, which ha\e 
 apijeared to some writers to demarnl a still greater 
 extension of the time. Tli • Jesuit missionaries in 
 China were so strongly imiiiessed with the proofs 
 ff high antiquity evinced in the leconls of that 
 people, that they applied to the Pope for a dis- 
 j)eiisation to adopt ihi- Septuagint chronology 
 iratc;id of that of the Vulgate ; and even c,on- 
 fessed that this would not be sulliciently consistent 
 wilri the anti(piity they Celt obliged "to assign to 
 jI* Chinese ^ -story. The Jesuit Mailla enters 
 
 DF.LUGE. 
 
 545 
 
 most info detail m the .subject, especial y an 
 cotmecfed with flu ir early inventions in the art* 
 (see Melanges Asiatiqucs, torn. i.). 
 
 Other writers have dwelt upon (he various 
 retnains indicating a spiead of jiopulation and a 
 degree ef civilization at jieriods too early Ui 
 he co.isislent with aiii/ received cluono'logy 
 among the l''gy])tians, Mexicans, Hindoos, and 
 other nations; and the piobai)iliiy of many 
 of those arts, of which they exhibit traces, 
 having been originally deiived fiom a still 
 more ancient, widely s.pread, and highly civilized 
 people in Central Asia. Some interesting remarKs 
 on this subject will be found in a [lajier ' On the 
 Hi-tory of Magnelical Discovery, by T. S. Davies, 
 Ks((. F.R.S.' inserleil in the liritish Anniial for 
 1S27, p. 21(5. Tills able writer argues much from 
 the unrqtial jMogress made in civilization and the 
 aits of life under ckillerent conditions of national 
 existence, and contends that, in the earlier stages, 
 that progiess must have lieen incalculably slow, 
 and the chronology, consequently, must be almost 
 inilelinitfly enlarged. Indeed, in a moie gene- 
 ral point of view, to such an extent is this 
 the case, if we follow it out in imagination to the 
 ciixunnsfances of the lowest stale of savage life, 
 that others have felt obliged to adopt the supposi- 
 tion of a direct divine interposi. -ion to communi- 
 cate certain first elements of civilization, without 
 wliich no race ever rises above the savage condi- 
 tion (see Archhp. \Vhately"s rolUical Ecotiomy, 
 lecf. V. p. 133). 
 
 Ujion the whole, the discerning inquirer will, on 
 such a subject as the present, more especially, ad- 
 mit the reasonalileness of an increasing attention 
 to that important liranch of criticism which leaches 
 us to view the com]io?ition of the dillcient portions 
 of the sacred writings as of a kind specially adapte<i 
 t(; the wants and ideas of the ages to whicli (hey 
 respectively belong; and iiot to overstretch ti.e 
 literal interpretation of tiiem to meet the conce})- 
 lions of other ages and other stages of the in'ei- 
 lectual and moial adwiiicement of iriankind; or, 
 in (he judicious language of I he learned Seniler — 
 ' Jam si iirgumentum attpie ingeniuin lil)rorurn 
 V. T. intneanuir pro))ius, facile pateliit hoc, genti 
 Israel itaruiri jiraecipue istos libros fuisse drstina- 
 tos, et ad eorum. tempora \'aria et varios status 
 maximc respicere ; miiiime aiitem libnrum isto- 
 rum cunctas partes hominibiis omnium tenipoium 
 idem atque ecjuale pracstare beneficium ' (^Instit 
 Brev. ^ xxxii.). 
 
 In any point of view, it must he admitted that 
 the subject, involves dinicultics of no inconsider- 
 able amount ; and if, after due consideration c' 
 the suggestioiLS oll'ered for their solution, we slionh' 
 still feel it necessary to retain a cautious si:sp<-ns» 
 of judgment (/U the subject, it may be also lioru"* 
 in mind that such hesitation will not involve the 
 dereliction of any material leligious (loctiine. 
 
 \( we look to theactiial (cnor of the whole na»- 
 rative as deliveied by Moses (Gen. viii. and ix.; 
 we sliall obsene that tiie maiiilest imuwdiale 
 piirju/it of it is the same jis tliat of the vev 
 of the early ]iortion of his history, vii. a* 
 forming jiart of the introdwtion to thr r.Aw 
 Thus we find in the first instance, the narrative 
 dwelling on ihe di^tinclioti of «?lean and u!>- 
 clean lieasts (v ii. 2) : afieiwanls on tlie covenui" 
 with N<tj.h ; (hi- promise of future eiijoymenr nf 
 tlie earth and its fruits: the prohibition of eating 
 
 2 N
 
 540 
 
 DEMAS. 
 
 bloud ; tli3 ])uiiisl)rr)ent of munic'r (ix. 4, &c.) ; 
 all consHtufiiig. in fact, some of i\v. rudinients 
 uut of v.'iiicli the Mosaic law was framed a.i»d 
 wliicli were thus brouujht before the Israelites as 
 forming ail anticipatory siinction for it. 
 
 If we look to any further applications of the 
 narrative, we must, of course, be guided by the 
 express rejircsentations of tiie sacred writers in 
 regartl to t!ie tenor of sucii references as they may 
 make to it. Now the only such application, are 
 purely of a practical nature, in which certain 
 points in the narrative are introduced !)y way of 
 adaptation to the subject in hand, as belonging to 
 a history familiarly known, and thus made to 
 furnish topics of argument or admonition to those 
 who had always acknowledged it. Regarded in 
 a Christian ligiit, tlie n.urative is important solely 
 in respect to the applications made of it in the 
 New Testament, and these ar^ only of the follow- 
 ing kind : it is referred to as a warning of Christ's 
 coming (Matt. xxiv. 39); Luke xvii. 27); as an 
 assurance of judgment on sin (2 Pet. ii. 5) ; and 
 of God's lon;r-sut!'ering ; while the ark is made a 
 type of baptism and Christian salvation (1 Pet. 
 iii. 20); and lastly, Noah is set forth as an ex- 
 ample of laith (Hel). xi. 7). 
 
 In these applications no reference is made to tlie 
 physical nature of the event, nor even to its literal 
 universality. They are all allusions, not to the 
 event abstractedly, but only in the way a^ argu- 
 ment itnth the parties addressed, in support of 
 other truths : an appeal to tlie Old Testament 
 addressed to those who already believed in it — in 
 tile first of the instances cited, to the Jews — in the 
 others to Jewish (converts to Cliristianity (compare 
 I Pet. i. 1 and 2 Pet. iii. 1).— B. P. 
 
 DEMAS (Arijuar), a Tiiessalonian Clnisfian, 
 who was for a time associated with St. Paul, but 
 who afterwards abandoned him at Rome, eitlier 
 from being discouraged by the hardships and perils 
 of the service, or in pursuit of temporal advantages 
 (Col. iv. 14; Phileni. xxiv.; 2 Tim. iv. iO). 
 The usual luifavourable sense attached to the last 
 text seems the just one. 
 
 DEMETRIUS [Ar)iJ.-nrpLos). a man's name, 
 denoting a votary of Ceres, and very common 
 among the Greeks. The jiersons of this name 
 mentioned in tlie h'story of the Maccabees, and in 
 the New Test.inient, are — 
 
 1. DEMETRIUS SOTER, king of Syria. 
 He was son of Seleucus IV., surnamed Philo])ator; 
 lint, being an hostage at Rome at the time of his 
 father's death, his uncle, tiie notorious Aiitiochus 
 Kpi])hanes, assumed the crown of Syria, and 
 retained it eleven years. After him it was held 
 two years liy his son Aiitiochus Eupator, who was 
 put to dea'h in u.c. 162 by Demetrius, who tlien 
 aiTived in Syria and secuied the royal heritage 
 from wliich he had so long been excluded. He 
 reiguetl twelve years, b.c. 162-150. The jioints 
 in wliicli his history connects him with the Jews 
 are alone of interest in this work, and tiiese jioints 
 belong to tiie history of the Maccabees [see art. 
 Maucabeesj. To his time belong the latter 
 end if the government of J udas in Israel and the 
 beginning of tliat of Jona'.han. He acted op- 
 pressivel; and unjustly towards them; but, when 
 a rival aicje in the person of Alexander Balas, 
 tie bade so high for the sujjport of Jonathan as 
 »o create a doubt of his sincerity ; for which cause, 
 U well as Vvoin resentment at the injuries he luid 
 
 DPJiMON. 
 
 inflicted on them, the Jews espoused the catise tt 
 lialas, to whoie success tiicy in na sligiit degree 
 contiiliult'd [Ai.KXANiJUii Bai.as]. 
 
 2. DEMETRIUS NIC.\TOR,otNICANOR, 
 
 son of the preceding, but who w;is excluded from 
 the throne fill u.c. \i>), by the success (rf Ale» 
 ander Balas, and then recovered il chiefly by the 
 assistance of his father-in-law Ptylemy Pliilo- 
 nietor. He at first tieattd tlie Jews well, h\x\ 
 eventually ga\e them so much cause lor dissaiis* 
 faction that they readily esjioused tiie cause of 
 Antiochus Tlieos, son of Ale.sander Balas. De- 
 metrius underwent many vicissitudes, and passed 
 several years (b.c 111-135) in cajitivity among 
 the Parthians, from which lie eventually returned 
 and recoveied his throne, which he continued ta 
 occupy till B.C. 12(1, when he was defeated in 
 battle by the jiietcnder Alexander Zebina, and 
 afterwards slain at Tyre, whiflier he had tied 
 [Maccabkks]. 
 
 3. DE.METRIUS, a silversmith at Ephesus, 
 who, being alarmed at tiie jirogress of the Gospel 
 under the preaching of Paul, assembled liis fellow- 
 craftsmen, and excited a tumult by haranguing 
 them on the dangei ihiit threatened the worship of 
 the great goddess Diana, and consequently their 
 own craft as silversmiths. Their employment 
 was to make 'silver shrines for Diana' (Acts 
 xix. 24) ; and it is now generally agreed that 
 these 'shrines' (vaovs) were silver models of ti^e 
 temple, or ol its advtuni or chapel, in which per- 
 liajis a little image of the goddess was placed. 
 These, it seems, were purchased by foreigners, 
 who either could not perform their devotions at 
 the temple itself, or who, after having done so, 
 carried them away aj memoiials or for purposes 
 of worship. The continual lesort of foieigsiers lo 
 Ephesus from all parts, on account of the siu- 
 gular veneration in which the image of the 
 goddess was held [Aktemis], must have renileied 
 this manufactuie very pnifitable, and sufKciently 
 explains the anxiety of Demetrius and his fellow- 
 cral't-men. 
 
 4. DEMETRIUS, a Christian, mentioned with 
 coiiimenvlation in 3 John 12. From the con- 
 nection of St. John wifli E))iiesus at the time the 
 Epistle was wiilten, stmie have supposed that this 
 Demetrius is the same as the ]\rectiliMg, and that 
 he luul been coiiveiteii to Christianity. But this 
 is a mere conjecture, rendeied the more unceitiiin 
 by the commonness of the name. 
 
 DEMON. The words bal^uay ;ind SatuOl'iov 
 are used as synonymous botli by profane and 
 sacred writers. Tlie etymologies they vespectively 
 assign to them, all point to some siippu.std cha- 
 racteristic of those inttUigeut bfi'iffs to whoio 
 the woids are applied. For example. PLito, in 
 his Cratijlus (vol. i. p. 398, ed. Strran.), derives 
 the word from Sart/j-uiv, ' knowing,' in allusion 
 to the superior intelligence, and consequent efli- 
 ciaicy, ascribed to demons; Eiisebius (7Vtyj. 
 Evang.iv- 5), from Setfxaivco, 'to be teriilled;' 
 others, as Proclus (in Ilesiod.), from hatct, ' to dis 
 tribute,' becavise demons vveie supposed to assign 
 the lots or ilestinies of mankind. The words in 
 question are used by beat hen writers with gieat 
 latitude, being ajinlied by them, 1. to every 
 order of beings superior to man, including even 
 the Highest. .Aristotle applies daifxlviov to tli« 
 Divinity, Providence ( ItJtct. 2. 23). 2. It i« 
 applied to any particular divinity; hy Honus
 
 DEMON. 
 
 DEMON. 
 
 M7 
 
 10 Vrniis (Ili(ul, iii.); and in //. xvii. 9fi, 99, 
 c«i!T!p;ire<l witli 10 J, Saiaaiv aitd fltjj arc iiseil 
 M iiitercliau;jeat)le vvurcU ; 3. to the inCeric r 
 divinities, as in tlie ]ihr.L'* Oeol Kal Sai/jLovfs ; 
 4. to a class of iK'in;^ lictwecn i^ods and men : 
 minores <liis et majores iu)min;l>u3 (Liv. viii. 20 ; 
 Adam, Horn. Ait'iq. p. 287). Of these latt<T 
 some weie kubituallii lienevo *ut, and others 
 malignant. The word tl-jmon, hy itself, occurs 
 usually in a good sense in heatlien writers ; the 
 evil are distinj^nished as ZaifjLouts Ko-Koi or iro- 
 rrj^oi. To the former class beloni; the tutelary 
 penii of cities, anil the guatdian spirits of in- 
 dividuals, as the demon of Socrates. 5. By an 
 easy metonymy it is used to ilenote fortune, 
 chance, fate. In the Septuagint the word, 
 thougli comparatively of rare occurrence, is used 
 in a very diversified and indefinite manner : Deut. 
 xxxii. 17, IK', ^aiix6viov\ Ps. xc. 6. 3t3p, 5ai;urf- 
 viav, where it seems to mean a pestilential Idast 
 
 (comp./Isa. xxviii. 2, Ileb.); Ps. xcv. 5, DvvX, 
 SaxixSviotf, which Symmachus renders himapKroi, 
 and A(juila, firiTrXaaTot; Isa. xiii. 21, 1*J?C, Sai- 
 fiiviov, Aqnila, rpixiwin-as; Isa. xxxiv. 14, D*''V, 
 Saifidviov; Isa. Ixv. 10, T3, Saifi.6i/tov, which seems 
 explained hy rvxn in the latter ]tart of the verse; 
 Vvilg.forticiia. In the hook of Toliit (iii. S), we 
 meet with woirriphu 5aifii.6viov. Since no distinct 
 jde<i3 of the ancient Jewish doctrines conreming 
 demons can he olitained from the Sejjtuagint, we 
 next have reaiurse to the heathens, and from their 
 writinj^, owing to the universal ])revalenre of 
 lielief in demons, ample information may be ob- 
 l.iifieii. Tiie following is ofl'ered as a summary 
 ul' their opinions. 
 
 1. Demons, in the theology of the Gentiles, are 
 iiiidiile beings, Ijetween gods and mortals. This 
 is the judgment of Plato, which will be considered 
 decisive — Trav rh oai/xSvLOi/ /*€to[|u fVri 0eoO re 
 Kal QvrtTov : ' Evert/ demon is a middle being be- 
 tween fiod and mortal.' He thus explains what 
 be means I'v a middle being — Qths ayOpwirw oil 
 tiyvvTm, dWa. 5ia Sai/Jiovitov Trntra f<niv ?') out\ia 
 tiu 7) SiaAfKToj Qioli TTphs dvdpdonovs : ' (iod is 
 clot approached immediiLfely by man, but all the 
 f;ommerce and intercourse between gods and men 
 isje perfoimed by the mediation of demoiis." He 
 enters info fuifl.er particulars — T^ daiiJi.6vi6v ecriy 
 ipfiriveiof Hal Siairopdntvov BfoTs ra nap' avOpdnnov, 
 Kal duBpwirois rd nupa Qtuv. rSiv fi\i> ras SfT^cfij 
 Kt£l dv<rias, Tuv 5€ toj eViTo^ed (re Kal afiotBds 
 raiv 6u<Ttwf : ' Deirons are lejxirteis and ciuriers 
 from men to the gods, and again from the gods to 
 men, of ti>e supplication? and prayers of the one, 
 and of the injunctioiis and rewards of tlevotion 
 from the other" (Plato, Si/mpos. jip. 202, 203, 
 to n. iii. ed. Serran.). ' .And this,' says the learned 
 M^de, 'wai the oecumenical philosophy of the 
 apistlca' fjmes, and of the times long before 
 thfTi." 
 
 ?. D»;"ions were of two kinds; the one were 
 tlie souls of good men, which ujion their de- 
 parture from the body were called heroes, were 
 alte wards raised to tlie diirnity of demons, anil 
 jubi jqueiitly to that of gods (Plutarch, De Defect. 
 Oro :.). Plato {Cratylus, ]>. 39H, torn. i. edit. 
 Serr. n.), says, 'the jKJets speak excellently who 
 afl'in 1 t'liat wlien good men die they attain great 
 hoDo ir and lignity, and become demons.' it is 
 ftluo adB;it M tluit Jamb'.ichu^ Hierocles, and 
 
 Simplicius \ise 'he words angels and detnuna in- 
 discriminately. Philo [De Giyantibus) say* 
 that souls, demons, and angels, are only dilVcient 
 names that imply one and the same substance; 
 and he affirms (^J)e Soinii.) that Musi's rails thut,e 
 angels whom the pliilos i|)hers call demons. It 
 was also l)elie\ed that tlie souls kS bad nun be- 
 came evil demons (('halcid. in I'taton. Tim. 
 cap. 13% p. 330). Accordingly SaifuSyioi often 
 occurs in ancient aulhois as a term of leproacli. 
 The ot/ier kind of demons were of more noble 
 origin than the human rai'e, having never inha- 
 bited human bodies (Plato, 'J'iin. ])p. 4!, 42. CO, 
 71, 75); Apuleius, De Deu i<oc/alis, p. 6', (I). 
 
 3. Those, demons who had once been souls of 
 men were the objects of immediate tcorthip 
 among the heathetis (Deut. xx\i. II ; Ps. cvi. 2^; 
 Isa. viii. 19), and it is in contradistinction to 
 these that Jehovah is so freipiently called ' the 
 living God ' (Deut. v. 6, &c. &c. ; Farmer's Essay 
 on the Di^noniacs, p^issim). 
 
 4. The heathens held that some demons were 
 malignant by nature, and not merely so when 
 provoked and otreniled. Plutarch says, ' it is a 
 very ancient o])inion that there are ceitain trtcAcrf 
 and malignant demons, who envy gooil men, and 
 endeavour to hinder them in the pursuit of viituc, 
 lest they slmiuld b« ijartakers of greater happiness 
 than they enjoy ' (FUit. Dion. p. 958, torn. i. edit. 
 Palis, l(i24). On this passage bi^llop Newton 
 remarks, * This was the opinion of all the later 
 philosophers, and Plutaich undeniably alfirms 
 it of the very ancient ones " (Dissert, on the 
 Proph., Lond. 1826, p. 476). Pythagoras held 
 that certain demons sent diseases to men and 
 cattle (Diog. Laert. Vit. rythag. p. 514, ed. 
 Amslel.). Zaleucus, in his preface to his Laws 
 (ajmd Stobanmi, Serm. xlii.), supposes that art 
 evil demon might be piescnt with a witness to 
 influence him to injustice. 
 
 In later times Josephus uses the word demon 
 always in a bad sense, as do the wiilers of 
 the New Testament, when using it asj'ro/n iitcm- 
 selvcs, and in their oicn sense of it {De Bell. 
 Jud. vii. 6, \ '6i, ' Demons are no other than 
 the spirits of the wicked, that enter into men 
 and kill them, iiiile.ss they can obtain simie helj) 
 against thetri.' For proof of the latter assertii.n 
 v€ must refer the reader to the contents of the 
 New Testament, and if necessary for a lecon- 
 cili.ition of the apjiarent excejitiuns, to Farmer's 
 Essaij ; and as the next stage of the inquiry will 
 usher us into the aiena of controversy, the opjxir- 
 tuuity is embraced of announcing that it is not 
 ovir intention to exhibit ourselves as ]iartizans of 
 either side of any question which may be hereafter 
 iiitroduceil, but simply to present an im|iurtial 
 view of the literature it may involve. 
 
 It is frequently sup]iosed tiiat the demons of 
 the New Tesfami'nt are fallen angelt : on the 
 contrary it is m.iintained liy Farmer, tliat ihe 
 word is never ap|jlied to the Devil and his angelis 
 and that there is nosulKcient leason for restricting 
 the term to spii its of a higher oiiler than man- 
 kind. They who uphold tlie former opinion urge 
 that our Lord, when accused of ciisting out 
 demons by Beelzebub, the jiriiice of demons, re- 
 plies, How can Satan cast out Satan (Maik iii. 
 23, &c.)* There is no doubt but that d Saramj 
 and 6 5ia/3o\oy are the same, and hence Bfel*^-- 
 bub and 6 SuiSoXoi are evidently the same being.
 
 048 
 
 DEMONIACS. 
 
 DoiMiidge calls this a demonstration of tlie point, 
 and consequently maintains, that ' Satan was con- 
 sidered as the prince of the demons who weic cast 
 out by Christ, and who are elsewhere re|Mesei)ted 
 as his angels (^Familij Expositor, i. 337, Lond. 
 1799). It is replied, that if tliis ar^^llneI)t ]iriives 
 anything, it proves that the word Satan is equi- 
 valent to Zaiix6viov, and that Satan is liere only 
 introduced as an illustrdtion, as aie the d:sc()rd3 
 111" kingdoms and families (Cauiphell's Prdim. 
 Dissert, p. I'iO). It mu.-.t he allowed that so 
 im.poitant a conclusion should not he rested on a 
 deduction from precaiious jjrinciples. It is fuither 
 urged, that it is liut fair and natural to supjjose 
 that the writers of the New Testament use the word 
 demons in tlie same sense in which it was under- 
 stood hy their contemporaries, wliich, as if appears 
 from Josephus and other auilmrities, was, that of 
 the spirits of the wicked; and that if these 
 writers had meant anything else they would have 
 given notice of so wide a deviation from popular 
 usage. The writings of tlie Fatliers show that 
 tliey sometimes understood the demons to be 
 fallen angels ; at other times they use the word 
 in the same sense as the ancient jdiilosopiiers. 
 Justin Martyr atKims {Apol. i. 2, p h5J that 
 ' those jiersons who are seized and thrown down 
 by the souls of the deceased are such as all men 
 agree in calling de:noniacs, or ni.id.' — J. F. D. 
 
 DEMONIACS (Sai^o^i^oVfyoi), demonized 
 peraoas, in the New Testament, are those wiio were 
 supposed to have a demon or demons occupying 
 them, suspending the faculties of their minds, and 
 governing the members of their bodies, so that 
 what was said and done by the demoniacs was 
 ascribed to the in dwelling demon. Plato {apud 
 Clem. Alex. Strom, i. 1U5, Oxon.) atKrms that 
 ' demoniacs do not use their own dialect or 
 tongue, but that of the demons who have entered 
 into them' Lucian says, 'tlie ]iatient is silent; 
 the demon returns the answer to the question 
 asked.' Apollonius thus addresses a youth su]>- 
 
 Eosed tobe possessed : ' I am treated contumeliously 
 y the demon, and not by thee' (comp. Matt. 
 viii. 2S and 31; Mark v. 2; ix. 12; Luke viii. 
 27, ,32). 
 
 The correctness of the opinion respecting those 
 who are called ^aifj.oviC6fJieyoi in the New Tes- 
 tament which prevailed among the Jews and 
 other nations in the time of our Lord and liis 
 Apostles, lias been called in que-^tion. On the 
 one hand it is urged that the details of the evan- 
 gelical history afford ilecisive evidence of the truth 
 and reality of demoniacal possessions in the sense 
 already explained, at least during tlie commence- 
 ment of Ciiristianity ; on the other hand it is con- 
 tended that the accounts in question may all be 
 luiderstood as the phenomena of certain diseases, 
 jiarticularly hyiiochondria, insanity, and epilepsy ; 
 that the sacred writers used the popular lungvaye 
 ui reference to the suliject, but tiiat they tiiem- 
 •elves understood no more than that the jiersons 
 were the siUijects of ordinary diseases. Heie 
 j«sue is joined — and it is to the evidence in this 
 cause that our attention will now lie diiected. 
 
 Those who contend that the demoniacs were 
 really possessed by an evil spirit, urge the fol- 
 lowing considerations : 
 
 I. Tlie demoniacs express themselves in away 
 oiiusua! for hypochondriacal, insane, or epileptic 
 pwsons (Matt. viii. 29; Mark i. 24); they pos- 
 
 DtMONIACS. 
 
 sessPil sujiematural strei^lh f Mark v. 4); they 
 adjure Jesus not to tornien! flu n: they answei 
 the questions proposed to them ir a rational man- 
 ner; thev are distinctly saiil to have ' come out of 
 men ami to have 'entered into swine,' and that 
 consequently the whole herd, amounting to about 
 two tlionsand, ran violently down a precipice 
 into the sea (Matt. viii. 32;' Mark v. 13). The 
 supposition which has lieen maintained l>y Lard* 
 ner among others, that the swine were driveti into 
 the sea liy the demimiucs, is irreconcilable with 
 the language of the narrative, lieing also highly 
 improbable in itself: madmen do not act in con< 
 cert, and rarely pursue the same train of maniacal 
 reaso7iing. 
 
 2. No mental diseases are predicated of the 
 dumb (Matt. ix. 32), or of the blind and dumb 
 (Matt. xii. 22). Do such diseases ever produce 
 blindness? 
 
 3. It is admitted that the symptoms of the 
 youth described Matt. xvii. 15 ; Mai k ix. 17 ; 
 Luke ix. 39, coincide precisely with those of epi- 
 lepsy, but they are attiibuted to the agency of the 
 demon in that very account. 
 
 4. The damsel at Philip])! is said to have been 
 possessed with a spirit of divination, which was 
 the means of olitaining much gain to her mastera, 
 and to have understood the divine commission 
 of Paul and his companions (Acts xvi. 17). Is 
 this to be ascribed merely to an alienation of 
 mind f 
 
 5. The demoniacs themselves confess that thev 
 were ]iosse;ised with demons (Mark v. 9): the 
 same is asserted of them by their relatives (Matt. 
 XV. 22). The Apostles and Evangelists assert that 
 persons possessed witli demons were brought unto 
 Jesus (Matt. iv. 21; Mark i. 32), or met him 
 (Luke viii. 27). Jesus commands them not to 
 make him known as the Messiah (Mark i. 34, mar- 
 gin) ; rebuked them (Matt. xvii. 18). The Evan- 
 gelists declare that die demons departed from 
 their victims at his command (Matt. xvii. IS; 
 Mark ix. 25, 26 ; Luke iv. 35 ; xi. 11) ; and Jesus 
 himself asserts it (Luke xiii. 32). 
 
 6. The writers of the New Testament makfl 
 distinctions lietween the diseased and the de- 
 moni.acs (Mark i. 32; Luke vi. 17, 18); and 
 Jesus himself does so (Matt. x. 8, &c.). 
 
 7. The demoniacs knew Jesus to be the Son of 
 God (Matt. viii. 29; Mark i. 24; v. 7), and the 
 Christ (Luke iv. 41). 
 
 8. Jesus addresses tlie demons (Matt. viii. 32 ; 
 Mark v. IS; ix. 25 ; Luke iv. 35 J ; so does 
 Paul (Acts xvi. IS). Jesus bids them be silent 
 (Maik i. 25); to depart, and enter no more into 
 the person (Maik ix. 2.5). 
 
 9. In Luke x. the seventy are related to 
 iiave returned to Jesus, saying, ' Lord, even the 
 demons are subject to us through thy name;' and 
 Jesus replies, ver. 1?^, 'I beheld Satan, as light- 
 ning, fall fiom heaven.' 
 
 10. When Jesus was accused by the Pliaris*e» 
 of casting-out demons liy Beelzebub, the prince 
 of the demons, he argued tluit there could be no 
 discord among demoniacal tieings (Matt. xii. 
 25, &c.) 
 
 1 1. Jesus make? certain gratuitous observalioni 
 respecting demons (see Matt. xii. 43. 41) ; which 
 seem like facts in tluir natural history. In re« 
 gard to the demon cast out of the youth, which the 
 disciples could not cast out, he says, ' tliis kimd
 
 DEMONIACS. 
 
 DKMONIACS. 
 
 M« 
 
 't. e. of deinoiis) goetli not out but by prayer and 
 'asting.' Ciiu tliese wiinis be understood ollier- 
 wise tlian as ieveal!n<^ u icul and ))ai titular fact 
 respecting the nal';ve of deindus (Matt. xvii. 21 ? 
 
 12. Tlie woman wliicii had a spirit of inlir- 
 mity, and was bowed toijelher (Luke xiii. 11), is, 
 hy our Lord liinsclf. said to have been bound by 
 Satan (v. KJ). 1l lliesame way St. Peter speaks 
 of all f.ie {K'r.'joiis who were healed by Jesus, as 
 being ' oppressed of the devil " (Acts x. 3><). 
 
 13. It is furllier pleaded, that it sinks the 
 importance and dignity of our Saviours miracles, 
 tu suj.puse that when he is said to liave cast out 
 devils, all that is meant is, that he healed dis- 
 eases. 
 
 To tliese arguments the o|)|)onent« of the theory 
 of real demoniacal possessions reply, generally, 
 that there can lie no dotd)t that it was the 
 aeneral belief of the Jewish nation, with the 
 exception of the Sadducees, and of most other 
 nations, that llie spii its (jf dead men, especially of 
 tiiose who iiati lived evil lives, and died by vio- 
 lent deaths, were peimitted to enter tlie bodies of 
 men, aiid to produce the etl'ects ascribed to them 
 in the popuUir creed ; but the fact and real state 
 of the case was, that those who were considered 
 to be possessed were atllicted with some peculiar 
 diseases of mind or l)ody, which, their true 
 caitses not being generally understood, were, as is 
 usual in such cases, ascribed to suj)ernatural 
 jiowcrs; and that Jesus and his a])Ostles, Wishing 
 of course to lie uuderstood i>y their contemjMua- 
 ries, and owing to other reiisons which can be 
 jwinted out, were uniler tlie jiCces-sjVy of exjiress- 
 ing themselves in popular language, and of seem- 
 ing to admit, or at least of not denying, its 
 coirectness. They Curther ])lead that the fact, 
 atlmitted on all hands, tiiat tlie demon so actu- 
 ated the possessed, as tliat whatever thei/ did, was 
 not to be distinguished from his agency, reduires 
 the questiiin, s,) f.u- as plienumena are concerned, 
 to one simple iriquiiy, namely, wlietlier tliese 
 phenomeiia aiesucli as can lie accounted for with- 
 out resorting to sujiernatural agency. They assert 
 that the syni];toms predicatetl of demoniacs cor- 
 respond with the ordinary symptoms of disease, 
 and especially df hypocliondiia, insanity, and 
 ejiilepsy ; that the sacied writeis themselves give 
 intimations, as plain as could be expected under 
 their circumstances, that they employed popular 
 language; that consequently they are not to 
 be cinsidered as teaching doctrines or asserting 
 facts when they use such language; and that the 
 doctrine of tlie agency of departed sjiirits on the 
 boilies of men is inconsisfiut with certain pe- 
 culiar and expiess doctrines of Chiist and his 
 apo-tles. 
 
 With re/ard to the symptoms related of the 
 demoniacs, it is urged tliat such persons as were 
 called demoniacs in other countries, and who 
 Beem to have laliouied under jirecisely the same 
 symptoms, aie lecorded to have lieen cured by the 
 nse of inedicines. Helleboro <iuoque piirgatur 
 lyinphaticiis eiror (Seien. Sammon. c. 27. v. 507), 
 'Insane delusion is remedied by hellebo.e." Jose- 
 phiis and the Jewish pii)'sicians speak of medi- 
 tines comjio-ed of stones, roots, and heriis, being 
 usefid to den oniacs {(lutei, f. 67). The cure 
 oi diseases liy such methods is intelligible; liut 
 is it raJ icnal .< Iielieve that the spirits of dead 
 •wen 'V ne di.sl ^Iged from human bodies by medi- 
 
 cal presrrijifions? Maimonides I'in Sctbat. ii. S\ 
 says, 'all kinds of diseases which arc called nie- 
 lancholv, they call an evil spirit' (couip. MatL 
 xi. 18;'joiin vii. 20; x. 20). 
 
 1. With regard to the two tiemoniacs at GiMlar« 
 (or one, according to Maik and Luke), it i.s ejtn- 
 cludcd that they weie madmen, who fancied thai 
 there weie within them irinunierable spirits of dea*! 
 men. Accordingly tliey dwelt among f!ic tomba 
 about which the sviuls of the dead were believed 
 to hover, went naked, were ungovernable, cried 
 aloud, attacked passengers, lieaf themselves, and 
 had in their p'..rerisy broken e\ery chain by which 
 they ha<l been bound. Strength almost sujier- 
 human is a common attendant on insanity. The 
 subject is illustiate<l liy VVetstein. in extracts 
 I'lom Greek medical writeis. P. j^^,'ineta, .-Vc- 
 tuarius, Cijelius Aurelianus, also tell that such 
 [lersons fancied themselves to be gods, demons, 
 Wilves, dogs. Ific. ; hence the disoriler was .some- 
 times callevl KvKavdfiwTria, or Kwai/dpcDTrla. Their 
 question, ' Ait thou come to torment us'j' refers 
 to the cruel treatment of the insane in those 
 times, and which they had no doubt shared, 
 in the endeavours of men to ' lame ' them. 
 Both Mark and Luke the physician describe 
 the demoniac as aoicppovovvrii, in ' his right 
 tni)id,' when healed, which imjilies previous iii- 
 sanity (see also Matt. xii. 22; xv. 2S ; xvii. 18; 
 Luke vii. 21; viii. 2; ix. 42). It is true that 
 these demoniacs adilress Jesus as the Son of God, 
 but they might lia\ e heard in their lucid intervals 
 that Jesus, whose fame was already dilfiised 
 throughout Syiia, was regarded by the people as 
 the Messiah. They show their insanity, ' their 
 shaping fancies,' by imagining they were demons 
 without ruimlier, and liy requesting ])ermis.iion to 
 enter the swine. Would actual demons choose 
 such an habitation "? They s]ieak and answer, 
 indeed, in a rational manner, but agreeably to 
 Locke's delinifion ol iiiadmen, ' they reason right 
 on false principles, and, t.iking their fancies 
 fur realities, make right deductions from them. 
 Thus you shall (ind a distracted man fancyintf 
 himself a king, and with a right inference require 
 suitable atteruiance. Others, wlo have thought 
 themseKes glass, take the needful care to preserve 
 such lirittle bodies' {Essay on llutnan Under- 
 standing, vol. i. ch. 11, ^ 12). It is true that 
 Jesus commands the unclean sjiirit (so called 
 because believed to lie the spirit of a dead man), 
 but he does this merely to excite the attention of 
 the peoiile, and to give them full opportiniity to 
 observe the miracle. It i« not necessary to sup- 
 pose that the madmen drove the swine, bat merely 
 that, in keeping with all the circumstances, the 
 insanity of the demoniacs was transferred to 
 them, as the leprosy of Naaman was transferied 
 to Geliazi, for the jiiirjiose of illustrating the 
 miraculous jMiwer of Christ; arnl though this wo* 
 a puititive miracle, it might serve the good j/jr- 
 pose of discouraging the expectation of temporal 
 lienelits from him. If the demoniac is repre- 
 sented as worshipping Jesus, it should be remem- 
 bered that the insane often show great reujiect t<; 
 particular persons. 
 
 2. The meji wiio were dumb, .ind both blind and 
 dumb, are not said to have becti disordered in their 
 intellects, any more than die blind man in John v. 
 The disease in their organs was pojiularly ascribed 
 to the inllueuce of demons. It is obsenalde tliat
 
 •so 
 
 DEMONIACS. 
 
 fa ih" parallel passage (Matt. ix. 32), the evan- 
 ^list says the 7)ia]i was dumb. 
 
 3. Tiie syiinjtums of epilepsy in the youth 
 described Matt. xvii. 15, are to.) evident not to 
 i'>f afkiiovvledjjed. It" the opinion of relatives is 
 to be pressed, it should lie noticed that in this 
 case the iaiher says his 'son is lunatic' It was 
 most probably a case of combined epilepsy and 
 lunacy, which has been comnioi' in all ajjes. 
 Kpilepsy was ascribed to the i.. .,jnce of the 
 moon in those times. The literal interpretation 
 of popular language would tlieiefore requiie us 
 to believe that lie was ' moonstiuck," as well as a 
 demoniac. A curious instance of tiie inlluence of 
 jjopular modes of speech, even on those who aie 
 conscious of its incorrectness, is oll'ered in the 
 case of Hipp.)crates, who, though he wrote a. book 
 to prove tliat epilepsy is 7iot a sacred malady, 
 i. c induenced by soine divinity, is neveitheless 
 in the habit of ajiplying to it that very appel- 
 lation. In the same way a learned physician 
 still speaks of lunacy, St. Anthonys iiie; and 
 persons of education speak of the rising and 
 setting of tlie sun, falling stars, as we all use 
 phrases tieiived from the rites and leligion of the 
 Gentiles. 
 
 4. Tlie damsel at Philippi is said by Luke to 
 nave been possessed with a -irvEvfj.a TlvOwfos, a 
 spirit of Apollo. It was her fixed idea. The 
 gift of divination is said by Cicero to have 
 i>een asciibed to Apollo (£)e Divinat. i. 5). 
 Insane persons, pretending to pro))hesy under 
 liiR influence of Apollo, would be likely to gain 
 money from tlie credulous. A belief among 
 the common people that the ravings of insanity 
 were sucied, was not coulined to Egypt. The 
 larvati, the lymjjhatici, the cerriti of the Romans 
 signify jmssessed persons. The apostle, who taught 
 that an • idol is nothing m the world,' did not 
 believe in the reality of her so(»thsayiii^'. Many 
 demoniacs are mentioned, the pecul ai symptoms 
 of whose diseases are not stated, as Maiy Magda- 
 lene (Mark XV i. 9), out of whom Je^us cast seven 
 demons, i. c. restored from an inveterate insanity 
 (seven being the Jewish number of peifection), 
 8iipj)05ed tu be caused by the united agency of 
 seven spirits of the dead. Yet she is said to have 
 been healed (Cuke viii. 2). 
 
 5. It' Jesus fill bade the demoniacs to say he 
 was the Chiist, it was because the declaiation of 
 such persons on tlie suliject would do more harm 
 than good. If he rehuked them he also lebuked 
 the wind (Matt. viii. "id), and the fever (Luke iv. 
 39j. li it be said of them, tliey dejiarted, so it is 
 .-^Iso said of the leprosy (Maik i. 42j. 
 
 6. It may be questioned whetlier the writers of 
 .*he New Testamtnt make a distinction between 
 the diseased and those ]M)ssessed of demons, or 
 whether they specify the demoniacs by tiiemselves, 
 astliey specify the lunatics (Matt. iv. 21), meiely 
 as a distinct and pecuiiar class of the sick, it 
 h., iiowever, most inipoitani to observe that St. 
 Pet'er includes 'all ' who were healed by Jens, 
 under the jihiase KaTaSvvacrTfuojjievuvs uTrh rov 
 Sia.p6\ov, many of wiioni weie not de^ciiljed by the 
 Evangelists as subjects of demoniacal possession, 
 wliicli is urged as a striking instiinee of tiie iisiis 
 lo(jtie7idi. Sometimes the s])ec ticatioii of the de- 
 .Tioniacs is omitted in the general recitals of mira- 
 culous cures (Matt. xi. 5), and this, too, (>n the 
 imticrtant occasion of our Lord sending to Jolin 
 
 DEMONIACS. 
 
 the Bapt Si an account of the miraculous evidc7io-« 
 attending his preaclniig (Matt. xi. .'>). Does not 
 this look as if they were considered as includeo 
 under the sick? 
 
 7. It cannot be {)roved that all (he demoniacs 
 knew Jesus to be the Messiah. 
 
 8. It is admitted tiiat Jesus addresses the de- 
 mons, but then it may be said tiiat ids doing so 
 has reference paitly to the persona t/iemsehes in 
 whom demons weie sujiposeil to be, and paitly to 
 tlie Ijystanders ; for the same reason that he re- 
 buked the winds in an audible voice, as also the 
 fever. It is also remarkable that in the case of the 
 demoniac (.Maik v. 8), it is said — koI iirijpwra 
 avTov, the man, ri aoi tvojxa, not ovrb, tlie 
 ^aifioviov. Tiie same words occur in Luke 
 viii. 3!\ 
 
 9. With reganl to our Lord's reply to the seventy, 
 it will not be urged that it was intended of a local 
 fall of Satan from heaven, unless it may be 
 supposed to allude to his primeval exjnilsion ; but 
 this sense is scarcely relevant to the occasion. If, 
 then, the literal sense be necessarily departed 
 from, a choice must be made out of the various 
 figurative interpretations of which the words 
 admit; and taking the word Satan here in its 
 generic sense, oi' whatever is inimical or opjwsed 
 to the Gosjiel, Jesus may be undei stood to say, I 
 foresaw the glorious results of your mission in the 
 triumphs which would attend it over the most 
 formidable obstacles. Heaven is otlen used in 
 the sense of political horizon (JLsa. xiv. 12, 13; 
 Matt. xxiv. 29). To be cast liom heaven to 
 hell is a phrase for total downfall (Lukex. 15; 
 Rev. xii. 7-9). Cicero says to Maik Antony, You 
 have hurled your colleagues down fiom heaven. 
 Satan is here used trojjically. Our Lord does 
 not, therefore, asseit the real opeiaiion of demons. 
 
 10. In the lefutation of the cliarge that he cast 
 out demons l)y Beelzebub, the piince of tlie 
 demons, he sim])ly argues with the Pharisees 
 upon their cum jn'incijjles, and ' juilges them out 
 of their own Uioutli, without assuming the trtiih 
 v( those principles. 
 
 11. The facts he seems to as.seit res])ecting the 
 wandering of demons tliron.;h diy places (Matt, 
 xii. 45), were already admitted in the populai 
 creed of the Jews. Tliey l>elieved tliat denioiis 
 wandered in desolate jilaces (liaruch iv. 35). 
 U|K)n these ideas he founds a ])aial>le or simili- 
 tuile, without involving an o])inion of their acca- 
 racy, to describe ' the end of this generation. 
 Tlie observations respecting jiiayer and fasting 
 seem to have relation to that faith in God which 
 lie exhorts his apostles to obtain. Piayer and 
 fasting would serve to enable them to i;erceive 
 the divine suggestion which accomjianied eveiy 
 miracle, and which the apostles had iu>l perceivt (I 
 upon this occasion, though given them, because 
 their animal nature had not been sufliciently sub- 
 dued. 
 
 12. The application of the teim Satan to tl;e 
 case of the woman who had a spirit of inlhmily, 
 is jjlainly an arguriienHon (id /io»ii?icni. It is 
 intei'iled to heighten the ant thesis Ijetween the 
 luusini/ of ail ox from his stall, ;ind /uosiiiff the 
 daughter of Aliiaham whom Satan, as tAet/ be- 
 lieved, Imd bound eighteen \ears. 
 
 13. Tlie oljjectiou taken from (he supposed 
 consequence of exjjlaining the casting out of 
 ilcmons to signilV no more than the cii'S ftf di»«
 
 DENARIUS. 
 
 tases, that it temis to lower llie lignity of the 
 Saviour's Tniraclt-s, dejienils ii])iiii thi ivadt-r's rom- 
 plexiun of mi;j(l, otir ))ri(>r IcHowlwl.^e of tlie rela- 
 tive liigiiity o<" TJuacIcs, anil s<mie othci things, 
 t>erha{is, ot' whicli we aic nut coitij)etcnt ju(lg<'s. 
 
 It remains to I>p oitservctL, tliat th« tlicory of 
 demoniacal pos?essic)iis is opposed to tlic known 
 and express doctrints of Clwist and his AjKntles. 
 Tliey teach us that tlic spiiile of the dead <"nt>er a 
 ftate caiit^uulins to their chaiatrter, no moi'e to 
 return to tliis world (Luke xvi, 22, &c. ; xxiii. 
 i3 ; 2 Cor. V. 1 ; Phil. i. 21). With regard to 
 the fallen ang>els, the rcpwspntatiDns of their 
 coiifiuemeKt are totally opposed to tl»e uotiori of 
 their waijderinj; about fli« world and tormenting 
 its inlialiitants (2 Pet. ii. 4 ; Jude, ver. 6). If it 
 he said that Jesus did not coirect tlve popuhir 
 opinion, still he nowliere denies that tlu> plieno- 
 njena in querticai arose from diseases ojily. lie 
 took no side; it was not his ]ii«vince. It was not 
 necessary to attack tlie jniscisiceiition in a formal 
 manner; it would be supplanted wltenever his 
 dpctiine respecting the state of the dead was em- 
 braced. To have done so would have engaged 
 our Lord in ]Holix arguments with a people in 
 whom tlie notion was so deeply rootetl, and have 
 led him away too much from the purposes of his 
 tniaistiy. * It was one of tlie many things he had 
 to say, but tliey could not then hear them.' It is 
 filially urged that th» antidemoniacal theory does 
 not detxact from the divine authority of the 
 Saviour, the reality of liis miracles, or the inte- 
 grity of the historians. Sttbjttdice lis est. (J aim's 
 Biblisckes ArckHologie ; Winei's BibUschcs Rral- 
 wr<er6«c/i^rt.*Besessene;' Moses Stuart'sS/vftc/tes 
 of Atigelologij in BMiotheca Sacra, London and 
 New Ywk, 18t3).— J. P. D. 
 
 DENARIUS (Sfji'typiov), lite principal silver 
 coin of tlie Romans, which took its name from 
 having been originally equal to ten ases. It was 
 in later times (aiter k.c. 217) current also among 
 the Jews, aad is the coin which is called ' a 
 penny ' in the Auth. Vers. The denarii were 
 first coined in B.C. 2Cy9, or four years after the 
 first Punic war, and tlie more ancient speci- 
 mens are much liea\ier than those nf later date. 
 Those coined in the early jteriod of the common- 
 wealtli have tlie average weight of 60 grains, and 
 those coine*! under the empire of 52-5 grains. 
 With some allowance for alhiy, the former would 
 lie woith 8'6215 penc«, or S^<i., and the latter, 
 7«5 pence, or 7^. It has been supposed, how- 
 
 DEUTERO-CAN ONICAL. 
 
 y>i 
 
 ever, that the reduction of weight did not take 
 ■place till the time of Nero ; and in that case 
 the denarii mentioned in the Gosjjels must have 
 l>een of the former weight and value, although 
 l^d. is the usual computation. A denarius was 
 the day-wages of a labourer in Palestine (Matt. 
 XX. 2,9, 13); an<l the daily pay of a Rtiman 
 •oldier w.is less (Tacit. Ann. i. 17). In the time 
 «f Christ "he denari.is Iwie the image of the em- 
 
 peror (Matt. xxii. 19; Mark xii. Ifi), but fcr- 
 nicrly it was imjircssed with the syiuijoU ol tha 
 repuhli<'_ 
 
 DEllUK (eiep0Ti\ X small lowii of Lycaonia, 
 in ,\s!a MiiKw, at the foot at' the Taurian iiiuun- 
 taiiis *>tJ miles south by east fiom Icoriium, and 
 Ix nailes east of Lystra. It was thebiitli-place of 
 Gains, the fr'fend and fellow-travel l«r of Paul 
 (Acts XX. 4); and it was to this place that Paul 
 and BaiYMl>as (led when exjielled truta Icuniuin, 
 A.u. 41 (.lets xiv. 6). 
 
 DESKRl'S. In the Enst, wide, extended 
 plains m\' usually liable to drotight, ;uid cjTim'- 
 quenlly to ban^jnness. Hence thf Hebrew lan- 
 guage describes a piahu, a drtcrt, and an UHfrnU- 
 ful tcaste, by the sarr>e wor<i, Hi'^y arahah. Tlie 
 term which is in general iwideied ' wilderness,' 
 12TD niidhar, means, projn^rly, « grazing tract, 
 imeultivatcd and destitute of wood, but (it for 
 pasture — a heath or step]*. T\^ixtsttires of the 
 Kikhrness are mentiouetl \n Ps. Ixv. 13; Joel i. 
 19 ; Luke XV. 4 ; and may be very well explained 
 by refefenc* to tlie fact, that e\en the Desert of 
 Arabia, which is utterly l»uint up with excessive 
 drought in summer, is in winter and s];ring co- 
 vered with rich and tender hiTbage. Wlicnce it is 
 (hat tlie .\rabian tribes letreat into tlieir deserts on 
 the apjK-oach of tlie autumnal rains, and when 
 spring has ended and the droughts commence, 
 return to the lands of rivers an<i nio*intains, in 
 search a( the pastures which the deserts no longer 
 all'ord. Tlie same word may therefore denote a 
 region which is desert, and also one wliich, at 
 stated seasons, contains rich and aliundant [las- 
 tures. But in fact the word translated in our 
 Bibles b}' 'desert' or ' wihlerness' often means no 
 more than the common, uncultivaletl grounds in 
 the neighbourhoml of towns on which the inhabit- 
 ants grazed their dpmestic cattle. 
 
 A great deseit or wihlerness is genei-ally ex- 
 pressed by the word JICC yeshimon, from Qlih 
 ynsliam, ' to be waste' or ' desolate' (1 Sam. xxiii. 
 19,21; Isa. xliii. 19, 20). This word i* esjiecially 
 a[)plie<l to that desert of Stony Araliia in which the 
 Isiaelites sojourned under Moses (Num. xxi. 20; 
 xxiii. 2^^; Ps. Ixviii. 7, Ixxviii. 40, &c.). This was 
 the most terrible of the deserts with which thelsrael- 
 ites were acquainted, an<l the only real desjit in 
 their immediate neighbouihood. It is described 
 under Arabia; as is also that luisieiti desert 
 extending from the eastern border of the cmintry 
 be\-ond Judffia to the Euphrates. It is empha- 
 tically called ' the Desert,' without any proper 
 name, in ExihI. xxiii, 31 ; Deut. xi. 24. 
 
 The several deserts or wildernesses mentioned 
 in Scripture are the following, which will be 
 found under (heir resjiective names : the deserts 
 of Edom, Etham, Ju<lah, Kadesh, M:ii'n, Parao, 
 Sliur, Sm, Sinai. 
 
 DEVIL. [Dkmon; Satan. J 
 
 DEUTERO-CANONICAL BOOKS, a term 
 applied in modern times to denote those sacreil 
 hooks which, originally denominated ecclesiastt.'ii 
 and apocryphal, were not in the Jewish or Hebrew 
 Canon, but, as being contained in the old (iieek 
 versions, were publicly read in the early Christian 
 Church [(^ANON, .A.pochvphaJ. 
 
 It is acknowledged by all that these hooks never 
 had a jilace in the Jewish Canon. The Roman 
 Catholic Professor AUier, of Pesth (who consider* 
 them as of equal authority with the rtceivtt'
 
 532 
 
 DEUTERO-CANONICAL 
 
 DKUTKKO-CANONICAL. 
 
 books of flie ilebiew Canon), observe: — ' Tlie 
 Denlero-tanoiiical Ixjoks are those "lii« i flie Jews 
 had not in llieirCani n, I'lit are notwiilis aniiin'^ re- 
 ceive<l by tlie Christian Ginrcli. i onceniin^; wliich, 
 111 (his vtry account of flicir n )t having l)efn in 
 the Jewish Canon, theie has existed some dotilit 
 even in flie Church ' ( Insiitut. Uei-meiieut. vol. i. 
 ch. viii. ix.). Josephus, a contemporary of the 
 a>-09tles, after describing' the Jewish (vanoii ((-ofitr. 
 4p. i. 8), which he says consists of 22 books. 
 ■einarka ■ ' Imt fiom the reij^n of Artaxerxes to 
 within our nirmory there liave been several thinifs 
 cominilfed 1o writing, whieli, however, hai'e nut 
 a^qtiired (he sante degree of c7-edit and au- 
 thoriti/ as tiie former books, inasmuch as the 
 trailition and succession of the projjlieta were 
 l«iss certain.' ]t lias been shown liy Hornemunn 
 ( Obseivat. ad ilhist. doctr. de Canon. V. T. ex 
 Pliilont) that, althoiigli Piiilo was acquainted 
 with the books in question, he lias not cited any 
 one of theii), at least with the viert of establishing 
 any proposition. 
 
 AmonT the early Christian writers, Jerome, 
 in bis Prefaces, gi\es us the most complete 
 information that we possess regarding the au- 
 tliority of these books in his time. After enu- 
 merating the 2i books of the Hebrew Canon, 
 consisting of the Law, the Prophets, and the 
 Hagiograjjha, he adils : ' This prologue I write 
 as a preface to the books to be translated by us 
 from tiie Hebrew info Latin, that we may know 
 that all the books which are not of this number 
 are apocryphal ; therefore Wisdom, which is com- 
 monly ascribed to Solomon as its author, and 
 the book of Jesus the son of Sirach, Judith, Tobit, 
 and the Shepherd, are not in the Canon.' Again, 
 in the ])ieface to liis translation of the books 
 of Soloinon from the Hebrew, he observes : — ■ 
 ' Tlie.se three books (Pioveibs, Ecclesiastes, and 
 Canticles) only are Solomon's. There is also the 
 Book of Jesus the son of Sirach, and another 
 p.«eiid-epigraplial book, called the Wisdom of 
 Solomon ; X\w Ibrmer of wliich I have seen in 
 Hebrew, called not Ecclesiasticus, as among the 
 Latins, but the Parables ; with which likewise 
 have lieen joined Ecclesiastes and the S<ing of 
 Songs, that the collection might the better re- 
 semble the books of Solomon bot-!i in matter and 
 design. The second is not to be found at all among 
 the Hebrews, and the style ])1ainly evinces its 
 Greek original : some ancient writers say it is a 
 work of Philo the Jew. As, therefore, the Church 
 reads Juditli and Tobit, and the books of Mac- 
 iabees, but does not receive, them among t-he Ca- 
 nonical Scriptures; so likewise it may read these 
 two books for the edification of the ])eople, but 
 not as of authority for proving any doctrines of 
 religion {ad cpdifrationon plehls, non ad aiitho- 
 ritatem ccclcsiasticorum dogmatiim covfrman- 
 rfam).' Of Baruch lie says, that he does ' not 
 translate it, becau.se it was not in Hebrew, nor 
 leceived by the Jews.' He never translated Wis- 
 dom, Ecclesiasticus, or either of the books of 
 MaCv,abee.s, and observes, that ' such books as are 
 not of the twenty-four " letters are to be utterly 
 rejected' {Pref. to Ezra). In his Preface to 
 
 * The variations in the . ■jmerical divisions of 
 rhese books, many of which are extremely fan- 
 ciful, do not att'e;t the identity of the canon 
 ktadf. 
 
 Jtidith he says, in like manner, '.Among tls" He- 
 brews this book is read amosig tl»« hagUnjraphc 
 (or, according to some manuscripts, ff^oc/T//)/(rt), 
 whose authority is not juilged sufficient to 9U))porl 
 disputed niatlei.s.' He adds, at the same liice, 
 that • the (4iMn<il of Nice is s^iid to nave incluOed 
 jl in tJie catalogue of the holy .Scriptuies.' We 
 have, however, no authority for su])j»sing that 
 the Coiiiicii of Nice ever formed such a catalogue. 
 There is no account of the matter in any of its 
 acts which have reached us. Tliere is, indeed, 
 a catalogue, as is obser\«l by Mr. Jones, at- 
 Iributed by Pappus, in his Synodlcon, to this 
 Council, with this relation — 'That the b'shojis 
 there as3eml>led weie, by a very extraordinary 
 miracle, convinced which were inspired and 
 which were a]iociyi>l)al books, after this manner : — 
 Ha\ ing ]iut all the liooks that laid claim to insjji- 
 ration under the communion-table Trp Csio Tpa- 
 Tff^ji) in a church, they jnayed fo Gml that those 
 whicli were of ilivine inspiiation iiiight be found 
 above, or upon, the table, and those which were 
 apocryjihal might be found under; and accoid- 
 ingly, as they jirayed, it came to ]iass.' This is 
 universally acknowledged to be a fable, and ('ai- 
 dinal Bellaimme {De Verba Dei) admits that 
 there could ha\e been no canon determined on by 
 the Nicene Council, as in that case none wouUl 
 liave ventured to have rejected it ; but lie siqi- 
 poses that Jerome may have found in some ol its 
 acts, now lost, some citation from the book of Ju- 
 dith, liellarmine further admits that in Jerome's 
 time the ecclesiastical books, although read in the 
 churches, were neither in the .Icicish nor Christian 
 Cations, inasmuch as no General Council had 
 yet deieimmed anything concerning them. 
 
 We have alrea<iy noticetl Jeromes remarks 
 resjjecting the additi ns to the book of Dan"*! 
 [D.VNiK!., Apocryphal Additiojis ^o]. In re- 
 ference to these it was that Jerome's contem- 
 porary Jiutinus, once his (iimiliar I'rieiid, but 
 now his bitter enemy, remarked in his second 
 invective against him — ' Who, in that host of 
 learned men, piesimied to compih the divine 
 instiument which the .-\])ostles delivered to th- 
 chuiches, and tlie de[)osit of the Holy S]iiiit? Is 
 it not a compdatiun, when ceitain jxiits are al- 
 tered, and an error said to be corrected ? for the 
 whole history of Susanna, wi ich alfordeil such an 
 example of chastity to the Cliureh of Goil, has 
 been cut oil'. Is the authority of one man now 
 to supersede the whole of the Seventy translators, 
 who, sliut up in separate cells, translated the 
 whole Bible without diU'ering in a single woid? 
 [Alluding to a fable now long exj)lode<l]. 
 He'er governed the Roman Cliuroh for twenty- 
 f,;ur years. It is not to be doubled that he 
 gave the Church the Sciipturis, which were 
 recited while he sat and taught, \^'hat! did 
 Peter deceive the Church, and give false books, 
 knowing that the true ones were acknow- 
 ledged l)y the Jews'? Hut he will jjerhaps say, 
 Peier was an i.nlettered man. What, then, w.ll 
 
 he say of Paul ? I will recei\e no trurb 
 
 which Peter and Paul did not reach. The fol 
 lowing are your own woids: — " .\tter four hun- 
 dreil years the simple ears of tiie Latins are not 
 to be olT'ended with new doctrine ; " but now yo« 
 say- — '■ Ev>y one who believes that Susanna, 
 married or unmairied, afi'orded no exanaple ot 
 chastity, nas erred,' It is not t'ue. And—
 
 DEUTERO C 4 NONICAL. 
 
 " Kvery one who thouu-tit that the hoy Diiiiicl was 
 nlleii with the Holy Spirit, mid coin icteil (l:e 
 elders, has en etl.'" 1 1 is not true. "TlieClimcli 
 Universal tliroii^'hout (he worUi, coiisistin;; either 
 of those who are in the hmly or tliose wiio are in 
 tlie Lord, whether holy conl'essors or holy mar- 
 tyrs, who have sung the Hyiiiii of the t;iiildreii, 
 have all erred, and sung falsely :" Theiefoie, alter 
 four hundred years, the truth of the law, hought 
 at a ])rice, j^ioceeds from the Synagogue. 
 
 To this angry in\ective Jeiome rei)lied — ' I 
 only stcite what the Hehrews are accustomed to 
 say against the history of Susanna, and the Song 
 of the Cliildren, anil the fahle of Bel and the 
 Dragon, which are not fiund in the Ilelirevv 
 Tolume. My accuser shows liimsell to he a silly 
 »ycopliant. 1 did not give my own opinion, hut 
 what they are accustomed to say against ns.' 
 For his own views on (his suhjoct, none of which 
 he retracts, he refers Rulinus to his Preface. 
 
 It will he observed that these invectives of 
 Rufinus 1 ave no reference to any other writings 
 than the history of Susanna and the Song of (lie 
 Thiee Children. In fact, Rutinus liimsell'made the 
 Bame distinction in regard to the books of Scrip- 
 ture that Jerome did. AiYer enumerating the 
 books of the Old and New Testament exactly 
 according to the Jewish canon, saying, ' These 
 are the volumes which the Fathers ha\o included 
 in the canon, and out of which they woulil iiuve 
 us prove the doctrines of our faith;' he adds — 
 'however, it ought to be observed, that there are 
 also other books which are not canonical, hut have 
 been called by our forefathers ecclesiastical ; as 
 the Wisdom of Solomon, and another called the 
 Wisdom of the Son of Sirach, which among the 
 Latins is called by the general name of Kccle- 
 siasticus, by wiiich title is denoted not the author 
 of the book, but the quality of the writing. Of 
 the same order is the book of Tobit, Judith, and 
 the books of the Maccal<ees. In (he Kew Testa- 
 ment is the book of the Shepherd of Heimas, 
 which is called the ' Two Ways, or the Judgment 
 of Peter ;' all which they would have to be read 
 in the churches, but not alleged by way of au- 
 thority for iJioviiig articles of faith. Other Scrip- 
 tnies (hey call apocryphal, which they would 
 not have to be read in churclies ' (/n Symb. 
 Apo3t.). 
 
 There have thus been three divisions made by 
 the ancictitg, viz. the Canonical Scriptures, the 
 Ecclesiastical, and the Apocryphal, or otherwise, 
 the Canonical and the Apocryphal, of which latter 
 tl.eie are two kinds, viz. those which, having 
 nothing contrary to the faith, may bo jjrolitably 
 lead, although not authentic, and those which are 
 injurious and contrary to thefaith. It is, how- 
 ever, maintained by Professor Alber that, when 
 Jerome and Ruiinus said (he Ecclesiastical books 
 weie read for edification, but not for contiiming 
 articles of faith, they only meant that they weie 
 not to be em])loyed in controversies with the Jews, 
 who did not acknowledge their authority. Tiiese 
 Fathers, however, certainly put them into tlie 
 same rank with the Shepherd of Heimas. 
 
 The eailiest catalogue which we possess of the 
 books of Scripture is that of Melito, Bishop of 
 Sardis, piescrve<l by Eusebins. From his state- 
 ment, written in the year 170, it seems evident 
 that there hail been then no catalogue authorized 
 ^j tlie Chiuch r any publi&(Jl>ody. He cnurae- 
 
 DEUTERO-CANONICAL 
 
 MS 
 
 rates the books of the Jewish C.inon oi^lv. irora 
 wliiih, however, he omitj tliC Inxik of Esther 
 [EsTHEu]. 
 
 The tirst catalogue of the Holy Srri]itiire9, 
 drawn up by any public body in the Christian 
 chiirc/i, wiiich has come down to u.s, is that <•/ 
 the (Council of Laodicea, in Phrygia, su]>|M>^ed to 
 be held about (he year 305. In the two la-st 
 canons of this Council, as we now have them, there 
 is an enumeration of the liooks of Scriptuie 
 nearly confoimable, in the Old Testament, (o the 
 Jewish canon. The canons are in thes-s word*, — 
 
 ' That private Psalms ought not U> lie said in 
 the church, nor any books not caiionicai, but onlv 
 the canonical hooks of the Old and New Testa- 
 ment. The books of the Old Tctament, which 
 ought to be read,aie these — l.(ienesis ; 2. Kxodus; 
 3. Leviticus; 1. Numiiers : 5. Deuteionomy ; 
 (). Joshua, son of Nnn : 7. Judges, with Ruth; 
 S. Esther; 1). 1 and 2 Kingdoms; 10. 3 and 4 
 Kingdoms; 11. 1 ami 2 Remains: 12. 1 and 
 2 E.sdias; 13. the book of l-'JI) P.,alms ; H. 
 Pioverbs; 15. E<clesiastes ; 16. Canticles; 17. 
 Job; IS. the Twelve Piophets; l!>. 1-aiah; 20. 
 Jeremiah and Barnch, the Lamentations and 
 the Epistles; 21. K/.ekiel ; 22. Daniel.' We 
 have already given the books of the New Testa- 
 ment as enumerated by this Council (see .\ntii.b- 
 go.mena). 
 
 This catalogue is not, however, universally ac- 
 kno.\ledged to be genuine. ' Possibly learned 
 men,' says Laidner, ' according to the dilferent 
 notions of the pa; ty they have l)i'en engaged in, 
 have been led to disregard the last canon; sor.-.e 
 because of its omitting the Apociyphal Imoks of 
 the Old Testament, ami otlieis bec.iuse it has not 
 the book of Revelation.' Basnage, in his History 
 of the Church, observes tlial ' I'loteslants and 
 Catholics have equally disparaged (his synod.' 
 ' It is said,' remarks Laidner, ' tliat the canons of 
 this Council were received and adopted l)y soine 
 General Councils in after times; iie\eitlieless j)Pr- 
 haps it would be tlillicult to show that fho e 
 General Councils received the last canon, and 
 exactly approved the catalogue of said br.oks 
 therein contained, without any addition or dimi- 
 nution, as we now have it' (see Majisi's Concilia, 
 ii. 57-1). 
 
 But, besides the Hebrew canon, the reader will 
 have observed that there were certain other books 
 ])ublicly read in the ])iimitive church, and treated 
 with a hi...li degree of respect, although not con- 
 sidered by (he Hebiews, from whom they were 
 derived (see the passage above cited from Jose- 
 ))!ius) as of equal authority with t!ie former. 
 These books seem to have been included in (he 
 copies of (he Sejituaglnt, which was generally 
 made use of by the sacred wrileis of the Nevr 
 Testament. It does not a]))*ar wtiether t'.ie Ajios- 
 tles gave any cautions against the reading of 
 these bi^oks; and it has been even sujijiosed thit 
 they have referred to (hem. Others, however, have 
 maintained that (he ])rinci])al pas.^ages to whicli 
 (hey have referred (for it is not pretended that 
 they have cited them) are from the amonical 
 books. The following are (he jiassages liere al- 
 luded to: — {Hve next paye.) 
 
 Some of (he uncanonical books, however, had 
 not been extant more than a hundred and thirtr 
 years at most at the Chri^ian era, and could 
 only have obtained a place in tlie Greek Scrip-
 
 8.14 
 
 DEUTERO-CANONICAL. 
 
 DEUTERO-CAN ONICAL- 
 
 Rom. xi. 24 
 Heb. i 13 
 
 „ xi..5 
 Ruin. xiii. 1 
 
 „ ii. II 
 Gal. ii 6 
 Ki)li. vi. 9 
 Ci.loss. iii. 23 
 1 Peter i. 21 
 Janies i. 10 
 1 Coi. X. 10 
 James li. '2-i 
 Luke X. 41 
 1 'lliess. iv. 3 
 Matt, vii 12 
 
 1 Cor. X. 20 
 John X. 22 
 Hel>. xi. 33 
 Malt, ix 13 
 
 2 Cor. xiii. 6 
 
 cornj)are<l with Wisdom ix. 13 
 „ „ vii. 26 
 
 „ „ iv. 10 
 
 1, vi. 3 
 
 vi. 7 
 
 Eccliis. xtv. 17 
 
 Juilitli viii. 25 
 
 ., V. 22 
 Tobit iv. 7 
 
 „ iv. 17 
 
 „ iv. l.> 
 Banicli iv. 7 
 
 1 Mace. iv. 59 
 
 2 Mace. vi. 7 
 Prayer of Maiiasses. 
 
 3 Esdras iii. 12 
 
 see Isaiah xl. 13 
 
 sec Gen. v. 24 
 
 see Prov. viii. 19, L€ 
 
 see Dent. x. 17 
 
 see Isaiali xl. 6 
 (Lat.) Num. xiv. IS 
 
 Ecclus. xiv. 15 
 
 tures a short time before this period ; but the 
 oidy coii'es of the Scriptures in existence lor 
 tiie first three hundreil years after Christ, either 
 anwrii^ the Jews or Ciiristians of Greece, Italy, 
 or Africa, contained these liooks witliout any 
 mark of ilistinction tliat we know of. The He- 
 brew Bible and language were cpiite unknown 
 to them (lining this period, and the most learned 
 were, probiljly, but ill-informetl on the stil'ject, 
 at least befoie Jerome's translation of tlie Scrip 
 tures from the original Hebrew. The Latin 
 versions before his lime were all made from the 
 Septuagint. We do not, indeed, find any cata- 
 logue of these writings before tlie Council of 
 Hippo, but only individual notices of separate 
 I'ooks. Thus Cleniejit of Alexandria (Stromata, 
 A.D. 211), cites tlie Wisdom of Solomon and 
 Ecclesiasticus, and Origeii refers to several of 
 these books, treating them with a liigh degree of 
 veneration. 'There is," says Kusebius, 'an epistle 
 of Aliicanus, addressed to Origen, in whicii he 
 intimates iiis doubt on the history of Stisannaii in 
 Daniel, as if it were a sjuirious and liclitioiis 
 composition: to rtiiich Origen wrote a very full 
 answer.' These epistles are both extant. Oiigen, 
 at great length, vinilicates tliese jiaits oftiieGieek 
 version — (or he acknowledges tliat they were not 
 in the Hebrew — from the objections of Africanus, 
 asserting that they were true and genuine, and 
 made use of in Gieek among all the cliiirches of 
 the Gentiles, and that we should not attend to 
 the fraudulent comments of the Jews, but take 
 that only for true in the holy Scriptures whicii the 
 Seventy liad translated, for that this only was con- 
 firmed by Ajiostolic autliority. lu tiiesanie letter 
 he cites the hook of Tobit, and in his second book 
 De Pricipia, he even speaks of the She[)herd of 
 Hermas as divinely inspired. Origen, however, 
 u«°5 very ditVerent language in regard to tlie 
 book of Enoch, the Testament of the Twelve 
 Patriarchs, anil the Assumption of Moses. 
 
 Tlie local Coun'-.il of Hippo, held in the year 
 of Christ 393, at which the celelirateil Augustine, 
 afterwards liisliop of Hip]io, was jireseiit, formed 
 a catalogue of the sacred books of the Old and 
 New Testament, in which the ecclesiastical books 
 were all included. They are inserted in tlie fol- 
 lowing order ill its 3Gth canon, viz.: — 
 
 • Tlial nothing be read in tlie church besides 
 the Canonical Scriptures. Under the name 
 
 of Canonical Scriptures are reckonwl Genesis 
 Exodus, Leviticus, Numlieis, Deuteionomy, 
 Joshua, Judges, Ruth. 4 books of Kings, lie- 
 mains, Job, Psalms of Diuid, 5 books of Solnnoii, 
 12 books of tlie Piophels, Isaiah, Jeremiah, 
 Daniel, E/.ekiel, Tobit, Judith, Hesther, Esdias, 
 2 books, Maccabees, 2 books.' [For the books of 
 the New Testament see supra, Antii.egomkna.] 
 ' But for the confirmation of this canon the 
 churches beyond the seas are to he consulted.' 
 The passions of the martyrs were also permitted 
 to be read on their anniveisuries. 
 
 The third Council of Caithage, generally be- 
 lieved to have been held in 397, at which Auselius, 
 bishop of Caithage, presided, and at which Au- 
 gustine was present, consisting in all of forty-four 
 bislio[is, ado])led the same catalogue, which was 
 confirmed at the fourth Council of Carthage, held 
 in the year 119. The reference said to have 
 been made from the tAird Council of Carthage, 
 held in 397, to Pope Boniface [Antii.egomkna], 
 is a manifest anaclii-onisin in the cojiies of the 
 acts of tliis council (see L'Alibe's Concilia'), as 
 the jiontilicate of Boniface did not commence 
 before 417. It has been, therefoie, conjectiire<l 
 that this reference belongs to tlie fourth council. 
 
 As St. Augustine had great inllnence at these 
 Councils, it must be of impoitance to ascer- 
 tain his private sentiments on tiiis subject. Tliis 
 eminent man, who was born in 3Jl, conse- 
 crated bislio]) of Hip]io (the jiresent Bona) in 
 395, and died in 430, in the seventy-sixth year 
 of his age, writes as follows in the year 397 : — 
 ' The entire Canon of Scri])ture is comjnised' in 
 these books. There are 5 of Moses, viz. Genesis, 
 Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy; 1 of 
 Joshua, 1 of Judges, 1 small book called Ruth, 
 which seems rather to belong to the beginning of 
 the Kingiloms, the 4 books ol' the Kingdoms, and 
 2 of tlie Remains, not following one another, but 
 jiarallel to each other. These are historical books 
 which contain a succession of times in the order 
 of events. Theie are others whicli do not observe 
 the order of time, and aie unconnected together, 
 as Job, Tobit, Esther, and Judith, the 2 books of 
 Maccabees, and the 2 books of Ezia,' which last 
 do more observe the order of a regular succession 
 of events, alter that contained in the Kingiloms 
 and Remains. Next are the Prophets, amonx 
 which is 1 book of tl|^ Psalms of DariU, a&d 9
 
 DEUTERO-CAN ONICAL. 
 
 DtUTERO-CANONICAL. 
 
 559 
 
 0/ Solomon, viz. Proveilw, Ciuitides, And Ei'cle- 
 iiastes; I'or fliesp 2 l»ooks, Wwdom ami Eccle- 
 •iasticiis, are called Solomon's for no oilier reason 
 than because tliey have a resemblance to liis 
 writins^s : lor if is a very ;;eneral opinion tiiat tliey 
 were written by Je^ns the son of Siracli, vvliicli 
 bf.-oVs, however, since tlin' ive ailinitte«l into 
 autliurity, are to i>e reckon* d amoni; projjiietical 
 books. The i-est are the l)ooks of those who are 
 proj)erly called jiropliets, as flie several books of 
 the 12 Prophets, which I'eing louiid toijcthcr, and 
 never separated, aie reckoned 1 book. The 
 names of which ])rophet3 are tliese : Ho-ea, Joel, 
 Amos, Obailiaii, Jonah, iMicah, Nahum, Habak- 
 kuk. Zepiianiali, Haj;i»ai, Zechariah, Malachi. 
 Al>er the-^e the four Hropliets of large volumes, 
 Isaiah, Jereiniali, Daniel, Kzekiel. In these 44 
 books is comprised all the aiitliority of the 01<1 
 Testament" {De Doctr. Christ). [For the New, 
 see Antii.eqomena : they are the same with tiiose 
 now received.] 
 
 It has been, indeed, nsaintained tliat Augustine 
 altered his opinion on the subject of the deiifero- 
 canonical books in his Hetractatioiis (see Hender- 
 son On Inspiration^ p. 495) ; l)nt the only ]iassage 
 in this work bearing on the subject, which we can 
 discover, is that wiierein he confesses his mistake 
 in terming Kcc!esia>t!cus a propheiical bo.ik. 
 
 Augustine has been also sup])osed to have testi- 
 fied to tiie infeiior authority of these books, from 
 iiis saying- tiiat one of them was reul from tiie 
 reader's place. ' The sentiment of the book of 
 Wiidom is not to be rejected, which has deserved 
 to be recited for such a long course of years from 
 the sti-p of the readers of tlie clinrch of Christ, 
 and to be heard with the veneration of divine 
 authority from tlie bishop to the humblest of 
 the laics, faitliful, penitents, and catechumens' 
 [Maccabek.i]. 
 
 What the result of tlie reference from Africa 
 to the 'churches beyond tlie seas' may have 
 been, we can only judge from the letter which is 
 said ro have lieen written on tlie subject by Inno- 
 cent I., bishop of Rome, to St. Kxu])ere, bishop of 
 Toulouse, in the year 405. In tliis letter, which, 
 although disputed, is most probalily genuine. 
 Innocent gives the same catalogue ot the books 
 of the Old and New Testaments as those of the 
 councils of Hippo and Carthage, omitting only 
 tiie book of Kstlie.'. 
 
 The next catalogue is that of the Roman 
 Council, drawn u]) by Po| e Geliisius and seventy 
 Iwshops. The genuineness of the acts of this 
 council has lieen questioned iiy Pearson, Cave, 
 and tiie two Hasnages, but viniiicated by Pagi 
 and Jeiemiah Jone-i. Tiie catalogue is identical 
 with the pieceding, except in the order of tlie 
 l)Qoks. 
 
 Some of the most important manuscripts of the 
 Holy Scriptures which have descended to us 
 weie wiiilen soon after this ])eri<Ml. The very 
 ancient ,\lexiindrian MS. now in the Biitish 
 Museum contains the following books in the 
 order which we here give them, txigether with the 
 annexed catalogue: — 
 
 ' Genesis, ICxodus, Leviticus, Numl)«rs, Deutero- 
 nomy, Joshua, Judges, Rirh; R books. — King- 
 doms, 4 ; Remains. 2; fi Ik>. ks. — IG Projihets, viz., 
 Hosea, 1 ; .Amos, 2 ; Micah, 3; Joel, 4; Olia- 
 iiih. .5; Jonah, (i ; Naliiini.7; Amiiacuni. *> ; Xe- 
 }bai iah, 9; Haggai, If* '•'^tcliariali, 11 ; Malachi, 
 
 12; Isaiah, l!); Jeremiah, 14; E/Hiel, 15; !)»• 
 niel, 16; E-ther; Tobit ; Judith; Kzia, 2; Mac- 
 cabees, 4; Psiilter anil Hyiniis; Job; I'loveibs; 
 Kcclesiiistes ; Canticles; Wisdnni ; Wisdom of 
 Jesus Sirach ; 4 (iospels ; ."Xcts, I ; 7 Catliulic 
 Ejiistles; 14 E])islles ol Paul; Revelation; 2 
 Epistles of Clement; to^Mther * * * * books; 
 Psalms of Solomon.' These bo.ks are eipially 
 incor))oraled in all the manuscripts of ihe Latin 
 Vulgate (which was oiiginatly trans], ileil noni 
 the .Se]itMagint). Those whicli Jerome did not 
 translate from the Heliiew or Giet.'k, as WiiMlom 
 and Ecc1e~i<usticu3, were adopted from the older 
 Latin version. 
 
 Although the Canon of Scripture seemed now 
 to lie so far settled liy the dec'ret-s of these 
 Councils, all di.l not conceive tlienjselves iMiund 
 by them; and it is oi)«erved by Jaliu (l)itrod.) 
 that tlicy were not otliei-ivi-.e to lie uuderstixxt 
 tlian ' that the ecclesiastical boiiks enumerated 
 in this catalogue weie to be held as useful for 
 the eilification of the petijile, but not to lie ap- 
 jilieil to the confirmation of doctrines of faith.' 
 Such ajipears at least to have been the sentiment 
 of many eminent divines between this ptiiod and 
 the sixteenth century. 
 
 Bishop Cosin. in his excellent Scholastic 
 History of the Canon, fimiisln's to this ell'ect 
 a host of quotations from writers of the middle 
 ages, including Veii. Bede. Julin of D^imascus, 
 .\!cuin. Peter Mauritius, Hugh tie St. Victor, 
 Carilinal Hugo de St. Ciier, tlie author of the 
 ordinary Gloss, and Nicholas Lyraiius. Of 
 these some call the Deutero-canonical books ' ex- 
 cellent and useful, but not in the canon;' others 
 speak of them as ' apocryphal, that is, doubtful 
 Scriptuies," as not having been ' written in the 
 time of the prophets, but in that of the priests, 
 under Ploleniy," ^c, iis not ' equalling the sub- 
 lime dignity of the other books, yet deserving 
 reception for their laudable instruction,' classing 
 them with the wiiiings of Jeronie, Augustine, 
 Ambiose, and Bede. and making a maike.1 dis- 
 tinction not only between the Jewish andCliii-.tian 
 Canons, but e\en between jiaits of the Deutero- 
 canonical writings. Mr. Archiliald Alexander 
 also ( Canon of the Old and Aew 'I'eslamcnt iiscer- 
 tained) cites several of the same authorities: he 
 has, however, in one instance, evidently mistaken 
 Peter Lombard for Peter Coniestor, the author ol 
 the Scholastic Uistwy. .\\ the era of the Reforma 
 lion, we find James l'"al>er of Etajiles and Car- 
 dinal Cajetan expiessing themselves to the same 
 ell'ect, and the learned Sanctcs Pagnini, in his 
 translation of the liible from the original lan- 
 guajres. jiublisheii at Lyons in 1528 (the liist Bible 
 that contained the division into veises with the 
 ]>resent tigures), dedicatetl to Pope ClenienI VH., 
 distinguished tjie ecclesiastical books, which ha 
 says weie not in the canon, liy the term Haato- 
 grapha. For a desciijition of this rare woik, see 
 Christian Remembrancer, vol. iv. p. 419, in a 
 treatise ' On the division of verses in tlie Bible,' 
 ly the author of the present article. 
 
 We ate now arrived at the jM-riod of the Re- 
 formation, when the cjucstion of the Canon of 
 Scripture was warmly discusseil. Long before 
 this jieiiod (viz. in 13*0), WiclllVhad jublshed 
 bis translation of the Bible, in whicli he sul>sti« 
 tilted another piologii* foi Jerorre's; wherein, 
 alter enumerating the ' vwt-niy-iive' Uk ks uf tlM
 
 556 
 
 DEL'TKRO-CAN ON ICAL. 
 
 DKUTKRO CANONICAL. 
 
 Hebrew Canon, lie adils- -' Wliati'ver Ijdok is in 
 tlie Old TostaiiK'nt, liesiiles lliese Iwiiity-iive, 
 gliall he set anionic tlie A|iocivi)lia, lliat h, williout 
 authority of helief." lie iiKo, in onler to distin- 
 guish the Helii«w text IVoin the Gieek interiK)- 
 lafioiis, inserted .leionie's iioles, rubricated, into 
 tlie luidy of the (e\t. 
 
 AUhongli MiUtin Lutlier commenced the pidi- 
 lication of liii fianslation oC flie Bihle in 1523, 
 yet, as it was ])iil)lislied in parts, he had not yet 
 made any distinction lietweeii the two classes of 
 l)Gdks, when Lunicei- pnljlished his edition of tlie 
 Greek Sejituagint at Straslnu};: in l5'Ui, in which 
 he sej)aiated the Deiitero-caiioidcal, or Apocryjihal, 
 tuiobs, from those of the Jewisli Canon ; for whicii 
 lie was severely rastij^uted hy Moriniis (see 
 Masch s edition cd' Ite'ltoii'/a Biblioi heca Biblica, 
 vol. ii. ]i. 2tiS) Arias Montamis went still 
 further, and rejected them alti)i;et:ier. In 1534 
 the cornjilete edition of Luther's Bible appeared, 
 wliereiii those books whicii Jerome had placed 
 inter apocrypha were separated, and ))laced liy 
 themselves t>etweentlie Old and New Testament, 
 under the title ' A])ocrypha; that is. Books which 
 are not to Ite considered as equal to iioly Scrip- 
 ture, and yet ai« useful and f^ood to read.' 
 
 A few years after, the divines of the Council of 
 Trent assembled; <md among the eavliest sub- 
 jects of their deliberation was the Canon of 
 Ssrijiture. ' The Canon of Au;>;ustine," says bisliop 
 Marsli, 'continued to be the Canon of tlie ruling 
 party. But as there were not Vffanting (bisons, 
 es[)ecially among the learned, who from time to 
 time recommemled tiie Canon of Jerome, it was 
 necessary i'ov the Council of Trent to decide 
 between the conteudiiii; patties" {Comparative 
 View, p. 97). Tlie Tridentine Fathers bad 
 conseijuently a nice and difficult question to 
 determine. 
 
 On the 8th April, 1516, i>l! who were piescnt 
 at the foujth session of flie Cxiuncil of Tieiit 
 adopted tiie canon of Augustine, declaring, ' He 
 is als<i to be anathema wlio does not receive these 
 entire books, with all their jiarts, as they hav« 
 lieeii accustomed to be read in the Catholic 
 Cliuici), and are found in the ancient editions 
 of tiie Latin Vulgate, as sacietl and canonical, 
 and wiio knowingly and wilfully despises the 
 aforeii-iid traditions ' 
 
 We aie int'urmed by Jalin {Introduction), that 
 this <!eoree did not allect the distinction which 
 the learned had always made l/etween the cano- 
 nical and deuteio-canonical books, in proof of 
 whicti he refers to the various opinions which 
 still prevail in his church on the subject, Ber- 
 naid Laniy {Appar tus Biblicus, ii. 5) deny- 
 ing, and Du Pin (rrole(/nmena) asseiting, that 
 the books ( f the second Canon are oi' equal au- 
 thoiity with those of the lirst. Tliose who desire 
 fiiilher information will find it in the two ac- 
 counts of the controversies which took place at 
 tl»e council on this subject ; one from the jien 
 of C^aidlnal Pallavicini, the other by Father Paul 
 Sarpi, the two eminent historians of the ('ouncil. 
 Profe«.'H)r Alber, to wiiom we have already re- 
 feried, ha\ing denied that amy such distin<tion 
 M that niaizitained by his brotlier Professor, 
 Jaiin, can lawfully exist among Roman Catliolic 
 divines, insists that Iwth canons possess one 
 4nd the same authority. The words of Bernaid 
 Laaiy, iiowever, cited by Jah i are — ' The books 
 
 of the second Canon, allhiMigh united with fh* 
 first, aie not, Iiowever, of tlie same aulhoiity' 
 [Apparut. Jiibl. ii. 5. p. 333). Alber endea- 
 vours to explain (his as meaning only that these 
 books had not the same authority before the Ca- 
 non of the Council of Tieiit, and ciles a jiassagc 
 fiOHi Pallavicini to prove that the anatheiiia was 
 ' directed against tlio.se Catholics who adoj.teii 
 the views of Cardinal Cajetan' (vol. ii. ]). TOS). 
 But, however this may be, among other opinions 
 of Luther condemned by the Council was the 
 following : — ' That no books should be admitted 
 into the Canon of the Old Testament but those 
 received by the Jews; and that from the new 
 should be excluded — the E|)istle to the Hebrews, 
 those of James, 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Jude and 
 the Apocaly])se.' 
 
 The whole of the books in debate, with the 
 exception of 3rd and Hh Ksdras, and the Piayer 
 of Manasses, are considered as canonical by the 
 Council of Trent. But it must be recollected, 
 that the decision of the ('ouncil of Trent is 
 one by no means peculiar to this council. The 
 third Council of Cartilage h.id consideied the 
 same books canonical. 'The Council of Trent,' 
 says bishop Maisli, ' declared no other booka 
 to be sacred and canonical than such as had 
 existed i'rom the earliest ages of Christianity, 
 not oidy in the Latin version of the Old Testa- 
 ment, but even in the ancient Greek version, whicfi 
 is l:nown by the name of the Septuagint ... In 
 the mani:scripfs of the Septuagint, tlieie is the 
 same intermixture of canonical and ajxicryphal 
 books, as in the inanuscri;)ts of the Latin version' 
 [aitiiough there are in dill'erent nianusciipts va- 
 riatiuas in the ])articular arrangement of single 
 books]. The Helirew was inaccessible to the 
 Latin translators in Europe and Africa duiing 
 the three first centuries.' 
 
 The ecclesiastical books were geneially written 
 within a peiiod which could not have extended to 
 more than two cen'uries before the birth of Christ. 
 Li the choice of tlie jjlaces whicii were assigned 
 them by the Gieek Jews resident in Alexandria 
 and other parts tif Egy [)t, who proliably added these 
 books to the Septuagint vi rsion according as they 
 became gradually approve<l of, they were directed 
 ' jiartly by the subjects, [jartly by their relation to 
 othex writings, and ])aitly by the periods in which 
 the recorded transactions aie sup]:osed to have 
 liapfjened.' Their insertion shows liow highly 
 tiiey were esteemed by the Greek Jews of Egypt; 
 but whether even the Egyptian Jews ascrilied to 
 them canonical and divine authority, it would not 
 be easy to jnove (Marsh's Comparative Vuiio). 
 
 The following were the proceedings of the 
 Anglican Church in leference to this subject : — 
 
 In Coverdale's English tian^lation of the Bible, 
 printed in 1535, the deuteio-canonical books 
 were divided from the others and j.rinted sepa- 
 rately, with the excejjtion of the book of Barucli, 
 which was not sejjaiated from the others in thia 
 version until the edition of 1550. They had 
 however been 6e[)aiated in Matthew's Bible in 
 1537, juefaced with the woids, 'the volume oi 
 the book called llagiographa.' This Bible con 
 tained Olivefan's pieface, in whicii these book* 
 were sj)oken of in somewhat disparaging terms. 
 In Cranmer's Bilile, published in 1539, the same 
 words and preface were continued ; but, in tii« 
 edition of 1549, tlie woid Hagiographa wa*
 
 DKUTERO-CANONICAL. 
 
 chang'ed into Apocn/pha, wliicn jwsseil tliioiif^h 
 *.ie succwil'ji:^ editions into Kiiij; James's liiliie. 
 Olivet.iii's prelaci- was omitted in tlie liislioj)"9 
 Bible in lolif*, altpi- tlie fiaminsr of tlie canon in 
 the Thirty-nine Ai tides in irj()2. 
 
 Ill tlie Geneva IJilile, whicli was tne ]io])nlar 
 Kiizlish translation liet")ie the iiiesent authorized 
 version, "anil which was jinhlisiied in 1559, these 
 booki are printed separately with a preface, in 
 which, althnn^ii not considrred of themselves as 
 (tnlhcient to prove any ]H>int of Clnistiati doctrine, 
 they are yet treated witli a high des^ree of vene- 
 rati(m. In ihe par;rilel passages in the margin 
 of this translation, references are made lo the 
 dentero-canonical l)ool<s. 
 
 In the (irst e;lition of the Articles of the Chnrch 
 of England, 15J2, no catalogue of tlie ' Holy 
 Scri|)tnre" had yet appeared. I)nt in the Articles 
 of 1562, the canon of St Jerome was finally 
 adopted in the following orde)-: 5 hooks of Moses, 
 Joshua, Judges, Ruth, I anil 2 Samuel ; 1 and 2 
 Kings, 1 and 2 Chronicles, 1 and 2 Esdras, Esther, 
 Joh, Psahns, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Cantica, 
 four Prophets tlie Greater, twelve Prophets the 
 Less. In the 6fh article it is declared that, ' hi 
 the name of the Holy Scii])tnre we ilo understand 
 those canonical hooks of the Old and New Testa- 
 ment, of whose authority was never any doid)t in 
 Ihe Church," and that ' the other books (as Jerome 
 saith) the Church doth read for exarn])le of life 
 and instruction of manners, hut yet it doth not 
 apply t'liem to estalilish any doctrine." The books 
 which the aiticle then enumerates are 1 and 2 
 [.•J and 4] Esdras, Tobia*!, Judith, the rest of 
 tlie book of Esther, Wisdom, Jesus the son of 
 Siiach, Baruch the Piojihet, the Song of the 
 Chihhen, the Story of Susanna, Bel and (he 
 Pragon, the Prayer of Manasses, and 1 and 2 
 Maccabees. If is not, iioiVP»er, p.ltogether correct, 
 in point of fact, in in ludiiig in the number of 
 'Kwks thus referred to iy Jerome as read liy the 
 •Church for ediKcation the third and fjurth books 
 of Esdras. TItese books were equally rejected by 
 the Ciiurch of Rome and by Luther, who did not 
 translate them. The Cnur<h of England further 
 declares, that ' all the hooks of the New Testament, 
 as they are commonly received, we do leceive and 
 account them canonical.' TlieCiiuich of ?>nglan(l 
 has herein followed the Councils of Hip])o and 
 Carthage. Tlie j)lirase'of whose authoiity was 
 never any doubt in the (Church," lefeis thcrefoie 
 more strictly to the books of the Old Testament 
 IIkih the New, for we have already seeri tiiat doubts 
 did exist respecting the .-Xntii.eodmena of the 
 New Testament. In the first book of Homilies, 
 publiiiied ill 15i", and the seconil in ISOO, both 
 confirmed by the Tiiiity-tifth Arti(;le of l.')62, the 
 Jeutero-canonical Ixioks are cited a? •Scripture," 
 iiid treated with the same reverence as the other 
 books in liie liilile ; and in the pieliice to the liook 
 jf Common Prayer, they are alluded to as being 
 ' aj^reeable to" the Holy .Scriptures. 
 
 The Helvetic Confession, dated 1st March, 
 !5r)(», has the fuHovting expression respecting 
 the apocryphal books : — * AVe do not deny that 
 ceriain books of the Old Testament were narneil 
 by the ancients apocryplial, by others eccle- 
 siastical, as being lead in the churches hut not 
 adduced for anthc.-iiy in matters of Ijelief: a.1 
 Angusline. in the ISth book of the Citu of GnH, 
 eh. UP, relates, that the n.ime^ und books of cer- 
 
 DF.UTERO-CANOMC.I L. !>V1 
 
 tain \ nphets were adduced in the books of Kii)i?«, 
 but adds that these were not in the Canon, uiiii 
 that those we have were snflicieiit for |i:ety.' 
 Tlie C'onfession of the Dutch Churclies (dated 
 the same yearj is more full. After recounting 
 the canonical boiks, ' lesnei'ting wl.icli i;o cor;- 
 troversy existeii," it a<lils, 'We make a dlstuictiun 
 between tiiose alio suf:h as are called A|H)Ciyphal, 
 which may indted be read in the Cniirch, aii,l 
 jiroofs addiiceil from them, so far as tliey agree with 
 the canonical b'.xjks; but (heir authority anil 
 force are by no me.ins such that any article of 
 faith may lie <eitainly declareil from their testi- 
 mony alone, still less that tl.ev can impugn or 
 detract from the authority of the others." They 
 atld, as their reason for receiving the cancmical 
 books, that ' it is not so much because the C/'hurch 
 receives them, as that the Holy Spirit feslilies to 
 our consciences that they ha\ e come ("nmi (iod ; 
 and chielly on this account, because they of 
 themselves hear testimony to (heir own antlwiily 
 .-xnd sanctity, so that even the blind may see the 
 fullilment of all things predic(ed in them, aS it 
 were with the senses.' 
 
 The Westminster Confession proceeded on the 
 same ]ninci])le, but (rca(ed (lie IxKiks of (he 
 second Canon widi less ceremony. Al*(cr enu- 
 meradng (he canonical books (ascribing thir- 
 teen e|)istle3 only to Paul), they proceed to say, 
 that ' the books calleil Apocryjiha, not being 
 of Divine conlirmation, .are no ]iait of the Canim 
 of Scripture; and therefore are of no authority 
 in the Church of God; nor lo be any otherwise 
 approved, or made use of, than other human 
 writings.' And again: 'The autluirity of Iluly 
 Scri])ture, for which it ought to be helieveil 
 and obeyed, depended not on the teslimony of 
 any man or church, but wholly n]:on God, the 
 author thereof, and tlierefoie it is to be received, 
 because it is tlie word of God. We may be 
 moved and induced l)y the Church to a high and 
 reverent esteem of the Holy Scriptures ; and the 
 heavenliness of the matter, the elhcacy of the 
 doctrine, the majesty of the style, Ike. &c., are 
 argiiinents whereby it doth abundantly evidence 
 itself to be the word of God : yet, not Aithstand 
 iiig, our full ])er3uasii.ii and assurance of the 
 infallilile truth and Divine authority thereof \t 
 from the inward work of the Holy .Spirit, being 
 witness by and with the word in our hearts." 
 
 Luther (oil I Cor. iii. 9, 10^ had declared 
 that (he touchstone by whi<h certain Sriiptures 
 should be acknowledged as divine or nut was the 
 following: — 'Do (hey jireach Jesns Chiist or 
 not T And, among the modems. Dr. 'J'westeii 
 {Vorlesunye-i nber die Doymatik, lS'29, vol. i. 
 p. 121, sqtp) has maintained a somewhat similar 
 ])iincl])le (see Gaussen"9 Tlieopneustia). The 
 Confession (rt" .'Augsburg, dated in \'yi\, contain* 
 no article whatever on the Canon of Scr'ptuie; 
 nor do the Lutherans appear to have any other 
 canon than Luther's Bilile. For the sentiments 
 of the (tukkk Ciiuucii, see llsniiA.s; KsT'ltu: 
 Maccabkks. 
 
 We shall add a few words on the grounds and 
 authorities adopted by dilVcrent parties for de- 
 ciding w'lethi'r a work is canonical or lio(. Mr. 
 Jeremiah Jones furnishes us with three difrereiit 
 views OM tnia subject. 'The first." he says, ' ii 
 the opinion of the Papists, vho liuve generally af« 
 tirmeil, in tl.eir coiitroversiei with the Pioteiitanta,
 
 538 
 
 m:UTERO-CANONICAL. 
 
 that die a illioiity of theSciiptmes deiientls u\ynn, 
 or is derived tVom, llie power ni' (heir (^liurcli. By 
 thft iiutliiMity uC (!«• Clmicli, tlio^e autliois i)l;i^nly 
 mean a ])owe»- lodged in tlie Cliuroli of Rome, 
 aiul her synwls, of determination, what books are 
 the word of God; thati wliich notliiii;^ can lie 
 more alisuid or contrary to conioion sense: for if 
 •o, it is possible, nay, it is easy for tiiem, to make 
 & t»ook wiiicU is not Divine to lie so.' And he 
 maintains that ' it is possiltle, on this principle, 
 that .^op's fahles, or the inlidel liooks of Celsus, 
 Julian, and Porjihyry mij^ht become a part of tiie 
 New Testiment.' But the fact must not be lost 
 »ight ol', tliat the Church has never pretended to 
 exercise a po.ver of this (iescription. Bishop 
 Marsh, referring to this sulijecf, observes : ' That 
 the Council of Trent assumed tiie privilege of 
 raising to the rank of canonical authority what 
 was genmally acivnowleJ;^ed to have no sucli au- 
 thority, is a charj^e which cannot lie made witii- 
 oi:t injustice : the power of declaritig canonical 
 a boot;, wtiich has never laid claim to tliat title, 
 is tt jKiwer not exercised even liy the Church of 
 Rome. In tliis respect it acts like other churches: 
 it sits in judgment on existing claims, and deter- 
 mines wlietlier they are valid or not.' From cer- 
 tain expressions of divines, who have asserted 
 ihat the Scriptures would have no authority what- 
 ever without the testimony of the Church, it has 
 tteen supposed that they ascribfd to tlie Church 
 an aibitrary power o\cr l..ese Divine books : 
 Bellarmine, therefore, has drav.n a di&ti'.icfion 
 between the objective an<l subjective authority 
 of the Scrij)tuies, tlieir authority in themseUes, 
 and that which they have in respect to us. Thus, 
 Augustine said that he would not believe the 
 Gosjiel, but for the autliority of the Church ; 
 adding, ho-vever, that tJie invitation of the Church 
 was but the first step to his complete illumina- 
 tion by the Spirit of God {Confessions, ii. 8). 
 
 Another princi])le was that adopted by all the 
 reformed communions (except the Anglican 
 Church), viz. to u.se Mr. Jones's words, that 
 ' there ere inward or innate evidences in the 
 Scriptures., tchiclu, applied hy the illuniination 
 w testimony of' the Holy Spirit, are the only 
 true proofs of their being the Word of God f 
 or, t(< use tlie words of the French reformed com- 
 munion in its Confession, which harmonize with 
 tiie methods adopted by the Scotch and Belgian 
 oommimions, that upon the internal persuasion 
 »f theS|jirit they knew the ('nnonieal from Eccle- 
 tiastical, \. e. Apocryphal, boolcs. This metliod 
 Mr. Jones thinks to tw of a very extraordinary 
 mature. '(Jan it be supposed,' he asks, 'that out 
 of teu thousand books, piivate Christians, or even 
 our most learned reformers, should by any internal 
 evidence agree precisely on the numlier of twenty- 
 seven, which are now esteemed canonical, induced 
 thereto by some characters those books contain, of 
 tlieir being written by the inspiration of the Holy 
 Ghost?' Tills he conceives to be folly and matl- 
 «iess,and^i assumption of 'immediate inspiration.' 
 ' It (list supjxjses the liooks are ins])ii«d, and then 
 pro\es that tliey are so because they are so.' This 
 IS only an argument, says bishop Burnet, to him 
 tliat feels it, if it l»e one at all. ' For my part,' 
 eaid tlie celebrated Richard Baxter, ' I c ^ifess I 
 could never iKuist of any such testimony or light 
 of tjie Snirit, nor reason neither, wiiich, without 
 buman testimony, would .Ave made me believe 
 
 DEUTERO-CANONICAL. 
 
 ►.hat til! book of Canticles is canonical and wnV 
 ten by Solomon, and the book of Wisdom apo 
 ciypiial and written by Philo. Nor could I hav« 
 known any historical boxjks, such as Joshua, 
 Judges, Ruth, Samuel, Kings, Chronicles, E<;ra, 
 Nelieiniah, &c. to be written bv divine inspira- 
 tion, but by tradition," &c. The third method ig 
 that approved of by Mr. Jones, viz: that tradition, 
 or the testimony of the ancient Christians, pre- 
 served in their writings, is the best method of 
 determining tliis subject. 'This,' adds Mr. Jones, 
 'is the method the first Christians constantly 
 made use of to jirove, against the heretics, the 
 truth of the sacred books, viz. by appealing to 
 that certain anil undoubted tradition which assured 
 them they were t'ue writings of the jtersoiis whose 
 names they bear. Thus we know that Ovid, 
 Virgil, or Li vy wrote the books under their names.' 
 To this, we think, might have been added interna! 
 evidence .and the application of critical skill. 
 The chief objection which has been urged against 
 this metliod is, that it leaves the canonicity of 
 each book to the decision i f every private indi- 
 vidual, wtiich is inconsistent with the idea of 
 a cayion. Certain it is that the ancient church, 
 in deciding on the present Canon, exhibited a 
 wonderful theological tact, as the books which it 
 has handed down as canonical, and these alone, are 
 generally the same which, after having undergone 
 the strictest ordeal that the learning and acumen 
 of modern times have been enabled to apply to 
 them, are acknowledged by the best critics to bo 
 authentic. In fact the Church has adopted the 
 same methods for this purjwse which Mr. Jones 
 has coiijiilered to be the only ones satisfactory to 
 private individuals. Christians are thus in jios- 
 session of the- iiighest degree of satisfaction. Mr. 
 Gaussen {Theopneiistia, p. 340), admits that the 
 principle laid down by the reformed churches is 
 untenable, and he substitutes for it 'for the (Jld 
 Testament, the Testimony of the Jews ; and for 
 the New, the Testimony of the Catholic Church; 
 by which he understands, the general consent, in 
 regard to the former, of all Jews, Egyptians and 
 Syrians, Asiatics and Europeans, ancient and 
 modern, good and bad;' and liy the testimony of 
 the Catholic Church he understands, 'the uni- 
 versal consent of ancient and modern churches, 
 Asiatic and European, good and bad : that is, not 
 only the sections which have adliered to the Re- 
 formation, but the Greek section, the Armenian 
 section, the Syrian section, tlie Roman section, 
 and the Unitarian section.' And in pp. 342,345, 
 he ascribes entire infallibility to both Jewish and 
 Christian churches, in respect to the Canpns of 
 Sciipture. 'The Jews could not intnxluce a 
 human book into the Old Testament, and neither 
 the Council of Trent, nor even the most corrupt 
 and iilolatrous churches, could add a single Apo- 
 cryphal b<»ok to the Nev/ It wa> ?to< in 
 
 their poiccr not to transmit them intact and com- 
 jilete. In spite of t/teniselves it was so ordered,' 
 &c. 
 
 The question, however, in dispute is not so 
 much with regard to the Jewish Canon, regarding 
 which no controversy exists, as whether there is or 
 is not sufficient testimony to the fact, how far our 
 Saviour and his A})Ostles gave the stamp of theii 
 authority to any bonks not contained in this canon. 
 We have no ceitain evidence as to the authority 
 on which, or the time when, the Jewish CaiMB
 
 DEUTERONOMY. 
 
 DEUTERONOMY. 
 
 5S9 
 
 WO! coilpciei', or of the cause of its cliisiii;^, ali<l 
 our i>^* evidence in favour of tiie eaiionicity of 
 Wie Helirtw Scri|itine-! rests iiii the aiitiidrity of 
 Christ, as contained in the Scriptures of the New 
 Testamen.. 
 
 We sli.ill conclude with the following metrical 
 ©•^aiogue from the ])fn ol Ca:diiial IIuj,'o : — 
 Quinqne liljros Mojsi, Josue, Judicum, Sam- 
 uel em, 
 Et Melachim, tres praecipuos bis sexque Pro- 
 phet as 
 Ilebraeus reliquis ceiiset praecellere Hbris. 
 Quiiique vocat legem, reliquos vult esse Pro- 
 
 nlietas. 
 Post Agiograplia, sunt Daniel, David, Esther, 
 
 et Ejdras ; 
 Job, Paralijwmenon, el tres lihri Salonionis. 
 Lex vetus his lihris perfecte tola tenetiir. 
 Restaiit Apocrypha, Jesus, Sapientia, Pastor, 
 Et JIacliahteoium libri, Jiulitii at(pie Tobias. 
 See. in addition to the works already cited, 
 Vicenzi'i fntroductio in So-ip. Dcuicro-canon. 
 Rome, iS42. ivhicii we ha<l not the advantage 
 of seeing unti' this article bad goue to press. — 
 
 W. W. 
 DEUTERONOMY (A6in-6poi/($juioj/), theGreek 
 ftame g-iven l)y the Alexandrian Jews to the (ilth 
 \M)ok of Moses (a corresjKiiuii'ii,' name, HJi^'D 
 minn, is, however, also found witii the RaljbinsJ, 
 by whicl; the {general tenor of the book is very 
 well characterize,!. It comprises that series of ad- 
 dresses wiiich the Law^'iver delivered (orally and 
 by writing, i 5; xxviii. 58, etc.) to a'^^sembled 
 Israel in the second montli of the fortieth year of 
 their wandering through the desert, when the se- 
 cond generation w;is about to cross the Jordan, 
 and when the [lartmg bom- of Moses had nearly 
 arrived. The book of Deuteronomy contains an 
 account of the suhlime and di^milied manner in 
 whicli Moses tej-minated that work, the accom- 
 plishment of w)' h was his jieculiar mission. It 
 forms a sacred legacy which he here bequeathed 
 to bis people ; and very dill'erent from those laws 
 which he had announced to them at Sinai. Tiie 
 tone of the law falls liere considerably in the back- 
 ground, and the stebjectivittj (individuality) of the 
 Law//ioer,and bis peculiar relation to his ])eo|)le, 
 Etands out more prominently. A thorouglily 
 sublime and prophetic spirit pervades all these 
 6i)eeches from beginning to end. Tlie thoughts of 
 the man of God are entirely taken up with the 
 inward concerns of his people, their relations, 
 future fate, and eventful vicissitudes. Tlie Law- 
 giver here stands amidst Israel, warning and 
 consoling, commanding and e.xhoiting, surveying 
 and proclaiming the future with marvellous dis- 
 cernment. 
 
 The speeches begin with the enurrferafion of the 
 wonderful dealings of God with the chosen jjcople 
 in the early period of their existence. Moses clearly 
 proves to them the punishment of unbelief, the 
 olxluracy of Israel, and the faithfulness of Jeho- 
 vaii with regard to his promises, which were now 
 on the point of being accomplished. Fully aware 
 of the tendencies of the people, and foreseeing 
 their alienations, Moses conjures them most 
 impressively to hold fa.st the comman<ls of the 
 Lord, and not to forget his revelations, lest 
 curse? should bef.ill them instead of iilessintrs 
 (ch. i.-iv.). TIfe Lawgiver then expatiates on the 
 •pirit of tlj? law, and its reception into tiie hea ts 
 
 pf men, lK)lh in a positive and nrg.itive w.av. 
 rear, he .says, is i^-« primary effect of ti.e la.v, 
 as also its aim. .\s Israel had once listened lo 
 the announcement of the fundainej.'lal laws ol 
 tlie theocracy with a sacred Jea); in like manner 
 siiould man also receive, through the whole system 
 of the lav , a lively ami awful ini|;:ession of llie 
 holiness and majesty of God (tli. v.). Hut as the 
 essence and sum of the la.v is lort- to Jehovah, 
 the only anil true Go ', man shall l)y li"; law ix; 
 remindeil of the Divine iiieM-y,so variou.sly niaiij- 
 fesled in deeds; and this reliection is calculated 
 to rouse in man s heait luva fur God. This lov€ 
 is tiie only and line source fnim wliicli projjer 
 respect and obedience to the law can proceed 
 (ch. vi.). 
 
 There were, however, two lemjiting deviations, 
 in following which the ])eo])!c were sure to be led 
 astray. The law, in its stiict rigour, wiia but too 
 apt to tempt them to de.seit Jehovah, and to yield 
 to idolatry (the very approval of which even in 
 thought polluted the hcait), by discontinuing to 
 bear the lieavy yoke ol' the law. Ilence the most 
 imjiressive wainiiigs against Canaan's inliabitanls 
 and idols; and hence die deciaialioiis that Israel, 
 in placing themselves on a par with the liealhens, 
 should have to endure an equal fate with them, 
 and be repulsed fiom the presence of Jehovah 
 (ch. vii. viii.). 
 
 The other, not less dang; rou.s, deviation is that 
 of self-jusfilication — the proud fani;y t!iat all 
 the favours Jehovah had sliown to his jjtople vveie 
 merely iir consequence of the ir own desirvings. 
 Therefoie Jehovah tells ihem that it was iiot 
 through tlieir own worthiness and purity of lieait 
 that they inherited the land of the heathens. It 
 was only tlirough his free favour; fir their sins 
 bore too strong and constant testimony how little 
 they ought to take credit to themselves for it 
 (ch. is I. 
 
 The history of the people, before and after the 
 exile, shows these two deviations in their fullest 
 bearings. Idolatry we lind to have been tlie 
 besetting sin before that |»eriod, and jiiesumj)- 
 tuous pride of lieart after it ; a pnnif how inti- 
 mately acquainted the Lawgiver was with fiio 
 character and disposition of his jieople, and how 
 necessary therefore those warnings had been. 
 
 Therefore, adds Moses, tmn to that which Je- 
 hovah, in giving you the tables of the law, aiid 
 establisliiiig the Tabernacle and ])riesthood, has 
 intimated as a significant symtwl, ' to circumcise 
 the foreskin of your heart,' and to cherish love 
 in your inward soul. Tliink of Jehovah, the just 
 and merciful, whose blessings and curses shall 
 be set befoie your eyes as a lasting monument 
 upon the mounts Ebal and (ierizim (ch. x., xi ). 
 
 Tiie mention of that fact leads the Lawgiver 
 to the domestic and jiractical life of the people 
 when domesticated in tiieir true home, the Land 
 of Promise; which he further regulates by ? 
 fixcl and solid rule, by new laws, which for this, 
 their new design and purpart, form a sort of 
 complement to the laws alieady given. There, 
 in tiie land of their forefalhei-s, Jehovah will a|>- 
 jioint one (ixed place ibr his lasting .sanctuary, 
 when every other place dedicated to the worship 
 (if idols is to be destroyed. At that chosen spot 
 alone are the sacrilice.s to I* killeil, while cafl'e 
 in general, which are not destined for Siicred 
 purposes, but meiely for f'KHl, may be slaughtered
 
 560 
 
 DEUTKRONOMY. 
 
 at all places accoiding to convenience — a regu- 
 lation wliicli still leaves in full force tlie previous 
 laws conceiiiing the eating of blood, and tiie 
 share of Jehovah in slaugiiteieil cattle. This 
 sanctuary was to he considered as the central 
 point for all sacred ohje'-fs. The whole lami was, 
 by means of the sancriiary estihlislied in the 
 midst of it, consicrated and dedicateil to Je- 
 h jvah. This consecration w;is incompatihle witii 
 any defHement whatsoever. On that account 
 tlie Canaanites must he exteiiiiinated, and all 
 idolatrous ahjniiiiations destroyed, since nothings 
 ought to he ailded to or taken from the laws 
 of God (ch. xii.). For the same reason (i e. 
 for the sake ((f the holiness i.f the land, diffused 
 from the sacred centre), no false projihet; or soolli- 
 sayers are to he tolerated, as tliej' inay turn tlie 
 minds of the jjeojile from the law, l)y establish- 
 ing a ditlerer'.t one, and therefore even a whole 
 town given to the worship of idols must he de- 
 molished by ((tree of aims (ch. xiii.). Neither, 
 in like manner, must the heatlien customs of 
 mourning he imitated, or unclean ((easts eaten; 
 but the people must always remain true to the 
 previous laws concerning food, &c., and sliow 
 their real attachment to Jehovah and his religion 
 by willingly paying the tit'ie as ordaineil by the 
 law (ch. xiv.). To the same end likewise shall 
 the regulations concerning the years of release 
 and the festivals of Jehovah (to be solemnized in 
 the place of tlie new-chosen Sanctuary) be most 
 scrupulously oli^erved (ch. xv., xvi.). Only uii- 
 blemis/ied saci dices shall he ollcred, for p. I! iiol- 
 W'lrsliippers must irrevocably be put to death liy 
 stoning. For tlie execution of due punishment, 
 honest judges must govern the nation, while tiie 
 highest tribunal shall exist in the place chosen 
 for the Sanctuary, consisting of the priests and 
 judges of the land. If a king be given by God 
 to thr peo])le, lie shall lirst of all accommodate 
 iiimsalf to tlie laws of God, and not lead a 
 heatlien life. Next to the regal and judicial 
 dignities, the ecclesiastical ]iower shall exist in 
 its full right ; and again, next to it, the prophetic 
 order (ch. xvii. xviii.}. Of all these institutions, 
 the duties of the judicial power are most clearly 
 defined; for Jehovah does as little sull'er that in 
 his land the right of the innocent shall be turned 
 aside, as that indulgence shall be shown to the 
 evil-doer (ch. xix.). The exposition of the civil law 
 is followed by that of the maitial law, which has 
 some bearing upon the then impending war with 
 Canaan, as tlie luost important v\ar and represent- 
 ing that with the heathen nations in general (ch. 
 XX.). T.l'ese are again follov/ed by a series of laws 
 in reference to the jireceding, and referring chiefly 
 tc hard cases iri the judicial courts, by which 
 Moses obviously designed to exhibit the whole of 
 the civil life of ids jieople irr its strict application 
 to the tliPDCratic system of law and right. There- 
 'bre the form of prayer to be spoken at the ollering 
 up of the firstlings and litlie — tlie theocratic coh- 
 fessionof fuitk — by which every Israelite acknow- 
 ledges in person that he is what God has enjoined 
 and called him to be, forms a beautiful con- 
 clusion of the whole legislation (ch. xxi.-xxvi.). 
 
 The blessings and curses of Jehovah, the two 
 opposite extremes whicli were to be impressed 
 np?n the minds of the people at their entrance 
 into Canaan, and which have hitherto lieensjioken 
 t)f only in j>eneral teims, are now set forth in their 
 
 DEUTERONOMY. 
 
 fullest detail, picturing in the most lively colouA 
 the delightl'iil abundance of ricli blessings on th» 
 one hand, and the awful visitations of Heaven"? 
 wrath on tiie ^ther. The prophetic speeches 
 visibly and gradually increase in energy and 
 entliusia-m, until th" j)ers])ective of the remotest 
 future of the people of God lies ojieri to the eye 
 of the ins])ired Lawgiver in all its chequeied de- 
 tails, when his words resolve tliemselves info a 
 flight of poetical extacy, into the strains of a 
 splendid trium))hal song in which the tone of 
 grief and lamentation is as heart-rending as the 
 announcement of divine salvation theiein is jubi- 
 lant (ch. xxvii. xxviii.). The history of the law 
 concludes with a supplement concerning; him 
 who was deemed woithy by tlie Lord to transmi 
 his law to Israel (ch. xxxiv.). 
 
 Thus much legarding the contents and cor 
 nection of the book of Deuteronomy. 
 
 The critics who have tried to show that t'lc 
 Pentateuch is composed of miscellaneous docu- 
 ments and by vaiious authors, have moie dlfh- 
 culty in applying their theory to ihls Iwok than 
 to any ether of the series [Pent.vtklch]. In- 
 deed the most sceptical critics admit thai, with 
 the exception of a few interpolalions (comp. for 
 instance, De V^'ette, /w^roii. ^ 151, sq.), the whole 
 of this book wiis moulded, as it were, in one 
 single cast. 
 
 Tlie date, however, of the composition of Deu- 
 teronomy, as well as its authenticiti/, has given 
 rise to a far greater variety" of o[)inion, more 
 especially among those who arc oujosed to the 
 autlioisliip of Moses. The older critics, such 
 as De \\'ette, Gesenius, &(;., considered Deu- 
 teronomy as the latest ]jroduction of all the l>ooks 
 of the Pentateuch ; while llie more recent ciltics, 
 such as Von Bohlen, Vatke, George, &c., have 
 come to just the contrary opinion, and declare 
 it to be tfie earliest of (he Mosaic writings. The 
 whole of their disjiufes on tliis head turn chiefly 
 on the ))rophetic character of Deuteronomy. 
 Some find tiiat this peculiar feature characterizes 
 the book as contemporary v/iih the later prophets, 
 and that it contains reflections on the law, as on 
 a thing long in existence : others, however, are of 
 a quite contrary ojiinion, and discover in thlsswi- 
 jective character, so predominant in Deuteronomy, 
 the very proof of its prior and early composition ; 
 and they consider, moreover, that the prophetic 
 enunciations contained in it were afterwards de- 
 veloped into objective, rigitl, and matter-of-fact 
 laws, such as we find them in Exodus and 
 Num()ers. For this reason, they add, is the 
 legislative tone in Deuteniiiomy more simple than 
 in the other books, embracing merely tlie inci- 
 pient elements and suggestive notes of a complete 
 code of law. ^ 
 
 A very strong proof of the genuineness of the 
 book lies in its relation to the later wiitlngs of the 
 proiihels. Of all the books of the Pentateuch, 
 Deuteronomy has been made most use of by the 
 jirophets, simply because it is best calculated to 
 serve as a model for prophetic declarations, as also 
 because of the inward harmony that exists be- 
 tween the prophecies and the laws upon which 
 they are Ijased. 
 
 - Deuteronomy exercised a most decisive and re- 
 markable influence more especially on Jeremialv, 
 owing not only to his priestly character, but also 
 and chiefly to the peculiar circumstances of hit
 
 DEl'T::itONOMY. 
 
 fime. so adniivably suited to illusfiate tlie flirpats 
 aiid w;injin»s contained in ihat hook, in tlie 
 strongest V\-^\\t of sarred and imniutilile trulli. 
 Deuteronomy was a l)ook altogether wriKen for 
 the times of Jeiemiali, who could t'lerefore do 
 nothing hetter than resume the old text, and hring 
 it home impressively to the ]!eople The iii!)iience 
 which the spiiit of Deuteronomy thus exercised 
 on that projihet, extended even to the adoption, 
 DO his part, of a considerable number of its ex- 
 pressions and phraseological terms. These liii- 
 guistical coincidences have been most erroneously 
 accounted for by some, by assumnig the contem- 
 porary origin of both liooks, wliile others (Von 
 Bohlen) have gone so fir in their speculations as 
 even to allot to Jeremiah a s!iare in the composi- 
 tion, or ralher interpolation, of Deuteronomy. Such 
 views betray total ignorance of the peculiar and 
 stiictly deKned ciiaracter of Deuteronomy, so dif- 
 ferent in many respects, even as regards the style 
 and language, from the bo>)k of' Jeremiah, though 
 it cannot be denied that no prophet ever adhered 
 more closely to the prototypes of the earlier 
 periods, or ever repeated more Irecjuently the 
 earlier enunciations, tlian did Jeremiah. 
 
 Among the arguments advanced against the 
 authenticity of Deuteronomy, aie : 
 
 1. The contrad Uions said to exist between this 
 and the other books of Moses ; 
 
 2. Certain anachronisms committed by the 
 author. 
 
 These contradictions are more especially al- 
 leged to exi^t in the festival laws, where but arbi- 
 trary and unwarranted views aie mostly enter- 
 tained by such critics with regard to the nature 
 and original meaning of tlie fe.->tivals, which ihey 
 identify altogether with natural or season festi- 
 vals, and without lending to them a more spi- 
 ritual chaiacter and signitication. 
 
 3. Th.it the Sinai of the other books is always 
 called Iloreb in Deuteronomy. — They forget, how- 
 ever, that Horeb is the general name of the whole 
 mountain, while Sinai is the special name of a 
 particular pait of it. Tiiis distinction is, indeed, 
 most scrupulously observed everywhere in the 
 Pentateuch. 
 
 4. That Priests and Levites are used as syno- 
 nymous terms in Deuteronomy (on account of 
 tie expres.sion D^vH D''jn3n); wliile, in the 
 other books of the Pentateuch, they are used as 
 terms distinct from each another. — By that ex- 
 pression, however, can oiil}- be meant the Le- 
 vitical priests, i. e. the only legitimate priests ; 
 l:.!* .-neaning is borne out liy Deuteronomy xviii. 
 3-fi, where a clear distinction is made between 
 Priests and Lcciies. 
 
 5. Tliat in Deuteronomy i. 44, are mentioned the 
 Amorites instead of the Aniahkites as in Num. 
 xiv. 43. — Here also they have forgotten to notice 
 tliiit, in the >equel of the very passage alluded 
 fo in Deuleronotny, both the Amorites and Amale- 
 kites aie mentioned. 
 
 <). Tiiat the cause of the punishment of Moses 
 is diflerently stated in Num. xxvii. li, and 
 Deuteronomy ili. 26. — To this objection wc leply, 
 •L::t botli the guilt and jiunishment of Moses are 
 described in both books as oiiginating with tlie 
 people; cotnp. also Deut. \xxli. 51, etc. 
 
 Among (lie anachronisms in Deuteronomy are 
 reckoned the allusions made in it to the Temple 
 (tit. xvi. 1, sqq.), to the royal and prophetic 
 
 DEUTERONOMY. 
 
 M\ 
 
 powers (xiii. xviii. xviii), to llie dilTerent oKvff* 
 of idol-woiship (iv. 19; xvii. \i), and lo tlie 
 exile (xxviii. scp). In suggesting these ciitical 
 points, however, they do not cons.iler that aW 
 these subjects are most closely ami intimately 
 connected with the spirit and piinciplesof tht 
 law itself, and that all these regulations and pro- 
 phecies ajjjK'ar here in Deuterononiv. a.s necessary 
 Knishing-points to the Law, so indispensable for 
 the better consolidation of the subseipient and later 
 relations of the theocracy. 
 
 More anachronisms are said to be 
 
 1. The sixty dwelling-places of Jair men- 
 tioned Deut. iii. 11, stp (conij). Judg. x. ."i, sq.) 
 We consider, however, that the men mntioned 
 in the tv;o )ias3ages are evidently dilleient persons, 
 though of the same name. Nor is it diihcult to 
 prove from other sources, that there really existed 
 at the time of Moses a man by name Jair. 
 
 2. The notice (iii. 11) concerning king Og, 
 which looks more like a note of a sul. sequent 
 writer in corroboration of the story told in the 
 chapter. But this hypothesis falls to the ground 
 when we consider tliat Moses did not write for his 
 contemporaries merely, but also for late posteiity. 
 
 The book contains, moreover, not a small num- 
 ber of jilain, though indirect traces, indicative of 
 its Mosaic origin. We thus find in it : 
 
 1. Numerous notices conceniing nations with 
 whom the Israelites had then come in contact, 
 but who, after the Mosaic period, entirely dis- 
 appeared from the (lages of history : such are the 
 accounts of the residences of the kings of Hashan 
 (i. 4). 
 
 2 The a]ij)ellafion of 'mountain of the ."Vmo- 
 rite?,"used throughout the whole book (i. 7, 19, 
 20, 44), while even in the book Joshua, soon after 
 the conquest of the land, the name is already ex- 
 changed for 'mountains of Judah' (Josh. xi. 
 16, 21). 
 
 3. The observation (ii. 10), that the Emim had 
 formerl}' dwelt in the plain of Moab : thev wer* 
 a great [.eople, equal to the Attakim. This ob- 
 servation quite accords with Genesis xiv. !). 
 
 4. A detailed account (ii. 11) concerning the 
 Horim and their relations lo the Kdomites. 
 
 5. An account of the Zamzummim (ii. 20, 21), 
 one of the earliest races of Canaan, though men- 
 tioned nowhere else. 
 
 6. A very circumstantial account of the Re- 
 pluum (iii. 3, sq.), witli whose concerns the author 
 seems to have been well acquainted. 
 
 The stinding-point also of the author of Deute- 
 ronomy is altogether in the M().saic time, anil had 
 it been assumed and fictitious, there must neces- 
 sarily have been moments when the spurious 
 author would have been olf his guard, and un- 
 mindful of the part he had to jilay. But no dis- 
 crejiancies of this kind can be traced; and this 
 is in itself an evidence of the genuineness ol' fn" 
 book. 
 
 A great number of other passages force us 
 likewise to the conclusion, tiiat the whole ol 
 Deuteronomy originated in the time of Moses. 
 Such are the jiassages where 
 
 1. A conqiarison is drawn lietween Canaan ami 
 Egypt (xi. 10, sq \ with the lattir of which the 
 author seems thoroughly acipiainted. 
 
 2. DetaiU'd desciiptions aie given of the fer« 
 tility and productions of Egypt (viii. 7, sq.). 
 
 3. Regulations aie jciveii relating to the zoo- 
 
 2o
 
 S63 
 
 DEUTEROJiOMY. 
 
 DIAL. 
 
 quest i( Canaan f xii. 1, sq. ; xx. 1, sq.), which 
 cannot he uiKleistood otherwise than l)y assiinnng 
 thai tliey had lieen liamed in the Mosaic time, 
 since tliey coiiUl be of ni) use after that ]:crio(l. 
 
 Besides, whole pieces and chapters in Deutero- 
 nomy, such as xxxii., xxxiii., lietray in form, lan- 
 griage, and tenor, a very early period in Hebrew 
 literature. Nor are the laws and regulations in 
 Deuteronomy less decisive of the authenticity of the 
 Iwok. We are struck with the most remarkable 
 phenomenon, that many laws from (he previous 
 books aie here partly rejieated and impressed witli 
 more energy, ]jaitly modilied, and j)nrt,]y alto- 
 gether aiiolished, according to the contingencies 
 of the time, or as the new aspect of circum- 
 stances amonjr the Je^s rendered such steps ne- 
 cessary (conip e. ff. Deut. xv. 17 witli Exod. xxi. 
 7 ; Deut. xii. with Lev. xvii). Such pretensions 
 10 raise, or even to oppose his own private opinions 
 to the authority of divine law, are foimd in no 
 autlior of the subsequent perioils, since the whole 
 of the sacred literatuie of the later times is, on the 
 contrary, rather the echo than otlierwise of the 
 Pentateuch, and is alto,:^ether founded on it. Add 
 to this the fact, that the law itself forbids most 
 impressively to add to, or take anytliing from it, 
 a prohil.'ition wiiich is repeated even in Deutero- 
 nomy (comp. iv. 2; xiii. 1) ; and it is but too 
 evident, that, if tlie opinion of the critics be cor- 
 rect, that this book contains nothin^' more than 
 a gradual development of the law— it clashes too 
 often with its own principles, and pronounces 
 tlius its own sentence of condemnation. 
 
 The part of Deuteroni)my (xxxiv.) respecting 
 the death of Moses requires a particular expla- 
 nation. That the whole of this section is to be 
 rejjarded as a piece altogether apart from what 
 precede- it, or as a supplement from another writer, 
 has already been maintained by the older theolo- 
 gians (comp. ex.gr. Carpzov, Introd. in Khr. V. T. 
 i.]). 137); and this opinion is contirmed not only by 
 the contents of the cha])ter, but also by tlie express 
 declaration of the book itself on that event and 
 its relations ; fir chapter xxxi. contains the con- 
 slusion of the work, where Moses describes iiim- 
 self as the autluf of the previous content-s, as also 
 of the Song (ch. xxxii.j, and the blessings (ch. 
 xxxiii.) belonging to it. All that follows is, con- 
 eequently, nut from Mose-;, the work being com- 
 pleted and concluded witli chapter xxxiii. Tliere 
 is another circumstance which favours this opi- 
 nion, namely, the close connection that exists 
 between the last section of Deuteronomy and the 
 l)eginning of Joshua (comp. Deut. xxxiv. 9 with 
 Josh. i. 1, wheie also tiie term "TT'I, in the latter 
 passage, must not be o\erlooked) jilainly shov/s 
 that ch. xxxiv. of Deuteronomy is intended to 
 serve as a point of transition to the book of 
 Joshua, and that it was written l)y the same 
 author as the latter. 
 
 The correct view of this chapter, therefore, is 
 to consider it as a real supplemetit, but by no 
 nieiins as an interjiolatidii (such as some critics 
 erroneorslj suppose No exist in f.ie Pentateuch 
 in general). To apply to it the term inter- 
 jclation would be as wrong as to give tliat 
 Hp[iellatiiri ex. gr. to the Sth bonk of Caesar's 
 Wvirk. ' l)e bcllo Gallico,' simjily because it was 
 equally written by an unknown author, for the 
 very purpose of ser\ing as a supplement to the 
 (weviuus books. 
 
 On tlie literature of Deuteronomy, compare tb< 
 article Pkntateuck. — H. A. C. II. 
 
 DEW. The various passages of Scripture in 
 which dew is mentioned, as well as the statements 
 of travellers, might, unless carefully considered^ 
 convey the impression that in Palestine the dews 
 fall co])iously at night during the heiglit of 
 summer, and supply in some degree the lack of 
 rain. But we (ind that those who mention dews 
 travelled in spring and autumn, while those 
 who travelled in summer make no mention of 
 them. In fact, scarcely any dew does fall 
 during the summer months — from the middle of 
 Maj- to the middle of August; but as it con- 
 tinues to fall for some time alter the rains of spring 
 have ceased, and begins to fail before tlie rains of 
 autunui conunence, we may from this gather the 
 sense in which the Scriptural references to dew 
 are to be undei stood. Witliout the dews con- 
 tinuing to fall after the rains have ceased, and 
 commencing before the rains return, the season 
 of actual drought, and the parched appearance 
 of the country, would be of mucli longer duration 
 than they really are. The j)arlial refreshment 
 thus aflordetl to the ground at the end of a 
 summer without dews or rains, is of great value 
 in Western Asia, and would alone explain all 
 tlie Oriental vefereuces to the efl'ecis of dew. This 
 explanation is of t'uilher interest as indicating the 
 times of the year to which the Scriptural notices 
 of dew refer ; for as it d les not, in any perceptible 
 degree, fall in summer, and as few would think 
 of mentioning it in the season of rain, we may 
 take all such notices to refer to the months of 
 A]]ril, May, pait of August, and September. 
 
 DEXiULABOS (5e|ioAa;aoj> This is the 
 Greek word rendered •spearmen' in the .\uth. 
 Vers, of Acts xxiii. 23. As it does not occur in 
 the classical writers, and only this once in the 
 Scriptures, it is uncertain what kind of soldiers is 
 denoted by it. It strictly signifies one who covers 
 or guards tlie right side of any one. Hence it 
 has been conjectured that, in the above passage, it 
 denotes officers who performed the same functions 
 in the camp as lictors did in the city — being ap- 
 pointed to aijprehend malefactors, and to gi;ard 
 criminals when led to execution, and called 
 Se^ioAciySof, from taking the right h.md of the jni 
 soner, who was bound to the left hand oi the guarcL 
 This explanation is, however, deduced entirely 
 from the etymology of the word, and is ojien to the 
 otijection arising from the improb ibility that such 
 a number of military lictois would be on duty 
 with the forces of the tribune, as that 2!")0 of them 
 at a time could be ready to depart with one pri- 
 soner. It seems jireferalde, therefore, to understand 
 the word as denoting tlie guard ol'the tribune. Nor 
 is this contrary to the etymology, since guarding 
 the rigid sde may be taken figuratively to mean 
 guarding the whole person. Nor is it strange ihat 
 these choice troops should lie emjiloyed on this 
 duty, since theseivice was iiniiortant and delicate, 
 The guarding of prisoners to be tried before C"w.>ai 
 was often, at Rome, committed to the pr«torians, 
 Our version ' spearmen ' seems to have been de- 
 rived from the Xularate, Mancearii.' 
 
 DIADEM. [Ckown] 
 
 DI.\L. The invention of the sun-dial belonji-g 
 most probably to the Babylonians. Herodotus af 
 firms, tliat the Greeks derived from tliem, ihepjl* 
 (suppjised to mean the dial-plate), the guuuxxi,
 
 IJIAL. 
 
 and tlie division of day into twelve parts (ii. 
 1)9). Vi'inviiis also asciilics tiie must ancient 
 t'oini of the dial, callt'd hemicycle, to Ijei-osus llie 
 t'lialdsan (ix. 9), fhouj^h lie prol«al)ly means 
 no mixe than that lie mtrodiwed il into Greece. 
 Certairily those Greeks to whom ^ ittuvins as- 
 cribes jiiven,ti')ns or ini()rovements in diallirii!;, 
 can all be noved to liave had c()mmuni<;a- 
 Hon, moi-e-or less remote, with the Clialdapuns. 
 The fiist mention in Scriptme of the ' liour," is 
 made hy Daniel, at Baljyloti (ch. iii. 6). The 
 Greeks used the diil befoi-e the Romans ; and 
 with re;;ard to tiie Ki;yptians, MJiere are no indi- 
 cations in the SiMiljiturty to ])rove tlie e])ocli when 
 the dial was first known in Eu:ypt" (Wilkinson, 
 Aiw. Egyptians, vol. iii. ]i. 312). The circum- 
 stances connected with tlie dial ofAhaz ("2 Kinirs 
 XX. li ; Isa. xxxviii. 8), whicli is perhaps the 
 earliest of whicii we have any clear mention, en- 
 tirely concur v.itli the derivation of f,'rn,morjics 
 from the Babylonians. Ahaz- had formed an 
 alliance with Tiglatli-jiikser, king of As.syria (2 
 Kings xvi. 7, 9) ; he was a man of taste, and was 
 ready to adoi)t foi-eign improvements, as appears 
 from his admiration of the altar at Damascus, 
 and his introduction of a copy of it mto Jcrusa 
 iem (2 Kings xvi. 10). ' The princes of Baby- 
 lon sent inito him to inquire of tlie wonder that 
 was done in the land" (2 (Jhron. xxxii. 31). Hence 
 the dial also, which was called after his name, 
 was probably an importation from Babylon. 
 Different conjectures have been formed respect- 
 ing the construction of tiiis instrument. The dif- 
 ticulty is to understand wiiat is meant by the 
 TDX ni?yD, 'the degrees or stej»s of Ahaz.' 
 They nuaj m.ean lines or figures on a dial-))late, 
 w on a pavement, or the steps to the jialace of 
 Ahaz. or some siejis or staircase lie Lad erected 
 elsewhere (v id. Car])Zov, Ajyxn'dt. Historic. Crit. 
 L'ps. 17 iS, p. 352, &c.). Tlie Sept. in Isaiah 
 le.KiS ava^aO/jLous toC oikou tov irarpus aov, 
 ' the steps or stairs of the house of thy father.' 
 Josephus also says, ' steps or degrees in his 
 house" (^Antiq. x. 1, 91). The C'haldee renders 
 (he jiassage in Kings, N"'y5}' |3N, ' hour-stone,' 
 And gixes the .same meaning to 'the stairs^ 
 (2 Kings ix. 1'^), and renders Isa. xxxviii. S 
 K'yC pN mi':i3. I)y ' tiie shadow of the stone 
 of hours." Synimachus most certainly under- 
 stood a siiii-iiial : ffTpc\^/w tyjc (jKiav toiv •ypa/A./iuu 
 /J KaTt^t] ei/ upuAoyloj "AxaC, ' I will cause to 
 leturn the shadow of the degrees which (shadow) 
 is gone down on the dial of .\liaz :' and so Jerome 
 renders it Horologium. On the whole, the dial of 
 Ahaz seems to have been a distinct contrivance, 
 rather than any jiarf .ofa house. It would also 
 seem probable, from the circumstances, that it was 
 of sucii a size, and so placed, that Hezekiah, now 
 convalescent (Isa. xxxviii. 21, 22% iiiit not 
 )erfectly recovered, could witness tlie miracle 
 ■Toin his idiamber or pavilion : ' Sliall 7Vn, t/ie 
 <>v this shadow,' &c. May it not ha\e been 
 situate • in the middle court ' mentioneil 2 
 Kings XX. 11 The cut given below (No. 217) 
 jiresents a dial discovered in Hindustan, near 
 Dellii, the ancient capital of the Mogul empire, 
 whose construction would well huit ti.e circuin- 
 stanccj recorded if the dial of Aha/,. It seems to 
 have answered the doiilile purjwie of an observatory 
 n:d a dial — a rei tangled hexangle, Thjse hypo- 
 
 DIAL. 
 
 Mi 
 
 tlienuse is a staircase a))parenilY parallel lo ttie 
 axis of the earth, and bisects a zirie or copini; jf a 
 wall, which wall connects the two leriiiini.tii>jj 
 towers right and left. Tlie coping itielf is of ^ 
 
 circular form, and accurately graduated to mar'k, 
 bj' the shadow of the gnomon aliove, the Sijn s 
 progress before and after noon ; for wheti tlie gun 
 is in the zenith, he shines directly on the stair- 
 ca.se, and the shadow falls beyond the co]iing. A 
 Jlat svrface on the top of the staircase, and a 
 gnomon, (itted the iiuilding for t;ie jiiupose of an 
 observatory According to the Aiiotcit taws of 
 refnictioii, a cloud or body of air of dillerciil 
 density from the common atnio<plieie, hiterposetl 
 between the gnomon and the coping of the dial- 
 jilate below, would, if the cloud weie denser thai' 
 the atmospheie, cause the shadow to recede from 
 the perpendicular height of i he staircase, ami <<t 
 course to re-ascend the steps on the cojiing. bv 
 whicli it had before n<jon gone down ; .iiid i( the 
 cloud were rarer, a contrary ell'eci would rake 
 ))lace. (See Bishop Stock's Trnnslutio/i of haiah. 
 Bath, 1803, ji. 109.) Such a building riiiglii also 
 be called ' a house." It agiees also wifli Adam 
 Clarke's supiiosition, that ' the stairs' weu' 
 really ' a dial,' and jirobably this very dial, 
 on which, as being in the most jiublic place, or 
 rather on (\\e platform on the top of which they 
 set Jehu, while they proclaimed him king by 
 sound of trumpet (Commeiifart/ nn 2 Kings ix. 
 13). Bishoj) Stock's speculatiim that llie retio- 
 gression of the shadow might be ell'ected by refiac- 
 tion, is sup] orted by a natural phenomenon o/ 
 the kind on record. On the27tli of March, 170ii, 
 P. Romauld, prior (if the cloister of Metz, made 
 the observalion that, owiny to such a, refra<-,tion of 
 the 'olar rays in lue higher regions <l the afnios- 
 ]iluie, in connection with the app<^aian<-e ol a 
 cloud, the shadow on his dial <leviated an hour 
 and a half (Rosen m iii ler). The plie:iomenon on 
 the dial of Ahaz. however, was doubtless of a 
 miraculous n.iture, even sliouhl such a /iicdiutn ot 
 the miiacle be a<linitted : nothing less than a 
 divine communication could have enabled Isaial: 
 to jjredity its occunence at that time and piar? : 
 besides, he gave the king his own ( lioice whe'lier 
 the shadow slioulu advance i-r letiie ten degrees. 
 Tliere seems, however, to be no necessity fur eeek- 
 ing ain/ medium for this miracle, and certainly 
 no necessity for supposing any actual inteiteiei;ce 
 with the revolution of the eaitii, or the jMisition of 
 the sun. In the more distinct and ample account 
 of it in 2 Kings, it is simply said that tlie Lurd, 
 at the ]-rayer of Isai.'th. biought the sfiniloic ten 
 ^egrees backward. The words K'DCn 3t;'n^
 
 Ml DIBON. 
 
 rivytD TJ'y in I^a. xxxviii. S, ' and the sun 
 
 ■rent lijick ten di'i^rees," are wanting in three of 
 Dr Kennicott's MSS., and oriofinally in two of 
 De Rdssi's ; and the words ' the shadow of the 
 de<^rees which ig gone down in the sun-dial of 
 Aliaz' are mare conectly ren<lered on the margin 
 degrees ' by or with the sun,' i. e. by nic.iiis of the 
 progress of the sun. The first 6 rjAioj in tills verse 
 is omitted in MS. Pachom. of the Sejit. Even if 
 the mention of the sun i)e retained, as in Ecclus. 
 xlviii. 23, it is only fair to understand tiie words 
 in their popular sense, the solar rays, or such a re- 
 cession of tlie shadow as would have been occasioned 
 by an actual recession of the sun. .Adopting the 
 present state of the text, it is observable that what 
 is called the sun in one part of the verse is called 
 the shadow in tlie otl er. It is certainly as ])hilo- 
 sojjliical to speak of the sun returning, as it is of 
 his setting and rising. Thus the miracle, from 
 all tlie accounts of it, miglit consist only of the 
 retroj:ression of the shadow ten degrees, by a 
 simple act of Almighty power, without any me- 
 dium, or, at most, by that of refracting those rays 
 only which fell ujxm the dial. It is not said 
 tliat any time was lost to the inhabitants of the 
 world at large : it was not even observed by the 
 asrronom"rs of B ibylon, for the deputation came 
 to inquire concerning the wonder that was done 
 in the land. It was tem])orary, local, and con- 
 fined to the observation of Hezekiah and his court, 
 being designed chieHy for the satisfaction of that 
 monarch. It is remarkable that no instrument 
 for keeping time is mentioned in the Scripture 
 Iwfore the dial of Aliaz, b.c. 700 ; nor does it 
 apjiear that tlie Jews generally, even after this 
 period, divideil their day into hours. Tlie dial 
 of Ahaz was probably an object cnly of cnrious 
 recreation, or served at most to regulate the occu- 
 pations of tlie palace. — J. F. D. 
 
 DIAMOND. [Yahai.om; Shamir.] 
 
 DIBON (fn^; Sei^t. Aaipdv), or DIMON 
 (jIDn, Isa. XV. 9), called also Dibon-Gad, from 
 its having been rebuilt by the trilie of that name 
 (Num. xxxii. 34), a city on ttie northern liank 
 of tlie Arnon, at the point where the Israelites 
 crossed tliat river on their journey to the Jordan, 
 and wliere their first encampment was made after 
 liaving passed it. In later times we find it, with 
 other towns In this quarter, in the hands of the 
 Moabites (Jer. xlviii. 22), Tlie site has been 
 recognised l)y Seet/.en.'Burckliprdt, and Irby and 
 Mangles, at a place which bears the name of l)iban, 
 in a low tract of the district called the Koura, 
 about three miles north of the Arnon (Modjeb). 
 Tlie ruins are here extensive, but offer nothing of 
 inteiest. There was another place called Dibon 
 in the Iribe of .ludah (Neh. xi. 25), perhaps the 
 •ame that is called Dimonah in Josli. xiii. 26. 
 
 DIDRACHMA (WSpaxiJi-ov, a double drachma), 
 a silver coin ecjual to two Attic drachmae, and 
 also to he Jewish half-shekel (Jose])h. Antiq. iii. 
 P. 2). It was tlierefore equivalent to about Is. Ad. 
 cf our money- By the law every Jew was re- 
 quireil to pay half a shekel to the Temple (Exod. 
 XXX. 1.3, s<j.). ard this amount is repiesented by 
 the didrachma in Matt. xvii. 2), wliere it is used 
 for tne ' tri!)ute-money" demanded of Christ. The 
 Septuagint eierywhere renders the ' stiekel ' of the 
 Old Testament by didrachma, but as tiie Attic 
 i.T»chma was egual 'o only half a shekel, it seems 
 
 IJIONYSIUS. 
 
 from this probalile that the drachma of hXtHt- 
 andria was equal to two .\tlic drachma;. 
 
 DIDYMUS (AiSv/j.oT, a twin), a w.mame of 
 the Apostle Thomas, denoting that he was a twin-, 
 and if translated, he wouM be called ' Tboma* 
 the Twin' (John xi. 16). [Tjomas."] 
 
 DIKE (Ai/fTj), the lie.it' fTiG'nldess of Justice, 
 describ«>d as the daughter ( f Zeus and Themis 
 (Hesiod, Op. 2;.6 : Theor/. i)l)2). The puriish- 
 nient of murderers is particularly ascribed to her j 
 and therefore, besides being the goddess of punish- 
 ment in a general sense, she is often to be con- 
 sidered the same as Nemesis or Vengeance. The 
 word occurs in Acts xxvili. 4, and is theie ren- 
 dered 'vengeance,' appellatively. 
 
 DIKLAH (n^|?l; Sept. AeK\i); a tribe de- 
 scended from Joktan fGen. x. 27). As the name 
 ii Aramaic and .\rabic means a palm-tree, it has 
 been judged necessary to seek the seat of the tribe 
 in some territory rich in palm-trees. Bochart 
 finds it in Southern Arabia, Michaelis in the 
 region of the Tigris (from the analogy of the 
 name Diglatli) ; but where the ground of search 
 is so uncertain, it is impossible to obtain any satis- 
 factory result. 
 
 DINAH (nr*!; Sept. AeiVc), daughter cf 
 Jacob by Leah (Gen. xxx. 21). and therefore full 
 sistCT of Simeon and Levi. While Jacob's camp 
 was in the nelghlwurhootl of Shechem, Dinah was 
 seduced by Shecliem. the son of Hamor, the 
 Hivite chief or head-man of the town. Partly 
 from dread of the consequences of his misconduct, 
 and partly, it would seem, out of love for the 
 damsel, he solicited a marriage with her, leaving 
 the • marriage price' (see Mariuagb) to l>e fixed 
 by her family. To this Dinah's lir.ithers woulfl 
 only consent on the further condition that all tl e 
 inhabitants of the jilace should be ciicumcised. 
 Even this was yielded ; and Simeon and Levi 
 took a most barliarous advantage of the compli- 
 ance by falling upon tlie town on the third day, 
 when the people were disabled liy the etl'ecls of 
 the operation, and slew them all (Gen. xxxiv). 
 For fills act of truly Oriental vindictiveness no 
 excuse can lieolfered, and Jacob himself repeatedly 
 alludes to it with abhorrence and regret (Gen. 
 xxxiv. 30; xlix. 5-7). To understand the act 
 at all, however, it is necessary to remembw, that 
 any stain upon the honour of a sister, and espe- 
 cially of an only sister, is even at this day consi- 
 dered as an insupjiortable disgra'-e and inexpi- 
 able ofVence amiing all the unmade trilies of \^'es- 
 tcrn Asia. If the woman be single, her brothers 
 more than her farher, if she be married, her ino- 
 thers more than iier husliand, are aggrieved, and 
 are considered bound to avenge the wrong. Henc* 
 the active vengeanie of Dinah's full brothers, 
 and the comparative passiver.ess of her father in 
 tiiese transactions. Of Dinah's sulisequent lot 
 nothing is known. 
 
 DIONYSIUS THE AREOP.AGITE, and 
 PSEUDO-DION YSIUS. The name of ' Dlony- 
 sius the Aieo])agite ' enlivens the scanty at coinit 
 of success which attended the visit oi' Paul to 
 Athens (Acts xvii. ;i4). Nothing fuither is re- 
 lated of him in the New Testament; but ecclesi- 
 astical historians record some particulars concern- 
 ing his career, both before and aftahis convemwi. 
 Suidas rec( unts that he was an .Alhenlaii by 
 birth, and eminent for his li'eiiarv attaiiira»nt»"
 
 DIONYSlUS. 
 
 DISKASES <)V TIIK JEWS. 
 
 AM 
 
 that he studietl first at; Athens and .iflerwunls at 
 Heliopolis in .'ii^'ypt ; and tliat, wl.ile in the hitter 
 citv, he tx-iieW tliat leniaikahle eclipse of the sun, 
 as lie terms it, wiiich tuok place at the death of 
 Christ, and exclaimetl to his friend Apoliophanes, 
 tj rb diioy Trdcrxfh ^ "^^ iraax^"'''^ ffufiirdax^h 
 'Either the Divinity suiVers, or syinpalliibes with 
 some sufferer.' He furtlier details, that alter 
 Dionysius returned to Athens, he was atlmitted 
 into tiie \reopuy;«s , and, having eitdiraced Ciiris- 
 tianity about a.d. 50, was coiistitiiteil Bishop 
 of Athens by the AjKistlc Paul himself. Syn- 
 cellus and Nicephorus both record the last par- 
 ticular. Aristides, an Atii. uian pliiiosopher, 
 asserts tha't he sidVered martyrdom — a fact gene- 
 rally admitted by historians; but the precise 
 period of his death, whether under Trajan (>i 
 Adrian, or. which is most likely, under Doniitian, 
 they do not determine. Whatever credit nia> :.e 
 given to these traditions, the name of Dionysi js is 
 certainly interesting in a literary point of .^iew, 
 owing to an attempt made by some wri er, in 
 after times, to personate the Areoj)agite ; aiid who 
 contrived to pass his productions on the <^,tiristian 
 world as of tlie apostolic age, and therel y greatly 
 influenced the spirit both of the R'.srern and 
 Western Churches. Daillti places t lis Psendo- 
 Dionysias a.d. 420 (viel. Daliceus de Scriptis 
 Dioitysii Areopa^itee, Genevae, 16fio) ; Peaison, 
 in the latter times of Eusebius Car«ariensis (vid. 
 Viiidic. par. i. c. 10, in fine). Others have con- 
 jectured that these jiroductions we/e written about 
 A.D. 360, but not compile<l till fne Mflh or nearly 
 the sixth century. They consist of a hook called 
 The Celestial Hierarchy ; aufither, Of the Eccle^ 
 siastical Hierarchy ; A Treo.iiise on the Dicim 
 Names ; another. Of Myslicid Divmity ; and 
 Ten Epistles : the first lour addressed to the monk 
 Caius, the tilth to Dositheu?, Mie sixth to Sosipater, 
 the seventh to Bishop Polycarp — in which the au- 
 tlior says he observed the tcl ipse at Heliopolis; 
 the eighth to the Monk Demojihilus — in which the 
 writer blames him for harshness to a priest and 
 a layman, and relates, as if in contrast to his 
 behaviour, that when a zealous pastor, named 
 Carpus, grew weary in his endeavoiu-s to convert 
 an obdurate sinner, Christ, in a vision, remon- 
 strated with him, telling him that he was re;idy 
 to die a second time for sinners ; the ninth epistle 
 is addressed to Bishop Titus, and the tei:th to St. 
 John. In the book On the Celestial Hierarchy, he 
 delivers many subtleties resjiecting the angels. 
 In the book on the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy, he 
 explains the ceremonies of the mass, consecration 
 of tiie holy chrism, the ordination of a bishop, 
 jiriest, and deacon, the manner of blessing a 
 monk, and tiie burial of the dead. In the book 
 Of Mystical Divinity, he mingles the notions of 
 the Contemplatives with ideas and terms borrowed 
 from the heathen philo.sophers. Indeed, so (U'eply 
 imbued are these (iroductions with ])hil(isophical 
 opinions, tiiat Suidas, who takes the author of them 
 to be tiie genuine Areopagite, conji-ctiires that 
 the philoso])heis referred to had bonowed from 
 him their notions, and vended tliem as their own. 
 It is evident that had tliese writings been genuine, 
 *hey would have been invalualile, on account of 
 the attestations they would liave atlbrded to the 
 practices and customs of the Christian Church at 
 its ver; commencement. Still tiiere have been 
 lome \ ?)sons who h(»ve contended that they are 
 
 the real works of the .-Vreopagile. Amon^ tliea« 
 are Claude David, a Maurist monk, in 170i; 
 Bernard of Sept I'linds, under the name ol Adiiait. 
 in 1708; and V. Ilonoratiis, of St. Mary, a (Car- 
 melite friar, in 1720. The first iincontroverte*! 
 occasion on which these sn])posititio\is writings 
 are rel'erred to, is in the conference betuecn tlie 
 Severians(a sect of Eiitychians)and theCatiiolics, 
 held .1 the emperor Justinian's ]>iilace, a.u. .')32, in 
 wlii .1; they are q.iiited by the h< retiral parly. 
 Mt.ximus, and other writers in the following ages, 
 re'er to them fiwpiently. DifVerent opinions iiave 
 Icen held iis to tiie real author of loese jinidiietioiis. 
 'k.'hey were asciibed, at an early ];i'riod, l().-\polli- 
 jaris, Bishoji of Laodicea in the loiiith century — 
 ;in opinion to which the learned Cave inclines, 
 though he thinks that Apollinaris, the son, may 
 have been the author. He remaiks that the |<3- 
 culiar acquirements and turn of mind of A|)olli' 
 naris the father, as described both ijy .Sociates and 
 Sozomen, would have well ijiialified iiim to ha\e 
 written the Areopayitica. There have not lieen 
 wanting instances in which supposititious v/oiks 
 were fatheied upon great names by disciples of 
 the Apollinarian school (heoutius, Lib. dc Sect. 
 act. viii. p. 527). 
 
 The resemblance between \\ie Areopayitica and 
 the writings of Proclus and Plotinus is so obvious 
 as to afford gieat prol)al)ility that the Pseudo- 
 Dionysius did not write much earlier than the 
 filth century (Cave's Hist. Literur. Colonia:-, 
 1720, p. 112, 1 l.'i ; Lardner's woiks, vol. vii. p. 
 371, ed. 17S8 ; Fabric. Bib. Bibli;y).~J. V. D. 
 
 DIOTHEPHES (AtoTpecpTiSs Jovc-nouri.^/>ed), 
 a jierson who seems to liave been one of the f'aUe 
 tea<;hers condemned by St. John in lis tiiird epistle. 
 He appears to ha\e heon a [iresliyti^r or deacon — 
 probably tlie former. He refused to r^-ci-ive the 
 letter sent by John, tliereby declining to submit 
 to liis directions or acknowledge his authoiity 
 (3 John ix). 
 
 DISCERNING OF SPIRITS. This is now 
 usually understood ♦o mean a high faculty, en- 
 joyed by certain persons in the ajiostolic age, oi 
 diving into the heait and discerning tiie seciel 
 dispositions of nun. It apjiears to have liven 
 one of the gifts peculiar to that age, :md was 
 especially necessaiy at a time when the stan- 
 dards of doctrine were not well established or 
 generally understood, and when many deceivers 
 were abroad (2 John ii. 7). This fa<tulty seems 
 to have been exerciseil chiefly upon thuse wlio 
 came forward as teachers of others, and whose 
 real designs it was important that the inlant 
 churches slioidd know. 
 
 DISCIPLE (;uoflTjTT,s), a scholar or follower 
 of any teacher, in the general sense. It is h.ence 
 applied in the gospels not only to the followeis 
 of Christ, but to those of John the Ba|,lisi (Matt. 
 ix. 11, &c.), and of the Piiansees (Matt. xxii. 
 Hi). AUliough used of the lolloweis of CChrist 
 generally, it is applied in a special manner tj 
 the twelve apostles (Matt. x. 1 ; xi. 1 ; xx. 17 ; 
 Luke ix. 1). After tlie death of Chiist the woid 
 took the wider sense of a believer, or Christian ; 
 t. e. a follower of Jesus (Christ. 
 
 DISEASES OF THE JEWS. Tiie most 
 prevalent diseases of tiie East aie cutaneous dis- 
 eases, malignant feveis, dysenteiy, and oplitl'al- 
 mia. Of tlie first of these the most remarkable 
 are leprosy and elephantiasis [Lei»kosv]. To
 
 966 DISEASES OF THE JEWS. 
 
 DISH. 
 
 fi.e siime class also belongs the singular disease 
 called the mal d' Aleppo, which is conliiied to 
 Aleppo, Uai^ilad, Aintal), and the villager on the 
 Sej^oui' an 1 Kowick. It consists in an eruptii)n 
 of one or more sm^ll red tiilieixles, which i;ive no 
 ■ineasiness at first, but, aCter a lew weeks, beconrie 
 jirurieiit, dischar^^e a little moisture, and soine- 
 *,irne> ulcerate. Its duration is from a i"c>v months 
 to a year, it does not alFect tlie general health 
 at ail, and i.s only dre.ideJ on account of the 
 scars it leaves. Foreig'ners wlio have visited 
 Alepp,) have sometimes been alfected l)y it several 
 years after their return to their own country. If 
 is a remark.ible laot that doifj and cats are like- 
 wise attacked by it (Rusiell's Nat. Hist. ofA'eppo, 
 ii. 299). The Eijypiians are sui)jer,t to an eru])- 
 (ion of red ,sp,)ts and jiimples, which cause a 
 troublesome sinaitiiij^. Tiie eruption returns every 
 year towaids tlie eml of June or beginning of 
 July, and is on that account attril)uted to the 
 ri»in,.j of the iMile (Volney, i. 231'). M.tlignant 
 fevers are vei-y frequent, and of this class is the 
 great scourge of the East, the plaj;ue, wliicii sur- 
 pwses all others in virulence and contagiousness 
 I^Pi.-VGi'i:]. The Egyptian o])litiialmia is pre- 
 valent throughout Egypt and Syria, and is the 
 cause of blindness l)eiug so frecpieut in those 
 countries [Blindness]. Of inflammatory dis- 
 eases in general, Dr. Russell (I. c.) says that at 
 Aleppo he has not found them more frequent, nor 
 more rapid in their course, tiian in Great Britain. 
 Epilepsy and diseases of the mind are commonly 
 met witli. Melancholy monomaniacs are re- 
 garded as .sacred persons in Egyjjt, and are held 
 in the highest veneration by all Maliometans 
 (Pros]>er .-Vlpinus, De Med. ^4i.gypt. p. 5S). 
 
 Diseases are not unfrequently alluded to in the 
 Old Testament ; but, as no descri])tion is given 
 ol' tiiem, except in one or two instances, it is for 
 the rnoit part impossible even to hazard a con- 
 'ecture concerning their nature. Tlie issue men- 
 .ioned in Lev. xv. 5 cannot refer to gonorilicea 
 cirulenta, as lias lieen supposed by Michaelis and 
 Hebenstreit (Winer, s. v. Kra/ik/ie/ten) ; for the 
 person who exposeil iiimself to infection in flie 
 various ways mentioned was only unclean until 
 the evening, which is f.ir too short a time to allow 
 of its l.'eing ascertained whether he had escaped 
 contagion or not. Eitlier. then, the law of puri- 
 fication had no reference whatever to the con- 
 ta;iousness of tlie disease (wliich is hardly admis- 
 siule), or the disease alluded to was really not 
 :ui!;tagio;is. Joram"s disease is probal>ly referable 
 to cliPO'iic dysentery, which sometimes occasions 
 in exiid ifi, n of tiliiine from the inner coats of the 
 .i.testines. T.iC fluid librine thus exuded coa.gu- 
 iates iiito a continuous tubular meml)rane, of fije 
 .s..rne s'ia;ie as the infest ne itself, and as such is 
 txpe'led. This form of tiie disease has been no- 
 tice. i by Dr. (iood uniler the name of diarrJKpa 
 ♦uliu'aris {Study of Med. \ 2' 7). A precisely 
 siui.lar formation of false membranes, as they are 
 leimt'd. takes plave in the windpipe in severe 
 cases of croup. 
 
 Hezekiah sufVered, according to onrversion, 
 from a boil. The term here used, I^PIti', means 
 literally inji-fimmation ; but we have no means of 
 Meutifyiii^ it with vvliat we call boil. Tlie same 
 may lie said of tlie plague of fioils and lilains 
 'Bl.AiNs], and of the names of disea-es mentioned 
 UD the 28lh chapter of Deuteronomy, such as pes- 
 
 tilence, consumption, fever, Ix , i of Eg\p1, itch, 
 seal). The case of Job, in which the term trans- 
 lated boil also occurs, demands a separate notice 
 [Job]. Nebuciiadnezzar's disease vvas a species 
 of melancholy monomania, called by authors 
 zoanthropia, or more co?niuonly lycanthropia, be- 
 cause the transformation into a wolf was the most 
 ordinary illusion. Esquivol considers it to hare 
 originated in tlie ancient custom of sacrificing 
 animals. Beit, whatever effect this practice might 
 have liad at the time, the cases recorded are in- 
 dependent of any such influence; and it really 
 does not seem necessary to trace this jiarticiilar 
 hallucination to a remote historical cause, when 
 we remember that the imaginary tianslbrmation.'i 
 into inanimate objects, such as glass, liutter, &c., 
 wliicli aie of every-day occurrence, are equally 
 irreconcilable with the natural instincts of the 
 mind. Tiie s inie author relates that a nobleman 
 of the court of Louis XIV. was in the habit of 
 frequently patting his head out of a window, in 
 order to satisfy tlie urgent d<«iie he had to bark. 
 Calmet informs us that the nuns of a German 
 convent were trausfirmed into cats, and went 
 mewing over the whole house at a fixed hour of 
 the (lay (Estjuirol, Maladies Mentales, i. 522). 
 Antioclius and Herod died, like Sylla, from 
 phthiriasis, a disease which was well known to 
 the ancients. Plutarch, in his Life of Sulla, 
 mentions several names of persons who had died 
 from it, amongst whom are Hlierecydes the 
 philosopher, Alcman tlie poet, and Mutins tiie 
 lawyer. M. Alibert was consulted by a cele- 
 brated F'rench academician, who complained that 
 his enemies even pursued him into the academv, 
 and almost carried ofi' iiis pen (Dcn-matoses, i. 
 585). Nothing is known respecting the imme- 
 diate causes of this m ilady ; but there is no doubt 
 that it depends on the general state of the consti- 
 tution, and must not be attrdiuted to uncleanli- 
 ness. Alibert mentions tlie case of a jierson who, 
 as soon as these animals had lieen destroyeil, fell 
 into a typhoid state, and shortly after died. Tlie 
 question of alleged demoniacal possession, so 
 often mentioned in the New Testament, has been 
 considered under another head [DkmomacsJ, and 
 need not lie re-opened in this place. — W. A. N. 
 
 DISH. Various kinds of dishes are mentioned 
 in Scripture ; but it is impo »ible to form any 
 other idea of their particular forms than may be 
 suggested liy those of ancient Egypt arul of the 
 mo(lern East, which have much resemlilance to 
 eacli other. The sites of such ancient towns as 
 weie built of sun-dried bricks are usually covered 
 with broken potsherds, some of them large 
 enough to indicate the form of the entire vessel. 
 
 These are remarkalily similar to those l»« roodero 
 use, and are for tiie most part made of a rather
 
 DIVINATION. 
 
 DU'INATION. 
 
 3«7 
 
 coarse earthenware, coveredi with a compact and 
 •tron;^ glaze, with hrijjlit coh)ur8, mostly Rreen, 
 blue, or yellow. Dishes and other vessels of 
 copper, coarsely but thickly tinned, are now 
 much used in the East ; hut liow far this may 
 have been anciently the ca^-e we have not Ihe 
 means of knowins^. The first cut (No. 2 IS) 
 represents a slave biinsjing dishes to fable; the 
 dishes have coveis, and the manner in whicli they 
 are carried on the reverted hand is the mode still 
 
 nsed by Eastern servants. Tlie gpecimens in the 
 other cut (No. 219) are modern Oriental, and 
 speak for themselves. 
 
 DISPERSION OF NATIONS. [Nations, 
 
 DiSPEUSION OK.] 
 
 DIVIN.\TION is a general term descriptive 
 of the various illusory arts anciently ])vacfised 
 for the discovery of things secret or future. The 
 human mind has always shown a strong curiosity 
 to ascertain the course of fortune, and the issue of 
 present or contemplated schemes ; and in those 
 eountries and ages where ignorance of physical 
 laws has con)bined with superstition to debase it, 
 it has sought to gratify this innate disposition to 
 pry info futurity, by looking for presages in things 
 between wliich and the object of its anxiety no 
 connection existed but in the diviner's imagina- 
 tion. Scarcely a single department of iiatuie but 
 was ajrpealed to, as fiunishing, on certain con- 
 ilitions, good or bad omens of human destiny ; 
 and the aspect of tilings, whiih, jcrhaps by the 
 most casual coincidence, marked some event or 
 crisis in the life of one or two individuals, came 
 to be regarded, by blind credulity, as the fixed 
 itjd invariable preciusor of a siu ilar result in the 
 ilTairs of mankind in general. By suc;h childish 
 and irrational notions was the conduct of the 
 aeathen guided in the most important, no less 
 than in the most ordinary occurrences of life ; and 
 hence arose the proli.'ssion of augurs, soothsayers, 
 tt hoc genus bmne of impostors, who, ingrafting 
 vulgar traditions on a small stock of natural 
 knowledge, established their claims to the posses- 
 sion of an occult science, the importance and in- 
 fluence of which they <lexterously increased by 
 associating it with all that was |)ompous and im- 
 posing in the ceremonies of their religion. 
 
 Tliis science, if that can be called science 
 which was the jiroibu't of ignorance and fraud 
 united, was divided into various t>ranches, each of 
 which had its separate professors. In a general 
 view, divination may be considered <as either na- 
 tural or artificial : the first being founded on the 
 notion that the soul possesses, from its spiritual 
 nature, some jirescience of futurity, which it ex- 
 emplifies particularly in dreams, and at the f."^ 
 nioach of death : the second, u-stiug on a peculia 
 interpretation of the course of nature, as well as 
 •jT\ such arbitrary observations and exf)eriments 
 B.I sup* 'stition introduced. The different systems 
 
 and methods that were anciently in vogue aie 
 almost in<'redible; as, for instance, Ai-romancy, 
 divining liy the air; Arithmomancy, liy meaui ot 
 numlK-rs; (lapnomancy, by the smoke of .saciiliues; 
 Chiromancy, by the lines on the palms of tU« 
 hands; Hydromancy, by water ; Pyromancy, by 
 tire, Sic. But without attemjiting an eiuuueratiou 
 and expl.mallon of all the arts of divination thai 
 were ancieutiv practised, and which the jeader, 
 ciuious ill studi inipnries, will find detaded al 
 length by Cicero {De Oiviiiatioiic), and Caidan 
 (De Scpif'ifid'), let us confine ourselves to the 
 mention of those whidrocciu- in .sacied hisiory. 
 1. DVDDn (Exod. vii. 1 1 ; Isa. xliv. 2') ; .I.-i . |. ;15 ; 
 Dan. ii. ]2. &c.), 'wise men," and DV^OIH (de- 
 rived bv Parkhurst fiom tSlfl, pen, anrl DH. to uc 
 com])li.sh), 'drawers of astrological figiues;' boti; 
 of these terms were applied generally to ma- 
 gicians, or luin who were skilleil m natural 
 science. 2. ''3'li?"!^, ' wizzards" or wise men, and 
 P|L*'20, 'a witcJj." from an Aiabic veri) signifying 
 'to reveal,' bofll _ ractrsing divination by the Siinie 
 arts, i. e. pietending to reveal secri ts, to discover 
 tilings lo.-t, find hidden Ireasnie, and inlerpiet 
 dreams. 3. D^fwDp DDIp kosem kcgamin. one 
 wiio foretold what wiis to happen by the flight of 
 birds, or the use of lots [Lots]. 4. piyD laeonen, 
 one who, though rendered by our traiislufors "an 
 observer of times,' foretold political or ]ihysic:il 
 changes by the motion of the clouds (fn>ni py, 
 clouds), along with whom Isaiah conjoins the 
 D''tDK* """l^n, &c., who made the same i)reiliction8 
 from eclipses, .and the conjunction of the stars, 
 (xlvii. 13). 5. J^TlJrD, in our veision, 'an en- 
 chanter,' was, coming as it docs from CTJ, a 
 serpent, probably one who practised Ophiomancy, 
 or the art of chaiming serijents, which w;is, and 
 still is, a favomite trick of jugglery in the East. 
 6. "lin ~l2'in, 'a charmer,' one who, iis the oii- 
 ginal word imjilies, placed words and things in a 
 certaiu arrangement, or muttered them", as a kind 
 
 of spell. 7. 315< 7N"|t;', 'a consulter widi familiar 
 
 spirits,' rendered by the Sejjtuagiut iyyacrriii- 
 IJ.V0OS, 'a ventiilocjuist,' was a « izzard ubo askrd 
 counsel of his familiar, and gave the iis|on.ses 
 received from him to others — the name 21X f)eiiig 
 ajtplieil in reference to tlie s|)iiit or demon tl at 
 aidmated the jieison. and inflated ihe belly, so 
 that it protuberated like the side of a bot'le. Tlie 
 31N of the Hebrews was thus piccisely the same 
 as the Pytlio of the Greeks, and was u.-ed ni.f ..nly 
 to designate the performer, but the rvfrna Fivriivoj, 
 which pos.sessed him (see Levit. xx. 27, HIN Dn3 
 in eis Pytho ; 1 S.mi. xxviii. 8, 21 "l Nil ;"'' Pi/(liu- 
 nem ; also Acts xvi. 16). S. D'n?jn Cin, 'a 
 necromancer, one who, by frequenting tondis, by 
 inspecting corpsos, or more fretpieolly, liy help 
 of the 31X, like the witch of Endor, pietonded 
 to evoke the d< «d, and bring se<i('ts from tiie 
 invisible world ((ien. xli. 8; Exod. vii. 11; 
 Lev. xix. 26; Dent, xviii. 10-12). 9. !'.<- 
 lomancy, as it is called, a form of divination 
 by means of arrows (Ezek. xxl. 21 ; see al>o 2 
 Kings xiii. 11-lS), a notable example of which 
 occurs in the history of Nebuchadnezzar, who, 
 being undecided whether to maich fiist agalnuf 
 Jerusalem or Kabl)ali, allowed n<'ither his po- 
 licy nor resentment to decide the course of his 
 expediti(m, but was <letein ined wholly by tlic 
 result of suj)erslitious rites. The way of liviniiig
 
 368 
 
 DIVINATION. 
 
 by ;imiw9 was, haviuj; Hi*t niaile tlienj Ijrig^Iit ' in 
 order tiie h<'tl«i lo f./ilow llit-ni with (lie eye,' to 
 ghoot them, and to pioseciife the ni.ircli accomin;^ 
 to the (lirccliiii) in which the f^reutest niimlter of 
 arrows fell; or, having "mixed to^ethei-" some 
 airows wi'ih. the nanu-s of the devoted cities 
 inarl<ed on them, to attack that liis>t wliich was 
 first drawn out : or to jwit in a ha;; three arrows, 
 as is the |)nu:tice of the Arabs (see DH. rhe'ots v. 
 Acdahy one of wliich is inscribed with tiie words 
 ' Coinniaiid me. Lord, tlie second witii ' Forbid 
 me. Lord," while the third is left blank; so that 
 if tiietir^t i- taken oot, be was tj .w; if the second, 
 he was to desist; if the third is drawn, no deci- 
 »ion hein,' given, flie experiment is to Ije re- 
 ijeatcd. 1(1. Rhal)dor!ia!u:y, or divination by 
 rods (Hos iv. 12). This lias been confonndeti 
 with the )irecedin^, n.it (.nly by Jerome, Grotins, 
 and other.s, but e.en i>y tlie Septua;.{int, which 
 renderi tlie ^''^fll of Ez;elviel liy pa/33oi, 'a rod.' 
 But the instiuuients of ilivination which Hosea 
 alludes to ;ire entirely dilfere/jt from those de- 
 scribed by Ezekiel, D"'Vn, arrows bein^,' u.sed by 
 
 the latter, whereas the former sjjeaks of 7pD, 
 
 'stair.' The form of divination by t!.e st^alf was, 
 after placing it upright, to let it fall, and decide 
 3y the direction in which it fell, (»r, accoiding 
 o others, by measuring the staff" with the linger, 
 saying at each span, ' I will go," or ' I will not 
 go," and I'etermining the course, according as it 
 happened to be the one or the oihei* at the last 
 measuiement. Both of these, as Jerome informs 
 lis, vvcie frequently practised by the Assyrians 
 and Babylonians. Herodotus (vi.) describes the 
 Alani women as gathering and searching an- 
 xiously for very smooth and straight wands to 
 l)e used in this superstitious manner. 1 1. Another 
 way of divining was by ' images," DS~in (Kzek. 
 xxi. 21), which are generally considered talis- 
 mans, but which the Persian and other versions 
 render astrological instruments or tables. 12. 
 Another form of divination was, 'by hniking into 
 the liver ' of a ne.vly killed .sacrifice, and by ob- 
 gerving its state and colour according to certain 
 mles, to draw a favourable or unfavourable omen. 
 The last form which it is of consequence to notice 
 asi alluded to in Scripture was by 'the cup.' But 
 ir: what manner it was practised; whether it was 
 by observing the ajjpearance of some magical in- 
 gredients that were infused into the ve sel ; or 
 whether allusion is made tf) a famous cup which 
 the immemorial tradition of the East says has 
 l)een in the [jossession of some great personages, 
 and '-epresents the whole world ; or, finally, wiie- 
 ther the original word ^HJ, ' divineth," should be 
 rendered by ' searching " or 'inquiring earnestly,' 
 as many learned writers, anxious to save the 
 ciiaiacfer of Josejih from the imputation of sor- 
 cery (Gen. xliv. 5), have laboured to prove, it is 
 absolutely impossible, and we shall not attempt, 
 to determine. 
 
 Egypt, the cradle of arts and sciences, if she 
 did not give it l)irth, seems to have encouraged 
 tiie practice of divination at an early age, and 
 whether any of its forms had become objects of 
 popular sujwrstitlon, or were resorted to for the 
 purposes of gain in the days of Joseph, it is well 
 known that at the time of the Hebrew Exodus 
 there were magicians in that country who.se know- 
 ledge of the arcana of nature, and whose dexterity 
 
 DIVINATION. 
 
 in the practi.-e of their art enabled them, to a c«r* 
 tain extent, to iqual tlie niiiacle« of Moses. By 
 what extraordinary jjoweis they achieved tlioM 
 feats, how tliey changed their rods into ."serpents, 
 the river water inio blood, and in;roduced fiogs 
 in unprecedented numbers, is an inquiry that has 
 occa^ic^ned great perplexity to many men ol 
 learning and piety. Some have ima;iiie(i tjiat 
 the only way of accounting for the jihenoniena is 
 to ascribe them to jugglery and legerdemain ; 
 the serpents, the frogs, and tire other materials 
 requisite having been secretly provided and dex- 
 terously produced at tlie moment their ]:eiform- 
 anc3s were to be exhibited. But the diiliculties 
 attending this method of soliiti n are so obvious 
 and manifold, that every reflecting mind must 
 allow it to l>e far more rational to sup])ose that these 
 conjurors were aided by familiar spirits or infernal 
 agents, with the Divine permission, in the per- 
 i'ormance oi ihAr wouderlul feats. ' Earth, air, 
 ami ocean," says a sensiltle writer, * may contain 
 n!a;iy things of which .our philosojihy lias never 
 dreamt. If thi* consideration tend to humble the 
 pride of learning, it may remind the Christian 
 that secret things belong not to him, but to a 
 higher power.' 
 
 It is reasonable to suppose that as Moses ne\'er 
 had lieen in any other civilized country, all the 
 allusions contained in his writings to the various 
 forms of divination were those which were prac- 
 tised in Egypt; and, inileed, so strong a taste had 
 his countrymen imbibed there for this species of 
 sujjerstition, that throughout the whole course of 
 their history it seems to have infected the national 
 character and habits. The diviners, who abounded 
 botii among.st the aborigines of Canaan and their 
 Philistine neighbours (Isa. ii. 6), proved a gieat 
 snare to the Israelites after their settlement in 
 the promised land ; and yet, notwithstanding the 
 stern prohibitions of the law, no vigorous elVorts 
 were made to put an end to tlie crime by extir- 
 pating the practitioners of the unhallowed art, 
 until the days of Saul, who himself, however, 
 violated the statute on the night previous to his 
 disastrous fall (1 Sam. xxviii.). But it was 
 ChahicEa to which the distinction lielongs of being 
 the mother-country of diviners. Such a degiee 
 of ])ower and influence had they attained in that 
 country [Chai.d.ea], that they formed the highest 
 caste and enjoyed a place at court ; nay, so indis- 
 pensable were they in Chaldeean society that no 
 step could be taken, not a relation could be 
 formed, a house built, a journey undertaken, a 
 campaign begun, until the diviners had ascer- 
 tained the lucky day and promisetl a happy issue. 
 A great influx of these impostors had, at various 
 times, ))oured from Clialdiea and Arabia into the 
 land of Israel to pursue their gainful occupation, 
 more especially during the reign of the later 
 kings (Isa. viii. 19), and we find IManasseh not 
 only their liberal patron, but zealous to a])pear as 
 one of their most ex])ert accomplices (2 Kings 
 xxi. 6 ; 2 Chron. xxxiii. C). The long captivities 
 in Babylon spread more widely than ever among 
 the Jews a devoted attachment to thissu])erstition ; 
 for after their return to their own country, having 
 entirely renounced idolatry, and, at the same 
 time, no longer enjoying the gift of prophecy or 
 access to the sacred oracle.s, they gradually aban< 
 doned themselves, as Lightfoot has satisfactorily 
 shown, before tlie advent of Christ, to all tlie
 
 DODANIM. 
 
 prevailing forms of divination (^Coniment. on 
 Matt). 
 
 Atfainst every species and degree of tli's super- 
 itifion llie sternest dcnunciaiions of the Musiiic 
 law were directed (ICxo.i. xxii. IS; Lev. xix. 26, 
 31; XX. 27; Deut. xviii. 10, 11), as fostorin;^ a 
 love for miLiw fill knowledge and withdrawing the 
 tniiid from God only wise ; while, at the same 
 time, re[pe.ited and distinct promises were given 
 that in place of diviners and all who used en- 
 ciiantments God woidd send them ])ropliefs. mes- 
 sengers of truth, who would declare the divine 
 will, reveal fiitiuity, atid aflbrd them all the 
 useful knowledge which was vainly sought for 
 from those pretended oracles of wisdom. Much 
 disci, Si. on, however, iiais been carried on hy learned 
 men to determine the question wlietlier the ancient 
 tribe of diviners merely juefendod to the powers 
 they exercised, or were actually assisted by de- 
 moniacal agency. The latter ojiinion is embraced 
 by almost all ihe fathers of tlie primitive church, 
 who a[)peal, in support of their views, to tlie 
 plain language of Scripture ; to the achievements 
 of Jannes and Jambres in the days of Aloses ; to 
 the divine law, which cannot be chargeable wiih 
 the folly of proliibiting crimes which never existed ; 
 and to the strong jiresumption that jiretensions to 
 interpret tlreams, to evoke the dead, &c., would 
 never have met with credit during so many ages 
 had there not been some known and authenticated 
 instances of success. On tlie other hand, it has 
 been, with great ability and erudition, maintained 
 that the whole arts of divination were a system of 
 imposture, and that Scripture itself frequently 
 ridicules those who practised them as utterly help- 
 less and incapable of accomplishing anything 
 beyond the ordinary powers of nature (Isa xlvii. 
 11-13; xliv. 25; Jer. xiv. li; Jonah ii. 8: see 
 Faber's Origin of Parian Idolairij ; Farmer's 
 Dissert, on Miracles ; Lightfoofs Works ; Vai- 
 ter's Antig. i. 354 ; Stol berg's Hist, of Relig. iii. ; 
 Selden, De diis Si/ris ; Godwin's Moses and 
 Aaron, p. 216 ; Rosenmiiller's Geog. vii. 101, 
 102 ; Gesenius's (.'omment. on Isaiah, app. xi. ; 
 Glanville's Sadducismus Triumphatus ; Richard- 
 son's Dissertation on the Manners of Eastern 
 Nations). — R. J. 
 
 DIVORCE. [Mauriagk.] 
 
 DODANIM (D^nn ; Sept. 'PJSioi), the de- 
 scendants of the fourth son of Javan ((Jen. x. 4). 
 Bochart and other commentators on the ethno- 
 graphical sketch in Gen. x. suppose that the 
 first .settlements of the Dodanim were in the south- 
 west part of Asia Minor; where the country 
 called iiy the Greeks D.oris, with the nelghbonring 
 isle of Rhodes, are conceived to exhibit traces of 
 this origin, the Hebrew letters T (cl) and T (r) 
 being, from their similarity, often transposed. In 
 fact, some copies have the "1 , and read Roda- 
 nim (as in the margin of the Auth. 'Vers.), and the 
 Sepiuagint gives the same reading both in Gen. x. 
 4, and 1 Chnm. i. 7, where it has 'Po'Sioi. It is fur- 
 tlier supposed that settlers of this family may be 
 traced in Thessaly and Epirus, where the name 
 is traced in the city of Dodona and in the coun- 
 try of Doris. But there seems much of uncer- 
 tainty in all these ingenious speculations. 
 
 DOKG (3X1 ; Scjit. Aojtj'k), an Edomite, and 
 chief overseer of King Saul's flocks, which is 
 BH fntiTwrtant trust in Oriental courts. At Nob 
 
 DOG. 
 
 M9 
 
 he was witness ol tlie assistance which ihe lii^h- 
 jnieot Ahimelecb seemed to alVord to the fugitiv« 
 David, by I'urnishing him wilh the sword of 
 Goliath, and by supjilying him with bread even 
 from the sacred table (1 Sam. xxi. 7). Of this 
 he failed not to inl'orm the king, wiio, regaidhss 
 of the explanation ollered by Ahimelecii, and find- 
 ing that the chiefs censured iiini. and liesilated Ic 
 lay their hands ujxm a |ierson so sacitx.. (din- 
 manded Doeg to .slay him and his priests — a la.>k 
 wlii<;h was executed with equal readiness and 
 cruelty by the Edomite (1 Sam. xxii. 18, wpp). 
 
 DOG (3^D keleb; Arabic, kclb) occurs in 
 many ])lares of Scripture (Exod. xxii. .31 ; 1 S im. 
 xvii.4.3; xxiv. 14 ; 2 Sam. ix. 8: SKingsviii. 13; 
 Ps. lix. 6, 14, 15; Prov. xxvi. 11, 17, &c.). An 
 animal so well known, whose numerous varieties 
 come under daily observation, requires no detailed 
 descri]itioii. There is, however, in Asia still extant 
 one, pi'rhajis more than one, species, that ne\er 
 have [)een the comjianiiins of man, and theie aie 
 races of ini( erfain origin, that may have ijeen for- 
 merly domesticated, but win chare now feral, and as 
 fierce as wolves; while, from ihe jjarticular opinions 
 of Oriental nations, there are others, exceedingly 
 numerous, neither wild nor domesticated, but 
 existing in all the cities and towns of the Levant, 
 without owners ; feeding on carrion and ofial.s, and 
 still having the true instinct of jirotecting pro- 
 perty, guarding the inhabitants of the district 
 or quarter where they are tolerated ; and so far 
 cherisheil, that water and some fcxxl are not un- 
 usually placed within their reach. 
 
 -^ 
 
 Tlie true wild species of Upper and Eastern 
 Asia is a low, sharp-nosed, reddish cur-dog, not 
 unlike a fox, but with less tail. In Persia and 
 Turkey there exists a larger dog resembling- a 
 wolf, exceedingly savage. Both are gregarious, 
 hunt in packs, but are oi;casioiialiy seen alone. 
 They are readily distinguished I'lom a wjlf liy 
 their shorter unfurni.>lied tails. In the time of the 
 sojourning of Israel in Egypt, there were already 
 in existence domestic dogs of tlie ])rincipal races 
 now extant — the cur-dog or fox-dog. the hound, 
 the greyhound, and even a kind of low-legged 
 turnspit. All the aliove, both wild and re- 
 claimed, there is every reason to believe, were 
 known to the Hebrews, and, notwithstanding the 
 presumed Mo.saic jirohibition, anterior hal)its, and, 
 in some measure, the necessity of their condition, 
 must have caused catlle->logs to be retained as 
 ]iroi)erty (Deut. xxiii. IS); for we find one of 
 that race, or a house-dog, actually attending on 
 travellers (Tobit v. 16; xi. 4). It is to be pre- 
 sumed that inacti(;ally the street-dogs alone wer« 
 considered as absolutely unclcjui j tiuiugh all, aa
 
 570 
 
 DOKHAN. 
 
 i» ttic case among Mohammedans, were exclude<I 
 from familiarity. 
 
 Beside thecattl?-dog, the Egyptian hound, and 
 one or two varieties of greyhound were most 
 likely iisetl for hvmting — a pastime, however, 
 which the Hebrews mostly pursued on foot. 
 
 Tiie street-dog, without master, apparently de- 
 rived from the rufous-cur, and in Egypt partaking 
 cf the mongrel greyhound, often more or less 
 bare, with a mangy unctuous skin, frequently 
 with several teetli wanting, was, as it now is, 
 considered a defiling animal. It is to animals 
 of this class, which no doubt followed the camp 
 of Israel, and hung on its skirts, that allusion 
 is more particularly made in Exod. xxii. 31 ; 
 for the same custom exists at this day, and 
 the race of street-dogs still retains their ancient 
 habits. A {wrtion of the Cairo packs annually 
 become hadgis^ and go and return with the 
 caravan to Mecca, while otliers come from Da- 
 mascus, acting in the same manner ; and it is 
 knov.'u that the pilgrims from the banks of the 
 Lidus are similarly attended to Kerbela : indeed, 
 every caravan is so, more or less, by these poor 
 animals. But with regard to the dogs that 
 devoured Jezebel, and licked up Ahab's blood 
 (1 Kings xxi. 23), they may have been of the 
 wild races, a species of which is reported to have 
 particularly infested the banks of the Kishon and 
 the district of Jezreel. 
 
 The cities of the East are still greatly disturbed 
 in the night by the bowlings of street-dogs, who, 
 it seems, were similarly noisy in ancient times, 
 the fact being noticed in Ps. lix. 6, 14 ; and 
 dumb or silent dogs are not unfrequently seen, 
 such as Isaiah alludes to (Ivi. 10). 
 
 In Egypt, anterior to the Cluistian era, domes- 
 tic <logs were venerated ; they continued to be 
 cherished till tlie Arabian conquest, when they, 
 like the unowned street-ilogs, fell under the impre- 
 cation of Mohammed, who with reluctance, though 
 with good policy, mo<lified his denunciations and 
 sentence of destruction in favour of hunting-dogs, 
 and even permitted game killed by them to be 
 eaten under certain conditions. For interesting 
 details ou the dogs of the East and their con- 
 geners, the wolf, Lyciscus, Thoa, and Jackal, 
 reference may be made to Sir William Jardine's 
 Naturalist's Library, vols. ix. and x., which con- 
 tain the Canidae. We figure a specimen of Feral, 
 or wild dog, copied from a large Persian picture 
 in the library of the Hon. East India Company. 
 In this picture the Shah and his sons are seen 
 killing game, and among the rest the dogs in 
 question. — C. H. S. 
 
 DOKHAN, or Dochan (IO'I), occurs in 
 F.zek. iv. 9, where the Prophet is directed to take 
 unto him wheat, and bailey, and beans, and len- 
 tiles, and millet (dok/um) and litches, and to put 
 tliem into one vessel, and to make bread thereof for 
 himself. All tlie grains enumerated in this verse 
 continue to form the cliief articles of diet in the 
 East in the present day, as they appear to have 
 done in ancient times. Wheat, barley, and beans 
 are well known in Euro])e. Lentiles are less so, 
 except in tlie soulii. and fitches will be noticed 
 imder the head of Kusmeth. The Helnew word 
 
 dokhim is identical with the Arabic i^i^ 
 
 dtikhun, which is applied in the present day by 
 
 DOKHAN. 
 
 the Arabs to a small grain culti\'ated fr»m tlie 
 middle of Europe to tlio most southern part o" 
 India. This is the common millet, Panicu>t% 
 miliaceum of botanists, which is sometimes culti- 
 vated in England on account of the seeds bein<» 
 nsed for feeding birds and poultry. But 1u# 
 
 >tl. [Millet— Panicum miliaceum.] 
 
 giain is usually imported into this country fiom 
 the Mediterranean. In India it- is cultivated 
 in the cold weather, that is, in the same season 
 with wheat and barley, and is an article of diet 
 with the inhabitants. Tiie culms are erect, from 
 two to four feet high, the wliole plant being very 
 hairy; leaves large, with long sheaths, which in- 
 volve most part of the culm ; panicle, oblong, 
 much branched, bending down with the weiglit 
 of the grain ; glumes cuspidate ; corol, three- 
 valved, adventitious valve emarginate ; seed, 
 oval and smooth, coloured longitudinally with 
 five streaks. The name, miliaceum. is said to 
 have been applied to tliis |)lant from its j)roducing 
 such a quantity of grain, as if one stalk bore a 
 thousand seeds. Havirg mentioned the extreme 
 points where tliis grain is cultivated, it is hardly 
 necessary to state that it is jiroduced in the inter- 
 mediate countries. Tournefort says that in the 
 Isle of Samos the inhabitarits, in preparing their 
 bread, knead together one half wheat and tlie otiier 
 half barley and millet mixed together. It is 
 also an article of diet both in Persia and India. 
 
 ForskUl ajiplies the name ^j^^^ du/ihmi to 
 another corn-grass, wliich he first found in a gar- 
 den at Rosetta, cultivated on account of its seed 
 being given as food to birds. Afterwards he 
 found it commonly cultivated in Arabia. It 
 grows to a great size, being about five cubits in 
 lieight, with seeds of the size of rice. To it hs 
 has given the name of Holms dochna, but the 
 plant is as yet unknov.n to liofanist.s. Therein, 
 however, no doubt that tlie true dukhun of A«b
 
 DOR. 
 
 •ufhors is the ahov e (\<^scT\[m\ pahici^m muiaceum. 
 This is so universally cultivated in tlie East as 
 »ne of their smaller corn-grasses, tliat it is most 
 likely to be the kind alluded to in the passage of 
 Ezekiel.— J. F. R. 
 
 DOORS. [Ctates.] 
 
 DOPliKAH, an encampment of the Israelites 
 in the Wilderness [Wandering, the]. 
 
 DOR (in or -iX'q ; Sept. Aupa. Aip), a town 
 on the border of the Mediterranean, whic.'i Jerome 
 places nine Roman miles north of Caesarea. It 
 was one of the royal towns of the Canaanites 
 (Josh. xi. 2 ; xii. 23), and was included in tlie 
 heritage of Mimasseh (Josh. xvii. 11). The place, 
 or rather the region to wliicli it gave name, occurs 
 again in 1 Kings iv. 11; and in the Maccabees 
 (1 Mace. XV. 1 1) and Josephus (Antiq. xvi. 4, 4) 
 appears under the name of Dora. A place still 
 exists, at the distance indicated by Jerome, under 
 the name of Tortura, which Buckingham de- 
 scribes as a small village with aboi't forty or fil'ty 
 houses and five hundred inhabitants. It h.as a 
 small port, formed l)y a narrow range of rocky 
 islets, at a short distance from the sandy beach. 
 
 DOTHAN (pni and jm ; Sept. AaiOaflfi 
 and AuOa'ifx) nrDoTHAiM, the place where Joseph 
 found his brethren, who had wandfred thither 
 with theii flocks from Shechem, and where he was 
 treacherously sold by them to the Ishmaelites 
 (Gen. XXX vii. 17). It was here also that the 
 Syrians were smitten wirh blindness at the word 
 of Elislia (2 Kings vi. 13). Dothan is placed 
 by Eusebius and Jerome twelve Roman miles 
 north of Sebaste or Samaria, and it was obviously 
 on the caravan track from Syria to Egypt. The 
 well into which Joseph was cast by his brothers, 
 and consequently the site of Dothan, has, how- 
 ever, been ]jlaced by tradition in a very distant 
 quarter, namely, about three miles south-east 
 from Safed, where tliere is a khan called Khan 
 JubhYusiif, the Khan of Jacob's Pit, because 
 the well connected wirh it has long passed among 
 Christians and Moslems for the well in question. 
 The Bethulia of Judith has long been identilied 
 with Safed, and as Dothan (Dothaim) is men- 
 tioneil as being in the neiglibourhood, it became 
 necessary that Dothan should be found in tliis 
 quarter. But it is clear, from tl)e notices in 
 Ju.lith (iv. 5; vii. 1, 2), that Bethulia was south, 
 and not north, of tiie plain of Esdraelon ; and 
 consequently we are at liberty to seek the site of 
 Dothan also at some point more confonnable to 
 the intimation of Eusebius and to the probabilities 
 of the story than that of tlie alleged Joseph's 
 well. 
 
 DOVE (n3V yoneh ; olvas and -Kepia-Tepd in 
 Gieek). There are jirobably several species of 
 iloves or pigeons included in the Ileljrew name 
 I'onch. It may contain all those that inhabit 
 Palestine, exclusive of the turtle-doves jmiperly 
 to called. Thus generalized, the dove is, ligina- 
 tively, next to man, the most exalted of animals, 
 symbolizing tiie Holy S])irit, the meekness, purity, 
 and s])le!i<tour of righteousness. Next, it is by some 
 considered (tho'igh in an obscure ])assage) as 
 an early national standard (Psa. Ixviii. 13), Ijeing 
 likewise held in ]iagan Syria and Ph.cenicia to be 
 *n ensign and a divinity, resplendent with silver 
 and gold ; and so venerated ;is to be regarded as 
 flolj, and forbidden as an article of food. Bv tiie 
 
 DtJVE. 
 
 571 
 
 Hebrew la'.?,hov,ever, doves a ail linfledoves were 
 the only birtls that could be ollrred in :,acritlce, 
 and tliey were usually selected for that |)urpose bj 
 the less wealthy (Gen. xv. 9; Lev. v. 7 ; xii. (5 : 
 Luke ii. 21) : ami to su])ply the demand for them 
 dealers in the^e birds sal al)out the precincts of the 
 Temple (Matt. xxi. 12, Sec). The dove is th* 
 harbinger of reconciliation with God (Gen. viii. 
 8, 10, Ac), and, thou;,'h somewhat questionalile, 
 the D*3V"in c/urio7ii)n, 'ibing oftloies ' (2 Kings 
 vi. 25), seems to be indicated as f(,od in the last 
 degree of human sidfering by famine That tliis 
 interpretation is not forced, appears from similai 
 passages in Jose])hus (De Bell. Juil. v. 13, 7). See 
 Winer, Renlworterbrich, s. v. Taube. where otiier 
 instances are adduced, and among them the fa- 
 mine in England, din-ing the reign of King Ed- 
 ward II. A.u. 131(5, when '])igeons' dung' is 
 nuntioned as being eaten l)y the poor. But we 
 tiike tliis to be a mere figure ufsjieech copied fr.-m 
 Josephus [DovKs' Duno]. 
 
 With regard to the dove as a national ensign 
 it may be remarked that we have two figures v;here 
 the symbol occurs: one from a Plurnician coin, 
 where the dove stands on a globe instead of the 
 usual pedestal ol'aiicirnt signa, with wing> closed, 
 and a glory of sunbeams round the head ; the other, 
 from a defaced bas-relief observed in the Hainan, 
 where fhel)ird, with wings dis]ilayed, is seated also 
 on a globe, and the sunbeams, spreading behinil 
 the whole, terminate in a circle of stars ; jirobably 
 representing Assyria, Syria, or pevhajis .Semiramis 
 (compare several ])assages in Jeremiah). Tlie 
 brown wood-dove is said to be intended liy the 
 Hebrew name ; but all the sacred birds, mdess ex- 
 pressly mentioned, were pure white, or with some 
 roseate feathers about the wing coverts, such as are 
 still frequently bred from the cariier-pigeon of 
 Scandiroon. It is this kind wliicli Ti bull us notices 
 
 'Alba Pala-stino sancta Cohimba Syro.' 
 Tlie carrier-birds are represented in Egyjitian 
 bas-reliefs, where priests are shown letting them 
 Hy on a message ; and to them also may be referred 
 the l)lack-doves, whi'.h fyjiified or g.ive their name 
 to an order of (ieiitde ]irie^ts. both in l"'.gvi.t ajid, 
 it would seem, in early Greece, who, under this 
 character, were, in the mysteries, ri'storers of light. 
 This may have had reference to tiie return of the 
 dove which caused Noah to uncover the aik. All 
 pigeons in their true wild plumage; have iri- 
 descent colours aijoul the neik, and ollen reflected 
 Hashes of the same colours on the .-hoiAieis, wluoli 
 are the source of the silver and gohl fealheii 
 ascribed te them in poetical diction: and thence the 
 epithec of purple bestowed upon them all, thougD
 
 573 
 
 UOVES' DUNG. 
 
 DOVES' DUNG. 
 
 No. 122, to an aljiid.;ed Chronicle of tie Historf 
 of Enjjlaiid, in wliicli it is said that in the faniiiM 
 wliicli laid England waste in 1316 the poor at* 
 pigeons' dung. But these explanations are Dot 
 moie satisfactory tlian the older ories. 
 
 mo«t applicable to the vinous and slaty-coloured been made in the Edinb. Christian Insti-uctm 
 8j)ecies. The coasts and territory of Syria are 
 noted loi the Lcieaf number of doves frequenting 
 them, thouLjt. th^y aie not so abundant there as in 
 the Coh-i-Suleiiuan chain near tiie Indus, which in 
 Sanscrit is named Arga varta, or, ^s it is inter- 
 preted, the ' dove." Syria possesses several species 
 of pigeon : tiie Coliunba QSnas, or stock-dove, 
 C. ralumbus, or ring-dove, C, Domestica, Livia, 
 the common pigeon in several varieties, such as 
 the Barbaiy, Turkish or Persian carrier, crisp, and 
 shaker. Tliese are still watched in their flight in 
 the same manner as anciently their number, gyra- 
 tion.s, and other manoeuvres were observed by sooth- 
 sayers. The wild species, as well as the turtle- 
 doves, migrate from Palestine to tlie south; but 
 stock and ring-doves are not long absent. 
 
 We figure above (No. 252) the more rare 
 species of white and ])ink carrier, and tiie Phoe- 
 nician sacred ensign of the dove. — C. H. S. 
 
 DOVES' DUNG. This expression occurs in 
 2 Kings vi. 25, as a literal translation of D'^JVIH 
 chirioaim or charei-i/onim, which in tlie margin 
 is written C'JVST dib-yonim, both meaning the 
 game thing : and it is curious that in the Arabic 
 
 there are two words very similar to these, S^ 
 
 khureh, and ^J^ \ zabil, which also signify the 
 
 same thing, that is, the dung of animals. In the 
 above compounds, MjV and dib being prefixed 
 to yonim, the plural form for doves, the literal 
 meaning is as alwve translated. By many the 
 expression is considered to signify literally the 
 dung of pigeons, as in tiie passage of 2 Kings vi. 
 25 : ' And there was a gre.it famine in Samaria, 
 and beiiold they besieged it, until an ass's head was 
 sold for threescore pieces of silver, and the fourth 
 part of a cab of doves' dung for four jiieces of 
 silver.' Different opinions, however, liave been 
 entertained respecting the meaning of the words 
 whicii are the subject of this article, namely, whe- 
 ther they should be taken literally, or as a figura- 
 tive name of some vegetable substance. The 
 strongest point in favour of the former view is that 
 all ancient Jewish writers liave understood the 
 teim literally. Taking it, however, in this sense, 
 various explanations have been given of the use 
 to wliich tlie doves" dung was applied. Some of 
 the rabbins were of opinion, tliat the doves' dung 
 was used for fuel, and Josephus, that it was pur- 
 chased for its salt. Mr. Haimer has suggested that 
 it might have been a valuable article, as being of 
 great use for quickening the growth of esculent 
 plants, iiarticularly melons ; and he shows, what 
 is well known, that the Persians live much on 
 melons in the summer months, and use pigeons' 
 dtmg in raising tliem. All travellers describe 
 the numlier of pigeon-houses in Persia. Mr. 
 Edwards, as cited bv Dr. Harris, remarks that 
 it is not likely they had much ground to culti- 
 vate in so populous a city for gardens ; and is 
 disjxised therefore to understand it as meaning 
 the oHals or refuse of all sorts of grain, wliicii was 
 wont to be given to jjigeons, &c. Dr. Harris, 
 however, oliserv-es tliat tiie stress of the famine 
 might have been so great as to have compelled 
 the ]x)or among the besieged in Samaria to devour 
 either the intestines of the doves, after tlie more 
 wealtliy had eaten the bodies, or, as it might 
 perhaps be rendered, tlie cro^ « ; and reference has 
 
 253. [Ornithogalum umbeilatum.] 
 
 Bochart, however, has shown (Kierozaiccn, 
 ii. 37) that the term ' pigeons' dung' was applied 
 by the Aralis to ditl'erent vegetable substances. 
 He quotes Avicenna as ap])lying the term stercus 
 columharum to two difl'erent plants or substances. 
 One of these is described by Avicenna and other 
 Arab authors, under the names kuz-kundem and 
 joug-kundem, as alight substance like moss. Se- 
 condly, this name was given to the as/man or 
 usnan, wliich appears to be a flestiy-leaved plant, 
 that, like the salsolas, salicornias, or inesembryan- 
 themums, when burnt, yields alkali in its ashes. 
 From this Bochart has been led to consider it as 
 identical with another plant, whicii occurs under 
 the name of kali both in tlie Hebrew and Arabic 
 languages, and which was one of the ])ulses used in 
 ancient times, as at the present day, as an article 
 of diet [Kali]. Witli reference to this grain it 
 has been observed that ' large quantities of it are 
 parched and dried, and stored in magazines at 
 Cairo and Damascus. It is much used during 
 iourneys, and particularly by the great pilgrim- 
 caravan to Mecca; and if tliis conjecture be cor- 
 rect it may be supposed to have been among (he 
 provisions stored up in the besieged city, and 
 sold at the extravagant price mentioned in the 
 text' {rict. Bible). The late Lady Callcott, in 
 her Scripture Herbal, 1842, ailduces the o'rrii- 
 thogahim unibellatmn, or common Star of Betii- 
 lehem, as the ' doves' dung ' of Scripture, and as- 
 signs tills, as well as "birds' milk,' as two of its 
 vernacular names, and infers that thepigeo7i,s' dung 
 which has been mentioned above as being eaten 
 in England in the famine of 1316 was the roots 
 of this plant. It is a native of this country, and 
 also of Taurus, Caucasus, and Northern Africa 
 Dioscorides states that its bulbs were sometimes 
 cooked with bread, in the same way as the me- 
 lanthium, and also that it was eaten both raw 
 and roasted. The roots were also commonly 
 eaten in Italy and other southern countries at MX 
 early pe-'iod. iSp'.'engel (wt Dioscor. ii. 471),
 
 DRACHMA. 
 
 «nt!) rffereticetn tlie at)ove passage of DioBCoridps 
 oil opvidtiyaXov. says, ' Klivaice dicta fuit [iLiiita 
 D'3V nn, stt'fcus coluinbiinim ("2 Re;^. vi. 25), 
 oil do is alliiilum cum lieihacd) inixtiim cnlorem, 
 »icut in steicore plcriiuniijuc avium herl/ivma- 
 riim ea mixtio oliseivalur. Kst enim ornitho- 
 gahim timhcllatum. (jiiod yet iiiniieiii oiientem 
 iiruveiiiens, bulbos hatjet eilules, licet a jiaujieri- 
 biis diiiitaxat pefantiir. Hire Liiiiicei expositio 
 bil)lici loci miilti ])lns valet, qiiam septem et 
 quod excedit (^■r)yr)(T(is, quas Bocliaitus enu- 
 merat.' 
 
 Having seen that the name of pigeons' dung 
 has been, and probably still is. ap[)lied l)y the 
 Arabs to ditl'ereiit vegetable substances, we are 
 n )t disposed to ado])t the literal meaning of the 
 te.m, as doves' ilmig, being devoid of nutri- 
 nifiit, was not likely to have served as food, even 
 during the iamine, especially as we find tiiat an 
 ass's head was sold for sixty jiieces of silver. Now 
 if any asses remained for sale, or ass-h>ads of 
 com, as the expression has i3een interpreted, there 
 is no reason tor supposing, that other substances 
 may not have remained stored up in secret for 
 those who had money to buy. But it is not easy 
 to say what vegetable sul)stance, serving as an 
 article of diet, is alluded to by the name of 
 ' doves' dung.' If the besieged had communication 
 with tiie exterior, or even if any of their body could 
 aave dug in the neighbourhood of tiie walls, for 
 the kind of ' earth-nut ' olVered by the Ijulbs of tlie 
 omithogalum, or Star of Bethelem, wliich is said 
 to 1)6 abundant in the neighbourhood of Samaria, 
 tiiere does not appear any good reason why it 
 s'liould not be the substance alluded to. But it 
 does not appear so likely to have been stored up; 
 and we iiave been unable to discover any reference 
 in the Arab authors to such a plant, under the 
 name of sterciis columbarum. Pulse was as 
 likely to have been stored up in ancient times 
 as at the present day ; and it may, therefore, as 
 siiown by Bochart, have been one of the sulistances 
 :o wfiich tlie name was applied l)y the Arabs, 
 ind have been known to the Hebrews also by a 
 similir name [Kxi.i]. — J. F. R. 
 
 DRACHMA C^jjaxiJ-v)-. a coin of silver, the 
 Host common among the Greeks, and wliich after 
 tie Exile became also current among the Jews 
 ;2 Mace. iv. 19; x. 20; xii. 13; Luke xv. S, 9> 
 The earlier Attic ilrachmae were of the average 
 weight of 66*.'') grains, and in a comparison with 
 the siiilling would be equal to ftjrf. But the S]ie- 
 cimens of later times are of the average weight of 
 ,nly 61 grains, and some of less. In tiiis state 
 tlie drachma was counted equal to the denarius, 
 which was at first worth ^^d., and aftervvartia only 
 1^1. The value of the drachma of the New Tes- 
 tament may therefore have rjeen about Sr/. The 
 woman's 'ten ijioces of silver' [drachmce) in 
 Luke XV. S, would hence be equal to 6s. bd. of 
 our money — that is, in nominal value, for the 
 real valu? cf money was far gieater in the time 
 of Christ than at present. That the (Jraclima of 
 Alexandria was equal to two of (iieeie is infeired 
 fiom the fact that the Septuagint makes the .Jewish 
 shekel equivalent to twodrachniir [])h)I{achm.\] ; 
 aiiU in fact an -Vlexandrian dra<:h;iia weighing 120 
 grains has been found. 
 
 DR.\.GON, in our version, is used for the 
 Hebrew 'n than, \''jT\ thanin, and D'^n (lin- 
 "iiii. it occurs princiDullv in the plural I'oiro 
 
 DRAGON. 
 
 »7a 
 
 (jjb XXX. 29; Ps. xliv. 19, 20; Isa. xiii. 22; 
 xxxiv. 13; xxxv. 7; Jer. ix. 11; xiv. 6; xli.x. 
 33; and Jlicah i. S). These texts, in geneial, 
 pie-ent pictures of mined cities and of desolation 
 in the wilderness. Where Tlianim aie assorialed 
 with birds of the desert, they deafly indicate 
 .serjients of various sjiecies, both sniiJ! and large, 
 as aheady noticed in the article Ai>dbu. In 
 Jer. xiv. (>, where wild asses sniilling up the wind 
 are i;ompaied to dragons, the image will ap]>ear 
 in its full strength, if we understand by dragons, 
 great iioas and python-serpents, such as are (iguiefl 
 in the Pra;ne^tine mosaics. They were cmninon 
 in ancient times, and are .§till far from rare ,n 
 the tropics of liotli continents. .Several of the 
 species grow to an enoimous size, and, during 
 their ])eriods of activity, are in the habit of 
 raising a consiclerable portion of their len^'^tli into 
 a vertical ])osition, like jiillars, 10 or 12 fpel 
 high, ill order to survey the vicinity above the 
 surrounding bushes, while with ojjen jaws Ihej 
 drink in a(juantity of the cuircnt air. The same 
 character exist-s in smaller serpeiifs ; l)ut it if 
 not obvious, unless when, threatening to strike, 
 they stand on end neaily three-fourths of their 
 length. Most, if not all, of these species are njute, 
 or can utter only a hissing sound; and although 
 the malli-jiambu, the great rock-snake of Southern 
 Asia, is said hi wail in the night, we have nevei 
 witnessed buch a jihenomenon, nur heard if as- 
 serted, that any other bo.i, jiython, or eipetcn 
 had a real voice; but they hiss, and, like cro- 
 codiles, may utter sounds somewhat akin tc 
 howling. 
 
 It is from these giant ser]i(nts which, at a 
 remote period, uere evidently still more coiossa) 
 than that which is lecnideil to have o])poseii 
 a Roman army, or the skeleton of another abovo 
 -100 feet in length, found more recently in Inilia, 
 that those vague but universally-spread notions 
 must have ari.sen in the eailiest antiquity, and 
 been perpetuated to our own time, which fypifiei' 
 the deluge and all great de.stiuctive agents undei 
 the form of a dragon or monster serpent. We 
 (ind them embodied by the anciints in the form 
 of dragon temjjles (Pracontia), consisting of huge 
 stones set ujnight in rows, such as that of Colchis, 
 no doubt, was. Such temjdes pxisted in Asia 
 Minor, Epirus, Noithein Africa, Gaul, and Bri- 
 tain, that at Abury, in Wiltshire, being several 
 miles in length; and where their dc-igii can be 
 traced out siitlicieiitly in existing remains, tlie 
 serj)entine figure is ever observeii to gliile through 
 or sustain a diagram of similar materials — a 
 cin'umstance which ajijiears best ex])lamed by 
 considering them more or less astronomical, but 
 fundamentally re[)os!ng upon tiaditions concern- 
 ing the Ark, the preserver of animal life, in the 
 act of s niggling with the overwhelming ele- 
 ment. These structures are ever connected with 
 water, coming, as it were, out of the sea, or al 
 least intersecting a stream or livulel; tlius re- 
 taining both the diluvian record and tlie truth 
 of natuie; for all boas and jiythons enter the 
 water at certain seasons, jiass ti.Moiigli rivers as 
 if they were unconscious of the change of me- 
 dium, swim with great velocity, or sojourn be- 
 neath the suiface, some for a time, others habitu- 
 ally. Perhaps in conjunction with the existence 
 of real colo^.sal sea->er]ients. Ijut liot win lly no, 
 iiati. ns lemote from the ocean, in common witk
 
 d74 
 
 DRAGON. 
 
 the rest, have in their cosmogonies their religious 
 di'};tnas, their legends and records, both males 
 voleiit and beneficial, iriant-serpents — tlie Indian 
 nations, their kapila, cuvera ananta, naga, sesha 
 naya ; and t.lie more western nations tlieir paystlia, 
 BQiine, kater, vidhanger, and finally, tlie great 
 dragon, sometimes denoting the guide-preserver 
 of the ark, tlie monster guardian of riches, tlie 
 tia lactea among the stars, or abstract powers 
 in Eastern demonology ; at otlier times similar 
 IV pes, but in the West more generally con- 
 nected with the image of tlie deluge, and figured 
 by the ancient Helio-Arkite temples of the Celtae 
 alreaily noticed. But the serpent type is con- 
 stantly mixed up with anotlier of the lizard 
 form; and as, in every quarter 'of the globe, the 
 diagon of the deluge assailing the ark is trans- 
 ferred to tlie skies, and a celestial dragon, in Asia, 
 generally denominated Satan |t^t^♦, is believed 
 to attack the moon, the crescent ship, during an 
 eclipse. Wings have been added to the monster of 
 (iie skies. Comets have been called dragon-stars, 
 and tlie assumed figure of one has been made a 
 chief ensign of all the equestrian nati^ons of 
 Ktisterii and Nortliein Asia. Westward the dra- 
 gon was tiie azdt'hac of Persia, a Roman ensign 
 during the empire, and one common to all the 
 Celtic and Gothic nations. So late as the 1 Ith cen- 
 tury, Harold, tlie last Anglo-Saxon king, jierished 
 at Ha:-tings fighting between his two dragon 
 standards; while our Norman sovereigns had a 
 pennon with the dragon painted thereon, in all 
 tile great wars, in the crus.tdes, and even down 
 to Henry Vlll. In Chiistian church ceremo- 
 nies the dragon image, the 'S.aupiaii', was carried 
 aijout, and fire was sometimes placed in its 
 mouth. It is necessary to bear in mind the general 
 tenour of these remaiks, when allusion is made in 
 fhes acred volume to the Tlianim, and in tiie Reve- 
 lations es[:ecially, where the dragon is mentioned; 
 for they tend to exjilain in what manner the exist- 
 ing nations of Western Asia might have viewed 
 the typjs in question at the beginning of the 
 Christian era. 
 
 Reverting from these symbols to the physically 
 existing siiecies whence tiiey may have been drawn, 
 it seems that when mentioned in connection with 
 
 riveis, |n*1?, kviath m, generally applies to the 
 
 crocodile; when in connection with land, and 
 particularly the deseit, it ajipears to designate 
 a waian, a species of monitor, pioliably tlie learan- 
 el-hard of tlie Arabs, monitor- arenari us, growing 
 to near six feet in lengtli ; or another species of a 
 gieen shining colour, not as yet completely de- 
 scrilied, but acquiring the length of i) feet, while 
 llianim is ceitainly used fur ser[)eiits mostly of 
 the larger kind. In the aiiocry]jhal history oi 
 ]-{el and tlie Dragon, where the last-mentioned 
 was a living animal, by some taken for a cro- 
 codile, we think it more likely to have been a 
 gre.it snake, such as is still fed and venerated in 
 Cutch, because these re[)til«s are safely handled 
 when not excited ; food may even be thrust info 
 their throats, and the worship of them is not yet 
 extinct in the eastern provinces of Persia. But 
 all tlieseaiiimaU are oviparous or ovoviviparous : 
 when, therefore, the same teim is used for tliose 
 tliat (haw the breast and suckle their young, which 
 implies a siiecies of mammalia, tiiey can indicate 
 only cetaceans, unless it weie jnoved that seals 
 
 DREAMS. 
 
 had at any time frequented the seas of Palestiiia 
 or of Arabia. We refer this question to t^jg 
 articles Leviathan and Whai.e.— C. H. S. 
 
 DREAMS. Of all the subjects upon whicn 
 the mind of man has sjieculated, there is perhaps 
 none which has more perplexed than that oi 
 dreaming. 
 
 Whatever may be the difficulties attending the 
 subject, still we know that '\* has formed a c'han- 
 nel tiirough which Jehovah was pleased in formei 
 times to re\eal His character and dispensations 
 to His jieople. 
 
 In regard to tlie immediate cause of dreaming 
 the opinions of the ancients were very various, 
 and some of them striking ; but they do not claim 
 notice in tae preteiU work. We cannot, however, 
 omit the opinion of Aristotle, who thought that 
 every object of sense produces ujion tlie human 
 soul a certain impression, which remains for somf 
 time after the object that made it is removed , 
 and which, being afterwards recognised by thf 
 perceptive faculty in sleep, gives rise to the varied 
 images which present themselve.s. 
 
 Amongst English writers tin this subject, none 
 have written with more acuteness in suppoit ot 
 his theory than Baxter. He supposes that our 
 dreams are prompted liy sepa7ate spirits — an 
 opinioti generally entertained liy the heathen, and 
 which opinion has given rise, in all ages and in 
 all countries, to mtcch superstition and imposture 
 (Baxter's Essay on the Phenomenon of iJream- 
 inff. vol. ii. 3d edit. 1745). 
 
 Professor Dugald Stewart, in endeavouring tt 
 reduce the phenomenon of dreaming to some es- 
 tablished principles, remarks, that in sleep those 
 operations of the mind are suspended which de- 
 pend on our volition. He then says tiiat, if the 
 suspension of our voluntary operations in sleeji 
 be admitted as a fact, there are only two supjio- 
 sitions which can be advanced concerning its 
 cause ;— the one is, that the power of volition is 
 suspended; the other, that the will loses its in- 
 fluence over those faculties of the mind and those 
 members of the body which, during our waking 
 liours, are subjected to its auihority. Now it 
 may lie shown that the former is not consistent 
 with fact, whence the latter follows as a necessary 
 consequence. Hence it is inferred that all our 
 mental operations which are independent of our 
 will may continue duiing sleep; and that the 
 phenomenon of dreaming may, peihaiis, be pro- 
 tluced by these, diversihed in their apparent effects 
 in consequence of the siisj'ension of our voluntaiy 
 powers. Two obvious consequences follow . — 
 1st. Ti;at when we are asleep the succession of 
 •jur thoughts, in so far as it dejiends on <he assc 
 elation, may be cariied on by the operation oi' the 
 same unknown causes liy which it is produced 
 while we are awake; and, 2nd. That the order 
 of our thoughts in these two states of our minds 
 must lie very diflerent, iiiiismuch as in the one 
 it <lepen<ls solely on the laws of association, and 
 in the other, on those laws comi)ine<l with our 
 own voluntary exertions. 
 
 If, then, the succession of our thuughts duriufr 
 sleep is regulated by the same general laws of 
 association to which it is subjected while we are 
 awake, and if the circumstances whidi discri- 
 minate dreaming fiom our waking thoughts a'e 
 such as must necessarily arise from the su>i)e i- 
 sion of the tcill, this may ac'-ount for 'he inaccu-
 
 DREAMS. 
 
 DREAMS. 
 
 975 
 
 iHte «8.imate we form of time wlieii dreaming ; 
 the rapidity of thon;^'liL U such that in tin- twink- 
 ling of an eve a ciowil of iileiw rnay pass before 
 us, to which it would take a loiig discourse to 
 give utteraiir;" ; and transactions may be con- 
 ceived which it would rcquiie dai/s to realise. 
 But in sleep the conceptions of the mind are mis- 
 taken fjir realities, and the'cfore our estimate of 
 time will be found not according to our experi- 
 ence of the lanidity of thought, but according to 
 our experience of tiie time requisite for realising 
 what we conceive (Stewart's Elements of the 
 Vh'dosophy of the Human Mind, pp. 328-348). 
 
 There seems a strong analogy between dream- 
 ing and insanity. Dr. Abercronibie delinos the 
 dili'erence between the two states to be, that in 
 the latter the erroneous impression, being jiernia- 
 nent, alfects the cond'ict; whereas, in dreaming, 
 no influence on the conduct is produced, because 
 llie vision is dissipated on awaking. 
 
 We believe that dreams are xirdinarily the re- 
 einbodiment of thoughts which have before, in 
 some siiape or other, occupied our minds. They 
 are broken fragments of our former conceptions 
 revived, and heterogeneously brought together. 
 If they break oft' from their coimecting chain, and 
 become loosely associated, they exhibit ofttimes 
 ab-iurd combinations, but the elements still sub- 
 sist. If, for iiisfaiice, any irritation, such as 
 pain, fever, &c., should excite the perceptive 
 organs while the rctleciive ones are under the 
 inlluence of sleep, we have a consciousness of 
 objects, colours, or sounds being presented to us, 
 
 i'ust as if the former organs were actually stimu- 
 ated by having such impressions communicated 
 lo them by the external senses; whilst, in conse- 
 quence of the repose of the reflect ing ])ower, we 
 are unable to rectify the illusiun, and conceive 
 tliat the scenes passing befoie us, or the souiuis 
 that we hear, have a real existence. This want 
 of mutual co-operation between the dillerent fa- 
 culties of the mind may account lor the disjointed 
 character of dreams. This position might be fully 
 Bubstaiitiateil by an ajijeal to the evidence of 
 fact. Dr. Beattie speaks of a man who could 
 be made to dream anything by wliispering in his 
 ear. Dr. Gregory relates of himself that, having 
 once had occasion to apply a boltle of hot water 
 to his own feet when he retned to bed, he dreamed 
 that he was ascending the side of Mount yl'^ina, 
 and tiiat he found the heat of tiic ground almost 
 insuR'erable. Persons who have had a blister 
 applied to their head have been known to dream 
 of being scalj)ed by a party of North American 
 Indians. SJeejiing in a smoky room, we may 
 dream of a house or a city being in flames. The 
 smell of a flower ap|)lied to the nostrils may call 
 forth the idea of walking in a garden; and the 
 gOund of a flute may exche in us the most plea- 
 surable associations. 
 
 IIe:e, then, we discover one great source of 
 that class of dreinis of which Solomon speaks in 
 Eccles. V. 7. 
 
 The only one of our mental powers which is 
 not.suspendeil while dreiuning is fancy, or ima- 
 gination* We often find memory and judgment 
 alternately suspended and exercised. Sometimes 
 we fancy otnselves conlemjKnaiieous witli jiersuiis 
 who iiav e lived ages Ijefore : here memory is at 
 work, but judgni'JUt is set asid'. We dream of 
 cttnying ou a very connected Uiscouise t^itli a 
 
 deceased friend, and are not conscious that he ii 
 no more : iiert! jmlgment is awake, but memory 
 suspended. Tlie.^e irre'jularii<es, or want of m«»- 
 tual co-operation in tlie dillerent faculiiis of tne 
 mind may form, for aught we know, tlie |dun tiy 
 which God gives health and vigour to the whole 
 soul. 
 
 How God revealed himself by dreams, and 
 raised u]) |)ersons lo interjirct them, the Script urta 
 abundantly testify. Under tlie three successixe 
 dispensations we find this channel of conmiuni- 
 catii)n with man adopted. It was doulttless in 
 this way tiiat God appiared to the father of tiie 
 faithful, ordering him to forsake country, kindred, 
 and his fatners house, and to go into tiie land 
 that he would .show him. To tins divine com- 
 mand .-Vbraham paid a ready obedience, it wixa 
 by a similar promj)t obedience to the admonition 
 conveyed to him in a dream that Abimelech 
 (Gen. XX. 3) himself and Abraham, t<;o, weie 
 saved from the evil con;.-equences of his meditated 
 act. 
 
 When Jacob was, as it were, banished from his 
 father's house, in order to avoid the effects of his 
 brother's implacable rage, he came to a place 
 called Luz (Gen. xxviii. 19), and, whilst theie 
 slee])ing under the canojjy of heaven, he had 
 communication by dream, not only with arigeN, 
 but with God also : — ' He dreamed, and behold 
 a ladder set upon the earth,' &c. Tins was an 
 encouraging dream to Jacob, for it filled his soul 
 with holy and awful thoughts of God. On 
 awaking we do not find this jiatriarch dismissing 
 the thought of the dream from his mind; but he 
 exclaims, ' Surely the Lord was in this place, and 
 I knew it not i and he was afraid, and said. How 
 dieadful is this place! This is none other but 
 the house of God, this is the gate of heaven ! ' 
 He even set up a pillar to perjietuate its nieuioiy. 
 and made a solemn vow Ihat Jehovah shonlil be 
 his God. And, moreover, such was the deep im- 
 pression which this dieam made upon his n-imi, 
 that God, wiio ajjpeared many yeais afterwards to 
 him when yet in Padan-arani. anil liade iiim re- 
 turn to his fatheiland, urges this as a motive : — 
 ' I am the God of Beth-el, wiieie thou anointeust 
 the pillar, and where thou vowcd.^t a vow unto 
 me.' We are inf'ornieil in tlie seijuel hou (iod 
 did fuliil to him all that he had then jjroniised. 
 
 But, Ihongli this was the first, it was iiot the 
 last time God apjieared to Jacob in a dream. 
 In Gen. xxxi. 10, Jacol) informs his wives that it 
 was God who saw iiow Lahan oppressed him — 
 wlio hail ilirected him to take the speckled. Xc. 
 cattle for iiis wages, and had urdeieii him tc 
 return home. He obeyed ; and when Lalian, d.*-. 
 signing to do Jacob some iiann (Gen. xxxi. 'ii\ 
 puisui il, and alter seven days ovi rtook him, God, 
 Ly a dream, jirevenled tiie meditated evil. 
 
 Joseph, whilst yet a child, had dreams pre- 
 dictive of his futiiie advancement (Gen. xxxvii. 
 6-1 1). Tiiese dreams an- one, and weie lepealed 
 under dilVeient forms, in onlvr, it vvouid seem, to 
 express the eeilainly of the tlhng lliey predicted. 
 How they formed tlie first link in an extended 
 chain of God's providential i;e;;lings itie sacred 
 record fully infoims ns. Jealous not only of 
 the jKirlialily of their lather for .Iose])li, but ilsc 
 of tliat wiiieli God would evnice Ijy tiiese dieum* 
 for liim, his biethien hated him, wid sold iiiin to 
 tlie Midiaiiiies. From their hundi> he wa;> tiaiu-
 
 019 
 
 DREAMS. 
 
 DREAMS. 
 
 ferred to Potiphar, captain of Pharaoh's guard, 
 and from him, under the cruel anci unjust accu- 
 sation of his vile wife, was cast into the king's 
 prison— alas! in this position Satan niigiit well 
 tempt Jo eph to doubt the kind providence of the 
 God whom he served. But no — he felt assured 
 tliat tlie Liird was with him, and th.it, in His 
 own time and manner, he would vindicate his 
 innocence, and give liim his liberty. Nor was 
 this confidence of Josepli disappointed; for, in 
 the course of time, by being al)le to give an 
 accurate interpretation of three predictive dreams, 
 he was raised from the prison to a ])articipation 
 with King Pharaoh in the government of Egypt! 
 It is true that a daring infidelity has tried to 
 reduce ihe Jirst of tliis series of dreams to a 
 natural principle — the conUitutional vanity of 
 the dreamer's mind — and thus to set aside its 
 divine character and tendency. But, granting 
 for a moment that Joseph vainly read in the 
 partial feelings of his fatlier his own eventual 
 elevation over liis brethren, and tliat by reason of 
 tbe impiession which this flattering prospect made 
 upon his miiul he was led to dream as above 
 noticed, still, this could not alter the ])redictive 
 character of the dream : and in proof of this we 
 «.pi)ft\l to the account of its i ctual fulfilment. 
 It is quite clear from the inspired history that 
 dreams were looked upon liy the earliest nations 
 of antiquity as premotiitions from their idol gods 
 of future events. One ])art of Jehovah's great 
 plan in revealing, through this cliannel, His de- 
 signs towaril Egypt, Joseph individually, and his 
 brethren generally, was to correct this notion. 
 Hence it was that, on Joseph being brought into 
 the pifsence of Pharaoh for the purpose of ex- 
 plaining his dreams, he at once says, ' it is not 
 in me; God shall give Pharaoh an answer of 
 peace.' Such were some of the dreams by which 
 God revealed himself under the patriarchal dis- 
 pensation, and that the same divine mode of 
 communicating with man was continued under 
 that of Moses is evident from an express word of 
 promise (Num. xii. 6), ' If tliere be a iirophet 
 among you I, the Lord, will make myself known 
 unto him in a vision, and will speak to him in a 
 dream.'' That dreams were one o^ the ways 
 whereby Goil was wont to signify his pleasure 
 '.o men un<ler this dispensation is evident from 
 the complaint of Saul to the s])irit of Samuel 
 (whom the witch pretended to raise up), when he 
 asked him, ' Why hast thou disquieted me to 
 bring nie ujj?' Saul answered, 'I am sore dis- 
 tressed ; for ttie Pliilistine? make war against me, 
 and God is departed from me, and answers me 
 no more ; neitiier by pro])hets, nor by dream* : 
 therefore I liave called thee that thou mayest 
 make known to me what I shall do.' And, 
 in order to guard against imposition, Moses 
 pronounced a penalty against dreams which were 
 invented and wickedly made use of, for the pro- 
 motion of idolatry (Deut. xiii. 1-5). Thus 
 Zechariah (x. 2^ complains: 'The idols have 
 spoken vanity, and the diviners have spoken a lie, 
 and have told false dreams ; they comfort in 
 vain.' And so Jeremiah (xxiii. 2.5), 'I have 
 heard what the prophets said that prophesy lies 
 in mj' name, saying, I have dreamed, I have 
 ilreamed,' &c. Yet this abuse did not alter 
 God's plan in the right use of them; for in the 
 28th verse of the same chapter, it is said, ■ the 
 
 prophet that hath a dream, and he that hath ni-f 
 word, let him S])eak my woril faithfully. What 
 is the dial]' to the wheat? sailh the Lord.' 
 
 When Gideon warred with the Amalekites, and 
 was alarmed at their vast multitudes, he was en- 
 couraged t« do God's will by overoearing one of 
 them relate his dream, and another giving the in- 
 terpretation (Judg. vii.). Again, it was in a 
 dream that God was pleased to giant Solonjon f 
 promise of wisdom and understanding (1 Kings 
 iii. 5, &c.). Here we may percei\e what converse 
 the Lord was pleased to hold with Solomon in a 
 dream ; and the sarred record informs us now 
 punctually everything herein promised was ful- 
 filled. 
 
 But, though God speaks frequently by dreams, 
 yet man is often found actually closing his ears 
 against such communications. Thus Job says 
 (xxxiii. 11), 'God speaketh once, yea twice, yet 
 man perceiveth it not. In a dream, in a vision of 
 the night, when deep sleep falleth upon men, in 
 slumbering upon the bed, then he openeth the 
 ears of men and sealeth their instruction.' 
 
 Sometimes those dreams and visions are of a 
 pleasiu-able and again of a. frightful character : — 
 ' When I say my bed shall comfort me, my 
 couch shall ease me ; then thou scarest me with 
 dreams and terrifiest me with visions' (Job vii. 
 
 The knowledge of visions and dreams is reckon- 
 ed amongst the principal gifts and graces some- 
 times bestowed by God upon them that fear 
 him; so it is said of Daniel and his companion, 
 that ' God gave them knowledge and skill in all 
 learning and wisdom ; and Dauie^ ^ad under- 
 standing in all visions and dreams ^Oan. i. 17). 
 And the God who had imparted this spirit unto his 
 servant Daniel soon, in the arrangement if his 
 proviilence, gave occasion for its exercise. Ne- 
 buchadnezzar, king of Babylon, dreamed a dream, 
 and his spirit was troubled because the thing had 
 gone from him. Having, however, a deep im- 
 pression that the dream was of poitenious mean- 
 iiiT, he called together his magicians, astrologers, 
 and sorcerers, and commanded them to recall and 
 explain it to him. These reputedly wise men of 
 Babylon at once acknowledged that to meet the 
 king's wishes belonged not to the capacity oi 
 man. Disappointeil and enraged at this con- 
 fessed impotency, he ordered all the wi.se men of 
 his kingdom to be put to death. Daniel being 
 in(duded in this order imyjlored God to reveal to 
 him the dream with its interpretation : his jirayer 
 was graciously answered (Dan. ii. 19). Whereujjon 
 he acquaints the king, that 'there is a God in 
 Heaven who revealeth secrets, and maketh known 
 to him what shall be in the latter days ;' and 
 then [iroceeds to state the dream together with the 
 interpretation thereof. Satisfied with what Da- 
 niel stated, Nebuchadnezzar said unto Daniel, 
 * Of a truth it is that your God is a God of gods, 
 and a Lord of kings;' and the divine historian 
 states that in consequence of this both the projjhet, 
 and Shadrach, Meshach, and Abeduego were {)ro- 
 nooted to the highest offices of the state! In this 
 dream a great variety of ends weie attained in 
 reference to Babylon, Israel, and indeed thii 
 world — all of which were worthy of God's miracu- 
 lous inteiferencB. 
 
 That this method of God's revealing himsell 
 was not confined to the legal dispensation, but
 
 DRESS 
 
 was to be extended to the Cliristiat is evident 
 from Joel (ii. 28), 'And iifterwards (saitli the 
 Lord) I will |)Oiir out my s]iiiit upon all tli'sii : 
 and your sons and yiuirilaugliteis siiall ju-ojiIk'sv ; 
 your young men shall see visions, and your old 
 men shall dream dreams." In Acts ii. 17 we 
 find the Apostle Peter a])iilyin_!T tliis to flie illu- 
 mination of tiic Holy Gliosi. Accordingly, we 
 read tiiat when Joseph designed to ])ut Mary 
 away, because he [leiceived her to be with child, 
 he was turned from his jiurjiose by a dream, in 
 whicli an angel made the truth of tlie matter 
 known to him (Matt. i. 20). And in the follow- 
 ing cuapter it is stated, that Gocf, in a dream, 
 warned the wise men not to return to Henid. 
 Moreover, in verses 13 and 19, Joseph is in- 
 structed to flo'e into and return from Egypt with 
 the child Jesus. 
 
 \Vliether the dream of Pilate's wife was a divine 
 intimation we cannot tell. 
 
 That divine dreams, which actually were im- 
 parted to God's servants, should be imitated in 
 fictitious representation by ancient and modem 
 writers, was consistent no less with the general 
 objects of superstition and imposture than with 
 those of literature. Hence divine dreams be- 
 came the constant a]ij)endages of the heathen my- 
 thology, and ac('onnts, real and fictitious, of com- 
 munications in vision, were interwoven in e\ery 
 production. Information which was su])erior to 
 the vulgar philosophy of the time, intimated its 
 discoveries as suggestions imparted by inspira- 
 tion. If a warning wa'sto be 'conveyetl, what so 
 afl'ecting as the admonition cif a de])arted friend ! 
 Such machineiy was i)arti(:ulaily adapted to 
 woiks of imagiimtion, and the poems of antiquity, 
 as well as tiiose of modem times, were frequently 
 decorated with its ornaments. 
 
 We inquire not how far God ma}' have revealed 
 himself to man beyond what Holy Scripture 
 records. Some of t'le dreams, both of ancient 
 and modern times, which lay claim to a divine 
 character are certainly striking, and niay, for 
 augiit we know, havK had, and may still liaxe, a 
 collateral bearing on the development of God's 
 purposes. — J. W. D. 
 
 DRESS. The subject of the costume of the 
 ancient Hel)rews is involved in much obsciu'ity 
 and doubt. Scul])tured monuments and coins 
 aft'ord us all needful information resjiecting the 
 »^ress of the ancient Egyptians, Babylonians, Per- 
 sians. Greeks, and Romans ; and even the garb 
 worn by the barbarous nations is f)erpetuated in 
 the monuments of tiieir antagonists and con- 
 querors. But the ancient Hebrews have left no 
 monumen+.s, no figure* of themselves ; and the 
 ^iwv figures which have been supposed to represent 
 Jews in the monumciits of Egyj)t and Persia are 
 ■o uncertain, tliat their autliority remains to be 
 C8tal)lished liefore we can rely upon the informa- 
 tion which they convey. There are, however, 
 many allusions to dress in the Scriptures, and 
 these form the only source of our positive infi>rma- 
 tion. They are often, indeed, obscure, and of 
 uncertain interpietation ; but tliey are invaluable 
 in so far as they eiia')le u.^ to compare and verify 
 t!ie information doivable from other sources. 
 Tliese sources are — 
 
 1. The costume .if neighitoming aiicieut na- 
 tions, as rejiresenled in thrir n)onumeij.'e. 
 
 DRESS. 
 
 M^ 
 
 2. The alleged costume of Jews as represented 
 
 in the siune moniunenfs. 
 
 3. The ])resint costumes (wliich are kno«n *j» 
 l)e anrien') of Syria and Arabia. 
 
 4. Trailition. 
 
 1. The range of inquiry into monumental 
 costume is very limited. It is a common mis- 
 take to talk of ' Oriental costume,' as if it wei* 
 a uniform thing, whereas, in fact, the costumes 
 of the Asiatic nations dill'er (iir more from one 
 another than do the costumes of the dill'erent na- 
 tions of Europe. And that this was the ciue 
 anciently, is siiown by the monuments, w'^ereiii 
 the costumes of Egyptians, Babylonians, Per- 
 sians, Mede.s, Syrians, and (ireek.s, dilVer as nnicb 
 from one another as do tiie costumes of the modei'i 
 Syrians, Egyptians, Arabs, Turks, and Persians. 
 It is therefoiv useless to examine the monumental 
 costume of any nation, remote liom Palestine, for 
 the pur|K)se of ascei taming tijc costume of the 
 ancient Hebrews. Syria, Araliia, and Egy])t, are 
 the only countries where monuments would be 
 likely to afford any useful inforniation : but 
 Aiiii)ia has lelt no monumental ligures, and 
 Syria none of snfliciently ancient (late; and it is 
 left for Egypt to supj)ly all the inliirmalion likely 
 to be tjf use. The extent and value of this in- 
 formation, for the particular ])urpose, we believe 
 to be far less than is usually represenleil. T.'iat 
 we are not dis])oscd to undervalue the iid'orma- 
 tion derivable from the Egyptian moiumients l(>r 
 tlie jiurjwse of illustrating Bililical iiistory and 
 antifjuities, the pages of the ])resent work will 
 sufliciently evince; and its editor may indeed 
 claim to have been the first in this country to 
 woik this mine of materials for Biblical illustra- 
 tion. But the rage for this kind of illustration has 
 been cariied to such ])rej)osferous lengths, and is 
 so likely in its fuither jirogress to confuse our 
 notions of the real position which the Hebrews 
 ()ccuj)ied, that it may not be an unwholesome 
 caution to remind our leaders that the Egy])tians 
 and the Hebrews were an exceedintily dill'eient 
 people — as difl'eient in every respect as can well 
 be cimceived ; and that the climates whicli tliey 
 inhabited were so very different as to necessitate 
 a greater difference of food and dress than might 
 be ]iie-su])po.sed of couiitiies so near to each other. 
 This consideration a]i[)eais to us to render ofliti1<i 
 value the vei)' ingenious illustrations of Jewfsh 
 costume which have been deduced from tliig 
 somce. It is true that the Jewish nation wajt 
 cradled in Egypt : and this ciicumstance may 
 have had some inlluenre on ceremonial dresses, 
 and the ornaments of women ; but we do not find 
 that nations ciicunistanced as the Jews were 
 readily adopt the costumes of other nations, es- 
 jK'cially when their residence in Egypt was always 
 re;;arded by them as temporary, and when theii 
 raiment was of home maiinl'acture — spun and 
 woven liy the women from the produce of their 
 flocks (Exod. XXXV. 2.')). We find also fh.t, 
 immediately after leaving Egypt, the princijuil 
 article of dre-s among the Hebrews was some 
 am]ile woollen garment, fit to slee|» in (Exod. 
 xxii. 27), to which nothing similar is to be seeti 
 among the costumes of ICgyjit 
 
 2. VVitli respect to (he sop|Hised rej.resentation 
 of Jews in ancient monuments, if any authentic 
 exani])le8 could lie found, even of a single figure, 
 in the ancienT costume, it wouaI afl'urd muuli >•• 
 
 2 V
 
 ffw 
 
 DRESS. 
 
 tisfactii n, as tenniiij; to eliicid:ife many passage? 
 of Scripiiire wliicli rauriot at ])reseiii be with cer- 
 tainty explaiiiei. The sculptures and paintinijs 
 »upi)osed to represent ancient Hebrews are con- 
 taineii in — 
 
 (a.) A painting at Beni Hassan, representing the 
 arrival of some foreiirners in Egypt, and sii])posed 
 10 fignre tlse arrival of Joseph's i)rethren in that 
 country. The accessories of the scene, the plij'- 
 siognoinies of the j)ersi)ns, and the time to whicii 
 the picture relates, are certainly in niiison with 
 that event : hut other circumstances are against 
 the notion. Sir J. G. Wilk.nson speaks hesi- 
 tatingly on the suhject : and, until some greater 
 certainty is ohfained. we may admit the ])ossil)le 
 correctness of the conjecture. The annexed cut 
 
 elrws the variety of costume which this scene 
 displays. All the men v.'ear sandals. Some of 
 them are clad only in a short tunic or shirt, witli 
 clo.ee sleeves (ng. 3); others wear over tliis a kind 
 M' sleeveless plaid or mantle, thrown over tlie left 
 Blioulder, and passing under tlie right arm 
 i^S- 2). It is of a striped and curiously ligtired 
 patfeni, and looks exceedingly like the line gra5s 
 wo\en cloth of the Soutlj Sea. Otliers have, in- 
 stead of this, a. fringed skirt of the same material 
 '..fi?- 1). All the figures are hare-headed, and 
 wear heards, which are circumstances favour- 
 able to the identification. The fringed skirt of 
 fi,'. I is certainly a remarkable circumstance. 
 Moses ilirected that the peopjle should wear a 
 fringe at the hem of their garments (Num. xv. 
 38); and the jirobaljility is that this command 
 merely jierpef uafed a more ancient usage. 
 
 {h.) This fringe re-appears, much enlarged, in 
 the other Egy[)tian sculpture in whii-h Jews are 
 eujiposcd to be rejiresented. These are in a tomb 
 discovered by Belzoiii. in the valley of Bab-el 
 Melook, near Thebes. There are captives of 
 <li(Terent nations, and among them four figures, 
 su[)[)osed to represent Jews. The scene is ima- 
 gined to commemorate the triumphs of Pharaoh- 
 
 DRESS. 
 
 (2 Chrnn. xxxv. xxxvi.). It will be seen that th« 
 
 dress of tliese figures di tiers little, excepting in t!;« 
 length of ll'.e fringe. I'loui that t)f tl\c skiifetl figure 
 in (lie earlier ])aiiiting ; and so far this is a cor- 
 roborative circumstance in favour of both. The 
 band round the head is the other princiial dif- 
 ference. These figures are manifestly in what 
 we would call undress, and the com])arison oeiiig 
 made with the similar undress figures in the 
 earlier scene, the resenibliince is greater than 
 might be expected from the distance c\' time and 
 ditlerence ot manners. The internal evidence is 
 so far good ; and if tlie external evidence were 
 equally stiong, there would not be much ground 
 for hesitation. 
 
 (c.) On the face of a rock, at Besitoon, on the 
 Median border of the ancicKt .Assyria, there is a 
 remaikable sculptiue representing a number of 
 captives strung together by the neck, brought be- 
 fore the king and conqueror, who seems pro- 
 nouncing sentence upon them. Tiie venerable 
 antiquity of this scul])ture is unquestionable ; and 
 Sir R. K. Porter was led to fancy that the sculp- 
 ture commemorates tlie subjugation and deporta- 
 tion of the ten trifjes Ijy Shalmanezer, king of 
 Assyria (2 Kings xvii. 6). The reasoiis which he 
 assigns for this conclusion are of little weight, and 
 not wortli examination. But the single (act that 
 the figmes are arrayed in a costume similar to the 
 ancient and present garb of the people of Syria 
 and Lel)aiii)n, inclines us to thiuk,that the figures 
 really do rejjresent the costume of nations west of 
 the Eujjhrates, including, probably, that of (he 
 Jews and tiieir near neighbours. The dress here 
 
 Neeno in that war in which the Jews were de- 
 'eatied at Megidt'o, and their king Josiah slair. 
 
 shown is a shirt or tiuiic confined around the 
 waist by a strap or girdle; while others have a 
 longer and larger robe, furnished with a spacious 
 cape or hood, and, probably, worn over the 
 other. , 
 
 There is no reason to think that the dress of the 
 Jews was ni any important lespect different (Vom 
 that of tlie other inhabitants of the same and im- 
 mediately bordering countries. It would there- 
 fore fje satisfactory, and would enable us to judge 
 better of the figures which have been noticed, if 
 we had representations of Canaanites, Phoenicians, 
 Syrians, Moabites, &c., by the Egyi).^ian artists, 
 who were so exact in discriminating, even to 
 caricature, the peculiarities of nations. At p. 22(5 
 there is a supposed figure of a Canaanite warrior 
 from this source. The dress being military does 
 not alTord mucli room for comparison in the pre- 
 sent instance ; but we at once recognise in it most 
 of the articles which formeii the military dress of 
 tlie Hei)rews. Tlie following figures (No. 257), 
 however, convey more iidorniation, as they apj)ear 
 to represent inhribitants of Syria anil Leliannn. 
 Tlie evidence for tiie hist (fig. 2) is as conclusive 
 as can be obtained, fur not only is there the name 
 Lemanon (in being constantly interclianged with 
 b), but file persons thus attired are representeil
 
 DRKSS. 
 
 DRKSS. 
 
 S7« 
 
 U iiihabitating a mountainous country, and 
 felling Jif-xrees to impede tiie cliariots of the 
 Egyi.itian invaders. The dresses are similar to 
 each other, and this similarity stvens^thens the 
 ]ir(ihal)ility that the dress of the Jews w:us not very 
 dirtVrt'iit ; and it is also observable that it is 
 sitndar to the full dress of some of the figures in 
 the sculpture at Besit(joii : tiie ligures are bearded, 
 and tlie cap, or head-dress, is bound round with 
 a fillet- Tiie figures are armyed in a long gown 
 reaching to the ankles, and confined around the 
 waist by a girdle ; and the shoulders are c(»\ ered 
 hy a cape which apjieais to have been common to 
 several nations of Asia. At first view it would 
 geem that this dress is different from those already 
 figured. But in all probability this more spa- 
 cious rol)e is merely an outer garment, covering 
 that inner dress wiiicli is shown in tlie figure* 
 tliHt seem more scantily arrayed. 
 
 Such is the amount of the information to be 
 derived from ancient monuments. 
 
 niscpnces of Hebrew costume ; and Jbat the 
 dresses wltich the painters have intrcKluctil intc 
 Scrijituial s«l)jicts arf far more near to correct- 
 ness than it li;w latterly l>een the fishion to su|h 
 p)se. It is porliaiis as nearly as posmble a just 
 medium between tlie ecclesiastical tradition and 
 tlie practical obscrvatiiin. No dress more suit- 
 able to the dignity of the siiltjects could possilily 
 be devised : and, sanctioned as it has been by 
 King use, and rendered venerable liy .Scriptuial ii*. 
 sociatitms, we should he relin;tant to see it ex- 
 changed for the existing Oriental cotttunies, wliu-h 
 the French artists have began to prefer, lint thig 
 
 That to be obtained from tradition is eml>odied 
 — I. In the dresses of monks and pilgrims, which 
 may be traced to an ancient date, and which are 
 an intendwJ imitation of the dresses su]ip(>se<l to 
 have [leen worn by the first disciples and apostles 
 of Christ. 2. The garb conventionally assigned 
 by i^ainters to Scriptural characters, which were 
 ev^jaWy intemled to emlwdy the dress of the a])os- 
 liulical jieriod, and is ccirrected in some degree by 
 rhe notions of Oriental c^istuine which were col- 
 lected during the Crusiides. 
 
 To i"«lge of the vabie of these costumes, we 
 •nust conniare thein, first, with the scanty ma- 
 terials already pro^luced, and then with the mo- 
 dern costumes oi" Syria and Arabia. The result 
 vf this examination will jirobably i>e that these 
 traditional garbs are by no means bad rerni- 
 
 18 only with regard to pictorial associations :mhI 
 effects; for, in an inquiry into the costume 
 actuallfi worn by the Israelites, n,o<iem sources 
 of illustration must l>e by no means overlooked. 
 And to that source of illustration we now turn. 
 
 The value of the modem Oriental costumes for 
 the ])iuposes of Scriptural illustration arise from 
 the fact that the dress, like the • u.sages, (if the 
 jteojde is understoo<l to be the same, or ne;u-!'y the 
 same, which was used in very ancient times. Of 
 the fact itself, nakedly taken, there is not the 
 least room for doul)t. But this must be under- 
 stiiod with some limitations. The tlress of the 
 Turks is distinctive and j)eculiar to tiieinselves, 
 and has no connection with the aboriginal cos- 
 tumes of Western Asia. The dress of the Persians 
 has also been changed almost within the memory 
 of man, that of the ruling Tartar triije having 
 been almost invariably adopted : so that the pre- 
 sent costume is altogether different from that- 
 wliich is figureil by Sir Thomas Herbert, ('liaidin, 
 Le Bruyn, Niebulir, and other travellers of the 
 seventeenth an<l eighteentli contvn'ies. But with 
 the exceptions of the foreign Turkish costume, aivi 
 the tniidifications thereof, and with c<'rtain local 
 exceptions, chiefly in mountainous regions, it may 
 be said that there is one prevailing costume in all 
 the countries of Asia between the Tigris arxl 
 Me<literrarie;in, and tliroughout Northern .\rrica, 
 from the Nile to Morocco and the Uuiks of the 
 Senegal. This c^istunie is substantially .\ral(ian, 
 and owes its extension to the wi<le con(|ci<'sfs of 
 tlie Arabians under the first caliphs; and it i> 
 through the Arabians — tiie least changed .if ancient 
 nations, and almost the only one which has re 
 mained as a nation from ancient times — thai t!i« 
 antiquity i>f this costume may be jiroved. Thi<t 
 is undoubtetlly the most ancient costume of
 
 s«o 
 
 DRKSS. 
 
 DRESS. 
 
 Western Asia, anil while one set of proofs woulil 
 carry it iij) to Scriiitnral tim^s, another set of strong 
 pioliabilities and satisfactory analogies will take 
 It hack to the most remote periods of Scriptural 
 history, ard will suggest tliat the dress of the 
 Jews themselves was very similar, without being 
 strictly identical. 
 
 It would be a pleasant task to trace out these 
 lines of proof and analogy. This cannot here be 
 done ; but it may be proper to remark — 1. Tiiat 
 tlie usages of the Arabians in Syria and Palestine 
 are more in agreement with those of Scripture 
 than those of any otiier inhabitants of those coun- 
 tiies. 2. That their costume throws more light 
 on the Scriptural intimations than any other now 
 existing, wliile it agrees more than any other with 
 the materials supplied by antiquity and by tra- 
 dition. 3. That the dress which the Arabian 
 garbs gradually superseded in Syria and Pales- 
 tine was not the same as that of Scrijitural 
 times, excepting, perhaj)S, among the jieasantry, 
 whose dress apjjears to have then dit!'ered little 
 from that of the Arabian conquerors. Tlie Jews 
 had for alwve five centuries ceased to be inha- 
 bitanti, of Palestine ; and it is certain tliat during 
 tlie intermediate period the dress of the upper 
 classes— the military and the townspeople— had 
 become assimilated to that of the Greeks of the 
 Eastern %nipire. Arabia had meanwhile been 
 subjected to no such inSuences, and the dress 
 wiiich it brought into Syria may be regarded as a 
 restoration of the more ancient costume, rather 
 than (as it was in many countries) the introduc- 
 tion of one previously unknown. 
 
 It is to l>e observed, however, that there are two 
 very diflerent sorts of dresses among the Arabians. 
 OiiC is that of the Bedouin tribes, and the otiier 
 tiiat of tlic iiiliUbitants of towns. The distinction 
 between tliese is seldom clearly understood, or 
 correctly stated ; but is of tiie utmost importance 
 for the purpose of tlie present notice. Instead 
 therefore oi' speaking of the Arabian costunis as 
 one tliinj;, we must regard it as two tilings — the 
 desert costume, and the town costume. 
 
 It', flien, our views of Hebrew costume were 
 based on the actual costume of the Arabians, we 
 should be led to conclude tiiat tiie desert costume 
 represented tliat which was worn during tlie pa- 
 triarclial period, and nntil the Israelites iiad been 
 some time settled in Canaan ; and the town cos- 
 tume that which was adopted from their neigh- 
 oouis when tliey became a settled people. 
 
 Tins is a subject which, more than any other, 
 requires tlie aid of pictorial illustration to render 
 tlie details intelligible. Having provided onr- 
 et'lves with these, our further observations will 
 m,)st advanta;j;eous]y take the form of explana- 
 tion-i of them, and of comments upon them. 
 
 Under tlie notion that the desert costume be- 
 longs to the ]iatiiarchal ])eriod, the precedence is 
 here given tn it. Only the outer articles of dress 
 are distinctive, tliose which are worn underneath 
 being similar toother articles worn by the town 
 and [leasant classes, and which as such will be 
 berevil'ier noticeii. 
 
 Tlie annexed cut (No. 260) represents, in fig. 2, 
 a Beilouin, or desert Arab, in the dress usually 
 worn in Asia ; and fig. 1 rejiresents a townsman 
 in a cloak of the same kind, adopted from the 
 Arabs, and worn very extensively as an outer- 
 aiost covering in all the countries from the Oxus 
 
 (for even the Persians use it) to tlie Mediterranean 
 The distinctive head-dress of the Bedouin, and 
 which has not been adojited by any other nation, 
 or even by the Arabian townsmen, is a kerchie/ 
 {kejfeh) foltled trian^rulaily, and tlirown over tlie 
 head so as to fall down ova tlie neckand shoulders, 
 and bound to tlie head by a band of twisted wool 
 or camel's hair. We forbear at tlie moment from 
 inquiring whether this was or was not in use 
 among the ancient Hebrews. The cloak is called 
 an abha. It is made of wool and hair, and of 
 various degrees of fineness. It is sometimes en- 
 tirely black, or entirely white, but is more usually 
 marked with broad stri]ies, tlie colours of which 
 (never more than two, one of which is always 
 white) are distinctive of the tribe by which it is 
 worn. The cloak is altogether shapeless, being 
 like a square sack, with an oiiening in front, and 
 v.'ith slits at tlie sides to let out the arms. The Arab 
 wlio wears it by day, sleeps in it by night, ai 
 does often the jieasant by whom it has been 
 adopted; and in all probability tliis was tlie gar- 
 ment similarly used liy the ancient Hebrews, and 
 which a lienevolent law, delivered while Israel 
 was still in the deseit, forbade to be kept in 
 jiledge beyond the day, that tlie ]ioor might not 
 1)6 without a covering at night (Exod. xxii. 27) 
 This article of dress ajijiears to have been littU 
 known to Biblical illustrators, although it is the 
 principal and most common outermost garment 
 in Western Asia. Tliis singular neglect has 
 arisen from their information being chiefly de- 
 rived from Shaw and otliers, who descrilie tiie 
 costume of the Arab trilves or Moors of Northern 
 Africa, where the outer garment is more gene- 
 rally the hournoos (No. 260, fig. 3), a woollen 
 cloak, not unlike the abba, but fiH-nishe«l with 
 a hood, and wliicli is sometimes strangely con- 
 founded even by well informed persons witli a 
 totally dill'ereiit outer-giunieiit worn in the same 
 regions, usually called tlie hyke, but which is 
 also, according to its materials, quality, or colour, 
 distlnguislied by various otiier names; and writers 
 have produced some confusion by not observing 
 tliat these names refer to an aiticle of raiment 
 which under all these names is essentially the 
 same. Regardless of tiiese minute distinctions, 
 this part of dress may be descrilied as a large 
 woollen blanket, either wliite or brown, and in 
 summer a cotton sheet (usually blue or wliite, or 
 both colours togrther). Putti.'ig one corner befon
 
 DRKSS. 
 
 DRESS. 
 
 S8I 
 
 over the left shoulder, the wear -r brings it behind, pawned liis oiiter-garmont ' wherein he slejii,' what 
 and then under the ri gilt imn, luid so over tiie dress was left to liini? Tlie answer is jiroli.illy 
 boily, flirowin^' it beliind over llie left slu'uhler, supplied by the annexed en^^'ravinj; (No. 'ICfi). 
 
 and leaving the vh^ht arm free for action. Tins 
 very picturesque mode of wearing the fii/ke. is 
 shown in fig. 2 (No. 261). Anotlier mode of wesj- 
 
 big it is shown in fig. 3. It is sometimes thrown 
 over the head as a protection from tlie smi or wind 
 (fig. I), and calls to mind the various passages of 
 Scripture in wliicli per.-ons are described as cover- 
 ing their heads with their mantles (2 Sam. xv. 
 30; 1 Kings xix. 13; Esther vi. 12). This 
 article of dress, originally borrowed frotn the 
 nomades, is known in Arabia, and extends west- 
 ward to the shores of the Atlantic, ijeing most ex- 
 tensively used by all classes of the ))0])ulation. 
 The seat of this dress, and of the abba res))ec- 
 tively, is indicated by the direction of their im- 
 portation into Egypt. Tlie hykes are imported 
 from the west (i. e. from North Africa), and the 
 abbas from Syria. The close resendilance of the 
 above group of real costume to those in which the 
 traditionary ecclesiastical and traditionary artis- 
 tical costumei are displaye<l, must l>e obvious to 
 the most cursory observer. It may also be noticed 
 that the hyke is not without some resemlilance, 
 as to the manner in which it was worn, to the 
 outer garment of one of the figures in tlie Kgy])tian 
 family, supposed to represent the arrival of 
 Josephs brethren in Egypt (No. 2.'J4, fig. 1). 
 
 We now turn to the costumes which are 
 seen in the towns and villages of south-western 
 Asia. 
 
 In the Scr'f^tures drawers are only mentioned 
 ;n the injunction that the high-priest siiould wear 
 them (Exod. xxviii. 42), which seems to show that 
 they were not generally in use ; nor have we any 
 evidence tliat they ever became common. Drawers 
 descending to the middle of the thigiis were worn 
 by the ancient Egyptians, and workmen often 
 laid aaide all the rest of heir dress wiien occu- 
 pied in their labours. As far as this ])art of dress 
 was used at all liy the Heorews, it wi>s doubtless 
 either like tiiis, or similar to those which are now 
 worn in Western Asia by all, except some among 
 the p'Kirer jieasantry, and by many of liie Be<louin 
 Arabs. They are of linen or cotton, of ample 
 breadth, tied around the lody by a running string, 
 or band, and always wor i next the skin, not over 
 (lie sliirt as in Euroi)e. 
 
 It >viU be asked, when the poor Israelite had 
 
 wliicli represents slightly <lil1'ereiit garments of 
 cotton, or woollen frocks or shirts, which often, in 
 warm weather, foru) the sole dress of the Beihr.iin 
 jieasants, and the lower class of lownspeojile. To 
 this the abba or hyke is the ])roper outer rolv? (as 
 in fig. 1, No. 261), but is usually, in summer, dis- 
 pensed with in the day-time, and in the orditiary 
 pursuits and occupations of life. It is sumclimes 
 'as in No. 262, fig. 2) worn witliout, but luore 
 usually with, a girdle; and it will be seen tliat 
 the shorter specimens are not unlike the dress of 
 one of the figures (fig. 3, No. 254) in the earliest of 
 the Egyptian subjects which liave been ])ro(lu<'e(l. 
 The shirt worn liy the sujierior classes is of the 
 same shape, hut of finer materials. This is shown 
 in the figure below (N-;). 263), which represents a 
 gentleman as just risen from licd. If we call this 
 a shirt, the Hebrews doubtless had it — the sole 
 dress (excepting the cloak) of the poor, and the 
 inner robe of the rich. Such, probably, were the 
 
 ' sheets' (h-anslated 'shirts' in si>me versions), of 
 which Samson despoiled thirty Philistines to pay 
 tlie foifeit of his riddle CJudg. xiv. 13, 19). It 
 
 is shown from the Talmud, indeed, that the He- 
 brews of later days had a shirt called pVH r/ia/u/c, 
 which it would a))pear was often of wool (Light- 
 foot, Ilor. Ueb. on Luke ix. 3), and wiiich is de- 
 •cribed as the ordinary inner-garmwt, the outet
 
 »>r2 
 
 DRESS. 
 
 being the cloak cr mantle. This shows that the 
 shirt or frock was, as in modern usage, the ordi- 
 nary dress of the Jews, to which a mantle (abba, 
 hyke, or bournoos) was the outer covering. 
 
 The Talmud enumerates eighteen several gar 
 ments which formed the clotliing of the Jews 
 f'.om liftid to fvict (T. Hieros. Sabb. fol. 15; 
 T. Bah. Sabb. l"ol. 120), mentioning, however, 
 two sandals, two buskins, &c. Tiiis shows, at 
 least, one thing, that they were not more sparingly 
 clad tlran the modern Orientals. Tiiis being the 
 case, we may be sure that altliougli persons of the 
 humbler classes were content with tlie shirt and 
 the manflo, tiie wealthier people iiad other robes 
 between these two, and forming a comjilete dress 
 without tlie mantle, wliich with them was pro- 
 baijly contined to out-of-door wear, or ceremonial 
 use. It is of course impossilile to discriminate 
 tiiose ])iecisely; but in this matter we cannut be 
 far wrong in trusting to the analogy of existing 
 usages. 
 
 In all the annexed figures (No. 26 1) representing 
 persons of the superior class, we observe the shirt 
 
 covered by a striped (sometimes figured) gown or 
 caftan, of mingled silk and cotton. It descends 
 to the ankles, with long sleeves, extending a few 
 inches beyond the fingers" ends, but divideii from 
 a point a little aliove the wrist, so that the hand 
 is generally exposed, though it may be concealed 
 liy the sleeve when necessary ; for it is customary 
 to cover the hands in the presence of a person of 
 high rank. It is very common, es])ecially in 
 winter, lor ]iersons to sleep without removing this 
 gown, Ijut only unloosing the girdle by which 
 it is l)Ound. It is not unusual witliin doors to 
 »ee persons without anv article of dress outside 
 this ; but it is consideied decidedly as an un- 
 dress, and no respectable person is l)eheld out of 
 «li ors, or receives or pays visits,, without an outer 
 Cfxering. Hence persons clad in this alone are 
 sa.d to lie ' naked' in Scrij)ture — that is, not in 
 the usual complete dress; for there can be no 
 maimer of doubt that this, or something like tliis, 
 i» the nJiriD cetoneth of the Scrij)ture (Exod 
 xxviii. JO ; Job xxx. 18; Isa. xxii. 21, &c.). A 
 similar robe is worn by the women, as was also 
 the rase among the Israelites (2 Sam. xiii. IS, 19; 
 Canr. V. t.j. It is in the bosom of this robe that 
 various avticles are carried, and hence the Scrip- 
 tural exjiression of giving things ' into the bosom.' 
 
 DRESS. 
 
 The girdle worn over this, arou id the waist, ^ 
 usually a coloured shawl, or long piece of figiirwl 
 white muslin. The girdle of the poorer classes is 
 of coarse stuff, and often of leather, with claa].>3. 
 This leathern girdle is also much used by the 
 Arabs, and by persons of condition when equijiped 
 for a journey. It is sometimes o:Tiamented with 
 workings in coloured worsted, or silk, or with 
 metal studs, shells, l)eads, &c. Botli kinds, of 
 giniles were certainly in use among tiie Hebrews 
 (2 Kings i. 8; Matt. iii. 4; Mark i. 6 ; comp. 
 Jer. xiii. 1). It is known to all readers of Scrip- 
 ture how ofl^en the • girdle ' and the act of ' gird- 
 ing the loins ' is mentioned. It seems from 2 
 Sam. XX. f* (comp. also the Syrian figure, No 257, 
 fig. 1), that it was usual to wear a knife or po- 
 niard in the girdle. This custom is still general, 
 and denotes not any deadly disposition, but the 
 want of clasp knives. Men of literary vocatiors 
 replace it by an inkhorn, as was al.so the case 
 among the Israelites (Ezek. !x. 2). 
 
 Over the gown is worn eitiier the short-sleeved 
 gibbeh (tig. 3), which is a long coat of woollen 
 cloth; or tiie long-sleeved benish (tig. 2), which 
 is also of woollen cloth, and may be worn either 
 over or instead of the other. The benish is, by 
 reason of its long sleeves (with which the lian.is 
 may be covered), the robe of ceremony, and is 
 worn in the presence of superiors and [lersons of 
 rank. Over one or liotli of these robes may l)e 
 worn the abba, bournoos, or hyke, in any of the 
 modes already indicated. Aged persons often 
 wrap up tlie head and shoulders with the latter, 
 in the manner sliown in fig 4. 
 
 This same hyke or wrapjier is usually taken by 
 persons going on a journey, for the purpose of 
 being used in the same manner as a jirotection 
 from the sun or wind. This is shown in the an- 
 nexed cut, representing a group of persons eipiijiped 
 for travel. The .obe is lieie more succinct and 
 compact, and the firm manner in which the whole 
 dress is girded up about the loins calls to mind 
 the passages of Scripture in which the action oJ 
 ' girding up the loins' for a journey is mentioned. 
 
 From tins it is aisoseen that travellers u«u&ll)
 
 DRINK. STRONG. 
 
 wrar a sword, and the maniioi in wliich it is 
 worn is correctly sliown. It would also ajipe^ir 
 that the Jews had swords for such occasional 
 uses (Matt. xxvi. 51 •, Luke xxii. 36). 
 
 The necessity of baring the aim for any kind 
 of exertion, must be evident from the manner in 
 which it is encumbered in all the dri-s.<!es we have 
 produced. This action is often mentioned in 
 Scripture, which alone jiroves that the arm was 
 in ordinary circumstances similarly encuml'ered 
 by the dress. For ordinary purposes a hasty tuck- 
 ing up of the sleeve of the riglit arm suflices; 
 but for a continued action s[iecial contiivancei 
 are necessary. These are cimmous, as will be 
 seen hy the cut (No. 266). The full sleeves of tiie 
 
 DRINK, STRONG 
 
 if<» 
 
 shirt are Eometimes drawn up by means of cords, 
 which pass round each shoulder, and cross be- 
 hind, where they are tied in a knot. This cus- 
 tom is particularly aflected by servants and 
 workmen, who have constant occasion for baring 
 the arm ; but others, whose occasions aie more 
 incidental, and who are, therelbre, unprovided 
 with the necessary co'ds, draw up the sleeves 
 and tie them together behind between the shoulders 
 ('ig;2)- 
 
 I* or the dress of females we must refer to the 
 aiticle Women. Certain parts of dress, also, 
 admit of separate consideiation, such as tlie 
 lead-dress [Turban j, and tlie dress of the feet 
 [Sandals], 
 
 DRINK, STRONG. The Hebrew "ISt^ 
 geeras to demand a more particular elucidation 
 than it has yet received, inasnmch as it had in 
 all probability a much wider signiHcation tlian 
 is now conveyed by the jihrase ' strong drink.' 
 Mr. Mill, in guarding against the common fal- 
 lacies arising from the. changes and corrujitions 
 continually going on in the meaning of terms, 
 by which their signilication is modified, narrowed, 
 or enlarged, justly observes that ' we continually 
 have cause to give up the opinions of our fore- 
 fathers ; but to tamper with their language, even 
 to the extent of a word, is an operation of much 
 greater re3i)onsil)ility, and implies, as an iniiis- 
 pensable requisite, an accurate accjuaintance with 
 the history of the particular word, and of the 
 opinions (or objects) which, in dilVerent stages of 
 its progress, it served to expi >ss. To be qualitjed 
 to define the name, we mus. know all that has 
 ever been known of the properties of tlie class of 
 objects which are, or originally were, denoted by 
 it' (Logic, ii. 2<ill. The mischiefs of an opjx)- 
 
 site course of ciiticism have been but too evident 
 in biblical literature, but are now beginning to 
 be lemedit'd and corrected. ' Two or three au- 
 thors,' observes the .-Vbl)!; Kcnaudot, ' who b.it 
 co])y from each other, sullice to give biilh to a 
 notion which S])rcad4 iniexamined by those wlio 
 follow them: this throws a mist over history, and 
 gives an op])ortunity to confoinid tiulh with 
 falsehood' — an observation not ina])plicable to 
 tlie word under discussion. The principle of 
 inteiprelation laid down al)ove we have endca- 
 voineil to keep steadily in view in treating of this 
 and otlier kiiuhed subjects ; and with regard to 
 the particular word before us, it liiis been our 
 study to acquiie a)i acciuate accjuainlance with 
 its history, as well as witli that ol its derivatives, 
 and as peifect a knowledge of the cla.ss of jiro- 
 ducts which are, or originally were, denolcd by it, 
 as the lapse of time and the obscurity of the 
 inquiry will );ennit. Tlie sources open for the 
 illustration of the subject ap{iear to be: — the 
 context of the passages in the Heliiew .Scriptures 
 wliere the noun occius, whicli it does twenty-three 
 times, twenty-one in coiijunctioti with p*, «.■/«<? ; 
 the verbs and secondary nouns formed from tlie 
 primordial noun, which express or imply the 
 quality of the original olject; the atlinities of 
 terms siqiplied by the kindied or derivative lan- 
 guages, Syro- Arabian or Indo-Geimanic ; and the 
 evidence of travellers and naturalists resj)ecting 
 the nature ot the class of objects denoted i)y tiie 
 original "IDE>, or liy words analogous to it. (In 
 illustration of the philological changes subse- 
 quently noticed, we beg to refer to the jjrinciples 
 laid down and developed in the articles .Ai.phahkt 
 and Arabic Language.] We shall class the 
 various senses of the word under three heads, in 
 the order in wiiich we conceive them to liave been 
 developed. 
 
 1. '^DtJ* shechar, luscious, saccharine drink, 
 or swiciiT svitup, especially sugar or honey of 
 dates, or of the ])alm-tiee (ti'^T debash) ; also, 
 by accommodation, occasionally the sweet I'luit 
 itself. Herodotus, Vano, Dioscorides, /3-^llaii, 
 Tertulliaii, A. Aplirodistcus, and others, speak of 
 saccharon, sugar, as ' honey made by men.' ijy 
 sugar or honey ti;e Jews undcrsto<id imt only 
 honey of bees, but also syrujxs made fiuin tiie 
 fruit or juice of the palm and other ti» es. Hince 
 sut;ar is exjiressed by tlie Kaliiiins as Q^3p"tJ'31 
 (Jose])h. De Bell. Jud. v. 4 ; Mis/tiia, Tr. Svdai iin, 
 vi. 8-10; Talmud, Ti: Berachoth, fol. 'i'^ a ; Tr 
 Chulin, 120 b; Terumoth, xi. 2; Maiiuonidcs. 
 Comment, in Tr. Biccurim, i. Misli. o ; D (Jyly's 
 Cahnet, art. 'Honey;' Bochart, Celsius). J)i-. 
 T. M. Harris says J.hat ' it is ))iobalde that they 
 (tlie Jews) used it (~)DU') to .swkkten their wine, 
 as we [?'. e. the Americans] put honey into cider 
 to encourage people to drink freely ' — a singular 
 observation, illustrating how far our conceptions 
 of foreign customs are moulded iiy tho.se which 
 we witness at home. ' In Solomon's time, and 
 afterwards,' continues Dr. Harris, ' tiie wine and 
 sweet cordials seeiri generally to iiavc bren u»«id 
 separately ' ( Nat. Hist, of Bible . It seems n.ior« 
 jirobable, however, that the palm syrup or honey 
 denoted by ^DSf, was used lioth as a sweetmeat or 
 articU of food, and as a dntii; like the Helirew 
 N3D soblie and the Roman sttpa (boiled wine"), 
 diluti'il with water, as witli the modern grajie and 
 honey syrups or sherl)ets (Prov. ix. '2, &). The
 
 98f 
 
 DRINK, STRONG. 
 
 derivalh'es <>fs/(ef/«77-. expressive of Ux firel ng- 
 uificutioii. aie nunitT,)iis. K.istwaid ami south- 
 ward, folldwing the Arabian channel and the 
 Saracenic cnnqnesfs, we meet witii lije nn>st 
 ohvioiis forniM of the Hebrew word still ex])ressive 
 
 of sugar. Tiius we liave the Arabic Jws sakar ; 
 Pertic and 13en;r-ili. sfnikkur fwlience our word 
 for sugar-eaiidy, sMikiir-lamd, ' rocli -sugar ') ; 
 comiiiuii Indian, Ja(/[/ree or zhaf/(/eri/ ; Moiesqne, 
 se.kkour ; Spauisli, aziicar ; and Pojtuguese, o*- 
 *«ca)- (molas -es lieing mnl-de-assxicar,'' \w\\ey oi 
 sugar,' abbreviated). Tiie wave of popniafion 
 has al&i) cairie I the oiiginal sense and form noith- 
 wards, embodying the wo)d in the Grecian and 
 Tentoi ic lar.^ages. Hence Greek, aaKxo-o; 
 Latin, saccharum ; Italian, zuccJiero ; Geiman, 
 iixhe''- and juderir/ ; Dutch, stiiker ; Russian, 
 sachar; Danish, iM/tA»r ; ^\\ediA\, sncker ; Welsh, 
 shogwr ; French, Sucre; and our own common 
 woids sukkar (sweetmeat), snr/ar, and saccharine. 
 'Sukkarlie' is also an old English word clearly 
 raceable in sense arid sound to the .same origin, 
 ■ind is used by the writers of the middle ages in 
 the sense of dainty, dessert, or svveetmeat. 
 
 This view of tiie objective noun is siipixnted by 
 the primary significations of the verbal noun 
 ">2B' shachar, to satisfy or satiate (whence the 
 sense of reward, wac/es, Sec, attached to other 
 forms of it. To satisfy or cloy is the well-known 
 property of sweet and luscious preparations (as 
 honey, Prov. xxv. 16, 27); whereas 'strong- 
 drink,' in the modem sense of intoxicating, is 
 jiroverbial for creating an a]i|»tite which is in- 
 satiaijle. The drinluvs of it ' tarry long at the 
 wine;' they 'rise up early in the morning and 
 con'imie until night, till wine indames them;' 
 and when, after sulLiing its evils, they awake, 
 their cry still is, ' I wiif seek it yet again' (Prov. 
 xxiii. 30-35; Isa. v. H, 22). It is easy to per- 
 ceive how the innocent sen<e of IDti', as to eat or 
 drnik to satiety, gradually had the idea of excess 
 superadded to it. The Greek /afdvco, frequently 
 used by the Septuagint translators as the ^ejjre- 
 sentative of "ID^*, is a case in point. It Hrst sig- 
 nified to drink to fulness — next, to excess — and, 
 liistly, to intoxication. Thus the Latin glutio, 
 ' *o swallow,' became the parent of (/hitton, ' one 
 who eats or drinks to excess.' So drunk, the jjast 
 tense oi' the infinitive ' to drink,' in like manner, 
 came to signify inebriated ; and the verbal noun 
 ' to fill ' in North Britain gave rise to fou, 
 meaning not merely full, but intoxicated. An 
 old French word, now obsolete, sacre or saker, ' a 
 glutton,' appears to have been derived irom the 
 Hebrew word. The Arabic has derivatives cor- 
 responding to those of the Hebrew, viz. fj^ 
 »".rces, Tifiij, ^Jit gratias egit. The following 
 
 testimonies, explanatory ot the primitive sense 
 a.nd nature of "IDL'', may be selected from a mul- 
 titude of travellers and authorities, ancient and 
 tn.idem. 
 
 ' It is usual,' says Dr. Shaw {Travels, i. 262), 
 ' with persons of better fasliion, Ujion a marriage, 
 at the birth or circiuncision of a child, or upon 
 any other feast or good ilay, (O eiiteitain tiieir 
 guests witii the honey, or dipsc, as they call it, of 
 tlie pahn-tree.' Tiiis serves to exjjlain tiie sc'tse 
 of K'^T in Gen. xliii. 1 1. From the f^tct that 
 
 DRINK, STR.ING. 
 
 Egy])t producea an al'undance of honey, we maj 
 be leil to supDose that the mure valuable date 
 honeij is here intended, which is rarely found in 
 Egypt' f De .Sola, Lindentball, and Rapliall's nmt 
 in New Translation of the Scriptures). VegetaLle 
 honey, or syrup oi' date; and of grajies (roft-el- 
 aneb), is still largely imporleil into Egypt. ' The 
 extensive importance of the date-tree,' observes 
 Dr. E. Clarke (Travels, v. 409), is one of the 
 most curious subjects to which a traveller can 
 direct his attention. A considerable part of t!ie 
 inhabitants of Egypt, of Arabia, and of Persia, 
 subsist almost entirely upon its fruit. Tliey 
 boast also of its medicijial virtues.'' Pliny (Hist. 
 Nat. xxiii. 4) says, ' The ancients gave the 
 juice of them boiled, instead of hydrtnieJ, to 
 the sick to rec^-uit strength antl to alia tiiiist, 
 tor which purpose they preferred thosv from 
 Thebais.' The cordial properties of ISl' are 
 probably referred to in Prov. xxxi. 6. Another 
 passage in the same ti'aveller illustrates the value 
 of sJiechar in the accommodated sense of ' sveet 
 tiLiit,' when presented as tithe or offering. ' Iha 
 dates hung from these v'rees in such large ai d 
 temj>fing clusters, although not quite ripe, jthal 
 we climbed to the tops of some of fhem, and bor« 
 axiay with tts large branches with their fruit. 
 In tliis manner dates are sometimes sent with the 
 branches as presents to Constantinople. It sui\i 
 tiie Turks, who are fond of sweetmeats of alt 
 kinds' (Travels, v. 408). This reminds one of 
 the statement of Josephus (Antiq. xiii. 13. 5), 
 that at \hs feast of Tabernacles the Jews carried 
 b'lvghs of the palm-tree and the citron-tree in 
 their hands, and on one occasion ]3elted King 
 Alexandsr .lannseus with citrons. ' By the word 
 debash^ says Calmet, ' the rabbins and lexico- 
 graphers uiiderstand not only the honey of bees, 
 but also honty of (kites, or \\\e fruits of the palm- 
 tree, or the daCes themselves, from which honey Is 
 extracted ; and when God enjoins the first fruits 
 of the honey to be offered to him, the Ji7-st fruits 
 of dates seetn to be meant ; for generally the 
 produce only of fruits was offered.' Tlie Jewish 
 rabbins render E;0T in 2 Chron. xxxi. 5, by 
 DATES (vid. Bagster's Comprehensive Bible). 
 The Arabs also still apply dibs both to the datea 
 and the honey of dates. On ti\e same jiriiiciplo 
 of accommodation as the sacred writers occa- 
 sionally employ debhash as a solid, and even 
 I"'*, icine, in the sense of t^'T^, vintage-fruit 
 (l)eut. xxviil. 39 ; Ps. civ. 14-15 ; Jer. xl. 10-12), 
 it is probable that ~\'2\^ shechar might also in- 
 clude the sense of ' sweet-fruit,' as in Deut. xiv. 
 26, wliere it and p* are placed amongst titlie- 
 oll'erings as solids to be eaten. Tlie leamed Dr. 
 Willet (1631) on Lev. x. 9, observes that ' tliia 
 priihibitiiin may also be extended to the eating oi 
 sucli things as may intoxicate the brain, as dates 
 and the fruits of the palir.-tree of Egyjjt ; and sc 
 D. Kimchi' (Hexapla in Lcviticum). Somesoits 
 of dates, if gathered too early and badly dried, do, 
 as Pliny oljserves (Hist. Nat. xxiii. 4), cause head- 
 ache and quasi intoxication. It may be remarked 
 that Pliny (xiii. 4) speaks of a species of fine- 
 flavoured dates as being called dabula. 
 
 Further illustrations of the nature of ' she- 
 char,' as palm honey or debhash. Abu Zeid ai 
 Hasan, a traveller of the nintli century, writing 
 of the Isle of Ceylon, says, ' Tiieir drink is made 
 of palm honey boiled, and prepared with tire tari
 
 DRINK, STRONG. 
 
 M juice wliicli runs fmm tiie tree' (Accounts of 
 Jiidia atid C/iiiin, Uy two Moliaiiiinetlaii Travel- 
 lers, p. 84). Sir JdIiu Miniiidevile, wlio went to 
 tlie east a.d. 1;522, says ( Wtijaye and Travailc, 
 p 141) that ' Sarraziiies, tliat he ilevout, ilr_vnkeii 
 never do wyn ; Init sume dryiiken it prevyly. 
 For gif they dronken it openly, thei scholde hen 
 repveved. But thei dryiikfii gotie Bevera<;e and 
 Steele and 7iori.ss/ii/iif/c, that is made ol Gula- 
 melle [calamus nielij ; anil tliat is that nxii 
 maken SM^ar ol, that is of rifjhle gode savour; 
 and it is gode for the Breest." He furtlier nar- 
 rates (p. 18yj that ' there hen other Trees tiiat 
 bereii Iloni,^ ^rode and swete ; anil otJK'r Tiecs 
 that heren Venyni ; agenst the whiche tiiere is no 
 Mei.'icyne hut on; for Triacle will not avaylle, 
 16 non other niedicyne." Iluighm van Lins- 
 cluiten (loS4), in his Discours of Voyages, cli. 
 5(5, says of the ])alm-trees of the Canarijns, that 
 ' they farme or hiie those trees for two causes, one 
 for the coquos or fruit to eat it,' the other to press 
 wme out of them, thereof to drink. When they 
 desire to have no cocus or fruite thereof, they cut 
 the hlosbouies of tlie cocus away, and hind a 
 round potte with a narrow mouth, by them called 
 callao, fast unto the tree, and stop the same close 
 round about with pot-earth, so that neyther wine 
 nor aire can eyfher enter in, or come forth, and 
 in that sort the pot in short space is full of water, 
 which they call sura, and is very pleasant to 
 drink, like sweet whay, and somewhat better.' 
 This sura is a form of the Arabic and Peisic 
 syra or sheer, signifying sweet liquor, milk, con- 
 gealed juice, &c. The word (joined to some 
 particle, as Persic oh, ' water or arink,' from tlie 
 
 Sanscrit ^jj j ^ abhi, ' before,' fig. Jirst, bettet ; 
 
 whence tli** Latin ob ; or perhaps to y^ "^ tid, 
 
 UP, fig. liable, superior") is traceable in the Arabic 
 
 &J fMi sherbh, whence Persian sherap and Turkish 
 
 s/ifOTetp, applied in both tongues to icine ; and 
 hence, too, sherbet, ' ])leasant liquor," Italian 
 sorbetto, and English shrub, sirop, and syrup. 
 LInschoten continues :— ' Of the aforesaid sura 
 they likewise make sugar, which is called Jauka; 
 they seethe the water, and set it in the sun, 
 whereof it becometh sugar. A.11 along the coast 
 of Malabar there are many thick reeds, specially 
 on the coiist of (jhorumaii^del, which reeds by the 
 Indians are called 3/auilju, and by the Portin 
 gales 5ambu ; these Mambus have a certain 
 matter within them, which is (as it were) the pith 
 of it. The Indians call it Sacau Mambu, ■wh\c\i 
 is as much to say, as sugar of Mambu [Banibou], 
 and is a very mtdicirudde thing, much esteemed 
 and much sought for by the Arabians, Persians, 
 and Moors, that call it Tubuxiir — i.e. Tub-a-'shir, 
 '.he X sutl'erin^- the same corruption a^' in Xcres, 
 whence sherries (wine). Ma jor Sir G. T. Temple, 
 Bart. (Excursions in the Mediterranean, Algiers, 
 arul Tunis, 1835), says that the best species of 
 dates are either preserved in cases or pressed in 
 lars. ' At the bottom of the jar is a cock, from 
 which is drawn the juice in the form o( a thi<:k 
 luscious syrup" (ii. 155). Tlius the two j)ri- 
 mitive senses of iAcf/tar would be iiicludul in 
 the command ' to oiler the first of thy ripe (mils 
 and of tiiv liquors' — literally tears w dni)|iiiigs 
 (Exod. yx"ii. 29). 
 
 DRINK, STRONG 
 
 A<«ft 
 
 2. ^^t;^ Date or Pai.m Wink in it.s fre«ii and 
 unfermented stale. Bisliop Lowtii translates Isa 
 xxiv. 9 (Ims:— 
 
 'With songs they shall no more drink wint> 
 [(. e. of grai)tvs, ]"<>] ; 
 The palm wine glial 1 be bitter to them that 
 drink it' — 
 and observes, note in loc, that ' this is the jiroper 
 meaning of the word "121", (rlnepa All ei jny- 
 ment sliall cease; the sweetest wine shall become 
 bitter to their taste.' 
 
 Herodotus, in his account of Assyria, remarks 
 that ' the jjalm is very common in this countiy,' 
 and that ' it produces tiiem biead, wine, anil 
 honey' (i. 193). 
 
 Tiie Mohammedan traveller (ad. S50) says 
 tiiat ' palm wine, if drunk fresh, is sweet like 
 honey ; but if kept, it turns to vinegar' (p. 9). 
 
 Maundevile, who travelled abo\e 500 years 
 ago, says, ' Olher trees liiere ben also, that beien 
 ?(')/« of noble sentement.' He tiien descrilies ilie 
 jaggree or sugar palm, and adds, • the hony and 
 the wyn and the vcnym ben ilrawen out of oihir 
 trees, in the same maiiere, and put in vessels for 
 to kepe' (p. 189). 
 
 Mandelslo (1G40), speaking of the village of 
 Damre near Surat, records thus : — ' Terry or 
 Palm Win?. In this village we found some 
 terry, which is a liquor drawn out of the ))alm- 
 trees, and drank of it in cu])s made of the leaves 
 of the same tree. To get out the juice, they go 
 up to the top of the tree, wliere they make an 
 incision in the bark, and fasten under it an 
 earthen pot, which they leave there all night, in 
 which time it is (ilTd with a certain sweet liquor 
 very pleasant to the taste. They get out some 
 u'iso in the day-time, but that [owin^ to the great 
 heat] corrupts immediately, and is good only for 
 vine^car, which is all the use they make of it'' 
 (Ambassador's Travels, p. 23). 
 
 Adam Fahroni, an Italian writer of celebrity, 
 informs us that ' the palm-trees, which particu- 
 larly abounded in the vicinity of Jericho and 
 Engaddi, also served to make a very sweet wine, 
 which is made all over the East, being called 
 palm wine by liie Latins, and syra in India, 
 from the Persian shir, whicii means luscious 
 liquor or drink' (On the Husbandry of the 
 Ancient Jews'). 
 
 Cajitain Cook says of the palm, ' A kind of 
 wine called toddy is jnocured from this tree ; the 
 juice, which is collected morning and evening, 
 is the common drink of every individual.' He 
 informs us also that the natives make a syrup 
 fiom this wine, called gu/a, ' by boiling the 
 liipior down till it is sufficiently inspissated.' 
 This is evidently done as a means of preserving 
 tlie wine sweet and preventing its corruption. 
 Dr. Shaw thus describes the unfermented pahn 
 wine: — ' This liquor, which has a more luscious 
 sweetness than honey, is of the consistence of a 
 thin syrup, but quickly gi'ows tart arid ropy, 
 acipiiring an intoxicating quality' (Travels, 't. 
 2G2). Sir G. T. Temple says, ' We were daily 
 sumilied with the sap of the date-tree, wliico is a 
 delicious and wholesome beierage when drunk 
 quite fresh ; but if allowed (o remain for some 
 hours, it acquires a sharp t;iste not u..like cider. 
 It is called leghma, and, poetically, the tears 
 of the date' — leghma being a comq.tiui of 
 luchryma. The Landers inform us that ' Valn\
 
 986 
 
 DRINK, STRONG. 
 
 wino \» the common and favourite drink of the 
 natives ' of Africa — that ' tlie juice is called 
 wine,' and that ' it is either used in this state, or 
 preserved till it acquires rather a bitter flavour' 
 {Expedition to the Niger, iii. 307-8). With 
 tibese facts before us, the language employed by 
 the propliet in the sublime chapter from which 
 we quoted alxive, becomes beautifully apposite. 
 His prediction is that ' the land shall be utterly 
 spoiled,' diat the light of joy shall be turned into 
 the gloom of sorrow, even as the siceet drink 
 which corrupts, grows sour and bitter to those 
 who drink it. The passage clearly indicates the 
 nature of tlie drink to have been stceet in what 
 ttie Jews esteemed its most valuable condition, 
 but bitter in its fermented state. Hence the 
 drunkard is represented in ch. v. 20-22, as one 
 who ' puts bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter.' 
 This palm wine, like the honey of dates and 
 sugar, was much valued as a medicine and 
 cordial. Dr. James (1747), in his Pharma- 
 copa-ia, states tliat ' the liquor or wine of suri is 
 said to be highly beneficial to phthisical patients, 
 &c.' (Art. ' Palrna Indica'). 
 
 3. Sakar, in its third sense as a noun, denotes, 
 both in the Hebrew and the Arabic, fermented or 
 INTOXICATING PALM WINE. Vaiious forms of 
 the noun in process of time became applied to 
 other kinds of intoxicating drink, whether made 
 from fruit or from grain. After the destruction 
 of Jerusalem and of the Jewish jwlity, almost 
 complete confusion prevailed as to its proper 
 signification. With the ancient Jews it was dis- 
 tinguished from wine; but since the Christian 
 era it has been frequently considered both by 
 Jewish and Christian writers as comprehend- 
 ing nil intoxicating drink. Thus in Spanish 
 sacar signifies to draw wine ; and xicara, a cup 
 or draught While, however, some authors, im- 
 perfectly acquainted with its history and nature, 
 were unduly enlarging its signification, others, 
 from equal ignorance, were narrowing it. Thus 
 Wycklifi'e, in the fourteenth century, in trans- 
 lating Luke i. 15, lias, 'He schal not drinke wyn 
 ne sydyr.' Phillips, in his World of Words, 
 however, shows that formerly cider was ajjplied 
 to the fresh expressed juice of apples as well as 
 to the fermented. Todd's Johnson gives the 
 following derivatives: — 'Cider; sidre, Italian; 
 sicera, Latin ; aiKepa, Greek. The word is sup- 
 posed to be originally of Egypt, and denoting an 
 inebriating liquor. This sense is now obsolete. 
 In old Flench cisere is used for ale.' Cervoise, 
 a drink made from herbs and grain, is tlie word 
 employed by the jiast.ns of Geneva in their trans- 
 lation of the Bible. Tiie fermented rice wine of 
 the Chinese is called cha, that of the Japanese 
 sachi ; the palm wine of the Celebes is named 
 s-achwire ; and the beer of the Kalmucks schara. 
 Arrack has been commonly, but erroneously, de- 
 rived from sakar, and some, including Dr. Paxton 
 {Illustrations of Scripture; Nat. Hist. ]). 51), 
 nave confounded the arrack with the palm wine, 
 forgetting that tiie original wine existed long 
 prior to the discovery of arrack distillation. The 
 true palm wine also, the IDK* of the Bible, is 
 exclusively the juice of ttie palm-tree or fruit, 
 whereas arrack is applied to the spirit obtained 
 from fermented rice and other things, and is, as 
 Di. Siiavv remarks, ' tlie general name for all hot 
 liquors extracted by the alembick' {IVavels, i. 
 
 IiUDAIM. 
 
 262). Such liquors furnish more powcrfiil t.raiu 
 of intoxication than the ancients possessed, anu 
 derive their name, we apprehend, from a poisfm- 
 ous sjiecies of the palm-tril>e, the areca, ot 
 ' drunken date-tree,' the nuts of which are mixed 
 with betel-leaf, datura, and other drugs, and 
 made into a confect or jireserve, which the Indians 
 chew, or put into their drink to make it intoxi- 
 cating (Pomet On Driiffi). 
 
 The Arabic confirms our illustrations of the 
 Hebrew, not only in possessing analogous nouns, 
 
 but also verbs. Hence we have X. , . intcxi- 
 
 cated, coiresponding to the Hebrew shachar. 
 
 The polm wine of the East, as we have ex- 
 plaincdj 13 made intoxicating either by allowing 
 it to corrapt and ferment, thereby losing the 
 sweet luscio'os character for which the Orientals 
 esteem it, asd becoming ropy^, tart, and bitter; 
 or, in its fresh «S boiled state, by an admixture u( 
 stimulating or 8tu])efying ingredients, of which 
 there is an abundance (vid. Olearius, iVIanilelslo, 
 Linschoten, and others). Such a practice seems 
 to have existed amongst the ancient Jews, and to 
 have called down severe reprobation (comp. Prov 
 xxiii. 30; Isa. i. 22; v. 11, 22, and vid. Lowth 
 in loc.).—Y. R. L. 
 
 DROMEDARY. [Camel.] 
 
 DRUSILLA {ApovaiXKa), youngest daughter 
 of Herod Agrippa I. She was much celebrated 
 for her beauty, and was betrothed to Epiphanes, 
 prince of Commagene ; but was afterwards mar- 
 ried to Azizas, king of Emesa, whom the procurator 
 Felix induced her to abandon, in order to live 
 with him. She is mentioned in Acts xxiv. 24 
 (comp. Joseph. Antiq. xix. 9. 1 ; xx. 7. 1, 2). 
 
 DUD AIM (D^N"in). This word, in its plura? 
 form, only occurs in two places of Scripture : 
 first in Genesis xxx. 14-16; and secondly, in 
 Canticles vii. 13. In the first passage it i( 
 mentioned several times : ' Reuben went out in 
 the days of wheat harvest, and found dudaim 
 (mandrakes) in the field, and brought them 
 home to his mother Leah. Then Rachel said 
 to Leah, give me of thy son's dudaim ;' also 
 in ver. 1.5, and in ver. 16, it is said, ' And Jacol 
 came out of the field in the evening, and Leab 
 went out to meet him, and said. Thou must com« 
 in unto me, for surely I have hired thee witl 
 my son's dudaim ; and he lay witli her tha' 
 night.' In tlie second passage we learn that thes4 
 dudaim, or the ])lants which yielded them, gavt 
 out a I'eculiar odour: ' Tiie dudaim (mandrakes) 
 give a smell, and at our gates are all manner of 
 pleasant plants.' From the above passages it is 
 evident tliat the dudaim were collecteii in the 
 fields, that they were fit for gathering in the 
 wheat harvest in Mesopotamia, where the first 
 occurrence took place; that they were found in 
 Palestine; that they or the plants which yielded 
 them diflused an odour, which Michaelis para- 
 phrases, ' Jam et somnifero odore, venereus man- 
 dragoras;' and that they were supjwsed to be 
 possessed if aplirodisiac powers, or of assisting in 
 producing conception. 
 
 From this it is manifest that tliere is little to 
 guide us in determining what plant is alluded 
 to at such f*jrly periods, especially as no similar 
 name has been recognised in any of 'he cognate 
 languages. Hence great diversitief of opinion
 
 DUDAIM. 
 
 h«Te been entertained respecting flie plant and 
 
 £ reduce intended by tlie name dudaiin. Tiiese 
 •r. Harris 'las thus summed up : ' Interpretei-s 
 have wasted nucli time and pains in endeavouring 
 to ascertain what is intended by the Hebrew word 
 dtidaim. Some translate it by " violet," others 
 
 DUDAIM. 
 
 587 
 
 M7. [Atropa Mandragors.] 
 
 * lilies,*' " jasmins," " truffle« or mushrooms ;" 
 an 1 some think that the word means " flowers," or 
 " fine flowers." Bochart, Caimet, and Sir Thomas 
 Browne suppose the citron intended ; Celsius is 
 persuaded that it is the fruit of the lute-tree ; 
 Hillei- that cAe?rie« are spoken of ; and Ludolf 
 maintains that it is the fruit whicli the Syrians 
 call " mauz" (tliat is the plantain), resemblinir in 
 figure and taste the Indian tig; but tlie generality 
 of interpreters and commentators understand 
 mandrakes, a species of melon, by diulaim.^ 
 Here, however, the autiior has confounded tlie 
 me\on ^ cucitrtiis dudaim'' vi\\\\ the niandiake or 
 mandragora, adopted by the generality of authors. 
 The grounds upon which the mandiagora has 
 been ])referred are, first, ' The most ancient 
 Greek translator interprets the Heljrew name in 
 Gen. XXX. 14, by mandrake apples (/ufjAa /xavSpa- 
 yopSiv) ; and in the Song of Solomon, by man- 
 drakes, 01 ijiavipa-y6pai. . Saad^as Onkelosand the 
 Syriac version agree with the Greek translators. 
 
 The first of tliese puts «.UJ laffach ; the two 
 
 latter |^ni"l2' yahruchin ; which names denote 
 the same plant' (Rosenmijller, Bib. Hot. p. 130, 
 and note). The earliest notice of /xavSpayopas is 
 by Hippocrates, and the next by Tiieo])hrastns 
 (Hist. Plaiit. vi. 2). Both of these C. Spiengel 
 {Hist. Rei Herb. i. 3S, 82) supix.ses, intend 
 fUropa mandragora. Dioscorides notices three 
 kinds: 1. the female, which is sujifjosed to be the 
 mandragora mi titnnalis of Berlotoii : 2. tlie male, 
 mandragora vemalis of the same botanist (these 
 two are, l.owever, usually accounted varieties 
 
 of airopa mandragora) ; 3. a kind railed mo- 
 rion. It has been infcired that tiiis may be th« 
 same as the niaiidragora of Theopliruslus, which, 
 by some autliors, has been supposed to be airopa 
 belladonna. To all of tiiese Dioscoiides a-scrioes 
 narcotic properties and says r)f tlie liist, tiiat it is 
 also called Circa-a, Ijecause it appears to be a root 
 which promotes venery. Pytiiagoias named tlie 
 mandragora anthrupomorphon, and Theojilnasf us, 
 among other qualities, mentions its sopoiitic 
 piweiu, and also its tendency to excite to love. 
 Its fruits were called ajiples of love, and Veinis 
 herself Man<lragorites. But it is not easy to 
 decide whetlier the above all refer to the same 
 plant or plants. 
 
 Persian autliors on materia medica give 7nan- 
 
 dragorat as a synonyme fur ^ tmfj yebrookh, or 
 
 yabrooz, which is said to be ti e rcjot of a plant of 
 
 which the fruit is called i^\si loofah. This, 
 
 there is little doubt, must be the above atropa 
 mandragora, as the Arabs usually refer only tc 
 the plants of Dioscorides, and, on this occasion, 
 they quote him as well as Galen, and ascril)e 
 narcotic properties to both the root and the fiuit. 
 D'Herbelot, under the article ' Abrousanaui,' ile- 
 tails some of tlie superstitious ojiinions respecting 
 this plant, which originated in tlie Kast, but which 
 continued for a long time to be retailed by 
 authors in Europe. 
 
 By the Arabs it is said to be called tufah-al' 
 sheitan, or devil's apple. If we look to the works 
 of more modern authors, we find a continuance of 
 the same statements. Thus Mariti, in his Travels, 
 (vol. ii. p.' 195), says that the Arabs called the 
 mandrake plant (yabrochak), which is, no doulit, 
 the same name as given above. 'At the village of 
 St. John in the mountains, about 6 miles south- 
 west from Jerusalem, this plant is found at pre- 
 sent, as well as in Tuscany. It grows low, like 
 lettuce, to which its leaves have a strong resem- 
 blance, except that they have a dark green colour. 
 The flowers are purple, and tlie root is for the 
 most part forked. The fruit, when rijie, in the 
 beginning of May, is of the size and colour of a 
 small apple, exceedingly rud<ly, and of a most 
 agreeable odour; i.ur guide thought us fools lot 
 suspecting it to be unwholesome. He ate it fn ely 
 himself, and it is generally valued by the inlialjif- 
 ants as exhilarating their spirits and a provoca- 
 tive to venery.' Maundrell was infuimed by the 
 chief priest of the Samaritans that it was still 
 noted for its genial virtue. HasSflquist also 
 set'ms inclined to consider it the dvdaim, for, 
 when at Nazareth, he says, 'what I found most 
 remarkable in their villages was the gieat quan- 
 tity of mandrakes that grew in a vale iielow if 
 The fruit was now (JMay 16) ripe. From ti e 
 season in wtiich tin's mandrake blossoms and 
 ripens its fruit, one might form a conjecture that 
 it is Rarhel's dudaim. These were biongiit her 
 in the wheat harvest, which in Galilee is in tiie 
 month of May, about this time, anil the man- 
 drake was now in fruit.' 
 
 Considering therefore that the earliest transla- 
 tors have given nuthdragora and Yahrokhim as 
 flie synonymous names for dudaim, and that the 
 root and fruits o\ atropa mandragora have, (naw 
 early tinier, U-en sujiposed to be posses^eil of 'ha 
 same properties which are a»cribel to the dttdatm^
 
 S88 
 
 DUKE. 
 
 there does not appear to us any other plant, 
 which has been yet adduced, better entitled than 
 it to stand for the chidaim. But there does not 
 exist siitlicient collateral proof to confirm the 
 selection by I be Greek translator of the nian- 
 dragora as the dudam. in preference to some 
 otlier ])lants, which might be adduced, and to 
 which similar properties have from ancient times 
 been ascribed. — J. F. R. 
 
 DUKE. This word is from the Latin dtix, 'a 
 captain or leaii^r,' from duco, ' to lead.' It thus 
 coiresponds with tolerable exactness to tiie Hebrew 
 f|17X alluph, from f)?X alaph, to ' lead,' 'guide.' 
 Tills word, alluph, is usually rendered by 'jnince' 
 or • chief;" but by ' duke' in Gen. xxxvi. 15-30, 
 where we find ' dukes of Edom.' The translator 
 lyas doubtless seduced by the identity of signifi- 
 cation into the somewhat improper, although not 
 incorrect, use of a modern title. 
 
 DULCIMER. [Music] 
 
 DUMAH (non), a tribe and country of 
 the Ishniaelites in Arabia (Gen. xxv. 14; Isa. 
 xxi. 11). It is doubtless the same that is 
 still called by the Arabs Duma the Stony, and 
 the Syi'ian Duma, situated on the confines of 
 the Araljian and Syrian deserts, with a fortress 
 (.Niebuhr, Beschreibung, p. 314). 
 
 DUMAH was also the name of a town in the 
 tribe of Judaii (Josh. xv. 52), which Euseliins and 
 Jerome place seventeen R. miles from Eleuthero- 
 polis, in Daroma. 
 
 DUNG. Among the Israelites, as with the 
 modern Orientals, dung was used both for ma- 
 nure and for fuel. In a district where wood is 
 scarce, dung is so valuable for the latter purpose, 
 that little of it is spared for the former. 
 
 Tlie use of dung f)r manure is indicated in 
 Isa. xxv. It), from which we also learn that its 
 bulk was increased by tlie addition of straw, 
 which was of course, as with us, left to rot in 
 the dunghill. Some of the regulations connected 
 with this use of dung we learn from the Talmud. 
 Tlie heaping up of a dunghill in a jjublic place 
 exposed the owner to the repair of any damage it 
 might occasion, and any one was at liberty to 
 take it away (Bava-kama, i. 3. 3). Another 
 regulation foibade the accumulation of the dung- 
 hill to be removed, in the seventh or sabbatic 
 year, to the vicinitj' of any ground under culture 
 (Sa66. iii. 1), wiiich was equivalent to an inter- 
 diction of the use of manure in that year ; and 
 this must have occasioned some increase of labour 
 in the year ensuing. 
 
 The use of dung for fuel is collected inci- 
 dentally from the passage in whicli the projihet 
 Ezekiel, being commanded, as a symbolical 
 action, to bake his bread with human dung, 
 excuses himself from the use of an unclean 
 thing, and is permittetl to employ cows' dung 
 instead (Ezek. iv. 12-15). This shows that the 
 dung of animals, at least of clean animals, was 
 usual, and that no ideas of ceremonial unclean- 
 ness were attached to its employment for this 
 purpose. The use of cow-dung for fuel is known 
 to our own villagers, who, at least in the west of 
 England, prefer it in liaking their bread ' under 
 the crock,' on account of the long-continued and 
 equable heat which it maintains. It is there 
 also not unusual in a summer evening to see 
 aged people traversing the green lanes with 
 
 EAGLE. 
 
 baskets to collect the cakes ot cov-dung whicli 
 have dried upon the road. Tiiis helps out 
 the ordinary (ire of wood, and makes it bum 
 longer. In many tliiidy-woodetl jjarts of south- 
 western Asia the dung of cows, cameJs, horsfs, 
 asses, whiclievet may hajipen to l)e the most 
 commorr, is collected with great zeal and dili- 
 gence from the streets and highways, chiefly by 
 young girls. They also hover on the skirts of the 
 encam])ments of travellers, and there are often 
 amusing scrambles among them for the droppings 
 of the cattle. Tlie dung is mixed u]) with 
 chopped straw, and made into cakes, which are 
 stuck up by their own adhesiveness against the 
 walls of the cottages, or are laid upon the de- 
 clivity of a hill, until sutficientl)' dried. It is 
 not unusual to see a whole village with its walls 
 thus gariiished, which has a singular and not 
 very agreeable appearance to a European tra- 
 veller. Towards the end of autumn, the result of 
 the summer collection of fuel for winter is shown 
 in large conical heaps or stacks of dried dung 
 ujwn the top of every cottage. The usages of the 
 Jews in this matter were probably similar in 
 kind, althoirgh the extent to which they pre- 
 vailed cannot now be estimated. 
 
 DURA (N'l-'n), the plain in which Nebu- 
 chadnezzar set up his golden image (Dan. iii. 1). 
 Traces of the name have been idly sought in 
 quarters too distant from Babylon to have been 
 historically possible, as it is clear from the con- 
 text that 'tlie plain of Dura' could be no other 
 than that plain (or some part of it) in which 
 Babylon itself was situated. 
 
 DUST. For storms of dust, &c., see Storm 
 for throwing dust on the bead, see Mournino. ■ 
 
 E. 
 
 EAGLE (■lE'3 nisr ; Arab, resr ; Ctiald. 
 nescher ; Coptic, akhom ; Exod. xix. 4 ; Lev. 
 xi. 13, &c.). The Eagle, in zoology, forms a 
 family of several genera of birds of prey, mostly 
 distinguished for tiieir size, courage, powers 
 of flight, and arms for attacK. The bill is 
 strong and bent into a plain jwinted hook, with- 
 out the notch in the inner curve which charac- 
 terizes falcons; the nostrils are covered with 
 a naked cere or skin, of a yellow or a blue colour; 
 the eyes are lateral, sunken, or placed beneat'h an 
 overhanging brow ; the iiead anil neck covered 
 with abundance of longish, narrow-pointed fea- 
 thers ; tlie chest broad, and the legs and thighs 
 exceedingly stout and sinewy. Eagles, properly 
 so called, constitute the genus Aqutla, and have 
 the tarsi feathered down to the foes ; they are 
 clothed in general with brownish and rust- 
 coloured feathers, and the tail is black, grey, or 
 leep brown. Sea-eagles (genus Halia-tics) have 
 the tarsi or legs half b^re and covered with homy 
 scales ; not unusually the head, back, and tail 
 more or less white. Tlie larger sjiecies of liotn 
 measure, from head to tip of tail, 3 feet 6 inches 
 or more, and spiead their wings above 7 feet 6 
 inches ; but these are proportionably broad ta 
 their length : for it is the third quill feather whick. 
 is the longest; as if the Creator intended to restraio 
 within bounds their rapidity of flight, while by 
 tlieir breadth the power of continuing on the wing
 
 EA(JLE. 
 
 is little or not at all impeded. Tlie claws o'' the 
 fore and iiiiul loe are parficulaily stro.i'„' mid 
 sharp; in tiie sea-ea^ies tliey form more i'.. n lialf 
 a circle, and in length measure I'mm l.J 'i, I J o( 
 an inch. Uiuiw the name ot" nin)' the Scrivimes 
 'nciude species jf Iwtli tlie alwve. and in some 
 cases, also, the larger vultures, or the j;enus rtil- 
 tur proper [Vli.tureJ. These majestic birds 
 have their alwde in Emope, on the sliores of the 
 Mediterranean, in Syria and Arabia, wherever 
 there are vast wooily mountains and U)l'ty dill's: 
 they occu])y eacli a single district, always liy jiairs, 
 ixcepting on the coasts, where the sea-eaglo and 
 tlie osprey {Pandion halicetus) may be found not 
 remote from the region possessed by the rough- 
 legged eagles — the firs< because it seeks to sub- 
 sist on the industry of the secrmd, and does not 
 interfere with the prey of the third. It is in this 
 last genus, most generally re[)resented by the 
 golden eagle {(iquiln chri/sceta) that the most 
 powerful and largest birds are found. That spe- 
 cies in its more juvenile pl\miage, known as the 
 ring-tailed eagle, the Imperial eagle, or mogil- 
 nick (aq. /leliaca), and the booted eagle (ug. pm- 
 nata) is found in Syria; and at least one species 
 of th* s?a-eagles (the hal. ossifrac/us, alhicilla, or 
 tl^ho-xidus) frequents the coasts, and is even of 
 
 EARNEST. 
 
 MS 
 
 268 [Aquila heliaca.] 
 
 Btronger wing than the otliers. These build 
 usually in the clifls of Phosnicia, while the oIIums 
 are more commonly domiciliated within tiie moun- 
 tains. According to their strength and habits the 
 former sul)sist on antelojies, hares, hyrax, l)ustard, 
 stoik, tortoises, and serjjents ; and the latter usual- 
 ly on lish ; both pursue the catta (pterocles), par- 
 tridge, and lizard. The osprey alone bein,' 
 migratory retires to SoutheiT. Arabia in winter. 
 None, excepting the last-mentioned, are so exclu- 
 siielv averse to ran ion as is connnonly asserteil : 
 from choice or necessity they all, but in jiaiti- 
 Tular the sea-eagles, occiisionally feed u]m)ii car- 
 cases of horses, &c. ; and it is well known in the 
 East that they f„lli.w armies for that ])ur()ose. 
 Hence the allusions in Job and Malt. xxiv. 2S, 
 »lough vultures may be included, aie ]ierfe<;fly 
 t. rrer.t. St) again are those which refer to the 
 
 eagle's eyrie, (ixetl ii» the most elevated cliffa. 
 Tlie swil'liie,s of this bid. sto.>]iuig among a fh.ck 
 of wild geese, with the rushing sound of a whirl" 
 winil, we have wiine-sed ; and all know its tower- 
 ing lliglit. suspended on its broad wings aiuong 
 the clouds with little motion or elloit. Thus the 
 jticdictions, in which teriible nations coming 
 liom afar are assimilated to eagles, have a jioet- 
 ical and absolute trutli, since there are species 
 like the golden, which really inhabit the wliole 
 circumfeieiice of the earth, ami the nations 
 alluded to bore eagles" wings for standards, and 
 for ornaments on their shields, helmets, and shoul- 
 ders. In the northern half of .-Vsia, and among 
 all the Turkish races, this jnactice is not entirely 
 aliandoiied at this day, and eagle ensigns were 
 constantly the companions ol' the dragons China, 
 India, Bactria, Persia, Egypt, the successors of 
 Alexander, the Etruscans, the Romans, the Cell*, 
 and the Arabs had eagle signa of carveil work, of 
 nieial, or the skins of binis stulVed, and set up 
 as if they were living. These, named O^y nit, 
 dfT6s, aquila, eryx, simurg, humma or hii- 
 niaion, karakoosh (the birds of victory of difl'erent 
 nations and ]ieriods of antiquity), were alwayi 
 symbolical of rapid irresistbln coiupiest. A 
 black eagle was the ensign oi' Kalid, general of 
 Mohammed, at the battle of Ai-nadiii, and the 
 carved eagle still seen on the walls of tlie citadel 
 of Cairo, set up by Karakoosh, the vizir of Salali- 
 ed-deen, to cominemorate his own name and 
 administration, indicates a sjiecies not here enu- 
 merated. Aq. heliaca, here figured, is the species 
 most common in Syria, and is distinguished 
 from the otliers by a spot of white feathers on 
 each shoulder. — C. II. S. 
 
 EARING. This word, which occurs in the 
 Authoiized Version (Cien. xlv. (ij. is very often 
 supposed to mean ' collecting the ears of corn,' 
 which would confound it willi harvest, from which 
 it is distinguished in this very jias^age. Hut the 
 word is radically the same with harrotn, and de- 
 notes ploiKjhing ; from the Anglo-Saxon erian 
 ♦ to ))lougli.' It is also traced in nrar Spanish, 
 aeron Dutch, aeria Swedi-h, er Icelandic, oriu 
 Sclavonic, orze Polish, araidh (iaelic, aredig 
 ■\Velsh, aro Latin, dpSw (Jreek, charath Arabic, 
 and charash ( C'ln) Helirew, which is the original 
 word in this place {Critica Biblica, iii. 210). 
 
 EARNEST. 'Ap^aPdu is evidently the He- 
 brew |i3"iy in Greek characters. W itii a slight 
 alteration in the letters, but with none wiiat- 
 ever in the sense, it becomes the Latin nrr/iabo, 
 contr. arr/ia ; French arres ; ICnglish taries and 
 enrtirxt. These three words occur in the He- 
 biew, Septuagint, and Vulgate, in Gen. xxx\ iii. 
 17, IS, and in ver. 20, w'th the excepiVin that 
 the Vulgate there changes it to pit/nus. The 
 use of these words in this passage clearly illus- 
 trates their general imixirt ; which is, that of an 
 earnest or jjledge, given and received, to assure the 
 liillilmeiit of an engagement. Ilesychiiis exjilains 
 apSa^MV by vpnSofxa, somewhat given iieforenand. 
 Tins idea attaches to all the ;«i;YM.»/ar uppl Ra- 
 tions of the word, as, anything given by way of 
 Wiirnmt or secuiity for the jM'rformance of a pio- 
 mise; jiart of a debt iwiid as an assurance of [lay- 
 iiig the remainder; jiart of the | rice of anything 
 paid befiMtliand to conlirm the iiargain between 
 baser and seller; jiart of a servant's wages (laiJ
 
 sw 
 
 EAR-RINGS. 
 
 at the time of hiring, for the purjjose of ratifying 
 trie engagement on huth sides. The idea that the 
 earnest is eifiier to he returned upon the fulfil- 
 ment of the engagement, or to be coiisitlered as 
 Dart of the stipulation, is also included. The 
 Worl is use<l tiiree times in the New Testament, 
 but always in a figurative sense: in the first (2 
 Cor. i. 22), it is applied to \\k gifts of the Holy 
 S))irit, which Gad bestowed upon tlie apostles, and 
 ;y which he might be said to have kired tliem to 
 oe the servants of his son •, and which were the 
 earnest, assurance, and commencement of those 
 far superior blessings wiiich He would bestow on 
 them in the life to come, as tlie wages of their 
 faithful services : — in the two latter (2 Cor. v. 5 ; 
 Eph. i. 13, 14), it is applied to the gifts bestowed 
 on Christians generally w^Qn wiiom, after bap- 
 tism, the Apostles had laid tlieir hands, and which 
 were to them an eartiesi of obtaining an heavenly 
 habitation and iniieritance, upon the supposition 
 of tlieir fidelity. Tliis use of the term finely illus- 
 trates the auginented powers and additional capa- 
 cities promised in a future state. Jerome, in his 
 comment on the second passage, evclaims, Si 
 arrhabo fantus, quanta erit possessio : ' If the 
 earnest was so great, how great must be the posses- 
 sion.' See Kypke, Macknight, atid Midilleton on 
 these passages. Le Movne, Not. ad Var. Sacr. 
 pp. 460-80.— J. V. I). 
 
 EAR-RINGS. No custom is more ancient or 
 universal than that of wearing ear-rings,from which 
 it would appear to be a very natural idea t.o attach 
 such an ornament to the pendulous lobe of the ear. 
 There are two words in Hebrew denoting ear- 
 rings, viz. 7*3J7 agil, which is applied to any kind 
 of ring, particularly to ear-rings (Num. xxxi. 
 .50, Ezek. xvi. 12). The name implies round- 
 ness, and it is a fact tliat nearly all the ancient 
 ear-rmgs exhibited in the sculptures of Egypt and 
 Persepolis are of a circular shape. The other 
 woul is QT3 nezein, and, as this word is also ap- 
 plied to a nose-jewel, we may supiwse tliat it was 
 a kind of ear-ring, different from the round ' agil,' 
 and more similar to the nose-jewel. It most 
 certainly denotes an ear-ring in Gen. xxxv. 4 : 
 but in (ien. xxiv. 47 ; Prov. xi. 22; Isa. iii. 21; 
 it sigjiifies a nose-jewel ; and it is doubtfrjl which 
 of the two is intended in Judg. viii. 24, 2.5; Job 
 xlii. 11. Ear-rings of certain kinds wereanciently, 
 and are still, in the East, instruments or appen- 
 dages of idolatry and superstition, being regarded 
 as talismans and amulets. Such probably were 
 the ear-rings of Jacob's family, which he buried 
 with thcstranj;e gods at Betii-el (Gen. xxxy. 4). 
 
 No conclusion can be fonned as to the shape of 
 tlie Hebrew ear-rings excp])t from the signification 
 of tlie words employed', and from tlie analogy of 
 similar ornaments in ancient sculpture. Tliose 
 worn by tlie Egyjitian ladies were large, round, 
 single hoojis of goUl, from one inch and a half to 
 two inches and one-thiid in diameter, and fre- 
 quently of still greater size, or made of six single 
 lings soldeied togetlier. Such probably was the 
 round ' agil ' of the Ilebrev.'s. Among persons of 
 high or royal rank the oinament was sometimes 
 in the shape of an asp, whose body was of gold 
 set with precious stunes [Amulets]. Silver ear- 
 rings have also been fouiul at Tliebcs, either jilain 
 -loops like the eai-rin-;s of gold, or simple studs. 
 The modern Oriental e*r-riiigs are more usually 
 
 EARTH. 
 
 jewelled drops or pendents than ciH.lel« of 
 gold. But the writer has seen a small round 
 plate of silver or gold suspended fiom a small 
 ring inserted into the ear. This circular plate 
 (about the size of a halfpenny) is either marked 
 with fanciful figures or set wi' i small stones. 
 It is the same kind of thing which, in that 
 country (Mesopotamia), is worn as a nose-j.ewel, 
 and in it we perhaps find the Hebrew ear-ring 
 which is denoted by the same word that desciibes 
 a nose-jewel. 
 
 The use of ear-rings appears to have been con 
 fined to the women among the Hebrews. That 
 they were not worn by men is implied in Judg. 
 xiv. 24, where gold ear-rings are mentioned as 
 distinctive of the Ishmaelite tribes. The men 
 of EgvDt also abstained from the use of ear-rings ; 
 but how extensively they were worn by men in other 
 nations is shown by the annexed group of heads 
 of different foreigners, collected from the Egyptian 
 monuments. By this also the usual foi-ms of the 
 most ancient ornaments of this description are 
 sufficiently displayed. cf 
 
 EARTH. There are two words in Hebrew 
 which are translated sometimes by earth, and 
 sometimes by laiui. Tliese are V^N eretz, and 
 riDTN adamah, both of which are rendered by 
 •yf/ in the Se|)tuagint, and this 77) is rendered 
 by ' earth,' ' land.' ' ground,' in tlie New Testa- 
 ment. The word adamah, however, is a])pl'ed 
 chiefly to the very substance of the eartli, as soil, 
 ground, clay, although sometimes denoting a re- 
 gion, land, or country ; where;is eretz more gene- 
 raMy denotes the stuf ace of the earth, and is hence, 
 in \lie earlier parts of the Bible, opjxwed to D^Dti' 
 shamayim, ' the heavens.' 
 
 Besides the ordinary senses of the word or words 
 rendered ' earth' in our translation — namely, as de- 
 noting mould, the surface of the earth, and the ter- 
 restrial glolie — there are others in Scripture which 
 require to lie discriniinate<l. 1. ' The eartli ' de- 
 notes ' the inhabitattts of the earth' (Gen. vi. 11 ; 
 xi. 1). 2. Heathen coiintries, as ftistingui^hed 
 from the land of Israel, especially during tlie 
 theocracy ; 2. e. all the rest of the world excej)ting 
 Israel (2 Kings xviii. 25 ; 2 Chron. xiii. 9, &c.). 
 3. In the New Testament especially, ' the earth' 
 appears in our translat'on as applied to the land
 
 EARTHQUAKK 
 
 f^ Jndxn. As in many of these jiassages it might 
 »««*m as if the liabitable glolie were infendefl, the 
 nie of so ambiguous a torrri as ' the oaitli' should 
 have been avoided, and »he original rendered liy 
 ' the land,' as in Lev. xxv. 23 ; Isa. x. 23, and 
 elsewhere. Tliis is the sense which the original 
 f-ears in Matt, xxiii. 35; xxvii. 45; Mark xv. 
 33; Luke iv. 25; xxi. 23; Rom. ix. 28; James 
 V. 17. For the cosmological uses of the tei-m, 
 lee Geography. 
 
 EARTHENWARE. [Pottery.] 
 
 EARTHQUAKE (t'yi). Tlie proximate 
 »»use o\ earthquakes, though by no means accu- 
 ately defined, seems referable to the action of 
 internal heat or fire. That the earth was once 
 subject to the action of a vast internal ])ower 
 springing probalily from the developnient of sub- 
 tQrranean cr central heat, the elevations and de- 
 pressions, and the generally scarred and torn 
 character of jts exterior make sufficiently evident. 
 A power simi1.jr in kind, but more restricted in 
 degree, is still at work in the bowels of the eartli, 
 and occasionally breaks down all barriers and 
 devastates certain ])arts of the world. 
 
 There is good reason for holding that earth- 
 quakes are closely connected with volcanic 
 agency. Both probablj' spring from the same 
 cause; and may be regardeti as one mighty in- 
 fluence ofierating to somewhat di.ssimilar results. 
 V^olcanio agency, therefore, is an indication of 
 earthquakes, and traces of the first may be tuken 
 as indications of the existence (either present or 
 past, actual orpossil)le) of the latter. 
 
 The manifestation of these awful phenomena 
 is restricted in its range. Accordingly geologists 
 have laid down certain volcanic regions or bands 
 within which this manifestation tiikes place. Over 
 these regions various traces of volcanic agency 
 Bre foimd, such as either gaseous vapours or hot 
 springs, or bituminous substances, and in some 
 instances (occasionally) active volcanoes. Several 
 sources of bitumen are found on tlie Tigris, in the 
 Persian mountains, near the Kharoon, and at J3u- 
 shire, as well as along the Euphrates. At Hit, espe- 
 cially, on the last-mentioned river, it exists on a 
 very large scale, and, having been much used 
 from tlie earliest ti\nes, seems inexhaustible. 
 Abundant traces of it are also to be seen amid the 
 ruins and over the entire vicinitv of Hillah — the 
 ancient Babylon. Syria and Palestine abovuid 
 in volcanic appearances. Between the river J(;r- 
 dan and Damascus lies a volcanic tract. The 
 entire country al)0ut the Duid Sea presents in- 
 dubitable tokens of volcanic igency. 
 
 Accordingly these plac&j come within one of 
 the volcanic regions. The >.hief of tiiese are — 
 1. that which extends from the C;u;pian Sea to 
 the Azores; 2. from the .\leutian Isles to the 
 Moluccas ; 3. that of the Andij ; 4. tiie African ; 
 5. the Icelandic. Syria and Palestine are em- 
 braced within tlie tlrst band ; and llie^e comitries 
 ha<'e not unfret-piently been subject to eartlupiakes. 
 Th? first visitation of the kind, recorded to have 
 hajipened to Palestine, was in the r<>ign of Ahab 
 ,u.c. 01>*-R97), when Elijah (1 Kings xix. 11, 
 12 Wcis directed to go forth and st.Liitl upon the 
 mountain bel'oie Jehovah : 'and l)el:o!d Jehofah 
 passed bv, and a great an(\ strong wiiul rfiit the 
 •iiounlaiiis. and brake in jiieces the rockj Litbre 
 Jehovah ; 'iiit Jehovah was not in the wind : wid 
 
 EARTHQUAKE. 
 
 991 
 
 after the wind an earthquake ; but Jehovah waf 
 not in tine eartliniiake : aiid after llie eaifhquakif a 
 fire: but Jehovali was not in t.'ie lire: and after the 
 fire a still small voice.' A terril)le eurtliqiiake 
 t<H)k jilace ' in the days of Uzziah, king of Jii<lah ' 
 (u.c. 811-759^, which' Josephus(.-l/;/iV/. ix. 10. 4) 
 says, ' shook the ground, and a rent was niaile in 
 the Temple, so that the rays of the sun shone 
 through it, which, falling ujxm the king's face, 
 struck him with the leprosy,' a jninishnii'iit which 
 the historian ascribes to tiie wralh of (iod conse- 
 quent on Uzziah's usurpation of the ))iiest's office. 
 That this earthquake was of an awful character, 
 may be learnt from the fact that Zechariah (xiv. 
 5) thus speaks respecting it — ' Ye shall (lee as ye 
 fled from before the earthquake in I lie ilays of 
 Uzziali, king of Judah :' and also tiiat it apjiears 
 from Amos (i. 1) that the event was so striking, 
 and left such deep iin]ressions on men's nimilg, 
 that it became a sort of e|)och from whicn to date 
 and reckon ; the prophet's words are, ' two years 
 before the eartiiquake.' 
 
 That earthquakes were amff.ig the extraordi- 
 nary phenomena of Palestine in ancient times 
 is shown in their being an element in the p;;etical 
 imagery of the Hebrews, and a source of religious 
 admonition and devout emotion. In Psalm 
 xviii. 7, we read, 'Then the eaith shook iuid 
 trembled ; the foundations also of the hills moved 
 and were shaken, because he was wroth ' (comji. 
 Hab. iii. 6 ; Nah. i. 5 ; Isa. v. 25). It was not an 
 unnatural transition that any signal display of the 
 will, sovereignty, or gootlnessof Providence, .should 
 be foretold in connection with, and accompanied 
 as by other signs in the heavens above or on the 
 earth below, so by earthquakes and their feaiful 
 concomitants (see Joel ii. 28; Matt. xxiv. 7, 
 29). The only earthquake mentioneil in the 
 New Testament is that which liajipened at tlie 
 crucifixion of the Saviour of inankiiid (Matt. 
 xxvii. 50-1; Luke xxiii. 44-5; Mark xv. 33). 
 This darkness has been misunderstood, and then 
 turned to the prejudice of Christianity [Dauk- 
 NKss]. The obscuration was obviously an at- 
 tendant on the earth(juake. Earthquakes are 
 not seldom attended by accompaniments which 
 obscure the light of day duri.'ig (as in this case 
 from the sixth to the ninth hour, that i.s, from 12 
 o'clock at noon to 3 o'clock i'm.^ several hours. If 
 this is the t'act, tiien the record is consistent witii na- 
 tural ])henomena, and the darkness which, sceptics 
 have pleadeii against speaks actually in favour of 
 thecn-dibility of the Go.'ipel. Now it is well known 
 to naturalists tiiat such obscurations are by no 
 means uncommon. It may be enough to give the 
 following instances. Avery remaikable volcanic 
 eruption took place on the lyth of January, 1*35, 
 in the volcano of Cosegiiina, situated in the Hay 
 of Fonseca (usually called the Coast of Concha- 
 gua), in Central America. The eruption was 
 preceded by a rumbling noise, accoinpanieil by a 
 column of smoke which issued Iroin the mountain, 
 increasing until it ikssumed llie l'"rm and ajipear- 
 aiice of a large deii^e cloud, wiiich, when viewed 
 at the distance of thirty miles, appealed like un 
 immense pluiTie of feathere, ri>ing with considi»r- 
 alile velocity, and expaiiiling in every diiectiun. 
 In the course of the two I'ollowing d.iy.s several 
 sliorks of earll quakes were felt ; the morning of 
 the 22nd rose line and clear, but a dense cloud 
 of a jiyramidal I'orm was observed in the direclioa
 
 592 
 
 EARTHQUAKE. 
 
 of tlie volcano. This gradiuilly ascended, ami by 
 II o'clock A.M. it liad spread over the wliole liinia- 
 ment, entirely obsourinsj the light oi' day, the 
 darkness equalling; in intensity that of thi; m)st 
 clouded night : this darkness continued with little 
 intermission for thiee days; during tlie whole 
 time a line Mack powder continued to fall. Tliis 
 darkness extended over half of Central America. 
 The convulsion was such as to change the outline 
 of the coast, turn the course of a river, and form 
 two new islands. Precisely analogous phenomena 
 were exhil)ited on occasions of eartiiquakes tliat 
 took place at Cartago, in Central America, when 
 there prevailed a dense black fog, which lasted for 
 three days (^Recreations in Physical Geography^ 
 p. 3Ei-2). ■ 
 
 In the case of the volcanic eruption which over- 
 whelmeil Herculaneum and Pompeii (a.d. 79), 
 we learn from the younger Pliny that a dense 
 column of vapour was first seen rising vertically 
 from Vesuvius, and then s[ir8ading itself out 
 laterally, so tliat its upjjer portion resembled the 
 head, and its lower the trunk of a pine. Tliis 
 black cloud was pierced occasionally by (lashes 
 of (ire as vivid as lightning, succeeded by dark- 
 ness more profound tlian night, and ashes fell even 
 at Misenum. These appearances agree perfectly 
 with tho.se witnessed in more recent eruptions, 
 especially those of Monte Nuovo in 153*^, and 
 Vesuvius in 1H2'2. Indeed earthquakes appear 
 to exert a very marked influence on our atmos- 
 phere : among otlier efl'ects Lyell {Principles of 
 Otology, i. 400) enumerates sudden gusts of wind, 
 interrupted by dead calms, evolution of electric 
 matter, or of inflammable gas, from the soil, with 
 sulphureous and mephitic vapours; a reddening 
 of the sun's disk and a haziness in the air often 
 continued for months (Joel ii. 30, 31). 
 
 P^arthquakes. together with thunder, lightning, 
 and otlier fearful jjhenomena of nature, form no 
 Bmall portion of the stock of materials which the 
 interpreters of the German rationalistic school 
 employ with no less liberality than confidence, in 
 order to explain after their manner events recorded 
 in the Scriptures, which have been commonly 
 referred to the immediate agency of God. Hezel, 
 Paulus, and other miracle-exploilers woulil, but 
 for this resource, find their ' occujiation gone.' 
 But, if there is reason for the statement that truth is 
 sometimes stranger than fiction, it may with equal 
 propriety be observed that their ' natural " causes 
 are most unnatural, unlikely, and insuflicient. 
 
 An earthquake devastated Judsea some years 
 (31) before the birth of our Lord, at the time of 
 the battle of Actium, which Josephus (Aiitiq. xv. 
 52) reports was such 'as had not happened at any 
 other time, which brought great destruction upon 
 tfie cattle in that country. About ten thousand 
 men also perished by the fall of houses.' Jerome 
 writes of an earthquake which, in the time of his 
 cb'ldhood (about a.d. 315), destroyed Rabbath 
 Woab (Jerome oti Isaiah, xv.). The writers of 
 tb'' middle ages also speak of earthquakes in 
 Palestine, stating that t ey were not only formi- 
 da'^ie, but frequent. In 18.54 an earthquake shook 
 Jerusalem, and injured the chapel of tlie nativity 
 at H?thleheni. As late as the year 1836 (Jan. I) 
 Jp'".salem and its vicinity were visited by severe 
 •blocks of earthquake, yet the city remains without 
 «e*itf'ig injury from these subterranean causes. — 
 
 J. R. B. 
 
 EAST. 
 
 EAST. This word, which is used by Englist 
 writers in only two senses, viz. to denote eithei 
 the quarter of the heavens where the sun rises, 
 or the regions in the eastern part of the world 
 has frequently t/i)-i:e senses in the Authorized 
 Version of the Bible. Thus, it is sometimej 
 used to represent the Hebrew miO, which 
 jnoperly meajis the sun rising (Ps. ciii. 12), 
 ' as far as the east is from the west ;' soine- 
 times its derivative, mtC, when apjilied *o 
 laud lying in a true easterly direction (Josh, 
 iv. 19j; and very fiequently it corrt^sponds to 
 D"1p kedein, the name given by the ancient He- 
 brews to a certain region, without any regard tc 
 its relation to the eastern ])art of the heavens, 
 comprehending not only Arabia Deserta and the 
 lands of iVIoab and Amnion, which really lay to 
 the east of Palestine, but also Armenia, Assviia, 
 Mesopotamia, Babylonia, and Clialda?a, wliitjh 
 were situated rather to the north than the east of 
 Judaea. Its geographical boundaries incliule 
 Syria, the countries lieyond the Tigris and Eu- 
 phrates, the shores of the Indian ocean and of the 
 Arabian gulf. The name given to this entire 
 region by the Hebrews was Dip |*1X (waroAjf), 
 or the land of Kedem or East ; by the Babylo- 
 nians it was called 3")^, or 'Apafiia. Its mis- 
 cellaneous population were called by the formei 
 Dip ^33, sons of the east, or orientals, and 
 by the latter, D"'2"li?, or the ])eople of the west. 
 The Jews themselves also ap])ly to them the 
 Babylonian name in some of their books writterr 
 after the captivity (2 Chron. xxii. 1 ; Neb. ii. 9). 
 The Arabs anciently denominated themselves, 
 and do to this day, by either of these names. To 
 this region belong Dip ''D7D, the kings of the 
 east (Isa. xix. If ; Jer. xxv. 19-25, Heb.). The 
 following passages may suffice as instaiices show- 
 ing the arbitrary application of the term ' east ' to 
 this region. Balaam .says that Balak, king of 
 Moab, had brought him from the mountains of 
 the east (Num. xxiii. 7), i. e. from Pethor on 
 the Eujjhrates. Isaiah places Syria in the east 
 (ix. 11 j DIpD DIN, ' the Syrians from the east' 
 (Bishop Lowth). Tiie distinction seems evident 
 in Gen. xxix. 1, ' Jacob came unto the land of 
 the children of the east.' It occurs again ii; 
 Judg. vi 3, ' Even the children of the east came 
 against them;' Se]>t. ol viol dvuToA^i/; Vulg. 
 ceteri orientaHnin nationum. The preceding 
 facts enable us to account for the jiridigioui 
 numbers of persons sometimes assembled in vwr 
 against the Israelites (Ju<lg. vi. 5; vii. 12), ■ ana 
 the children of the east were like grasshopjxjr* 
 for multitude,' and for the astonishing carnage 
 recorded (Judg. viii. 10;, ' tline fell an hundred 
 and twenty thousand men thai uiew the sword.' 
 It seems that the inhabitants of this region were 
 distinguished for their jjioficiency in the arts an' 
 sciences (comp. 1 Kings i. 4, 30), axid were ad- 
 dicted in the time of Isaiah to sujjexstition (I.sa. 
 xxvi.). The wise men, who came from the tait 
 to Jerusalem at the birth of the Saviour, no 
 doubt belonged to this tract of country, ' saying 
 we have seen his star in the east.' Campbell 
 justly lemarks that ' to see either star or meteor 
 in the east,' means, in English, to see it in th« 
 east-quarter of the heavens, or looking eastward. 
 But this cannot be the evangelist s meaning. The 
 meaning manifestly is, that when the magianj 
 themselves were in the east, they saw tlie star
 
 EHAL. 
 
 FXCLESIASTES. 
 
 it 
 
 S» far were tliey fiom spring the star in tlie east, 
 according to the Kngiisli acceiitation of tlie 
 phrase, tiiat they must li.tve soeii it in the west, 
 us they were by its fjiiidunce hron^ht out of the 
 east ctiuntry westwards ti> Jerusak-m. 'I hus the 
 plural of the s;ime word, in the jjreceding verse, 
 signifies ' the countries lying east from Judaia.' 
 See also ver. 9, where dvaroKT^ means the place 
 where they first saw the star. Luther's trans- 
 lation reads ini tnorgenlnndc. (Cam))heirs Four 
 Gospels translated from the (Ircck, 17^9, vol. ii. 
 p. 353; Rosenmiiller On Job, i. 3; Wesley's 
 Dis. Lib. Job, 173'), p. 2U; Winer, Bibl. Ile'al- 
 wiirterbtcck, a.it. ' Murgenlaiul ;' S|),uilieim"s Hist. 
 Jobe, c. iv. ^ G, p. 81; Ge^enius, Hand id rter- 
 bitck, &c. : Jalin. Archdoloqie Bibl.) — J. F. D. 
 
 EAST WIND. [VViNu.] 
 
 EB.\L and GERlZiM, two mountains of Sa- 
 maria, forming the opposite sides of tlie valley 
 which contained the ancieiit town of Shechem, the 
 present Nahulus. From this connection it is Iwst 
 to notice them together. The valley which these 
 mountains enclose is ahout 2110 or 300 paces wide, 
 by above 3 miles in length; and Mount Ehal rises 
 on the right hand and Gerizim on the left hand 
 of the valley (wliicli extends west-north-west) as a 
 person approaches Shechem from Jerusalem. It 
 wa.3 on iVIount Elial that God commanded to he 
 reareil up an altar, and a jiillar inscrihed with 
 the law ; and the trihes were lo he assemliled, half 
 on Ehal and half on Gerizim. to hear the fearful 
 maledictions pronounced by tiie Levites upon all 
 who should violate the oltlig.i'ions of the .sacred 
 code, and the blessings promised to those who 
 should ol)Sfrvetliem. The trihes wiiich responded 
 with simult.meous ' Amens " to the curses, were to 
 be stationed on Jlount El).il, and those who an- 
 swered to the blessings, on Mount Geiizim. This 
 grand ceremony — perhaps the most grand in the 
 history of nations— could not have found a more 
 fitting scene; and it was duly performed by 
 Joshua as soon as he gained ]);)ssession of the Pro- 
 mised Land (l)eut. xxvii.; Josh. viii. 30-3.5). 
 Dr. R.ii)in-on (^Bib. licscarchrs, iii. 96"! says — 
 ' Mounts Gerizim and Ebal rise in steep, rocky 
 precipices, immetiialely from tiie valley on each 
 side, apparently some SOO feet in height. The 
 sides of both these mountains as here seen (i. e. 
 from Nabulus) were, to gur eyes, equally naked 
 and sleiile, although some travellers have chosen 
 to descritic Geiizim iis feitile, and confine the ste- 
 rility to Ebal. The only exce|'tion in favour of 
 the former, as far as we ct.uld ])erceive, is a small 
 ravine coming down opposite to tlie west end of 
 the town, which indeed is full of fountains ami 
 trees; ii» other res[)ects Imth mountains, as here 
 seen, are desolate, except that a tew olive-ttees 
 are scattered u])on them. The side of the north- 
 ern mountain, Ehal, along the foot, is full of 
 ancient excavated sepiilcnres. The sonlheMi 
 m.iuntaiii is now called by the inhabitints Jehel- 
 et-Tur, though the name Geii^im is known, at 
 least, to the S.imarifans. The modern ap])ellation 
 of Ehal we did not leant." 
 
 A still more recent American travdler. Dr. 
 Ollin, ascended to the fop of (leiizim, which lie 
 States 1* be somewh.it higher tluiii that of Ebal. 
 The ascent is bvun ancient load excavated iii the 
 tide of ttie moiinl.iin with murh labour, and in 
 the steelier parts of the ascent fishioned into a regu- 
 lar High* of broad stone steps. Tliis was probably 
 
 the ])rincipal asce.it to the ancient town and ff»r. 
 tress, whose ruins cover the top of the mountain, 
 and that pursued by the re.igious piocessimis in 
 til. ir way iVoiu tlie valley of Sliec-hem to the 
 temple which ihe S.imarilans hnilt on this moun- 
 tain in rivalry of tlie orthodox Temple at Jeru- 
 s.ilem [Samaijitan]. The top of Gerizim all'ords 
 a commanding i lew of a considerable region, 
 cliiedy occupied with mountains of int'eiior eleva- 
 tion, liut also embracing seveial fniilfiil valleys, 
 esjiecially those of Nabulus and of W ady Salil, 
 through wlii'-h lies the road to Jerusalem. A 
 great num'>>cr of villages are seen all along its 
 noith-eastern side, upon high and ap|iarently pre- 
 cipitous s])urs of the mountain which push out 
 into Ihe valley IVom (Wady Said) the main ridge. 
 Dr. Ollin declares that the region which he over- 
 looked I'roiT) fhetojuif Geiizim had the a]ipearance 
 of being the most populous as well as the most 
 fiuitl'ul which he hail seen in Palestine. Culti- 
 vation is caiiied quite to the top of the mountains, 
 which are adorned with plantations of finit-fiees, 
 while every level spot and a vast niitriheidf small 
 fields, supported by terraces, were sown in wheat. 
 A cimsideiable jioition of the table-land on Ihe 
 summit of (ierizim itself exhibits marks of recent 
 tillage. Mount Ebal, as viewed IVom Gerizim, 
 spreads out, like the latter, into a table-land, but 
 is apiiavontly rocky and more broken, and less 
 su5teptil)le of cultivation. Dr. Ollin saw, or 
 imagined that he saw, the ap|ieara:ice of ruins 
 ujjon Mount Ebal, nearly opposite Nabulus, but 
 was unable to satisfy himself by a nearer exami- 
 nation {Travels in the East, ii. pp. 3/0-3it7'v 
 If theie appears any contradiction in the ac- 
 counts of the two American writeis, it may Ihs 
 removed by obsciving that Dr. Ollin's \ isit wx'S 
 in the vernal month of Ajjiil ; Dr. Robinson's, 
 ill the parched month of June; that Dr. Olliii 
 speaks of the view I'rom the tojj of Gerizim, 
 looking not into, but out of, the valley of Na- 
 bulus, over the opposite sloj>e of the mountain, 
 and the lower hei^'hts and the fine plain (Wady 
 Salil) below, and then tuming to view thiit side of 
 Ebal which is jiresented to the val'ey of Nabulus ; 
 wheieas the description of Dr. Robinson applies 
 to both mountains as seen fiom that narro >• valley. 
 Many of the apparent discrepancies in the ac- 
 counts of travellers tnighr be removed, anil tn^ 
 bearings of the subject enlarged, by attention to 
 such diH'erences in the jioints of view. 
 EBEN-IJOHAN. [Boua.v.] 
 
 EBEN-EZEL (."p.^H }5;<, gtone of depar- 
 ture); an old stone of testimonial, mentioned iv. 
 I Sam. XX. 19. The circumstiuice which it coa»« 
 mcinoraled is not known. 
 
 EBEN-EZER 0)X^ I2«, stone of help), 
 tlie name given to a stone which Samuel set up 
 In-tween Mizpeli and Shen, in witness of the 
 divitie assistance obtained against the Philistines 
 (I S.im. vii. 12 1. 
 
 EBER [Hki)ei«.] 
 
 l''BOD.\, one of the station? of the I~raelitea 
 in the wiMeiriess. [Wanukrino, thk.1 
 
 EBONY. [IIahknim.] 
 
 ECB.-\.TANA. [AciiMKTHA.] 
 
 E('CI>:SI.\STES (H^np A-oAcfe/A). \.Tk» 
 Ilebrfw .\ainp of the Hook. --This Ixnik has 
 obtained iti Hclirrw name from Ih*? designa* 
 
 •i H
 
 094 
 
 ECCLESIASTES. 
 
 tion of tlie ]>rinci]>al jTcrson mentioned in if, 
 who is thus seli-styled in several passages. The 
 feminiiie terniijiation of the name has given lise 
 to tlie opinion that Koheleth means a hoily or 
 academy of sages, whose dicta are contained in 
 tliis book ; l)ut tliis opinion is coiitiadicted liy the 
 r eading of the hoolv itself, which thus commences : 
 Words o/riTTlp, t/ie son of David, the king in 
 Jerusalem. Hence it ai)])ears tiiat Koheletri is 
 intended for an epithet of Solomon. Compare 
 also ch. i. 12, ' I. Kohelelh, was king over Israel 
 in Jerusalem.' With one exception, in ch. vii. 27, 
 the word Koheleth is always construed as a mas- 
 culine noun. 
 
 The various interpreters wlio consider Koheleth 
 a-s expressive of a ]ierson, difler in their translation 
 of it indilleient manners. Some follow the Septu- 
 agiut, in which it is translated "E.KK\r,(Tia(rriii, 
 assembler. Others intcrjjret it by coi.i.ectoii ; 
 which implies, they state, that the autlior not 
 merely intended to communicate his own wis- 
 dom, but that he had compiled tlie experience 
 of former sages. The verb 7np, however, does 
 not mean to compile, hui always io assemble or 
 to convene a meeting. It hence appears that 
 ♦he Septuagint translation, assembler, preacher, 
 or teacher, is correct. Still toere remains to be 
 explained the feminine form of the word. The 
 only correct explanation of this is, that Solomon 
 was called Koheleth because he was personi- 
 (ied Wisdom, riGSnn, and that Wisdom spoke 
 tiirough him. St. Augustine says, ' Sapientia 
 per Salomonem cecinit.' So, also, among the 
 moderns, Ewald, Grammar, p. 569; and Die 
 Puetisc/ien Biicherdes Alten Biindes, tli. iv. p. ISIO. 
 According to this interpretation, tlve construction 
 of n^np. both with the masculine and with the 
 feminine, may be equally well ex])lained. If with 
 the masculine, the bearer of the name is consi- 
 dered; but if with the feminine, the HlO^n, 
 toisdom, which animates him, is kept chielly in 
 view. 
 
 According to the usual opinion, which has 
 again lately been defended by Kn ibid, the femi- 
 nine leimination is to be ex))lained by the fact 
 that abstiacta frequently occur pro concrelis ; 
 and that especially abstract names of offices are 
 transferred as titles to the office-bearers. Tiiis 
 explanation does not apply '.leie, because KoheletJi 
 is not an abstractum, \\V>i prwdicatio, describing 
 Solomon as a living preaching, liut can only 
 mean something like concionatrix, prcedicatrix. 
 
 The title of the book, however, indicates that 
 the author did not write only for a literary public, 
 but that he had in view the whole congregation of 
 tiie Lord ; and tliat his doctrine was not confined 
 within tlie narrow bounds of a school, but belonged 
 to the church in its whole extent. Compare Ps. 
 xlix. 2-4. 
 
 II. The Author of the Book. — Tlie circum- 
 stance that Solomon is introduced as the speaker 
 in this book iias induced most of the ar.cient inter- 
 preters to coi.siiler him as its autlior. Tiiis oj)inion 
 was opj)Os«l by Grotius, who says, 'Ego tamcn 
 Salonionis esse non pufo, sed scii])tuni serins sub 
 illius legis vancjuam pfpnitentia ducti nomine. 
 In sui.(jort of this assertion Grotius appeals to the 
 peculiarities of the language. 
 
 The only argument in support of the opinion 
 that Solomon was the autlior of iL book ajijjears 
 
 ECCLESIASTES. 
 
 quite insr.lTicieiit, frnm this single ciic\»m«fanj«^ 
 that tlie author alar of tiie book entitled the \Vi«- 
 doin of Solomon, wiiicli was wvitttii in Greek, 
 iiitvoilnces Solomon as s)ieakiiig. Hence tne 
 question arises whether ii is n(>t merely in form 
 that Ilie author of Kcclesi;u«tes does the same. 
 He certainly seems to indicate this l.>y introducing 
 Solomon not by his pro|)er name, but by the 
 name Koheleth ; which signilies that S«>lom(>n is 
 not introduced in his indiviilual caiwcity, but is 
 here rather to be considered as the representative 
 of Wisdom. 
 
 13nt the greatest obstacle in the way of consi- 
 dei'ing Solomon to be the author, is the chavactei 
 of the language. Many O])ponents of the Solo- 
 monic authorship certainly went much too far in 
 their assertions. The Grecisins whiiii Zukle 
 thouglit tliat he had found have now gaierally 
 been given up. The Rabbinisms likewise could 
 not stand the proof. The words, signilicatlons, 
 and forms which seem to appertain to a later 
 ]>eriod of Hebrew literature, and the Chaldaisins, 
 an abmidance of which Knol)ej gaihesed, require, 
 
 asHerzfeld has shown, to be nuich sifted. {Twi^p, 
 iibcrseizt und erliiiitert, von Dr. L. Herzfeld, 
 lirauiiHchweig, 1^38, ]). 13, sq.) -Accoriling to 
 Herzfeld, there aie in Kohelelh not more than 
 between eleven and lifteen ' young Hebrew " ex- 
 |)ies»ionsand constru<:iions, and between eight and 
 ten Chaldaisma. Neveitlie^ess, it is certain that 
 the book does not belong to tiie productions of the 
 first, but rather to tiie second period of the He-brew 
 language. This alone would not quite disprove 
 the authorship of Solomon, if we could jiroduce 
 any weighty argument in its favour. We could 
 su])jK)=!e that Solomon, in a philosophical work, 
 toun«l the jmre Hebiew language to l>e insullicieiit ; 
 and had, theiel'ore, recourse to the Chahhiizing 
 pojiular dialect, by which, at a later period, llie 
 book-language was entiiely displaced. This sup- 
 ])osition could not be rejected « priari, since 
 almost eiery one of the Hebrew authors before 
 the exile tlid the same, alihough in a less degree, 
 riieie exist, liovveier, no wei:;lity jmsitive reasi ns 
 for siqiposing .Solonuiu io lie the author ; and the 
 sti iking liillerence lietwecn the language of Kohe- 
 htli and the language of the Proverbs renders 
 that ex])lanalioii quite iuailiuissilile. Tliis dill'er- 
 ence would prove liitle if tlie two books belonged 
 to two entirely dilleieiit clases of literature ; that 
 is, if Koheleth bore the same relation to the Pro- 
 veibs as the Song of Solomon does : liut since Ko- 
 heleth and the Proverbs belong essentially to the 
 same class, the argument taken fioni the dif- 
 ference of style must be admitted to be peifectly 
 conclusive 
 
 Among the other arguments which have been 
 produce<l against Solomon's authorship, the only 
 one which seems to have some inipoifaiice, is tiiat 
 the author now and then forgets his fiction: for 
 instance, in ch. i. 12, where he says ' 1 was king 
 over Israel in Jerusalem." But such passages are 
 by no means decisive. The arguments taken from 
 the contents, which Knoljel nt p. 77, sq. haa 
 produced, are quite futile. For instance, that 
 Solomon, who was constantly prosperous, could 
 not have written in so meIan<-holy a manner, 
 and could not have complained about tlie preva 
 lence of injustice without writing a satire against 
 himself^ that lie would not have written m
 
 KCCLESIASTES. 
 
 unfavourably aUout vviinan, tc wlioiu lie was so 
 [-.aitial, &<!. 
 
 SupiKisiiig- it now [irovi'il fliat Solomon is only 
 introclucetl as the speaker, theqiicsti. a aris« wliy 
 tlie i»iitli()r jvloptcil tlii-i I'oiiii. 'I'lif usual leply is, 
 that Solomon amoii:^ the Istaelitcs iiail, as it were, 
 the prerogative of wisd.ui ; and lieiue the aiitiior 
 w<is uiduced tu put into Solomon's mouth that 
 wisdom which he intended to pioelaim, without 
 the slightest intention of fi)rging a supjiosititious 
 volume. This reply contains some tiufli ; but it 
 doe-i not exhaust the matter. 
 
 Tiie chief o!ij('ct of ilje anfiior was to commu- 
 nicate wisdom in general; hut next lo lliis, as 
 a])|)ears from ch. i. I'i, sq., he intended to in- 
 culcate the vanity of hum.ni pinsuils. Now, 
 from the mouth of no one could more aptly pro- 
 ceed the proclamation of the nofhiugne<s of all 
 eartidy tilings than from the mouth of Solomon, 
 who h.id possessed tliem in all their fulness; at 
 whose command were wisdom, riches, and pleasures 
 ill ahundance ; and who had theiefoie full oppor- 
 tunity to ex|ierience tlie notliingneiS of all that is 
 earthly. What Rarnhacli. in his AiinoUitiones 
 Uberiores, th. ii. p. ^"29, says, jiresupposing the 
 autliorshi]) of S^iiomon, may with sliglit alteration 
 be applied to the real author: ' Necpie vero sine 
 singulari Dei proviilentia, ille pra; reli(juis ilivi- 
 nitus excitatus fuit, qui rerum hujus saeculi om- 
 nium vanitatem doceiet, ut niminim apud oniiies 
 CO majoies momenti esset teatijnonium ejus, cui 
 taiitus antea reium vanarum amor, ut nihil inex- 
 I)ertum reliquerit, tantus opum apparatus fuit, ut 
 volujitates ac delicias ounies gustaturus nulla 
 sumiuun: !.noi)ia excludeietur.' 
 
 III. Date of the Book. — The history of. the 
 canon fixes the time after which the book can- 
 not have lieen written. It cannot have Ijeen 
 written after the times of Ezra and Nohemiah, 
 under whom the canon was completed. The 
 writers who asserted that Koheletli was written at 
 the conclusion of the Persian and at the begiiming 
 of the Mace^lonian period, or who even make it as 
 late as the time of the Maccabees, are unable to 
 produce any arg iment capable of standing juoof, 
 and can scarcely render their as-eitimis probable. 
 
 The style alone furnishes the date UEioitE which 
 the book cannot have been written ; that is, not 
 before the time of Aramaean inlluence. But within 
 these boundaries we are unable to ]iroduce any 
 valid reasons for (ixiiig the date more precisely. 
 The language cannot be our guide, because, after 
 the -A.ramapan dialect had commenced to [lenetiate 
 into the Hebrew, the degree of its ailojition de- 
 |)ended hencefoith upon the [eculiar character of 
 individual authors.' Tlie reasons deduced from 
 the contents, by means of which Ewald, p. 179, sq., 
 lias endeavoured to prove that the author lived 
 in the later peiiod of the Peisian goveinnient, 
 the contemporarN' of Malaclii and Neliemiah, are 
 unimjKirtaiit. A sense of the vanity of eaithly 
 things, complain'^s res|j«^*ing tiie |K'^ver^ion of 
 justice, op])ressio:.. -a'-.l ^.rbitrary government; 
 admonitio!is to obey <.iie magistrali's ; all this is, 
 according to Kwaid, indiciitive of the later |)eriod 
 of the Persian government, wiiicii proliabiy be- 
 came at Xii&t ojiprcssive and odious. Uut to all 
 this there could b»* produced jiarallels fiom tlie 
 ancient IxKiks of Holy VVrit, because these are 
 ■enttnoents and facts as old and a> lasting as tlie 
 world. One circumstancf alone soenrs to indicate 
 
 ECCLF^IASTES. 
 
 909 
 
 that Koheletli was not written dining the latter 
 jieriod of the first, but rather duiing the time of 
 the second temple., since idolatry do?s nit occur 
 amongst the deviations combated Ijy the author. 
 The whole Ixjok seems lo prcs(ip|H>se that the 
 p-'ople were externally devoted lo the Lord. Ttie 
 admonitions of tlie author to a seiene enj<ivment 
 of life, imil against riiurii.uring; evhoitaiions to 
 be contented with Divine Providence, and tlie 
 attacks upon a sellish righteousness of works, may 
 besi be explained by supposing the author to have 
 lived in a period like that of Maluchi. in uhicli 
 there prevailed a Pharisaical righteou.siiess of 
 woiks, and melancholy iniirmuriiigs becau.^e (iod 
 would not recognise the alleged rights which they 
 produced before him, and refused to acknowledge 
 the claims they maile upon him. Whoever will 
 compare Koheletli and Malaclii will iind a itrik- 
 ipg siniilariry. 
 
 IV. I'laii. — The author places the fundamental 
 •Idea of the nothingness of all earthly tilings both 
 at the beginning and at the end of his book, and 
 during its course repeatedly returns to the same. 
 This has induced many interi)ieteis Ui suppose 
 that the purpose of the author was to demon- 
 strate this one idea; an opinion which, down to 
 the most recent times, has been unfavourable to 
 the true interpi elation of the biHik, because every 
 thing, however reluctant, has been forced into an 
 imaginary connection. The following is the cor- 
 rect view. The object of the author is not lo leacli 
 an especial tendency of wisdom, but wisdom in 
 general. Consequently, it is not at all surprising 
 if the connection suddenly ceases, and a new 
 subject commences. The ailificial process by 
 which Ewald, for instance, frequently endeavours 
 to establish a connection, is quite inadmissible. 
 That the idea of the nothingness of eaithly matters 
 should strongly jiretlominate may ejisily lie ex- 
 ])lained, since according to our author it forms a 
 very imixiitaiit ])ait of wisdom. He never, how- 
 ever, intended to ccnline himsell' Jo this one idea, 
 although he likes frequently to jioint it out in 
 passing, even when he is coiisideiing a matter from 
 another point of view. Healer, although he also 
 too much su]iposes that the author intended tft 
 treat of a paiticular subject, has best explained 
 the plan of Ki.heletli (irtv/.e zur I{eli;/um titul 
 Tluvlocjie, th. xiii. p. 148, 182!)): 'The plan of 
 this book has been the subject of much investiga- 
 tion. It is best to consider this plan as fiee as 
 Ijossible, and to employ its separate parts for its 
 support. The comniencemtnt and the conclusion 
 show the unity of the whole. But since King 
 Solomon would not write a disjmta io de vaniUite 
 rerum, the gieater jwirt consists of isolated obser- 
 vations concerning the course of the world, an<l 
 the expi ience of iiis life. These are connected 
 with general sentences; and, finally, a very simp'e 
 conclusion is detiuced from the whole. It seem* 
 to me that a more aililitiai texture ought not to 
 he sougiit for.' 
 
 Several inter jireters have supjxjsed that Kohelelh 
 consists of a dialogue between a considerate sage 
 and a discontented sceptic. Others have ihougFt 
 that not two [lersons, but twovoi<es, or two mo«)d« 
 of the same jicrson, are to be dislin^fiiiKlied, whose 
 conflict is at tlie conclusion terniinaied in lii» 
 victory of the belter |iait by faith. This opinioti, 
 however, originated fiom an iinj)ri(ect under. 
 standing, which seemed to discover every where
 
 99b 
 
 ECCLESIASTES. 
 
 irreconcilable contradictions. Wlioever penetrates 
 deeper will perceive tliat the atithor remains un- 
 changed iVotn llic be^'intiinu; to the end. 
 
 V. Con'ents and Objects of the Book. — Here 
 we consider only tlie ruiuiamental idea, omitting 
 isolated sentences of wisdom, and rules for tlie 
 conduct of life. Nohody can entertain any doubt 
 concerning this fundamental idea. It is con- 
 , tained in tlie sentence : ' Vanity of vanities; all 
 ' is vanity.' It is. liowever, very important that 
 this shiinld be rightly understood. Tiie question 
 is. What is that ai.i. which is vanity? The author 
 does not mean ai,i. in general, but <inly am. of a 
 certain genus. He himself explains this, by de- 
 fining this AI.I, in numerous passages; as, ' all 
 that is tmder tiie sun;' that is, earthly things in 
 their separation from the heavenly. To this leads 
 also tlie enumeration of the all, in which occur 
 only those things wliich lielong to the earth — 
 riches, sensual pleasure, honour, spliere of activity, 
 human wisdom apart from God, self-iighteous- 
 ness. From many passages it ajijiears that the 
 author was far from comprehending the fear of God 
 and active obedience to his laws among that ai.i, 
 which was vanity. This appears most strikingly 
 from the conclusion, which, as such, is (jf the 
 highest importance, and furnishes the imdoubled 
 measure for the correctness of the whole inter- 
 pretation. ' Let us hear the conclusion of the 
 whole matter : Fear God, and keep his command- 
 ments : for this is the whole duty of man \i. e. in 
 tills consists all that is incumiient upon him ; and 
 his whole salvation depends upon it]. For God 
 shall bring every woik into judgment, with every 
 secret thing, whetlier good, or whether evil, 
 f Compare cii. xii. 1 : ' Rememl)er now thy Creatot 
 in tlie days of thy youth;" ch. v. 5-7, ' Fear tliou 
 God ;' ch. vii. 18, and many other passages.) A 
 deep leligions sense pervades the whole book. 
 In reference to the prevailing idea, Ewald 
 strikingly remarks, p. 183, ' Tiiere blows tlirough- 
 out this book a piercing chill against every earthly 
 aim, and every vain endeavour ; a contempt which 
 clianges into a bitter sneer against every tiling 
 which in tlie usual proceedings of men is one- 
 sided and perverse ; an indefatigable penetration 
 in the discovery of all human vanil ies and fooleries. 
 In no earlier writing lias all cause of pride and 
 vain imagination so decidedly and so comprehen- 
 sively been taken from man; and no liook is per- 
 vaded by such an outcry of noble indignation 
 against all that is vain in this world.' 
 
 From the contents of the book results its object. 
 The author had received the mission to neat jno- 
 fessedly and in a concentrated manner tiie highly 
 important sentence, ' V'anitas vanitatum.omniaque 
 vaiiitas," '.vliich pervades the whole of Holy Writ; 
 but he is not content with the mere theoretical 
 demonstration, so as to leave to another teacher 
 ils jiraclical application, but places before us these 
 pidctical results themselves : What is incumbent 
 ■ipou man, since every thing else is nought * 
 ^Vhat real good remains for us, after the ajipear- 
 "iiice in every seeming good has been destroyed ? 
 The answer is, Man shall not gain by cunning 
 and grasping; shall not consume himself in vain 
 meditations, nor in a hurried activity ; he shall 
 not murmur about the loss of that which is naught ; 
 he gliall not by means of a self-made righteousness 
 constrain God to grant him salvation ; but he shall 
 imfead fear God (ch. xii. 13; v. 0, 7), and Ije 
 
 ECCLESIASTES, 
 
 mindful of his Creator (ch. xii. 1); he shall dt 
 good as much as he is able (ch. iii. 12j ; and ii) 
 other passages. And all this, as it i-; constantly 
 inculcated by the author, with a rontented and 
 grateful heart, freed from care and avaiice; living 
 for the ])resent moment, joyfully taking from the 
 hand of the Lord what he ofiers in a friendly 
 manner. Man sliall not be of a sorrowful coun- 
 tenance, but in quiet serenity enjoy the gifts of 
 God. What would avail him all his cares and 
 all his avarice? By tlieni he cannot turn any- 
 thing aside from liim, or obtain a'ly thing, since 
 every thing happens as il shall hajijien. This 
 a'ni of the book has been best develojjed by Ewald 
 among the moderns; but it was already perfectly 
 well understood by Luther, who, in his Prte- 
 fatio in Ecclesiastcn, says, ' Est status et consi- 
 lium hujus libelli erudiie nos, ut cum gratiarum 
 actione utamur rebus pra-sentibus et creaturis Dei, 
 quae nobis benedictione Dei largiter dantur et 
 donatae sunt, sine solicitudine futurorum, taiitun* 
 ut tiauquillum et quietum cor habeamus et ani- 
 mum gaudii plenum, coiitenti scilicet verbo et 
 opera Dei.' 
 
 VI. Misunderstandings of tliis Book. — This 
 liook has always had many warm friends, even 
 among those who have not been decided believers 
 in revelation. Herder, for instance, p. 146, says, 
 ' I do not know any book in the whole of the Old 
 Testament that describes more fully, more con- 
 vincingly, or more concisely, the whole sum of 
 human life, with 'all its changes and vanitie.s, in 
 occupations, plans, speculations, and pleasures ; 
 and at the same time that which alone is real, 
 lasting, progressive, and rewarding.' 
 
 On the other hand, this book has excited various 
 doulrts, and met with opposition St. Jerome, in 
 his commentary on ch. xii. v. 13, relates that, ac- 
 cording to the statement of the Hebrews, they 
 were disinclinetl to receive it into the canon : 
 'eoquod vanas assereret Dei creaturas et totum 
 jiiitarct esse pro niliilo, et cibum et ])otiim et de- 
 licias transeunles piaefeiret omnibus;' but that 
 the conclusion of the volume had saved its divine 
 authority. Similar doubts occur in the Talmud 
 and other Jewish writings. Tlie.se doubts were 
 not, however, allowed to prevail, but were sup- 
 pressed in deference to the conclusion of Koheleth. 
 Within the Christian Church the divine inspi- 
 ration of Koheleth, the Proverbs, and the Song of 
 Solomon was denied by Tlieodonis of Mopsuestia. 
 In recent times, the accusers of Koheleth have 
 been Augusti, De Wette, and Knobel ; but their 
 accusations are based on mere misundeistandiiigs. 
 They are especially as follows: — 1. The author 
 is said to incline towards a moral epicurism. 
 All his ethical admonitions and doctrines tend 
 to jiromote the comforts and enjoyments of life. 
 But let us consider abo\e all what tendency 
 and disposition it is to which the author ad- 
 dresses his admonition, serenely and contentedly 
 to enjoy God's gifts. He addies.ses this admo- 
 nition to that speculation which will not rest 
 before it has penetrated the whole depth of 
 the inscrutable councils of God ; to that mur- 
 muring which liewails the badness of times and 
 quarrels with God about the sulferings of out 
 terrene existence; to that gloomy piety which 
 wearies itself in imaginary good works and ex- 
 feinal strictness, with a view to wrest salvation 
 from God; to that avaiice which gathers, ntf
 
 ECCLESIASTES. 
 
 EGLON. 
 
 59* 
 
 kjiflwiiig for wlicm ; making the means of exist- 
 nice our liifjhest aim ; building mHin an imcer- 
 iaiti fufiaity wliicli is in the haiul of Goil aUine. 
 When the autiior ailclre?ses levity he speaks quite 
 otheiwise. For instance, in ch. vii. 2, 4, ' It is 
 better to go to the house of nioiuning tiiau totlie 
 house of feasting ; for that is the enii of all men ; 
 and the living will lay it to his heart. Sorrow is 
 better than laughter ; for by tire sadness of the 
 countenance the iieart is made better. The heart 
 of the wise man is in the house of mourning; but 
 the heait of fools is in the house of mirth." Tiie 
 natiue of the joy reconiinendeil l)y the auliior is 
 also misunilerst(H)d. L'niestrained merriment and 
 gidily sensuality belong to those vanities which 
 our author enumerates. lie says to laughter, tiioti 
 art mad, and to ji)y, what ait thou doing 'i He 
 says, ch. vii. 5, 6, 'It is better to hear the rebuke 
 of the wise than for a man to hear the song of 
 tools. For as the crackling of thorns under a 
 Dot, so is the laughter of a fool; this also is 
 vanity.' That joy which he recommends is joy 
 in God. It is not the ojijwsite, but the fruit of 
 the fear of God. How inseparable tliese are is 
 shown in jiassages like ch. v. fi, vii. 18. iii. 12, 
 ' I know that there is no good in them, but for a 
 man to rejoice, and to do good in his life ;' and in 
 many similar passages, but esjjecially ch. xi. 9, 10, 
 and xii. I, 'Remember now thy Cieator in the 
 days of (liy youtii," &c. In reference to these 
 passages Kivald says, p. 186, ' Finally, in order to 
 remove every doubt, and to speak with perfect 
 clearness, he directs us to the eternal juilgment 
 of God, concerning all the doings of man, and 
 inculcates tliat man, in the midst of momentary 
 enjoyment, should r.ever forget the whole luturily, 
 the accoun*. .ind the consequences of iiis doings, 
 the Creator and the Judge." Ewald ailtls, p. 227, 
 in reference to tiie conclusion, * In oriler to ob- 
 viate every possible misunderstanding of this 
 writing, there is, ver. 1.5, once more briefly indi- 
 cated that its tendency is not, by the condemna- 
 tion of nuirmuring, to recommend an unbridled 
 life ; b'ut rather to (each, in iiarmcny wilii the 
 best old books, the i'ear of God, in wliich the 
 whole man consists ; or that true i.ingleness of 
 life, satisfying the whole ma;:, and which com- 
 prehends every thing else that is truly human. 
 It is very necessary to limit the principle of jjy 
 which this book reconmremls again and again in 
 various ways and in the most impressive manijir ; 
 and to refer tl is joy to a still higher trutli, since 
 it is so liable to be misunderstood. 2. It is ol>- 
 jected that in his views concerning the gover.>- 
 ment of the world the author wiis strongly in- 
 clined to fatalism, according to which everything 
 In this world progresses widi an eternally un- 
 changeable step ; and that he liy this fatalism was 
 (ii.) misled into a moral scepticism, having at- 
 tained on his dogmatical basis tiie conviction of 
 the inability of nuui, notwithstanding all hisetforts, 
 to reach his aim. However, this so-called fatalism 
 of our author is nodiiug else but wliat our Lord 
 teaches, Matt. vi. 23 : ' Take no ihougiit," &o. 
 And as (or the moral scepticism, our auliior cer- 
 tainly inculcates that man v/ith all his endeavours 
 ean do nothing; but at the .same time he lecom- 
 inen'.'.s the fear of God, as the never-failing means 
 of s<t\'alioii. Man in himself can ilo notiiing; 
 ^ut in God he can do all. It is quite clear fn.Ai 
 •h. vii. 16, 18, vhere b>tl» self-righteousness ai 1 
 
 wisdom, when 8e])arafe<l from God, are described lu 
 ecjually destructive, and o).|K>site to them is placed 
 the fear of (Vod, as being their common antithesis, 
 that our autlior, by jioiuting to tiie sovereignfv o( 
 God, did not mean to undermine morality : ' He 
 that fearel h God comes out from them all." II 
 our author were gi\en to moral scepticism, it 
 wonlii be impossible for him to leach relrit'ution, 
 wiiich he inculcates in numerous |)assages. and 
 which are not contradicted by otiier.s, in which he 
 says that the retribution in individual circum- 
 stances is fie(juently obscure and enigmatical. 
 Where is that advocate for retribution wlio is not 
 compelled to confess this as well as our autlior? 
 (4.) Tiiis liOok has given oB'ence also, by ch. 
 iii. 21, and similar ]);issages, concerning immor- 
 tality. But the assertion that there is expressed 
 here some doubt concerning the immortality of 
 the soul is bused on a wrong granunatical per- 
 ception. The n cannot, uccorditig to its ])unc- 
 (nation, be the inteirogative, but must be the 
 article; and our author elsewhere asserts posi- 
 tively liis belief in the doctrine of immortality 
 (ch. xii. 7). How it hap]iens that lie did not 
 give to this doctrine a prevailing influence upon 
 his mode of treating his subject has lately been 
 investigated by Heyder, in his essay entitled 
 Ecclcsiastce de Immortalitate Aiiimi Hententice, 
 Erlangen, IS38.— E. W. H. 
 
 ECCLESIASTICUS, (Wisdom of Sihach.! 
 
 ECDIPPA. fAcHziB.j 
 
 EDKN. [PARADISiE.] 
 
 EDOM. [Esau.] 
 
 EDOMITSS. [Ii>uM.«A.J 
 
 EDREI (VV'l'^X ; Sept. 'Upadv), one of tlit 
 metrojwlitan towns (.Ashtarotk being the other) 
 of the kingdom of liashan, beyond the Jordaii. 
 It was here that Og, the gigantic king of Ba- 
 shan, was defeated by the Israelites, and lost 
 his kingdom (Num. xxi. 33-35 ; Deut. i. 4 ; iii. 
 1-3). Edrei al'terwards belonged to eastern Ma 
 nasseh (Josh. xiii. 31). It is mentioned in the 
 Oiiomasticon as 21-25 R. miles from Ashtaroth. 
 It was the seat of a bishop in the early ages of 
 CJhristianity, a::d a bishop of Adraa sat in the 
 council of Seleucia (a.u 3S1), and of Ciialcedon 
 (a.d. 451). Ailraa was the name given to tlie 
 place by the Greeks : by the Crusaders it wag 
 K!!ov/n as Adratum, and also as Civilas Bernardi 
 da Stampis (Will. Tyr p. 895). Abulfeda calls 
 it Adsraat {Tab. Syr. 79). The jilace now 
 bears the name of Uraa, and has been visited in 
 the present century by most of the travellers who 
 have explored the coimtry lieyond the Jordan, — 
 Seetzen, Burckhanif. BiKkingham, Richter, G. 
 Robin-ion, &c. It is situated in a deej) valley, 
 two hours south-east fiom Mezareili ; and l!ie 
 ruins cover an extent of about two miles in cir- 
 cnmt'erence, the principal being an innnense 
 rectangular building, with a double covered colon- 
 nade all around, and a cistern in tiie middle. 
 This seems to have been originally a Chriatiap 
 church, anil afterwards a mosque. Near the town 
 in the hollow of the mountains, is a large reservoir 
 cased with stone, near winch are the ruins of a 
 large building, with a cupila of light matetials. 
 
 EGLON OiVW; Sept. 'ZyKtifi), a king of 
 Moab, who, assisted by the Ammonitiea and 
 Amalckiles, subdued the Israelites iieyond the 
 Jordan, and the southern tribes on this side Hit
 
 fi98 
 
 EGOZ. 
 
 river, and made Jericho ihe seaf , or one of tne seats, 
 of his goi'ernment. This sulijectioii to a power 
 always p eseiit must liave l>eeii more galling to 
 the Israejres tlian any they had jirevioiisly siif- 
 iVred. It lasted eii,'hteeii years, when (b c. 1428) 
 tlipy weie delivered, throuijh tiie instrumentality 
 oi' Elmd, who slew the Moabitish king (Judg. 
 iii. 12-33). 
 
 EGOZ (TIJX). This word occurs in the 
 Song of Solomon', vi. 11, ' I went into the garden 
 of nnts,' where probably ' walnuts" are intended. 
 The Hebrew name is evidently the same as the 
 
 Persian '.^ ffowz, which has been converted by 
 the Arabs into ]t!*^ j'owz, by a process common 
 
 in the case of many other words beginning with 
 ihe interchangeable letters c/af a\iil Jim. In both 
 languages these words, wlien they stand alone, 
 signify the walnut, gouz-hun being the walnut- 
 tree : when used in comp:)sition they may signify 
 the nut of any otlier tree \ — \\\nsjouz-i-boa is the 
 nutmeg, jmiz-i-hindi is the Indian or cocoa-nut, 
 &c. So the Greeks employed Kapuov, and the 
 Romans mix to denote the wahmt ; wliich last 
 remains in modern languages, as Ital. noce, Fr. 
 noix, Span. nuez. and Ger. niisz. The walnut was, 
 however, also called Kcipvoy jSaatXiKSv (Diosc. i. 
 179), royal nut, and also UeptriKou, or Persian, 
 from having been so highly esteemed, and from 
 having been introduced into Greece from Persia : 
 ttie name jxiglans lias been derived from Jovis 
 glans. That tlie walnut was highly esteemed in the 
 East we learn from Abulpharagius, who states that 
 Al Mahadi, the third caliph of the Abassides, * sub 
 juglande sub qua sedere solebat, sepullus est.' 
 That it is found in Syria has been recorded by 
 several travellers. Thevenot found it iu the 
 nei<fhbourhoo<l of Mount Sinai, and Belun says 
 of a village not far from Lebanon, that it was 
 
 t"0. [Walnut — Juglans regis.] 
 
 ' bien cm'- rage d'ormeaux ef de noyers.' Tliat 
 it was jjlaiited at an early jjeriod is well known, 
 and might be easily jiroved from a variety of 
 sources. 
 
 EGYFr. 
 
 The walnut, or juglnns regia of Iwtanistx, I* 
 longs to the natural family of juglandea;, of which 
 the species are fo' nd in Noith America and in 
 Nortiiern Asia The walnut itself extends from 
 Greece and Asia Minor over Lelianon and Persia, 
 probably all ahmg tlie Hind.x) Khoosii to the Hi 
 mal tvas, and isabimdant in Cashmere (ff«m. Bni 
 p. 312). The walnut-tree is well known as a 
 lofty, wide spreading tree, affording a grateful 
 shade, and of which the leaves have an agreeable 
 odour when bruised. It seems formerly to have 
 been thought luiwholesome to sit under its shade, 
 but this a])[)ears to be incorrect. The (lowers begin 
 to open in .\i>ril, a^id the fruit is ripe in Septem- 
 ber and Octolier. The tree is much esteemed for 
 the excellence of its wooil ; antl the kernel of 
 the nut is valued not only as an article of diet, 
 but for the oil which it yielils. Being thus 
 known to, and highly valued by, the Gieeks iu 
 early times, it is mine tlian probal)le that, if not 
 indigenous in Svria, it was introduced there at a 
 still earlier jieriod, and that therefire it may be 
 alluded to in the above pas-age, more especially 
 as Solomon has said, ' I made me gardens and 
 orchar<ls, and planted trees in them jf all kind 
 of fruits' (Eccles. ii. 5).— J. F. R. 
 
 EGYPT (Dp^VP, poetically Tii'D ; in Ps. 
 cv. 23, DPI fnX),"the laud of Ham, a son of 
 Noah, fiom whom was derive'! the ancient native 
 appellation of tlie country, Chemi. From Miz- 
 raim, the second son of Ham, comes the ordinary 
 Biblical name, Mizraim, a word whicJi pn)perly 
 denotes Lower Egypt, as lieing that jiart of the 
 country with wliich the Israelites were nearest and 
 best, if not (in the earlier jieriods of their history) 
 solely, acquainted. This designation, ho.vever, is 
 sometimes used for Egyjit indiscriminately, and 
 was by the later Arabs extended to the entire 
 country. Josejihus (^Antiq. i. 6, 2) says that all 
 those who inhabit the co'.mtry call it Mestrem, and 
 the Egyptians, Mestraeens. Tlie word Chemi, ac 
 cording to Plutarch, signifie-; black, in alhision to 
 the dark colour of the water of the Nile. The Greek 
 and Europf-an name (t; hlyvirros), Egypt, is of 
 imcertain origin and signilication (Champollion, 
 L'Egypte, i. 77). In Homer, the Nile is called 
 Egypt, Alyvirros. 
 
 Egypt is the land of the Nile, the country 
 through which that river (lows from the island of 
 Phihfi, situated just abo\ e rht Cat.iracts of Svene, 
 in lal. 24^ 1' 3(5", to Da nie-i;i, in 31-' 35' N., 
 where its jirincipal stream ukuk i»s^lf info the 
 Mediterranean Sea. On i.r.e ea<f u is bounded 
 by Palestine, Mumaea, Arabia P-'i'rjea, and the 
 Araliian Gulf. On t!ie west, the moving sands 
 of the wide Libyan desert oblilerate the traces 
 of all political or physical limits. Inhabited 
 Egyjil, however, is restricted to the vailey of the 
 Nile, which, having a breadth of from two to three 
 miles, is enclosed on botn sides by a range of 
 hills: the chain on the eastern side disa|ipears 
 at Mocattam ; that (in the west extends to the sea. 
 In lat. 30' f.V, the Nile divides into two prin- 
 cipal streams, which, in conjunction with a third 
 that springs somewhat higner up, forms the Delta 
 so called from its resemblance to the Greek letter 
 A. These mountains are interesting, if for no 
 other reason tiian that rney served as 'h>; bed 
 whence the rrlaterials were ol-tahied out uf whicl' 
 \«pre constructed the won lerful liuilding* i'oi
 
 EGYPT. 
 
 ••hlch Egyjt is justly distiii<;uijlie(l. Tlic siq/ef- 
 ficial extent oC K.^'yi** I*** lieea cstimatoil ut 
 about 11.000 square miles. The soil, wliicli 
 is productive, ccHisists almost exclusively of aniil 
 brou^iit down and dc|iusitcd liy tlie nver, wliiwe 
 waters iue indisjjensaUle every year for llie \»n- 
 
 r loses of" ai^riciilture to sucli an extent tliat llie 
 imits of tlieif Ikiw ave tl>e limits of vt-i^ctation. 
 Tlie Delta owes its very existence to tlie deposits 
 of the Nile, and liuf for (lie waters of this stream, 
 carried over its surface hy natural or aitiliciul 
 means, would sikhi Ite a desert ; it was tlieiefore 
 with j)roi)riety, as, indeed, was tiie entire country, 
 termed * the gilV of tlie Nile." The agency of the 
 stream is the mure necessary because rain very 
 seldom falls in Lower Kgypt, The land, placed 
 as it, is on the coniines o( Africa and Asia, yet so 
 adjacent and accessible to Eurojie, in itself a 
 garden and a store- house, may well have held an 
 important position in the aiicrent world, and can 
 liardly fail, unless jwlilical iiiflue/icejs are very 
 adverse, to rise to a commanding attitude in 
 modern times. As to the nutnlier of its inlia- 
 bitants, nothinu; veiy definite is known. Its fer- 
 tility would iloubtless give birth to, and support, 
 a teeming jtopuiation. In very re«note times as 
 mariy as 8.000,000 of souls aie saiil to have lived 
 on its soil. In the days of Dio lorus Siculus 
 they were estimated at 3,000,000. Volney maile 
 the number 2,300,1)00. Tiie present government 
 estiniate is 3,20(),i)00, whicii seems to lie some- 
 what beyond the fact (Bowring's Report on Egypt 
 <ind Ca'.tdda, p. 4). 
 
 K^5-pr r.;it<.«rally divides itself into two great 
 sections at tiie a|3ex of t!;e Delta, the country 
 lyir.^ south ef *J:c.t rnjint being designated Upjier 
 Kgypt, t.';at no:i,h of it Lower Egypt. Upper 
 Ks-yirf itself wc-s divided into the Thebais and 
 the Hc-ptanomis : the Tliebais extended from 
 Pliilae to HeriuO()olis; Heptanomis, from Hermo- 
 polis to the ;x)irit w!:sre the Delta begins to form 
 itself. Uiuler tlie Ptolemies, and probably at a 
 very eai'ly i)eriod, the whole country was divided 
 into thirty-six cantons or provinces (Diod. Sic. i. 
 51; Sdabo, xvii. 1), which divi.-tion was main- 
 tained till tiie invasion of the Saracens. It is now 
 comuosed of 2i departments, which, according to 
 the French system of geograpiiical arrangement, 
 are sul)divided into arrondissements and cantons 
 (Bowrinir's lieport). 
 
 Tlie Nile is never mentioned by name in our 
 translation of tiie Old Testament : it is always 
 called the river of Egypt, altiiough the word Nile 
 
 (?nj) occurs in the original (Isa. xxvii. 12 ; 
 Josh. XV. 4; 2 Kings- xxiv. 7). In these places 
 the river of Egypt, literally the Nile oi the 
 Egyptians, is sjioken of as the boundary of Pales- 
 tine. The desert apjiears to have Ijecn the natural 
 boundary between Palestine and' Egyjjt ; but 
 map-niakers, agreeably with their idea of the pas- 
 sages just leferred to, have inserted a stream in 
 the desert, and called it j^gyptus. Yet there is 
 no ditHculty in understanding the claim of the 
 Jewish writers to extend Palestine, say to the 
 Felusian mouth o( the Nile, when it is remem- 
 bered that Solomon had ports on the Red Sea, 
 
 Till vvitiiin a few years the sources of the Nile 
 md the termination of the Niger were hid in alike 
 mysterious oliscarity. The latter has Ix'en dis- 
 lovered, but the former, notwithstanding many 
 
 EGYPT. 
 
 AM 
 
 strcnuou.'; efforls and some pretence, remain U re- 
 ward tlie enterprise of some iiioie fortunate travel 
 ler. Tlie various lii-a«iches of the Nile have iheit 
 rise in tlie high lands nortli of the eijualor. TIk 
 three principal brandies of the Nile are, 1. tlw 
 Bahr el Ai)ia(l-, or Whit" River, to the west, which 
 is no\v known to l»e the largest and longest ; 2. 
 the Bahr el Azrek, or Blue River, in the centre; 
 3. the Tacizae, or .•Vbaia, which ii tlie eiislern 
 branch. Tlie Nile, fiotn its con'Iiienee with the 
 Tacazzc (17° 45' north lat.) down to its entrance 
 into the MeditciMiuiean (1200 geographic.il niiles\ 
 receives no permanent slream.s ; b;it in the rainy 
 season it receives wadys, or toiienls, from the 
 mountains. The annual ovenlow of *\\e river, 
 on which the ancients wrote so obscurely, is known 
 to aiisc from the jieriodiciil rains whicli fall 
 within the tropics. T)ie rich alluvial dejiosits 
 which the Nile spreads over Nubia atid Egypt 
 are mainly derived through the Blue River; the 
 \Vhile River, or longest stream, bringing notliing 
 of the kind. Owing to the yearly deiiosit of alluvial 
 matter, both the bed of the Nile and the land of 
 Egy]it are being gradually raised. Tlie river 
 proceeds in its cunent uniformly and quietly at 
 the rate of two and a half or three miles an hour, 
 always deep enough for navigation. Its water is 
 usually blue, but it becomes of a deep linck-red 
 during the jieriod of \U overllow. It is saliijaious 
 when drunk, meriting the encomiums which it 
 has so abundantly received. On the river the 
 land is wholly dependent. If the Nile does not 
 rise a sufficient height, sterility and dearth, if not 
 famine, ensue. An elevation o( sixteen ("alhoms 
 is essential to secure the jnosperity of tlie<;ountiy. 
 Such, however, is the regularity of nature, and 
 such the faithfulness of God, tliat for thousands 
 of years, with but few and jiartial exceptions, 
 these inundations have in essential jiaiticulars 
 been the sitme. The waters of the stream aie 
 conveyed over the surface of the country by 
 canals when natural channels fail. During the 
 overllow the land is literally inimdate<l, and 
 li«is the apjiearance of a sea d,)ttecl with islands. 
 AVherever the waters reach, abundance sp.rings 
 forth. The cultivator has scareely more to do 
 tJian to scatter tlie seed. No woniier that a river 
 whose waters aie so grateful, salubrious, and l>ene- 
 ficial, should in days of ignorance liave been 
 regarded as an oliject of woisliij<, and that it is 
 still revered and beloved. 
 
 Well may Egypt have lieen visited as a granary 
 by the needy in ancient times (Gen. xii. 10- 
 Exod. xvi. 3; Joseph. Antiq. xv. y, 2). Besides 
 corn, the country ])rodnced onions, garlic, lieans, 
 pumpkins, cucuml>ers, melons, (lax, cotton and 
 wine. The acacia, sycamore, ]ialm, and (ig-tree 
 adorned the land ; but there was a want of tinilier. 
 The Nile produced the useful jiapyms, and 
 abounded in Hsh. On its lianks linked the croco- 
 dile and liip|K>]H)tamu3. The Egyptian oxen vveie 
 celebrated in the ancient world (.\ristot. IliM. 
 Ani/n. viii. 2S). Horses aboundeil (1 Kings x. 
 28); hence the use of war-chaiiots in light (Isa. 
 xxxi. 1; Diod. Sic. i. 45), and the celebrity ol 
 Egy))tian charioteers (Jer. xlvi. 4 ; Ezek. xvii. 15 ,. 
 The land was not ilestitiite of mii'cral tifa«iirea. 
 Gold mines were wrought in Uiiier Egypt n>iod 
 Sic. iii. 12). • •' ^ 
 
 The climate is very regular and exceedinglj 
 hot ; the atmosphere clear and shining ; a sha<le it
 
 600 
 
 EGYPT. 
 
 not easily found. Tliougli laiii falls even in the 
 winter monMis very rarely, it is not altogetlier 
 waniinj}, as w^s once believt'd. Thunder and 
 lightning are still nxjre unfrecjiient, anil are so 
 
 KUYHT. 
 
 fully practised all the arts of life, and hare l«f 
 ever-during memorials of their proficiency and 
 skill. 
 
 On this natural divejkify of pursuits, as weU 
 
 completely di.ested of their terrilic (niiiiiti s that as on a diversity of hlood— 'for lK?sides the niastei 
 
 the E^'vptiaii^ njver associate with them the idea and ruling race of Ethiopians were others who 
 
 ui dedtrtictue force. Showers of iiiil deiceixiing were of nom:ide ori-in— w,is ftmnded the insti- 
 
 from the lulls of Syria are sometimes known to f.jtion of castes, which E^'vpt had in common 
 
 reach tlie conlines of Egyi)t. The formation of with India, and which j^evva'ded the ejjti.-e life of 
 
 ice IS very uncommon. De.v is prodnce.l in great the nation. These, according to Herodotus (xi. 
 
 abundance. Tlie wind blo.vs from the north from 
 May U) Sv[ tember, when it veeri round to the 
 east, assumes a southerly direction, and Huctiiates 
 iill the close of .\pril. Tlie southerly vernal 
 winds tTaversing the ai-id sands of Ahica, are 
 most changeable as well as most unhealthy. Tliey 
 form the sim(K>m or samiel, and have proved 
 fatal to caravans an<l even to armies (Vieiv of 
 Aticiant and Modern Egypt, Edin. Cab. Libraiy). 
 Mu3qu\los, locusts, frogs, together witli the pla^n.e, 
 the small pox, and leprosy, are the great evils of 
 tlie country. 
 
 871. 1. Egypto-litliiopiaii (tlie Tirliake of Scripture) ; 
 2, 4. Ethiopian ; 3. Egyptian. 
 
 Tlie most recent inquiries have shown that the 
 extreme limit at Pliilae was only of a jwlitical 
 nature; for the natives of the country below it 
 were of the same race as those who lived above 
 that spot — a tribe which passed ilown into the 
 fertile vail: y of the Nile from its original aboile 
 in the south. Tliese Etliiopians and tlie Egyp- 
 tians were not negroes, but a iiranch of the gieat 
 Caucasian family. Tlieir colour — at least the 
 colour of the higher castes — was hi own ; their 
 frame .slender, but of great strength. Tiieir speech, 
 now found in the Coptic, is akin to the Shemitic 
 
 761), were seven in numbei- (comp. Diod. Sic. i. 
 7-1). Tlie ])riestly caste was the most honoured 
 and inlluential. It had in every large city a 
 temple dedicated to ih? deity of the jilace, together 
 with a high priest, who stoud next to the king ard 
 restricted his powei-. The ])riestl)iiod jjossessed 
 the finest jjortions of the country. They were the 
 judges, physicians, astrologers, arcl.ntects, — in a 
 word, they u;iited in themselves all the highest 
 culture and most listinguished oflices of the laria, 
 while with them alone lay tradition, literature, 
 and the sacred writings. This clasa CKerted tiie 
 most decided and extensive inllnence on the cul- 
 ture not only of tiieir own country, but of the 
 world; for during the brightest periods of Grecian 
 history trie love of knowledge carried into Egyjit 
 men who have done much to form the character 
 of after ages, such as Solon, Pythagoras, Archytas, 
 Thales, Herodoliis, Plato, and otliers (comp. Gen. 
 xli. 8; Exod. vii. 11; viii. 11; xiii. 1 ; Joseph. 
 Antiq. ii. 9, iJ). 
 
 The jjeculiarities of the ancient Egyptians of the 
 lower castes seem to have survived best, and to be 
 represented, at least in some (larticulars, by tlie Fel- 
 lahs of the ])iesent day. These Fellahs discharge 
 all the duties of tilling the country and gathering 
 its rich almndance. Tiiey are a quiet, contented, 
 submissive race, always living, thiougn an unjust 
 govcniment, on the edge of starvation, yet always 
 ha])py, with no thought ("or the mcrrovir, no care 
 for, no inteiest in, jwlltical changes. 'Of the 
 Fellahs it may be saul, as was said by Amrou of 
 the ancient Egyptians: " ti.ey are bees always 
 foiling, always toiling fur others, not themselves." 
 The love of the Fellah for his country and his 
 Nile is an all-absorbing love. Remove him, and 
 I e jierishes. He cannot live a year away from hig 
 village; his giave must be where his cradle was. 
 But he is of all men most submissive: he will 
 rather die than revolt ; resignation is his primary 
 virtue ; imjiatience under any yoke is unknown 
 to him ; his life, his faith, his law is submission. 
 "Allah Kerim! ' is his hourly consolatiim, his jjer- 
 ])etual benediction. He was made for jiface, not 
 for war; and, though his patiiotism is intense^ 
 there is no mingling in it of tlie hive of glory or 
 the ]wssion for conquest. His nationality is in his 
 local all'ectlons, and they are most intense. Upon 
 this race, the race of liiight eyes and t>eautiful 
 forms, it is inipossilile to look without deep in- 
 
 tongues. The women were very fiuitful (Sirabo, terest : of all the gay, the gayest: of all the beings 
 
 XV. p. 605 ; Heeien, Ideen, xi. 2, 10). 
 
 The mode of iile of the Egy[)tians was influ- 
 enceil by their locality : those who dwelt on high 
 lantls on the east, as well as those who dwelt on 
 f-ie marshy flat country in the Delta, were shep- 
 herds, as their land did not admit cultivation. 
 The jieople who lived along the Nile became fisi 
 
 made for happiness the most excitable. If days of 
 ])eace and prosjierity could be theirs, what songs, 
 what music, what joys' (Howring's Uejxyrt, p. 7). 
 The only other tribe we have room to notice is 
 that of the C!>|;t.s, equally with the jireceding, in- 
 digenous. They are Christians by hereditary 
 transmission, and have snlleie'l centuries of cruel 
 
 ermen and sailors. The cultivated pait of the persecutions and humiliations, though now they 
 natives who lived on the plains and over the sur- seem to be rising in imjxiitance, and promise lo 
 C»ceofthe country diligently and m(wt success- fill an important page in the future history J
 
 EGYPT. 
 
 EGVPT. 
 
 ovl 
 
 Egypt. Ill cliaracfev tlicy are ainiahle, ]iacific, 
 and iiitellh^wif, liiivini; of course ilie t'aulls and 
 vices (if dissiui (liUioii, fiilseliiK)d, and ni«anne?s, 
 whicli slavery ne\e>- fails to cn'^'emitT. In i>tlicc 
 tliey are the sciibe-, the aiillinieliclans, tlie niea- 
 ■urers, the clerks, — in a xvorii, llie leiiined men of 
 the country. The lan^jnage which they use in 
 their reli'<ious services is ihe .uicieiit Kiryptian, or 
 (Joptic, which, however, is translated into Aiahic 
 for the l)€!ielit of the laity. Tiie Ctipfs liave been 
 under-estiiiiated at lo 1,000 souls, divided into 
 twelve episcopal districts, the lwsh()|)s of which 
 unite to elect a jwtriarcii (Bowring's Report). 
 
 'The wisdom of E_i;ypt " was a ])hriise which, 
 at an early jieriod, passed into a proveih, so high 
 wiis tlie opinion enieitained l)y antitpiify of the 
 knowledij'e and skill of the ancient Kgypti;ui3 (I 
 Kings iv.3U; Ilerod. ii. loO ; Joseph. Antiq. viii. 
 25; Acts vii. 22). Nor, as tlic seijuel of this 
 article will show, were there wijinting suhstantial 
 reasons for the current estimate. If, however, 
 antiquity did not on this point exceed the hounds 
 of moderation, very certain is it lliat men of later 
 ages are chargeal)le with the utmost extravagiince 
 ill the terms which they employed when sjjeaking 
 an the subject. It was long thought that the 
 aieroglyphical inscriptions on the monumental 
 remains of Egypt contained treasures of wisdom 
 no less Ijoundless than hiiiden ; and, indeed, hiero- 
 glyphics were, in the opinion of some, iirvented 
 hy the priests of the land, if not expressly to con- 
 ceal their knowledge from the profane vulgar, yet 
 as a safe receptacle and convenient stoieliouse for 
 their mysterious but invaluuljle doctrines. Great, 
 consequently, was the exjwctalion of the public 
 when it was announced that a key had been dis- 
 covered which (Uteneil tiie poital to these long- 
 concealed treasui^s. Tlie result has not been 
 correspondent. Only jiarlial success has rewarded 
 the labour which has been expended on the attemjil 
 to ilecypher the hieroglyphics; and what little 
 light has been thus obtained is neither very valu- 
 able in itself, nor of very high promise in regard 
 U) what may yet be kept under clouds and sha- 
 ll. )ws. Men of profound learning, great acuteness 
 r.f mind, and distinguislied reputation have en- 
 •(aged and persevered in the inquiry : it is inipos- 
 siljle to study wifliout advantage the writings of 
 such persons as Zoega, Akerl)hid, Young, C'ham- 
 [>.>llion. SiKihn, Seytlarth, Kosegarten, Riihle; 
 a!id equally ungrateful would it be to aflirm that 
 no progress lias been made in tiie undertaking; 
 but, after all, the conclusinns and (x)sitions which 
 have been drawn and set forth are only in a i'^Mi 
 ca;es (comparatively) delinite and unimfieachalile 
 (Ileeren, Ideen, ii. 2, 4 ; Quatremere, Hcchcrcliea 
 sur la laufjue et la litiiralure dc I'Effi/p/e'). 
 
 The little ihat was known in classical times on 
 the suliject of the hieroglyphics is found in a few 
 [WLSiages of a few Greek writers (Herod, ii. 36 ; 
 Diod. Sic. Ixxxi. 3, 4; (Uem. Alex. Strom, v.), 
 the very import of which w;ls, if at all, very im- 
 (lerl'ectly understood till recent investigations 
 threw the light of fact upon tiieir words. A brief 
 exjxJsition will put the reaier into jjossession of 
 the most important trntlis connected with tlie 
 Bubject. We premise, however, tiiat un.uiimity 
 by no m»;ans jirevails am<ing the writers wiio have 
 t right to be considered as autliorities. 
 
 The knowledge of hitroglypliics which we at 
 jpresent possess owes its origin to llie Hosetta 
 
 stone, which is now in the British Muse;:m. Tliis 
 stone wiis Ibund l-y the l''ren<'h among the niiiii 
 of Fort St. .lulien, whicli is si ualetl near lh< 
 mouth of the Kosetia brancli of tlie Nile, and 
 was given up to the English in accord.»iice with 
 the icrmH of the treaty o( Alexandria, it it^up- 
 
 ''BAS" 11 A I" Y'^ 
 
 ins. The Kojctta Stone, with specimra« of th» eaaracter* 
 1, 1/. Sacred ; 'J, J', linctiorial ; 3, 3'. Greek 
 
 posed to have been sculptured about B.C. 19.j 
 and contains a decree in honour of Ptolemy V. 
 (E[)iphanes) wiilten in three dillerent characti is. 
 One of these is Greek, and a jiait of it has been 
 explained to state that tlie decree was ordered to 
 be written in Sacred, Enciiorial, and Greek 
 writing. Dr. Young was the lirst that aftem]ifed 
 to (leci))lier this inscri]<tion ; in which he jiaitially 
 succeeded liy counting the recurrence of the more 
 marked characters in the hieroglyphics, and com- 
 paring them with those that occurieil about tJie 
 same number of times in the Greek.. Cham- 
 (lollion and ^^'ilkinson have followed up Dr. 
 Young's discoveries with great ingenuity, and we 
 can now jiartially read inscriptions wh-icli before 
 were wholly unintelligible to us. Among otiiei 
 olistacles, however, 'his remains in the way, viz., 
 that the Rosetta stone was sculptuied about 193 
 ii.c. and in Lower Egypt; while the major ]iart 
 of the inscri]itii>n3 were written ilur'ng the twelve 
 previous centuries, and are found in Upper Egypt 
 Ilieniglyphics are written either from left to 
 right or right to left ; though sometimes the | 
 c(diimn» are so narrow that they may be almost J 
 said to be written from foj) to bottom. They are 
 partly pictorial ; thus ' ox," 'goose," ' temule," are 
 re[iresented by pictures or jiictorial symbols u." aji 
 ox, A,:c. At o'her times they are phonetic, and 
 written by an alphabet of about 1 10 Ictteis, of 
 which many aie.synonym^ius; some beuig adapted 
 fur writing, others for sculpture ; some iu use at
 
 m) 
 
 EGYPT. 
 
 sn earlier jioriod, others at a later. The powers 
 of these li'lteis are lietcrmined hy tlie names of 
 the kitif^s in wliii^h fliey are foiind ; liat as tliis 
 cannot be dime very exactly, tliey are generally 
 arranged umler alnmt twelve of oiu- primary 
 letters We cannot, however, distinguish accu- 
 rately between the \ow('l.s, or i> and vn, and otlier 
 cognate letters. The names of sovereigns are 
 always written within a ring or <:artoiiche : tliose 
 of any oilier person are distlTiguislied l)y a sitting 
 ti^nue' following them : decides tliese, there is 
 nolliing to tTiar(< tlie diJlerence hetweep a letter 
 ami a pictorial syndtol. In some words the 
 meaning is expressed twice ; once by a phonetic 
 coinbindtioM ; and again, by a jiicturial symbol; 
 in others flie more important part is symbolical, 
 and the gramtnatical termination is spelt. Some- 
 tin-.es also we tiod a sjiecies of abbreviation ; thus 
 the word ox would be expressed liy the first letter 
 of the Coptic word signifying ox. 
 
 It is manifest that tlie hieroglyphics which 
 were either pmely pictorial or symbolic would be 
 inade<piate to express every part of speech. Every 
 language must, exce))t at its very conimeucement, 
 have some words which taken alone, are voiil of 
 meaning; and unless tliose wiio speak it are 
 entirely separated nimi other nations, tiiey must 
 have occasion to ex]iress foreign names and terms 
 in their own tongue, and write them in their own 
 character, if lliey are sulliciently advanced in 
 civilization to possess the art of wiiting. Now 
 the Egyptians, at the ]ie;iod from wliich their 
 exi.sting monuments can be dated, were the most 
 civilized nation on earth, and, tliough debarred 
 from trading with foreigners before the time of 
 Psammeticus, they weie often at war with their 
 southern and eastern neighbours. Their language 
 then must ha\e possesseil sucli terms as could be 
 expressed only by characters which stood for 
 sounds, and this necessity may be supposed to 
 have given rise to a third kind of hieroglyphics, 
 :al!ed by M. Ciiamjiollion phonetic. That a 
 •ertain number weie so employed is beyond a 
 doubt, and the principle on which these figures 
 were selected for that ])urpose has prol>at)ly Ijeen 
 ascertained ; it was ajiparently this, that the 
 names ol' things (i. e. the words) suggested by 
 these hierogly])hics l)egan by tiie sound or letter 
 which tliey were taken to represent. Thus an 
 eagle, whicli in Egyi^tian or Coptic is abo?n, ex- 
 jiressed tlie letter a; a censer, in Egyptian berbe, 
 the letter b, and so on. This principle being 
 admitted, it f Hows that the ninnber of figures 
 used to icpiesent one sound might be incieased 
 almost without limit, as any hieroglyphic might 
 itand for the first letter of its name; but so 
 copious an alphal>et would have been, even to a 
 native, a constant source of error. The cha- 
 racters, theicfore, so emjdoyed were soon fixed; 
 and, as far as has been hitherto ascertained, 
 eighteen or nineteen was the largest number as- 
 iiined to any one letter, while some have only 
 one or two By tl-.is varit-ty the Egyptians were 
 able to exf-rcise a faculty lield in high esteem 
 S.VA ng tlici'- e;istein neighliours — tiiat of convey- 
 ing a (U)ul>le meaning by the same sign, and of 
 expressing covert allu-.ions not generally compre- 
 hensible. Thus the lion is put for the I in 
 ptoleinv and Alexander, liecause they were power- 
 ful kings; tlic ran. for the 6 in Anuljis, because 
 t was sa( red to that god, &c. 
 
 EGYPT. 
 
 But for the pxn-pose of writing, strictly W 
 called, there was a less ornamental and more 
 rapid wav of forming tiie characters, which is 
 always found in the MSS,, and whicli would be 
 the natural consequence of using a pen or stylus. 
 This is called by Strabo and Pliny hieiatic 
 writing, tlie hienvglyphics being, as the name 
 imports, peculiar to sculpture. It is chiefly by 
 means of the hieroglyjihics that we are enabled 
 to read tiie hieratic writing, the latter being, for 
 the most [lart, an alibreviated way of writing the 
 former. The Ilosetta stone contained the in- 
 scrijition in yet another set of ciiaracters, the 
 demotic or enchorial. It is to Dr. Young that 
 we owe the greater jiait of our knowledge on this 
 subject. He was greatly assisted by the dis- 
 covery of two or three papyri written in this 
 character with Greek translations, tlie earliest of 
 which dates in the reign of Psammeticus about 
 B.C. 65(1. An alphabet has lieeii formed fjom 
 ■Greek pro]ier names ; from whicli it apjiears that 
 the few words which we can decipher aie Coptic. 
 In this writing the hieroglyphics have almost 
 wholly disajipeared, though some still appear 
 scattered here and there. 
 
 The last statement worthy of attention which 
 has come under the writer's notice in connection 
 with hieroglyphics is that of Wathen (Arts, An- 
 tiquit. and Chron. of Eyypt, p. 1, sqq.), who 
 thinks he h;is discovered that the construction of 
 the hieroglyphic ' names and standards' of the 
 ancient monarcbs bear a resemblance to the 
 quartering of arms in modern heraldry. Hence 
 
 from the names and standards of a king we may 
 often learn his extraction, ];aternal and maternal, 
 and, when not descended fioni the reigning fa- 
 mily, what his claim was to the throne. Tliis 
 writer also holds that dilVeient physiognomies, 
 each characteristic of a different royal family, 
 are distinctly traceable in the portraits of tlie 
 kings preserved on the walls of the ancient mo- 
 numents. ' The Egyptian physiognomy, the 
 Ethiopian, and the mixture of the two, may each 
 be plainly recognised. Even the ciiaracteristic 
 lineaments of the dill'eient families purely Egyp- 
 tian are accurately given.' ' The facts," he con 
 tinues, '<leducible from these two sources confirm 
 and illustrate each other. Together, they throw 
 a new light on tlie whole ])eriod of monumental 
 history, commencing within a few centuries ol 
 the flood ; render jjlain and certain what wa« 
 before doul)tful and obscure in notices of ancieut 
 Egypt scattered in sacred and jirofane higtory,- 
 and fuinlsh a clue to the mazes of the Mane 
 thonian liynasfies.' 
 
 The ditliculties that oppose the formation of «
 
 EGYPT. 
 
 Mtisfactorji Egyptian cluonolosy are preat and 
 Dumennis. Tlic most ilistiii^iiisliPil writers ililler 
 egregioiisly in tl.eir slateineiits. Ni'wton pl.ices 
 Sliisliuk about the midiile of the teiitli century 
 before our era; Uslier Hxes liini at u c. 1 iSy. 
 Owe clironoloLcer iletei mines tlie e|)ocli of Menes, 
 fiisl king of Ejjypt, at al.iout u.c. 2231 ; Ciiam- 
 ])()11io'< tiediices from llie same aiitliorities that he 
 lived 1)000 years before Mohammed. Every 
 Ei;y[)fian monarch hail sever.il names. The 
 writin<;s which we jwssess on Egyptian liistory 
 are either fragments, or mnliially conllicting, or 
 of too late a date to be of great value. The 
 copyists of Manetho give diveise reports of what 
 they profess to quote from his work. Mythology 
 is blended witli history, theory witli fact, and mere 
 conjectures and plays of the fancy aie reiH)rteil 
 with a gravity of maimer which is surpassed only 
 by the credulity to wliich they owe their birth and 
 their currency. 
 
 Various ellbrts, however, hav'e been made to 
 remove difficulties, reconcile contradictions, and 
 harmonize dissonances. The success has been 
 far from distiuguislied. Sharpe, in his Karhj 
 Ilinturi/ of Ei/i/pt, has laboiued for this purpose 
 by contracting the ordinary chronological period, 
 and by tlie hvpotliesis of several contQjn]K)raneous 
 dynastie<:. ruling in Lower or in Upj.er Egypt. 
 The earliest event whieli he seems to aiimit, as 
 ascertained with exactness, is the capture of Jeru- 
 salem by Shishak, in the filth year of king lleho- 
 boam. B c. 070. ^Va!hcn (ut supra), a.\iu\'\i)g 
 himself of the discoveries maile i'y others and by 
 himself, in decyphering the sculptured language 
 of the ancient monuments, has, in his own opiriiun, 
 gone far to clear away previously existing tlitli- 
 culties, to bring the fragmentary accounts of 
 ancient writers into accordance, and to otter to 
 the woild a definite, consistent, and trustwoithy 
 Egy])tian chronology. The aiitiior (p. 75) lays 
 consideralile stress on the fact that, in almost 
 every instance, when Hebrew history is interwoven 
 with Egyptian, the chronology wliich he has de- 
 veloped harmonizes witli tliat of the sacred writers 
 as determined l)v Archblsliop Usher in the Eng- 
 lish Bible. ' Thus Usiier's date for Peleg, in 
 wliose days the earth was divided (1 Cliion. i. 19) 
 is B.C. 2247 ; that of .Menes, the first king of 
 Egyjit, is here fixed at n.c. 2222.' Other cor- 
 respondencies are tlie Exodus, English Bil)le, 
 U91; Wathen, 14S9; Shishak s captiii* of . leru- 
 salem, 971; liis accession, according to Watlicn, 
 990; Pharaoli-Necho slew Josiah, GIO; his ac- 
 cession, (518. On which it seems sufficient to 
 vemaik that, even taking these ami the one or 
 tv/o other statements made liy the author on the 
 jioint, to be as be has set ihein forth, they neither 
 do nor can etVect much for fixing with certainty 
 liistorical events, so long as doubts are enteitaiiied 
 wliether Usher's chronology itself is correct, and 
 so long as uncertainty iirevails generally in rela- 
 tion to the strict chioiiological |)eriod of the Old 
 Testament history [Chronoi.ouy]. 
 
 Wiiat, however, we 1<now to l>e definite, and 
 fielieve lo be a(M-iirate in its (iisclosures, and what 
 we judge to be far more imjiorfant in .in historical 
 relation, is to be fotinil in tlie paintings and 
 BCnlntures with which the Ei; iptians left the walls 
 of fiieir tombs and temples tiecorated in forms and 
 colours which have not yet f.ided from the sight. 
 U is true that there instances of real picture writ- 
 
 EGTPT. 
 
 60S 
 
 Ing may do little for fixing the epooli of the ao- 
 cessiiiii of a king or the termination of a dynasty. 
 Yet ill this tliey are nut entirely mute. Amoug 
 
 s;74. [Intfirior of Pictured Tomb.] 
 
 tiie innumerable mural sculptures in the temple 
 at Karnak, Clianijxillion discovered one in which 
 a king, Slieshonk (Shi-hak), is ))resenling captives 
 of various nations to his God as tro])hies of vic- 
 tory. One of these, distinguished liy a long lieard 
 and Jewish physiognomy, bears the liieri>glyi)hical 
 title Yoiuiah Malek, king of Judah. lint for any 
 practical purpose, the determination of a date, or 
 the identification of an evert, is of sn>all compa- 
 rative moment ; and far too irmon imjioitancc has 
 fjeen attached to meie chronological iletaiU. To 
 learn when an Egyiitianor Chinese king ascended 
 the throne, ov ileparted tiiis life, may gratify the 
 anti(piaiy or even reward much learned toil, but 
 the world at large has an interest in history in the 
 main, if not exclusively, so far as it disclosi's what 
 men thought, felt, did; wIkiI they hoped, feared, 
 and a( hie\ ed in the days of old; thereby aflbrding 
 to ])osterity warnings, encouragement, light, and 
 impulse. Now for tliese highly important jiur- 
 po-es tiie most abundant materials aie jiiesented 
 in Egypt, and may be found described in the 
 works of Champollion, AVilkinson, and others. 
 Let any one visit the Egyjitian gallery in the 
 British Museum, and he will be surprised and 
 delighted to find Egypt alnio.st resuscitated. The 
 tombs have given nj) their dead. Buried tiea- 
 sures, over whose silence centuiics had rolled Ije- 
 fore our era began, crowd on the sight and gratify 
 the mind. .-Vnd jiaiiitings, too, strike the eye, 
 which may not indeed confuvm very exactly to 
 llie laws of peispective, but which lay o))eit, and 
 set hefoie the sjjectator, the Egyptian, as he was 
 in the days ol his glory and piide. Indeed, fiona 
 the jiaintiiig!' and sculptures which have been di»- 
 coveied anil tiescrilied, vte .are enableil to follow 
 this most singular ami deeply interesting neonle 
 through all the clas.ses of society, thioiit(h all th«p 
 operations of .science aiivl husbandry, into the trans- 
 actions of ])ublic life, the details of house-keeping, 
 the achievenienis of war. the aniusenients of iinnt 
 ing. fishing, feasting, and the solemn rites of a 
 most aui;ust and imposing leiiglous ceremonial. 
 
 Amid the vaiious piofane authors who have 
 written more or less in detail on Egypt (see a list 
 of I hem in .Sliaipe's Laili/ llistori/ of Ep-i/pt, 
 London, 183G p. 3), and after all the labour 
 that has been bestowed on the attempt todecypher 
 tlie hieroglyphics, tlie Bible lemains our liest 
 and fullest aulhoriry fur the caily liistory of \he 
 country. This history, it is true, is not ))rfsentcd 
 in a chronological series of events, nor si pplied 
 respecting iiny |eiio<! with nice exactitude and 
 minute details. The disclo-ures made by in. 
 sciiijtions iv' public buildings, of k in^s, wars, oiui
 
 601 
 
 EGYPT. 
 
 EGYPT 
 
 conquests, may, when vtrilieil as fo aire, aiul 
 
 plac<>i| ill tlieir j)iol)a!ile unler liy the aid of learn- 
 ing and criticism, reveal inme as to tlie dvnastie-i 
 and individual sovf-iei-cn-i ; Imt on such inlorrna- 
 tiiin, e\ nn wlii'n Ciee from doubt, and most accu- 
 rate, litde real value can lie set ; while tiie liilile 
 «L;|i|)lies, either l>y express slatcnicnt or oinioiis 
 iiiijiiifution, facts and piinci|)les which constitute 
 genuine history, and go far to give the past all tiie 
 value Mrliicli it can possess for the men of these 
 times. And what makes these disclosures the 
 nioie valuable is not only that tliey wear the 
 ciiara<;ter of genuine and uncorrupled iiistory — 
 free froui the false, deep, and unnatural colourings 
 of mythology ; i;ut that they relate to the eailiest 
 forms of civilized life, and to ages over which pro- 
 fane iiistorians iiave left the thickest daikness. 
 Narrations and implications, such as the Bihie 
 artbrds in regard to the early history of Egypt, 
 want uo corroboration ; they wear in their natural- 
 ness, simplicity, and correspondence wi'.ii what 
 would [le e>;|)ected in the ages to which they refer, 
 evidence that they represent actual realities, which 
 tone cm resist who have srudietl either human 
 nature or human society. Still it may not be su- 
 pererogatory to remark that the little which learn- 
 ing and industry liave succeeded in extracting 
 from the monumental inscii|)tions, and the very 
 great deal which funereal ar.d leligious f)aintings 
 iia\e of late made known ; and, indeed all, fmm 
 whatever source gathei'eJ, that we know of tiie 
 co'mtry and its institutions and usages, are in 
 entire harmony with what the Scriptures directly 
 or indirectly teach resjjccting Egypt. Moi-e than 
 one ellbrt has indeed l>een made to corroborate 
 riie truth of Scriptural history, by setting forth a 
 certain corres|iondency alleged to exist itctween 
 the results of modern discovery, and dates and 
 events found in tlie sacred volume. Nor would 
 we deny that the time may arrive when such a 
 coniesfKtndency will appear to rest on the surest 
 vouchers, as in one or two instances it may 
 do even in tiie actual state of knowledge. But 
 chronology must assume a more definite and cer- 
 tain form betbre, whatever may Ije learnt from 
 the monuments of Kgyjrf, any iiistorical relation- 
 ship lietween the Bilile and other sources of know- 
 ledge tou(;hing Egy))t can be accurately ascer- 
 tained and satisfactorily established. Meanwiiile, 
 by these iuij)er(cct attempts, even suspicion may 
 Le engendered, and certainly tliere is a risk lest 
 tiie mind should be drawn otf from a sphere of 
 evidence which is no less striking than it is full 
 anil satisfactory. It is, we had almost said, 
 enough, it is certainly a very great point to have 
 ascertained lieyond doubt that the Egypt of the 
 Hilile is Egypt it.deed, not a fiction, nor an im- 
 posture, nor a blunder — as writers of the V^oltaire 
 school would j)ersuade the world — but a reality, 
 80 fa: as it goes, a picture copied from actual 
 life 
 
 We leani from the Old Testament that while 
 (he Jews, the earliest nation that has handed 
 Jown to us the history of its rise and civilization, 
 were yet a triiie of w.uidering shepherds, under 
 Abraliam^ depending solely njwn the unbought 
 gifts of nattire, who, when they had exhausted 
 one district, instead of cultivating it, drove off 
 their Hocks in searcii of a new jiasture-ground, 
 itfVer the manner of the American Indians ; the 
 Egyptians were acquainted v/iih agriculture and 
 
 all those arts of ci\iliiatiiin and governmeiil 
 which indicate a social existence, extemlins! 
 backwards f<ir at least several ages. This is con- 
 (iimed in a striking maimer by architectural 
 reniains that have survived tie ra\ages of above 
 thiity centuries; for while the Israelites, un<lei 
 the immediate successors of Joshu;i, were stll. 
 waning with tlie Canaanites for the ])Os$ession Oi 
 the land of promise, or yet earlier, while they 
 were yet sla» es in Egypt, that most interesting 
 land was distinguished fir )ia!aces, temples, por- 
 ticos, obelisks, statues, and canals, which declare 
 that they had been ))ie(:eded by a long period o< 
 civilization, and whicli still remain the admira- 
 tion of the world. The pyramids of Lower Egyp... 
 requiring for their erection the least cpjantity ol 
 architectural knowledge, no elegance of design, 
 no taste in detail, might possibly have lieen the 
 w">rk of men diiien by task-masters toiheir daily 
 labour ; but that the palaces, tombs, and temjjles 
 of Upper Egypt, which piesent fo us the earliest 
 known instances of architecture, sculj)ture, and 
 painting ; the colossal statues of Amenoph and 
 Rameses, requiring consideiable anatomical know- 
 ledge for the original design, arid a mechanicdil 
 
 skill in the execution, exceeding perhaps even 
 that of the Greeks themselves ; the vast works for 
 irrigation; and the correct division of the calen- 
 dar, implying gieat knowledge of mathematics — 
 that these should have been the woiks of a people 
 suli'eiiug under political disadvantages, and not 
 far advanced in all the arts and vetinements of 
 social life, wouhl contradict all that observation 
 or history has made known. Some considerable 
 degree therefore of jjolitical freedom. "*s well as a. 
 high cultivation, must at an early period have 
 been enjoyed by the Egyptians. 
 
 In Gen. x. we find the colonization of Egy]it 
 traced up to the immediate children of Noah, for 
 it is there stated that Mizraim was the second son 
 of Hani, who was himself the second son of Noah. 
 Immediately after these genealogical stat'»menti 
 the sacred narrative (Gen. xii.) informs us that the 
 patriarch Abraham, pressed by famine, went down 
 (about B.C. 1920; into Egypt, wheje it ap[)eaiii iu
 
 EGYPT. 
 
 EGYPT 
 
 Ml 
 
 I 
 
 found a monarcli, a court, princes and servants 
 aiui wliere hf i'ouiiil also lluwt- supplii's of fooa 
 wliicli tlie \vt'il-kn-jwn feitility of tl:e couiidv had 
 'ed him to ocektliere; for it is exjiVessIy stated 
 'liat llie liivoiir vvliicii liia wile liaii won in tli« 
 reigriiiig Pliaraoli's eyes jjrocuied liini iiiefp and 
 oxen, as well as hfc-.is.-ics, and inen-servanl.% and 
 maiil-seivants, and slie-assej and camels. In 
 Gen. xxi. 0, mention is made in the case of 
 Isl.nmel, tJie son of Hagar tlie Egyptian, whose 
 mother l0(ik liim (> wife out of tlie land of K;^ypt, 
 of a mixed race between the Ej,'yi)lians and liie 
 Chaldajyns, a r ce whicii in after limes became 
 a great nation. From this mixture of races it lias 
 heen siqiposed the Arat)s (2"iy, ' niixed ])eople") 
 •ad their name (Sliarre's Early Hist, of lu/i/pt, 
 . 11). In Gen. xxxix. begins the interesting 
 itory of Joseph's being carried down to Egy)it, 
 with all its important consequences for the gieat- 
 grandchildren of Abraham. The iiroductiveuess 
 of the country is the allurpmcnt, famine the im- 
 pulse. Attendant circumstance? siiow that Egypt 
 was then famous also for its conmiercial |)ursuit,<; 
 and thfi entire narrative gives tlie idea of a com- 
 plex system of society (about B.C. 1720), and a 
 well-constituted yet arbitrary form of government. 
 As in eastern courts at later jjeriods of history, 
 elevation to high ollices was marked and sudden. 
 1 he slave Joseph is taken from prison and from 
 imi)endiiigdeath,and raised to the dignity of prime 
 vizier, and is entrusted witli making provision for 
 an ap])roaching dearth of food, whicli he had him- 
 self 'bref old, during wliich he ellects in favour of 
 the ruling sovereign one of the gieatcst revolutions 
 of piopeily which history has recorded. The 
 hi^h consideration in which the piiestly caste 
 was held is apparent. Joseph himself marries a 
 dangliler of the priest of On. Out of respect 
 Inwards, as well as by the diiect influence of, Jo- 
 sepii, the Hebrews were well treated. Tlie Scrip- 
 tural recoid, however, distinctly states (xlvi. 34) 
 that befoie the descent of Israel and his sons 
 'every shepherd' was 'an abomination unto the 
 iV?yiitiaiis.' The Hebrews, whose ' trade had been 
 about cattle," must have been odious in the eyes 
 of the Egyptians, yet aie they expressly permitted 
 to dwell ' in the best of the land" (xlvii. (3), which 
 is identilied with the land of Goshen, tlie place 
 which the Isiaelites had prayed might be assigned 
 to them, and which they oliviously desired on ac- 
 count of the adaptation of its soil to their way 
 of life as herdsmen. Having settled his father 
 and family satisl"act<irily in the land, Joscjih jiro- 
 c*eded to sujiply the urgent wants of a hungiy 
 Ration, antl at the same time conveited the tenure 
 of all property from fieehold into tenaiicy-at-will, 
 with a lent charge of one-fifti. of the produce, 
 leaving their lands, hoivever, in the hamls ol' the 
 [iriests; and thus he gaveanother evidence of the 
 greatness of their power. 
 
 The richness of Go'ihen was favour.ible, and 
 the Israelites 'grew and multiplied exceedingly,' 
 go that the l.md was lilled witli them. iJut Jo- 
 seph was Tiow de.id ; time had jiassed on, and 
 t'.eie rose up a new king fiirobably one of a new 
 d/nasty) whicli kiietv (Exod. i. 8) not Joseph, 
 haviii.; no peisoiiul knowledge, and it may be no 
 daliiiite inlbimu* on of his .'er\ ices ; who, becom- 
 ).'ig jealous ol'tlie iiiciea.se of the Hebrews, set about 
 pei»ecuting them uiiii the avowed intention of 
 nivri'iiisKin^' their numbers and ciip^ling tlieir 
 
 power. Seve. .• task -masters aie tlieiefore set ov«f 
 tl.fm ; heavy tasks aie imjiosed ; the Hebrews are 
 comjielleii to build * treasure ciliea, I'ltliim and 
 R;L'\;nseJ.' It is found, liowever, liiat liicy onljr 
 increase the more. In consi-queiK'e, ihfir burdeiia 
 are doub'eii and their lives made bitrcr willi haril 
 bondage TExod. i. 11), ' in morler and in brick, 
 and in al' manner of mm vice in lie lield." Their 
 tiist-boin males, moreo\ er, are di.omed lo destruc- 
 tion tiie moment they come into Iteiiig. Tlie 
 deepest lieiuf burnings ensue; hatred aiises be- 
 tween the oppicjpor and the oppie-seil ; the Israel- 
 ites seek revenge in jirivate anil l»y steallh (Exod. 
 ii. 12). At last a liigher power interferes, and 
 the atllicted race is jx'iniilted to (pi:t Egypt. At 
 this time Egyjif ap|)ears to h.ive been a well- 
 peojiled and well-cultivated countiy, with nu- 
 meriius cities, under a despotic inonarLli, sur- 
 rounded by otlicers of his couit and a life-guard. 
 There v>as a ceiemoniul at audience, a distinction 
 of ranks, a state-jirison, and a piime minister. 
 Great buildings were cuiried on. Tliere was set 
 apart from tlie rest of the ]ieoj le an order ot 
 p'iests will) ])robably lilled ollice.s in t'.ie civil 
 government; the piiest of Alidian and tiie priest 
 of On seem to have ruled over the cities so named. 
 There was in the geneial class of piiests an order 
 — wise men, sorcerers, and magicians — wlio had 
 charge of a certain secret knowledge : there were 
 jihysiciana or eiiiba'mers of the dead; the royal 
 army covitained chosen captaijis and. horsemen 
 and charicts. The attention which the psople at 
 large ]iaid to agriculture, and the fixed n'jti.<i» iS 
 propel fy whv-:ii they in conseipience had, made 
 tiiem hold tlir she] held or noinade tril>es in ab- 
 horrence, as freebooters only less dangerous than 
 hunting tribes. 
 
 The ill feeliii'^s wliich the ]>ecnliar circum- 
 stances connected with the exode from Egypt 
 had occasioned seived to keep the Israelites and 
 the Egyptians strangers, if not enemies, one tc 
 another during the 'apse of centuiies, till lh«t 
 days of David and So'i.mcm, when (1 Kings iii., 
 vii., ix., xi.) friendly Fixations again spring iiji 
 between the two coun(ii'>s. Solomon mairies the 
 daughter of a Pharaoh, who burns the city oi 
 Gezer, and who in conswjuence mu-t have been 
 master of Lower Egypt. 'And Solomon had 
 horses bixiught out of Egypt, and linen yarn : 
 six hiindied shekels of silvci was the piiceof a 
 chariot, and one hundred and Ml'.'y the price of a 
 horse. Jcioboam, however, who ' hiid lifted up his 
 liaiid against the king," and becim-^e subseque)illy 
 monarch of the revolted ten tiibes, fouiid lefugn 
 and pn)tection in Egypt, which w;\s then (al>out 
 H.c 975) governed by S/iishak. Frooi 2 Cliron. 
 xii. it appears that in the fifth year of S/lomon"* 
 successor, Rehoboam, this same Shishak ' came 
 against Jerusalem' with a very large ainr, con 
 sisling of chariots, horse and foot soldiers, bosiiles 
 auxiliary foreigners, ami having cajitmed the 
 fortilied cities which lay on his march, he en',«'»-d 
 and plundered the metropolis. The laiiguiige 
 which is employed in Joel (iii. 19) shows that in 
 the ninth century liefoie Christ, Egy])t iiad, in 
 conjiuictioii with Edom, displayed liolh its | owet 
 anil its cruelty towards the kingdom of Jndiih 
 Tlie lise and oppressiveness of the A^syriar powei 
 soon, however, inclined the ]''gyp'ian3 and the 
 Isiaelites, fri>m a sense of common danger to cul- 
 tivate fri>;ndlv relations with one aiixtl vt la
 
 606 
 
 EGYPT 
 
 EGYPT. 
 
 i King's xvii. we find that in the twelfth year of 
 Alia/, kin,' of Juda'i (b.c. 730) Hoshea king of 
 Israel il-?sist«( fiom paying his usual tribute to 
 Ihe king of Assyria, and courted <he alliance of 
 So, king of Kgypt, who must iiave been a very 
 powerful inonarcli to have ln-eii thought ulile to 
 give assistance in opposition to Assyria. Against 
 this were l)uman resource the prophet Isaiah 
 (xxxi.) warinlv (irotested, declaring its utter in- 
 efliciency, and striving to lead his countrymen 
 to the practice of that righteousness and piety 
 by neglecting which they had been forsaken of 
 God. Upon this act of king Hoshea, iiowever, 
 the Assyrians ovsrran Samaria and carried (2 
 Kings xvii. 6) Israel away into Assyria. In the 
 reign of Hezekiah (b c. 726) it ap|iears (2 Kings 
 xviii. 21) that the kingdom of Judali still 'tiusted 
 upon the staff of tliis bruised reed, even Egypt, 
 on wliicli if a man lean, it will go into his hind 
 and jiierce it: so is P!iavaoh kiiig of Egypt unto 
 all tliat trust on liim.' In the last year of tiie 
 reign of Jnsiah (bc. 609) Egypt seems to have 
 attempted to inciease its inlluence in PaL^stine, 
 when Pharaoh-Nechoh (2 Kings xxiii. 29) 'went 
 u;i a;ainst llie king of Assyria to the ri\er Eii- 
 phratei," and Josiah going against him was slain 
 in battle. His successor, Jehoabaz, was dethroned 
 after a brief reign of three months, and imprisoneu 
 at Riblah by the Egyptian monarch, who imjx)sed 
 on the country a heavy tribute. Pharaoh-Nechoh 
 then made'liis elder l)rottier Eliakini kitig, having 
 changed liis ntme to Jehoiakim. Jehoahaz after- 
 wards died in Egypt. But the Egyptian influence 
 over Judah soon ended ; for in tlie fourtli year of 
 Jehoiakim (b.c. 6;i4) Nebuchadnezzar king of Ba- 
 ij-ylon marched against (Jer. xlvi , 2 Kings xxiv.) 
 Jutlaea and its allies, defeated Pliaraiili-Nechoh, 
 anil retoiik from the Egyptians Arabia Petrsea 
 and all tliat belonged to them between the Eu- 
 phrates and the Nile. Zedekiah, the next king 
 of Judah, rebelling against Nebuchadnezzar, 
 made an alliiuice with Pharauh-Hoi)hra ''Jet. 
 xliv.); and when Nebuchadnezzar besieged Jeru- 
 salem, on the m.arch of the Egyptian army, the 
 Chaldees raised the siege (Jer. xxwii. 5) and 
 willidrew the army. But this was the last time 
 tliat the Egyptian power was able to serve liie 
 Jews. The Assyrian party in the state, indewl, 
 v.? in the minority, though assisted by the in- 
 tmeiice of Jeremiah and Ezekiel (Ezek. xxix., 
 Jer. XXV.): yet it preduminated ; the Jews were 
 canied captive to Babylon, and in less than a 
 centiirv afterwards Egypt v.iis made a province 
 of the SLune empire. 
 
 Afte*- tlie time of the exile the Egyptian Pto- 
 lemies were for a long wliile (from b.c. 301 to 
 about 180) masters of Palestine, and during this 
 jieriod Egy|)t liecame as of old a place of refuge 
 to the Jews, to whom many favours and privi- 
 l^o-es weie concede<l. This shelter seems not to 
 iiave i«?en for ages withdrawn (Matt. ii. 13). Yet 
 jt ciujiot be said that the Jews ware held in 
 esteem by tlie Egyptians (Philo, c. Afion. ii. p. 
 !yHj. indeed it was fioni an Egyptian, Majietho 
 fn.c- 39^*). that the most dei'.imaiory misrepresen- 
 tiitii*ns of Jewi.sh history were given to the world ; 
 ai2(L in tl;e days of Augustus, Chaeremon took 
 M>e<;;ai jKxins to make the Jewish jieople appear 
 despicable ( Ju-stph. c. Apion. i. 32; cump. Creuzer, 
 Corn. Ilurod. i. 270). 
 
 la the reign of Ptolemy Philometor, Onias, 
 
 whose father, tlie third high-priest of that name, 
 had been murdered, fled into Egypt, and rose into 
 high favour with the king and Cleopatra his 
 queen. The high-jniesthood of tiie temple of 
 Jerusalem, which belonged of right to his family, 
 having passed from it to the family of the Mac- 
 caliees, by the nomination of Jonathan to this 
 office (m.c. 153), Onias used iiis influence with 
 the court to procure the estaljlishinent of a temjile 
 and ritual in Egypt which should detach the 
 Jews who lived there from their connection with 
 the temple at Jerusalem. The king complied 
 with the request. To reconcile :iie Egyptian 
 Jews to a second temjile, Onia« alleged Isa xix 
 IS, 19. He chose for the purpose a ruined tem- 
 ple of Bubastis, at Leonto])olis, in the Heliopolitarj 
 nome, one hundred and lii'ty stadia from Memphis, 
 which ])lace he converted into a sort of miniature 
 Jerusalem (Joseph. iJe Dell. Jud. i. 1), erecting an 
 altar in imitation of that in the temple, and con- 
 stituting himself high-priest. The king granted 
 a tract of land around the temjile for the main- 
 tenance of the worship, and it remained in exist- 
 ence till destroyed by Vespasian (Joseph. Antiq. 
 xiii.3; XX. 9; De Bell. Jtid. v\'\. 11). Tlie district 
 in which this temple stood appears to have lieeii, 
 after Alexandria, the chief seat of the Jews in 
 Egypt, and which from the name of its ttwrnder 
 was called 'OfiLU X'^P"' (Joseph. Antiq. xiv, 8 
 HeloiTs Pilgrim. ]i. 32^). 
 
 If, instead of taking the sacred volume for our 
 guide, we consult jirofane authors, only a few 
 gerieral conclusions can be given with any degree 
 of historical truth and well-grounded confidence. 
 ' The earliest history,' says Winer, (Bib. Beal' 
 tc'orterb. in loc.) ' of Egypt is altogether legen- 
 dary till we come to the age of Sesostris. With 
 tliis monarch, who was also named Rumeses, begins 
 the half-mythical half-historical |)eiiod o\' great 
 revolutions and august edifices (fleeren, Idecii\, 
 and lasts till the time of Psammeticus, about 700 
 years before Christ. Then, and not before, cre- 
 dible history begins. Originally several sacerdotal 
 governments ajipear to have coexisted, among 
 which that of Memphis was. though not the oldest, 
 yet the most influential. Then Lower Egypt was 
 invaded liy certain nomade hordes from the ea.sf, 
 who spvead as far as Memphis, of which city they 
 became masters, and founded a dynasty of slieji- 
 herd kings (Hyksos). The st.ites of Upper Egypt 
 succeeded in driving these foieigners out of the 
 land; that of Diospolis gained the ascendancy, 
 whose king was the celeliiated Sesostris — probably 
 B.C. 1500-1400. In the eighth century before 
 Christ the Elthiopians invaded Upper Egypt, and 
 ruled there with mililnessand wisdom, whilst two 
 otlier dynasties, a Saitic and aTanatic, flourished 
 in Lower Egypt. A ci'vil war converted Egypt 
 inio a state under twelve princes. Psamme- 
 ticus, one of tliese twelve, supported by foreigr 
 mercenaries, succeeded in making himself sole 
 monarch, and o])ened to strangers the hitherto 
 closed country. Tlie history now liecomes clear. 
 From 526 before our Loni Egypt became a Pei- 
 siaii province, fell (bc. 332) into the hands of 
 Alexander the Great, and after his death (b.c. 323) 
 the dynasty of the Ptolemies established it«el^ 
 which (a u.c. 723) came to a termination at ttM 
 battle of Actium.' 
 
 The ascertained correspondencies in respect •! 
 monarchs found alike in sacred and profane bw-
 
 EGYPT 
 
 toiy are not nuinerous. The followiiiij muiiaiclis 
 }jlve lieen i(l-,»nti(itMl(SliaiiH!"s Ea'hj Kgijjjt, ji. 2(i), 
 Shisliiik (2 CliMiti. xii.) will) Si'sostris (u.c. 98,1); 
 Pharaoli-Nerhiili (2 Kiii;^s xxiii.) \\\\.\\ Ncclio II. 
 (b.c. fil(>); iind I'luiraoli-Hoplua (Jer. xliv.) with 
 Apiies (u.c. 51) J). 
 
 On few liistciical points liave ni'.re various or. 
 ronfliclin^ opinions l>eoM held tliaii ios))ectin^; tlie 
 Hyk?i)3 or shepliprd kings. \Vho were thi'y "^ 
 When did they rule? When wen; they ex|)elletl ? 
 Were they the «imeas the Israelites'? are quest! )n3 
 which have reeeivc.l at the hands c\en of ])ro- 
 foundly learned men very dill'erent answers. Nor 
 in so debated a c;ise should we lieie venture an 
 opinion did we not feel that the view we take has 
 an important heaiing on the origin of some ])art cf 
 the religion of the Ejiyufiaiis. 
 
 Manetiio makes liis Hl'teenth dynasty to consist 
 of the Plurnieian sheplierd kings. ' In the reign 
 of King Timeus,' he says, 'there came up from 
 the east men of an ignuble race, who had the con- 
 fidence to invade our coiintiy, and easily suiidued 
 it without a hattle, liurning tiie cities, demolishing 
 the temples, slaying tlie men, and reducing the 
 women and chiUlreJi to slavery.' Tliey made 
 S.il.itis, one of themselves, king: he reigned at 
 Memphis, and made tlie up)ier and lower region 
 triliutary. Of his sev enfeenth dynasty also weie 
 forty-tiiiee sheplierd kings, called Hycsos, who 
 reigned, j erliaps coniemjiovaneously with the jne- 
 reil'n^, at Diospolis. In the eigrneenth dynasty 
 of DiosiKiiis a "ising took jilace. and the shejiiierd 
 kings were ex]ielled out of the other ])aits of Egypt 
 into the dis.rict of Aharis, which they fortified. 
 Amosis besieged and compelleil them to capi- 
 tulate ; on which they left Egypt, in number 
 240,0011, and ' marched through the desert towards 
 Syria, and built the city of Jerusalem.' The last 
 few words seem to render it jirobable that Maneilio 
 confounded the Hyksos with the Israelites, which 
 is the less surpi ising since the Hyksos were, as he 
 rightly calls liiem, Phoenicians, of the ancient, if 
 not original, race which inhabited Phoenicia, or 
 Palestine (taken in its widest sense), lietbre the 
 conquest of the country by the Hebrews. Chro- 
 noJogical consideratiyns seem to refer the time 
 of the dominion of the Hyksos to the period of 
 Abraham and Josejih (say fiom b.c. 2000 to 1600). 
 When Jo«»;|)h wei.t into the land he fcaind the 
 name of slie]iherd odious — which agrees with the 
 hyijothesis that places the iiru]ition of the shep- 
 herd kings anterior to his time; and possibly lioth 
 the ease with which he rose to power, and the fact 
 that Jacob turned towards Egyjit for a supply of 
 food when urged by want, may be readily ac- 
 counted for, on the supposition that a kindred 
 race held dominion in the land, which, though 
 hated by the people, as being foreign in its origin 
 and oppressive in its character, would not be in- 
 disposed to sliow favour to members of the great 
 Shemitic family to which they themselves be- 
 longed. The irrujition into Egypt, and the con- 
 quest of the country on the part of the Phoenician 
 shepher<ls, seems to have been a consequence of 
 the gene.al pressti-e of population, from the noitli- 
 east towards the south-west, which led the nomade 
 Siienntic tribes first to overcome the original in- 
 habitants of Palestine, and, continuing in the 
 ume line of advance, then to enter and subdue 
 Sj^pt. The invasion of the Hyksos is ind"ed to 
 oe regarded as cue result of the movement from 
 
 EGYPT. Mr 
 
 the KuphrutCR westward of th« mo«l |>owerfui rtmI 
 (comparatively) most civiii/.<-d |H.Mp'e ilien foiiiid 
 in \Veslern A>i.i, who i:i llieir |)ro,'irj(s subdued or 
 expelled in the countiies tiirough «h'ri| they not 
 improbably weie urged by a pie-siue .'"n)r> otiier 
 advancing tiibei, nation and tribe one al'ler uuo- 
 t!ier, driving tiieni down toward liie sea, and 
 coin|)elling tlio.se who dwelt along ti.e sliurus of 
 the ^lediteiranean, to seek uheller and safety in 
 tiie islands of that sea anil other dis'ani pailit. 
 To conquerors ami ag,'res<ors of the character of 
 tiiese shepherd hordes Egyjif would ofl'er special 
 attractions. Tliey coniinued sm-eplu.^ unvtards, 
 and at last entered and conquered Egypt, esiu- 
 blishing there a ne.v dynasty, which was iiateful, 
 because foreign, and iiecaiise of a lower degree of 
 culture than tlieEgyptiansthcinsei\ es liad leached. 
 Nor would tiiese shephrrds be less odious be'ause, 
 coming from the east and imme<lialely from the 
 deserts of Araliia, tiiey came from tlie quait^r 
 whence tlie mild and cultivated Egyptians had 
 long been wont to sutler from the jin datiay incur- 
 sions of the vihl nomade tribes {Die I'll nizicr, 
 von Movers, Bomi, IS 41; Z r Gcsc/iuJite ih.r 
 Israehten, von E. Uertheau, Gotiingeii, IS 12,, 
 lietueen whom and the agriciiltur.il natives of tlie 
 country difl'erent pursuits, haliits, and tastes would 
 naturally engeniier animosities. This feeling A 
 alienation exists at the piesent day. The .\iab is 
 still a depressed anil despiseil being in Egypu 
 Bowring, m his valuable iiejMiit on the country, 
 remarks, • It is scarcely allowable even to send a 
 message to a person in authority by an Arab ser- 
 vant.' (p. 7.) 
 
 The expulsion of the shepherds was strangely 
 confounded by Joseihus or Manetho with tii« 
 Exodus of the Israelites. The slie|ilierds w'.-re 
 conquerois, rulers, and oppressoi s ; tiie Isiaeiiies 
 guests and slaves. The shepherds weie ex- 
 pelled, the Israelites were delivered. Josephus 
 (e. Apion. i.), however, gives from Manetho 
 a narrative of an event which wears a muc^i 
 nearer likeness to the Exodus, in the case of a 
 King Amenophis, who was ordered liy the gotis 
 to clean.se Egypt of a multitude of hpers and 
 other unclean jiersons ; many of whom were 
 drowned, and others sent in great nunil)crs to 
 work ill the quarries which are on the east side 
 of the Nile. After a time they were jiermitted 
 to establish themselves in --Vvari-s, which had been 
 abandoned by the sheplierds Tliey then elected 
 a ruler, Osarsiph, wliose name was afleiwauls 
 changed to tliat of Moses. Tliis chief 'made this 
 law for them, tiiat they should not worship the 
 Egyptian gods, but should kill the animals held 
 sacred by the Egyjitians ; nor were they to have 
 intercouise with any but sucii as were members 
 of their own body — in all re.spects aiming to 
 oppose the customs and inlluence of the nations. 
 These, sending for aid to the shepherds wlio had 
 settled in Jerusalem, and having received troo]* 
 to the iiumlier of 21)0,000 men, were met by 
 Amenophis, the king, with a yet laiger force, b\it 
 not attacked. On a subsecpient occiision, howfver, 
 they were assailed by the Egyptians. l>e}iten, and 
 driven to the confines of Syria.' Lysimachus gives 
 an account not dissimilar to this, adi'ing, that 
 under the lejidership of Moses tiiese mixed hordes 
 settled in Jiid:pa (Cory's Annent Frnijme^Ui), 
 The account which Diodorus gives of the inigr»- 
 tioii of the Isiaelilcs from Egypt to Palestine it
 
 90% 
 
 EGYPT. 
 
 EGYPT. 
 
 Of a similar tenor. The devi.itions from the 
 wcred narrative may lie easily accounted for l»y 
 Kgyptiai. i^;norance. vanity, and pride. 
 
 Wati.tn, fallowing his own chronology, refei-s 
 the gvat wori<s existing in Kgyi)t to three jieiiods, 
 dcpaiated hy intervals of several centiiiies. 'The 
 first includes the two gicat dynasties of Theban 
 priiicee wild froverried E,\vpt during her " most 
 lugii and palmy state," when Thelies sent forth her 
 armies to distant conquests. In the second j)eriod 
 is comprised tiie erection of tiie pyramids. The 
 third includes tlie leigjis of tiie Ptolemies and 
 earlier Caesars, under whom K^'vptian architectvne 
 Nourished in a second youth, and almost attained 
 its original splemlour. On tiie chronology, liow- 
 eier, of tiie Hrie arts in Egypt, as well as on so 
 many otb.er \ 'ints, dilVerent, not to say ojiposite, 
 opinions are held ; for instance, the erect ion of the 
 
 ! pyramids, whicli W'atlien tiius hrings down into 
 lis second period, others refer back to the early 
 dawn of its history. This is not the place to state, 
 much !e?s discuss, (he diversities which present 
 themselves to tiie student; our purjiose will Ite 
 answered by some general details as to the extent 
 and character of the sublime creations of art in 
 Egypt— of that wonderful country, the most won- 
 deil'ul monuments. 
 
 tn regard to style, that remained essentially the 
 same, in pii:;ciples and character, from its first 
 apjiearance {• in the seventeenth century before 
 our era' — Wathen) to its final downfall, on the 
 introduction of Clnistiaiiity ; though ornamental 
 inemlters weie in later times modified, elaborated, 
 iuid im])roved, and some entirely new added. 
 Siany of its peculiarities may have been borrowed 
 Iro n large aichitecfural excavations. One of 
 Jtie most striking jiec iiliaiities of the style is the 
 pyrami lai ciiaracter of the asceuding lines. The 
 tyne of the arciiitecfure wa^ the primitive dwelling 
 formed of reeds, which abounded on tiie banks of 
 die Nile. In one of tiie orders of the Pharaonic 
 
 columns, the original post of reeds may he said to 
 have been translated into stone. If the construc- 
 tion* were of any great height, their stability, as 
 lieing originally built of reeds, would, it is evi- 
 ■ient, require them tn incline one to the other, 
 8loping inwards, tluis forming the ])yramidal out- 
 line to whicli rel'e.rence has been made. The 
 »lan of tlie Egyptian tenijjle appears to have 
 
 originated in the practice of extending the 9tlTi>> 
 ture bv successive additions till llie oiigiiial form 
 became the mere nucleus of tiie whole. First, 3 
 large pylon, consisting of two broad towering 
 masses of masonry, with a doorway in tlie middle, 
 was erected in advance to give greater dignity to 
 •the aiiproicii. This was united to the oiiginal 
 liuilding hy lateral walls, fronted internally by 
 colonnades ; and thus tiie intermediate space was 
 converted into a cloistered court, ,=olemn and 
 secluded, well agreeing with the dark and mys- 
 terious characler of tiie- national religion^ A 
 succeeding monarch would add a grand hall of 
 columns in advance of, and attached to, diis court; 
 and a third, not less anxious to iionour tlie gods 
 and immortalize his name, evecteil a second quad- 
 rangle before the hall, terminating the wiude 
 range of buildings with a stupendous pylon which 
 bore his inscriptions; and, if lie were a v.'arricr, 
 of!ered a grand field for the sculptLired display of 
 his achievenients. 
 
 Tiie most brilliant periods of Egyptian art 
 were the reigns of tlie second and third Rameses.. 
 Most of the olielisks and colossal statues were 
 wrought before or during the reign of Rameses II., 
 the Sesostris of the Greek writers. Under this 
 enterprising monarch, the ancient Theban empire 
 attained its higliest pinnacle of prosperity and 
 power. Rameses III. undertook distant military 
 expeditions, roused the energies of the country, 
 encouraged art, and erecteil the splendid temple 
 of Medinet Abu. At a later age (he sceptre of 
 Egypt was swayed by powerful monarclis, who 
 built on a grand scale ; but the seat of tlie govern- 
 ment was then in the Delta, and there remain 
 only a few obelisks. 
 
 The valley of tlie Nile is all along at intervals 
 stre.ved with wrecks of ancient monumental gran- 
 deur ; at Thebes, however, they are found on 
 butli sides of the river in gieatest prolusion. Ni.'X.t 
 to the pyramids, the most wonderful relic of 
 Egyptian art is the great hall of the temple of 
 Carnak, on the east bank of the Nile. Its sujwr- 
 ficial area is 31 1 feet by 16 1. The massive 
 stone roof is su])ported by 134 columns ranged in 
 sixteen rows, most of wiiich are 9 feet in diame- 
 ter, and nearly 43 feet higli : those of the central 
 aveime are not less than 1 1 feet 6 inches in dia- 
 meter, and 72 feet high ; the diameter of their 
 CJipitals at their widest spread is 22 feet. The 
 walls, columns, arcliitraves, ceilings, every sur- 
 face exjiosed to the eye, is overspread with in- 
 taglio sculptures — gods, heroes, and hieioglypliics, 
 jminted in once vivid cohjiirs. But the hall ol 
 colunms was but a part of this wondeifol fabric. 
 Immense ]iyloiis, hall'-buried quadrangles and 
 halls, granite obelisks, and tremendiius piles of 
 fallen masonry once formed a range of buildings 
 upwards of 1200 feet in length. An avenue of 
 C(-lossal sphinxes led from the temple to Luxor, 
 forming a vista wliich extended nearly a mile 
 and a half, and was aiimirably ailapted for iha 
 fwgeantry o:.* religious processioni. All theie 
 liuildings fornietl parts of one magnificent whole; 
 all were constructed of gigantic blocks, and most 
 were covcieil with sculpture. 'Such was Uie 
 imperial palace of the Pharaohs when Euroj* 
 was yet in primeval barbarism, ages before Romu- 
 lus took his omen on the Palatine hill.' Now 
 the luins are strewed in chaotic cotd"usion over i 
 sandy plain, broken into shajieless taound.'*.
 
 EGYPT. 
 
 Amon^ the most reniaikalile works of the 
 Kgyptiiiiis must he rankeil tlie vast sfpiilchrps ex- 
 cavated in {he se.hisidii of llip Tlicl):m moun- 
 tains to receivo their dead monaichs. ' It was,' 
 says Wathen, 'about an hour lx,'l'ore siinset one 
 eveniinf that I set out to visit this Nccrojinlis, 
 intendin;^ to piiss tli; night in one of the royal 
 sepulchres. Oi. »j)|noaciiins^ the g-orpje, the first 
 thing that strur't i,» was the quantify of bones, 
 fragjiienls of i 'ummies, rolls of nuiminy cloth, 
 and other relics im" lilled (Egy[)tian) tomhs that 
 strewed the ground. Princes, priests, and war- 
 riors, after rejiosiiig thousands of years, are now 
 dragged forth hy poor peiisants, and their hones 
 lie scattered before the <loors of their sepulchres. 
 Caudles were lighted : ' 1 passed the threshold, 
 and looked round with silent wonder on the 
 scene within. A large corridor or gallery ran 
 
 KfJYPT. 
 
 60* 
 
 back hundreds of feet into the heart (,f the moun- 
 tain, diviiied liy lateral projections into Ieu!,'then- 
 ing vistas of apartments. The walls were el»» 
 gantly aihirned with columns of hlue hieitigiy- 
 phic;s on a while ground, olWO yeas old. vil n- 
 taining ahnost the freshness of yi^terd:iy. In a 
 large chamher at the euil of the gallery »,i. a 
 massive sarcophagus. Here once lay tlie roy.il 
 mummy, but it had long heen oj^n. and wan 
 empty. There are eight or nine ot these large 
 painted tondis in a grouj), hesides others of l<--s 
 interest. They vary in hngth fiom lOl) to u])w.ii.is 
 of 41)0 feet. In most, you tind on entering a long 
 descending corridor or gallery, running (>(! in a 
 straight line into tiie heait of the mountain. At 
 its farther end the corridor ex])ands into one or 
 more large apartments, whose roofs are supported 
 liy massive piers of the living rock. Tae' wallg 
 
 
 877. [Great Hall of the Temple of Carnak.j 
 
 «nd piers throughout are generally decorated with 
 paintings still wonderfully retaining tl.,-"ir fresh- 
 ness : the sulijects are chiedy processions, leligious 
 rites, and allegoric and enigmatical devices.' The 
 ohject seems to have been to enshrine the corj)se 
 dee]) within the earth in a mitss of mas,.nry, far 
 from the stir of the living world. For these "royal 
 sq)ulchres of Theiies the"y first selected the lone- 
 liest ravine; fur each tomb fliey carried a gallery 
 deep into the hill, and then placed the corpse in 
 the lemotest jjart. But the tomhs of the kings 
 form only a part of tins great city of (he dead. 
 The sides of the hills overlooking the plain and 
 tlie ravines intersecting them, contain innumerable 
 sepidchral excavations. One valley was appropri- 
 ated to the queens, ami in a remote comer the apes 
 bad a cmetery. Tiie priests seized the liest Sjiots. 
 The ,/uri)ose for whicli the pyramids were 
 ^rmr.tfii was once as little known "as were most 
 
 other things connected with Egypt. It now ap- 
 pears satisfactorily ascertained that they were 
 designed to be mausoleums ; and what an idea 
 does it give us of the grandeur of conception, the 
 splendour in every respect of tie monarchs to 
 whom they owe-t!:eir origin, that tl ey sliould have 
 devised and executed tombs so stupendoii? I 'On 
 leaving the villa-e of fJizeli. en the river buik o-,h 
 ))osite old f'airo (Memphis), the ])yiamid« use 
 before you glittering white against the blue sky ; 
 liut the flatness of the plain and the purity of i'ii» 
 atmospheie ellectually deceixe the eve as to theii 
 distance and consecpiently their size : you atmosi 
 a]>pear at their base while several miles re ily in 
 terveiie. As you advajice gradually they •infdil 
 their gigtuilic dimensions; but you miisr liavi 
 been some time on tiie spot, your eye must have 
 repeatedly travelhd alon.' the great pvramirri 
 7iO feet of bise, and uj) its slee]i toweritig auglVt,
 
 i)0 
 
 KGIPT. 
 
 •efoie yon can fully understand its immensity, 
 tnd tlie acivial amount of laljour involved in 
 U erection' (Watlieji). According to Pliny 
 
 
 878. [Pyramid of Cheops.] 
 
 J66,O00 men were employed for 20 years in erect- 
 ing the great pyramid, and Herodotus reports 
 from an inscription wliicli it bore, that the ex- 
 Qense of ;iroviaing the workmen witli onions and 
 MhtT roots amounted to 1600 talents. ^Whole 
 mosques liave prohably been built out of spoils 
 from it alone. Yet the integrity of its form re- 
 nnains substantially unimpaired, and from a dis- 
 iince scarcely a trace of violence or decay can 
 se seen. Tlie existing masonry lias been estimated 
 it above six millions of tons, which was raised 
 over an area of thirteen English acres and a half; 
 irid, snpposin,^ the cost of the structure to have 
 been one shilling a cubic foot, including carriage, 
 materials, and worlcmanship, the erection required 
 tn outlay of nearly live millions sterling. The 
 jrigiual peiijendiciilar height was 4'!0 feet, ex- 
 -;e«ling that of St. Peter's by 43 feet, and that 
 if St. Paul's by 1 1 0. Tlie huge mass_ equalled a 
 lolid pile occupying the whole area of Luicoln s- 
 mn-fields, and "ascending to a point 100 feet 
 bigher than the top of St. Paul's. 
 
 If, as we have some reason to believe, and as 
 •lie reader may see satisfactorily established in 
 Movers and Beitlieau (ut supra), a race of the 
 Sliemitic family, coming down from the upper 
 Aram) country into the lower (Canaan), in course 
 of time subjugated Egypt and established their 
 dominion, maintaining it for some five hundred 
 years, such an historical event must ha\e liad a 
 marked influence on the religion of the land. 
 Tliese invaders are described (Herod, ii. 128) as 
 enemies to the religion of Egypt, who destroyed 
 or closed the temples, broke in pieces the altars 
 and images of the gods, and killed the sacred 
 animals. Their influence on the Egyjitian reli- 
 gion was, probably, not unlike that of the Persians 
 on the Grecian, having for its aim and elVect to 
 discounteiiauce and destroy a low and degrading 
 system of idolatry ; for tlie worslilp of the iieavenly 
 bodies, to whiih the PhcEiiician equally with the 
 P«-siaii invaders were given, was higlier in its cha- 
 tacter and elfects than the seivlce of tlie ordinary 
 gods of Greece, and still more_so tlian the de- 
 grading homage paid by the l-.gyifiar.s to the 
 lowest animals. By this means the Shemitic re- 
 ligion exerted on the native Egyptian religion a 
 decided and improving influence, which may be 
 se«n and traced in that element of the rell^niiu of 
 ^'^y\>i which con ilns and Dresents the woislnp 
 
 EGYPT. 
 
 of tlie lieavenly bodies. The two s) stems, tiwt n* 
 
 the Egyi)tians liefoie it received inoculation from 
 the East, and that oi' the Eastern invaders, agreed 
 in this, that they were both the worship of the 
 poweis of natuie ; but they diflered in this, and 
 an imjKntant ditVerence it was, that tlie Egyptians 
 adored the brute creation, the PhcEnlclans, tl e 
 host of heaven. Our limits foilnd details on the 
 subject, which, however, together with proofs and 
 illustrations, may be fcund in the valuable works 
 before mentioned. On the subject of Egyptian 
 religion, besides the woiks aheady referred to, 
 the following may be advantageously consultev!. 
 Pauly, Rmi-Encylopiidie, Mgypthihe Rclifiion i 
 Prichard's Egyptian Mythology; Jablonski. i'.T/>- 
 theon Aigyptiaciim ; Beltrcige zur Kentniss der 
 Lit. Ktmst, Mi/t/wl. unci Gcschich. dcs alum 
 jEgyptens, voii G. SeylVartli ; Vntersuchung: 
 uber den Mythos der beruh. Volker alter Welt ; 
 Creuzer. Symbolik. 
 
 The relation in which the religion of Egypt 
 stands to that of Moses is one of very consider- 
 able interest and impoitance, and one which has 
 not yet received the kind and degree of attention 
 which it merits. Michaelis ' MosaischdS liecht), 
 and others of tlie same school, liave given valualile 
 aid, but they wrote with, compared witli what is 
 now known, insufficient knowledge, if not \yith 
 somewhat too much of a foregone conclusion. 
 Other learned men, influenced by their philoso 
 phical notions, or prejudiced against the 'Hebrew 
 religion, have made Moses a mere copyist of in- 
 stitutions and retailer of ideas wliicii he found m 
 Egyjit. As a basis for such a view it was neces- 
 sarily assumed that a purer system of religion 
 was found in Egypt in the days of Moses than 
 existed in any other ])art of the world. In par- 
 ticular, the Egyptian mysteries were set forth as 
 the depositaries of high and valuable religious doc- 
 trines. Scripture and history (the Acts of the 
 Apostles; Josephus, Philo) were adduced to show 
 that Moses had been instructed in tliis priceless 
 lore, and initiated into these mysteries; whence 
 he was declared to have drawn his system of Mo- 
 notheism, and even the characteristic name lAH, 
 which he gave to the God whom he proclaimed, 
 as alone worthy of the solemn title (Plesslng, 
 Memnonium, ii. 529 ; Schiller, Die Sendung 
 Moses ; Reinliold, Die Hebrais.hen Mystenen). 
 These views, however, rest on no solid foundation 
 whatever, if, indeed, they may not be to some 
 extent considered a's the illusory and almost 
 posthumous ollspriiig of the old and exploded 
 notion which ascribed boundless knowledge to the 
 ancient Egyptians. Nor can they for a moment 
 be held in' tliese days, after the lignt thrown on 
 early Egypt by the monumental disclosures. The 
 brief n^rtion g'iven above of the general charac- 
 teristics of tlie earliest religion of the country, 
 sho«s liow utterly baseless such a theory .s. In 
 truth, the inhabitants of Palestine, so far back as 
 we have been able to learn anything of them, 
 seem to have jKissessed far better and purer religious 
 opinions than those of the valley of the Nile, and 
 in all probability did sometliing to improve and 
 elevate the religious system of the latter (Movers, 
 rkonizier). The exposure of this sceptical hyuo- 
 thesis, which the IJil)le enables the scholar to su^j- 
 piy, mav be found in Vatke, Die Religion dei 
 .a'. T. iiai'h den Canon. Buchern eiitwickelt, itrd 
 Hen 'stenberg. Die Authent.e des Pentateuch.
 
 EHUD. 
 
 TliP »•<' jecl ">f ciicnmcisiiin among tlie Egyp- 
 tians Has alrfticiy been coiisiiiered [Ciucum- 
 cision]. Tl>e pages of the present wdik nfloid 
 ample evidences ot" tlie relation wliicli i'^s^ypt 
 hears to tli« Biblical History, and siieclmens of 
 the liicht which the manners, customs, opinions, 
 and buildings of the Egyptian jieople already 
 throw, and of the fuller and clearer light which, 
 as our knowledge advances, they ai^ likely to 
 tlirow, on the usages of the cliosen }ieopk', and the 
 jiages of the sacred volunne. 
 
 It may be projjer to add that, siii'^e the almve 
 was written, we liaxe read Ancient Ej!fp(, iuT 
 Monuments, &c. by Georgp R. GiiddoM: a work 
 whi'"h gives a mwdi more favourable account of 
 the .esults of modern reseiucii into th-e Hierogly- 
 pliics than this article would seem to jus'ify. The 
 peculiarly advantageous position of the author of 
 Ancient Egypt, as having lived above twenty 
 yeais in tl>« country, and being Unitetl States' 
 consul for Cairo, makes his opinions on Egyptian 
 antiquities worthy of gi-eat attention. Yet we 
 cannot <lf>ny that his woi-k has traces of being 
 written in a partisan spirit. The reader, however, 
 will !)« rew-anled by perusing the jnoduction, since 
 it ]iresents (tho«gh not in the best style) a rajiid 
 sketch of the entn-e subject of Egyptian antitiui- 
 Lies, written by a man intimately and in part 
 personally acquainted with the jwints in question. 
 
 J. R.B. 
 
 EHUD O-IHK ; Sept. 'Aiu'S), of the trii>e of 
 Ucnjamin, one of the ' Judges ' of Israel, or rather 
 of til at p:irt of Israel \X'iiich he delivered from the 
 dominion of the Moabities by the assassmation of 
 their king Eglon. These were tiie tribes l»eyond 
 the Jordan, and the soirthein triljcs on this side the 
 river. Ehud obtained access to Eglon as the 
 ■"litvirer of tjibute from the sulgugated tribes, and 
 being left-hawded, or rather ambid'extrous, he was 
 enabled to \ise with a sure and fatal arm a dagger 
 concealed under a {wirt of his dress, where it was 
 iinsusiiccted, because it would there liave been 
 Mieless To a person employing his right hand. The 
 l-raelitcs continued to «njoy fur eighty j-eais tlte 
 inde))endence olftairred through this deed of 
 Eiiud (Jndg. iii. 1;k30). 
 
 KKRON (fnpy.; Sept, 'AxKopt^r), the chief 
 of the live Pliilistine states (Josh. xiii. 3), and 
 the uoHlieinmost of the live. In the geneaai 
 ■distribution of territory (unconquereti as well 
 as conquei-ed) Ekion wa3 assigtjed to Judah, 
 as being upon its border (Josh. xiii. 3; xv. 11, 
 4.5) ; Imt was afterwards apjiarently given to Dan, 
 althougli conquered by Judah (Josh. xv. 11, 4) ; 
 xix. 43: Judf. i, 18; comp. Joseph. Antiq. v. 1, 
 22; v. 2, 4). In Scrijjture Ekron is ciiiefly u- 
 ■r.iaikahle from the ai-k- having l)een sent home 
 from iiienc«, upon a r>ew cart drawn by two milch 
 liiiie (I Sara. v. iO ; vi. 1-8). In later days, it 
 is nametl with the otlier cities of the Philistines 
 in the denunciations of tl)e prophets against that 
 ipeople (Jer. xxv. 90; Amos i. S; Zeph. ii. 4; 
 •Zec.h. IK. 3). Euseliius ajnl Jerome descrilje 
 Ekion as a village of the .I^ews between Azotus 
 *nd Jainnia towards tlie east, or eastw;U'd of a 
 line drawn l»elween these two places [Onomast. in 
 ■* AccaroH '). The name of Ekron, w rather Ac- 
 caron, occurs ir.citlentally in tiie histories of tlie 
 Crusades; ar\d it lias lately been recognised by 
 Kw liobitison (Hib. Jieaearchit, iii. 24") in that of 
 
 VLAM. 
 
 tu 
 
 .\1cri, in a 8ituati(m corresponding 'o all we kno;» 
 
 of Ekron. Tiie radical U'tlers of tlie .-Yraliic name 
 are the same as those ol' the Ileljiew, and bodi the 
 Christians aud Moslt'ms of the neiglilKnnhood i<>- 
 gard the site as that of the aiK-ient Ekron. .\kri 
 is a small Moslem village, (i\e riiilis south of 
 Ramleh. It is built of unlunut Itiicks, and, as 
 tliere arv lut apjiarent ruin<, fiie ancient town wa« 
 probably of the same materials. It is alleged, 
 however, that cisterns and the stones of haiid-mdls 
 are often found at Akri ami in t.ie adjacent fields. 
 
 ELAH (H^X ; Sept. 'H\a). son of Baasha 
 
 king of Israel, After a reign of two years (h.c. 
 0'?0-(>'29) he was assassinated while drunk, and 
 all his kinsfolk iuid friends cut otf, by Zinui, 
 ' the cajitain of half his chariots.' lie was the 
 last king of Haasiia's line, and by this cata- 
 stro[)he (he jiredictions of the ]irophcl Jehu were 
 accomplished (^l Kings xvi. (>-14). 
 
 ELAH, a valley in which the Israelites were 
 encamped when Daviil fought Goliah fl Sara, 
 xvii. lH). It doubtless received this name, which 
 some sikW Alah (which see), fiom the terebinth 
 trees, or fmrn some remaikable terebintii tree, 
 growing in it. Ecclesiastical traditio.is identify 
 it with tlie nresetit valley of Beit Ilanina, about 
 eight miles nortii-west fiom Jenlsaleni. In this 
 valley olive trees and carob trees now pieiail, 
 and terebinth trees are few ; but the inook is still 
 indicatetl whence the youthful champion selected 
 tiie ' smo th s'oiies" wherewith he smote the Philis- 
 tine. The brook is dry in summer, but in wintrt 
 it becomes a mighty torrent, which inundates tiie 
 vale (Pictorial Palestine, p. 121). Dr. Robin- 
 son, however, dis]rutes this ancient tiatlition. and 
 finds that the conditions of the history iwpiiie 
 him to identify the valley of Elah witii the Wady 
 es-'Sunit (acacia valley), which he crossed <hi tlie 
 road from Jerusalem to Gaza, about eleven miles 
 SQuth-west from the foi-mer city. His reasons are 
 given in Biblical liesearches, iii. 3.51) ; and he 
 remarks that the largest specimen of the tei'ebinth 
 tree which lie saw in Palestine still stands in the 
 vicinity. 
 
 ELAil (ttyV ; Sept. 'EAa/i), which is men- 
 tioned in Gen. x. 22, as a tribe descended from 
 Shem, is, in ch. xiv. 1, introduced along witli tlw 
 kingdom of Shinar in Babylon, and in lia. xxi. 
 2, and Jer, xxv. 25, is cwiix-ctetl with Media. In 
 Ezra iv. 9, the Elamites are descrilied among the 
 nations of the Persian empire ; and in Djin. xiii. 2, 
 Susa is sai-<l to lie on the liver Ulai (Eula?us or 
 ChoiisiK-s) in the p:ovince of Elam, Tiiese ac 
 c(;uiits lead to tiie conclusion that Elam was the 
 same land which was designated by the Greeks 
 and Romans by tlie name of Elymais, and which 
 formed a juit of the ancient Susiana, the modern 
 Khusisfaii, This SusioJia, which may thus be 
 regarded «is the Elam of Scripture, was bouniled 
 on the east by Persia Projier (ancient Pei-sis, m.<- 
 4lein Fars), en the west by Babylonia (the .\ra- 
 bian Irak), i.n the north by Me<lia, and on tl« 
 south by the Peisi.in Gulf. This country is n.)t 
 unfix<pieiitly regai-ded as a jviit of Persia Pioi^r: 
 but in t:ie division of the juovinces it wd-s con- 
 siilered distinct from it, and constituietl a [leculiur 
 satrajiy. which was about half as large as Persis, 
 and not quite as large as England. Elam wa< 
 inhabited by various tribes of people. Tite 
 Elvmaei or Elama;i, together with the Ki^M
 
 612 
 
 ELaTH. 
 
 ELATH 
 
 ■eem fo liave heen tlie oldest iriliahifanfs not only 
 of Siiaiana Proper hut also of Persia ; whence the 
 sacreii writers, iiniler the name of Elain, coin])re- 
 liended the country of tlie Persians in general. 
 Thp Elamaei dwelt partly in the north and partly 
 in tlie south of tlie countrv ; and as tiiey occii])ied 
 tlie greater jiart of it, they wereahle to iiring into 
 the field a considerahle ijody of troops, who were 
 chiefly archers (Strabo, xv. 3, 10). It was in this 
 capacity, indeed, as arclieis, that the other inlia- 
 hitin^ tiihes the Uxii, the Kissi, the Cossaei — 
 were chiedy celebrated ; and hence the historical 
 pii)|in'ety of the Scriptural allusion to the qtiiver 
 and the bow of the Elainites (Isa. xxii. 6; Jer. 
 xiix. 31). Indeed, in the latter text the bow i* 
 <lisfiricily mentioned as tlie chief instrument of 
 Elawlte jjower — ' I will break the bow of Elam, 
 the chief of his might.' 
 
 It would seem tliat Elam was veiy early a se- 
 ]iaiate state with its own kings; for in tlie time 
 of Abraham we find that Chedovlaomer king of 
 Elam extendeil his conquests we;t of the Eu- 
 )i!irates as far as the Joiilan and the Dead Sea 
 (Cien. xiv.); but whether he acted for himself, or 
 only as the viceroy or general of the Assyrians 
 (as Josephus seems to intimate), must remain a 
 matter of doubt. Ezekiel (xxxii. 24) mentions 
 Ehim among the mighty uncircumcised nations 
 which had been tlie terror of the world : and 
 about the same period (b.c. .590) Jeremiah threat- 
 ened it with conquest and destruction by the 
 Chaldwans (Jer. xlix. 30,31, sqq.). This was 
 accomplished probably by Nebuchidnezzar, who 
 subjected Western Asia to his dominion ; for we 
 find his successiir Behhazzar residing at Susa, the 
 cajiital of Elam, a province then subject to that 
 monarch (Dan viii. 1. 2: Kosfmxu'uWeT's Biblical 
 Geography, kc). With this the Scriptural no- 
 tices of Elam end, unless we add tliat Elaniites are 
 found among those who were at Jerusalem at the 
 feast of Pentecost (Acts ii. 9); which implies that 
 Jews descended from the exiles were settled in 
 that country. Here also they are mentioned next 
 to the ' Medians," with whom they are also coupled 
 by the jiiophets (Isa. xxi. 2 ; Jer. xxv. 2-5) ; for 
 which it does not appear necessary to seek any 
 fmtlier reason than tliat, to the Jewish writers, 
 Elam lay next beyond Media. 
 
 ELATH (n^^N), termed in the Sept. Alxdv ; 
 in Josejih. (Avfiq. viii. 6, 4) hlKavi) ; in Jerome, 
 Ailath ; by the Greeks and Romans, '¥.\6.va. It is 
 now called Ailah. These several names are only 
 variations of the original Hebrew word. It was a 
 city of Idumsea, having a ]iort on the eastern arm 
 or gulf of the Red Sea, which thence received the 
 name of Sinus Elaniticus (Gulf of Akaba). Ac- 
 cording to Eiisebiiis, it was ten miles east from 
 Petra. It lies at the extremity of the valley of 
 Elglior, which runs at the bottom of two parallel 
 ranges of hills, north and south, through Arabia 
 PetrrEa. from the Dead Sea to the northern parts 
 of the Elanitic Gulf. 
 
 The first time that it is mentioned in the .Scrip- 
 hires is in Dent. ii. 8, where, in speaking of the 
 journey of the Israelites towards the Promised 
 Land, these xKirds occur — ' When we passed by 
 from onr bietlren the children of Esau, whicii 
 dwelt in Seir, through the way of the ]ilain from 
 Klath. and from Eziongeber.' These two places 
 »re mentioned together agaixi in 1 Kings ix. 2<5, 
 
 in such a manner as to show that Klath wa^ 
 more ancient than Eziongeber, and was of m 
 much repute as to be used for indicating the 
 locality of other places : the jiassage also fixes tin 
 spot where Elath itseif was to be fo'ind : ' and 
 King Solomon made a navy of shijjs in Ezion- 
 gelier, which is beside Klath. on the sliore (Num. 
 xxxiii. ZCy) of flie Red Sea, in the land of Kilom.' 
 The use which David made of the vicinity of 
 Elath shows that tiie country was at that time in 
 his possession. Acco-dingly, in 2 Sam. viii. 14, 
 we learn that he had previously made himself 
 master of Iduma?a, and garrisoned its strong-holdi 
 with his own troo]is. Under his successor, Joram 
 f2 Kings viii. 20), the I<luma;ans revolted from 
 Judah, and elected a king over themselves. 
 Joram thereupon assembled his forces, ' and 
 all the chariots with him,' and, filling on the 
 Idum>»ans by night, succeeded in defeating and 
 scattering their army. Tlie Helnews, however, 
 could not prevail, but ' Edom revolted from under 
 the hand of Juilali unto this day ;' flius exempli- 
 fying the striking language employed (Gen. Kxvii. 
 40) by Isaac — ' liy thy sword shalt thou live, and 
 shalt serve thy brother : and it shall come to pass, 
 when thou shalt have the dominion, that thou shalt 
 break his yoke from otT thy neck." From 2 Kings 
 xiv. 22. however, it a])pears that Uzziah recovered 
 Elath, and, having so repaired and adomed the 
 city as to lie said to have built, that is rebuilt, 
 it, he made it a part of his dominions. This 
 connection was not of long continuance ; for in 
 ch. xvi. ver. C of the same book, we find tlie 
 Syrian king Rczin interjiosing. who captured 
 Elath, drove out the Jews, and annexed the place 
 to his .Syrian kingdom, and ' the Syrians came to 
 Elath, and dwelt tliere unto this day.' At a 
 later period it fell under the jiower of the Romans, 
 and was for a time guarded by the tenth legion, 
 forming part of Palse.stinaTertia (Jerome, f)7iom. 
 s. V. Ailath ; Strabo, xxi. 4, 4 ; Reland, p. 5.56 ). It 
 subsecpientl y became the residence of a Christian 
 bishop. Bishops of Elath were at the council of 
 Chalcedon (a.d. l.'Jl), and that of Constantinople, 
 (a.d. 53(5). At the council of Chalcedon, Beryllus 
 thus wrote his designation as bishop 'AiAci t^t 
 rioAaio-TiVr/j TpiTrjj. In the days of its pros- 
 perity it was much distinguished fir commerce, 
 which coIllinue^l to flourish under the auspices of 
 Christianity. In the sixth century it is spoken 
 of by Procopiiis as being inhabited by Jews sub- 
 ject to the Roman dominion {De Bell. Pers. i. 
 19). In A.D. 6"0, the Christian communities of 
 Arabia Petraea found it exjiedient to submit to 
 Mohammed, when John, the Christian governor of 
 Ailah, iiecame bound to pay an annual tribute 
 of .300 gold-pieces (Abulfeda, An7i. i. 171) 
 Henceforward, till the present century, Ailah 
 lay in the darkness of Islaniism. It is merely 
 mentioned by the siijijwsed lim Haukal, perha]* 
 in tlie eleventh century; and, after the -middle 
 of the twelfth, Edrisi des<;ribes it as a small 
 town frequented by the Arabs, who were now if* 
 masters, and forming an important point in the 
 route between Cairo and Medina. In a.d. 1116, 
 King Baldwin of .Jerusalem took possession o? 
 it. Again was it wrested from (he hands of 
 the Christians by Saladin 1., a.d. 111)7, and 
 never again fully recovered by them ; altliough 
 the reckless Rainald of Cliatillon, in ».d. liSl 
 seized, and for a time held, the *own. In Al)ui*
 
 ELD AD. 
 
 %Ia'8 day, anil before a.d. 1300, it was already 
 deserted. He says, ' In our day it is a fortress, 
 10 wliich a governor is sent from Kgyjit. It iiad 
 a small castle in the sea, but this is r.ow aliaii- 
 ioned, and tiie governor removed to tlie forfress 
 on tiie shore.' Such as Ailah was in the days of 
 Abulfeda, is Akaba now. Mounds of lubbish 
 alone mark the site of the town, whih> a foitiess, 
 occupied by a governor and a small gairis(>n 
 under the Pasha of P^gypt, serves fo k(rp the 
 neighbouring tribes of the desert in awe, and to 
 minister to the wants and protection of the annual 
 Egyptian Haj, or pilgrim caravan. Tliis place 
 has always been an important station uix)n the 
 route of the Egyptian Haj. Sucii is the importance 
 of this caravan of pilgrims from Cairo to Mecca, 
 both in a religious and political point of view, 
 that the rulers of Kgypt from tiie earliest period 
 have given it convoy and protection. For this 
 purpose a line of fortresses similar to tliat of 
 Akaba has lieen established at intervals along the 
 route, with wells of water and supplies of provisions 
 (Robinson's Biblical Jicsearchex', vol. i. p. 250). 
 
 The first Frank who visited this place in mo- 
 dern times, was Ru))pell, in 1822. Laborde 
 (Journejj through Arabia Fetraa, London, 1836) 
 was well received by the garrison and iriliabitants 
 of the castle of Akaba, of whicli he lias given a 
 view (vol. i. p. 1161. The fortress, he states, is 
 built on a regular plan, and is in a pretty good 
 condition, though within several good habitutioris 
 have been suffered to fall to ilecay. It has onl)' 
 hvo guns fit for service. — J. R. B. 
 
 ELDAD and MEDAD (inGI T^J^N ; Sept. 
 *EA5a5 KoL Mcti5a5j, two of the seventy elders 
 appointed by Moses to assist him in the govern- 
 ment of die people. Although not present with 
 the others at the door of the tabernacle, they 
 were equally filled with the divine spirit and be- 
 gan to 'prophesy' in the camp. Joshua, thinking 
 tliis irregular, requested Moses to forbid them, 
 and received an answer eminently characteristic 
 of the great lawgiver: — 'Enviest thou for uiy 
 sakeV Would to God that all the Lords people 
 were prophets, and that the Lord would jmt his 
 spirit upon theiu" (Num. xi. 24-29 j. 
 
 ELDER (JP.T ; Sept. Trpea^vnpos), literally, 
 one of the older men, and because, in ancient 
 times, older persons would naturally be selected 
 to hold public offices, out of regard to their jire- 
 sumed superiority in knowledge and experience, 
 the terai came to be used as the designation for 
 the office itself, borne by an individual, of what- 
 ever age. Such is the origin of the words 
 yepovffia (a council of elders), senatus, alder- 
 man, &c. But the term 'elder' appears to l>e 
 also expressive of respect and reverence in gene- 
 ral, as sigiiore, seigneur, senor, &c. The word 
 occurs in this sense in Gen. 1. 7, ' Joseph went 
 iij to bury his father, and with him went up all 
 li:.e servants of Pharaoh, the eiders of his house, 
 and all the elders of the land of Eiryiif; Sept. 
 npeff^vrepoi, V'ulg. senes. These elders of Egypt 
 were, probably, the various state-oflicers. The 
 elders of Israel, of whom such frequent mention 
 is made, may have been, in early times, the lineal 
 descendants of the patriarchs (Exotl. xii. 21). To 
 the elders Moses w;is directed to open his com- 
 mission (Exod. iii. 16), rh,y ytpovaiav riisv vlaii/ 
 \ 'lapaijK- A.q. reads toDs Trpeo-jSyros. They accoai- 
 
 ELDER. 
 
 613 
 
 panied Moses in his first interview with Pharaoh, 
 as the lepresentatives of tiie Hebrew nation (ver. 
 IS); ihi'oiigh them Moses issued his coninumiiu 
 tions and commands to the wliole people (E\<kI. 
 xix. 7; Dent. xxxi. 9); they were his imuiedial«> 
 attendants in all the great tiansactions in the wil- 
 derness (Exod. xvii. !}) ; seventy of tiieir nun:i,er 
 were selected fo attend Moses, .Vaion, Nadab, and 
 Abihu, at the giving of the law (Exod. xx'v. [ j, 
 on which occasion they aie called the nooUs 
 
 (''?*yN) of the children of Israel, who did eat and 
 ilrink before God, in ratification of flie covenant, 
 •IS representatives of the nation. In Num. xi. 
 16,-17, we meet with the appi^intment of seventy 
 elders to liear the burden of llie [ieojile along witli 
 Moses; these were selected by Moses out of the 
 whole numlier of the elders, and are desciibed as 
 being, already, ofiieeis over the childien of Isiael. 
 It is the opinion of Michaelis, that this council, 
 chosen to assist Moses, should not be confounded 
 with the Sanhedrim, which, he thinks, was not 
 instituted till after the return iVom the Baliyj-.nish 
 captivity [SANiiEuitiii]. Heobservesthatthe.se 
 seventy elders were not clu'sen fo Lejiidgei of the 
 jjeople, who had alieady more than 60,000 juilges. 
 He also argues that the election of .seveyjy addi- 
 tional /((flV/t-s wouhl have done but little fowauls 
 suppressing the lebellion which led Moses fo 
 adopt fliis proceeding; Ijut that it seems moie 
 likely to ha\e been his intention fo foim a suprenic 
 senate to take a share in the government, consist- 
 ing of the most respectable persons, either for 
 family or merit, which would materially support 
 his power and influence among the peojife in 
 general ; would unite large and })Ov.ertul lamilii s, 
 and give an air of aiistocracy to his goveinineift, 
 which had hitheito been deemeil too monarchical. 
 He further infers that this council was not pei- 
 manent, not being once alluded to from the deatii 
 of Moses till the IJal)ylonish cajjtivily ; that 
 Moses did not fill up the vacancies occasioned bv 
 deaths, and that it ceased altogether in the wiluei- 
 ness. After the settlement in Canajui the elders 
 seem to have been the ailminisiiators of the laws 
 in all the cities (Dent. xix. 12; xxi. 3,6, 19; 
 xxii. 15, 25). The continuance of the olhce may 
 be traceil during the time of the judges (Judg. ii. 
 7); during that of Samuel (1 Sam. xvi. 4); 
 under Saul (I Sam. xxx. 2(i); and David (I 
 Chron. xxi. 16). Tiie elders of Israel aie men- 
 tioned during the captivity (E/ia x. 14), consist- 
 ing either of those wlio hail sustained tliat olhce 
 in their own land, or weie jieimitted liy the iSabv- 
 lonians to exercise it still among their coun- 
 trymen. We meet with fhtm again at thf lesto- 
 ration (Ezra v. 5), and l)y (liem the Teiiip'.e was 
 rebuilt (vi. 14). After the re»torafiou and during 
 the time of the Maccabees, the Sanhedrim, acconl- 
 ing to Michaelis, was instituted, being fiist men- 
 tioned under Hyrcanus II. (^Josej h. Antiq. 9, 3); 
 but elders are still refeired to in 1 Mace. vii. 33. 
 Among the members of the Sanhedrim wne ti.e 
 Trpta^vTtpoi. Thus we find u apx'^P^''^ '" nicie 
 frequently ol upx'^pf^s /coi oi •ypa/j./j.aTfis Kal oi 
 TTpfaPvTe^ot, al.so 'chief priests and eldeis,' 'ejileu 
 and scribes,' and various other collocations. Like 
 the scribes, they olifained their seat in ;lie San- 
 hedrim by election, or iioniinafii II Irom the execu- 
 tive authority. The woid eliier, with many other 
 Jewish term», was intioduccil into the Chiistiaa
 
 •u 
 
 ELEALEII. 
 
 rlmrcli. Id the latter it is the title of inferloi 
 mi listers, who were appointed o> eiseeis amoiiff 
 not over tlie fl )ck ; Gr. eV ^. Viilg. ' in quo ' 
 (Acts XX. 17, 2S : Tit. i. 5, 7 ; 1 Pet. v. 1-5). The 
 »enn is a])plieil even to the apostles (2 John; 
 3 John). So also -Kfna-^vTfpiov certainly in- 
 clutles even St. Paul lilmseif (conij). I Tim. iv. 
 14 anil 2 Tim. i. 6). Still the apostles are dis- 
 tinij;uislied from the elders elsewhere (Acts xv. G). 
 The elder was constituted hy an apostle or some 
 one invested with ajmstolic authority (Acts xiv. 
 23 : see also tlie epistles to Timothy and John) 
 The elders preached, conl'uted gainsayers (Tit. i. 
 il), and visited the 8ici< (James v. 14). The 
 word elders is sometimes used in the sense_ of 
 ancients, ancestors, predecessors, like tiie word 
 d^Xa'O' (Matt. v. 21 ; Heb. xi. 2). It is used 
 symliolically (Rev. iv. 4, ^c). The term irpiff- 
 ^i'Ttpos is plainly the origin of our word ^ priest ; 
 Saxon, preostcr mid preste, then priest; High and 
 Low Dutch, pricster ; French, ^jres^re AnApretre ; 
 ltal.,jt) eie; S]mu., presbijtero (^.'ni\i\i, Biblisches 
 Ardido'., § 244 ; Mede's Works, fol. p. 27 ; Gese- 
 niui, Wcrterbiich, s. v.). — J. F. D. 
 
 KLEALEH (n^V^^ ; Sept. 'E\e<i\v), a town 
 of the Reubenites east of the Jordan (Num. xxxii. 
 3, 37) ; but which is named by the projihets as a 
 city of the Moabites (Isa. xv. 4; xvi. 9; Jer. 
 xlviii. 31). It is usually mentioned along with 
 He.shhon : and accordingly travellers find in the 
 neighbourhood of that city a ruined place, bear- 
 ing the name of El Aal, which doubtless re[)re- 
 sent-i EValeli. It stands upon the summit of a 
 lill, and takes its name from its situation, Aal 
 meaning ' higli.' It commands the whole plain, 
 and tlie view fioin it is very extensive. It is about 
 a mile and a quarter north-east of Heshbon. Wi- 
 ner rejiresents Buickhardt as saying that it was 6^ 
 hours from Heshbon; and G. Robinson, copying 
 liiiickhardt, as if de cribing what he himself 
 saw, niaki^s the same mi^Uike (^Travels, ii. 193). 
 But the 6^ hours of Burckliardt refer to the dis- 
 tance from his starting-point in the morning, 
 which was Szalt. At 5j hours he arrived at El 
 Aal, and at 6j hours at Heshbon, bearing south- 
 west from El .Aal (Syria, p. 365). This makes 
 the distance between them only half an hour, 
 coriesiioiiding with the other accounts. 
 
 ELEAZAR (~lTy^N, God the Helper; Sept. 
 EAeaCao)^ This was an exceedingly commoi. 
 name among the Hebrews, being borne by a con- 
 siderable number of persons in Scripture (as well 
 ii> in tlie Apocrypha and Josephus), of whom the 
 pi:nci])al are tlie following. 
 
 1. ELEAZAR, eldest son of Aaron (Exod, vi. 
 23, 25), who acted in his father's lifetime as chief 
 of the tiibe of Levi (Num. iii. 32), and at his 
 ('.eatli succeeded him in the high-priesthood 
 (.Num. XX. 35, sq.). His pontificate was con- 
 lenijioraiy with the military government of Joshua, 
 whom lie ap|iears to have survived. A perfectly 
 good understaniliiig seems at all times to have 
 subsisted lie'i'een Eleazar and Joshua, as we con- 
 gtaiitly trace .^lat co-operation and mutual sup 
 (;or which the circiunstances of the time and of 
 til'.' nation rendered so necessary. Eleazar is sup- 
 posed to haie lived twenty-live years after the 
 r.assage of tlie Joidan, and the book of Joshua 
 r:>nclude8 with a notice of his death and burial. 
 
 ELECTA. 
 
 2. ELEAZAR, who was set apart to attend 
 upon the ark wliile it remained under the root o* 
 bis father Abinadab (1 Sam. vii. 1). 
 
 3. ELEAZAR, one of the three most eminent 
 of David's heroes, who ' fought till his hand was 
 weary' in maintaining with David and the other 
 two a daring stand against the Piiilistines after 
 ' the men of Israel had gone away." He was also 
 one of the same three when they broke through 
 the Philistine host, to gratify David's longing for 
 a drink of water from i]A. well of his native Beth- 
 lehem (2 Sam. xxiii. 9, 10, 13). 
 
 4. ELEAZAR, the fourth of the Maccabaean 
 brotliers, sons of the priest Mattathias (1 Mace, 
 ii. 5). He was crusii(.'<l to death by the fill of 
 an elephant which he stabbed under the l>elly in 
 the belief tliat it bore the king, Antiochus Eujiator 
 (1 Mace. vi. 43-4(i). 
 
 5. ELEAZAR, an aged and venerable scrilie 
 who, ' as became his age, and the excellency of 
 his ancient years, and the honour of his grey head,' 
 chose rather to submit to the inost cruel toinietits 
 than conform to the jiolluting enactments of 
 Antiochus Epijihanes (2 Mace. vii. lS-31). 
 
 ELECTA or Eci.KCTA CEic\fKr^). Accord- 
 ing to Grotius, Wetstein, and some other critics, 
 this word is used as a pro])er name in the address 
 of John's second epistle, 'OTlpecr^vTepos''E.K\eKrf 
 Kvpla — ' The Presbyter to the Lady Eclecta.' 
 This meaning is advocated by Bisliop Middletoi 
 in his treatise on the Doctrine of the Greei 
 Article (2nd ed. Cambridge, 182!=^, pp. 626-629) 
 He adduces in supjjort of it several epistolary in 
 scription? from Basil, in which the name precedes 
 and the rank or condition in life is subjoined, 
 such as 'Ei'TTadico larpiS — AiovTiCji ffOipiffTrj-^ 
 'Boairopicu iTnaK6TTw — Mayvri/u.iavtS K^yLrjTi : none 
 of these, however, are purely lionorary titles. To 
 meet the objection that the sister of the jierson 
 addressed is also called Eclecta in verse 13, he 
 suggests tha. the words ttjs 'Ek-A€kt^j are a gloss, 
 explanatory of aov. But this is mere conjecture, 
 unsupjiorted by a single manuscript ; and such a 
 gloss, if occasioned (as Bishop Middleton sup- 
 poses) by the return to the singular numl'er, would 
 more naturally have been inserted al^er ire. in 
 which position, howe\ er lumecessary, it would at 
 least produce no ambiguity. Some wi iters, lx)th 
 ancient and modern, have adojited a mystical in- 
 terpretation, though contrary to the usiis lugiieiuli, 
 -mil 'o all a])ostolic usage, and su|)posed with Je- 
 rome ttiat the term e/fXeKT?; referred to the church 
 in general, or with Cassiodorus, to some jiarticidar 
 congregation. The last named writer (b. a.d. 470. d. 
 562), in his Votnplexioncs in Epistolas, &c. (Loud. 
 1722, p. 136), says, ' Johannes - electae dominse 
 scvibit ecclesiae, filiis(jne ejus, qiias sacro fonte 
 genuerat.' Clemens Alexandrinus, in a fragment 
 of Uis Adumbrnfiones, attempts to combine the 
 literal and the mystical meanings — 'Scrijjta veic 
 est ad quandam Baliyloniam Electiim nomine, ■ 
 signilicat aiitem electionem ecclesiae sanctee. 
 (Opera, ed. Klotz. iv. p. 66). The Authorized 
 Version trai slates the words in question ' the elect 
 lady,' an interpretation approved by Castalio, 
 Beza, IMill, Wolf, Le Clerc. and Macknight. 
 Most modem critics, howevei, Schleusner and 
 Breitschneider in their L' xi<:on.s, Bourger (1763), 
 Vater (1!^24), Goe^chen (1832), an<l Tlsoliendorf 
 (1841), in their editions of tiie New Testament, 
 Neander (History nj'the I'lantiuy of the Christian /
 
 ELEMENTS 
 
 Church, vol. ii. p. 71, Eng. trans!.), Do Wpfte 
 (Lehrhuch, p. 339), and Liioke (^Commentary on 
 the Epistles of St. John, np. oi 1-320, Kni,'. traiisl.), 
 agree wilh the Syriuc and Araliic V'eisioiis in 
 making Ku^i'a a proper name, and render (he 
 words ' to the elect Ci/ria.' Lardner has given a 
 copious account of critical opinions in his History 
 of the Apostles and Evangelists, c. xx. H'orLi, 
 vi. 28I-2S8.— J. E. R. 
 
 ELEMENTS (o-roixe^)- The etymon both 
 of the Euglisli and Gieek word conveys tlieir 
 primary meaning : thus, eleni<'nti, from e'.ementa, 
 ihe aliments from which things aie made, and 
 /Toixe"«i from <m'ix<^, ' to go ui) by steps — 
 ^le first principles wiience tlie sui)sequent parts of 
 ihings (cTToixoOa-i) proceed in order. It seems to 
 ■have been believed, from a very early period, that 
 *11 bodies consist of certain first, specific ingre- 
 dients ((TTOiXfia), into which they are all resolv- 
 able, although dilVerent opinions ])revailed re- 
 gl)ecting the number and nature of tliese jui- 
 mary constituents of things. Hesychius explains 
 (TTOix^ia. by trvp, vSuip, yri, «''^ °-VPi ^■'P' '^'' '''" 
 (nifxara—tUe, water, eartli, and air, of which lio- 
 dies are formed. Tiiis, which is the simplest, may 
 be called the primary sense of the word. A 
 secondary use of tlie word relates to the organized 
 parts of which anything is framed, as the letters 
 of tlie alphabet (Hesychius gives also ypaixijiara), 
 these being the elements of words; also the ele- 
 ments, rudiments, or first principles of any art 
 or science. The word occurs in its primanj 
 sense. Wis. vii. 17, avcTTaffiv k6(Tijlov Koi evtp- 
 ytiKV aroixeleov, ' the constitution of the worUl and 
 tlie operation of tlie elements;' also xix. IS. It is 
 used in the same sense, 2 Pet. iii. lU, CToixeia 
 8« Kavaovjxiva KvQriaovTai, and ver. 12, rT]KfTai, 
 ' the elements burning will be dissolved and 
 melted.' Tlie Jews, in Peter's time, spoke of four 
 elements (Josejih. Antiq. iii. 7. 7). 
 
 Tiie word occurs in a secondary sense in Gal. 
 iv. 3-9, Tot ffToixeia toC kSctixov, ' tiie elements or 
 rudiments of the world,' which the Apostle calls 
 Lffdivri /cat wrwxo- ffToix^la, ' very weak and poor 
 elements.' He introduces the word to preserve the 
 unity of his comparison of the law to a. peilagoffti^ 
 (iii. '2i), and of persons under it, to children 
 under tutors; and by the elements or rudiments 
 of the world he evidently means tiiat state of 
 religious knowledge which had subsisted in 
 the world, among Jews and Gentiles, before 
 Christ; (he weakness of which, among the Jcw,s, 
 may be seen in Heb. vii. 1^, 19 ; x. 1, and among 
 tlie Gentiles, in the ejiistle to tiie Romans, passim. 
 'Tiie elements of tlie world" occurs again. Col. 
 ii. S-20, in tiie same sense, as a])pears from the 
 various allusions both to the terms used in Grecian 
 philasojiliy, an I the dogmas of the Judaizcrs in 
 thesulisequent verses; the phrase being possibly sug- 
 gested to the Apostle by his previous use of it to 
 the Galatians. The word (TToix^la in Hii). v. 12 
 is restricted, by the addition rSiv \oyiwv rov Qeov, 
 to the rudiments of Christianity (see Roseiimiiller 
 and Benson on tlie passages) -J. F. ]). 
 
 ELEPHANT (f'Ae(^ay) occurs only jn 1 Mace. 
 vi. 34. Bochart imagined D"'!2n2t^' shciihnh- 
 hini to be a contraction of D^^np'ji;' shi-n- 
 kdhabbim, because alikhaban is one of the .Arabic 
 names of the elephant ; and thence inferred that 
 tchin denoting tooth, the remaining part of the 
 
 ELEPHANT. 
 
 613 
 
 word, hahhim or hahhchim, was in Helirew. like 
 khahan in .-Vrabic, to lie referred to elejihant. 
 However tliis may lie, ail (lie nations of the sontli 
 and west of Asia have fur many ages generally 
 
 used tiie word fit, feci, phetl, phil, 7*S ; for we 
 find it in the Chaldce, Syriac, Persian, Arabii-, 
 and Turkish, extending to the east I'ar beyond t!ie 
 Ganges, where, nevertheless, in (he indigentr.is 
 tongues anei, waranum, and hatli are exist inj^ 
 names. 
 
 27». [Asiatic Klephant.] 
 
 Tlie animals of this genus consist at present of 
 two very distinct specie.s, one a native of Southern 
 Asia, once spread considerably to the westward 
 of the Ujiper Indus, and the other occupying 
 southern and middle Africa to tlie edge of tlie 
 great Sahara. In a fossil state there are besides 
 six more species clearly distingui.>hed. The ele- 
 phant is the largest of all terrestrial animals, 
 sometimes reaching to above eleven feet of ver- 
 tical height at tlie slioulders, and weighing from 
 five to seven tliousand pounds: lie is of a black 
 or slaty-ash colour, and almost destitute of ha'r. 
 The head, which is piopoitionably large, is pro- 
 vided with two broad pendulous ears, paiticulaily 
 in tliose of the African species, wiiich aie occa- 
 sionally six feet in length. This species has 
 also two molar teeth on each side of the jaw, 
 both above and below, and only tliree toe-nails on 
 each of the hind-feet; wheieas the Asiatic species 
 is ]irovidcd wiili only one tooth on each side alxne 
 anil below ; and though both have tusks orilelences, 
 the last-mentioned lias them confined solely to 
 the males : they are never of wore than seventy 
 pounds weight, often much less, and in some 
 (ireeds even totally wanting ; w bile in the Africa'i 
 both sexes are aimed with tusks, and' in the maUs 
 they ha\ e been known seven feet in length, and 
 weighing above 150 jiounds each. The foidifad 
 of tlie African is low ; that of the Asiatic high ; 
 in both the eyes are comi'aralively small, wilh a 
 malevolent expression, and on the ten-pies are 
 pores which exude a viscous humour; the tail is 
 long, hanging nearly to the I eels, and distichous at 
 the end. But the most reniaikable organ of Ihe 
 elejihant, that which equally enable'* the .nninial 
 to reach the ground and to grasp bran<hes of 
 trees at a considerable heiglit, is the jirolxiscis 
 or trunk ; a cylindrical elastic 'nstrunient, in 
 ordinary condition reaching nearly down to the 
 ground, but contractile to two-tliiids of it» u«ii«J
 
 ;i6 
 
 ELKI'IIANT. 
 
 ELEPHANT. 
 
 lengtli. and ox iiisile to uiie-lliiitl Ijcyond it ; pro- 
 vided wilii nearly 'lOOo Diiisclej crossin^,' t'.icli utlitT 
 in sucli ;i in.iniier tliiit tlie jiiolio-cis is tk'xible in 
 every diiectiun, ami so ahmidaiifly smvpliL'd witlj 
 nerYP3 as to lender \hc cvijiii one ol the iii>)st 
 delicate in natine. VVitliiu is the doiil)le canal 
 of the nistiils, and at the teiTninu! (i])ening a 
 tinj;ei-lil;e piocess, witL wliicli the animal can 
 lake up very niinnte olijetts and grasp otliers, 
 even to a writing p -n, and mark I'ajier witli it. 
 By means of ihc jrohoscis the elejjlianl has a 
 pi>wer ot" sii<;(ii)n capahle of raising' nearly 200 
 pounds \veii<ht; and with tliis instrument he 
 U'atliers tiKxl frotn trees and I'voin the earth, draws 
 lip drink to sqnit it down his throat, draws 
 forks, nn'ies small knot-, atwl jierfonns niinibcr- 
 less other minute ojievations ; and, if necessaiy, 
 teais down brandies oi' trees moie than live inches 
 in <liametfr with no }e>s tlexteiity than strength. 
 The gait ot" an elephant is an enoimous stride, 
 perlonned with his liigh and ponderous legs, and 
 sniliciently rapid to ie(piire smart galloping on 
 liov^cha'k to outstri]) liitn. 
 
 Elephants are peacealile towards all inoffensive 
 animals, sociahle among themselves, and leady 
 to help each other; gregarious in grassy jilains ; 
 hut more inclined to frequent densely-wooded 
 mountain glens : at times not unwilling to visit 
 t];e more arid wastes, hut fond of rivers and jiools, 
 wliere they wallow in mud and water among reeds 
 and uniler the shade of trees. They are most 
 assuredly more sagacious than observer.?, who, 
 from a few visits to menageries, compare tliem 
 with dogs, are able to appreciate, for on tliis 
 question we must take into account, on the one 
 hand, the physical advantages of the proboscis 
 added to the individual experience gained by an 
 animal slow in growth, and of a longevity ex- 
 ceeding a century ; but still placed in contact 
 with man after a birth free in every sense, where 
 Iiis (lowers exp;ind without human education; 
 wliile on the other hanii dogs are the oiTspiing of 
 an immense numlier of geneiations, all fashioned 
 to the will of a master, iind consequently with 
 innate dispnisitions to acquire a certain education. 
 In Gritlitli's Cuvier are found several anecdotes, 
 some of them from the personal observations of 
 t'lie present writer : and referring to them, we 
 shall add only a single one here, related by the 
 Lite Captain Hotison, R.N., as observed by himself 
 at Travaneore, where several of tiie.se animals 
 were employed in stacking teak timber balk. 
 They Iiad scarcely any human aid or direction, 
 but e.ich beam being successively noosed and 
 slung, they dragg?!! it to the stack, raised one 
 end up, contrived to shove it forward, nicely 
 watching when, being poised by its own weight, 
 the lower end would rise, and then, placing their 
 foreheads agaiii'-t the liutt end, they pushed it 
 even on the stack ; the sling they unfastened and 
 Carried back to have it fitted again ! In a wild 
 gtate no other animal has the sagacity to break 
 off a leafy branch, lK)ld it as a fan, and use it as 
 a brush to drive away ilies. 
 
 The Asiatic species, carrying the head higher, 
 has more dignity of ajipearance, and is believed 
 to have more sagacity and courage than the 
 African ; which, however, is not inferior in weight 
 or bulk, and has never been in the hands of such 
 ftxperienced managers as the Indian moliauts are, 
 wlio have acquired suclr deep knowledge of the 
 
 character of these beasts that they make then 
 submit to almost incredilile operations; sucli, foi 
 example, as suflering ];atienllv the extraction of a 
 decayeil jiart of a touth, a kind of chisel and 
 mallet being tlie instruments used for tlie jiurpose. 
 This was witnessed by a medical oflicer, a nea? 
 relative of the piesent writer. Eleplianls walk 
 under water as long as the end of the prolioscs 
 can remain above the surface; but when in greater 
 dejith, they float witii the head and back only 
 aliout a foot beneath it. In this niaT>ncr they. swim 
 across the broailest streams, and guide themselves 
 by tlie sense of smelling till (hey roach footing to 
 look alx)ut them and land. Tliey are steady, 
 assiduous workmen in many laborious tasks, often 
 using discretion wl en they require some dexteiity 
 and attention in the jieri'orniance. Good will is 
 ail man can trust to in directing them, for cor- 
 rection cainot be fr.forced beyond t'tieir jiatience ; 
 but liatter,y, good vreatment, kind words, pro- 
 mises, and rewards, even to the wear of tinerv, 
 have the desired efi'ect. In history they appear 
 niost conspicuous as formidable elements of 
 battle. From the remotest ages they were trained 
 f.ir war tiy the natii ns of India, and by their aid 
 tiiey no doubt acquired and long held posse.ssion 
 of several regions of High Asia westward of the 
 Indus. They are noticed in the ancient Maha- 
 liarata. According to Sauti the relative force of 
 elephants in an akshaushini or great army corps 
 was one to each chariot of war, three horsemen, 
 and five foot-soldiers, or rather archers mounted 
 on the animal's liack within a defensible lioudah 
 — in the west denominated a castle. Thus one 
 armed elephant, one chariot, and three horsemen 
 formed a patti or squad of at most eleven men, 
 and if there were other bodies of infantry iii the 
 army they are unnoticed. This enumeration is 
 suilicient to show that in India, which furnished 
 the elephants and the model of arming them, 
 there were only four or live archers with or with* 
 out the niohaut or driver, and tliat, consecjuently, 
 when the successors of Alexander introduced 
 them ill their wars in Syria, Greece, and even 
 Italy, they could not be encumbered more than 
 perhajrs momentarily with one or two additional 
 persons before a charge; tor the weight carried by 
 a war-elephant is less than that of one used for 
 burthen, wliicli seldom equals two thousand 
 jiounds. In order to ascend liis back when sud- 
 denly required, tlie animal will hold out one 
 of his liind legs horizontally, allowing a person 
 to step upon it until he has grasped the crupper 
 and crejit up. In tlie West, where they were con- 
 sidere<l for a time of great importance, no doubt 
 the squad or escort of each animal was more 
 considerable than in the East, and may have 
 amounted to thirty-two foot-soldiers; the number 
 given, by some mistake, as if actually mounted, 
 in I Mace. vi. 37. 
 
 Altiiough red colours are offensive to many 
 animals, it may be observed that the use of mul- 
 berry juice or grapes must have been intended as 
 an excitement to their taste, for they are all fond 
 of fruit. Wine, so as to cause an approach to in- 
 toxication, would render them ungovernable, and 
 more dangerous than when in a state of fear. They 
 do not requise stimulants to urge them on in a 
 motlern battle, with all its flaslies of lire, smoke:, 
 and explosion; and re<l colours usually employed 
 for their trappings produce more of a satisfactory
 
 ELEUTHEROVOLIS. 
 
 feeling than rage. .Tudicitius and long-contiimeil 
 iraiiiiriL,' is the utily j^ixnl reineiiy against siulil-'i) 
 surprises caused by oljjccts not yet cxaniiiied liy 
 their acitely-jialgiiig senses, or connecteil with 
 forn:er scenes of ilanger, whicii are ahme apt to 
 make tiiem turn. It is likely that tlie dis- 
 ciplined steadiness of* well-armed ranks fright- 
 ened tliem by tlieir novelty more tliar. fhe sluuits 
 of Macedonian thousands, whicli must have been 
 fcelile in tlie ears of clepliaiits accustomed to the 
 roar of hundreds of tliou'^ands of Inilians. It is 
 [Hobafjle that the (Jartliaginians made tlie ex- 
 periment ol'tmiiiing African elejiiiauls in imitation 
 of Ptolemy Piiiladelplius : they are noticed in 
 their army only in the first Punic war; and, from 
 wiiat a|i] ears of the mode of managing tiieni, 
 theie is reason to believe, as already noticed, tliat 
 tliey were never so thoroughly subdued as the 
 Indian elephants. — C. II. S. 
 
 ELEUTHKKOPOLIS ('KK^ve^^owoKis), a 
 ]ilace not named in Scriptme, but whicii was an 
 episcojial city of such impurtance in the time of 
 Euseliius and Jerome that they assumed it as the 
 P'.iint whence to estimate tlie distances and posi- 
 tions of other cities in Southern Palestine. It 
 continued to be a great city until the sixth cen- 
 tury : but after that we lose sight of it, and all the 
 attempts to recover the knowledge of a position of 
 such topographical importance have jjroceeded 
 ufwn critical conjectures and combinations. This 
 process sufficed to show that it lay in the south- 
 western plain of Juda.'a, between Hebron and 
 Askelon, but not to determine the site with any 
 precision. Professor Roliiiison, when in lljat quar- 
 ter, made this long-lost and important site a 
 subject of jiarticular inquiry ; but no traces of 
 the name could be found, and Beit-Jibrin was 
 referred to as the only place in the neighliourhood 
 where any ruins of consequence existed. Of 
 these ruins the Arabs spike in the most extrava- 
 gant terms, and the travellers were induced to 
 turn their steps in that direciion. On approach- 
 ing Beit-Jibrin they were gratitied to find them- 
 selves surrounded by several places wliose dis- 
 tances from Kleutheropolis are specified by Eii- 
 sebius and Jerome, and which might serve them 
 a» ^ clew in tlie search for Eleutliero])olis itself. 
 
 Beit-Jibrin jiroved to be a village of moderate 
 size, the capital of a district in the province of 
 Gaxa. In and around this village are ruins of 
 ditl'erent ages, more extensive and massy than any 
 which had been seen in Palestine, excepting the 
 substructions of the ancient temple at Jerusalem 
 and the Haram at Hebron. These ruins consist 
 principally of the remains of a fortress of immense 
 strength, in the midst of an irregular rounded 
 enclosure, encompassed by a very ancient and 
 strong wall. This outer wall is built of large 
 squared stones, uncemeiited. Along this wall on 
 the inside, towards the west and north-west, is a 
 row of iincient massive vaults with tine round 
 arches, apparently of the same age as the wall 
 itself, and Ijoth undoubtedly of Roman origin. 
 In tlie midst of the area stands an i-.'regular castle, 
 the lower parts of whicii seem to be as ancient as 
 the exterior wall, but it has obviously been built 
 up again in modern times. An inscription over 
 the gate «liows that it was last repaired by the 
 Turks A.H. 958 (a.d. 1.5.51), nearly two years 
 liter the yiresent walls of Jerusalem were built. 
 Remaius of ancient walh and dwellinjis extend 
 
 ELEUTIIEROPOLIS. 
 
 617 
 
 up the vallev ; and at the distance of Iwi'uly 
 minutes from the jiresent village are the riiiin 
 of an ancient church, bearing the name of .Santa 
 Ilanneh (St. Anne). Only the easleri' end 'm 
 now standing, including the niche of the great 
 altar and that of a side chapel, built of large 
 hewn stones <if strong and lieautilul masonry. 
 
 Ruins thus worthy of the Ruiuan name and 
 indicative of a poweit'ol city, seemed sufliciiiit to 
 warrant the conclusion that the site was that (,f 
 the ancient Eli'utlieropolis ; especia'ly as it lay 
 within the limits to whicii a careful estimate of 
 tiie distances and jio-iitions in tiie Onoinasticon 
 had satislied Dr. Roliiiison that the site mu>t lie. 
 Ne\ eitiieless, he had assured himself ihul this 
 lieil-Jibiin could be no other than tiie Lk-to- 
 gabia of Ptolemy and the Peutinger Tables, and 
 the Beigeberin (an episcopal city) of the eccle- 
 siastical Notitice of the subsequent centuries : 
 and a^ he was not prejiaied to su]i]iosf> that Eku- 
 therojiolis and Bi'to-gabra could be the same 
 ]ilace, he proceeded to look elsewhere lor tlie 
 former cily. Failing to discover the slightest 
 trace of it wilhin the quarter in which it must 
 needs have lain, he again visited Beit-Jibrin, and 
 then arri\ed at the conclusion that Beto-gahra 
 anil Elentheropolis were indeed one and the 
 same, the former represented by the jiresent Bei> 
 Jibrin, being the native name, kept in the b'lck- 
 ground for a time by the Gneco-Roman official 
 title of Elentheropolis, 'free city,' lait reappearing 
 as soon as the Romans, who used that name, had 
 withdrawn. This explains satisfactorily the dis- 
 njipearaiice of the name of so ini}«ii tant a place as 
 Elentheropolis, and affords ground for tracing its 
 continued existence for ages under its native name. 
 
 In the twelfth century the Crusaders found on 
 this sjiot an ancient site in rnins under the name 
 of Beth-Gelnim ; and here they reared again a 
 fortress ujjoii the ancient foundations. This plai:e 
 and fortress are often mentioned in the histories 
 of the Crusades, usually under the corru])ted 
 name of Gibelin ; and it w;is most erroneously 
 confounded by the Christian writers with Beer- 
 slieba. By the Arabian authors it is not iinfre- 
 quently mentioned tinder the names of Beit- 
 .librin and Ileit-Jibril. Since the time of the 
 Crusades the jilacedoes not appear to have been 
 visited liy any Christian traveller until Dr. Ro- 
 binson explored fhe neighbourhood on his route 
 from Jerusalem to Gaza. 
 
 Beto-Gabra, Beth-Gelnim, and Beit-Jibrin ap 
 jiear to be dilTerent forms of the ancient Helnew 
 name. But the name itself does not occur in 
 Scripture. Josejihns indeed mentions a large 
 village, BvfTapij (Betaris), in this region i^De 
 Bell. Jxul. iv. 8, 1), which Rufinus reads "Bi-iya^^iis 
 (Begaliris) in his copy ; and Reland (p. 626) 
 suggests that this may have been tlie same place, 
 which is not unlikely. 
 
 This short analysis of the extended observations 
 and discussions of Dr. Robinson {Researchen, ii. 
 34S, 359, 398, ■101-420, 642-616) will put the 
 reader in ])os.session of tlit leading facts of this 
 interesting question. The result seems to be that 
 the identity of Beto-Gabris with Beit-Jibrin is 
 satisfactorily established, and that the identity of 
 Eleutliero]X)lis with the same, although less cer- 
 tain, is rendered more than luohable. IJeit-Jibrin 
 is twenty miles east of Askelon, ai;d thirteen milef 
 east-north-east from Uebrou.
 
 618 
 
 ELI. 
 
 ELI (yV, raised up : Sept. 'H\f), high-priest of 
 the Jews when tlie ark was in Shiloh (1 Sam. i. 3, 
 9). He was the lirst higli-priest Of the Izrieof Itha- 
 mar, Aaron's youngest son. This is deduced t'roin 
 1 Chron. xxiv. 3, 6 (comp. Josej)!!. Antiq. v. 9, 1 ). 
 It also appears from the omission of tlie names 
 of Eli and his immediate successors in tlie enu- 
 meration of the high-priests of Eleazar"s line in 
 I Chron. vi. 4-6. What occasioned this remark- 
 able transfer is not known — most probably tlie 
 incapacity or minority of the then sole represen- 
 tativii of the elder line ; for it is very evident that 
 >t was no unauthorized usurpation on the part of 
 Eli (1 Sam. ii. 27, 28). Eli also acted as regent 
 or civil judge of Israel after the death of Samson. 
 This function, indeed, seems to have been in- 
 tended, by the theocratical constitution, to devolve 
 upon the higli-priest, by virtue of his office, in the 
 absence of any person specially appointed by the 
 Divine King, to deliver and govern Israel. He 
 is said to have jiidged Israel forty years (I Sam. 
 iv IS): tlie Septuagint makes it twenty; and 
 chronologers are divided on the matter. But the 
 proliability seems to be that the forty years com- 
 preliend the whole period of his administration 
 as high-priest a7id judge, including, in the first 
 half, the twenty years in which Samson is said to 
 have judged Israel (Judg. xvi. 31), when some 
 of liis civil functions in southern Palestine may 
 have been in abeyance. As Eli died at the age 
 of ninety-eight (1 Sam. iv. 15), the forty years 
 must have commenced when he was fifty-eight 
 years old. 
 
 Eli seems to have been a religious man; and 
 the only fault recorded of him was an excessive 
 easiness of temper, most unbefitting the high re- 
 sponsibilities of his official character. His sons, 
 Ho])lini and Phinehas, whom he invested with 
 autliority, misconducted themselves so outrage- 
 ously as to excite deep disgust among the people, 
 and render the services of the tabernacle odious 
 in their eyes. Of this misconduct Eli was aware, 
 but contented himself with mild and inelTectual 
 remonstrances, where his station required severe 
 and vigorous action. For this neglect the judg- 
 ment of God was at length denounced upon his 
 house, tlirougb the young Samuel, who, under pe- 
 culiar circumstances [Samuel], had beenattached 
 from childhood to his person (1 Sam. ii. 29; iii. 
 IS). Some years passed without any apparent 
 fulfilment of this denunciation — but it came at 
 length in one terrilile crasli, by which the old man's 
 heart was broken. The Philistines had gained the 
 upper hand over Israel, and the ark o( God was 
 taken to the Held, in the confidence of victory and 
 safety from its presence. But in the battle which 
 followed, the ark itself was taken by the Philis- 
 tines, and the two sons of Eli, who were in at- 
 tendance upon it, were slain. The high-priest, 
 tiien blind with age, sat by the way-side at 
 Shiloh, awaiting tidiogs from the war. 'for his 
 heart fremfiled for the ark of God.' A man of 
 Benjamin, with his clothes rent, and with earth 
 upon his head, brought the fatal news : and Eli 
 heard tl) at Israel was defeated — that his sons were 
 slain — that the ark of God was taken — at which 
 last word he fell heavily from his seat, and died 
 CI Sam. iv). 
 
 The ultimate doom upon Eli's house was ac- 
 c^inpHshed wiien Solomon removed Abiatliar (the 
 
 ELIEZEtt. 
 
 last high-priest of this line) fiom v is office. ■•«< 
 restored the line of Eleazer in the })erson of Zailuk 
 [Abiathar]. 
 
 ELIAKIM. [Jehoiakim.] 
 
 ELIAS. [Elijah.] 
 
 ELIEZER. Tliis is the samenan easElcazar- 
 whence came the alibieviated Lazar or Lazarus 
 of the New Testament. It is pro|)<*r to note tliig 
 here, because the parable which describes Lazarus 
 in Abraham's bosom (Luke xvi. 23j has been snp- 
 jiosed to contain a latent allusion to the nam*' of 
 Kliezer, whom, before the birth of Ishmael and 
 Isaac, Abraham regarded as his heir. The pas- 
 sage of Scripture in wliich tiie name of Kliezer 
 occurs is one of some ditHculty. Abraham, being 
 promised a son, says :— ' I go childless, and the 
 steward of my house is this Eliezer of Damascus. 
 .... Behold, to me thou hast given no seed : and, 
 lo, one born in mine house is mine heir" (Gen. w 
 2, 3). Part of the difficulty is caused l)y the 
 translation, and part by the prevalence of no- 
 tions gathered liom external sources, and not 
 warranted by the original text. The common 
 notion is that Eliezer was Abraham's house-born 
 slave, adopted as his heir, and meanwliile iiis 
 chief and confidential servant, and the same who 
 was afterwards sent into INIesopotamia to seek a 
 wife for Isaac. This last point we may dismiss 
 with the remark, that there is not the least evi- 
 dence that ' the elder servant of his house' (Gen. 
 xxiv. 2), whom Aliraham charged with this mis- 
 sion, was the same as Eliezer : and our attention 
 may therefore be confined to the verses which 
 have been quoted. 
 
 It is obvious that the third verse is not pro- 
 perly a sequel to the second, but a repetition 
 of the statement contained in the second ; and, 
 being thus regarded as jiaiallel passages, tlie t\vo 
 may be used to explain each other. 
 
 ' Eliez'er of Damascus,' or ' Damascene-Eliezer,' 
 is the subject of both verse.s. The obvious mean- 
 ing is, that Eliezer was born in Damascus : and 
 how is this compatible with the notion of his 
 being Abraham's house-born slave, seeing that 
 Abraham's household never was at Damascus "? 
 It is true that there is a tradition, quoted l)y Jose- 
 phiis from Nicolaus of Damascus {A7itig. i. 7. 4 ), 
 that Abraham 'reigned in Damascus;' but the 
 tradition was probably founded on this very pas- 
 sage, and has no claim on our belief. 
 
 The expression, 'the steward of mine house,' in 
 ver. 2, will explain the sense of ' one born in 
 mine house is mine heir,' in ver. 3. The first 
 phrase, literally translated, is ' the son of posses- 
 sion of my house,' i. e. one who shall possess my 
 house, my property, after my death ; and is there- 
 fore exactly the same as the ])liiase in the next 
 verse, ' the son of my house (parajihrased by ' one 
 born in mine house') is mine heir.' Tliis removes 
 every objection to Eliezer's being of Damascus, 
 and enables us to dispense witli the tradition; for 
 it is no longer necessary to suppose that Kliezer 
 was a house-born slave, or a servant at all ; and 
 leaves it more juobable that he was some near 
 relative whom Almiham regarded as liis heir- 
 at-law. In this case Abraham obviously means 
 to say, ' Behold, to me thou hast given no ciiil- 
 dren, and not the son of my loins, but the son ot 
 my house (i- e. of my family- the son whom in^ 
 house gives me — the heir-at-law) is mine heir.' 
 It is by no means certain that ' this Eliezer" was
 
 ELIEZER. 
 
 ELIJAH. 
 
 6(9 
 
 present in Alralianri! camp at all: ami we, of 
 course, canno: know n what de,i;iiH' lie stood re- 
 lated to Abra latn, or under wliat ciicunislauces 
 he was lx)rn a% or belonged to, Damascus. It is 
 passible that he lived there at the very time when 
 Abraham tnus spoke of liini, and that he is hence 
 called ' Kliezer of Damascus." 
 
 This viesv, that Eliezer was actually Abraham's 
 near relative and heir-it-law, removes another dif- 
 ficulty, which has always occasioned some embar- 
 rassment, and w'.iich arises from the fad, tliat 
 while ne speaks of Eliezer as his heir, liis nepliew 
 Lot was in his neighbourhood, and had been, until 
 lately, the companion of liis wanderings. If 
 Eliezer was Abraham's servant, it might well oc- 
 \ casion surprise that he should speak of him and 
 not of Lot as his heir : but this surprise ceases 
 vrhen we regard Eliezer as also a relative, and if 
 so, a nearer relative than Lot, although not, like 
 Lot, the companion of liis journeys. Some have 
 supjwsed that Lot and Eliezer were, in fact, the 
 same person; and this would be an excellent 
 exi)lanation if the Scriptures aflorded sufficient 
 grounds for it. 
 
 2. ELIEZER. The second of the two sons 
 bom to Moses while an exile in the land of 
 Midian (Exod. xviii. 4). Eliezer had a son 
 called Rebadiah (1 Chron. viii. 17). 
 
 ELIHU {^'\n^h^_^God-Jehovah ySept. 'EXiovs). 
 One of Job's friends, described as ' the son of 
 Barachel, a Biizite, of the kindred of Ram" (Job 
 xxxii. 2). This is usually understood to imply 
 that he was descended from Buz, the son of Abra- 
 ham's brother Nahor, from whose i'aniily the city 
 called Buz (Jer. xxv. 23) also took its name. 
 Tiie Chaldee paraphrase asserts Elihu to have 
 been a relation of Abraham. Elihu's name does 
 not ajipear among those of the friends who came 
 in tlie first instance to condole with Job, nor is 
 nis presence indicated till the debate between the 
 afllicted man and his three friends had been 
 brought to a conclusion. Tlien, finding there 
 was no answer to Job's last speech, he comes 
 forward with considerable modesty, which he 
 loses as he proceeds, to remark on the debate, and 
 to deliver his own opinion on tlie points at issue. 
 Tlie character and scope of his orations are 
 descril)ed elsewhere [Job, Book of]. It a])pears, 
 from the manner in which Eliliu introduces him- 
 self, that he was by much the youngest of the 
 party ; and it is evident that he liad lieen pre- 
 sent from the commencement of tlie discussion, to 
 which he had paid very close attention. This 
 would suggest that the debate between Job and 
 his friends was carried on in the jiresence of a 
 deeply-interested auditory, amorig which was this 
 Elihu, who could not forbear from interf'ering 
 when the controversy appeared to have reached an 
 imsatisfactory conclusion. 
 
 ELIJAH (n^-^X. God-Jehovah ;Sei>t.'}i\toi). 
 This wonder-working projjliet is introduced to 
 our notice liK» anotlier Melchizedek (Gen. x. 
 4, 18 ; Heb. fii. 3}, without any mention of 
 iiis father or mother, or of the beginning of his 
 days — as if he had dropt out of that cloudy 
 chariot, which, after his work was done on earth, 
 conveyed him back to heaven. From tt)is si- 
 lence of Scriptur«i as to his parentage and birth, 
 aiuch vain sneci.lation has arisen. Some of tlie 
 
 Rabbins have supjxtsed that lie was P',inea», t})« 
 granilson of Aaron; whilst ofiiers iiave thought 
 that he was an angel, who. for the ])ur))ose oi' re- 
 forming wicked king Ahab and his ungodly suli- 
 jects. assumed the fonn of a man. Some sup]Kise 
 that Elijah is called aTishbite fromTishbeii, a city 
 beyond the Jordan. Others su])|)()se tli;it Ti.-hhile 
 means converter or reformer, deriving it from tlie 
 Hebrew radical IJIC. Tiie very (iist sentence that 
 the prophet utters is a direful denunciation again*i 
 Ahab: and this he snpjwrts by a solemn latii, ■ Ah 
 the Lord Go<l of Israel livedi, before wiioin I 
 stand, there shall not be dew or rain these years 
 (('. e, three and a half years, Luke iv. 25 ; James v. 
 17), b"t according to my wurd ' (1 Kings xvii. 
 1). B^jfore, however, he spoke tlius, it would 
 seem that he had been warning this most wicked 
 king as to the fatal conse(|ueiices which mns' 
 result both to himself and his ])eople, from thf 
 iniquitous course he was then pursuing', and this 
 may account I'or the ajjpaient abruptness with 
 which he opens his commission. 
 
 We can imagine Ahab and Jezebel being greatly 
 incensed against Elijah for having I'oretold and 
 ])rayed that such calamities might befall them. 
 For some time they might attribute the drought 
 under which the nation sulVered to natural causes, 
 and not to the interposition of the jirojiliet; and, 
 therefore, however they might da-ipise him as a 
 vain enthusiast, they would not proceed im- 
 mediately to punish him. When, however, they 
 saw the denunciation of Elijah taking ellt'ct far 
 more extensively than had been anllci|)ated, tiiey 
 would naturally seek to wreak their vengeance 
 upon him as the cause of their sulVerings. But 
 we do not find him taking one step for his own pre- 
 servation, till the God wiiom he served said, 'Get 
 thee hence, and turn thee eastwaril, and hide thy- 
 self by the brook Cherith, that is botiiie Jordan : 
 and it shall be that tliou slialt drink oi' tlie biook ; 
 and I have commanded tlie ravens to feed Ihee 
 there' (1 Kings xvii. 3, 4). Other and better 
 means of jirotection from thq impending danger 
 might seem open to him ; but, regaidless of these, 
 he hastened to obey the divine mandate, and 
 ' went and dwelt iiy the brook CI eritli tliat is be- 
 fore Jordan ' (1 Kings xvii. 5) [Chkuith]. 
 
 Some commentators, availing themselves of the 
 fact that □''3"iy orebim, which we translate 
 ravens, means, in Ezek. xxvii. 27, merchants, 
 have tried to explain away the miraculous cha- 
 racter of God's jneservation of his servant at 
 Cherith. Otiiers again have thought (hat the 
 original signifies Arabians, as in 2 ('hron. xxi. 
 16; Neh. iv. 7 ; where the like word is used; 
 or possibly the inhabitants of the city Arabah, 
 near Beth-shan (Josh. xv. 6, and xviii. 18, &c.). 
 In the face of such ojiinions as these, we still be- 
 lieve that ravens and not men were the instru- 
 ments which God, on this occitsion, employed 
 to carry needful food to his exiled and jierse- 
 cuted servant; and in this he would give us a 
 manifest proof of Ilis sovereignty over all crea- 
 tures. But, it has been incpiired, how could 
 these binls ol'tain food of a ))ni])er kind, anil of a 
 sufficient quantity, to supjily the dally wants of 
 the jirophet ? The answer to this Inquiry is very 
 simple. We cannot tell. It is enough for us to 
 know that God engaged to make a jirovlsion for 
 him, and fiiat He failed not to fulfil his engage- 
 ment. We need not to speculate, at some ha-vt
 
 620 
 
 ELIJAH. 
 
 ELIJAH. 
 
 done, as to wlietlie'' this sujjjily vas taken from 
 
 Allah's or Jehosliajjhat's table, or from that of 
 one of the seven thousand of Israel wlio had not 
 howed (lie knee to Baal. 
 
 A fresh trial now awaits tliis servant of God 
 (u.c. 900), and in the manner in which he bears 
 i-t. we see the strene^th of his I'aith. For one year, 
 AS some suppose, Goil had miraculously provided 
 t'oV his bodily wants at Cherith ; but the brook 
 which, heretofore, had afforded him the needful 
 refieshment there, became dried up. Encouraged 
 by past e'v))erience of his heavenly Father's care 
 of him, the propliet still waited patiently till He 
 said, ' Arise (1 Kings xvii. 9), ^et thee to Zare- 
 phath, which iielongeth to Z-idon, and dwell 
 there: behold. I have commanded a widow woman 
 there to sustain thee.' He then, at once, set out 
 on the journey, and now arrived at Zarephath, he, 
 in the arranifement of God's [irovidence, met, as 
 tie enteied its gate, the very woinan who was de- 
 puted to give him immediate sup]iort. But his 
 faith is again put to a sore test, for he found her 
 engaged in a way which was well calculated to 
 discourage all his hopes ; she was gathering sticks 
 for the purjK)se, as slie assured him, of cooking the 
 last meal, and now that the famine prevailed 
 there, as it did in Israel, she saw nothing before 
 her and her only son but starvation and death. 
 How then could the propliet ask for, and how 
 could she think of giving, a part of her last morsel? 
 The same Divine Spirit inspired him to assure her 
 that she and her child should be even miracu- 
 lously provided for during tlie continuance of the 
 famine; and also influenced her heart to receive, 
 without doubting, the assurance ! The kindness 
 of this widow in baking the first cake for Elijah 
 v/as well requited with a prophet's reward (Matt. 
 X. 41, -12) ; she afforded one meal to him, and God 
 afforded many to her (see 1 Kings xv. 16). But 
 uninterrupted prosjierity will not do for even God's 
 most devoted servants. Possibly a feeling of self- 
 righteousness might, through the deceitfulness of 
 sin, have begun to enter their minds, seeing that, 
 wliilst millions around them were now sufl'ering 
 and dying from want, they were made the special 
 objects of God's providential care. Accordingly, 
 their heavenly Father saw fit to visit them with a 
 tem[iorary calamity — a calamity as severely felt 
 in some respects liy the one as it was by the other. 
 ' And it came to pass that the son of the woman, 
 the mistress of tlie house, fell sick ; and his sick- 
 ness was so sore that there was no life left in him ' 
 (1 Kings xvii. 17). Verse 18 contains the ex- 
 postulation with the prophet of this bereaved 
 widow ; she rashly imputes the death to his 
 presence. She seems to have thought within 
 herself, that, as God had shut up heaven from 
 pouring down refreshing showers upon a guilty 
 nation, in consequence of the prophet's prayer, 
 so she was now suffering from a similar cause. 
 Elijah retaliates not, but calmly takes the dead 
 child out of the mother's bosom, and lays it on 
 iiis own bed (verse 19). that there he may, in pri- 
 I'ate, pray the more fervently for its restoration. 
 Every epithet that the prophet poiu'ed forth on this 
 occasion was big with meaning ; his prayer was 
 heard, and answered by the restorarion of life to 
 :he child, and of gladness to the widow's heart. 
 
 Since now, however, the long-protracted famine, 
 with all its attendant horrors, failed to iletach 
 Ahab and Ki guilty people from their al)omiiiable 
 
 idolatries, God mercifully gave them another op» 
 portunity of re{X'niing and turning to Himself. 
 For three years and six months (James v. 17) 
 the destructive famine had spread its deadly in* 
 Huence over the wliole nation of Israel. During 
 this time the jnophet was called uixin ])assively to 
 suft'er God's will ; now he must once again resiune 
 the more active duties of life ; le must make one 
 great public etl'ort more to reclaim his country 
 from apostacy and ruin. According to the word 
 of the Lord he returned t« Israel ; Ahab was yet 
 alive, and uineformed ; Jezebel, his impious con- 
 sort, was still mad ujwn her idols ; in a word, the 
 prophets of Baal were prophesying lies, the priests 
 were bearing ride by their means, and tlie people 
 loved to have it so. Such was the state of things 
 in Israel when Elijah once again stood before 
 Ahab. Wishing not to tempt God by going un- 
 necessarily into danger, he (iist presented himself 
 to good Obadiah (1 Kings xviii. 7). This prin- 
 cipal servant of Ahab was also a true servant of 
 God ; and c n recognising the prophet he treated 
 him with honour and respect. Elijah requested 
 him to announce to Ahab that he liad returned. 
 Obadiah, ajiparently stung by the unkindiiess of 
 this request, replied, ' What have I sinned, that 
 thou shouldest thus expose me to Almb's rage, 
 who will certainly slay me f(jr not apprehending 
 thee, for whom he has so long and so anxiously 
 sought in all lands and in confederate countries, 
 tliat they should not harbour a traitor whom he 
 looks upon as the author of the famine,' &c. 
 Moreover, he would delicately intimate to Elijah 
 how he had actually jeoparded his own life in 
 securing that of one hundred of the Lord's pro- 
 phets, and whom he had fed at his own expense. 
 Satisfied with Elij'ah's reply to this touching ap- 
 jieal, wherein he removed all his fears about the 
 Spirit's carrying himself away (as 2 Kings ii. il- 
 16; Ezek. iii. 4 ; Acts viii. 39), he resolves to be 
 the prophet's messenger to Ahab. Intending to be 
 revenged on him, or to inquire when rain might be 
 expected, Ahab now came forth to meet Elijali. He 
 at once charged him with troubling Israel, i.e. with 
 being the main cause of all the calamities which 
 he and the nation had suft'ered. But Elijah 
 flung back the charge upon himself, assigning 
 the real cause to be his own sin of idolatry. 
 Regarding, however, his magisterial position, 
 while he reproved his sin, he requests him to ex- 
 ercise his authority in summoning an assembly 
 to Mount Carmel, that the controversy between 
 them might be decided, whether the king or the 
 prophet was Israel's troubler. Whatever were the 
 secret motives which induced Ahab to comply 
 with this proposal, God directed the result. 
 Elijah off'ered to deeide this controversy between 
 God and Baal, not by Scripture — for an appeal 
 to its authority would have fallen jiowerless upon 
 their infidel minds — but by a miracle from Hea- 
 ven. As fire was the element over which Baal 
 was supposed to preside, the projihet proposes 
 (wishing to give them every advantage), that, two 
 bullocks being slain, and laid each ujion a dis- 
 tinct altar, the one for Baal, the other for Je- 
 hovah, whichever should be consumed by tire 
 must proclaim whose the people of Israel were, 
 and whom it was their duty to serve. The people 
 consent to this proposal, because, it may be, they 
 were not altogether ignorant how God had fot- 
 merly answered by fire (Gen. iv. 4 ; Lev. iac 2Af
 
 ELIJAH 
 
 Juilp. vi. 21 ; xiii. 20 1 Cliron. xxi. 26 ; 2 Cliron. 
 rii. ] ). Klija'i will liave summoiifd not only 
 all tl.e elders uf Israel. Ixit also flie fiiur liiiiidn'tl 
 priests of liaal l)eliini,'ina; to Jfzi'liel's conit, 
 awl the four Iniiulrcd ami (il'ty who were dis- 
 persed over the k'ngdom. Tlie former, iiowever, 
 did not attend ; heing, perhaps, glad to sheller 
 tiiemselves under the j)Iea that Jezehel would 
 not allow them to do so. Confident of success, 
 because douhfless God had revealed tlie whole 
 malfer to him, he enters the lists of conte-t witii the 
 four hundred and lifty jjriesls of liaal. Having 
 reconstructed an altar which, had once belonged to 
 God, with twelve stones — as if to' declare that the 
 twelve tribes of Israel should again be united in 
 the service of Jehov all — and having laid thereon 
 his bullock, and tilled the trench by which it was 
 surrounded with large cpiantities of water, lest 
 any sns|)icion of deceit might occur to any mind, 
 the propliet gives place to the Baalites — allows 
 them to make trial first. In vain did tliese de- 
 ceived and deceiving men call, from morning till 
 evening, upon Baal — in vain did fliey now mingle 
 their own blood with that of the sacrifice: no 
 answer was given — no tire descended. 
 
 Elijah ha\irig rebuked their folly and wicked- 
 ness with the sharpest irony, and it being at last 
 evident to all that their etVorls to ol)tain the 
 wished-for fire were vain, now, at the time of the 
 evening sacrifice, otVered u]) his jirayer. The 
 Baalites' jjrayer was long, that of the prophet is 
 short — chariring God with the care of His cove- 
 nant, of His truth, and of His glory — when, 
 l)ehold, ' the fire came down, lickeil u]) the water, 
 and consumed not only the bullock, iiut the very 
 stones of the altar also.' The effect of this on the 
 mind of the people was what the prophet desired : 
 acknowledging the awful ])rcseuce uf the Godhead, 
 they exclaim, as with one voice, 'Tlie Lord He 
 is God ; the Lord He is God !' Seizing the o])])or- 
 funity whilst the ])eople's hearts were warm with 
 the fresh conviction of this miracle, he bade them 
 take those juggling priests and kill them at 
 Kishon, that their blood might lielp to fill that 
 river whi<-li tlieir idolatry had jirovoked God to 
 empty by ilrought. All this Elijah might law- 
 fully do at Gods direction, and under the sanc- 
 tion of His law (Deut. xiii. .5; xviii. 20). Ahab 
 luuing now publicly vindicated God's violated 
 law by giving his roy-al sanction to the execution 
 of Baals priests, Elijah informed him that lie may 
 go up to his tent on Carmel to take refreshment, 
 for God will send the desired rain. In the mean 
 time he ])rayed earnestly (James v. 17, 18) for 
 tliis blessing: God hears and answers: a little 
 cloud arises out of the Mediterranean sea, in 
 •ight of which the pro])het now was, difl'uses itself 
 gradually over the entire face of the heavens, 
 •and now em])ties its refreshing waters ujion the 
 whole land of Israel ! Hire was another ))roof of 
 (he Divine mission of the projihet, from which, we 
 «lu)uld imagine, the whole nation must have jiro- 
 tited ; Ijiit subsequent events would seem to prove 
 tiiat the impression jiroduced by these dealings of 
 GikI was of a very jiartial and teni])orary. charac- 
 ter Imjiressed with the liojw that the report of 
 G()d"s miraculous actings at Caimel might not 
 ciily reach tlie ear, but also penetrate, and soften, 
 the hard lie.iit of Je^eliel ; and anxious that the 
 rtl'o'ii ation uf iiis country sliould spread in and 
 tbiiut Ji'ireel also, Elijah, streng'hened, as we are 
 
 ELIJAH. 
 
 n 
 
 told, from on high, now accompanies A) \\: ihithei 
 on foot. How iil-fiiundeil the piopliel's exfjectji- 
 tioii was, sidiseipient events too paiiil'nlly proved. 
 .Ii /ebel, instead of receivnig Elijah oinioiislv ai 
 the messenger of God for good to her naiion, now 
 sei retly conceives and openly declares her fiied 
 pur]iose to |)ut hitn to death. The man whose 
 player had raised the dead, had shut and oiM-nctl 
 Heaven, he who had been so wonderfully ]»e- 
 seived by Goil at ("/heiith and Zare])liatli, .md who 
 dared to tax Ahab to his face wilh belli:.' Israel's 
 troiibler, is now so leriified by the knowk'di;e 
 of this vi'.e woman's design that he lied into the 
 wilderness and there longed fi.r death — dius af- 
 fording a practical evidence of wliai St. James 
 says of him, that he wtis a man of like passions 
 with us. His now altered state of n.iini would 
 seem to have arisen out of an exairtrerated exjiec- 
 talion of what (iod designed to ell'ecf thiougii tlie 
 miracles exhibited to, and the judgments jMiuied 
 ujion, this guilty nation. He stems to have 
 thougiit that, ;is complete success did not crown 
 the last great elliirt he had nia'le to refoim Lrael, 
 there could not be the slightest usi* in labouring 
 for this end any longer. Alas! had he stood his 
 ground at Jezreel, who can tell what effect this 
 might have had even ujion the mind of Jezeiie!, 
 and, through her, upon the whole nation I But 
 no; the great oiiportiinity of usefuli!e''S is now 
 lost, and he asks I'or death : slill Gixl will be gra- 
 cious to him. He now. alone in fhe wilderness 
 and at Mount Horeli, will at once touch his heart 
 and correct his ]ietiilancy by the ministiatiou of 
 His angel, and by a feail'ul exhiliition of His 
 Divine power. And having done tliis, revealing 
 Himself in the gentle accents of a still voice. He 
 announces to liiin that he must go and anoint 
 Hazael king over .Syria, Jehu king over Isuiel, 
 and Elislia jirojihet in his own place, ere death can 
 put a jjeriod to his labours. These jiersons shall 
 revenge God's quarrels ; one .shall begin, another 
 shall prosecute, and the third shall jierfect the 
 vengeance on Israel. When God had comforled 
 His prophet by telling him of tlie^e three instru- 
 ments he had in store to vindicate his own in- 
 sulted honour, then he convinced him of his 
 mistake in saying ' I only am left alone,' &c., by 
 the assurance that there were seven thousand in 
 Israel who had not bowed the knee to Baal. 
 
 Leaving the cave of Hoieb (b.c. t'Ofi), Elijah 
 now jiroceeded to the field where l.e f(>ii:id Elisha 
 in the act of jiloughing, and, w-'iiout uttering a 
 word, he cast his proplii<l's mantle jver him, \\iiich 
 was a symbol of his being clothed wilh God's 
 Spirit. The divine imjiression prud.iceJl upon ilie 
 mind of Elisha liy this act of Elijali made him 
 willing to leave all things aiul follow him. 
 
 For about six years I'rom this calling of Elisha 
 we find no notice in the sacred history of Elijah, 
 till God sent him once again lo jironomic.e sore 
 judgments upon .Ahab and Jezebel tor the murder 
 of unolfending Naboth (I Kings xxi. 17. &c. i. 
 How lie and liis associate in the jiiojilietic of!ice 
 employed themselves during this lime we are not 
 told. We may conceive, however, that tliey were 
 much engaged in prayer for their country, and in 
 inipaiting knowledge in the schools of the ]>m' 
 jil.et.s which were at Jericho and Belh-el. We 
 need not dwell upon the complicaled character 
 of .\hal)'s wickedness (I Kings xxi.), in winkinij 
 at the murderous means wherebv Jezebel i/v«:
 
 633 
 
 ELIJAH. 
 
 cured for him the inalienable property of Naboth 
 [Ahab; Naboth]. VV'lien he seemed to be 
 .Tiumphing in the possession of his ill-obtained 
 gain, Elijah stood before him, and threatened 
 him, in the name of the Lord (2 Kings ix. 
 21 -2(; inch;sive). that God woukl retaliate blood 
 for blood, and that not on liimself only — ' his 
 seventy sons shall die, and (2 Kings x. 6) 
 Jezebel shall become meat for dogs.' Fearing 
 tiiat these predictions would prove true, as those 
 alwut the rain and fire had done, Ahab now 
 assumed the manner of a penitent; and, though 
 subsequent acts proved tlie insincerity of his re- 
 pentance, yet God rewards his temporary abase- 
 ment by a temporary arrest of judgment. We 
 see, however, in after parts of this sacred history, 
 how the judgments denounced against him, his 
 aliandoiieil consort, and children, took ert'ect to 
 tlie verv letter. 
 
 Elijah a,'ain retires from the history till an 
 act of blasphemy on the part of Ahaziali, the son 
 and successor of Aiiab, causes God to call him 
 forth. Ahaziah met with an injury, and, fearing 
 'Isat it might be unto death, he, as if to prove 
 himself woithy of being the son of idolatrous 
 Ahab and Jezebel, sent to consult Baalzebub, the 
 idol-god of Ekron ; but tlie Angel of the Lord 
 tells Elijah to u:o forth and meet the messengers 
 of the king (2 Kings i. 3, 4), and assure them that 
 he shall nol recover. Suddenly re-appearing be- 
 fore their mas'^er, iie said unto them, 'Why are 
 ye now turned back T when they answered, ' there 
 came a man up to meet us, and said unto us, Go, 
 turn again unto the king that sent you, and say 
 unto him, thus saitli the Lord : is it not because 
 there is no G.id in Israel that thou sendest to in- 
 quire of Baalzebub, the god of Ekron ? Where- 
 fore tliou slialt not come down from that bed on 
 which thou art gone uj), but shalt surely die.' 
 tloTiscience seems to ha\e at once whispered to 
 iiim that the man who dared to arrest his messen- 
 gers with such a communication must be Elijah, 
 the bokl but unsuccessful reprover of his parents. 
 Determined to chastise him for such an insult, he 
 sent a captain and Kfty armed men to bring him 
 into his ]iresence ; but lo ! at Elijah's word the 
 tire descends fropi Heaven and consumes the 
 whole band ! Attributing this destruction of his 
 men to some natural cause, he sent forth another 
 company, on whom though tlie same judgment 
 fell, this impious king is not satisfied till another 
 and a s'milar etlort is made to capture the pro- 
 phet. The cajitain of the third band imjilored 
 mercy at the hands of the ])ro])het, and mercy 
 was granted. Descending at once from Carniel, 
 he accompanies him to Ahaziali. Fearless of his 
 wrath Elijah now re]ieats to the king himself what 
 he had befure said to his messengers, and agree- 
 ably thereto, tlie sacred naixative informs us that 
 Ahaziali died. 
 
 The above was the last more public efl'ort which 
 the prophet made to reform Israel. His warfare 
 being now accomplished on eartii, God. whom he 
 •lad so lonir and so futlifuUy served, will translate 
 nim in a cliariot of (he to Heaven. Conscious of 
 t lis, he determines to spend his last moments in 
 .mjiarting divine instruction to, and pronouncing 
 -lis last l)ene<liction upon, the students in the col- 
 .eges of Betli-el and Jericho ; accordingly, he 
 made a circuit from Gilgal, near the Jordan, to 
 Beth-el, »ii I from tiience to Jericho Wishing 
 
 ELIPHAZ. 
 
 either to be alone at the moment of being caught 
 up to Heaven ; or, what is more ])robaljle, anxioiia 
 to test the affection of Elislia (as Christ did that 
 of Peter), he delicately intimates to him not to 
 accompany him in tiiis tour. But tlie faithful 
 Elisha, to whom, as also to the schools of the ])ro- 
 phets, God had revealed his ])ur[)o3e to remove 
 Elijah, declares with an oath his fixed determina- 
 tion not to forsake his master now at the close of 
 his earthly yjilgrimage. Ere yet, however, the 
 chariot of God descended for him, he asks what he 
 should do for Elisha. The latter, feeling that, as the 
 former's successor, he was, in a sense, his son, and, 
 tfierefore, entitled to a <louble portion ; or rather, 
 conscious of the complicated and difficult duties 
 which now awiited him, asks for a double portion 
 of Elijah's spirit. Elijah, acknowledging the 
 magnitude of the request, yet promises to grant 
 it on the contingency of Elisha seeing him at the 
 moment of his rapture. Possibly this contingency 
 was placed before him in order to make him more 
 oil the watch, that the glorious departure of 
 Elijah should not take place without his actually 
 seeing it. Whilst standing on the other side of the 
 Jordan, whose waters were miraculously parted 
 for them to pass over on dry ground, and jxissibiy 
 engaged in discourse about anointing Hazael "king 
 over Syria, angels descended, as in a fiery cha- 
 riot, and. in the sight of fifly of the sons of the 
 prophets and Elisha, carried Elijah into Heaven. 
 Elisha, at this wonderful sight, cries out, li'Ke a 
 bereaved child, ' 5Iy Father, my Father, the 
 chariot of Israel and the horsemen thereof;" as if 
 he had said, Alas ! the strength and saviour of 
 Israel is now departed! But no; God designed 
 that the mantle which fell from Elijah as he as- 
 cended should now remain with Elisha as a 
 pledge that the oflice and spirit of the former had 
 now fallen uj)on himself — J. W. D. 
 
 ELIM. one of the stations of the Israelites in 
 the route to Mount Siii.ii. [Exouus.] 
 
 ELDIELECH {"^^l^'hii. GodtheKing; Sept 
 'EAi|it6A6x)- A native of Bethlehem, husband of 
 Naomi, and father by her of two sons, Mahlon 
 and Chilion. In a time of scarcity he withdrew 
 with his familv into the lan^l of Moab, where he 
 died (Ruth i. i-3). [Naomi, Ruth ] 
 
 1. ELIPHAZ (TQ''^X God the Strong ; Sept. 
 'EA«|)oj). A son of Esau and Adah (Gen xxxvi. 
 10). 
 
 2. ELIPHAZ, one of the three friends who 
 came to conih)le with Job in his affliction, and 
 who took ])art in that remarkable disi;ussion which 
 occupies the liook of Job. He was of Tenian in 
 Idiimaea ; and as Kliphaz the son of Esau had 
 a Sim called Teman, from whom the place took 
 its name, there is reason to conclude that this' 
 Eliphaz was a descendant of the former Eliphaz. 
 Some, indeed, even go so far as to suppose that 
 the Eliphaz of Job was no other than the sou of 
 Esau. This view is of course confined to tho.se 
 who refer the age of Job to the time of llie pa- 
 triarchs: 
 
 Elijihaz is the first of tiie friends to take up tins 
 debate, in reply to Joli's passionate complaints. 
 Toe SCO]* of his argument aiul the cliaracter of 
 his oratory are descrified under another head 
 [Job, Book. ok]. He ap[)ears to have been the 
 oldest of the siieakei-s, fiom which circumsta 'ce,
 
 ELISABKTH. 
 
 or from natural disposition, liis langiiai^e is more 
 mild and sedate fliaii that of any ol" the other 
 •peakers. He begins liis orations with dflicacy, 
 ajid conducts his })art of the argument with con- 
 siderable aihhess. His share in the controversy 
 occujiies chapters iv. v. xv. xxii. 
 
 ELISABETH ('EAKraySer), wife of Zacharias, 
 and mother of Joim the Bajjtist (Luke i. 5). The 
 name in this precise shape does not occur in ihe 
 Old Testament, where the nan es of few females 
 are given. But it is a Hebrew .lame, the same in 
 fact as Elisheba, which see. 
 
 ELISHA (J?b'^S>*, God the Deliverer; Sept. 
 EAicraif). The manner, and the circumstances, 
 in which Elisha was called to the prophetic office 
 have been noticed in the article Ei.i.jah. 
 
 Anxious to enter at once upon the duties of 
 his sacred office, Elisha determined to visit the 
 schools of the jnophets which were on the other 
 side of the Jordan. Accordingly, returning to 
 tins river, and wishing that sensible evidence 
 should be artbrded, both to himself and others, of 
 the spirit and power of his departed master rest- 
 ing n])on him, he struck its waters with Elijah's 
 mantle, when they parted asunder and ojjened a 
 way for him to pass over on dry lanil. Witness- 
 ing this miraculous transaction, tlie fifty sons of 
 the prophets, who had seen from the opposite side 
 Elijah's ascension, and who were awaiting Eli- 
 siia's return, now, with liecoming reverence, ac- 
 knowledged him their spiritual head. 
 
 These yoimg prophets are not more full of re- 
 verence for Elisha than of zeal for Elijah: they 
 «a-.v the latter carried up in the air — they knew 
 tliat this was not the first time of his miraculous 
 removal. Imagining it therefore possible that 
 the Spirit of God had cast him on some remote 
 mountain or valley, they ask permission to go and 
 seek him. Elisha, though fully aware that he 
 was received up into glory, but yet fearful lest it 
 should be conceived that he, from any unworthy 
 motives, was not anxious to have iiim brought 
 back, yielded to their request. 
 
 The divine authority by which Elisha became 
 the successor of Elijah received fuither confirma- 
 tion from tlie miracle Afhereby the bitter waters of 
 Jericho were made sweet, and the place thereby 
 rendered lit for the habitation of man (2 Kings 
 ii. 19-22). 
 
 As tlie general visitor of the schools of the pro- 
 phets, Elisha now passes on from Jericho to the 
 college which was at Beth-el. Ere, however, he 
 entered Bethel, there met him from thence (2 
 Kings iii. "23, 24) little children, who no doubt 
 instigated by their idolatrous ])arents, tauntingly 
 told him to ascend into lieaven, as did his master, 
 Elijah! There was in tlieir expressions an ad- 
 mixture of rudeness, infidelity, and impiety. Jiut 
 the inhai)itaiits of Beth-el were to know, from bitter 
 exjHr'ence. that to ilishonour God's projjhets was 
 to disliononr Himself; for Elislia was at tiie mo- 
 ment ins]iired to pronounce the judgment which 
 at once took efVecf : God, who never wants for 
 instruments to accomplish liis purposes, caused 
 two she-bears tc emersrc from a neighbouring 
 urcicd. and destroy the young delincpients. 
 
 Jelioram, wtio'ieigned over Israel at this time, 
 Ciougii not a Baa/ite, was yet addic'ed to tlie sin 
 01 Jeiuboaiu: still lie iulierits the fiiendship of 
 lenuahaphat, tlie good King of Judtea, wii(>se 
 
 ELISHA. 
 
 023 
 
 counsel, possibly, under God. had detached him 
 from the more r/ross idolatri/ of his I'atlier Ahub. 
 'Wishing to see tiie now (u.c. ^95) revolted knig cf 
 Moab reductnl to his wonted allegiance to Isr.ael, 
 Jehoshaphat determined to go iij) to liaflle ag.^iM!(t 
 iiim, together with Jehoram, and iiis own trilui- 
 tary the king of Edom. Tiiese coml)ineil anniM 
 met together on the (ilains of Edom. Conliderit 
 in their own jmwers they press onwanl against the 
 enemy; but, not meeting him, another •f a more 
 fornndable character started uji befdie tliem. lu 
 the miilst of tlie arid plains of Arabia Petrira ttiey 
 could find no water. Jehoram deplores the cala- 
 mity into which they had fallen, but Jehoshiqiliat 
 inquired for a prophet. On this, one of his cour- 
 tiers said to Jehoram, ' Here is Elisha, Ihe ?on ot 
 Shaphat, who jioured water on the hands of Eli- 
 jali.' No sooner were they made acquainted with 
 the fact that Elisha was at hand than the thre« 
 kings waited upon him. Elisha, feeling that it waa 
 nought but superstitious fear, joined to the influ- 
 ence of Jehosliaphat, which led Jehoram thus to 
 consult him, now indignantly and tauntingly ad- 
 vises him to go for succour to the gods of his fatlier 
 Ahab and of his mother Je/.ebel. The reiiro\ed 
 monarch was then led to acknowledge the impo- 
 tency of those gods in whom he had trusted, and 
 the power of that God wliom he had neglected. 
 Still the man of God, seeing the hoUowness of 
 Jehorams humiliation, continues: • As the Lord 
 liveth, before whom I stand, surely were it not 
 that I reg.ird the jiresence of Jehosliaphat, the king 
 of Judah, 1 would not look toward thee.' Hav- 
 ing thus addressed Jehoram, Elisha desired a min- 
 strel to be brought before liini; and now wlien his 
 spirit is calmed by, perhap-i, one of the songs of 
 Zion, .lehovah approaches His prophet in the 
 power of inspiration, as it is written. 'The luind 
 of the Lord came u]vn him.' Tlie minstrel 
 ceases, and Elislia communicates the joyful in- 
 telligence that not only shoulii water be miracK- 
 lously supplied, but also that Moab should Ite 
 overcome. ' Thus saith the Lord, Make this 
 vallev full of ditches; ye shall not see wind, nei- 
 ther shall ye see the rain ; yet tliat valley shall iie 
 filled with water that ye may drink.' Accord- 
 ingly the next morning they realized the truth of 
 this prediction. But the same water which pie- 
 serves their lives becomes the source of destruction 
 to their enemies.. The Moabites, who had leceiv ed 
 intelligence of the advance of tlie allied army, 
 were now assembled vijion their f-onti^is. When 
 the sun was up, and its rosy lig'it first fell u|ion 
 the water, their van-guard, beholding it at a 
 distance, supposed it to be bluod. Thus the 
 notion was rajiidly spread from one end to anolhei 
 that the kings were suiely slain, having fallen out 
 amongst themselves. Hence there was a univer- 
 sal shout, ' Miiab, to the spoil 1 ' and they went 
 forward confident of victory. But who can de- 
 scribe their consternation at beholding the Israel- 
 ilish squadrons advancing to miet them sword in 
 hand! At once they flee in the utmost jianic and 
 confusion; but in vain do they seek to defend 
 tlieinselves, (rod had decreed their jiunishment 
 bv, and subjiiL'ation to, Israel ('.I Kings iii. 20, 
 &c.). 
 
 The war lia\ ing terminated in the signal over- 
 tliiow of the re\()llers, Elisha, who ti.id retuineU 
 home, is again employed in min stering b1e88m»rt. 
 .■\jiother case aiose to declare the pecidiar ctt»
 
 (Ai 
 
 ELISHA. 
 
 racter of liis mission as messenger of mercy to 
 man. The widow of a pious piopliet presents 
 herself liefore him (2 Kings iv), informs iiim that 
 lier husband iiaving died in deht, his creditors 
 were dboiit to sell lier two only sons, which, iiy an 
 extension ol the law (Exod. xxi. 7, and Lev. xxv. 
 39), and by virtue of anotlier(Kxod. xxii. 3), they 
 had the jK>wer to do; and against this hard- 
 liearfed act she implores the propiiet's assistance. 
 Goil will not, icilhout a cause, depart from tlic 
 general laws of His administiation : E'.islia 
 tlierefoie inepiires how far she herself liad the 
 ])ower to avert, tlie threatened calamity. Slie re- 
 plies tliat the only tliinjr of which she was pps- 
 sesse<l was one j)ot. of oil. By multiplying this, 
 as did his predecessor Elijah in the case of the 
 vvidov/ of Zareplialh, he enabled her at once to 
 pay oJf her debts and thereby to iireserve (lie 
 iil>er1y of her children (2 Kings iv. 1-7). 
 
 Having thus contemplated Elisha in ihe act of 
 relieving the wants of a ])oor wiilow, we may witli 
 the more pleasure observe liow, in the arrangement 
 of God's providence, his own necessities were, 
 in turn, supplied. In liis visitations to the schools 
 of the )n'",ihets it would seem tliat his journey lay 
 through the city of Sliuriem, wliere lived a rich 
 and godly woman. Wishing that lie should take 
 up, move than occasionally, liis abode under her 
 roof, she ])rnposed to her husband to construct for 
 him a chamber, where, far from die society of 
 man, he miybt hold solitary and sweet commu- 
 nion with his God. The iiusband at once con- 
 sented, antl, the apartment lieing completed and 
 fitted up in a way tiiat sliowed tlieir proper concep- 
 tion of his feeling, the prophet becomes its occupant. 
 Grateful for such disinterested kindness, Elislia 
 delicately inquired of her if he could prefer her 
 interest before the king or the captain of his host ; 
 for he must iiave had consideraijle inliuence at 
 court, from the }iart he had taken in the late war. 
 But the good woman declined llie projiliel's oiler, 
 liy declaring tliat she would ratlier 'dwell among 
 lier own people,' and in the condition of life to 
 Avliicli she had been accustomed. Still, to crown 
 Iier domestic happiness, she lacked one thing — • 
 she liad no cViild , and now, by reason of tlie age 
 of her husband, she could not expect such a bless- 
 ing. In answer, however, to the prayer of tlie 
 prophet, and contrary to all her own conclusions, 
 God causes her to conceive and bring forth a son 
 (B.C. 891). This new pledge of their alfection 
 grows up till lie is able to visit his fond father in 
 the liarvesf-field, wlieu all the hopes they had 
 huilt up in him were overthrown by his being 
 suddenly laid prostrate in death. 
 
 The lieieaved mother, with exquisite tenderness 
 towards the feelings of tlie father, concealed the 
 fact that tlie child was no more till she should see 
 if it might please God, througli Klislia, to restore 
 liim to life. She therefore hastens to Carmel, 
 where she found the pro^ihet, and informed him 
 what had taken ]ilace. Conceiving probably that 
 it was a case of mere sus^iiended animation, or a 
 sworn, the prophet sent Geliazi, his servant, to 
 jilace his stair on the face of the child, in the ln)[oe 
 that it might act as a stimulus to excite the ani- 
 mal motions. But the mother, conscious tliat he 
 was actually departed, continued to entreat that 
 he himself would come to the chamber of the 
 dead. He did sci, and found that the soul of the 
 child liad is 'asjj flttd from the earthly tenement. 
 
 ELISHA. 
 
 Natural means belong to man ; those that an 
 supernatural belong to God : we should do uiii 
 part, and lieg of GoJ to do his. On this jirin- 
 ciple the pic^pliet on this occasion acted. God 
 blesses the iiiiMns used, and answers the prayer 
 presentetl liy Elisha. The child is raised up and 
 restored to tlie fond eml>race of its grateful and 
 rejoicing jiarents. 
 
 Tlie next remaikable event in the hislary ,)f 
 Elisha was the miraculous healing of the incuiable 
 leprosy of the Syrian general Naaman, whereby the 
 neiglibouring nation bad the o))iiortnnity of jearn- 
 ing tilt lieiieticeiice of that God of Israel, whobc 
 judgments had often brought them verv low 
 Tlie particulars are given under another head 
 [Naaman]. 
 
 Soon after this transaction we find tliis man 
 of God in Gilgal, miraculously neutralizing the 
 poison which liad, by mistake, been mixed with the 
 food of the prophets, and also feeding one hun- 
 dred of them with t.\enty small loaves which had 
 been sent for his own consumjition (2 Kings iv. 
 38, Ike). In his tender regard to the wants ot 
 others, and in the miracles he wrought, how like 
 he was to the Saviour of the woriu. 
 
 Notwithstanding the general profligacy of Israel, 
 tlie schools of the prophets increased, b.c. 89 '■ 
 This was, doubtless, owing to the ia&«ence o( 
 Elisha. Accom]ianied by their master, a party 
 of these young |)ropliets, or theological students, 
 came to the Jortlan, and whiLt one of them was 
 'felling abeam (for the ])ur])ose of constructing 
 there a house) the axe-head fell into the water." 
 This accident was the more distressing because 
 the axe was liorrowed jirojierty. Elisha, however, 
 soon relieved him by causing it miraculously to 
 rise to the stnface of the river. 
 
 The sacred record again leads us to contemplate 
 the prophet's usefulness, not only in such indi- 
 vidual ])oiuts of view, but also in reference to his 
 country at large. Does the kiing of Syria devise 
 well-concerted schemes for the destruction of 
 Israel ? God inspires Elisha to detect and lay 
 tliem ojien to Jehoram. Benhadad, on hearing 
 that it was he that thus caused his hostile nune- 
 ments to Lie frustrated, sent an armed band to 
 Dothan in oider to bring him bound to Damasf'us. 
 The propiiet's servant, on seeing the host ol ths 
 enemy which invested Dothan, was much alarmed, 
 but by the jiiayer of Elisha God reveals to him 
 the mighty comjiany of angels which were set for 
 their defence. Regardless of c(jnse(juences, Ihe 
 prophet went forth to meet the hostile band ; and 
 having again ]iiayed, God so blinded them that 
 they could not recognise the object of their search. 
 The ]iro]ilief then promised to lead them to where 
 tliey might see him with the natural eye. Trust- 
 ing to his guidance they followed on till tiiey 
 reached the centre of Samaiia, when, the optical 
 illusion being removed, Elisha stands in his re- 
 cognised form before them ! Who can tell their 
 confusion and alarm at this moment? The king 
 is for jiutting them all to death ; but, through the 
 interjiositiori of him wlioni they had just before 
 sought to destroy, ti.ev were honouialily dismissed 
 to their own country (b c. 892). But a year had 
 scarcely elapsed from this time when Benhadad, 
 unmindful of Israel's kindness and forbearance, 
 invests Samaria and redvices its inhabitants 1c 
 such a state of sturvation that an ass's head, a 
 pioscribed animal by the Levitical law, was soM
 
 ELISIIA. 
 
 tm fnurBCtire piccci 'if silvtr, and tlie fomil. part 
 of a c.iS)--a quart or tlirre pints — ol' (love's diiii!^ 
 for live pieces of silver IDovk's J)unci]. Jiiit 
 this was not all. Parents were fimnii, if luit 
 murdering, actually eatinj; their deceased cliil- 
 iieii. These very calamities Moses had foretold 
 siiould ccmie npun them if they forsook God 
 'Deut. xxviii. 5;?-57). Still the king of Israel 
 plunges deeper anil deeper into sin, lor he orders 
 Klisliik to be jiut to deatlj, conceiving that it was 
 his piayer which brought these sull'erings upon 
 himself and nation. iJiit God forewarns him of 
 ills danger, and inspires him to piedict to the 
 wickei king that by to-morrow ' a measure of fine 
 flour should be sold for a sliekel, and two mea- 
 sures of bailey for a shekel, in the gate of Sa- 
 maria ' This assurance was not more comfortable 
 than incredible; but when the lord oti whose 
 nand the k ng leaned e.\pressed iiis disbelief, he 
 was atvfidly reliuked by the assurance that he 
 should see Imt not enjoy (he lieneKt. Tiie next 
 tiiglit God caused the Syrians to liear the noise of 
 chariits and horses ; and conceiving that .Jehorani 
 had hired against them the kings of the Hittiles 
 and t'le king of Egypt, they Hed from before the 
 walls of Samaria — leaving their tents (illed with 
 gold ind provisions — in the utmost panic and 
 confu.ion. In this way did God, according to 
 the wcrd of Elisha, miraculously deliver the iniia- 
 bitants of Samaria from a deadly enemy without, 
 and f(im sore famine within, its walls: another 
 prediction moreover was accom])Iished ; for the 
 distrostful loid was trampled to death by the 
 fam.shed |)eojile in rushing through the gate of 
 the city to the forsaken tents of the Syrians 
 O-i Kings vii.). 
 
 iVe are next led, in the order of the history, 
 th'tugh mt in that of time, to notice (rod's gra- 
 cii)us care of the woman o\' Siiunem. Having 
 fi--lowe<{ the advice ol' her kind friend Elislia, she 
 resided in Philistia iluiing the seven yeais" famine 
 n Israel. On her return, however, she f()und 
 lliat her paternal estate had been seized by others. 
 Biie at once went to the king, who at the moment 
 oi' her approach was talking with Geiiazi as to 
 Klisha having miraculously raised her son to life, 
 rins was a very providential coincidence in 
 l<ehalf of the Shunamite. The relation given by 
 Gehaiti w^s now corrotiorated by the woman her- 
 •eli". The king was tluly allected, and gave im- 
 mediate orders for the restoration of her land and 
 all that it had yielded during her ab.sence. VVe 
 next find the prophet in Damascus, but are 
 not told what led him thither (h.c. SP5). Ben- 
 >iadad, the king, whose couirsels he had so often 
 frustrateil, rejoiced to hear of his presence; and 
 now, as if he had forgotten the attempt he once 
 made upon his Ide, disjiatches a noble messen- 
 ger with a costly present, to consult him con- 
 cerning Ills sickness and recovery. The jnophet 
 replie<i that he should then die, though his intiis- 
 {Kfsitiuti was not of a deadly character. Seeing 
 moreover, in piophetic vision, that the man 
 Ilaz e!, who now s'ood l>efore him, siioidd be 
 king in lienliadad's stead ; and that, as such, he 
 woi d commit un'neard-of cruelties upon his 
 couiitry, *he prophet was moved to te us. How 
 'Jiese jiairiful ariiicij^ttions of Klisha w<'re reali/.ed 
 t'iie subse<juei; history of this man proved. Some 
 twenty-three years had now eliips<'d since I'.lijaii 
 Bad prr)phe.sied the de^struction of Allah's guilty 
 
 ELKAN.UI. 
 
 615 
 
 consort and family. liui (Jod's declared judjr- 
 nients are suje thouf;h delayed. Not only .*IihI» 
 and Jezel)el had been bloo<ly and idolatious. but 
 Israel had become partakers in their crimes, and 
 must shaie in the judgment. I'^lijah's eomplai'.t 
 in the cave now ie<'eived this late answer: ' Ha- 
 zael shall jjlagtie Israel : Jehu shall plague the 
 house of Ahab and Jezebel.' How fearfully 
 these declared purposes of (rod took effect we rnav 
 reu<l in 2 Kings ix. and x. 
 
 For a considerable time after Klisha had sent 
 to anoint Jehu king over Israel vn: liml no men- 
 tion of iiim in the sacred record. We have rea- 
 son to su])pose that he was utterly neglected by 
 Jehu, Jehoahaz, an<l Joash, who reigned in suc- 
 ce.ssion. Neither the sanctity of his life nor the 
 stupendous miracles he wrought had the efl'eet of 
 refoiming the nation at large ; much of the time 
 of his latter years was. doubtless, 8[)ent in the 
 schools of the prophets. At length, worn out by 
 his public and private labours, and at tiie age of 
 90— during 61) ol which he is sujiposed to liave 
 ])W)phesied — he is called into eteinitv. Nor wa5 
 the maiiner of his death inglorious; though he 
 did not enter into rest as did Klljah (2 Kings xiii. 
 14, &c.). .-Xmongst his weeping attendants was 
 Joasii, the king of Israel. He was probably 
 stung with lemorse for having so neglected to 
 acknowledge his national wortii ; yet, though late, 
 Gud does not sidl'er this public recoi;niiion of 
 his aged and faithful servant to go unrequited. 
 The s]jirit of jirophecy again entering the dying 
 I'^lisha, he informs Joash that he sliotdd jirevail 
 against the Syrians. Even after death Go»i 
 v/ould put honour upon Klijah : a dead body iia\- 
 ing touched his bones came to life again! (2Kin^« 
 xiii. 21.) 
 
 Klisha was not less eminent than his predece.s- 
 sor Klijah. His miracles are various and slu- 
 jiendous, and. like those which were wrought bv 
 C'hiist, were on tlie whole of a merciful char.icter. 
 In this they weie remarkably distinguished, in 
 many instances, from the miracles of Eliiah. — 
 
 , J. W. 1). 
 
 ELISHAH Cn^7N ; Sept. 'EA.o-cJ), a son of 
 Javan (Gen. x. 4), who seems to have given name 
 to ' the isle.s of Elishah," which are described as 
 expoiting fabrics of purple and scarlet to the mar- 
 kets of Tyre (Kzek. xxvii. 7). If the descendants 
 of Javan peopled Greece, we may expect to I'nd 
 Elishah in some province of that country. Tlie 
 circumstance of the purple suits the Peloponnesus ; 
 for the fisii atl'ording the purple dye was caught 
 at tlie mouth of tlie Kuiotas, and the purple (>f 
 Laconia was ver}' celebrated. The name setnu 
 kindred to Elis, which, in a wider sense, was ap- 
 plied to the whole Peloponnesus; and some iden- 
 tify Elishah with Ucllaa. The unceituiiity of all 
 this speculation is most a])]iaient : but it niav 
 lie added that, if jjrobable thus (iir, it is equally 
 probable that the geiieial name of ' the isles of 
 Elishah' may also have been extended to the 
 i.slantis of fJK' /Egian sea; a pa/' of which may 
 seem to have deiived the name of HellesjKUi', 
 sea of Hellits, from the same souice. 
 
 ELISHKBA (,y5y"'7N, coieiKint-God ; Sept 
 'EAicrajSt'Oy, uife of .-Vaion, and iience the motlic 
 of the prii'slly familv ( Hxod vi. 23'). 
 
 ELKANAH (n.:ii^^5<. r,VW tlieJfuloxi^ ; Skfi 
 'Z?ucayd). Seveia' pi isi.ns of liiis name are mm
 
 6a« 
 
 FXKOSH. 
 
 tioneil ill Scrij) lire, as a son of Kornli (Exod. vi. 
 24; I Cliron. vi. 23); the fatlicr (.f Samuel (1 
 Sa:n. i. 1. seq. ; ii. 11-20; 1 Cliroii. vi. 27), 
 a fViend of KiIl^^' Aliab (2 Cliron. xxviii. 7); oiiij 
 of David's heroes (1 Cliron. fi'\\. 6); Levites 
 ^1 Cliron. vi. 23, 25, 2!i, 27 ; xv. 23). 
 
 ELKOSH. The prophet Nahiim is called an 
 Elkosliite (^B'pPN), that is, a native of some 
 ) lace called Elkosh (Nahum i. 1). There was a 
 \iUage of this name in Galilee in the time of 
 Jerome; but *lie pvoi)h«t was more jirohably born 
 of Jewish exiles at Elkosh or Alkush in Assyria, 
 near Mosul. The Jews themselves believe that 
 he was horn and buried there; and Jewish ])il- 
 (ffims from all parts still visit his alleged tomb. 
 On this Mr. Rich remarks, ' The Jews are gene- 
 rally to be trusfe<l for local antiquities. Their 
 )iilgrimao;e to a spot is almost a sufficient test. 
 The unlnoken line of tradition which may have 
 been handed down amonsj; them, and their perti- 
 nacious resistance of all innovation, especially in 
 matters of religious belief, render their testimony 
 very weighty in such matters" (Residence in Koor- 
 distan. p. 111). Alkosh is thirty-four miles north 
 of Mosul (Nineveh), and is situated a little way 
 up the side of a mountain, in the range to which 
 it gives its name. It is entirely inhabited by 
 'Chaldee Christians, who have a convent higher 
 up the mountains. 
 
 ELLASAR("ip?X ; Sept. "EWcurap), a territory 
 in Asia, wlifise king, Arioch, was one of the four 
 who invaded Canaan in tlie tinie of Abraham 
 (Gen. xiv. 1). The association of this king with 
 those of Elam and Shinar, indicates the region in 
 which the kingdom should besought; butnothing 
 further is known of it, iniless it be the same as 
 Tlielassar mentioned in 2 Kings xix. 12 [The- 
 i.assar]. 
 
 ELM. Tlie Authorized Version has this word 
 in Hosea iv. 13. But the original word there is 
 iTPX, which is difleiently translated in every 
 other jilace [,\i.ah]. 
 
 ELOHIM. [God.] 
 
 ELON d'v''^? ; Sept. kiKwfjL, *EA.co;u), of the 
 tribe of Zebulon. who judged Israel ten years. 
 He was preceded by Ibzan of Bethlehem, and suc- 
 ceeded by Abdon of Ephraim. The whole period 
 covered by their ad-T>inistiati(m was twenty-five 
 years (from B.C. 1190 to 1174); hut it is pro- 
 bable that they were for a part of this time con- 
 tein]iorary, each exercising authority over a few 
 of the friix's. They appear to have overawed the 
 «iemiesof Israel by their judicious administra- 
 tion ; for no war is mentioned in their time (Judg. 
 xii. 8-1.5). 
 
 ELUL ('?-"l'?X, Neh. vi. 15; Sept. 'EXoiK; 
 the Macedonian Vopinaios) is the name of that 
 month which was the sixth of the ecclesiastical, and 
 twelfth of the civil, year of the Jews, and which 
 began with the new moon of our September. 
 Several unsatisfactory attempts ha\e been made to 
 find a Syru-Arabian etymology for the word. 
 Tiie most recent derivation, that of B«ifey, de- 
 duces it, thvoUf,'h many conimMfations and muti- 
 lations, from an original Zend form haiirvntul 
 ( Monatsnameti, p. 126). According to the Me- 
 giri'-it Taanith, the 17th day of this month was a 
 ^■il''^"<; fast for the death of the spies who brought 
 
 ENCAMPiMENTS. 
 
 back a bad rqwrt of the land (.Nam. ri». 
 37).— J. N. 
 
 ELYMAS ('EAtJaoi), an ajipellative com« 
 monly derived from the Arabic *<a£ Aliman (a 
 
 wise man), which Luke rnterprets by u fidyos : 
 it is applied to a Jew named Hiir-Jesns, mentioned 
 in Acts xiii. fill (v. Neanuer's Hist, of first 
 planting of the Christian Church, i. )). 12.5, Eng. 
 transl.). A very different but less }>robable de- 
 rivation of the wgrd is given iiy Dr. Ltghtfoot in 
 his Helirew and Talmudical Exeicitaticms on the 
 Acts (Works, viii. p. 4()1), and in his Sermon 
 on Elymas the Sorcerer (Works, vii. ]). 104), 
 Chrysostom observes, in reference to the blindness 
 inflicted by the Apostle on Bar-Jesus, that the 
 limiting clause 'for a season,'' shows that it was 
 not intendeil so much for the jiunisliment of the 
 sorcerer as for the cornersion of the deputy. E« 
 •yap KoXd^ovTOS ?iv, StawavThs hv avrly fTrohlffe 
 Tv^\6v, vvv 5e ov TovTo, dAAa wphs Katphy, Iva 
 rhv avOvTraTov KfpSdyr). Chrysost. in Acta Apost, 
 Homil. xxviii. ; Opera, torn. ix. p. 241. — J. E, R. 
 
 EMBALMIN5. [Buuia...] 
 
 EMERALD. [Noi-kch.] 
 
 EMKROnS, a painful disease with which the 
 Philistines were afflicted (1 Su:n. v. 6) [Techo- 
 uim]. 
 
 EMIM (D"'P'^1; Sejif , 'O/xfjiiv), a num'erous 
 and gigantic race of people who, in the time of 
 Abraham, occu])ied tlie country beyond the Jor- 
 dan, afterwards possessed by the Moabites (Gen. 
 xiv. 5 : Deut. li. 10). 
 
 EM.MAUS CEfxtxaovs, hot baths), a villige 60 
 stadia, or 7^ miles, from Jerusalem, noted for our 
 Lord's interview with two «liscij)les on the day of 
 liis resurrection (Luke xxiv. 13). The same 
 place is mentioned by Josephus (De Bell. Jud. 
 vii. 6, 6), and jilaced at tlie same distance from 
 Jerusalem, in stating that VfsjRisian left 800 
 soldiers in Jiidsea, to whom be gave the village ot 
 Emmaiis. The si'e is not now known; for Dr. 
 Robinson has shown that El Kii<>eiheh, wliich is 
 usually indicated, is too distiuit from Jerusalem ; 
 and tliat the jxisitioii of Eunnans, and all correct 
 tradition respe<tiiig it, weie lost l>efi>ie the time of 
 Eusebius and Jerome ; since these writers make 
 it iilentical with the city ol' Fmuiaiis, oi Nico])olis, 
 which lies not far from lOOstailia from Jernsaien^. 
 He adds : — ' There never was the .^liglitest ground 
 for connecting El-Kubeibeh in ;iiiy way with 
 Emmaus; nor is tlieie any trace of its having 
 been so connected before the f()urte>»itb century' 
 (Bib. Researches, iii 65, GO). The other Em- 
 maus, also called Nicopulis, just mentioned, is 
 identified with Lusiun, aliout midway between 
 Jerusalem and Ramleh. There was another Em- 
 maus, near Tiberias, on the lake of the same name, 
 wtiere the hot baths which gaie name to it an* 
 still frequented, and have a temjjeratuTe of I3t 
 Fahrenheit. Here the name Emmaus is merely 
 preserved in that of Hanimam, which flie Arabs 
 give to hot-baths, whether )iatural or artificial. 
 N either of these places is named in Scripture. 
 
 EN, jirojjerly Ain, a word signifying 'foun- 
 tain;' and hence entering into the compositior 
 of sundry local names, which are exjdained 
 lander Ain. 
 
 ENCAMPMENTS. Of the Jewish system 
 of encampment the Mosaic books have left a d**
 
 .•^KStrAMp-MKNTS. 
 
 EN-EQLAm. 
 
 627 
 
 EAST.— FIRST DIVISION— CAMP OF JUDAII: 186,400. 
 
 
 
 JUDAH. 
 
 
 
 
 
 74,600. 
 
 
 
 
 
 [S«ACHAU ANU SKBI'I.UN, 
 
 
 
 
 
 54,400. 57,400. 
 
 
 
 
 < ^ 
 
 MOSES, AARON, 
 
 e» on 
 
 
 
 f-2 
 
 ANU THE PRIBSTS. 
 
 i^S 
 
 
 
 B.PS 
 < >f> 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 t) 
 
 
 Pz 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 a 
 % 
 
 < 
 
 * 
 
 JTo 
 S o 
 < c^ 
 = CO 
 
 
 o 
 
 i 
 
 >• 
 o 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 H O 
 
 
 o»o 
 
 
 
 •ogg'z 
 
 if 
 
 
 
 S2- 
 
 ♦sa.iiMOHsaao 
 
 
 
 ■<-* 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 •OOT'ce •00Z28 
 
 
 
 
 
 'KiRvruaa onv iiassvNVR 
 
 
 
 
 
 •005'0I' 
 
 
 
 
 
 'KlVHH'ia 
 
 
 
 •001'80I :KIVHH«ia JO dlMVO— NTOISIAia aaiHx— 'XS^.U 
 
 ailed (lescn])lion. Fiom the period of tlie sojourn 
 m the wilderness tt) the crossing ot" tlie Jordan 
 the twelve tribes were formed into loor great 
 armies, encamping in as many fionts, or forming 
 a square, with a great space in the rear, where 
 the tiibemacle of the Lord was placed, sur- 
 rounded by the tribe of Levi and the bodies of 
 CJirriers, &c., by the stalls of the cattle and tiie 
 baggage: the four fronts faced tlie cardinal points 
 while the march was eastward, but as Judah con- 
 tinued to lead the van, it follows that when the 
 Jordan was to l)e crossed the direction became 
 westward, and therefore the general arrangement, 
 so far as the cardinal points were concerned, 
 was reversed.* It does not appear that, during 
 this time, Israel ever had lines of defence thrown 
 up; but in after ages, wiien only single armies 
 came into the field, it- is probable that the c;istral 
 dis]H)sition was not invarialilj' c[ua(b-angular ; 
 and, from the many positions indicated on the 
 crests of steep mountains, the fronts were clearly 
 adapted to the grouna and to the space which 
 it was necessary to occupy. The rear of such 
 positions, or the square camps in tlje plain, <a]j{)ear 
 from the marginal reading of I Sam. xvii. 20, 
 and xxvi, 5 to have been enclosed witii a line of 
 
 * If the leading tribes did not thus tuni with 
 the direction oX the march, Judah and his two 
 wing* must have formed tb(^ rear in crossing the 
 Jordan. 
 
 carts or chariots, which, from the remotest jiorro 1. 
 was a practice among all the nomade nations <if 
 the noith. The books of Moses are so ex]ilicit «m 
 the subject of encampment, and the march of tin- 
 Israelites, that we deem a distinct plan of the 
 niunbers and i)Osition of fiie twelve triljes, of the 
 various corps of Levites, &c., witii the tents fif 
 Moses and Aaron ranged alwut the fabernaclif, 
 and other particulars, suificient to give a very 
 clear idea of ttie whole, and to- sui)ersede the 
 necessity of further descri])tion. — C. 11. S. 
 ENCHANTMENTS. [Divination.] 
 ENDOR ("in I'y, home-fountain; Sept. 
 'AffSwp), a town of Galilee, assigned to Mauiisscli, 
 although lying beyond the limits of that trilu- 
 (Josh. xvii. II). It is mentioned in connection with 
 the victory of Deborah and Barak (Ps. Ixxxiii. 
 10); but is chiefly memorable as the abode of 
 the sorceress wliotn Saul consulted on the eve of 
 tiie battle in which he jjerished (1 Sam. xxv iii. 7, 
 sq.) Tlie name is not found in the New Testa- 
 ment ; but in the time of Eusebius and Jerome 
 the jilace still existed as alarge village, fourmilia 
 south of Mount Tabor. At this distance, on the 
 northern slope of the lower ridge of Hernion, a 
 village with this name still exists. 
 
 EN-EGLAIM {0"^^^ ^y, calves' J^mntain { 
 Sept. 'EvayaXXtifj.), a town of Muab (Exek, xlvtL 
 10), which Jerome places at the northern end ol 
 the Dead Sea, at the influx uf the Jordan.
 
 62S 
 
 EN-GANNIM. 
 
 EN-(JANNIM (D^33 |*y, ciardcns" fountain ; 
 Sept. "H^z-rawiV)- 1- A town ol" Jiidah (Josh. xv. 
 34),whicli Jerome places near Heth-el. 2. A Le- 
 vit.ical city in Issaciiar (Josli xix. 21 ; xxi. 29), 
 prpbalily the same as the Ginaeii of Josephus 
 {Antiq. xx. fi, 1), and wliich Bidihilph ( in 
 Purchas, vol. li. p. lo5) identities with the present 
 Jen In, a town 15 miles soutii of Mount Tabor, 
 (i and which he and others descrihe as still a place 
 I of gardens and abundant water. He adds that 
 in liis whole journey from Damascus to Jerusa- 
 lem, he nowhere saw so much iVuitfid ground 
 together, as in riding' between tiiis place and 
 Mount Talior. 3. Jerome mentions anotlier place, 
 called En-gannim, heyond the Jordan, near Ge- 
 raza ; and the name seems, indeed, to have been 
 very common for places where water, and conse- 
 quently gardens, abounded. 
 
 EN-GEDI (nri^y, hidsfovntain; Sejit.'Ej/- 
 7a55i') a city of Judah, which gave its name to 
 a part of the desert to which David withdrew for 
 fearofSaul (Josh. xv. Q-l; 1" Sam. xxiv. 1-4). Its 
 more ancient Hebrew name was Hazezon-tamar ; 
 anJ by that name it is mentioned liefore the de- 
 struction of Siidom, as being inhabited by the 
 Amorites, and near the cities of the plain (Gen. 
 xiv. 7). In 2 Chron. xx. 1, 2, bands of the Mo- 
 abites and Ammonites are describeil as coming up 
 against king Jehoshaphat, apparently round tl e 
 south end of tiie Dead Sea, as far as En-gedi. 
 And this, as we learn from Dr. Robinson, is the 
 route taken by the Arabs in their marauding ex- 
 peditions at the present day. According to Jo- 
 sephus, En-gedi lay upon the lake As])haltites, atid 
 Avas celebrated for its beautiful palm trees and 
 opobalsum {Atitiq. ix. 1, 2); while its vineyards 
 are also mentioned in Sol. Song, i. 14. In the 
 time of Eusebius and Jerome, En-gedi was still a 
 large village on the shore of tlie Dead Sea. En- 
 gedi has always, until recently, been sougiit at 
 the north end of the Dead Sea. But Seetzen re- 
 cognised the ancient name in the Ain-jidy of the 
 Arabs, and lays it down in his ma}) at a point of 
 the western shore, nearly equidistant from both 
 extremities of the lake. This s])Ot was visited by 
 Dr. Robinson, and he confirms the identification. 
 The site lies among the mountains which liere 
 confine the lake, a consideral)le way down the de- 
 scent to its shore. Here is the beautiful fountain 
 of Ain-jidy, bursting forth at once in a fine stream 
 upon a sort of narrow terrace or shelf of the moun- 
 tain, above 400 feet above the level of the lake. 
 The stream rushes down the steep descent of the 
 mountain below, and its course ishiddenby aluxu- 
 riaiit tliicket of trees ami shrubs belonging to a 
 more southern clime. Near this fountain are the 
 remains of .several buildings, apparently ancient ; 
 althougli the main site of the town seems to have 
 Ix^en farther below. The whole of the descent 
 below ajipears to have lieen once teiraced for til- 
 lage and gardens ; and near the foot are the ruins 
 of a town, exliibiting nothing of parficular in- 
 f terest, and built mostly of unhewn stones. Tiiis 
 we may conclude to have been the town which 
 took its name from the fouutain (^Robinson, ii. 
 209-216). 
 
 Thk Wilderness of En-gedi is doubtless 
 die immediately neighbouring part of the wild 
 region, west of the Dead Sea, wliich must lie tra- 
 T«»ed to raach its shores. It was here tliat David 
 
 ENGINES OF WAR. 
 
 a! i his men liveil among the 'rocks of tb# wild 
 
 goats," and where the former cut olT the skirts of 
 Saul's robe in a cave '\ Sam. xxi. 1-4). * On 
 all sides,' says Dr. Robinson, ' the ci"intry i.s full 
 of caverns, which might then serve as lurkitig- 
 jilaces for David and his men, as they do for out- 
 laws at the present day.' He adds that as he 
 came in sigiit of the ravine of the Gliar, a moun- 
 tain-goat started up and bounded along the face 
 of the rocks on the o])posite side. 
 
 ENGINES OF WAR were certainly l<nowii 
 much earlier than the Greek writers appear to 
 admit, since figures of them occur in Egyptian 
 monuments, where two kinds of the testudo, or 
 pent-house, used as shelters for the besiegers, 
 are represented, and a colossal lance, worked 
 by men who, under the cover of a testudo, 
 diive the point between the stones of a city 
 wall. The chief projectiles were the catapulta 
 for throwing darts, and the balista for throwing 
 stones. Both these kinds of instruments were 
 prepared by Uzziah for the defence of Jerusalem 
 (2 Chron. xxvi. 15), and battering the wall is 
 mentioned in the reign of King David (2 Sam. 
 XX. 15); but the instrument itself for throwing it 
 down may have been that above-noticed, and not 
 the battering-ram. The ram was, however, a 
 simple machine, and capable of demolishing the 
 strongest walls, provided access to the foot was 
 jiracticable ; for the mass of cast metal which 
 formed the head could be fixed to a beam 
 lengthened sufficiently to require between one and 
 two hundred men to lift and impel it ; * and when 
 it was still heavier and hung in the lower floor 
 of a movable tower, ox helipolis, it became a most 
 formidable engine of war — one used in all great 
 
 280. [Battering Ram.] 
 
 sieges from the time of Demetrius, about b ». 
 306, till long after the invention of gunpowder. 
 Towers of this kind were largely used at the 
 destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans. Of 
 tlie balistae and catapultfe it may be })roper to add 
 that they were of various poweis. For battering 
 walls theie were some that tlirew stones of fifty, 
 others of one hundred, and -some of three imndred 
 weight ; in the field of battle they were oi mucc 
 inferior strength. Darts varied sjmi.'arly from 
 small beams to large arrows, and the range 
 they had exceeded a quarter of a mile, or about 
 450 yards. .-VI 1 these engines were constructed 
 upon tlie principle of the sling, the bow, or the 
 spring, the last being an elastic bar, bent back by 
 
 * The Algcrines, about two centui 'es ago, took 
 the lower mast of one of their frigates and 'wo- 
 nelled it by fi,rcii5g 400 slaves to use their p«- 
 
 sona' sliength ni the work.
 
 ENOCH. 
 
 K »crew >/f « CAl)le of sinews, will) a trigger to set 
 it free, and contrived either to iimiel darts by its 
 
 KNOCK, BOOK OF. 
 
 m 
 
 281. [Balista.] 
 
 jtroke, or to throw stones from a kind of spoon 
 formed towards the summit of the spring. — 
 
 C. H. S. 
 ENGRAVING. [Seals, Writinq.] 
 
 ENOCH ("qbn ; Sept. and New Test. 'E^c^x)- 
 Four persons hearing this name are mentioned in 
 the Old Testament, the most distinguished of 
 whom was the son of Jared and father of Metiiu- 
 selali. Accoriling to the Ohl Testament, he 
 walked ivith God ; and, after 365 years, he was 
 not, for God took him (Gen. v. 24). The inspired 
 wiiter of tlie Epistle to the Hebrews says, 'By 
 -faith Enocli was translated tljat lie should not see 
 death, and was not found, because God had trans- 
 lated him" (xi. 5.). Walkin(j xcith God implies 
 tiie closest fellowship with Jehovah which it is 
 possible for a human being to enjoy on earth. As 
 a reward, therefore, of liis extraordinary sanctity, he 
 was transported into heaven without the experience 
 of death. Elijali was in lil<e iranner tianslated ; 
 and thus was t!ie doctrine of immortality /ja^/iaS/y 
 taught under the ancient dispensation. The 
 traditions of ihe Jews have asciibed to Enoch 
 many fabulous qualities. Tiiey have invested 
 him with various attributes and e-Kcellencies for 
 which the Bible furnishes no foundation. Accord- 
 ingly, he is represented as the invent(.r of letiers, 
 arithmetic, and astronomy ; as the Jirst author, 
 from whom several books emanated. Visions and 
 prophecies were commonly ascribed to him, which 
 he is said to have arranged in a book. Ttiis book 
 was delivered to his son, and jjreserved by Noah 
 in rhe ark. After the flood it was made known to 
 the world, and haniled down from one generation 
 
 to another. Hence the Arabians call him iut^yj\ 
 
 Kdris, i. e. the learned (Koran, Sur. xix). See 
 Juchasin, f. l^U ; Eusebiu?, Prcepar. Evang. ix. 
 17, and Hist. Eccles. vii. 32; Barhebr. Chron. 
 p 5.— S. 1). 
 
 ENOCH, BOOK OF. The interest that once 
 attached to the apocryphal book of Enoch has now 
 partly subsided. Yet a documtnt quoted, as is 
 generally believed, by an inspired a|K)stle. can 
 Dever be wiiolly deioid of importance or utility 
 in sacred literature. ^Ve shall allude to the fol- 
 lowing particulars relating to it : — - 
 
 1. The history of the l)ook of Enoch. 
 
 2. The language in whic-li it was written. 
 
 3. Its form and c ^hereuce. 
 
 4. Its author, and the time when it was writ* 
 ten. 
 
 5. The jilace where it was written. 
 8. Did Jude really quote it? 
 
 7. Its use. 
 
 In several of tiie fathers mention is made of 
 Enocli as the antlior, not only of a pro])lietic 
 writing, but of various productions. The Ixiok of 
 Enoch is alluded to by Justin Martyr. Irena?us, 
 Clement of Alexandiia Teitidlian, Origen, Au- 
 gustine, Jerome. Hilary, and Eusebius. It is also 
 quoted on various occasions in the Testament nj 
 the Tirehc I'alriarr.lis, a document which Nitzsch 
 has shown to belong to the latter j)art of the fimt 
 cent my or tlje beginning of the second. Tlie 
 passages in these ancient writings relating to oui 
 present jmrjMise have iieen carefully colleited by 
 Fabricius. in Ids Cudex Pseud-epigrophiis (vol. i 
 pp. 160-224) ; to whidi, and to the first Exciirstii 
 of liolVmann, we refer our readers. In tiie eighth 
 century Georgius Syncellus, in a work entitled 
 Chronographia, that leaches from Adam to Dio- 
 cletian, made various extracts from ' tho first 
 book of Enocli." In the ninth century Nicepho- 
 rus, patriarcli of Constantinople, at the conclusion 
 of his Cliroitographice Compendium, in his list of 
 canonical and iaica)i07ncal books, refers to the 
 book of Enoch, and assigns 4600 cttI\oi as the 
 extent of it. After this time little or no mention 
 appears to have been made of liie production 
 until Scaliger jirinted tlie fragments of Syncellus 
 regarding it, which he inserted in his notes to the 
 Chyo7iitus Canon of Eusebius. In consequence 
 of sucii extracts (he bouk of Enoch excited much 
 atfeiition and awakened great cvniosity. At the 
 l>eginning of the seventeenth century an idea pre- 
 vailed that it existed irk an Ethiopic translalion. 
 A Cajuichin mnnk from Egypt assured Peiresc 
 that he had seen the book in Et"iopic, a circum- 
 stance which excited the aidour of the scliolar of 
 Pisa so much, tliai he never resteil until he ob- 
 tained the tract. But when Job Ludolph went 
 afterwards to Paris to the Royal Library, he founJ 
 it to be a fabulous and silly ijrotluct'on. In conse- 
 quence of tliis disappointment the idea of recover 
 ing it in Ethiopic was abandoned. At length 
 Bruce brought home three co])ies of the book oi' 
 Enoch from Abyssinia. 'Amongst ♦he articles,' 
 he states, ' I consigned to the library at Paiis, was a 
 very beautiful anil magnificent copy of the proplie- 
 cies of Enoch in large quarto. Another is amonggt 
 tlie books of Scripture which I brought home, stand- 
 ing inmiediately before the book of Job, which is 
 its proper place in the Abyssinian Canon ; and a 
 tliird copy I have presented to the Bodleian Li- 
 brarv at Oxford by the hands of Dr. l^juglas, 
 bishop of Carlisle.' As soon as it was kni>wn in 
 England that such a present had been made to 
 the Royal Library at Paris, Dr. Woidc, libra- 
 rian of the British Museum, set out for France 
 with letters from the secretary of state to the am- 
 bassador at that court, desiring him to assist the 
 learned bearer in procuring access to the work. 
 Dr. VVoide accordingly transciibed it, and lirought 
 back with him the copy to England. The Pari- 
 sian MS. was first publicly noticed by the emi- 
 nent Orientalist De Sacy, who translated into 
 Latin cli. i. ii. iii. iv.-xvi., also xxii. and xKxi. 
 Tifse he also published m tl e Mayasin Encyclo- 
 pedi<jue, an vi. torn. i. p. 3*<2 et seq. Mr. Murray, 
 editor of Bruce't Travels, gave some accouat 6f
 
 €30 
 
 ENOCH, BOOK OF. 
 
 fhe book from tlie traveller's own MS. The Bml- 
 leiaii MS. was translated into English by Dr. 
 Laiiif nee. then Professor of Hebrew in Oxford ; 
 and ttius the pulilic were favouied, for the first 
 time, with the whole hook in Enj^'lish, a.d. 1H21. 
 In lh3o a second, improvei.l edition ol the traiis- 
 !ati»)r ajijjeared ; and, in 183:1, tlie fliiid edition, 
 revistd and enlaiged. To tlie translation is pre- 
 fixed a preliminary dissertation of 59 ))ages, 
 giving some account of the book, its autlior, the 
 time and [)lace of its composition, &c. &c It has 
 also been translated into German by Dr. Hoil'mann 
 of Jena. According to Angelo Mai there is a 
 MS. copy of tiie book of Enoch among the Ethi- 
 opic cdclices of the Vatican, which must have 
 been brought into Europe earlier than Bruce's 
 MSS. In 1834 D;-. Riippell procured another 
 MS. of Enoch from Abyssinia, from which Hoft- 
 maiin made the second part of his German version. 
 
 Tiiere can be no doubt that the Ethiopic trans- 
 lation exiiiblts the identical book, which, as most 
 believe, Jude quoted, and wliicli is also men- 
 tioned or cited l)y many of the fatlieis. The 
 fragment presei ved by Syncellus (re])nnted by 
 Laurence and Hoil'mann) ia obviously the same as 
 oh. vii., &c., tlie deviations being of little import- 
 ance and probably accidental. It is manifest 
 also, to any one who w'.i com])are the quotations 
 made by the father"; with the Ethio[)ic veision, 
 that buth point to the sanie original. The ex- 
 tracts in question could not have been interpola- 
 tion*. as they are essential to the connections in 
 wiiich they are found. 
 
 Tl^e book was never received into the series 
 of canonical writings. The ApostoJical Consti- 
 tutions expressly style it apocryphal (vi. Iti), 
 while Urigen {contra Celsuni) ailirms that it 
 was not reckoned ilivine by the churches; al- 
 though in another place he hints that some of his 
 contemporaries were of a ditVerent opinion. In 
 the Si/7icpsis of Scripture piUdished v/hh the 
 works of Athanasius, as well as in the writings of 
 Jerome and Augustine, its non-canonicity is dis- 
 tmctly stated. The only aniient writer who 
 reckoned it of divine authority was TertuUian, 
 who undertakes to defend it against fhe objections 
 by which it was then assailed (see his treatise De 
 Cultu Fceminarimi). His arguments, however, 
 ire exceedingly pnerile. 
 
 The Greek translation, in which it was known 
 to the fathers, appears to be irrecoverably lost. 
 There is no trace of it after the eighth century. 
 The last remnant of it is preserved by .Syncellus. 
 
 Tiie leading ot)ject of the writer, who was mani- 
 festly imbued with deep piety, was to comfort and 
 strengthen his contemporaries. He lived in times 
 of distress and persecution, when the enemies of 
 religion oppressed the righteous. The outward cir- 
 cumstances of the godly were such as to excite 
 doubts of the divine equity in their mlnd^, or at 
 least to prevent it from iiaving tljat hold on tiieir 
 I'aith which was necessaiy to sustain them in the 
 lour of trial. In accordance with this, the writer 
 exhibits the reward of the lighteousand the punish- 
 ment of the wi<ked. To give greater authority to 
 his aflirniafion% he puts tl)em into tiie mouth of 
 Enoch. Thus they have all the weight belonging 
 to the charactt>r of an eminent jiropliet and saint. 
 Various digiessions are not without their bearing 
 on the author's main pin[>o-ie. The narrative of the 
 fallen angels and iheir punishment, as also of the 
 
 ENOCH, BOOK OP. 
 
 flood, exemplifies the retributive justrK o' Jeho- 
 vah; while the Jewish lustory, continued d< wn t« 
 the Maccabees, exhiliits the tinal triumph of His 
 people, notwithst-anding all tlieir vicissitudes. 
 Doubtless the author lived amid fiery trial : and, 
 looking aliroad over the desolation, sought to cheei 
 the sufferers by the consideration that tliey should 
 be recomj)ensed in another life. As for their 
 wicked oppressors, they were to experience terrible 
 judgments. The writer seems to delight in utter- 
 ing dire anathem.is against the wicked.. It is 
 plain that the book grew out of the time when the 
 author lived, and the circumstances by which he 
 was surrounded. It gives us a glimpse not only 
 of the religious ruinions, but also of the general 
 features that characterized the jieriod. 
 
 2. T/w kmguagi- in which it was icritten. — ■ 
 Seveial circumstances render it apjiarent that the 
 book befoie us was originally composed in the 
 Hebrew or Clialdee language. This was long 
 since perceived Ity Joseph Scaliger, although he 
 had before him nothing more than the Greek frag- 
 ment preserved by Syncellus. The book of Zohar, 
 in which are various allusions !o Enoch, seems to 
 speak of it as an inipoitaiit Heljrew production 
 which had been handed down from generation to 
 generation. The Cabbalists, whose o[)inions are 
 embodied in Zohar, thought that Enoch was really 
 tlie author, a sentiment quite at variance with any 
 other hypothesis than that of a Hebrew original. 
 The names of the angels (ch. vii. viii. and ix.) 
 also point to a Hebrew origin, and can be most 
 easily derived from Hebrew roots. Thus Tamiel 
 
 (viii. 7) is comjjoundid of Dfl and 7X, the up- 
 
 right of God ; Samyaza of Dt^' and K*y, the name 
 of the strong. T!ie same conclusion follows frc-m 
 the temi Ophania (Ix. 13), which is evidently 
 identical with the Heijiew piDN. It is remark 
 able also, that as (Jjihanin occurs in connectio) 
 with the Cherubim, so the Hebrew term ^JDN ii 
 found in fhe same assi>ciation (1 Kings vii. M\ 
 Ezek. i. 1.5, IC, 19, 20, 21 ; and x. 2, 6, ', 10, 
 &c. ; Murray's Enoch Restitutvs, p. 3.^ sq.) 
 Other particulars corroborate the .same in erence. 
 Tlius in ch. Ixxvi. 1, it is written, ' The '^rst wind 
 is called the eastein, because it is the fist.' The 
 first and tlie east have an affinity in ' ae Hebrew, 
 wiiich explains the phraseology, s'nce Dnp, a» 
 well as its derivatives, signifies bc'n the east An>\ 
 ihe first. But neither in the Et' lopic nor in the 
 Greek is there such aftinity. I'l the same man- 
 ner may the next sentence be explained. ' The 
 second wind is called the sout i, because the Most 
 High there descends.' What is said respecting 
 the western wind, may be employed in confirma- 
 tion of the same conclusion. It is highly pro- 
 bable, too, that the names of the conductors of the 
 month (ch. Ixxxi. 23) are ])ure Heijrew (Murray, 
 p. 4ti ; HoHmann, p. (>9()). t'tlier jnesumjrtive 
 evidences iir favour of a Hebrew original may I ; 
 collected liy the attentive reader. 
 
 The Ethiopic version was matie from ttie Creek, 
 not the Hebiew. 
 
 3. Its form and coherence. — In the MSS. rtie 
 IV hole is divided into chapters and '.erses, although 
 they vary in their sjiecitication of such compart- 
 ments. There aie lO.J chaijters of unequal length, 
 and often injudiciously made; while there are 19 
 se"''oiiS;or larger divisions. 
 
 The vvant of coherence among its several i«x>%
 
 ENOCH, BOOK OF. 
 
 h olivioiis. Detached iwitions are put together 
 vv/thoxt regard to tlieir mutual connection. The 
 work sfems in fad to be made up <tf several 
 pieces, which, iiaviiig- been se])ar.itely comjiosed, 
 were afterwards thrown to;^ether witliout care. 
 Various chapters occupy an unsuitable [wsilion iu 
 the MSS. Hence Lamience has bten obliited in 
 one case to rectify ^vlvit be justly conceived to Itn 
 erroneous by transferring to their fnoper place the 
 verses badly located according to tbe Bmlleian 
 MS. 
 
 Laurence remarks, that 'the Imok may have 
 been composed at diflei-ent [leriods ; }ierha]is it 
 migLt be also added, that there may liave lifen 
 difVerent tracts, as well as tracts comjHtsed by dif- 
 ferent authors.' Tiiis idea has been taken up by 
 Murray, and expanded in a treutise of consider- 
 able researcii and great ingenuity. Pioceeding 
 upon the hy[)othesis that the book consists of 
 various tracts on ditlerent subjects, he endeavoin's 
 to disentangle them from one another, antl to class 
 tiiem under th«ir appropriate heads. In the pro- 
 secution of an extended inquiry he endeuvotirs to 
 show, that tti« diilerent parts of the piesent work 
 possess unequal authority, and belong to very dif- 
 ferent times. He lias therefore selected what he 
 conceives to be tiie ancient iKwk quoted by Jude, 
 and atti-ibutes its origin to Enoch himself. The 
 later additiot>s now incorporated witli it belong to 
 other writings, and have been mingled together. 
 The ingenious author has been guided by the con- 
 nection of one j)art with another, and the similarity 
 or dissimilarity of subject. The ancient book, 
 as it is denominated by him, to which he princi- 
 pally confines his attention, is said to consist of 
 the following -parts : chajjters i. and ii. ; xlv. 2-5 ; 
 xlvii. 1-4; xlviii. 2; 1. 5; Ivi. 2-5; Ix. 7; Ixi. 
 18; Ixviii. 34-41. The other parts he has se- 
 lected and arranged under the heads of a propfieci/, 
 consisting of the xcii. chapter ; second book, imi- 
 tated from tliat which he has endeavoured to re- 
 store ; two books of the angels or watchers ; two 
 books concerning secret things, called visions of 
 wisdom ; the vision of Aoah and historic ; vision 
 of Noah ; and the book of astronomy. Such is 
 the mode in which the whole document before us 
 is separated and arranged. Yet there is much 
 reason to doubt its conectness and success. If 
 the looseness with which the parts frequentlj' 
 hang together, and the transition from one sort 
 of wilting to another, as from the historic to 
 the prophetic, be reckoned a good ground for dis- 
 meml)erment, tlie book of Daniel ]iresents simi- 
 lar features. It cannot indeed be denied that 
 several chapters, such as xxxvii. sq., Ixi v. sq., 
 Ixxi. sq., xcii. xciii. sq., cv , do not coincide witii 
 the preceding or subsequent portions, or with 
 the manifest object of the writer. Some parts 
 again are very unsuitable, and altogether foreign 
 to their present position. Yet it appears to us 
 much more probable, that a number of tracts 
 emlx)dying ditl'erent traditions were put together 
 about the same period, and by one {jerson. Much 
 R^ay be done by transposition to restore a measure 
 of unitj', although a disunited cliaracter will still 
 belong to the ivlide. Perhaps some parts have 
 been lost, as maj be inferreil from allusions to 
 Enoch in early writings. The various transla- 
 tions througli which it has passed, and the tran- 
 •cribers by whom it has bstu copied, liave doubtless 
 contributed to its dislocation. 
 
 ENOCH, BOOK OF. 
 
 031 
 
 The mention of books of Enoch in tie Tcslit 
 mcnt of .ludali, in tlie Testanient of lieiijamin. in 
 Oiigen {c. C'e/s. and liomH. in \u/n.\, and o( 
 the lirst book of Enocli iti the (Vagnn'iil pie.seivm 
 by Syncellus, is quite consisient with (iie idr.i 
 that tlie wiwle w;is tiien (bvideil into diflrrtnt 
 biK)ks. Teilullian lea«ls us to l)elif»e that it iv..* 
 of the same extent in the Greek texl then exisiinj, 
 as it is in iIk^ present Ethiojiic. Our lin)its lin- 
 Itiil furtiier examination of tliis topic. We nui-t 
 refer such as are desirous of prost^-utiiig it lo 
 Murray's elaboiate treatise, and to Hoflinaiiu'i 
 second Excurstu where Enoch Rcsliluius is re 
 viewed. 
 
 4. Its author, and the time when it tras tvrit- 
 ten. — The two questions respecting tiie age and 
 authoisliip of the book of Enocli are so intimately 
 connecteil that they nuist be treated t<»gether. 
 The opinions entertained in relation to the one 
 necessarily affect oiu' idt^as of liie other. Ac- 
 cordingly, the same jiassages have been made to 
 hear more or less directly on both. l( the writer 
 was a Christian Jew, as Liicke and Stuait are 
 inclined to l<eli<'ve, it will then t»ehu\e us to bring 
 diiwn the ])eriod ofcomjKisition to the (ir->t century 
 of the Christian era; but if he was a Jew, there 
 is no neetl to l)end {)assages into comjiliance with 
 the former hypothesis. Rather will the advocates 
 of a puiely Jewish authorship lie dispi.scil to isfer 
 it back with Laurence to the reign of Herod, or 
 still earlier, with HolVmann. It will not be 
 denied by any reader, that tlie ideus, imagery, and 
 general complexion of the book, are essentially 
 Jewish. Tiiere is so much imitation of Daniel — 
 such an exliiliition of Jewish conceptions mixed 
 with superstition, and occasionally with cabba- 
 listic theology or oriental tlieosophy, that the 
 hand of a Jew cannot be mistaken. But the 
 question is, are tliere sufficient indications in the 
 work itself to wairant the conclusion that the 
 writer was acquainted with the New Testament; 
 that he derived various passages from the Apoca- 
 lypse in particular; and that, therefore, he was 
 probably a Jewish Christian. There is no goo<_l 
 ground for supposing that the passages relating to 
 the Messiah were interpolated by Christians ; for, 
 as Hoffmann well remaiks, they constitute es- 
 sential parts of the whole, lieing intimately intei- 
 woven with the pieces to which they belong. 
 Tliere is therefore no alternative between tiie two 
 hypotheses. 
 
 There are some data for determining the time 
 when this production first ap|ieared. If Jude 
 quoted it, it must have existed in <lie (iist cen- 
 tury ; and as the writer imitates the language and 
 imagery of Daniel, it must liave been written 
 after the comjiosition of that inspired book. Heit 
 are two termini, within which we aie to look. 
 Chapters Ixxxiv. — xc; liv., Iv., and xcii. contain 
 chronological marks of a somewhat definite cha- 
 racter. In the first of these jiassages is found un 
 allegorical representation, exhibiting the principal 
 events in Jewish history, from Adam down to 
 seventy kings who ruled over the Israelites. The.se 
 are divided into three classes. 1. Tliirty-seveii 
 shepherds (ch. Ixxxix. 1). 2. Twenty-three she|»- 
 herds (ch. Ixxxix. 7). 3. Twelve shepherds (ch. 
 Ixxxix. 25). The first class consists of the kinga 
 .of.fudah and Israel, twenty ol' the fonner, and 
 seventeen of the latter. Dr. Laurence tliink,s iiiat 
 for thirty-seven we should c«ud tJiirty-tive, becauM
 
 tf62 
 
 ENOCH, BOOK OF. 
 
 llie gum of the slieplienis is said to he seventy, not 
 seveiily-two ; yel we may ralhei- suppose will) 
 Lucke, llolVmaiiii, ami Stiiait, that seventy is a 
 round, propliefic number. The writer did not 
 a.iiHne liiinself to minute exactness. Believing 
 ihereCore that thiity-seven is a correct exhibition 
 «)f the writer's opinion, Zimri, Siiallum. and 
 Tibni are omitttd, in consecjnence of their very 
 short reign. The next twenty-tliree shepiierds 
 were foiei-rners. ,vho ruled over tiie Israelites 
 during and after the Bal)ylonish captivity. 
 Their lumes are, 1. Nebucliadneziar. 2. Evil- 
 mert)dach. «. Neiiglissar. 4. Belshazziir. 5. Da- 
 rius the Mede. 6. Cyrus. 7. Caml)y.se3. 8. 
 Smerdis. 9. Darius Hystaspis. 10. Xerxes. 
 11. Artaxerxes Longimanus. 12. Xerxes II. 
 13. Sogdianus. 14. Ochus (D.irius Notliu-s). 15. 
 Artaxerxes Mnenion. IG. Darius Oclnis. 17. 
 Arse*. 18. Darius Codomaniius. 19. Alexander 
 tiie Great. 20. Antlgonus. 21. Ptolemy Lagi. 
 21. Ptolemy Pliiladelphus. 23. Ptolemy Euer- 
 getes. Tiie tliird class cousi.'^ts of t\\elve rulers, 
 who, according to Laurence, vieve-iuitive princes. 
 In reckoning them he begins with Mattaihia.'j 
 father of Judas Maccabseus, and endswitli Herod. 
 Now Herod reigned thirty-four years ; and, as 
 the autlior stops with him, Laurence infers that 
 the book was written during the reign of Heroil. 
 Laurence makes tiie twelve princes to be Malta- 
 tiiias, Judas Maccabgens, Jonathan, Simon, John 
 Hyrcanus, Aristobulus, Alexander Jannaeus, 
 Alexandra his widow, Aristobulus, Hyrcanus, 
 Antigonus, and Herod. But there is good ground 
 for questioning this reckoning. It lias been per- 
 tinently remarked by Stuart, that none of the 
 Asmonjean family were )iroper!y kings until 
 Simon. According to this view, the twelve 
 princes are, Simon, John Hyrcanus, Aristo- 
 bulus I., x\lexander Jannteiis, Alexandra his 
 widow, Aristibulus II., Alexander, Hyrcanus, 
 Antigonus, and Herod, Archelaus and Agrippa. 
 Such is the computation of Professor Stuart, 
 more probable, as it appears to us, than that 
 of Laurence, but still liable to doubt and se- 
 rious objection. Alexander was never king of 
 Judaea. Besides, in tiie book of Enoch it is stated, 
 in relation to the twelve, that liiey 'destroyed 
 more thati those who jireceded them;' an asser- 
 tion TT-anifestly inconsistent with fact. The tirst 
 tnree prince?, at least, were just and mild m their 
 administration, and several of tlieir succes;ors 
 cannot be equitably characterized as tyrants who 
 shed the blcod of the people. Of Henxl alone is 
 the statement empiiatically true. To tliis it has 
 been replied, that the writer gives the general cha^ 
 racter of tiie whole. Yet the exjjression 'tiiey 
 destroyed more than those who preceded them." is 
 not the general ciiaracter of the whole, but only 
 of one in particular. Hence we are inclined to 
 accede to the opinion of Hott'mann, who refers 
 tlie fwehe princes to yorc/^H, not native, lulers. 
 In that case we must look for these twelve princes 
 in the peiiod of the Jews' oppressors, under the 
 dynasties that arose after the deatli of .\lexander 
 tlie Great. Their names, according to Holl- 
 niann, are Ptolemy Pliilopator, Ptolemy Pliila- 
 delphus, Seleucu* ill. Philopator, Antiochus IV., 
 Epiphanes, Antiochus V , Eupator, Demetrius 
 Soter son of Seleucus, Alexander Balas son o^ 
 Antiochus, Demetrius Nicator, Ptolemy Pliilo- 
 ■aetor, Demetrius Nicator II., Antiochus Theos. 
 
 ENOi H, BOOK OF. 
 
 and Tryphon. If tliis view \>e correct, we are not 
 bound lo conclude from the jiassage that tha 
 book oi' Enoch, or tiie liistoric jiortion of it, was 
 written during tlie reign of Herod the (ireat. 
 
 Another jiassage on which Laurence rests in de- 
 termining the time when the book was written, is 
 chapter liv. 9, It), wliere "the chiefs of the east 
 among the Partliians and Medes' are represent -d 
 as about to remove kings, as hurting tiivm from 
 their thrones, 'springing as lions from their dens, 
 and like tarnished wolves into the midst o.f the 
 flock. They shall gu up and tre.id upon the land 
 of their elect. The land of tlieir elect shaH Ije 
 before them,' &c., &c. In the year B.C. 41 tlie 
 Partliians invaded Syria and took jxis-session of 
 the country. In the year B.C. 40 they entered 
 Jerusalem, drove Herod oi^t of the country, and 
 raised Antigonus, the last of the .\smonaeai. race, 
 to the throne. Herod ajipears to be alluded to as 
 one in whom was the spirit of perturbation ; while 
 the retreat of the Partliians when the Romans in- 
 terl'ered on behalf of Herod, seems to be indicated 
 in other language. Tliis brings us down Xo the 
 year B.C. 40, before wliich the book of Enoch 
 could not have been written. Perhaps the book 
 toas icritten about b.c. 40. 
 
 In chap. Iv. is another chronological datum. 
 The prophet beholds ' another army of chariots, 
 
 with men riding in them ' coining from the 
 
 east, the west, and the south. ' The sound of the 
 noise of their chariots was heard from the ex- 
 tremities' of the eaith unto the extremities of 
 heaven at the same time.' In the former chajiter 
 the Parthian army is re])resented as powerful and 
 territic, while here the Roman seems to be noticed. 
 It is ambiguous wlietliei' the language .should be 
 refeired to the interposition of the Romans on 
 behalf of Herod, or regarded as an expansion of 
 the idea that the Roman name was poweiful oit 
 e\eiy side of Judaea, or assigned, with Liicke and 
 Stuait, to the invasion of Judaea by the Romans 
 under Vespasian and Titus. The liinguage is 
 {xietlcal and glowing. Tlieie is, therefore, no ne- 
 cessity to refer it to the Jewish war. It is suffi- 
 ciently appropriate iu relation to the interposition 
 of the Romans on behalf of Herod. 
 
 Chap. Ixxxix. 2'.', ^c. and chap. xcii. are also 
 rested on by Liicke and Stuart in favour of the 
 opinion that the author was a Jew instructed in 
 Chiistianity. But their arguments are unsatis- 
 factory, and the construction they jiut on the pas- 
 sages in question lialile to uncertainty. Hotl'- 
 mann, in his Vommeniarij, shows that they are 
 either unten.ible or exceedingly doubtful. We 
 are inclined to exp'ain them otherwise; .so tiiat, in 
 our view, tlie olwervations built ujion them by 
 Liicke fall tii the ground. 
 
 Professor Stuait lays consideraljle v,'eight on the 
 Christology of the book, as indicative of an ac- 
 quaintance on the author's ]),irt with the New 
 Testament, especially the Apocalyjise. Yet the 
 Cliristulogical poitioiis do not pos.sess suHicient 
 distinctness to imply a knowledge oi' the New 
 Testament. The na.ue JesM.v never occurs ; though 
 Son of n'.an, so often given to tlie ilessiah in the 
 Gospels, is very frequent. Neither are the a( ]iel- 
 lations Lord, Lord Jesus, Jesus (.'hrist, or even 
 Christ employed. Is there not s<nnething uiiac;- 
 countable here on the siqiposltion that the writei 
 was instructed in Christianity V Al'ter ill tlie con- 
 siderations that have been adduced bv L'icke nmJ
 
 ENOCH, BOOK OF. 
 
 Stuart, and the many coincidences between sen- 
 timents advanced in nur liook and tlie New Testa- 
 ment, we cannot su|)jx)se tliat it Wiis written in 
 the first century by a Je.vish (^liristian. It seems 
 to us to have been c()in])i)sed a little before Christ's 
 {ippearance by a Jew who had studied well the 
 book of Daniel. At the same time we freely con- 
 fess that tlie Saviour is spoken of in terms ex- 
 jiressive of his dignity, character, and acts, sur- 
 passing the descriptions which other Jewish books 
 p:e-ieJit. 
 
 5. The place where it teas icritten. — The ])lace 
 where the author li\ed and wrote is determined by 
 Laurence from the seventy-first chapter, where the 
 len^'th of the days at various i)eriods of the year 
 is yiveu. It must have been between the 45lh 
 and 19th degrees of north latitude, in tiie nortliern 
 districts of tlie (Caspian and Eiixine seas. Perlia]is, 
 therefore, the author was one of the Jews who had 
 been carried away by Shalmaneser and did not 
 return from captivity. " Yet an examination of 
 ciiap. xiii. 8-10, points to the northern jjart of 
 Palestine. Mr. Murray has also shown that one 
 passage favours tlie idea that the writer of it lived 
 in Abyssinia ([i. 63-73). Hence lie infers that 
 the work of dill'eient authors, living in countries 
 ren-cved from one another, is comliined in the 
 book of Enoch. But De Sacy has well remarked, 
 that as the astronomical system of the author 
 appears to be in part imaginary, so his geography 
 may be probably visionary. Neither Egypt, nor 
 Chaldsca, nor Palestine, suits the astronomy con- 
 tained in the book. It is true fiiat there are allu- 
 sions to the oriental tlieosophy and the opinions of 
 Zor(»aster which would ajipear to recommend a 
 Cfialdoean origin, at least of the astronomical part ; 
 but the author's predilection for tiie images ofjire, 
 radiance, light, and otlier Oriental syml)ol.s, may 
 bt accounted for on some other sujjposition than 
 that of liis residence in Chaldaea. In wiial way 
 he became acquainted with the Zend-Avesta, or 
 the sentiments embodied in that book, we are not 
 able to tell, although it is jiretly obvious that 
 vari(>us {Kirtions of his book are tinctured witii the 
 Oriental philosophy of Middle Asia. 
 
 (5. Did Jude reallfi quote the book of Enoch f — 
 Some aie most unwilling to believe that an in- 
 Sjjiied writer could cite au Apocryphal production. 
 Such an opinion destroys, in their view, the cha- 
 racter of the writing said to be inspired, and 
 reduces it to the level of an ordinary comiiosition. 
 But this is pre]yosterous. The Apostle Paul quotes 
 several of tlie heathen poets ;yet who ever su])posed 
 that by such raferences lie sanctions the produc- 
 tions from which his citations are made, or renders 
 them of greater value: All that can be reason- 
 ably interred fiom such a fact is, that if the in- 
 sp'ied writer cites a particular sentimrnt with 
 apjn\ibatiun, it must be regarded as just and right, 
 inespective of the remainder of the book in which 
 •t is found. The Apostle's sanction extends no 
 faither than the passage to which he alludes. 
 Other portions of the original document may ex- 
 liibit the most absuul and superstitious notions. 
 It has alw.iys b(en t.ie curient opinion that Jude 
 quoted the book of Enoch ; and there is nothing 
 to disprove it. It is true that there is some varia- 
 tioE lietween the quotation and its original, but 
 this is quite usual even with the New Testament 
 ly^ritsrs inciting tiie Old Testament. 
 
 Otliers, us Cave, Simon, Witsius, &c., sapiiose 
 
 ENOCH, BOOK OF. 
 
 6M 
 
 tiiat Jude quoteii a. traditional prophecy or siiying 
 of Enoch, and we see no impi(il)al)dity in the a»- 
 sumption. Otliers, again, lielieve that the word* 
 a])parently cited liy Jude weiV siigijesled to him 
 by the Holy .Spirit, lint surely this hypothesis \* 
 unnecessarv. Until if can I* sliown that I lie bo. ik 
 of Enoch ditl not exist in the time of Jude. or that 
 his quoting it is unworthy of an ,'\postle, or that 
 such kn^<wle<lge was not liande>l down traili- 
 tionally within the .\])ostle's reach, we aliide by 
 the '-pinion that Jude really Quoted tlie book of 
 Enoch. Wiiile tiiere are piolwl'e grounds for 
 l>elieving tiiat Jude might have liecome acquainted 
 with the circumstance inilepemiently of inspira- 
 tion, we ought not to have recourse to the hyiKi- 
 thesis of immediate suggestion. On the whole, it 
 is mo-it likely that the book of Enoch existed be- 
 fore tiie time of Jiide. and that the latter really 
 quoted it in accordance with the current tradition. 
 If s 1, the prophecy ascribed to Enoch was trnhj 
 ascribed to him, l)ecause it is scarcely credible 
 that Jude writing by inspiration would have 
 sanctioned a false statement. 
 
 7. Its use. — Presuming that it was written by 
 a Jew, the book before us is an imjiortant docu- 
 ment in the history of Jewish opinions. It indi- 
 cates an essential portion of the Jewish creed 
 before the appearance of Christ ; and assists us in 
 comparing tiie theological views of the later with 
 those of the earlier Jews. It also serVes to establish 
 the fact that some doctrines of great iiiqiortance 
 in the eyes of evangelical Christians ought not to 
 be regarded as the growtli of an age in which 
 Christianity had been corrupted by the inventions 
 of men. \Ve would not appeal h) it as ]jo3sessing 
 autlioritg. The place of anthoriti/ can be as- 
 signed to the Bible atone No human com]iosi- 
 tion, be it ever so valuable, is entitled to usum 
 dominion ovei- the understandings of men. But 
 apart from all ideas of aiit)iorit>j, it may lie 
 fairly regarded as an index of the .stat ' of opinion 
 at the time when it was written. Hence it sub- 
 serves the coiifiimation of certain opinions, j.ro- 
 vided they can be shown to have a good f!;ni;d2)ion 
 in the word of God. If it be conceded that certain 
 doctrines are contained by express declaration or 
 fair inference in the volume of inspiration, it is 
 surely some attestation of their truth that they lie 
 on the surface of this ancient book. Let us briefly 
 allude to several representations which occur in 
 its pages : — 
 
 1. Respecting the nature of the Deify. — Theie 
 are distinct allusions to a ])lurality in the God- 
 head. The doctrine of the Trinity seems to have 
 been received by the writer and his contempo- 
 raries, as the following quotation will jjrove : ' He 
 shall call to every power of the heavens, to all the 
 holy alnive, and to the jjower of God. Tiie Ciieru- 
 bim, the Seraphim, and the 0]iiiaiiin, all the 
 angels of power, and all the angels of liie Lords, 
 namely, of the Elect One and of the other Power, 
 who was ujxin earth over the watA on that day, 
 shall raise their united voice; shall bless, glorify, 
 jiiaise, and exalt with the sjiiiit of faitli, witli the 
 spirit of wisdom and patience, with the sjiirit i>/ 
 jiatience, &c., &c.' (Ix. 13, 1 1). Here the Elect 
 One evidently refers to the Messiah, and the ' other 
 Power who was upon earth over the water on that 
 day ' to the Holy Spirit. 
 
 In accordance with this passage Christ is re* 
 presented as (aj existing from eternity. Thus i
 
 *34 
 
 ENOCH, BOOK Of. 
 
 In tliat hour was tliis Son of man invoked before 
 ■lie Lord ot'S|iiiits, and his name in presence of 
 (lie Ancient of days. Before flie sun and the signs 
 were cieited, liefoici the stars of iieaven were 
 fcniied, his name was invoked in the presence of 
 the Lord of Spirits. Therefore tiie Elect and flie 
 Concealed One existed in liis presence, before tiie 
 World Wiis cieatpd, and for ever ' (xlviii. 2, 3, 5). 
 ' Tiien s!ia!l (he kin.'s, ttie jtrinces, and all who 
 possess thi' eurfli, ijloiify Him who has dominion 
 over all things. Him who was concealetl ; for, 
 from the l/eginning, tlie Son ot man existed in 
 secret, whom the Most High preserved in the pre- 
 sence of his power, anci revea'.ed to the elect. All 
 the kings, the prince.s, the exalted, and those who 
 role o\er the earth, shall fall down on their faces 
 before Him, and shall worsiilp Him. Tiiey shall 
 (ix their hopes on this Son of man. shall prav to 
 Him, and petition Him for merely' (Ixi. 10. 12, 13). 
 
 (6) As the oliject of invocaiion and worship. 
 Tlie last quotation is corri)l-ii:-.ative of this state- 
 ment; so also ch. xlviii. 3 ard 4, ' Before the 
 sun and tlie sigr.s were created, before the stars 
 of heaven were formed, liis namo was invoked 
 in the jireseiice of the Lord of Spirits. All who 
 dwell on earth shall fall down and vorship before 
 Ilim; shall bless and glorify Him, and sing 
 praises to tiie fiiime of the Lord of Spirits.' 
 
 (c) .\s the sujMCiT:e J-^dge of men and angels. 
 ' O ye kings, -O ye mighty, who inhabit the 
 world, you shall ijehold My Elect One sitting iijjon 
 the throne of My glory. And he shall judge 
 Azazeel. all nis associates, and all his hosts, in 
 the name of the Loid of spirits' (liv. 5). ' Tlien 
 the Lord of Si)iiits seated upon the throne of His 
 glory the Elect One ; who shall judge all the woiks 
 of the holy in heaven above, and in a balance 
 sliall He weigh their actions. And wiien he shall 
 lift up His countenance to judge their secret ways 
 in the word of the name of the Lord of spirits' 
 &c. &c. (Ix. 10, llj. 'They Idessed, glorllied, 
 and exalted, because the name of the Son of man 
 was rffvealed to them. He sat upim the throne of 
 His glory ; and the principal 'part of the jndg- 
 tneni was assigned to Him, the Son of man ' 
 (Ixviii. 3S, 39J. 
 
 2. The doctrine of a future slate of retribution 
 ii implied in many passages. Thus : ' You have 
 committed lilasplu-rny and iniquity ; and aie 
 destined to the day of the effusii-n of blood, to the 
 day of darkness, and to the day of the great judg- 
 n:ent. Tliis I ileclare, and point out to you, that 
 He wlio created you will destroy }'^ou ' (xciii. S, 
 9). ' Who has peru.itted you to hate and to 
 transgress? Judgment shall overtake you, ye 
 einners. VVo to you who recoinpense your neigh- 
 bour witli evil ; for you shall be recompensed 
 according to your works ' (x iv.2, -1 ; comp. also 
 chapters xcv. xcvi. xcix. and ciii.). 
 
 3. The eteruitij of future punishment is also 
 contained in the book of Enoch, as the following 
 jiassages will slunv : — ' Moreover, abundant is 
 their sulVering until the time of tlie great judg- 
 ment, tlie castigation, and the torment of those 
 who eternally execrate, whose souls are punished 
 and bound there for ever. A receptacle of this 
 toit has been formed for the souls of unrighteous 
 men, anil vX sinners ; cd" those who have com- 
 mitted crime, and associated with the impious 
 whom they resemble. Their souls shall not l)e 
 annihilated in the day of judgment, neither shall 
 
 EN ROGEL. 
 
 they arise from this place' (xxii. 12, 14). 'Nevei 
 shall they obtain mercy, saith the Lord of sjjirits' 
 (xxxix. 2). ' The countenances likewise of tb« 
 mighty shall He cast down, filling thorn with con- 
 fusion. Darkness shall be their habitation, and 
 worms shall be their bcil; nor fiom that their bed 
 shall (hey hope to be again raised, because they ex- 
 alted not the name of the Lord of spirits ' (xlvi. 4). 
 ' But has it not been shown to them, that, when to 
 the 'ecepfacle of the dead their souls shall be made 
 (o descend, their evil deeds shall become their 
 gieatest torment? Into darkness, into the snare, 
 and into the flame which shall bum to the great 
 judgment, shall their spirits enter ; and the great 
 judgment shall take etlect for ever and for ever' 
 (ciii. 5). 
 
 We waive all comment on these j)assages, be 
 cause their imjxnt is so plain, and I)ear3 so di 
 rectly on the |)n)positions in snjiport of whic i 
 they have been adduced. Whatever value may 
 be attached to the theological o])inions expressed 
 in the book of Enoch, it is ajiparent fiom the pre- 
 ceding extracts, that certain sentiments to which 
 evangelical Cliristian; as-ign a high imjrortance, 
 because, in their view, they an; contained in Scrip- 
 ture, ajipear to have ])iQvailed at the commence- 
 ment of the Christian era. To the serious in- 
 quiier they can never i;e of trillurg interest. 
 
 TJie Bonk of Enoch the Prophet, by Richard 
 Larrtence, LL 1)., Aichl>islioi) of Cashel, third 
 edition, Oxfor<l, 1S38, Svo. Das Buck Henoch 
 in vollstdndiger rcbersdzung niit fortlaiij'endetn 
 C'ommcntar, atisfu/irlichcr Linleitunff U7,d crldu- 
 tcrnden Ejntrsen, von Andr. G. Hofl'mann, Erste 
 Abtheilung, Jena, 1P3'), Svo. Zueite Abtheilung, 
 Jena, 183S, Svo. This is tlie fullest and L^st book 
 on the suiiject. Enoch Restitutus, or an attampt 
 to separate from the books of Enoch the book 
 quoted bij St. .hide, &c., l)y the Rev. E<1. Murray, 
 London, IR36. Svo. American Biblical Hepo 
 sitorij for 1840, in which theie are two excellent 
 articles by Professor Stuait on the book of Enoch. 
 Versuch eincr vollstUndigen Einleitiing in die 
 Offenbarung Johannis, von Dr. F. Llicke, Bonn, 
 1S32, Svo. ^ 12, pp. 52-78. A. F. Gfiorer's 
 tract in the Tiibingen ' Zeiischrift fur Thvologie,'' 
 entitled, ' Die Quellen zur Kentniss de.i Zu 
 standes der judischen Dogmen und der Vc'.ks' 
 bihhing im Zeitalter Jesn Christi,' 4 Helft. pp. 
 120, sq. for the year lSo7. Silvestre de Sacy's 
 Notice du livre a' Enoch in Magnsin Encyclo- 
 pidicjue, an vi. torn. i. p. 3S2. This disseifation 
 contains a Latin version of seveial chajjteis, and 
 was translated into German by F. T. Rink, Koe- 
 nigsberg. ISOl, Svo. Fabricii Codex I'sctid- 
 epigraphiis Veteris Testame7iti,\'o]. i. pp. 180-224. 
 Bruce's Travels, vol. ii. Svo. edition. The 
 Genuineness of the Book of Enoch Investigated, 
 by Rev. J. M. Butt, M.A., I^ndon, 1 S27^ 8vo. 
 (The older dissertations of Drusius, Hottinge^, 
 Pfein'er, Van Dale, Buddeus, and Heber, are now 
 of little value, because the entire work had not 
 been brought from Abyssinia when they were 
 written. They are founded upon the allusions of 
 the Fathers to the production in question, and 
 lij),)!! the-fragment of Syncellus). — S. D. 
 
 ENON'. [^:non.] 
 
 EN-ROGEL ('?P"]''J?; Sept. -Pwy-fiK). Tht 
 name means Foot-fountain, and is construed by 
 the Targnm into 'Fuller's Fountain,' l«cauM
 
 KP^NETUS. 
 
 Hie fiillers trod the clothes there with their feet. 
 It wag near Jerusalem, on tlie liountlary-line 
 between the trilx'S ol' Jiidah and Benjamin (Josh. 
 XV. 7; xviii. 6; 2 Sam xvii. 17; 1 Kinjjs i. 
 9). It lias been usually supjwsetl the same as 
 the Fountain of Siloani. But Dr. Robinson is 
 more inclined to find it iri what is called hy 
 Frank Christians the Well of Nehemiaii, liut 
 by the native inliabitants the Well of Job (/i«V 
 Kyiib\ There aie only three sources, or rather 
 receptacles of living water, now accessible at 
 Jerusalem, and this is one of tlieni. It is 
 situated just below the junction of the Valley 
 of Hinnom with tiiat of Jehoshaphat. It is a 
 veiy deep well, of an irregular quadrilateral 
 form, walleil up with lari^e squared stones, ter- 
 minating above in an arch on one side, and ap- 
 parently of great antiquity. There is a small 
 ruUe l)uildiiig over it, furnished with one or two 
 large troughs or reservoirs of stone, which are kept 
 partially filled for the convenience of the people. 
 Tiie well measures 125 feet in depth: 50 feet of 
 which were, at the time of Dr. Robinson's visit (in 
 the middle of April), nearly full of water. Tlie 
 waier is sweet, but not very cold, and at the pre- 
 sent day is drawn up by the hand. In tlje rainy 
 seaK'.?n tlie well becomes quite fidl, and sometimes 
 oveiilows at ilie mouth. Usually, liouever, the 
 water runs oil' under the surface of the ground, and 
 finds an outlet some forty yards below tlie well, 
 whence it is said to How for sixty or seventy days 
 in winter; ami the stream is sometimes large. 
 
 ENSIGNS. [SrANUAitDS.] 
 
 EP.^']NKTUS ('ETraiVeTos). a Clnistwn resi- 
 dent at Ron\o when Paul wrote his Ep'stle to 
 the Church in that city, and one of the persons 
 \n whom he sent special salutations (Rom. xvi. 
 ."ij. In the received text he is s])oken of as being 
 ' the first fruits of Achaia (aTrapxh t^s 'Axaiar); 
 but 'the first fruits of Asia (rris'Acrias) is the 
 reading of the best MSS. (A B C D E F G 67) 
 of the Coptic, Aimenian, T^'^hitijiic, Vulgate, the 
 Latin Fathers, and Origen (/» /-.Vj. ad Rom. Com- 
 ment, lib. X, Opera, vii. p. 431; In Numer. 
 Horn, xi., Opera, x. p. 109). Vater says, ' nisi 
 praeferendiim certe sequiparandum.' This read- 
 ing is prefeired Ijy Grotius. Mill, Bengel, Wliitby, 
 Kopjje. Rosenmiiller, Riickcrt, OL-hauseii, and 
 Thiiluck ; and admitted into the text by Griesbach, 
 Knap]),Tittmanii.Scholz,Lachmaiiii,and Tischen- 
 dorlV; also by Hruder, in his edition of Schmillt's 
 Concordance, Lips IS42. Dr. Bloomlield. who 
 also adopts it in liis (ireek Testament (2nd ed. 
 1S3()), remarks that ' the very nature of the term 
 drrapxn suggests the idea of one person only (see 
 1 Cor. XV. '10), and, as in 1 Cor. xvi. 15, Stephanas 
 i-i called the airapxh ''^is 'Axa'ixs, E|ia'netus could 
 have no claim to the name.' ^^'itll respect to the 
 former part of this statement, the learned writer 
 has strangely ovei looked such passages as James i. 
 IS, ' tiiat ice should be a kind cf tir.st fruits' 
 {anapxh" tij/o), and Rev. xiv. 4. ' These weie 
 redeemed fiom among men, Iteiiig the first fruits' 
 [dTrapxv) '■ and as to the latter part, not Stephanas 
 alone, but his house, is said to 1 e the first fruits, 
 3Jid to have addicted themselves [iTa^av eauTous) 
 to the ministry of the saints. Macknight's re- 
 mark in favour of the received reading, that if 
 Kp:snetus was one of that house, he w;is a jiarf of 
 khe first fruits of Achaia, seems somewhat forced. 
 
 J.E. R. 
 
 epiifjsians. 
 
 A3i 
 
 EPAPIIR.\S (*E7raf/)pas), an eminent teach« 
 in the church at (lolossit, denomlnatetl by Pan) 
 'his dear fellow-.st rvaiit,' and 'a faithful mi- 
 nister of Christ' (Coloss. i. 7 ; iv. 12). From 
 Paid's F.jiistle to Piiilemon it aji|)eais thai h« 
 sull'ered imprisonment with the ajioslle at Rome. 
 It hiis been inferred from Coloss. i. 7, that he w;is 
 the founder of the Colossian Church ; and Dr. 
 Neander sujiiioses that the ajxjslle terms him virtp 
 ■4)pii)v Sidicofos rov Xpiarov (a servant of Christ 
 in our stead), because he committed to him the 
 ofKce of ])roclaiming theGos|iel in the threePhry- 
 giaii cities Ct)loss;L', Hicra])olis, and I>aoiiice;i, 
 which he could not visit \\hri>u;\i{Ilis/.ofJ'/a7ilinQ, 
 Xc. i. pp. 200, 373, Eng. tiansl.). This language, 
 however, is by no means decisive: yet most 
 proiiably Epaphras was one of tiie earliest and 
 most zealous instructors of tiie Colossian Church. 
 Lardner thinks that the expression respecting Epa- 
 j)hr;is in Colo.ss. iv. 12, <5 (^ upu>y, is quite incon- 
 sistent with the supposition of his lieing the 
 founder of the (Jhurch. since the same jihiase is 
 a])plied to (Jnesiniiis, a recent convcil (///ii. of 
 the Apostles and llvaiiffelists, c. xiv. ; Works, vi. 
 153). But, in lioth cases, the words in (jnestion 
 seem intended sinqily to i(h'ntify these individuah 
 as the fellow townsmen of the Colossians, and to 
 distinguish them from others of the same name in 
 Rome (?•. Mackiiight on Coloss iv. 2) — J. E. R 
 
 EPAPIIRODITUS ('Eira0po'5iTos , a mes- 
 senger (airoa-ToAos) of the church at Philijipi to 
 the Apostle Paul during his impristmment at 
 Rome, who wasentiusted with their c(.ntri lint ions 
 for his siqiport (Phil. ii. 25; iv. IR). Paul's 
 high estimate of his character is shown by an 
 accumulation of honoural)le epithets (to;- cbeA- 
 <p6v, KoX avvepySv, koI <Tv<rrp:^rtuTr)v /.wv). and by 
 fervent exjiresslons of gratitude for his recovery 
 from a dangerous illness brought on in part liy a 
 generous disregard of liis j)ersonal welfaie in mi- 
 nistering to the Apostle (Phil. ii. 30): Epapino- 
 ditus, on his return to Philijipi, was the btaier of 
 the epistle whicli forms part cif the canon, (iro- 
 tius and some other critics conjecture that Fqia- 
 phroditus was the same as the Eiiaijlnas r.ienlioned 
 in the Ejiistle to the Colossians. But though the 
 latter name may be a contraction of the former, 
 tlie fact that Epajihras was mo.si j,;ol,ably in jiii- 
 son at the time sulliciently marks the distinction 
 of the persons. The name Ejiajihroditus was by 
 no means uncommon, as Wetstein has shown liy 
 various quotations from classical autiiois (.Vw». 
 Test. Or. torn. ii. {i. 273). — J. E. R. 
 
 KPHAH,adry measure of cajiacify, equivalent 
 to the liath lor liipiids. It containe<i thiee peeks 
 aiid three pints. [Wkights and IVlKAsiiiiiis.] 
 
 EPIIFSIANS, EPISTLE TO THE. This 
 Ejiistle expressly claims to be the production of 
 the .-VjHJStle Paul (i. 1; iii. 1); and this claim 
 the writer in the latter of these passages follows 
 11]) liy spe.iking of himself in language .such ivs 
 that apostle is accustomed to use in describing 
 his own jjosiliun as an amluss;idor of ("hrisf 
 (iii. 1, 3. R, 0). The justice of this cl.'iini seems 
 to have been universally admitted by the early 
 Christians, and it is expiessly sftnctioiuMi by se- 
 Veiiil of the fathers of tlie second and third cen- 
 turies (IreiiiBus, Adv. Htpr. v. 2. 3; (^lemens 
 Alexandr. Protrept. ix. p. 61), ed. Potter ; Strom. 
 !■-. <(, p. 502; Origen, Cont. C,h. iv. p 211, ed. 
 Spencer; Teitullian, Adv. Ma7v. v. U, 17; Cy
 
 636 
 
 KPHESIAXS. 
 
 priau Tesiiiii. iii. 7, ^-c.^ Tiie Epistle is al*.) 
 cited aj j^i-AiL of sacied Siii'Iuie liy Pi>lyca.H) 
 {Ep. cd r.'iilipp. c. I ; c. 12; ; ami it is pnilialily 
 to it tlia.t lijtiatiiis lefeis wlioii, in wiitirij; tj the 
 Epliesians, he calli tiiem HauKot/ (TufjLfjLvaTai . . . 
 4s fV iracrj; iiriaToKrj jUMj/iOi/e I'fi v/j.uy tv Xpiai ^ 
 'IrjToC (c. 12, Colli". Coteleili, Aniiof. in Uic. ; 
 Pearson, Viiid. /f/aatian Par. ii. p. 119; Lardiier's 
 (rocA*,vi)l.ii.|i.'70,8vo.). De\Vetteha5attein()teil, 
 iVoiu internal eviileiice, to set aside tliis e.vterrial 
 jiro,)f of the Pauline origin of this K|)i.stle ; l)iit 
 liis cavils have heeii so fully and satisfactorily 
 answered hy ScUott {Isag. in N. T. p. "260 , 
 Giierike {lieitriUje zur hist. krit. Einleitunr/ ins 
 11. T. s. 106). \i'^'ri^ni{Der Ap. Paahts, s. 130), 
 Riickert {Der Br. f'aiJi an die Epheser, u. s. w. 
 s. 2S9), and u;liers, that even l)e VVette himself 
 has lieen constrained to admit, in the second edi- 
 tion of his Einleitung, that his objections are 
 without force. The genuiiie.iess of this book, 
 therefore, maj Ite re^rarded as universally ad- 
 mitted by Biblical scholars. 
 
 It is much more dilKcult to determine to ichom 
 this Epistle was addressed. On this suliject two 
 hypotheses have been principally entertained, be- 
 sides the common opinion which, following the 
 [disputed] reading in ch. i. ver. 1, regards the 
 party to whom it was sent as the church at Ephe- 
 sus. Grotius, reviving the opinion of the ancient 
 heretic Marcion, maintains that the party ad- 
 dressed in tliis Epistle was the church at Laodicea, 
 and that we have in this the Epistle to that 
 church which is commoidy supposed to have been 
 lost; whilst others contend that this was aiidressed 
 to no church in jiarticular, but was a^ort of cir- 
 cular letter, intended for the use of several 
 churches, of which Ephesus may have been the 
 first or centre. 
 
 Tlie view of Grotius, which has been followed 
 by some scholars of eminent name, among wliom 
 Sire found Hammond, Mill, Venema, VVetsfein, 
 an<l Paley, rests chieliy on two grounds; viz., the 
 testimony of Marcion, and the close resemblance 
 between this Epistle and (hat to the Coloss'ans, 
 taken in connection with Coloss. iv. 16. With 
 resjiect to the former of these grounds, it is alleged 
 tuat, iis Marcion was under no temptation to utter 
 a wilful falsehood in regard to the destination of 
 this Epistle, he probably had the authority of the 
 church at Laodicea, and it may l)e the tradition 
 of the churches generally of Asia Minor for the 
 opinion which he expresses (Grotius. Proleg ad 
 Epkes. ; Mill, Pruleij. ad N. T. p. 9, Oxon, 
 1707). But, without charging Marcion with 
 designedly uttering what was false, we may sujj- 
 {Kise that, like some critics of recent times, this 
 view was suggested to him by the apostle's allu- 
 RJon, in C';ol. iv. 16, to an epistle addiessed by 
 him to the Laodiceans. Nor is there the least 
 pound for supposing tluit Marcion spoke in this 
 instance on the authority of the Asiatic chinches; 
 on the contrary, there is every reason to believe 
 t(ie opposite, for not only do Origen and Clement 
 of Alexandria, who were fully acquainted with 
 the views of the eastern churches on such matters, 
 give no hint of any such tradition being enter- 
 tained by tliem, but Tertullian, to whom we are 
 mtlebted for our information resjiecting the opi- 
 nion of Marcion,* expressly says that in that 
 
 Bpiphanius alsb speaks of Marcion as having 
 
 EPIIKSIAA'S. 
 
 oj.inion he op])osed the tradition of the orthodoi 
 churches, and imposed upon the Epistle a false 
 title, through conceit of his own superior diligence 
 in exploring such matters (' EcclesiiE qaidem 
 veritate ppistolam istum ad E}iliesios habemuii 
 eniLssam, nun ad Laiidicenos, sed Marcion ei 
 titulum aliipiando interpolaie gestiit, quasi ef in 
 isto diligentissimus explorator." — Adv. Marc v. 
 17). It is plain that to a statement of such a 
 nature no weight can be safely attached. With 
 regard to the other argument by which this .view 
 IS advocated, we cannot helji cx])ressiMg sin- 
 prise that such men as Mill and Paley should 
 have deemed it of so much importance as to rest 
 upon it the chief weight of their opinion. To us 
 it ap'pears to possess no force whatever in suppoit 
 of the view which they esjiouse. Admitting the 
 fact of a close resemltlance between the Epistle to 
 the Colossians and that before us, and the fact 
 that Paul had, some time before sending the 
 former Epistle, written one to the church at Lao- 
 dicea, wliicli he advises the Colossians to seni.' 
 for and read, how does it follow from all this that 
 the Epistle to the Laodiceans and that now under 
 notice were one and the same? To us it appears 
 more proiiable that, seeing the two extant Epistles 
 l)ear so close a resemblance to each other, had the 
 one now hearing the inscription ' to the Ephesians' 
 been really the one addressed to the Laodiceans, 
 the apostle would not have deemed it of so much 
 importance that the churches of Colossae and Lao- 
 dicea shmild intercliange epistles. Such being 
 the chief arguments in favour of this hypothesis 
 (for those which, in addition, Wetsteln alleges 
 from a comparison of this Ej)istlc with that to the 
 church at Laodicea, in the Apocalypse, are not 
 deserving of notice ; see Micliaelis, lutrod. vol. iv. 
 p. 137), we may venture to set it aside as without 
 any adequate sujjport. It may be observed also 
 that it seems incompatible with what the apostle 
 says. Col. iv. 15, where he enjoins the church at 
 Colos.sae to send his greetings to the brethren at 
 Laodicea, &c. Now one sends greetings by an- 
 other only when it is impossible to express them 
 oneself. But if Paul wrote to Laodicea at the 
 same time as to Colossae, and sent both letters by 
 the same bearer, Tychicus, there was manifestly 
 no occasion whatever for his sending his saluta- 
 tions to the latter of these churches through the 
 medium of the former; it was obviously as easy, 
 and greatly more natural, to have sent his salu- 
 tations to the church at Laodicea in the Epistle 
 addressed to themselves. This seems to prove 
 that the Epistle to the Laodiceans had been writ- 
 ten some considi'rable time before that to the 
 Colossians, and therefore could not have been the 
 same with that now mider notice. 
 
 The opinion that this epistle was a sort of cir- 
 cular letter was first broached by Archbishop 
 Usher. His words are {Annal. Vet. et Nov. 
 Test. p. 680, BremaB, 1686), ' Notandum, i» 
 antiquis nonnullis codicibus (ut ex Basilii lib. 
 2, adv. Eunomium, et Hieronymi in hunc 
 Apostoli locum commeiitario apparet) geiieratim 
 inscriptam fuisse banc epistolarn roh aylois to7s 
 oi(rt, Kol iriffTols if Xp Itj. vel (ut in liteiarum 
 
 an Epistle to the Laodiceans in his Apostolicon , 
 but, as he states that; he had also the Epistle to 
 the Ephesians, this cannrt be regarded as corro> 
 borating the testi-nony of Tertullian.
 
 EPIiESJANS. 
 
 mcyclicarum descrijitione fieri solel)at)5a«r^('s qui 
 
 iHnt 1 1 Jidelibiis in Christo Jvsu ; ac si 
 
 Epltesum jnimo, iit ])i-8eci[)iicim Asite nicfrDpolini, 
 missa ea f'liisset, tniiismitlenda iiule ml rcliqiias 
 [insertis singiilanim nomiiiihus) ejusiiein pro- 
 V'inciae ecclesias." To this opinion the tjrcat ma- 
 jority of critics have {^iveii tlieir siitlVage; iniloed, 
 it may be regarded as the received ojiiiiioii of 
 Bil))ical si,holara in the present day. Tiiis may 
 make it ap[)aiently jiresnmptiious in us to call il 
 :n question ; and yet it seems to us so ill suppoited 
 hy positive evidence, and expi)sed to so many 
 olijection-;. that we cani.ot yield assent to it. In 
 t\\e Jirst place it is to he ohseived il)at it is an 
 hypothesis entirely of modern invention. No 
 hint is furnished of any such notion having l)een 
 entertained concerning the destination of this 
 epistle by the early cjiurch. With the solitary 
 exception of Marcion, so far as we know, all 
 parties were unannnons in assigning Ephesus as 
 the place \.o whicii this epistle was sent, and Mar- 
 cion's view is as ipnch opposed to the supposition 
 of its being a circular letter' as 'he other. As 
 respects the external evidence, therefore, this 
 hypothesis is ])urely destitute of support. — 2 It 
 is an hypothesis suggesle'l for the purpose of 
 accounting for certain allegeil facts, some of 
 whicli are. to Siiy the least, doubtful, and others 
 of which may lie explained ;is well without it as 
 with it. Tliese facts aie, I. The alleged omis- 
 sion of the name of any place at the commence- 
 ment of the epistle; 2. Marcion"s asserti(jn that 
 this epistle was addressed to the Laodicean', 
 which, it is said, arose [uobably out of his having 
 seen that copy of this circular episile which had 
 been seiit to Laodicea; 3. The want of any pre- 
 cise allusions to personal relations subsisting be 
 tween the ajjoslle and those to whom this epistle 
 was addressed ; and 4. The exj)re.ssit)ns of un- 
 acquaintednt-ss with those to whom he wrote, 
 which occur in tiiis epistle, e. (/ iii. 1-4. How 
 tliese facts may lie recoucileil with the supposition 
 that this eplslle was addre.-)Sed to the Ephesians 
 will fall to be considered afterwards ; at ])resent 
 the question is, How do they I'avour the hypo- 
 thesis that this was a circular letter? Now, 
 supposing them to be unquestionable, and ad- 
 mitting that they are not irreconcilable with 
 this hypothesis, it must yet appear to all that 
 they go very little way towards all()reling /;r«»iar)/ 
 evidence in its support. It is not one which 
 grows naturally out of these facts, or is suggested 
 hy them ; it is plainly of foreign birth, and sug- 
 gested for them. But when it is remembered 
 that the Jirst of these allegeil facts is (t > say the 
 least) very doubtful ; that the second is made to 
 serve this hy|)othe.-:is oidy liy means of another 
 as doubtf.il as itself, and that, were its services 
 admitted, it would prove too much, for it would 
 go to show that, to the Liiodiceans. the apostle 
 not only sent a jieculiar epistle, mentioned Col. 
 IV. 16, but gave them a .share also in this circular 
 epistle, written some time after their own; and 
 that the third aimX fourth are both either partial tjr 
 or wholly questionable, it most 1)6 admitted 
 thai this hypothesis stands upon a basis which is 
 •irtle bette'- than none. 3. Had the epistle been 
 jiddresseil to a particular circle of churches, some 
 desi/na'ion of these chinches would have beeri 
 l^iveil, by which it might have been knoivii wh.it 
 "ihurrhes they were to which this letter beloiij^ed. 
 
 KPHESIANS. 
 
 fir; 
 
 When it is argue<l that this must \x a circular 
 letter, because tliere is no church .specitied to 
 which it is a<ldre»sed, it seems to be forgot en 
 that the designation of a particular set ol 
 churches is m necessary f.>r a circular epistle, aa 
 (he designalit)!! of one church is for an epistle 
 specially addressed to it. If we must leave out 
 the words «• 'E<^«Vy ni ch. i. I, what are we to 
 put in their placet for if we take the piissage as 
 it stands without them, it will follow that the 
 epistle wasaddiessed to nil Christians everywhere, 
 which is iiioie than the advocates of the hypo- 
 thesis nov umler notice contend fur. It will' not 
 much hel|) tlum to say with Usher, that the name 
 of the place was left blank to be tilled up; for 
 the question immediately arises. By whom was it 
 to be Idled up'? If by the church at Epliesu.s, to 
 whom the epistle was lirst sent, then it could not 
 be a circular epistle, but was a special epistle to 
 the church at E])hesus, which they were left to 
 communicate to as many or as few other churches 
 as they ))leascd ; and this may be saiil, we sup- 
 pose, of all Paul's Epistles; nor is it at all im- 
 probable that this is exactly what the Ephesians 
 would have done of iheir own accord, witliont any 
 blank being left to give them the hint. If we 
 say with Michaelis that the blank was left to be 
 filled uj) by the .\postle himself, wIk) had a num- 
 ber of copies written, whicli he thus addressed to 
 particular churches, the question occurs, How do 
 we know in that case that theie ever was a blank 
 atair^ l[' everij copy of this ej)istle that Wiis .sent 
 by the Apostle liad the name of a place written 
 in it bel'ore it left him, tliere was, of course, no 
 bli'nk in any of them. The reasoning here in 
 fact is a mere petitio princijiii If we ask. How 
 is It known that this was a circular ejiistle ? the 
 answer is. Because the name of the place \v;i3 
 left blank to be filled in by the .Apostle. H, 
 now, we ask, How is it known that the |)lace was 
 left blank "i it is answered. Because this is a 
 circular epistle, ' ut in literarum encyclicarum 
 descrijitione hoc (Jeii solebat !' Besitles, it .seiins 
 haruly consistent witii the Apostle's perfect in- 
 tegrity of chaiacter to suppose that he would in- 
 sert in the co])y sent to each church the name of 
 the place where that church was located, in such 
 a way as to lead the mendjers of that church io 
 suppose that the ejiistle they received was spe- 
 cially addressed, to them. As an aiv)stolic leiter 
 was usually esteemed a treasure of no ordinary 
 value by the cliurch to which it wiis original iV 
 sent, we may easily suppose tliat it would occa- 
 sion no small mortification to each of the chuiche^ 
 round Ejthesus, to find that what each had suii- 
 jiosed to be a letter sjiecially addressed tj itself 
 was in fact only a copy of what had been sent to 
 many otliers. In fine, this sugLjeslion of Michaelis 
 remleis it very difficult to account for the ijre- 
 vailing insertion of iv 'E<f>fff<f> in the text, a,i 
 well as the universal tradition <.f the church, that 
 such was the tiestination of this epistle. The 
 solution proposed by Michaelis hiiiiself, vi/., that 
 ' when the several parts of the (iieek Te-.laineiu 
 weie Collected into a volume, the copy inseiteil 
 in this Collection must have been jiriKMiied lii.m 
 Ephcius,' besides being mere uusuj.putted supin> 
 sition, proceeds on the assumption that the Canon 
 of the New Testament was formed hy autLoritv, 
 which IS what caiiu;! be prove. I [('a.nonI. Hug's 
 opiiii.)!! that ' the lit'e irphs 'Eoecioi'? w is jjive*
 
 M8 
 
 EPHESIANS. 
 
 ko it,eif1iCT hecatise Ephesus was tne mosi erninont 
 of t!ie Asiiilic cities, or was tlie first wliicli le- 
 ceiveil it,' ini^lit account, peiliaps, for a prepon- 
 derance, of testimony in favi)ui- oftliis title, Imt is 
 ceitainl y inadequate to account for the unanimity 
 of testimony by wliicli it is sujijiorted. On tiiese 
 grounds tiie suggestion of Miciiaelis appears to 
 tie inadir.issilile, and our ohjection to Usher's 
 inypothesis remains in full force. 4. In ck. vi. 
 21, 22, Paul mentions that he had sent to those 
 for whom this epistle was destineil, Tychicus, wiio 
 siiould make known to tliem all tilings, that they 
 might know his afl'airs, and tiiat lie miglit com- 
 fort their hearts. From this it appears that 
 Tychicus was not only the bearer of this letter, hut 
 vliat he was personally to visit, converse with, 
 ami comfort those to whom it was addresied. On 
 the supposition iliat this was a circular letter, the 
 following questions are naturally raised by this 
 statement of the Apostle : Was Tychicus to 
 carry tliis letter from church to church? or had 
 he a distin;t copy for each church in the circle? 
 If the fi)rmer, it will follow that no church ever 
 possessed this epistle, but that certain churclies 
 aroiuid Ephasus enjoyed the advantage of read- 
 ing it or hearing it read, wWle the bearer of it 
 stayed with them. If the latter, then it may be 
 asked, VV.is Tychicus, as he carried round these 
 co[)ies to <leliver them, bound to abide at each 
 church, and to answer all the demands and in- 
 quiries which the Apostle's declarations in the 
 passage quoted would prompt its members to 
 make i To aflirm of either of these suppositions 
 that it is impossible, would be, perhaps, to go too 
 tar ; but it must be felt by every one, that, iinder 
 all the circumstances of the case, neither of them 
 is very probabf-e. 
 
 The objections just stated seem to us to justify 
 the rejection of Usher's hypothesis respecting the 
 destination of this Epistle: we now turn to the 
 consideration of the common and, as we believe, 
 the true view of this matter. Here it will 
 be necessary to consider, in the first instance, the 
 objections which have been ot!'ered to this view. 
 Tliese are borrowed from the E[ilstle itself, in 
 which, it is said, we not only miss those allusions 
 to jiersonal relations and intercourse which we 
 shoiil<l exjrct in an epistle from Paul to a 
 chu. ,*"• ivilh which he had been so closely con- 
 nected a.^ with that at Ephesus, but we meet with 
 statemeuts which seem to imply that the parties 
 to whom this Epistle was written were, at the 
 time, strangers to the Ajwstle. As respects the 
 former of tlie>e objections, it must be admitted 
 that the Epistle contiiins no direct allusions to 
 {M'evious intercourse between the writer and those 
 whom lie aildresses; but this may be partly 
 accounted fm- l)y the circumstance that several 
 years had now elapsed since that intercourse took 
 place; and probaldy, during the interval mes- 
 sages had lieen seut by the Apostle to the Ephe- 
 sians which rendered it unnecessary to allude to 
 bis earlier personal intercourse with them, in this 
 Epistle, It is worthy of remark, on the other 
 hand, that the tone and style of the Epistle are 
 such as of themselves to suggest the probability of 
 previous intercourse between the parties; such 
 warmth of feeling and so much of a free outpour- 
 ing of thought not being customary in a letter 
 •ddressed to strangers, however strong might be 
 tttfl wrier '» general interest in their welfare. 
 
 EPHESIANS. 
 
 With rei;ard to the passages in wliich it i* 
 alleged that Paul writes as if (he parlies he ad- 
 dresses were jiersonally unknown to him, they are 
 all susceptible of a very ditltrent construction 
 VV'iien the AjKwtle says (i. 15), ' Wherefore also, 
 / having heard of your faith,' &c., he is not neces- 
 sarily to be understood as intimating that this 
 knowledge had then for tiie Jirst time hem ob- 
 tained by him through the report of others ; he 
 rather means that, as some years had elapsed since 
 he left tliem, he was rejoiced ta hear that' tliey 
 were still stedfasi in the faith. Again, when he 
 says (iii. 2), ' If ye have heard of the dispensa- 
 tion of the grace of God which is given me to 
 you-ward,' &c. and (iv. 21), ' If so Ue that ye 
 liave iieard him,' &c., the force of the particle 
 ^ye is not adversative, but rather, according to 
 its proper meaning (comp. Hermann, ad Viger. 
 6 512 ; Kuhner's Gram. d. Gr. Sp ^ 7Ui, th. ii. 1), 
 and the ordinary usage of the Ajjostle, concessive ; 
 it is thus equivalent to since, forasmuch as, and 
 expresses rather the confidence of knowledge than 
 the uncertainty of ignorance. To tliese passages, 
 then, no weight whatever deserves to be attached 
 as tending to show the ernineousness of the ordi- 
 nary designation of this Epistle. In favour of 
 this designation, on the other hand, are to be 
 urged the reading ev 'E^tVaj (i. 1), and tlie unani- 
 mous testimony of Christian antiquity. This read- 
 ing is that supplied by all the MSS.* and ancient 
 versions. From a passage, however, in one of the 
 writings of Basil (Adv. Eunoniium, lib. ii.), it 
 has been inferred that in his day some MSS. were 
 extant in which these words were not found. In 
 maintaining against Eunomins, that Jesus Christ 
 rnay justly be styled 6 &i>, Basil argues that this 
 is the more proper from the circumstance that the 
 Apostle, writing to the Ephesians, calls Christiana 
 ovras, absolutely and peculiarly saying to7$ aylois 
 rails oixTi Kai iriaToTs ii' Xp. 'Itj., and adds ' for so 
 those before us have handed down, and we have 
 found it in old copies.' No.v there can be no d )ubt 
 that Basil here means to s:iy that he ha(* Loth 
 traditional and documentary authority for read- 
 ing TOiS ou<ri absolutely without tlie addition cf 
 ey "E<piffif after these words, else his whole argu- 
 ment against Eunomius, based on this quota- 
 tion, must go for nothing. But in the first place, 
 su{)posing that in these MSS. to which B.-vsil 
 refers, tlie words iv ^E<pe(ro} were not found at all 
 in the address of the Epistle, of wliat weight, in a 
 critical point of view, is this fact? Of the age, 
 number, source, and general worth of these testi- 
 monies to which Basil appeals, we know nothing, 
 and we must be jealous of taking a keen contro- 
 versialist's authority for the value of what serves 
 his purpose against his antagonist. As the case 
 stands, we have on the one side the unanimous 
 testimony of all the extant witnesses in favour of 
 eu 'EcpeiTffi\ we have against it only the assertion 
 of a writer who, to support what he considers a 
 good stroke at his adversary, assures us that he 
 had heard a tradition that tliese words were to be 
 omitted, and had seen some MSS. in which they 
 were omitted, thereby at the same time implicitly 
 assuring us tliat in his day the recei:cd reading 
 was the same as in ours. Jc such a case it is sui«ly 
 
 * Though in the Vatican Codex it appears only 
 on the margin, Hug says it is inserted there by 
 the first hand {De Antiquitate Cod. Vut, p. 26)
 
 EPHESIANS. 
 
 EPHESrs. 
 
 «39 
 
 pwpoafero'ig to attach any weiijlit iviiatever to 
 •uch a teslimoiiv. But, spcotiilly. Hoes Uisil's 
 statement iiecess;iril v deny the existence of the 
 words iu 'E<pf(r(i> in nntj part of ihis versed Ad- 
 ■«iiftii:_r thiit he did not read them after To?y olcri, 
 does it follow that he did not read them here at 
 all? M:iy tK,. the passa^^e have stood, in the 
 authorities to whicii he a])peals, thus — to7s (f 
 'E<pf<rtf> To7j aylots rui? oiiffi, k. t. \. 1 the words 
 haviiifj lioen transposed by some transcri her whose 
 bhnuler Basil, with the blind zeal of a contro- 
 versialist, hailed as provin',' his argument? This 
 supposition lias in its tkvonr, 1. tliat Biisil, in the 
 p.issanje quoted, fortnally states that Paul wrote 
 thus in an Epislle to the Ephcsions ; 2. t) at this 
 readini^ su])ports as well Basil's argument against 
 EiMioinins, as if «V 'E^it'tro) had heen entirely 
 omitted; and 3. that unless we insert those or 
 Rimilar words some.vhere in the jiassiige, the in- 
 scription of tin's Epislle l)eeomes so vague and inde- 
 finite as to he without meaning S.iine continna- 
 tion of this suggestion may he <lrawn, ]ieihaps, 
 from the place in which Jerome alludes to the 
 argument here urged hy Basil from tliis passage. 
 After staling the argument he adds, ' Alii veri 
 siniplicrlter non ad e.is </»/ sant. sed qui Ephcsi 
 sancii etfidvlcs sunt, scriptuin arliitranlnr,' where 
 he arranges the words in the same order, suhstan- 
 tially, in which we have supposed them to have 
 stood in Basil's MSS. If this suggestion, how- 
 ever, be deemed uiigronnded or im[)robal)!e, we 
 nave still the fact that Basil's e* idence is unsiip- 
 porfed to fall hack np iti in supjKirl of ihe received 
 reading. Stress has also heen laiti by Hug and 
 others upon the ])assage fiom Tertullian, already 
 quoted, in which he charges Marcion with having 
 altered the title of this Epistle. Had the MSS., 
 it is argued, in Tertullian's time contained ef 
 'Ecpfcro), Marcion must have had to alter not only 
 the title of the Epistle, but, to be consistent, the 
 text also of the first veise; and wilh this Tertul- 
 lian does not charge him, though 'not accus- 
 tomed,' as Hug reminds ns, 'to overlook anything 
 in him.' But this, surely, is at best, very preca- 
 rious reasoning. Tertullian may have not deemeti 
 it worth while to specify Marcion's alteration of 
 Ihe text just because it was rendered so obviously 
 necessary by his alteration of the title, that in 
 mentioning th« latter (which was all his purpose 
 requirrd), he, l)y implication, also intimated tlie 
 former. 
 
 From these considerations it ap]iears that the 
 received reading ii> 'Ecperrw is impregnable. As 
 a necessary consequence it follows that the title 
 •^ijhs 'Ecpeaiovs expresses the original and pioper 
 destination of this Epistle. 
 
 The Epistle is so much the utterance of a mind 
 overflowing with thought and feeling that it does 
 not present any ])recisely markeil divisions under 
 which its dirt'erent jarts may be ranked. After 
 the usual apostolic salutation Paul breaks forth 
 mto an expression of thanksgiving to God and 
 Christ for the scheme of redemption (i 3-10), 
 from which he passes to speak of the privileges 
 actually enjoyed by himself and those to whom 
 lie was writing, through Christ fi. 11-23). He 
 then reminds the Kphesians of their former con- 
 •lition when they were without Christ, and of the 
 great change which, through divine grace, tliey 
 nad experienced ''ii. 1-22). An allusion to him- 
 •elf af enjoying l;j divine revelation (he know- 
 
 ledge of the mystery of Christ l^sids the .\f'<t1« 
 to enlarge upon the dignity of his olVice and !iit 
 bles^i'd results that were desiined to (low from tlie 
 exercise of it lo others (iii. 1-12). On thi« he 
 groiindg an exhortation lo his bielhien not to faint 
 on account of his snll'erings for the (iosuel. and 
 aflectionately invokes on their behalf the divine 
 blessing, ci'i'dnding this, which may be called 
 the more ..i>ctrin.il part of his Epistle, wilh a 
 doxology to God (iii. 13-21). What follows is 
 chielly hortatory, and is directed partly to the in- 
 culcation of general (Uiiisistencv, stedfa'*tness in 
 the faitli. and jiropiiely of depoifment (iv. 1 : v. 
 21), and ]).ully to the enforcement of relative 
 duties (v. 22; vi. 9). Tiie Ejii^tle concludes 
 with an animated exhortation to fortitude, watch- 
 fulness and prayer, followed by a lel'erence to 
 Tychicus as the bearer of the E))istle, and by the 
 usual a{)0()*olic benediction (vi. l()-2t). 
 
 This Epistle was writlen during the esirlier 
 ]iart of the .\poslle's imprisonment at Rome, at 
 the same time with that to tlie Colossians ( Coi.oe- 
 
 SIANS, Ep18T1,B to THe]. 
 
 Of commentaries specially on this Ejiistle. the 
 following deserve particular notice : Seli. Schn.id., 
 Parapliras. super Ep. nd Ep/ies., 4to., Strasburg, 
 lliSi; Riickcrt, />£■;• Brief Patcli on die Ephes. 
 erlniifert mid vertheidicjt, Svo. Leipz. IS.'M ; 
 Matthia.s, Erkiiirmui des Br. Panli ati d. Ephes 
 Svo. Greifswald, 1S34 ; Harless, Commentar. iib 
 d. Br. Pauli an d. Ephes. Svo. Eriangen, 1R34. — 
 
 W . L. A. 
 
 EPHESUS CE</)e(roy), an old an.l celelirated 
 city, capital of Ionia, one of the twelve Ionian 
 cities in Asia Minor in the Mythic times, and said 
 to have been founded liy the Amazons, was in later 
 ages inhabited by the Carians and Leleges, and 
 taken possession of by the lonians, under .\ndro- 
 clus, tiieson of Codrus. It lay on the ri\er Cay- 
 ster, not far from the coast of ihe Icaiian sea, 
 between Smyrna and Miletus. It was also one of 
 the most considerable of the Greek cilies in \i<n. 
 Minor; but while, about the epoch of the intro- 
 liiction of Christianity, the other cities declined, 
 Ephesus rose more and more. It owed it- jirospe- 
 rity in part to the favour of its governois, for Lysi- 
 maclius named the cily Arsinoe, in honour of liis 
 second wife, and Attains Philadelplius furnished 
 it with sjilendid wharfs and docks : in part to the 
 favourable jiosition of the place, which naturally 
 made it the emporium of Asia on this side the 
 Taurus (Sfrabo, xiv. pp. 611, ()fi-f). Under the 
 Romans Ephesus was the cajiital not only of Ionia, 
 but of tlie entire jirovince of Asia, and bore the 
 honourable tii le TTJy irpc^Trjs koI /ufy/cTTjy fxrjTpSiro- 
 Xeuii TTJr 'Atri'ay. of the first and r/rcatcst metro- 
 polis of Asia. (Boeckh, Cotp. liiscr. Gr. 2968 
 2992). The Bishop of Ejihesus in later times was 
 the ]>resident of the Asiatic dioceses, with the 
 rights and privileges of a patriarch (Evagr. ]Iist. 
 Eccl. iii. 6). In the days of Paul Jews were 
 found settled in the city in no inconsiderable nuir- 
 ber (compare Joseph. Antii/. xiv. 10, 11), and from 
 them the Apostle collected a Chris'ian commu- 
 nity (Ac's xviii. 19: xix. 1 ; XX. 1(5), whicli, being 
 fostered and extended by the hand of Paul him- 
 self, Ijecame the centre of Christianity in Asia 
 Minor. On leaving the city the .A)H)slle left 
 Timothy there (1 Tim. i. 3): at a larer jieriod, 
 according to a tradition which prevailed exten- 
 sively in ancient times, wc find the Apostle JuIjb
 
 640 
 
 EPHESUS. 
 
 EPHKSUS. 
 
 in Epnesus, where lie employed liimself most dili- 
 gently for llie spread of tiie gospel, and wnere lie 
 not only died, at a very old ai^e, luit was liuiied, 
 with Mary the mother oC the Lunl. Some make 
 John bishop of the E[)hesian communities, while 
 others as'jiihe that honour to Timothy. In the 
 book of Rpvelati<ins (ii. I) a favourable testimony 
 ig borne to the Christiari chvnches at Ephesus. 
 
 The classic celebrity of this city iscliielly owing 
 to its famous temple, and the giiddess in whose 
 hojiour it was built, namely, ' Diana of theEphe- 
 sians ' Tiiis goiKless has been already noticed, 
 and a figure given of her famous image at Ephesus 
 
 [AuTKMl.s]. 
 
 Aronud the image of the giidiless was afterwards 
 erected, according to Callimachus (Ili/mn. in 
 Diati. 24?'}, a large and sp'eiuiid temple: 
 ToC Vov Tt dewTfpQi' oif fTai rjws 
 Oi)5' a,(pvfi6T€pof pea Key Vltiduva irap€K9oC 
 This temple was burnt down oi: the night in which 
 Alexander was boin, liy an oliscure person of the 
 name of Eiatostratus, who thus sought to transmit 
 his name to posterity; and, as it seemed somewhat 
 unaccountable that the goddess should permit a 
 place which redounded so mucli to her iionour to be 
 thus recklessly destroyed, it was given out that 
 Diana was so engaged with (Jlympias, in aiding to 
 bring Alexander into the world, that she had no time 
 nor thought for any other concern. At a subse- 
 quent peiijd. Alexander made an offer to rebuild 
 the tern [lie. provided he was allowed to inscribe his 
 name on the iVont, which the Epiiesians refused. 
 Aided, ho.vever, by the whole of Asia iVIinor, they 
 succeeded in erecting a still more magnificent 
 temple, which flie ancients have lavishly jjraised 
 and placed among the seven wonder^ of the world. 
 It took two bundled and twentj' years to complete. 
 Pliny {Hi't Sat. xxxvi. 21 J, wlio has given a 
 de.scrititi,,ii of it, says it was 42.5 feet in length, 
 220 iiioad, and siip|ioited by 127 columns each 
 of which had Ijeeii contiibiiteil liy some prince, and 
 were 60 feet high : 30 of them were richly carved. 
 Chersiphron, the architect, presided over the un- 
 dertaking, and, being ready to lay violent hands 
 on himseif, in consequence of his diflicultie.s, was 
 restrained bv the command of the goddess, who 
 apjjeaied to him during the night, assuring him 
 that she herself had accomplished that which had 
 brought him to despair. The altar was the work 
 of Praxiteles. Tiie famous sculjitor Scopas is said 
 by Pliny to have chiselled one of the columns. 
 Apelles, a native of the cit/, contributed a splen- 
 did jiictuie of Alexander the Great. The rights 
 of sanctuary, to the extent of a stadium in all di- 
 lections round the temple, were also conceded, 
 which in consequince of abuse tiie Emperor Tibe- 
 rius abolished. The temple was built of cedar, 
 cypress, white martile, and even gold, with which 
 it glittered ( Spanli. Ohscrvat. in Hijiiin. in Dian. 
 353). Custly aiid magnificent oll'eiings of various 
 kinds were made to the goddess, and treasured in 
 the temj)!e ; such as paintings, statues, &c., the 
 value of which almost exceeded ccmTputation. The 
 fame of tlie temple, of the god less, and of the 
 city itself, w.is spiead not only through Asia but 
 the world, a celehiily which was enlianced and 
 diflused die irune readily because sacied games 
 were jiraciised there, which called conij>etitors and 
 •jKictators from every country. Anuiiig his other 
 fjiormities Nero is said to have despoiled the temple 
 %tt Diana of much oi its trea;sure. It contiimed 
 
 to conciliate no small portion of respect, till i* 
 was finally burnt by the Goths in the reign of 
 Gallienus. 
 
 At Ephesus Diana was worshipped under tht 
 name of Artemis. There was more than one di' 
 vinity which went by the name of Artemis, n 
 the Arcadian Artemis, the Taurian Artemis, at 
 well as the Ephesian Artemis. It will he seen, 
 from the liguie already given, that this last differed 
 materially from the Diana, sister of Apollo, whost 
 attributes aie the bow, the quiver, the girt-up robe 
 and the hound ; whose person is a model o 
 feminine strength, ease, and grace; and v/aa^ 
 delights were in the puisuits of the chace. — 
 Along the shady hills and breezy ]ie<ik3 
 Rejoicing in the chace, her golden bow 
 She bends, her deadly arrows sendini; fjrih. 
 The ' silver shrines ' of the Ejihesian Artemis 
 mentioned in Acts xix. 24, have been alreailj 
 noticetl [Dkmetkius, 3]. 
 
 Among the distinguished natives of Ephesus ir 
 the ancient world, may be mentioned Ajielles ftiid 
 Parrhasius, rivals in the art of painting, Hera 
 clitus, the man-hating philosopher, Hip])onax, a 
 satirical poet, Artemidorus, who wrote a histor) 
 and descrqition of the earth. The claims o: 
 Ejjhesus, hovvever, to the praise of originality ii. 
 the prosecution of tne liberal arts, are but incon- 
 siderable ; and it must be content with the dubi(mi 
 reputation of having excelled in the refinements 
 of a volu])tiious and artificial civilization. Witn 
 culture of this kind a practical belief in, and a 
 constant use of, those arts which jiretend to lay 
 open the secrets of nature and arm the hand of 
 man with siqiernatural powers, have generally 
 been found conjoined. Accordingly, the Ephe- 
 sian multitude were addicted to sorcery; indeed, 
 in the age of Jesus and his Apostles, adejits in th« 
 occult sciences were numerous ; they travellecJ 
 from country to country, and were found in great 
 numbers in Asia, deceiving the credulous multi- 
 tude and profiting by their expectations. They 
 were sometimes Jews, who referred their skill and 
 even their forms of proceeding to Solomon, who ii 
 still regarded in the East as head or prince of 
 magicians (Joseph. ^?i^ti/. viii. 2, 5: Acts viii. 
 9; xiii. 6, 8). In Asia Minor Ephesus h.ad a 
 high reputation for magieal asis {0\Xiob . De Fpkit. 
 Libris combustis). 
 
 The books mentioned, Acts xix. 19, were (3oubt 
 less books of magic. How extensi\ely they were 
 in use may be learnt from the fact that ' the pric* 
 of tl.em ' was 'fifty thousand pieces of silver.' 
 Very celebrated were the Ephesian letleis ('E(^6'fr*a 
 ypdfi.fAaTa), which appear to have been a sort of 
 magical formulae written on paper or jiaichment, 
 designed to be fixed as amulets on different parts 
 of the Ixidy, such as the bauds and the head(Plut. 
 Si/m. vii. ; Lakemacher, Obs. P/iilot. ii. 126; 
 Deylinir, Observ. iii. 35.)). Erasmus (.4rfrt</. Cent, 
 ii. 578) says that they were certain signs or marks 
 which rendered their po>sessor victorious in every- 
 tliino;. Eustathius {ad Horn Odi/s. t 694) states an 
 opinion that Cioesus, when on ids funeral [lile, was 
 very much t)eiiefited by the use of them ; and 
 that when a Milesian and an Ejihesian were 
 wrestling in the Olymjiic game.s, the former could 
 gain no advantaije, as the latter lad Ephesian 
 letters bound round his heel ; but, these beii^Ji 
 discovered and removed, he lost his superiori»7 
 and was thrown Uiirty times Thec^e (vtssagM
 
 EPIIESUS. 
 
 fhow tlie feeling whicli jirevaik^d irsppcting llie 
 books fliat were broiij^lit and Imirieil, and serve to 
 iiinstiate tlie remark made liy tlie writer of the 
 Acts, 'So tni^lifily ^rew the wonl of the Lord 
 fcun jirevailed." 
 
 The ruins of Kphesiis lie two short days' 
 journey from Smyrna, in jiroceedini^ fVom which 
 towards tlie south-east the traveller passes the 
 rretfy villai^e of Sodekuy; and two hours and a 
 nilfoiuvaids he comes to tlie mined vilhii^e of 
 iJaiiizzi, on a wide, solitary, unrulfivafed phiin, 
 beyond wliicli several hui ial jjrounils mav he 
 observed ; near one of these, on an eminence, 
 we the siip])osed ruins of Kphesiis, consisting of 
 nhattered walls, in which some pillars, archi- 
 travea, and fragments of marlile have been hnilt. 
 The soil of the plain apjiears lich. It is covered 
 with a rank, hiirnt-up vegetal iim, and is every- 
 where deserted and solitary, though bordered by 
 
 EPIIEbUS. 
 
 Ml 
 
 picturesque mountains. A few corn lields aire 
 scattered along the site of the aniient city, whicn 
 is marked by some larije masses of siiattc'es* 
 ruins and stone walls. Towards tlie sea oxfeii'la 
 the ancient jiort, a pe-.tileiifial n>arsh. .\lon;» 
 the slope of t!ie mountain and ovei ihe pla'n are 
 scattered fragments of masonry and detacheii 
 ruins, but iiotiiing can now be fixed upon as the 
 great temjile of Diana. There are some broken 
 columns and ca]iitals of the ('oiinl'iian order of 
 while marble: tlrere an; also ruins of a theat 'p, 
 consisting of some circular seats and niimero.is 
 arches, supp^ised to be tlie one in which Piu! was 
 preaching when interrupted by shouts of, ' Great "• 
 Diana of the Kphesians.' The ruins of this 
 theatre present a wreck of immense grandeur, 
 and the original must h.ave been of the largest 
 and most imposing dimensions. Its form alone 
 can now be sjioken of, for e\'ery seat is removed 
 
 W' 
 
 ^.■^V-' '"^^^'^^"'■^'^^N 
 
 l^^#^'^ 
 
 set. [Ephesas.] 
 
 Mid the proscenium is a hill of ruins. A splendid still retain the name of thejiarent city. Asa'oo'i — ■ 
 
 circus (Fellows' /?<7)or^s, J). 275) or stadium re- a Turkish word, which is associatetl with tiie same 
 
 mains tolerably entiie, and there are numerous idea as Ephesus, meaning the City ( f the Moon 
 
 piles of buildings seen alike at Peigainus and (Fellows). A church dedic:ited to St. John \i 
 
 Tro as well as here, by some called gymnasia, thought to have stood near, if not on tlie .site of", 
 
 l)y others temples; I ly others again, with more the present mosque. Arundell (D/^coce/vV;*. vol. 
 
 jirojiriety, jialaces. They all came with tlie ii. ji. 253) conjectures that the gate, called the (iate 
 
 Roman conquest. No one but a Roman emperor of Persecution, and large masses of biick wai., 
 
 could have conceived such stiuctures. In Italy which lie beyond it, are parts of this celebntt-u 
 
 tliey have parallels in Adrians villa near Tivoli, 
 and (lerliajis in the pile upoi. the Palatine. Many 
 Oilier walls remain to show the extent ol' the 
 liiiildiugs of the city, but no inscription or orna- 
 jitnt is to lie ''" t. 1, cities having been built out 
 of this quarry of worked marble. The ruins ol' 
 the adjoining town, which arose alioiit four hun- 
 dred years ago, are enliiely composed of materials 
 from Kiihesus. There are a ifW hutswitliin these 
 
 church, which w,is fortilied during the gieji* 
 Council of Ephesus. The tomb of St. John «;« 
 in or under his church, and the (ireeks have a 
 tradition of a sacred dust arising every year, nn 
 liis festival, from the tomb, possessed of miracu- 
 lous virtues : this dust tiiey term manna. No', 'u 
 from the toml) of St. John WiLs that of TimoV-.v. 
 The tomb of .Ma/y and the seven TrauSla (Iwy* at 
 the Synaxarui calls tlie Seven Sleepers) ai-e fouiid 
 
 iiins(about a mile andahalf from Ephesus), which in an adjoining hill. At the back of the mosque 
 
 2t
 
 143 
 
 EPHESU9. 
 
 EPHRAIM. 
 
 on the hill, is tlie sunk giciiml-[)lan of a small 
 cliurcli, still much venerated by the Greeks. The 
 sites of two others are shown at Asalook. There is 
 also a l)nildini;, called the Prison of St. Paul, 
 constructed of large stones wiliiout cement. 
 
 Thoiifrh Ephesus presents few traces of human 
 life, and little but scattered and mutilated remains 
 of its ancient grandeur, yet the environs, diversi- 
 tieu as they are with hill and dale, and not 
 scantily su[)])lied with wood and water, ])re3ent 
 many features of great beauty. Annidell (ii. 
 211) enumerates a great variety of tiee.s, which 
 he saw in the neighbourliood, amonu; whicli 
 may l)e speciKed groves of myrtle near Ephesus. 
 lie also found heath in abundance, of two vari- 
 efes ; and saw there the common fern, which he 
 met with in no other part of Asia Minor. 
 
 i)r. Chandler ([>. l-Vi), 4to) gives a striking 
 desciiption t)f Ephe.Hus, as lie found it on his vis.it 
 in 1781; — 'Its po',,alation consisted of a few 
 Greek peasants, living in extreme wrefcheilness, 
 dependence, and insensibility, the representatives 
 of an illustrious |>eople, and inhabiting the wreck 
 of their greatness — some the substructure of the 
 glorious edifices which they raised; some beneath 
 the vaults of the stadium, once the crowded scene 
 of their di\ersion3; and some in the abrupt pre- 
 cipice, in the sepulclnes which received their 
 ashes. Such are the present citizens of Ephesus, and 
 such is the condition to which that renowned city 
 has l)een reduced. It was a ruinous place when 
 the Emperor Justinian filled Constantino[)le with 
 its statues and raised the church of St. Sophia on 
 its columns. Its streets are obscured and over- 
 grown. A herd of goats was driven to it for 
 shelter from the sun at noon, and a noisy (light 
 of crows from the quarries seemed to insult its 
 silence. We heard the partiidge call in tlie area 
 of ths theatre and of the sfauium. Tlie ])omp of 
 its heathen worship is no longer remembered; and 
 Christianity, which was then nursed by apostles, 
 and fostered by general councils, barely lingers 
 on, iu an existence hardly \i3ible.' Hovvever 
 much the Cliurch at E])hesus may (Rev. ii. 2), 
 in its earliest daj^s, have merited jnaise for its 
 ' works, labour, and patience,' yet it appears soon 
 to have ' left its first love,' and to have received 
 in vain the admonition — ' Remember, therefore, 
 from whetice thou art fallen, and repent and do 
 the first works; or else I will come imto thee 
 ({uickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of 
 his jilace, except thou repent.' If any n^pentance 
 was produced by this solemn warning, its effects 
 were not durable, and the place has long since 
 offered an evidence of the truth of prophecy, and 
 the certainty of tlie divine threatenings, as well as 
 a melancholy suijject for thought to the contem- 
 plative Christian. Its fate is that of the once- 
 flourishing seven churches of Asia : its fate is 
 l::.at of the entire country — a garden has become 
 a desert. Busy centres of civilization, spots 
 where the refinements and delights of the age 
 were collected, are now a prey to silence, destruc- 
 •-ion, and death. Consecrated first of all to the 
 purposes of idolatry, Ephesus next had Christian 
 temples almos*: rivalling the pagan in splendotn-, 
 wherein the image of *,ne great Diana lay pros- 
 trate before the cross; and, aftfr the hijise i)f sonu 
 centiu'ies, JesMS gives place to Maliomed, and the 
 crescent glittered on the dome of the recently 
 f.hristian church. A few more s'jres of years, 
 
 and Ephes IS has neither tem])le, croM, crescenr. 
 nor city, but is ' a desolation, a dry lan(i. aua 
 a wilderness.' Even tlie sea has retired iiom »'ut 
 scene of devastation, and a pestilential morosi, 
 covered with mod and rushes, lias succeeded to tiie 
 waters which brought up shijis laden with mer 
 chanilise from every jiart of the known wor.u 
 (Herod, i. 2'), ii. 1 IS ; Liv. i. ICi ; Pausan. vii. 2, 
 4; Philo, Bi/z. de 7 Orb. Mirac. Gvonov. Thescur. 
 viii.: Creiizer, Si/mbol.W.Vi; Wnnl, Erdbeschr. 
 ii. 132; fin- a plan of Ephesus, si;e Kiepert;' Atlas, 
 von Hellas ; Arundell's V'isit to the Secen 
 Churches of Asia ; Fellows' Extnirsicn in Asia 
 Minor, 1839; Discoveries in Asia Minor, bj 
 Rev. T. Arundell, 1S34).— J. R. B. 
 
 EPHOD, an article of dress worn by the He- 
 brew priests. [Priests.] 
 
 EPHRAIM (Dn?^; Sejit. '^<ppaifx), the 
 youngi^r son of Joseplt, but w'no received prece- 
 dence over the eliier in and fiom the lilessing ol 
 Jacob (Gen. xli. 5"2; xlviii. 1). That blessing 
 was an adoptive act, whereliy Ephraim and Ids 
 brotiier Manasseh were counted as sons of Jacob 
 in the jilace of their father; the ol)ject being 
 to give to Joseph, through his sons, a double 
 portion in the brilliant prospects of his house. 
 Thus the descendants of Joseph formed two of 
 the tribes of Israel, whereas every other of Jacob's 
 sons counted but as one. There were thus, in fact, 
 thirteen tribes of Israel ; but the number twelve 
 is nsuiilly preserved, either by excluding that of 
 Levi (which had no territory), when Ephraim and 
 Manasseh are separately named, or by counting 
 these two togetlier as the tribe of Joseph, when 
 Levi is included in the account. The intentions 
 of Jacob were fulfilled, and Ephraim and Ma- 
 nasseh were counted as trilies of Israel at the 
 departure from Egypt, and as such shared in the 
 territorial distribution of the Prouiised Land 
 (Num. i. 33; Josh. xvii. 14; 1 Chron. vii. 20). 
 The precise position of the immediate descend- 
 ants of Joseph in Egypt might form an interesting 
 subject for speculation. Being the sons of one 
 in eminent jjlace, and through their mother con- 
 nected with high families in Egypt, their con- 
 dition could not at once have been identified with 
 that of the sojourners in Goshen ; and perhaps 
 they were not fully amalgamated with the rest of 
 their countrymen until that king arose who knew 
 not Joseph. 
 
 At the departure from Egypt, the population of 
 the two tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh toge- 
 tl-;er amounted to 72,700 men capable of bearing 
 arms, greatly exceeding that of any single tribe, 
 except Judah, which hail somewhat more. During 
 the wandering, their number increased to 9.3,200, 
 which placed the two tribes much higher than 
 even Judah. At the Exode, Ephraim singly had 
 40,500, and Manasseh only 32,200; but a great 
 change took place in their relative numbers 
 (hiring the wandering. Epl.iaim lost SCOO, and 
 Manasseh gained 20 500 ; so that just before 
 entering Canaan, Eiihraim s.ioil at 32,500, and 
 Manasseh at 52,700. At tiie drjarture frdin 
 Egypt, Ephraim, at 40,50l'>, was above Ma- 
 nasseh and Benjamin in numbers; at tlie enil 
 of the wandering it was, at 32,510, above Simeon 
 only, which tribe had suffered a still greater low 
 of nuiubeis (colli]). Num. i. ami xxvi.). 
 
 One of the finest and most fruitful narta ol
 
 EPHRAIM. 
 
 Palestine, occupyini? tlie very centre of tlie land, 
 was assiirned to this tribe. It extended from liie 
 h>r<lersof tlie Mediteiraiieiin on tiie west to tlie 
 J*)rdan on the east : on the north it 1iad tiic haU- 
 tiibe of Manasseh, and tin tlie soutti Uenjaiiiin 
 U^d Dan (Josli. xvi. 5, sq. ; xvii. 7, sq.). This 
 fine country iiiclnded most of wliat «.is after- 
 «iuds called Samaria, as distinguished from 
 Judaea on the one hand, and from Galilee on the 
 Xi.er. The taliemacle and the ark were dejK>- 
 I'ted within its limits, at Sliiloh ; and the {X(S- 
 tessionof the sacerdotal estahlishment, which was 
 X central ohjectof utti-action to all the other trilies, 
 must, in no small ilegree, have enhanced its 
 im])oitaiice, and increased its wealth and ])0- 
 pulalion. The dcniineering and hauu'hty spirit 
 of the E]>hraimites is more tliaii once indi- 
 cated (Jdsli. xvii. 14; Jiulj,'. viii. 1-3; xii. I) 
 before the establishment of the regal go\eiii- 
 ment; but tlio particular enmity of Eplnaim 
 against the other great trilie of Jiulah. and the 
 rivalry l)et\veen them, do not come out distinctly 
 until the establishment of the monarchy. In 
 the election of Saul fronri the least considerable 
 tribe in Israel, there was nothing to excite the 
 jealousy of Ephraim ; and, after his heroic quali- 
 ties had conciliated respect, it rendered the new 
 king true allegiance and support. But when the 
 great trib6,^f Judali juoduced a king In the jierson 
 of David, the pride and jealousy of Eiihraim were 
 thoroughly awakened, and it was doubtless chiedy 
 through their means (hat Abner was enabled to 
 uphold for a time the house of Saul : for there are 
 manifest indications that by this time Ephraim 
 intiuenced the views and feelings of all the other 
 tribes. They were at length driven Ijy the force 
 of circnmstiinces to acknowledge Da\ id upon 
 conditions ; arid were probably not without hojie 
 that, as the king of the nation at large, he would 
 establish his capital in their central portion of 
 the land. But when he not only established his 
 coiut at Jerusalem, hut proceeded to renuive the 
 ark thither, making his native .Judah the seat Ixitli 
 ttf the theocratical and civil government, the 
 Ephraimites became thoroughly alienated, and 
 longed to establish their own ascendancy. The 
 buildizig of the temple at Jerusalem, and other 
 measures of Solomon, strengthened this desii« ; 
 and although tlie minute organization and vi- 
 gour of his government pieveuteil any overt acts 
 of rebellion, the train was tlien laid, which, upon 
 his death, rent the ten tribes lium the house of 
 David, aiid gave to them a king, a capital, and a 
 religion suitable to the separate views arwl in- 
 terests of the tribe. Tlienceforth the rivalry of 
 Ephraim and Jutlah was merged in that l>etweeir 
 the t»vo kingdoms; although still the pi^edomi- 
 naiice of Ephraim in the kingdom of Isra<'l was so 
 conspicu4)us as to occasion the whole realm to lie 
 called by its name, especially when that rivalry 
 is mentioned. 
 
 2. EFIIllAni ('E<poain), a city in tlie wilder- 
 aess of Juda-a, to which Jesus with(hx!W from the 
 persecution wiiich followed the miracle of raising 
 i-azarus fuim the dead (John xi. 54). It is 
 placed by F.usebius ( Onomast. s. v, 'T£.<ppu>v) eight 
 Roman miles north of .lerusalem. This indica- 
 4io"a would seem to make it the siime with the 
 Ephiiin which is mentioned in 3 Cliion. xiii. 19, 
 along v;itli Jkthel and JeshTinah, as towns taken 
 from Jerobcain by Abijah. Ani this again U 
 
 EPISTLES. 
 
 Mt 
 
 doubtless the s.inie which Josephus alw namw 
 along with BetlK'l as ' two siiiall cities' (7roA/x«'««X 
 whii'h were takeii atid garrisone*! by Vespasian 
 while reducing the country orounil Jeriisa'ioni 
 {I)c Bill. jKtl. iv. «», 0). 
 
 3. EPHRAIM, a niounlain or groupof nionn- 
 taiiis in central Palestine, in^the tribe of the same 
 name, on or towards the bonlers of Benjamin 
 (Josh. xvii. 15; xix. 50; xx. 7; Jndg. vii. 24, 
 xvii. I ; I Sam, ix. -1 ; 1 Kmgs iv. S). Prom a 
 comparison o\' tliese |ass.iges it may be collected 
 that the n<une of * M<iunt Ephiaim ' was ajiplieo tu 
 the whole of the ranges and groups of hills Yvliich 
 occupy the central jiart of ihe siinlheriimos; border 
 of this tril>e, and which are [irolunged iHMithward 
 into the trilje of Benjamin. In the time of 
 Josiiua tliese hills weie densely covered with tieeg 
 (Josli. xvii. 18), which is by no means the ca«e 
 at present. In Jer. 1. 19, Mount Ephraim is 
 mentioned in apposition with Bashan, on tlw; 
 other side of the Jordan, as a region of rich 
 jiastiires, suggesting that the valleys among the.s* 
 mountains were well watered and covered with 
 rich herbage, which is true at the present day. 
 
 4. EPHRAIM, THE FoitKvr of, in which 
 Absalom lost his life {2 Sani. x\i:i. 6-S), w;is in 
 the country east of the Joidan. not far fioni Ma- 
 luuiaim. How it came to bear the name of a 
 tribe on the other side the river is not known. 
 Some think it was on account of the slaughter of 
 the Ephraimites here in the time of Joj hthah 
 (Judg. .xii 4-(J) ; but others supp<ise that if was 
 because tlie Ephiaimites were in the habit of 
 bringing their (locks into this quaiter for pasture; 
 for the Jews allege that the Ephraimites receiveU 
 from Joshua, who was of their tribe, ])ermission to 
 feed their (locks in the woodlands within the 
 territories of any of the trilies of Israel ; and that 
 as this forest lay near (heir territories on the other 
 side the Jordan, they were wont tc» ilri\e their 
 flocks over to I'eed there (see Jarclii, KimchL, 
 Abarbanel, &c., on 2 Sam. xviii. 6j. 
 
 EPHRATAH, otherwise Bkthi.ehem, which 
 see. 
 
 EPHRON, a Hittite residing in Ileliron, who 
 sold to Abraham the cave and fielil of Mach- 
 pelah as a family sepulchre (Gren. xxiii. <o). 
 
 EPICUREANS. [Piiii.o.soi'HV, Guekk.] 
 
 EPISTL?>S. In directing our incpiiry first 
 of all towards the telation in wliich the Epistles 
 stand to the other cotnp(inent iiarts of the New 
 Testament, we (ind that both tiie Old and New 
 Testament have been arranged by divine wisdom 
 alter i.ne and the same plan. All the revelations 
 of (iod to mankind lest upon history. Therefore 
 in the Old, as well as in the New Testamei.t, (lie 
 history ol' the ileeils of Ciod staiuls tiiivr, as 
 being the basis of holy writ; thereupon follow 
 the books which exhibit the doctrines and internal 
 life of the men of God — in the Old Testament 
 the Psalms, the writings of Solomon, X;c., .ind in 
 the New Testament (lie Epistles of the .A.|H)siles; 
 (inally, tlvere follow in the Ohl Testaii.<-nt the 
 writings of the ])rophets. wluise vision ext<'nds 
 into the times of the New Testament ; and at tin* 
 conclusion of the New Testamnil stjuids its only 
 prophetic book, the Revelation of John. 
 
 In this als<i we must thaiikfully ailore divitse 
 wisdom, that the Epistles, which lay down (lif 
 doctrines of tlie Ciiristian religion, originate, no'
 
 Ill 
 
 EPISTLES. 
 
 EPISTLES. 
 
 from oiie ajwstle alone, lint from all tlie four prin- 
 cipal .i()ostles ; so fliat one and the same divine 
 friilii is presented to our eyes in various forms as 
 it were in various mirrors, liv wliicli its riclmess 
 and manifold character aie tiie better displayed. 
 
 Tlie I'^pistles of the New Testament divide 
 themselves into two parta — the Pauline and the 
 so-called Catholic. 
 
 The Pauline Epistles are tliirteen in number; 
 or t'(nnteen. if we add to tliem the Epistle to tlie 
 Hi Lrews. Up to our days tlieir "cnuineness has 
 altnost unanimously been recognised in Germany, 
 with the exception only of the pastoral e])istles, and 
 more especially the first letter to Timothy. Elcli- 
 h irn and Bauer have attacked the (genuineness of 
 all the three ])astoral ejiisfles, and Sch^eiermacher 
 that of the first epistle to Timothy. Indeed, 
 the very peculiar character of the Pauline Epistles 
 is so striking to any one wlio is not ignoiant 
 of the want of ease and originality conspicuous 
 in the counterfeit writings of early times, as to 
 leave not the least doubt of their geiiuineiiess. 
 l^epth of thought, tire of speech, firmneGS of dia- 
 racter — these manly feaiur^g^ joined withal to the 
 indulgence of feelings of the most devotcii love 
 and affection, chaiacterize these episties. The 
 amiai)le personal character of the apostle laay be 
 most beautifully traced in his Epistles to the 
 Philippians aTid to Pliilemon. 
 
 Ail the Epistles, except the one to the Romans, 
 were called forth by circumstances and particular 
 occasions in the aft'airs of the communities to 
 which they were addressed. Not all, howe\er, 
 were jireserved ; it is, at least, evident, from 
 1 Cor. V. 9, iknt a letter to the Corinthians has 
 Ijpen lo^t ; f:oni Col. iv. 16, it lias also been con- 
 cluded — though probably erroneously, since there 
 perhaps the letter to the Ephesians is referred to — 
 that another letter to the community of Laodicea 
 has likewise lieen lost. Press of business usually 
 comjielled Paul - what was, besides, not uncom- 
 mon in those times — to use his companions as 
 amanuenses. He mentions (Gal. vi. 11), as 
 something peculiar, that he had written this letter 
 with his i)wn hand. This circumstance may 
 greatly have favoured the temptation to forge 
 l-etters in hi.s name, Uecause since the period of 
 Alexandrine literature it was not unusual to indite 
 spurious books, as is evident from Eusebius (W(,si. 
 E'Ci'es. ]). 23) ; an<l even Christian bishops made 
 complaints aliout the falsification of their letters. 
 Paul alludes to this (2 Thes. ii. 2), and therefore 
 wiites the greeting (2 Thes. iii. 17) with his own 
 hand. Paul himself exhorted the communities 
 mutually to impart to each other his letters to 
 tliein, and read them aloud in their assemblies 
 (("ol. iv. IC). It is therefore jirobable that copies 
 of these letters hail been eail.y made by the several 
 c.imnuinities, and deposited in the form of col- 
 lections. So long therefore as the various com- 
 munities transmitted the manuscripts to each 
 ot.ier, no other letters, it is obvious, could come 
 into tlie collections than those to whose genuine- 
 ness the communities to whom they were origin- 
 ally achiressed, bore witness. Even Peter (2 Pet. 
 iii. K) i seems to have had before him a number 
 of Paul's letters, as, about forty years later, a 
 niiinber of letters of Ignatius were transmitted by 
 Pclycarp to Smyrna, while the church of Plii- 
 lippi forwarded to him those directed to them 
 'Ep. I'olic. »ub Sn. ; Euscb. Hht. Kccles. iii. 30). 
 
 Tills Pauline collection, in conlra-distitiClion tt 
 the gospels, jiassed by the name of b a,Tr6(TTo\o\. 
 
 Tlie letters of Paul may be chronologically 
 arran^'ed into those written liel'ore his R.iioan im» 
 jirisonment, and those written during and al'ter it: 
 thus beginning with his first letter'to the Thessa- 
 lonians, and concluding with his second to Timo* 
 thy, embracing an interval of aliout ten years 
 (a.d. Sl-tJI). In onr Bibles, however, the letters 
 are arranged according to the pre-eminent parts 
 and stations of the communities to whom tiiey 
 were addressed, and conclude with the epistles to 
 the two bishops and a private letter to Philemon. 
 
 That the Epistles otl'ered great difKciilties was 
 already felt in the earliest limes (2 Peter iii. 10). 
 In the Roman Church their true understanding 
 was more jiarticulaily lost by the circumstance 
 that it understood by tub law, only the opua 
 operntiDn of the ceremoniid law; consequently 
 the Roman Church could not comprehend justifi- 
 cation l;y faith, and taught instead justification 
 by works ; as soon, therefore, as the true under- 
 standing of the Pauline epistles dawnetl upon 
 Jjuther, his breach with the Roman Ciiurch was 
 decided. 
 
 Among the more ancient interpreters of the 
 Pauline letters Chrysostom and Calvin deserve 
 
 particular diatinctiwi ; tliontr"^ "^'^^ ft--r-^'»j., y'l'^h 
 ail ni.s zea. anu psyciioiogical ]ienetration, wa« 
 still deficient in the true hermeueutic method. 
 
 The Catholic Eplstles. — There is, in the 
 first instance, a diversity of opinion respecting 
 their name : some refer it to their writers (letters 
 from all the other apostles who had enteicil the 
 stage of authorshi]! along with Paul); some, again, 
 to their contents (letters of no special but general 
 Christian tenor); others, again, to the ueckiv lijcs 
 (letters addressed to no comiouiiity in pirticular). 
 None Ol" these views, however, is free from ditfi- 
 culties. The first and the second views — and more 
 especially the first — cannot be brought to harmo- 
 nize Vi'ith the idiomatic expressions in the extant 
 pages of the ancient writers; the second is, lie- 
 si<les, contradicted by the fact that the letter of 
 James is of' a s])ecial tenor, while, on the contrary, 
 that to the Romans is of such a general charact« 
 as to deserve the name Catholic in that sense. 
 The third opinion is most decidedly justified by 
 passages from the ancient writers (Euseb. Hist. 
 Ecclcs. V. IS ; Clem. Alex. Strom, iv. 1.5, ed. Potter, 
 ]i. 606 ; Orig. c. Cels. i. 63). The Pauline Epistles 
 had all their jiarticular diiections, while the 
 lettws of Peter, James, 1 John, and Jude were 
 circular epistles. The Epistles 2 and 3 John 
 were subsequently added, and included on ac- 
 count of their sliiirtness, and to this collection 
 was given the name Catholic Letters, in con- 
 tradistinction to tlie Pauline, which were called' 
 6 diroffToXos. — A. T. 
 
 EPISTLES OF THE APOSTOLICAL 
 FATHERS. Under this head we shall iniefiy 
 notice those remains of Christian antiquity which 
 are ascribed to die wi iters usually styled the 
 Apostolic Fathers, from the circumstance that 
 they were converted to the Christian faith during 
 the life-time, and jwobably by the instrumentality, 
 of the A])ostles. Of Barnabas and the epistlf 
 which bears his name we have already sjxiken at 
 length [Barnabas]. 
 
 1. Clement, or Clemens Romanus. It vill 
 probably be generally admitted that no prodoo-
 
 EPISTLES. 
 
 tioo of the early clmrch appioatlies so iie.ir the 
 apostolic writings, in lli« union vC ilevcmt feeling 
 witli justness and sobriety of tliou^^lit, as lliat ileuii- 
 miiiateJ the' First Epistle of Clement to the Coiin- 
 thians" but adiiresscti in the name of ' the (^hurcii 
 sojourning at Rome ( rj irapuiKoiaa 'Vwfxr]i') lo the 
 Ciiurch of God sojourning? at Corinth.' Kusibiiis 
 terms it, ' great and wonderful ' ( /xfydKri t6 koI 
 davfuurla), and states that in his own and foinier 
 times it was read in most churches. {Ilisl. Ecrles. 
 iii. 16; iii. 38; iv. 22, 2;$). Irenaeus calls it 
 iKav(tjTa.T-iji> yfta^iiv, ' a most powerful writing ' 
 (Eiiseb. Hist. Eccles. v. G). It is fnHiuuntly 
 quoted by Clemens Alexandrinus (Str(»)i. i. 7, 
 6 38; Ojjera, ed. KUitz, ii. p. 29 ■> o diroaToKos 
 K\rifir]s; Strom, iv. 17, ^ 107; ii. p. 335; 
 Strom.. V. 12, § 81; iii. i> 57; Slrum. -vi. 3, 
 § 65; iii. p. 137. Tiie only known manu- 
 script of this Epistle is tiiat appended to the 
 celebrated Alexandrian Coilex, wiiich was pre- 
 sented to Charles 1. liy Cyrillus Lucaiis, the 
 patriarch of Constantinople. The same nianu- 
 6cri])t contains also a fragment of tiie so-called 
 second Epistle. They were (list pidilished at 
 Oxford, in 1633, by Patrick Young, the royal 
 librarian. Sir Keiny Wotton re-examined the 
 manuscript, amended Youngs cojiy in above 
 eighty places, and jiuldished a very coriect edition 
 at Cambridge, in 1718. Certain portions of the 
 first epistle have been thought to bear internal 
 evidence of s})urionsness. Bignonius, in a letter 
 to Grotins, instances ch. xl., which relates to the 
 presentation of oHierings at set times, in wiiich the 
 word \aiK6s occurs ; ajid the e[)itJiet ancient 
 (apxaiav) api)lied to the Corinthian church in ch. 
 xlvii. Moslieim asserts that some jutssages are evi- 
 dently taken from Clement of Alexandria (Mo- 
 slieiiir's Conimeuturies, transl. by Vidal, vol. i. p. 
 271). The main object of this ICpistle was to 
 allay the dissensions which had arisen in the Co- 
 rinthian church, and especially to leprcss the un- 
 ruly spirit shown by many against their teachers. 
 It is worthy of notice tliat Clement uniformly 
 Bj:)eaks of the opposition of the Corinthians against 
 their presbyters, never of their insuboidination to 
 their bishop : he inculcates suliniission to the 
 presbyters, hut never to the bishop. Thus in ch. 
 xlvii., 'It is disgraceful, beloved, and unworthy 
 of vour training in Christ, to have it reported 
 that the well-established and ancient Corinthian 
 church has been excited by one or two ind viduals 
 to revolt against the presbyters' (its priests, Abp. 
 Wakes transl.). Ch. liv., ' Only let the Hock of 
 Christ be at peace with tiie presbyters that aie set 
 over it ' (toJc Ka.Of(na.jxivct>v irpeajSvTepwv >. Ch. 
 Ivii.. ' Do ye who laid ihe foundation of ihe dis- 
 eension sul mit to the presbyters ' (priest.', Alip. 
 \Vake's transl.). In two other passages tie term 
 ■7rpe<r^vr€poi apjiears to dtnote sim])ly the elder 
 membeis of the cliurch, 'vhile the leirn rjyovfj.fi/ct 
 (Heb. xiii. 7, 17, 24) is used for their teachers or 
 superintendents Ch. i., ' Being sni)j<.ct to those 
 that have the rule over you ' (tois rjyoufjifi/ois 
 vfiuv), 'and givingdue lionour to the aged among 
 you' {rails irap' v/uuf -rcpvalivTipoisy Ch. xxi., 
 ' Let us honour those tiiat are set over us " (tous 
 nporiyovfjUvovs)', ' let us rcs])ect the aged that are 
 among us' {rovs Trpea^vrfpous) ; 'let us instruct 
 tire young,' &c. In ch. xlii. he speaks of liishops 
 U)d de».coi IS in a niaaner which shows that he 
 considered the former ;£ synonymous with presby- 
 
 EPISTLES. 4» 
 
 fers : 'They (the Apostles) a])pointed their dr»i- 
 fruits to be bIsho|is and deacoks {mmitters, Abp, 
 ^Yake's transl.) of those who should believe Noi 
 was this any new thing, seeing that long liel'oi* 
 it was written concerning bishops iUiii deacons. 
 For thus the Sciipture, in a certain ])lace, sailii, 
 I will ajipoint their overseers (liishops, rcii'j t'lrt- 
 (XK6irous), and their ministers (deacons, rovs Ltu 
 Kiirovs) in faith.' It has indeed l>een su|>posed 
 that the bishop of the Corinthian church was de- 
 ceased, and that the disorders whicii Ciemciit 
 sought to rejiress broke out bt fore his sncctssi>r 
 wiis ap](ointed. But had this lieeii the ca^e, lor 
 which theie is not the slightest e\ iilence, it is 
 almost incredible tliat no allusion should lie inatit 
 to it. Tlie only legiiimate inference a]ipeais tu 
 be, ' that the original constitution of the chinch 
 ofC'oiinth still suiisisted in Clement's time ; (he 
 government was still vested not in otie man. lii'. 
 in many ' (Dr. -Yrnold's Strntons on the Christian 
 Life. Introduction, p. xh i.). 
 
 In Clement's Epistle only mie book of the New 
 Testament is expressly named, Paul s lirst ICpisth; 
 to the Corlithians; but though the Evangelists 
 are not named, several sayings of Christ contained 
 in our Gospels are repeated. Tlieie are also 
 evident allusions to the Acts, all the I'aulij.e 
 Epistles (1 Thessaloiiians excejited), the l'^pisl!es 
 of Peter and James, and the Epistle to the He- 
 brews. A tabular vie>v of these passages is given 
 by Dr. Lanlner ( CrecHbiliti/ of the Gospel //w- 
 iory, y)t. ii. ch. ii, ; Works, \o\. ii. pp. 35-53} Eu- 
 sebius, speaking of Clement's Epistle, says, ' H« 
 has inserted in it many sentiments taken Irom the 
 Epistle to the Hebievvs, and sometimes makes n.-e 
 of the identical expressions, t'rom wiiich it is evi- 
 dent that tliat composition is not a recent one. 
 
 . . Paul having addressed Ihe Ilebiews in 
 their native language, some say that the Evange- 
 list Luke, and others that this \eiy (;lemn' 
 translated the document ; an ojjinion wiiich ,*, 
 supporte<l by the fact, that the Epistle of Clement 
 and that to the Hebiews are marked by the same 
 jieculiaritieg of style, and in both compositions the 
 sentiiiieiifs are not unlike." — (Hist. Eccles. iii. 'i'^, 
 ed. Valessii, 1072, p. 110.) 
 
 As to the date of this epistle it has been f.xed 
 by Grabe. Galland, \Votton, and Ilel'ele ain.nt 
 the year 68; but Coteleriiis, Tilleniont, Ji^id Laid- 
 ner think that it was written at the close of ti.e 
 Diiicleiian Persecution in 96 cr 1)7. A passiite 
 in ch. xli., in which Clement speaks in the niesei.t 
 tense respecting the sacrifices of the Mosax law, 
 has been sup[ioseil to favour the earlier dal-e ; lot 
 Josephiis adopts the same phraseology in hi* Anti- 
 quities, whicli were not (inished tin tweiity yeais 
 after the destruction of Jerusalem. ^ 
 
 The first writer that notices the second Ej)is''e 
 of Clement is Eusebins, who does not absolulelv 
 jironoiince it spurious, but says that it was less 
 known than the former, and not quoted by an- 
 cient writers (lJi.st. Eccles. iii. 38). Piiolins 
 states decideilly lliat it was rejected as s))uiious. 
 It is only a fragment, and its style is rather hou'i- 
 letic than epistolary. The Gospels are (jnoted 
 seveial limes in it, more ex[/iessly than in the 
 first Kjiistle, and tlure is one piLssage fiom an 
 apocryjihal writing called the Gos|el accoidi:..^ 
 to the Egyptians (Lardner's Credibility, <S(f., |iait 
 ii. ch. 3; Works ii. 55). In 1752. John James 
 Wetslein published, at the end of his editimi o<
 
 •46 
 
 EPISTLES. 
 
 the Giock Tesrament, two epistles in Syriac (ac- 
 '•ompjDiipil by a Latin (lanslatii)n), attijKuted to 
 Clement, which were discovered at the end of a 
 niannaciipt of the Syriac New Testament. Im- 
 nie liately on tlieir i)ulilic.ition Dr. Lanlner ex- 
 aiTjineil ;he evidence for their ),^eauinoness, and 
 l^ave the result of his inquiries in a Disscrtntion 
 (Works, vol. X. pp. 186-212), to wliich we refer 
 tl-3 reader, only leniarking that the whole strain 
 of tiiese compositions, and the allusions to pre- 
 vailing |iractice3, siitliciently indicate that they 
 were written long afte- Clement's time. 
 
 The following works have also been attributed 
 t(i Clement, but, as they are inKjiiestionabiy sup- 
 posititious, we shall merely givetiieir titles. l.The 
 Apostolic Constitutions, in eight hooks. 2. The 
 Apostolic Canons. 3. Tiie liecognitions of Cle- 
 ment. 4. The Clementina. They are all printed 
 in tiie Pa:res Aposiolici of Coteferins, vol. i. 
 (Mosheim's Commentaries, translated by Vidal, 
 vol. i. pp. 270-274). 
 
 2. Ignatius, according to Ensebins (Tlist. Ec- 
 cles. iii. L^fi'land Origen {Horn. vi. in Luc.; Opera, 
 oti. Lomniatzsch, v. iOi), the second bishop, or, 
 according to Jerome {De Vir. Ilbistr. xvi.), the 
 third l)ishop of Antioch in Syria. Fifteen epistles 
 bear his name. Three of these (one addressed to 
 the Virgin Blary, the other two to St. John) are 
 preserved only in a Latin version. The rest are 
 extant in Greek and in an ancient Latin version, 
 and are addressed to Mary of Cassabolis or 
 Neapolis, to Hero, to the churclies at Tarsus, 
 Antioch, Philippi, Ephesus, Magnesia, Tiallium, 
 Rome, Philadelphia, Smyrna, and to Polycarp. 
 Tlie first eight are unanimously allowed to be 
 spurious. Of the remaining seven (which were 
 written on iiis journey froiTi Antioch to Rome, 
 where he suffered martyrdom l)y exposure to wild 
 l>easts), there are two recensions, one longer, the 
 other shorter. It has been warmly controverted 
 whether the longer epistles are interpolation, of 
 the shorter, or the sliurter abridgments of the 
 longer. Mr. Winston contended earnestly in 
 fitvour (if the longer recension, including the 
 Epistles to Tarsus, Antiocli, and Hero, and 
 attempted to prove that the smaller were only 
 heretical extracts from them made in the fourth 
 century. He published both recensions, with 
 translations and various readings, in the first 
 volume of his Primitive Christianity Revived, 
 London, 1711, 5 vols. Rvo. Tiie same o])inion 
 iias lately been maintained by Dr. Charles Meier 
 of the University of Giessen (Stndien nnd Kri- 
 tiken, 1836, p. 310), whose arguments have been 
 met by Dr. Richard Rothe in an essay on the 
 genuiueripss of tlie Ignatian Epistles appeniled to 
 bis wo!K Dif, Anfdnge der Christlichen Kifche 
 xivd Hirer Verfassimy. Wittenberg, 1 837. Lardner 
 ai I most modern ciitics adopt the shorter re- 
 cei.sion. Mosheim expresses himself very doubt- 
 fully, and, while he allows the seven epistles to 
 have ' somewhat of a genuine cast,' confesses that 
 he is unable to determine how much may be 
 consiilered as" authentic (Commentaries, trans- 
 lated by Viiial, vol. i. pp. 276, 277). Dr. Neander, 
 while lie allows many passages to bear the im- 
 nress of antiquity, considers even the shorter re- 
 cension to be grossly interpolated. The support 
 which it was sup])osed might be drawn from 
 these ejiisrles in favour of episcopac;y gave, on 
 tlieir publication^ a\ exaggerated imjiortance to 
 
 £PISTLES, SPURIOUS. 
 
 the question of their genuineness, and called fiirti 
 the jHilemical skill of several distinguished theo- 
 logians of the seventeenth century. In TG66 a 
 work appeared by Dalla-us (Jean Daiile), er;- 
 titled, De Scriptii qute sub Diomjsii Arc(>pu(jit(t 
 ct Ignn.ii Antiocheni nominibus circuinjeruntw 
 Libri duo, in which he maintains tliat tlie Ig- 
 natian Epistles were forged at the close of the 
 third, or at the beginning of the fourth century 
 (c. xxxviii. ]). 461). In reply to this and othei 
 writers, Bishop Pearson publisheil his celebrated 
 Vindicice Ignatiance, Cantali. 1672, wMch' was 
 repvinted by Cotelerius in his edition of the 
 Apostolic Fathers, vol. ii. jip. 251-111. (Wake's 
 Genuine Epistles of the Apostolical Fathers, 
 London, 1737, pp. xl.-li. pp 60-12S; Camjibeirs 
 Lectures on Ecclesiastical Histoi y, London, 1800, 
 vol. i. pp. 139, 181-197; Dr. Arnold's Sermons 
 on the Christian Life, 181 1; Introduction, pj . 
 xlvi.-xlix. ; Lardner s Credibility, ]it. ii. ch. 5 ; 
 Works, vol. ii. pp. 73-91 ; Neander's Allgcmcine 
 Geschichte, i. Abtli. ii. Band. 1140, 2nd edit. 
 1843). 
 
 3. yaL-icwip's Epistle to the Philippians. Ire- 
 npeus, in a letter to Florinus the Valentinian, 
 preserved in part by Eusebius (^Ilist. Eccles. v. 
 20), gives an interesting account of his early 
 recollections of Polycai-ji, and refers to the 
 ejiistles which he sent to the neighbouring 
 churches. Only one, however, has been ]ire- 
 servetl ; it was addressed to the Pliilippiara, and 
 in Jeromes time was publicly read in the as- 
 sembly of Asia — ' Scripsit ad Philippenses vable 
 utilem ejiistolam quae ugque liodie in Asiae coi>- 
 ventu legitur' (De Vir. Itlnstr. c. 13). It is also 
 mentioneil by Eusebius (Hist. Eccles. iii. 36), 
 who cites two passages from it (^ 8 and C> 13) 
 relating to Ignatius, and remarks tliat it contains 
 several quotations from the first epistle of Peter 
 (Hist. Eccles. iv. 14). It is divided info fourteen 
 sections, of which flie first nine and the fiiirteenth, 
 pre.served iiy Eiiseliius, are in the original Greek, 
 and the rest only in an ancient Latin V^ersion. 
 This version of tiie whole epistle was first jirinted 
 at Paris in 1498. Peter Halloix ]iul)lished the 
 Pj[iistle ill Greek and Latin in 1633, from a copy 
 sent by the Jesuit Sirmond to Turrianus. Four- 
 teen years alter, Archbisiiop Usslier obtained 
 another cojjy, from which he prejiared an edition 
 in 1617. An excellent edition, edital liy Sir 
 Thomas Smith, appeared in 170* (Hvfele's Pa- 
 trum Apostolicorum Opera, p. xvii» ; Lardner 's 
 Credibility, pt. ii. ch 6). 
 
 4. The Shepherd of Hermas [Hermas], — 
 
 I K R 
 
 EPISTLES, SPURIOUS [Apocrypha].' Of 
 these many are lost, but there are several still ex- 
 tant : the princi]).il aie 
 
 T'oe E])istle of Paul to the Laodiceans. 
 
 Tlie Third Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians. 
 
 The Epistle of Petei- to James. 
 
 The Epistles of Paul and Seneca. 
 
 There was an Epistle to the Laoiliceans extant 
 in the beginning of the sec«nd century, which was 
 received by Marcion; but whether this is the same 
 with the one now extant in the Latin langmige is 
 more than doubtful. ' Tiiere are some,' says Je- 
 rome, ' who read I he Epistle to the Laodioeans, but 
 it is universally rt^j^cted.' Tiie original Epistle was 
 most proliably a forgery founded on Coloss. iv. 16, 
 'And when this Epistle is read among you, cauM
 
 EPISTLES, SPURIOUS. 
 
 toat i'. be '•ead also in the church of the I^aodi- 
 ceans, ami that ye likeicise read the Epislle from 
 Laodu:ea.' Tlie apparf.'it ainl)i}::iiity of these 
 lasi words has induced some to understaiiil St. 
 Paul as speaking of an e])istle written hy him to 
 f.ie Jiaodiceans. which lie advises the Cohissians 
 to procure from Laodicea, and read to their church. 
 *Some,' says Tlieodoret, ' imaj^iiie Paul to have 
 written an Epistle to the Laodiceaiis, and accord- 
 ingly produce a certain forjred epistle; hut tlie 
 Apostle does not say, the Epistle to. hut the 
 E])istle/row, the Laodiceans.' IJellarniine, amon;^ 
 the Roman Catholics, and among the Protestants 
 Le Clerc and others, sujipose that the passatje in 
 Colossians refers to an epistle of St. Paul, now 
 lost, and the Vulgate translation — eamquee Laodi- 
 censiutn est — seems to favour this view. Grotius, 
 however, conceives that the Epistle to the Ephe- 
 sians is here meant, and he is followed i)y Ham- 
 mond, Whithy, and Mill, and also hy Arcli- 
 hishop Wake (Epistles of the Apostolic Fathers). 
 Tlieopliylact, who is followed by Dr. Li^htfoot, 
 conceives that the epistle alluded to is 1 Timothy. 
 Others luilil it to he I John, Philemon, X:c. Mr. 
 Jones conjectures that the epistle now passing as 
 that to the Laodiceans (which seems entirely com- 
 piled out of the Epistle to the Philippians) was 
 the composition of some idle monk not long liefore 
 the Reformation ; l)ut this opinion is scarcely 
 compatible witli the fact mentioned hy Mr. Jones 
 himself, that when Sixtus of Sienna published his 
 Bibliotheca Sancta (a.d. 1560), there was a very 
 old manuscript of this ejjistle in the library of the 
 Sorhonne. This epistle was first published liy 
 James Le Fevre of Estaples in 1517. It was the 
 opinion of Calvin, Louis Capell, and many others, 
 that St. Paul witfe several epistles besides those 
 now extant. One of the chief grounds of this 
 opinion is the passage 1 Cor. v. 9. There is still 
 extant, in the Armenian language, an epistle from 
 the Corinthians to St. Paul, together with the 
 Ajwstle's reply. TIhs is considered by Mr. La 
 Croze to be a forgery of the tenth or eleventh 
 century, and tie asserts that it was never cited by 
 any one of the early Christian writers. In this, 
 however, he is mistaken, for this epistle is ex- 
 pressly quoted as Paul's by St. Gregory the 
 Illuminator in the third centuiy, Theodore Chre- 
 thenor in the seventh, and St. Nierses in the* 
 twelfth. Neither of them, however, is quoted by 
 any ancient Greek or Latin writer (Henderson, 
 On Inspiration. ]). 497. The passages are cited 
 at length in Father Paschal Aucher's Armenian 
 and English Grammar, Venice, 1819). 
 . The Epistle of Peter to Jatnes is a very ancient 
 forgery. It was first published by Cotelerius, 
 ami is supposed to ha\e been a preface to the 
 Preaching of Peter, which was in great esteem 
 among some of the early Christian writers, anrl is 
 several times cited as a genuine work by Clement 
 of Alexandria, Theodotus of Byzantium, and 
 others. It was also made use of by the heretic 
 Heracleon, »" the second century. Origen ob- 
 serves of it, that it is not to be reckoned among 
 the ecclesiastical lx)oks, and that it is neither the 
 writing of Peter nor of any other inspired person. 
 Mr. Jones conceives it to be a forgery of some of 
 the Ebionites in the beginning of the second cen- 
 tury. 
 
 The Ep'Mlcs of PatdandSeneea cor\f,'\sioie\^\\t 
 jrete ided Latin letters from the philoso2)her Seneca 
 
 ERECIl. 
 
 60 
 
 to St. Paul, and six from the latter to Seneca. 
 Their an»i(juity is undoulited. St. Jeionie had 
 sucn an idea of the value of these Idlers ihat he 
 was niduced to say, * 1 should not have ranked 
 Seneca in my catalogue of saints, bui that I was 
 •lofermined to it by tiiose Epistles of Paul to Se- 
 neca and Seneca to Paul, which are read liv 
 
 many He w.-is slain by Nero, two years 
 
 before Peter and Paul were honoured witii n.ar- 
 lyrdom.' St. Augustine also observes (Epislle to 
 Mai;ed. niiis) that ' Seneca wrote certain epistles 
 to St. Paul, which are now reail.' Tlie ej)isiles 
 are also refeired to in the sjiurious 'Achi' ol 
 Liiuis, the first l)isho]) of Rome after the ApO!>tles. 
 But these Acts are a manifest forgery, an<l were 
 first alluded to l^y a inonk of the eievenlh ci n- 
 tury. The letters do not a|)|iear to liave lieen 
 mentioned by any other ancient writer; but it 
 seems certain that those now extant are I he same 
 which were known to Jerome and Augustine. 
 The genuininess of these letters lias been main- 
 tained liy some learned men, but by far tlie 
 greater numlier reject them as spurious. Mr. 
 Jones conceives them to lie a forgery of the fourth 
 century, founded on Philip, iv. 22. Indeed, there 
 are few persons mentioned in the New Testament, 
 as companions of the Ajiostle, who have not had 
 some spurious jiiece or otiier fathered on them. 
 
 These are the principal of the ancient forged 
 epi-tles. Among those now universally rejected 
 are the well-known Epistle of Lentulus to the 
 Roman Senate, giving a description of tiie person 
 of Christ (OrtJiodoxographia, p. 2, Basil, 1555; 
 Faliricii Cad. I'^pig., 1719), aird some pretcniled 
 epistles of the Virgin Mary. One of these is 
 said to be written in Hebrew, and addiessed to 
 the Christians of Messina in Sicily, of which a 
 Lai in translation has been pulilished, and its 
 genuinene-s gravely vindicateil {Veritas I'in- 
 dicata, 1692, f'ul. ). It is daled Inmi Jerusalem, 
 in the 42nd year ' of our Son," nones of July. 
 Lima 17, Feria qitinta. The metropolitan chnrcii 
 of our Lady of Me Fetter, at Messina, fakes its 
 name from the jiossession of this celeliiated ejiislle, 
 of which sinne have pretended that even the au- 
 tograph still exists. An epistle of the Virgin to 
 the Florentines has been also celebrated, and tluie 
 is extant a pretended letter from the .same to St. 
 Ignatius, together with his rejily. — W . W. 
 
 ER.\STUS {"EpaaTos), a Corinthian, and one 
 of PauTs discinles, wlio.se salutations he sei.tls 
 from Corinth to the Church at Rome as tho~e i.f 
 'the chamberlain of the city' (Rum. xvi. 2.'>). 
 The words so remlered (olKOfSfios rfjj ir6\ewi ; 
 Vulg. arcarius civitatis) denote the city trea- 
 surer or steward, an oflicer of great dignity ii 
 ancient times (comp. Joseph. Aittiq. vii. 8, 2V 
 We find this Erastus with Paul nt E[ilies>is, 
 whence he was sent along wifli Timothy into Ma- 
 cedonia (Acts xix. 22). They were both with (he 
 apostle at Corinth when he wrote, as above, f'loin 
 that city to the Romans : at a subsequent period 
 Erastus was still at Corinth (2 Tim. iv. 20), 
 which would seem to have been the usual place 
 of his abode. 
 
 ERECH (^"I.^J ; Sept. 'Ope'x), one of the 
 cities which formed the beginning of Nimrod 8 
 kingdom in tlie jilain of Shinar (Gen. x. 10). 
 It is not said 'hat he hiiill these cities, but ll-.al 
 he established his power over them ; from which
 
 S4S 
 
 ERES. 
 
 we ma.' ctJiiclmie tliat tliey previously existed. 
 Aji an -iHot trailiiion. wtiich Jpiome ami others 
 )ave follaA-ed, Init wliich is ii;,'ainst all piol)a- 
 )ilitv. ami lias no f,)uinla(ioii to lest npun, i :en- 
 .ilies En-c'i vvitli E;lessa. li,)cliait, however, rather 
 K-ek-! the iiaiTie in the Aiiicca or Araclia oi' the old 
 5eo{nau!ieis. which was on the Ti};'''*' upon the 
 .wideis of Jjaliylonia ami Snsi.ma f Pto'emy, vi. 
 3: AiTiniian. Marcel), xxxiii. 6, 2fi). This was 
 prolMhly the same city whicli Ileroilofns (i. 185; 
 vi. 119) calls Aideriklia, i. c. Great Erecli. Ro- 
 BenniUHer happily conjcctiircs that Eivch prohahly 
 lav iiean T to liahylon than Aracca ; ami this has 
 U*n lately contiriDed l)y C/'ol. Taylor, the Hritish re- 
 sident at Bagdad, who is disjiosed to find the .-ite oi" 
 ■i»s anoient Krech in the^jieaf ;nounds ofpiinutive 
 -iiini, inddVeienfly calleci Irak, hUa, an 1 Sen- 
 <erah, hy the nomade .\ralis: and somclinies Kl 
 A.5ayiah, ' the ],laie ol" peUhles.' Tiiese moiuids, 
 Hrhich are now surrounded L>y the almost per])etua] 
 niarslies and inundations of the lower Euphrates, 
 lie some miles east oi that stream, ahout midway 
 3etween the site of Ijaliylou anil its junction with 
 the Tignis. Some have thought that the name of 
 Evecli may be ineserved in that of Irak {Irak- 
 Arahi), which is given to the rei^ion enclosed by 
 the two rivers, in the lower part of their couise. 
 
 ERES or j^LjiES (TIH) occurs in numerous 
 olaces of Scripture, but authors are not agreed on 
 :he exact meaning of tlie term : Celsius (/fjVro- 
 icii. i. l(i(i, sq.), for instance, conceives that it is a 
 jeneial name for tlie pine tribe, to the exclusion 
 >f the ce<lar of Lebanon, winch he considers to be 
 ')idic.ated by tlie word Berosh. Tlie majority of 
 luthors, however, are of opinion tliat the cedar of 
 Lebanon {Finns Ceclrus or Cedrus Libayii of 
 Botanists) is alone intended. It is unfortunate 
 tliat there sliould be discrepancy of o])inion as to 
 the identification of so remarkable a tree, as it 
 necessarily produces a distrust in tlie conclusions 
 which are arrived at respecting, what would ajjpear 
 to be, the less easily distinguished plants and trees 
 mentioned in the Bible. The discrepancy of 
 opinion has on this occasion, liowever, arisen from 
 the doubt whether Eres, in the numerous passages 
 of Scripture where it occurs, is always used in the 
 same signilicaliou; that is, whether it is always in- 
 tended to sj.ecify only one particular kind of the 
 pine tribe, or whetiier it is not sometimes used 
 generically. In the latter case others of the' pine 
 h'ibe ajipear to be intended along with the cedar of 
 Lebanon, and not to its exclusion, as advoi-ated by 
 the It-aiiied Celsius. We are disposed to think that 
 the diiVerent passages in which jKres occurs autho- 
 rize our considering it a general term, applied to 
 difii'rent species. 
 
 But before jiroceedin,' to compare these passages 
 with one anotner, it will be desnable to ascertain 
 its modern accei)tatiun, as well as the meaning 
 which it bears in Arabic works on J.Iateria Medica. 
 In these such terms are generally used in a more 
 ];recise sense than in general works, the authors 
 of which are usually tmacquainted with the cor- 
 rect appellation of the products of nature. 
 
 In the iiist place, there is no doubt tliat the 
 
 name arz or ars (jj'J '*•. at the present day, ap- 
 plied to the cedar of Lebanon, by llie Arabs in 
 che neghbourhuod Mr. Ilarmei, on Canticles v. 
 15, oliserves that the country people near the 
 
 ERES. 
 
 moniitain call the cedar ars, wiiich it rerf 
 nearly the original name. But the same Ram* 
 
 appears to be ap])lied also to others of the ])\ut 
 trilie: thus ' al Aleppo the tirtrce is included 
 under thi! name ars (Niebuhr, as (juoted by 
 Rosenmiiller, Bihl. Boi. p. 246). So we find the 
 term alerce, that is al-arz, ap]>lied by the Araba 
 to a coniferous ])laiit, a native of Mount Atlas, 
 and of other uncultivated l.'lls on the coast of 
 Africa. The wood-woik of the roof of the celebrated 
 mos'jue, now the catheilial, of Cordova, which 
 was built in the ninth century, has been proved 
 to be formed of the wood of this free (London "s 
 Ai'.roret. ]). 2163). From alerce tlie En.clisb 
 name /arch is su])posed to have been derived. If 
 we consult I'ersian works on Materia Medica we 
 lind the name aras or oriis given as a synonyme 
 oi' abh id, which is a sjjecies ofjunii>er : so, again, 
 onntz is described as durukht sviioburbe bur, 
 that is, ' the pine-tiee without frutt ;' sunobur 
 a])pearing as the general teim for jiine-lrees, 
 which are liistingui.shed by the name of S!Mio6!<r 
 snr/hiir, ' tlie lesser pine,' called also tiinooh, and 
 simobnr /iiibar, 'the larger jiine:' of this are 
 given, as synnriymes, nasov and (hih/hoztth, whit-li 
 is the Pinus Gerardiaiia of Botuiiists. \\ itli the 
 
 Arabs, as quoted by Celsius, I.e. p. 107: 'mi 
 
 {arz) nomeii generale est ad jiini species desig 
 nandas ;' and he further quotes Abu'l Fadli, as 
 stating, ' Arz est aibor zaiianbar (])inus) cujus, 
 quoad omnes ejus species, nientionem faciemug 
 sub lit. Z. si Dens volet. — Loco condlcto lice 
 modo jjergit : Zanaubar (pinus) est arbor magna 
 G'igtiilur in montibus, et regionibus frigidii 
 Ejus tres sunt species, njas nemiie, et foemma 
 major, atque minor.' It is not nfecessaiy lor us 
 on the present occasion to detennine what are the 
 species intended by the Arabian authors. They no 
 doubt sometimes follow Dioscorides, and at other 
 times insert names and descri[itions which will 
 ajijilyonly to the siiecies indigenous in the moun- 
 taii^s of Persia. Difierent species of Jiine, therefore, 
 will be adduced as the kinds intended, in difl'erent 
 countiies. VVe may also remaik, as stated by 
 Celsius, that the translators of the sacred Scrij>- 
 tures into Arabic sometimes use the term .si<«o6«r. 
 sometimes arz, as the re))resentative of eres. 
 
 Rosenmiiller states tliat ' the word eres, which 
 occurs so frequently in tlie Old Te.stament, is, 
 by the ancient translators, universally rendered 
 cedar' (Ke'Spos). Therefore il has been inferred by 
 him, as well as others, that the cedar of Lebanon 
 must be intended : but the name does not appeal 
 to have been applied sjiecially to this tree by tht 
 ancients. Thus the /ce'Spos of Dioscoriiles is sup- 
 posed by Spreiigel, in his edition of that author, tc 
 be a species of juniper, and ])r. Lindley, the editoi 
 of the last numbeis of Sibthorjie s Flora Grceca, 
 agrees with him : ^ KiSpos, junijjerus oxycedrug, 
 vel potius J. Phirnicea, secundum Sprengelium, 
 cui assentio, KeSpos fitKpd, junijierus cominunis." 
 J. oxycedrus is the brown- hen ied juniper, and 
 J. Phuinicea is the Pha-nician juniper or cedar, 
 while J. Lycia, the Lycian juniper or cedar, ii 
 cedrus Phuenicea altera Plinii et Tlieo])hr£u«ti. 
 These have already been mentioned under tiit 
 article Biiitosii. 
 
 Pliny, sjieaking of the plants of Syria, says, 
 * Juni]ieri similem habent Piiu'nices et cedruio 
 minorem. Duo ejus genera, Lycia et Phoeniciaf
 
 ERES. 
 
 difTerunt fulio: nam quae (iuriim, aciitutn, spiiio- 
 »um iiiiUet, oxycedros vocatur, vamosa et iiotlis 
 iiifVsia : altera lulore jiia'stat. Fiuctiiiti rcruiit 
 tnyrli mugtiihuliiie, liiilcem sai)()ie. Kl niajoiis 
 ceuii tliio genera : qux linre', (Vnctinn iKin I'ert. 
 Frn4;irera noil lloret : et in ea anteceileiitem triic- 
 tiim Dcciipat nmns. Semen ejus ciipresso simile. 
 Quidain ceiJrelaien vocaiit. Kx liac resina laiula- 
 thiimii' (Hist. I\'at. \\\\. 11). The conclusion of 
 tliis jiassage, as translated liy Holland, is, ' and 
 llie tindier of it is everlasting : wherefore in old 
 time tliey were wont To make fiie images of the 
 g(nls of this wood, iis it ajjpeareth by the statue of 
 A])olluS.)sianus, made of cedar wood brouytif from 
 Seleuc'a." A,'ain(xvi 39), 'as for cedars, the best 
 simply be those that grow in Candia, Africke, 
 anil Syrie. This verlue hath the oile of cedar, 
 that if aiiv wood or timber Ijc thoroughly anointed 
 liierewith it is subject neilher to worm nor moth, 
 aor yet to lotfennesse.' The greater ])art of this 
 \ccount of the dill'erent kinds of cedar is adopted 
 •.Vom Theo])hraslus (iii. 12); ihoiigli, no doubt, 
 the latter was also actjuainted wi.th a large cedar, 
 as ajjpears from lib. v. c. 9, wheie, speaking of 
 Syiia, he says, ' Illic enim cedri in nionlil)us, 
 cum longitudine, turn cassitudine j)raestanlissimae 
 nascuntur.' Quintus Curtius also uses the term 
 KfSpos fn a general «ense, when he says of the 
 jialace of Fersepolis, ' multa cedro sediticata erat 
 
 ERKS. 
 
 649 
 
 S!83. [Cedar of Lebanon.] 
 
 If we proceed to compare the several passages 
 ot Serl])tuie in which the word Eres occurs, we 
 shall e(jually lind that one plant is not strictly 
 applicable to them all. Ttie earliest notice of 
 'lie cedar is in Lev. xiv. 4, C, where we are 
 fiild tliat Moses commanded the lener that was to 
 be cleansed to make an oflervng of two sjiarrows, 
 fcdar-wood, wool dyed in scarlet, and hyssop ; 
 and in ver. JO, 51, 52, the houses in w'lich the 
 lepers dwell are directed to be ])iuiiied with 
 the same materials. Again, in Num. xix. (5, 
 Moses and Xaron iire connnanded to sacrili<;c a 
 red iieifer " And tlie priest shall take cedar-wood 
 uad hyisop iud scarlet.' As remarketl by Lady 
 
 Callcotf (Sn-ip. Ileihal. p. 92), ' The cinlar was 
 not a native of Egypt, nor coidd it have lieeii pro- 
 cured in the desert w ithout great didiculty ; but 
 tiie juniper is most pleiitilul ihire. and takes ileep 
 root in the cre\ ic<'S of the rocks (,f Mount Sinai.' 
 That some, at least, of ihe cedaig of the ancient.s 
 w(-re a species of junijier is evident fiom (he pas- 
 sages we have quoteil ; the w<H>d of most of I hem 
 is more or less aromatic. The ancients, it niav 
 be remarked, threw the beiries of the junijev 
 on funeral piles, to jirolect the dep.irtmg s])iiit 
 from evil inlluences, and olleied its wood in 
 sacrifice to the infernal gods, because they believ<'d 
 its jiresence was accejitable to them. Tiiey al.so 
 burne<l it in their dwelling-houses to keej) away 
 ilemons. It is curious that, in the lemote pa' is 
 of the Himalayan Mountains, another species of 
 this germs is siniilaily employed, as the present 
 writer has nientinne<l elsewhere (lliinohnjan Bo- 
 tany, p. 350): ' Here there is also another speiies, 
 Juiiipents relif/iosa. Royle, c,\\\vi\ gognl l)y the 
 natives, and employed foi' burning as incense in 
 iheir religious ceremonies." 
 
 At a later jieiiod we have notices of the various 
 uses to which the wood of the crcs was ap]ilied, 
 as 2 Sau). v. 11 ; vii. 2-7; 1 Kings v. G, 8, 10; 
 vi. 9, 10, 15, 16, IS, 20; vii. 2, 3, '7, 11, 12; ix. 
 11 ; X. 27; 1 Chron. xvii. 6; 2 Cliron. ii. 8; ix. 
 27 ; XXV. IS. In these passages we are informed 
 of tiie negotiations wilh Hiiam, King of Tyre, 
 foi the supply of ceilar-trees out of Lebanon, and 
 of the uses to which the timber was ajjplied in 
 the construction of the Tenijile, and of the king's 
 ]) ilace : he ' covered the house with beams and 
 boards of cedar;" ' the walls of the house within 
 were covered with boartls of cedar;' there wore 
 ' cedar jiillars,' and ' beams of cedar;' and the 
 altar was of cedar. In all these passages ihe 
 word eres is emjjloyed, for which the Arabic 
 translation, according to Celsius [loc. cit.), gives 
 sjniobar as the synonyme. There is nothing 
 distinctive stated respecting the chaiacter of the 
 wood, from which we might draw any certain 
 conclusion, further than tiiat, t'rom the selection 
 made ani/ 'he constant mention of the material 
 used, it may lie fairly inferred that it must have 
 been considered as well fitted, or rather, of a 
 sujierior quality, for the purpose of buikling the 
 Temjjle anil palace. From this, however, jiro- 
 ceeds the ditliculty in admitting that what 
 we call the cedar of Lebanon was the only 
 tree intended by the name Eres. For moiiern 
 experience has ascertained that its woo<l is not 
 of a superior quality. To determine this point, 
 we must not ret"er to the statements of those 
 who take their descriptions from writers who. in- 
 deed, <lescribe cedar- wood, but do not prove that 
 it was derived from the cedar of Lel)aiK)n. The 
 term ' cea^./ se^.^is to have been as indelinite in 
 ancient as in modern times. Now we find it ap- 
 plied to the wood oi' J u nip cr^ts virijiniana, which 
 is red or ])encil cedar; and to that of J..Bermu- 
 diana or Hermuila cedar. J. oxycedrus yields tiie 
 cedar of the north of Sjiain and south ol France, 
 but the term is also a])))lie<l to many other wo<;ds, 
 as to wliife cedar, that of Melia Azedarach j 
 and Indian cedar, that of Cedrela Toona. 
 
 Mr. Loudon, in his Arboretum (]). 2117), 
 describes it thus: 'Tlie wood of the cedar is of a 
 reddish while, liglit and spongy, easily worked, but 
 very apt t) shrink and warp, and by no means du-
 
 830 
 
 ERES. 
 
 rable.' But when the tree is grown on mountains, 
 the annual layers of wood are much narrower and 
 tlie fibie mucli finer than when it is grown on 
 plains; so mucIi so that a pit«e of cedar-wood 
 hroiigiit from Mount Lebanon hy Dr. Parisel, in 
 1829, and which he had made i'.ito a small piece 
 of furniture, presented a surface compact, agree- 
 ably veined, and variously sliaded, and wliich, on 
 the whok', may be considered handsome (Hist, du 
 Cedre, p. 43). But Dr. Pococke, who brougiit away 
 a piece of one of ihe large cedars which liad been 
 l)l()\vn down by the wind, says that the wood does 
 not differ in appearance from white deal, and that 
 it does not a])pear to be harder. Varennes de 
 Feuilie considers it as the lightest of the resinous 
 woods, and lie adds that it contains very little 
 resin: tliat its grain is coarse, and that he thinks 
 tlie wood can neither be so strong nor so durable 
 Hn it has tlie reputation of being. Mr. Loudon 
 gays (loc. cit.) that a table which Sir J. Banks 
 had made out of the Hillingdon cedar was soft, 
 without scent (except tliat of common deal), and 
 possessed little variety of veining ; and tiie same 
 remarks will apply to a table which Mr. L. had 
 made from a plank whicli is referred to as having 
 been kindly presented to him by J. Gostling, 
 Esq. of Whitton Park. Dr. Lindley {Gar- 
 dener's Chronicle, vol. i. p. 699) calls it ' the 
 worthless, though magnificent cedar of Mount 
 Lebanon.' A correspondent, however, at p. 733, 
 says, ' Mr. Wilcox of Warwick, a most in- 
 genious and skilful carver (in his works little 
 inferior to the celebrated Gibbons), has now in his 
 rooms some specimens of furniture made of cedar 
 of Lebanon, ornamented with carved work, in 
 flowers, leaves, &c. &c., in the best taste, and in 
 sharpness and colour so similar to box-wood 
 that any common observer would mistake it to 
 be such.' In reply to this Dr. Lindley adds, 
 The fact last mentioned is the first that has 
 come to our knowledge of the cedar of Lebanon 
 having been found of important use.' He is of 
 opinion tliat some of the cedar-trees sent by Hiram, 
 king of Tyre, may have been obtained from Mount 
 j^tlas, and may iiave been tiie produce of the 
 above Alerce or Al Arz — the Callitri» quadri- 
 valvis — which no doubt furnished the ancients 
 with one of their most valued woods [Thyine], 
 This is hard, durable and fragrant, and com- 
 monly used in religious buildings in the East." 
 Thougli we have seen both temples and palaces 
 built entirely with one kind of cedar (that of the 
 Cedrus Deodara), we think it more probable that, 
 as the timber had to be brought from a distance, 
 where all the kinds of cedar grew, the common 
 pine-tree and the cedar of Lebanon would both fur- 
 nish some of the timber required for the building 
 of the Temple, together with juniper cedar. The 
 name arz, as we have seen, is applied b> Uie Arabs 
 to all tiiree; and they would give all the qualities 
 of timber tiiat could be required. We have shown 
 that the KeSpos of the ancients was most probably 
 the wood ot a juniper. Celsius was of ojiinion 
 that the ere* indicated the Pinus sylvestris or 
 Scotch pine, which yields the red and yellow 
 deals of Norway, and wliich is likewise found on 
 Mount Lelianon. Tiiis ojiinion seems to be con- 
 firmed by Ezekiel xxvii. .5, 'They have made all 
 thy ship boards of fir-trees of Senir, they have 
 taken cedar from Lebanon to make masts for 
 thee. For it is not probable that any other tree 
 
 ERES. 
 
 than the comviion pine wouItJ be taken fcv mastt 
 when this was jirocurable, aince even In the pre- 
 Kent day .' Pallas assures us that the nine oi 
 Livonia and Lithuania differs not from Ihe Pinus 
 sylvestris ; masts, he says, arc not made of any 
 ])eculiar species, as foreigners, and more especially 
 the French, think; but they ai" all of tiie Pinus 
 sylvestris' (Loudon, Arborit. p. 2io8). 
 
 Though Celsius appears to us to iie quite right 
 in concluding that ercz, in Sucne of the jiassages 
 of .Scrijiture, refers to the pine-tree, yet it seems 
 equally cl'ar tlu'.u there are other passages to 
 which this tree will not answer. It certainly a]i- 
 pears imjirobaiile that a tree so remarkable for 
 the magnificence of its a)>pearance as the ceda* 
 of Lebanon should not liave been noticed in the 
 Sacred Scriptures; and this would be the case if 
 we ajiplied eres exclusively to the pine, and 
 berosh to the cypress. If we consider some of the 
 remaining passages of Scripture, we cannot fail 
 to perceive that they forcibly ajiply to the cedar 
 of Lebanon and to the cedar of Lebanon only. 
 Thus, in Ps. xcii. 12, it is said, ' Tiie righteous 
 sliall flourish like a palm-tree, and spread abroad 
 like a cedar of Lebanon.' It has been v/ell re- 
 marked ' that the flourishing head of the palm 
 and the spreading abroad of the cedar are equally 
 characteristic' But the prophet Ezekiel (ch. xxxi.) 
 is justly adduced as giving the most magni- 
 ficent and, at the same time, the most grajihic 
 description of this celebrated tree (ver. 3) : ' Be- 
 hold, the Assyrian was a cedar in Lebanon with 
 fair branches, and with a shadowy shroud, and of 
 an high stature ; and his top was among the thick 
 boughs :' (ver. 5) ' Therefore his height was ex- 
 alted above all the trees of the field, and his 
 boughs were multiplied, and his branches became 
 long because of the multitude of waters :' (ver. 6) 
 ' All the fowls of heaven made their nests in his 
 boughs, and under his branches did all the beasts 
 of the field bring forth their young.' In this 
 description, Mr. Gilpin has well observed, ' the 
 principal characteristics of the cetlar are marked : 
 first, the multiplicity and length of its branches. 
 Few trees divide so many fair branches from the 
 main stem, or spread over so large a compass of 
 ground. ' His boughs are multiplied,' as Ezekiel 
 says, ' and his branches become long,' wliich 
 David calls spreading abroad. His very boughs 
 are equal to the stem of a fir or a chesinut. 
 The second characteristic is what Ezekiel, wilh 
 great beauty and aptness, calls his shadowy 
 shroud. No tree in the forest is more remarkable 
 than the cedar for its close-woven leafy canojiy 
 Ezekiel's cedar is marked as a tree of full and 
 perfect growth, from the circumstance of its top 
 being among the thick boughs.' The other ])rin- 
 cipal jjassages in which the cedar is mentioned 
 are 1 Kings iv. 33; 2 Kings xix. 23; Joti xl. 17; 
 Ps. xxix. 5 ; Ixxx. 10 ; xcii. 12 ; civ. 16 ; cxlviii 
 9; Cant. i. 17; v. 15; viii. 9; Isa. ii. 13; ix. R, 
 10; xiv. 8; xxxvii. 21; xli. 19; xliv. 11; Jer. 
 xxii. 7, 14, 23; Ezek. xvii. 3, 22, 23; Amos ii. 
 9; Zeph. ii. 14; Zech. xi. 1, 2; and in the Ajio- 
 crypha, 1 Esdras iv. 48 ; v. 55 ; Ecclus. xxiv. 
 13 ; 1. 12 ; but it would occupy too much space 
 to adduce further illustrations from them of what 
 indeed is the usually admitted opinion. 
 
 It is, however, necessary before concluding to 
 give some account of this celebrated tree, as no- 
 ticed by travellers in the East, all of whom makt
 
 ESAU. 
 
 KSAU. 
 
 091 
 
 t pilgrimage to its native sites. The cedar of 
 Lebanon is well known to be a wiilely-spieailing 
 tree, geneially from 50 to 80 feet higli, and when 
 standing singly, often covering a space with its 
 branches, tlie diameter of which is much greater 
 than its height. The horizontal branches, wlicn 
 the tree is exposed on all sides, are very large in. 
 proportion to the trunk, being dis]K)sed in dis- 
 tinct layers or stages, and the distai;ce to which 
 they extend diminishes as they approach the top, 
 where they form a jjyramidal head, broad in j)ro- 
 portion to its height. The branchlets are disposed 
 in a flat fan-like manner on (he branches. The 
 leaves, produced in tufts, are straight, about one 
 inch long, slender, nearly cylindrical, tanering to 
 a point, and are on short footstalks. I'he male 
 catkins are single, solitary, of a reddisli hue, about 
 two inches long, terminal and turning upwards. 
 The female catkins are short, erect, roundish, and 
 rather oval ; they change after fecundation into 
 oval oblonj; cones, wl?ich, wlien they approach 
 maturity, become from 2^ inches to 5 inches long. 
 Every part of the cone abounds with resin, wKicii 
 Bometimes exudes from between the scales. Bc- 
 lon, who travelled in Syria about 1.550, found the 
 cedars about 2S in number, in a valley on the sides 
 of the mountains. Rauwolf, who visited the cedars 
 in 1574, 'could tell no more but 24, tliat stood 
 round about in a circle; and two otiiers, tlie 
 branches whereof are quite decayed from age.' De 
 ]a Roque, in 168S, found but 20. Maundrell, in 
 109t), found them reduced to 16, and Dr. Pococke, 
 who visited Syria 1744 and 1745, discovered only 
 15. One of these, that had the soundest l)ody, 
 though not tlie largest, measured 24 feet in circum- 
 ference, and another, with a sort of triple body, 
 and of a triangular figure, measured 12 feet on 
 each side. ' Tlie wood,' he says, ' does not dill'er 
 from white deal in a])pearance, nor does it seem 
 to be harder. It has a fine smell, but is not so 
 flagrant as the juniper of America, which is com- 
 monly called cedar, and it also falls short of it in 
 beauty. I took a piece of the wood from a great 
 tree that was blown down by the wind, and left 
 there to rot : there are 15 large ones standing.' 
 Mr. Buckingham, in 1825, says, ' Leaving Bis- 
 kcny on our right, we ascended for an hour over 
 light snow, until we came to the Arz-el l.ihinien, 
 or the cedars of Lebanon.' M. Laure, who, in 
 company with the Prince de Joinville, visited the 
 cedars in 1836, calls them El-llcrze. M. Latnar- 
 tine, ill 1832, says, ' These trees diminish in every 
 succeeding age. Travellers formerly coimted 30 or 
 40; more recently, 17; more recently still, only 12. 
 There are now but 7. These, however, from their 
 size and general appearance, may be fairly pre- 
 sumed to have existed in biblical times. Around 
 these ancient witnesses of ages long since past, 
 there still remains a little grove of yellow cedars, 
 apjiearing to me to form a group of from 400 to 
 500 trees or shrubs. Every year, in the month of 
 Jane, the inhabitants of Beschierai, of Eden, of 
 Kandbin, and the other neighbouring valleys and 
 villages, climb up to these cedars, and celebrate 
 mass at their feet. How many prayers have re- 
 •ounded under these branches, and what more 
 leautiful canopy for worsiiip can exist!' — J. F. R. 
 ESAR-HADDON. [As.svria.] 
 
 KSAU ( WV ; Sept. 'Ho-oi)). The origin and 
 meaning of the name are not quite free from am- 
 
 biguity. Simon, deriving the m ;rd frtrii 7i\ffy, 
 texit, renders it pilis oprrtit-t ^coviTeu with 
 hair), and some such reason as tliLs implies, seems 
 involved in the p;issage Gen. xxv. 2.5. Cruden, 
 however, explains tlie name as meaning one who 
 docs fqui facit), an actor or agent. His surname 
 of Edom (reil) was given him, it ajipears (Gen. 
 xxv. 30) from the red jiotlage which he asked 
 of Jacob. Esau was the eldest son of 'Isaac, 
 Abraham's son' (Gen. xxv. li>) l)y Rcbekah, * the 
 daughter of Bethuel the Syrian of l*adan-aram, 
 the sister to Laban the Syrian.' The marriage 
 remaining for some time (about 19 years ; com- 
 jiare xxv. 20, 26) unproductive, Lsaac entreated 
 Jehovah, and she Ix'came ])regiiaiit. Led by pecu- 
 liar feelings 'to inqniie of Jelio\ah,' Uebekah waJ 
 informed that she should give birth to twin.? 
 whose fate would be as diverse as their cliaiactei, 
 and, what in those days was stranger still, that 
 the elder should serve the younger. On occa- 
 sion of her delivery the child that wiis born 
 first was ' red, all over like an hairy garment : 
 and they called his name Esau.' Immediately 
 afterwards Jacol) was bom. 
 
 In ])roces3 of time the dilVerent natural endow- 
 ments of the two boys began to display their 
 efl'ects in dissimilar aptitudes and jjursuits. 
 While Jacob was led iiy his' less robust make and 
 quiet disposition to fiillil the duties of a sheiiheid's 
 life, and pass his days in and aioiind his tent, 
 Esau was imi)elled, iiy the ardour and lofty spirit 
 which agitated his bosom, to .seek in the toils, 
 adventures, and perils of the chace, his occupa- 
 tion and sustenance: and, as is generally the 
 case in natures like his, he gained iiigh repute by 
 his skill and daring. 
 
 A hunter "s life is of necessity one of uncertainty 
 as well as hardship; days pass in which the 
 greatest vigilance and the most strenuous exer- 
 tions may fail even to find, nuich less caj)ture, 
 game. The hunting tribes of North America often 
 find themselves, lifter severe and long-cnutinued 
 labour and watching, unprovided with food, and 
 necessitated to a length of alistinence which 
 would be fatal to persons bred in towns or living 
 by the ordinary pursuits of the field. Esau had 
 on one occasion experienced such a dis<i]'point- 
 ment, and, wearied with his unproductiv e elVorfs, 
 exhausted for want of sustenance, and despairing 
 of capturing any prey, he was fain to tuin his 
 steps to his father's house for succoor in his ex- 
 tremity. On reaching home he found his brother 
 enjoying a carefully prepared dish of potta^'e : 
 attracted by the odour of which he besou^^lit Jacob 
 to allow him to share in the meal. His iiKJther 
 saw the exigency in which Es.ui was, and delei- 
 mined not to let it pass uiiii)i])rove<i. Aci-oid- 
 ingly he puts a price on the reijuiied food. Esau 
 was the elder, and had in consequence immuni- 
 ties and privileges which were of liigh value. Tlie 
 surrender of these to himself Jacob makes the con- 
 dition of his complying with EsaiTs peiili,,n. 
 ^Urged by the cravings of hunger, ahumed even 
 by the fear of instant death, Esau sold his biith- 
 right to liis younger brother, conlirming the con- 
 tract iiy the sanction of an oath. Jacob having 
 thus got his price, supjilied the famisiiing Esau 
 witli needful refresh<nents. 
 
 Arrived now at years of matjiity Esau, wiien 
 40 years of age, married two wives, Jiulith and 
 Bashemoth. Some u;iiappy feelings appear tc
 
 653 
 
 ESAU. 
 
 ESAU. 
 
 hiive iiie\iously existed in the family ; for while 
 Esau was a i'avimiite with his father, in conse- 
 quence, if aj)|)eais, of ihe presents of venison which 
 the youtli gave hiin, Jacob was regarded with 
 special affection by tlie mother. These partiali- 
 ties, and their natural consequences in unamiable 
 feelings, were increased anil exaggerated by 
 Ksau's marriage. Judith and Basheniotli were 
 Canaanites, and, on account of their origin, were 
 unacceptalile to Isaac and Rel)ekaii. Tlie latter 
 was especially grieved. ' 1 ain weary,' she said 
 (Gen. xxvii. 46), ' of my life, because of the 
 daughters of Heth.' Esau thus became alienated 
 from the jiarental home. Even his father's ])re- 
 ference of him niay liave been injuriously ail'ected. 
 The way was in some measure smoothed for the 
 transference of the coveted birthriglit to the 
 younger son. 
 
 The time for the fulfil nient of the compact 
 between tiie l)rothers at lengtii arrived. Isaac is 
 ' sick unto death.' His appetite, as well as his 
 strengtii, having failed, is only to be gratified 
 by provocatives. He desires some savoury veni- 
 son, and gives the requisite instructions to Esau, 
 who accordingly proceeds in quest of it. On 
 this Rebekali begins to feel that the critical time 
 Las come. If the hated Hiitites are not to enter 
 with her less favoured son into possession of the 
 family property, tlie sale of the birthright (the 
 original idea of whicli she may have suggested to 
 the ■ plain man,' her son Jacob) must now in 
 some way be confirmed and consummated. One 
 essential j)articular remained — the father's bless- 
 ing. If this should be given to Esau, all hope 
 was gone; for (his, like our modern wills, would 
 hand the inheritance and the accompanying 
 headship of the tribe to Esau and his wives. 
 
 Isaac, howei-er, had lost his sight — indeed, all 
 liis senses were dull and feeble. It was tlierefore 
 not very difficult to pass olf Jacob upon liim as 
 Esau. Rebekah takes her measures, and, not- 
 witlistanding Jacob's fears, succeeds. Isaac, 
 indeed, is not without suspicion, but a falsehood 
 comes to aid Jacob in his otherwise discreditable 
 personation of Esau. Tlie blessing is pronounced, 
 and tlius the coveted property and ascendancy 
 are secured. The all'ectionale endearments which 
 pass b<!tween the deceiver and the abused old 
 blind fdllier stand in painful contrast with the 
 base trickery by which mother and son had 
 accomiilished their end. 
 
 Esau, however, returns from the field, aj)- 
 proaches his decrepid and sightless father, de- 
 claring who he is. ' And Isaac trembled very 
 exceedingly, and said. Who ? where is he that 
 hath taken venison and brought it me, and I 
 have eaten of all before thou earnest, and have 
 blessed him? — yea, and he shall be blessed.' 
 On this Esau becomes agitated, and entreats a 
 blessing for himself — ' Bless me, even me also, 
 O my father.' Urging this entreaty again and 
 again, even witli tears Isaac at length said unto 
 iiin^ ' Behold, thy dwelling shall be the fatness* 
 of the earth, and of the dew of heaven from 
 above ; and by thy sword slialt thou live, and 
 slialt serve tiiy brother; and it shall come to pass 
 wtien tliou shall have the dominion that tliou 
 shalt break his yoke from olf thy neck ' (Gen. 
 xxvii.). ■ 
 
 Thug, deprived for ever of liis birtliright, in 
 rirtue of tlie irrevociible blessing, Esau but too 
 
 naturally conceived and entertained a natred of 
 Jacob, and even f(jrmed a resolution to seize tii« 
 oppoitunily for slaying him, which the days of 
 mourning consequent on tiie aj)proaching decease 
 of tlieir father would be likely to all'oi'i. VVordg 
 to this eHect, which Esau let droj), were repeated 
 to his mother, who tiiereujion prevailed on her 
 younger son to flee to his uncle Laban, wlio lived 
 in Haran, there to remain until time, witli its 
 usual ell'ect, might have mitigated Esau's wrath. 
 Meanwhile Esau had giown poweiful in Idumxa, 
 and when, after many years, Jacob intended to 
 return within the borders of the Jorilan, he feared 
 lest his elder brother migiit intercept him on his 
 way, to take revenge for former injuiies. He ac- 
 cordingly sent messengers to Esau in order, if pos- 
 sible, to disarm liis wrath. Esau appears to have 
 announced in reply, that he would proceed to meet 
 his returning broth.er. Wiien, tiieiefoie, Jacob 
 was informed tiiat Esau was on his way for this 
 purjiose with a band of four hundred men, he was 
 greatly distressed, in fear of that hostility which 
 his conscience told him he had done something to 
 deserve. What then must have been his surprise 
 when he saw Esau running witli extended arms to 
 greet and embrace him? and Esau ' fell on his 
 neck, and ki.ssed him, and they wejit.' Jacob 
 had prepared a jjresent for Esau, hoping thus to 
 conciliate his favour; but with the generous ardour 
 which cliaracterizes, and somewhat of tlie disinter- 
 estedness which adorns, natures like his, Esau at 
 first courteously refused the gift — ' 1 have enough, 
 my brotlier, keep that thou hast unto thyself 
 (Gen. xxxiii.). 
 
 The whole of this rencontre serves to show that, 
 if Jacob had acquired riches, Esau had gained 
 power and influence as well as property ; and the 
 homage which is paid to him indirectly, and by 
 implication, on the jiart of Jacoli, anil directly, 
 and in the most marked and respectful manner, 
 by the females and children of Jacobs family, 
 leads to the supposition that he had made himself 
 sujnenie in the surrounding country of Idumaea. 
 
 Esau from this time appears but very little in 
 the sacred narrative. He was ready to accompany 
 Jacob, or to send with him an escoit, jjroliably 
 for jiiotection, but Jacob's feais and suspicions 
 induced him to decline these friendly offers; ami 
 they separated on the same day tiiat they met, 
 after an interview in which Jacob's bearing is 
 rather that of an inferior to his lord than that of 
 a brother, and Esau's has all the geuerousness 
 which a high nature feels in forgiving an injury 
 and aiming to do good to the injurer. Tlie latter, 
 we are merely fold, ' returned on his way to Seir' 
 (Gen. xxxiii. 16). 
 
 JsLCob and Esau appear togetlier again at the 
 funeral rites which were jiaid to their deceased 
 father ; but the book of Genesis furnishes no par- 
 ticulars of what took place. 
 
 Esau is once moie presented to us (Gen 
 xxxvi.) in a genealogical table, in which a long 
 lire of illustrious descendants is referred to 'Esau, 
 the father of the Edomites' (Gen. xxxvi. 43). 
 
 If the historical outline now given is supported 
 by the scriptural narrative, the character of Esau 
 has not ordinarily received justice at the hands 
 of theologians. The injurious impression against 
 him may be traced back to a very ancient period. 
 Tlie Targum of Jonatlian sanctioned anil sprea<l, 
 if it did not originate 'he misjudgmea'i by UD
 
 ESDRAS, BOOKS OF. 
 
 Urarrantaulc additions to the account given in 
 Grenesis. The reason, it states, wl)y Esiin did not 
 at once slay liis lirotiier was, lest, as liapiienel in 
 tlie case of Cain and Al)el, aiiotiier man-child 
 might be l)oin, and thus lie shonhl lie still de- 
 nrived of the inheritance; he, theiefore, resolved 
 to wait till tiie dcalli of Isaac, wiieu the ninrder 
 of Jacob would leave him in safe and undis- 
 puted |K)ssession. Represenfatioiis made in tlie 
 Talmud are of a similar tendency (VVincr"s 
 Jiealworterfntch, in voc). Tlie fathers of the 
 Olunch, particularly Augustine, regard Esau as 
 the repre;enlative of iKe (himncd, while they 
 iidmire Jacob as that of the elect. — J. H. B. 
 ESDRAELON, PLAIN OF. [Palestine.] 
 
 ESDRAS, BOOKS OF, (APOCRYPHA); 
 Gr. "ErrSpas, Lat. Esdras. In several maiuiscrii)ts 
 of the Latin V'ulgate, as well as in all the printetl 
 editions anterior to the decree of the Council of 
 Trent, and in many since that period, there will 
 be found four books following eacii other, entitled 
 the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th books of Ezra. The 
 two first are the canonical books of Ezra and 
 Nehemiah, the 3r(l an<l 4th form the subject of 
 the present article. They are the same which 
 are called 1st and 2nd Esdras in the English 
 Autln)rized Version. 
 
 TIicThikd Book ok Ezua is found in all the 
 manuscri])ts of the Seventy, where it is called the 
 first book, aiid precedes the second or canonical 
 Ezra, wliich. in this version, includes the book of 
 Nehemiah. It contains 109 K:€(^aA.aio. It is little 
 more than a recapitulation of the history con- 
 tained in the canonical Ezra, interspersed with 
 some remaikable interpolations, tlie chief of 
 which are chap, i., taken from 2 Cliron. xxxv. 
 xxxvi., part of the last (chapter, from Nehem. viii., 
 snd the narration of the themes or sentences of 
 Eorobabel and the two other young men of 
 Darius's body-guard (3 Esd. iii. 4). The book is 
 more properly a version than an original work. 
 The style is acknowledged to be elegant, and not 
 unlike that of Synmiachus. This Ixiok was made 
 use of by J():ieplius. who cites it largely in his 
 Antiquities, but noiliing furtlier has been ascer- 
 tained respecting the age either of the original 
 or tlie translation. It is cited by (Siemens Alex- 
 andrinus (Stromata, i.), the author of the Im- 
 perfect H'ork on Matt. (Hom. i.), Athanasins 
 ( Orat. iii. cont. Ariatios), and by Cyprian (^Ejnst. 
 ad Pofnpeium). 
 
 From the circumstance of Jerome's having 
 declined to translate the third and fourth liooks of 
 Ezra, they are (with the exception of the book of 
 Jol) and the Psalms) tlie only portions either of 
 tlie canonical or apocryphal wiitings of the Old 
 Testament wiiich have lieen preserved to us entire 
 ill the old Latin translation. We have aheady 
 noticed tlie contemjit in which Jerome held these 
 books (see the extract from his letter to Vigilant ius, 
 siijjra, ]). 177, Ai'ocRyi*iiA, where Athanasins is a 
 misjirint fvir ./crowe). In his pieface to Ezra and 
 Nehemiah, he ob-^crves. 'None shouhl l)e trouided 
 bv the clrcumst.uice th.it only one b.iok [of Ezra] 
 has lieen published by \\%, nor sliould any take plea- 
 iure in tlie dieanis of the lliird and liuuith apocry- 
 phal l)Ooks, (or, in the Hebieiv, Ezra and Nehemiah 
 form but one volume, and what is not oi' the 
 twenty-four elders is to be utterly rejected.' 
 ^ugusmic speaks of th ; tliirii book with more 
 
 ESDRAS, BOOKS OF. 
 
 «53 
 
 respect, although we have already seen [Dkvi eho- 
 Canonical] that he did not include it in lila 
 catalogue. Ezra, he suys (J)e Civitale Dei, lib 
 xviii. cap. 36) . . . . ' who is rather to be con- 
 sidered a historian than a prophet, iinles.t, indeed, 
 he may be iindcistood to have prophesied, wiieii 
 . . . . he demonstrates that 6■((^'J (A //*<' i</'oH_(/c.v< 
 (alluding to 3 !')zia, ch. iii. iv.il, for, m llie gospel, 
 Christ is acknowledged to be the truth.' 
 
 Tiiis book does not, however, ajipear to have 
 been included in the catalogue of any council, 
 nor has any 'portion of it been leail in the otiices 
 of the cliinch. IlaviiiiT been rejected as apocry- 
 phal by the Couiudl ol' Trent, it lia-i lieen reinoveil, 
 together with the fourth book, in the Sixtiiip and 
 Clementine editions of the V^ulgate, to the end of 
 the volume, with the observation th.it they are fliui 
 retained in order to ' preserve from liein^ altogether 
 lost books which had been somejiiut's cited by 
 some of the holy fathers. The fallowing is the order 
 , of the books of the Old Testament cleclared to be 
 canonical by this council : — 5 of Moses ; Joshua ; 
 Judges; Ruth; 4 of Kings; 2 of Chronicles j 
 2 of Ezra (viz. Kzra and Nehemiah); Tobit; 
 Judith; Esther: Job; Psalms; Pioveibs; Ec- 
 clesiastes; Canticles; Wisdom; l''cclesiasticiis ; 
 Isaias ; Jeremias with Baruch ; Ezekiel ; Daniel ; 
 12 minor Projihels, viz. Hosea, Joel, Amos, 
 Alidias, Jonas, Micah, Nahum, liabaciic, Ze- 
 phanias, Haggai, Zecharias, IMalachi, and 2 of 
 Maccaliees. 
 
 The Fourth Book of E/.ua is quite of a 
 dilVereiit character from the former, and it has 
 been even doubted whether it more piojicily be- 
 longs to the Ajiocrypha of the Old or the New 
 Te tament, but the circumstance of the author's 
 personating the celelirated scr be of that name 
 has been siipjiosed to ha\e led to its obtaining 
 a ])lace in tiie lormer. It consists of a num- 
 ber of similitudes or visions, resembling in 
 some ])assages the Apocalypse. The descriptiunt 
 are acknowledged to be sometimes most spiiited 
 and sli iking, occasionally rising to great sublimity 
 of thought, energy of conception, and elegance of 
 exjiression (Lee's Kpist.larij l)iscourse ; Lau- 
 rences ^li.tld<>pic Version uf Ezray This would 
 probably be still nuire ajiparent liad we the book 
 in the original, for it seems highly ])robal»le that 
 this, as well as the former book, is a translation 
 from tlie Hebrew or Chaldee (Morinl Exercit. 
 Bibl. lib. ii. p. 225; Fabricii Cod. Pstud. 
 V. T. iii. 1S9). But neither this nor the Greek 
 Version, which was known to Clemens Alexan- 
 driiius in (he second century (^Stromata, iii.), 
 are any longer in existence, and the liook \va» 
 sup]K)sed to h-ive been ])reserved only in the old 
 Latin Ante-Hieronymian Version, until the middle 
 of the seventeenlh ccntnty, when an Aiabic \eision 
 was discovued in the Bodleian Libiary by Mr. 
 Gregory, a translation of which, by Simon Uckley, 
 the .\iabic Professor at Cambridge, was published, 
 ill 1711, by Mr. William Whiston {Primitive 
 t'liristianity, vol.iv.). Suliseq lently an Ethiopic 
 veision, which, allhough known to Ludolf, was 
 concealed from the world, was piilili.'-hed lor the 
 first time, aciom])ani<d by a Latin and English 
 traiidation, by the late Archl)i^l.op Laurence, in 
 IS2(). It had been su])p(>sed indeed by som*, 
 that the work Wiis extant in Hebrew, and Arch- 
 liisliop Laurence states, on the authority of Fatliet 
 Siinun, that Leo Judah s translation, which a]j^
 
 fi54 
 
 ESDRAS, BOOKS OF. 
 
 peared \u Rol)ert Stephen's octavo Bilile (1515 ?), 
 was from a Hebrew manuscript, wliicli, however, 
 Jie Archbishop asserts, was itself imcjTiestionalily 
 a translation info Hebrew from tlie jiriiited Vul- 
 gate. The truth of the matte-, however, we be- 
 lieve to l)e, tliat Leo Judali only translated the 
 canonical books, wiiile the apocryphal were done 
 bv Chotin, who merely put sucli Hebrew words 
 in the margin as he conjectured to have been the 
 originals; for llie translator observes in the preface 
 that he had ' never seen the book either in Greek 
 or Hebrew.' It is remarked in some of Stejihen's 
 editions, that the prophet Ezra, who wrote this 
 book, was probably a dill'erent person from the 
 scribe. But, scornfully as Jerome looked upon 
 this book, and tliat probably more on dogma- 
 tical than purely critical grounds, it was highly 
 esteemed bv others among the Fathers of the 
 Christian church. The booh is ascribed to the 
 prophet FiZra by Clemens A-lexandrinus (Strom. 
 h. iii.), who looked upon it as canorn'cal and, 
 divine, as did Irenseus, Tertullian, and Ambrose, 
 wlio has made several quotations from this 
 ' prophe",' as he also styles iiim (Sixtus Senensis, 
 Biblioth. Sanct), and among others, one which 
 no longer exists in the Latin, but is found buth in 
 the Arabic and yEthiopic (I.ainence's Ezra). 
 In the chinch of Rome the mass for Whit- 
 Tuesday commences with a sentence from 4 Ezra, 
 oil. ii. 36,37 (' Receive,' &c., to 'kingdom'), and 
 on the anniversary of the Martyi's, with another 
 from the smie chupter, ver 15, ' Now are they 
 crowned and receive ]jalms.' Jahn observes that 
 the ' cafiiolics iiave made many martyrs on its 
 authority' ( Hcb. Commoiiwealih, h. v.). Pico 
 de Mirandula considered this book as divinely in- 
 spired, and Gasjiar Zamora placed it in his Con- 
 cordance l)etween Nehemiah and Maccabees. 
 An ' anonvmous catholic," cited by .lahn, main- 
 tains that the Pseu(h)-Ezra was considereil as an 
 inspiie<l writer until the time of the Council of 
 Trent; but this is scarcely consistent with the 
 fact, that although all the printed editions of the 
 Vulgate, before the time of the council, con- 
 tain the four Ijooks of Ezra without any mark of 
 doubt, very few manuscripts are known to possess 
 the fourth. Among modern writeis, Whiston 
 (^Authentic Records), and others, both before and 
 since his time, have considered this book as an 
 ins])ired composition, and as (he genuine pro- 
 duction of Ezra (See Prophecy that hath lain 
 hid above these 20<J0 years; Middle State of the 
 SJ^c:s Departed; the Prophecies of the Second 
 Book of Esdras. by Sir Jorm Flover). 
 
 Author and Age of the Fourth Jiook of Ezra. — 
 Jahn {ut supra) supposes the author to have been 
 a Jew, educated in Chaldea, who borrowed his 
 style from Daniel, and who, having become a 
 Ch.ristian, s'ill retained his re\erence lur Cabalistic 
 traditions. He places him in the first or early 
 in the second ceiitury (see also VOgel s Com- 
 tnenfatio de quarto lib. Esdrce, Aliorf. 1795). 
 Arclpliisho]) Laurence, on the other hand («< 
 supra). concei\es that the author was a Jew 
 who nevor dianged his creed, and endeavours 
 to destrf.y the two main arguments in favour of 
 the woik having emanated from a Christian: one 
 of these is foiridwl on the remaikable fact that 
 ♦tie anllicf s'/euk.s of Jesus by name (ciiap. vii. 
 8R), tlif <t}'a» OH tiie circumstance of his being 
 (lia'idy ■X'.i'.e-sant with the Christian Scriptures. 
 
 ESDRAS, BOOKS OF. 
 
 As to the former, Dr. Laurence appeals to tfat 
 Ethiopic Version, where the text is (not my 
 Son Jesics, but)'rti?/ Messiah shall be revealed, 
 which is confirmed' by the Arabic reading, 
 my Son Messiah. The Archbislio[) considers 
 these texts both in the Latin and Aiabic to be 
 inlerjiolations or explanatory glosses. The argu- 
 ment derived from the autlior's accpiaintance 
 with the Christian Scriptures is principally 
 founded on the two first chapters, which are 
 wanting in both the Arabic and Ethiopic Ver- 
 sions, and in most manuscripts of the Latin 
 are placed at the beginning of the third book 
 of Ezra, or at the end of Nehemiah, where they 
 form a distinct book The two last chapters aiv 
 equally wanting in these versions, and in most 
 Latin manuscripts form a fifth f»ook, or are 
 otherwise clearly distinguished from the former 
 part of the book. This fifth book is in some 
 manuscrijjts divided into seven chapters, and the 
 wnole of the fourth into thi:ty-nine. The division 
 into two cliapters is erroneously ascribed by Dr. 
 Frank Lee to Robert Stejjhen, for the same di- 
 vision is found in the Editio Princeps l)y Fust 
 and Schoefl'er, printed in 1462, where also the 
 two last chajjters, as well as the two first, art 
 incorporated into the rest of the book, and liavi 
 so continued in all sulisequent editions. Dr 
 Laurence concludes from other internal grounds 
 that the book was written before the Christian 
 era, after the death of Mark Anthony, antl before 
 the accession of Augustus, or between the 28th 
 and 25th year before Christ. Upon tliis hypo- 
 thesis he conceives, that liesides that the doc- 
 trine of the immortality of the soul and a se- 
 parate slate of sf)iritual existence between death 
 and judgment are distinctly described as the 
 general and popular belief, the most im])ortant 
 use of the book consists in the testimony wliich it 
 bears to the Jewish idea of the Messiah, who is 
 herein clearly and familiarly denominated by the 
 appellation of the Son of God — as well as to the 
 belief that previou-sly to ins appearance on earth 
 he existed in iieaven. 
 
 Dr. Le« {td supra) is strongly of opinion that 
 the author of this book was contemjjorary with 
 the author of the book of Enoch, or rather that 
 both these books were written i)y one and the same 
 author. It does not appear that Josephus was 
 awaie of its existence. 
 
 Among the most remarkable passages in tjiis 
 book is that famous one (4 Ezra xiv.) wlJch 
 ascribes the recension of I lie entire Scriptures to 
 Ezra. It is well known that the Rabbins have a 
 tradition, preserved in the Talmud, that on the 
 rebidlding of the Temple, Ezra assembled a col- 
 lege of 120 literati, known by tlie name of the 
 Great Synagogue, for the purpose of collecting 
 and arranging the Scrip^nies. .Among the mem- 
 bers are enumerated Daniel, Shadracli, Meshach, 
 and Abednego, Haggai, Zechaiiah, Ezra, and 
 Nehemial), and Simon the Just. Ezr i. who, they 
 say, was the same with the propliet Malachi, they 
 represent as the first, and Simon the Just, its latent 
 s;;rviving memlier, as tiie last jiresident of the 
 college. They fnither rejiresent all tliese eniinen. 
 men as living, at the same period, under Dariuj 
 Hystaspis, whom they suppose to be the same 
 Darius wiio was subdued by Alexander, and alsc 
 as that Artaxerxes who sent Kzia and Neiieinian 
 to Jer'isalem. Darnel is thus made to hav<
 
 ESDRAS, BOOKS OF. 
 
 lived to the time of Alexander the Great, and 
 Simon tlie Jnst they liold to be tlie same with 
 Jaddiiah, the hiL,'h-piiest, who received Ah»xan<ler 
 i'.t Jerusalem. To tlii.s synajrogiie tiie Riiljbiiis 
 ascribe the formation of the canon, to wliich they 
 add ttiat its nieml)ers wrote Kzckiel, the twelve 
 minor Propliets, Daniel and Estlier, wiiile Ezra 
 wrote the book bearing his name, and the genea- 
 logies in Chronicles down to his time (Bava 
 Bathra). Jahn "" lu'iifiitiiiif/, 2S) supposes that 
 as tliere is no authority whatever for the exist- 
 ence of this synagogue, all that can lie meant 
 is, that the canon was set'led by Ezra and the 
 others named as niendjers )f the synagogue, and 
 closed by Simon, who filled the office of high- 
 priest for nine years till his death, B.C. 292 
 (Eusebius, Cfiroti.). But, in addition to this, 
 there was a cnrreti •])inioTi among the early 
 Christian writers to the elfect that the law having 
 been burned at the destruction of the Temple by 
 Nebuchadnezzar, Ezra restored the whole from 
 nieL..jry, or liy divine insj)iration. This notion 
 of a revision or restoration of ■ the Scriptures, 
 foundal on the statement of the P.<eudo-Ezra, 
 was looked ujwn as an ui. doubted fact by Irenieus 
 (Adcers. Hares, iii. 2oV, Tertullian {De Habit. 
 Mulier. caj). 1. ]). 3; 6 25); Clemens Alexandri- 
 nus (Strom, i. 329,' 330, 342); Basil ( Epist. ad 
 Chilon. Paris, IS39, ii. pt. i. p. 1 M) ; Chrysostom 
 (Horn. viii. in Heb.); Jerome (Cont. Helvid.); 
 Augustine (/>e MirabUibiis Scrip, ii. 33); the 
 author of the Synopsis {op. Athmias. ii. y. 124); 
 Theodoret {Praf. Com. in Cant.); and Leontius 
 of Byzantium ( De Sectis, p. 428). It was re- 
 vived by Spinvjza {Tract. Theol. polit. ch. 8, 
 9) and other modern sce])tics, vviio sought to 
 undermine the aiithority of the Scrijitures by 
 ascribing their composition to Ezra (in refutation 
 of wliich opinion see the Introductions of Carpzov, 
 Ei'v iiiom, Jahn, and De Wette), and who referred, 
 in prfxjf of their tlieory, to ceitain passages which 
 seem to betray a later date than that usually 
 a8cril)ed to the com[X)sition of these books. 
 
 Dean Piideaux, who observes {Connexi.on, 
 part i., b. v.) tliat ' it wotdd shock the faith of 
 tlie whole should it be held that it owed its 
 present being to such a levival, it being oinious 
 for sceptical persons to ol»ject that lie wtio should 
 be said thus to revise it, then forged the whide,' 
 has foniied out of the.se traditioirs a hyjiothesis, 
 which, although resting on no historic basis, has 
 met with a favourable recejjtion from its sup- 
 posed probability. He assumes that Ezra settled 
 the canon up tu his time, and was the jirolwble 
 author of Chronicles, Ezra, and Esther, wliioli, 
 together with the books of Nehemiah and Malachi, 
 were atlded t)y Simon tlie Just, by whom the 
 canon was cLiscd in the commencement of the 
 third century before Clirist. As, however, men- 
 tion is made in Nehemiah of Darius, who lived 
 a century later than Ezra, and of Jadduah, who 
 died two years after the death of Alexander the 
 Great; and as tlie genealogy in Chronicles is 
 brought down to aiioul tlie year B.C. 3('0, which 
 eiictimstances have ii..iuce<l some to asciile the 
 writing of these books to a period not more an- 
 cient than the eld of .-Vlexaruler. Pridcaux looks 
 upon these passages as late additions or interpo- 
 tttion?, added bv those who completed the canon ; 
 w:ich is also the oninion of Jahn (Intrud.). al- 
 tbough he conceives *]ie author not to iiave been 
 
 ESHCOL. 
 
 65ft 
 
 Ema. Dean Prideaux, in fine, sujijioses that Ezra 
 gave a new clition of the Scriptuies, corrected 
 the errors of transcribers, adiling what ap)ie.uetl 
 necessary for illustiating, correcting, or com- 
 jileting them, changing names, and supplyil.g 
 what was wanting. He fnilhrr uiainfains tiiat 
 Ezra was the author of several interpolations in 
 all the books which passed his examination, and 
 Simon tiie Just in all the rest, which were added 
 afterwards (see the authorities in Huxtorfs 7VAe- 
 rius,c. xi. p. 103). By tiiis hy])ntliesis, whicii is 
 a modification of the ancient idea, he endea- 
 vours to meet the objection raised against these 
 books, and to supjily by ingenious conjectures a 
 deticiency where Scr jjtiire and history are silent. 
 The reader will find some animadversions on 
 Prideaux's hypothesis by the author of the article 
 Dnkilogie, in the I'.ncyclopedie, who maintains 
 that the ])ve)pndeil Great Synagogue had no divine 
 and infallible authority to decide upon and close 
 the canon. Eichhorn thinks it jiossible that 
 Simon the Just has been confounded in the Tal- 
 mudical fable with Simon the Maccabee, a.s he 
 su])poses that all the luioks in the canon could not 
 have been written so early as the time of Simcn 
 the Just, but that the canon may iia\ e Ijten closed 
 imder Simon the Maccabee (u.c. 141-135;. St. 
 Jerome mistakes him for Simeon, the contemporary 
 of our S.ivioiir. [MACc.iUKiis; ^Visdom ov Si- 
 
 RACH ; SvNACiOaUE. ] 
 
 Althougii Esdras is included in the Gth article 
 among the other books read for edification, ^c. 
 (Dklteuo-Canonicai.), it will be i)bser\ed that 
 no lessons are taken from it in the offices of the 
 chuich of England. References are, however, 
 made fiom i* in the Authorized Version to jia- 
 rallel passages in the Old and New Testament. 
 Cirabe and others have conceived that this was 
 the book cited as the ' H'isdoni of God' (Luc. 
 xi. 9, comp. witii 4 Esdras i. 32). — W. VV. 
 
 ESHBAAL. [I.SII1J0SHETH.] 
 
 1. ESHCOL (^^P'N; Sept. '^ax'^K), one ol 
 the Amoritish chief's witli whom Abraham was in 
 alliance when his camp was near Hebron, and 
 who joined with him in the jiursnit of Chedor- 
 laomer and his allies, for the rescue of Lot (Gen, 
 xiv. 13, 24). 
 
 2. ESHCOL. The name of fh.- valley in 
 whicii tie HebrcM' sjiip* jntained the fine cluster 
 of grapes «hicli they took liack witli them, borne 
 'on a stall' iictween two,' as a sjecinien of the 
 fruits of the Promised Land (Num. xiii. 24). The 
 cluster was doubtless !.irge ; Imt tiie fact liiat it 
 was carried in this manner, dots not. as usiialU 
 understood, imply that the bunch was as much 
 as two men could carry, seeing that it was jiro- 
 bably .so carried to p)e\ent itsl)eing bruised in tiie 
 journey. The valley of E.shcol jin.liably took its 
 iiame from the distinguis!i»'d .^morite already 
 mentioned, and is hence to lie sought in the i>eigh- 
 bourhood of Hebron. Accordingly the valley 
 through which lies the c(/niniencenient of the road 
 fVoni Hebron to Ji-rusaleiii is indicated as that o( 
 Kshcol. This valley is now f'ull of vineyaids and 
 a'ive-yards ; tiie foimer chitlly in the valley it.-elt", 
 the latter up the sides of the enclosing hillt. 
 'Tliese vineyards are still very tine, and produce 
 the finest and hui.;e«t grapes iu al'J «lie coimtr-.' 
 (Robinson, i. 317).
 
 856 ESHEL. 
 
 ESIIEL v'w'^)! iilso EsciiKi, and Aishbi., 
 occurs in three iilaces of Scripture, in one of 
 which, in our Authorized Version, it is ren- 
 dered grove, and in the other two tree. Celsius 
 ''Hierobot. i. 535) 'mainf^'ns that TK'X has 
 always a general, and not a specific si^'nili- 
 catiori, and that it is properly translated tree. 
 This, as stated hy Roseuiniiller, has i)een satis- 
 factorily refuted l)y Michaelis in his Siipple>n. 
 p. 134. If we compare the passages in which 
 the word es/<eZ occurs, we shall see that there is 
 no necessity for considering it a generic term : 
 tlie more so, as we find in the Arabic a name 
 very similar to it, and ajjplied to a tree of 
 which the character and properties would point 
 it out as likely to attract notice in tlie situa- 
 tions where cshel'ls mentioned. The first notice 
 of this tree is in Gen. xxi. 33, ' And Abraham 
 planted a f/rove (eshel) in Beersheba, and called 
 there on the name of the Lord.' The second 
 notice is in 1 Sam. xxii. 6 : ' Now Saul abode in 
 (•jibeah under a tree (^eshel) in Raraah, liaving 
 his sjiear iu his hand, and all his servants were 
 standing about him.' Under such a tree also lie 
 and his sons were buried, for it is said (1 Sam. 
 xxsi. 13), ' And they took their bones, and 
 buried them under a tree (eshel) at Jabesh, and 
 fasted seven days.' In the parallel passage of 
 i Cliron. X. 12, tlie word alali is employed. Tliis 
 sigiifies a 'terebinth tree,' but is translated ' oak' 
 in tlie AutiioHzed Version : ' They arose, all the 
 valiant men, and took away the body of Saul, 
 and tlie bodies of his sons, and brought tliem to 
 Jabesh, and burned their bones under the oak in 
 Jabesh, and fasted seven days.' 
 
 »84. [Tamarisk. Tamarix orientalis.] 
 
 (.Celsius has quoted .several authorities in sup- 
 port of his n],inioii that csficl is used in a generic 
 sense, as R. David Kiniclii, who remarks, '■ Eschel 
 est nomen generale omni ariwri :' and witii re- 
 ference to the passage in Genesis, ' Et plantavit 
 Esfhel, h. m. interpretatur : et jdantavit plan- 
 tationeni.' So Ro.senmiiller, though considering 
 the term to Oe specific, says, ' We haye the testi- 
 mony of Rabl)i Jonah or Abulwalid, in his He- 
 brew-Arabic Lexicon, tiiat fiie .-Vrabic term athle 
 
 ESHEL. 
 
 is not. unfrequently used for any large tree, a. 
 was the word cshcl by the later Hebrews.' Tlie 
 word atlile which is cited, is no doubt the Arabic 
 
 jjjl asul or afhxil. The letter t * » is the fourth 
 
 letter of the Arabic alphabet : it.s legitimate jiower 
 appears to be that of th in the Englisli woni thing ; 
 liut in tlie mouth of a Turk, Syrian, Egyj)tian, 
 Persian, and a native of Ilindoostan, it is either 
 pronounced like an s lisped, or not to lie distin- 
 guislit'tl fiom liiat character. In a few In-itancss 
 it is pronounced like t (ItichardsoJi, Persian and 
 
 Arabic Dictioiiary). In that work jjji ail ia 
 
 translated ' a tamarisk shnib ;' tiJwJi asalat, 
 
 * large prickly tamarisks.' In Tllnstr. Iliiial. Bof. 
 p. 211, we have saiii 'Tlie Araliic name asul 
 ox atul is applied to yioas (an ai boreous s])ecies 
 of tamarisk) in India, as to T. orientaliis in 
 Arabia and Egypt." So in the Ulfaz Udicieh, 
 translated by Mr. Gladwin, we have at No. 36, 
 
 /JJl usscl, tlie tamarisk bush, with j'haotc as the 
 Hindee; and 5 guz as the Persian synonyme. 
 
 Tlie tamarisk and its products were highly valued, 
 by the Arabs for their medicinal properties, and 
 are described in several places under diH'erent 
 names in Avicenna ; the ]dant being noticed 
 under toorfa, and the galls, which are often 
 found on it, under jouz-al-toorfa, but which are 
 also called chezmezech or kuzmezech. They 
 adopt much of the description of Dioscorides, 
 though the translation of Serapion no <loubt errs 
 in making atkel the aKaKa\ls of the Greeks. But 
 Serajiion himself, fnim Isaac eben Amram, says, 
 ' Athel est species tamarisci.' 
 
 If we refer to travellers in eastern countries 
 we shall find that most of them mention the athul. 
 Thus Prosper Alpinus (De Plantis yEgypti, c. 
 ix. De Tamarisco atle vocata) gives a figme 
 which sufficiently shows that it must grow to the 
 size of a large tree ; ' Altei-um vero tamarisci do- 
 mesticum genus in yEgypto specfafur — quod ad 
 magna; olivae magnituUinem crescit;' and says 
 tliat he liad heard of its attaining, in anotlter 
 place, to the size of a large oak ; that its wood was 
 employed for making a variety of ve.ssels, and its 
 charcoal used throughout Egypt and Araliia ; 
 and that difierent parts of it were employed in 
 medicines. So Foiskal, who calls the species 
 2\imartscus orientalis, gives, atl as its Aral)ic 
 name, and identifies it with ?EJ'N, says, ' Gallae 
 Tamaricis in ojiticinig usurpantur loco fnictus.' 
 Belon (in his Observ. ii. 2'^), says, 'Tamarices in 
 ^vgypto humidis et siccioribus locis indifi'erenfer 
 nascuntur ; illarum enim silvula^ perinile in 
 aridioribus locis re[)eriuntiir atque in humidis 
 littoribus. Ese autem excrescenlia quaniGallam 
 nominavimus adeo onustse sunt, ut parum absit 
 quin rami prae jwndere rumpantur.' In Arabia 
 Burckhardt found the trie called asul in the 
 neighbourhood of Medina, and observes that the 
 Aralis cultivated if on account of the hardness of 
 its wood. If we endeavour to trace a S[)ecie3 oi 
 tamarisk in Syria, we shall find some didicult'- 
 from the want of precision in the information 
 supplied by travellers on suiijects of Natural 
 History. But a French naturalist, M Bove, wli(> 
 tra\ elled from Cairo to Mount Sin«i, vuJ from
 
 ESHEL. 
 
 thtmce info Syria, las pivcn ample proofs of the 
 existcnco of species of tamarisk in tlics*: rc^ior.a. 
 Thus rn;ar Siiiai, he says, ' Le iMulemaiii, je in'a- 
 vaii^ai dans la vallue el Clieick, in-esqiie oiifii'ie- 
 ineiit coiivfitf lie ta/narix maiimfera.' In pio- 
 ceeilinsj I'roin Suez to Gaza, in an exlefisive ))lain 
 of liaircii sauil, he again finds a tamarisk ; and 
 fortiier on, ' l)e la nous anivaiiies a (piehpies 
 dunes de sjlile, on je remarquai di- tii's gios 
 Tamarix.' Un tlie hinders of Palestine, and the 
 day liefure reaching' Gaza, he says, ' Vers niidi, 
 nous nous arietilmes dans la vallee Lusarc, hordije 
 de dunes de sahle mouvant, et reniplie de Ta- 
 marisc qui ont frois a quatre nu'lres de circon- 
 fil'ience, et de douze ii quinze mities de hauteur :' 
 tliat is, in tiie very country in whicli lieersiielia is 
 supposed to have heeu situated, we have taiiiaiisk 
 trees, now calleil asul, wiiere the eshel is desciiheil 
 as iiaviii^ heen jjlanted. 
 
 It is very remarkable tliat the only tree which 
 is found growinjj; amon^ the ruins of Bahylun 
 is a tamarisk. Thus, tm tiie north side of llie 
 Kasf, wliere Ker Porter thoui^dt he saw traces 
 of the hanging gardens, there stands upon an 
 artificial emiiK'nce a tree to which tlie Arabs give 
 the name of atltela. It is a species of tree alto- 
 gether foreign to the country. Tivo of the attend- 
 ants of Ker Porter, wiio were natives of IJender 
 Biishire, assured him that there are trees of that 
 kind in tlieir country, which attain a very great 
 age, and are called gaz. ' The one in question is 
 in apjjearance like the weeping-willow, but the 
 trunk is iiollow through age, and paifly shattered. 
 The Aialjs venerate it as sacred, in consequence 
 of the Calif Ali having reposed under its shade 
 after the battle of Hillah" (Ilosenmuller, Bibl. 
 iieog. ii. p. 20, from Ker Porter; coinp. Aiiis- 
 wortlfs Researclies, p. 126). If may be nbserved 
 that the preaent writer has already quoted the two 
 names here given as applied to the tamarisk, in a 
 Persian work on Materia Medica, published in 
 India. 
 
 From the characteristics of the tamarisk-free 
 of the East, it certainly ajipears as likely ».s any to 
 have been planted in Beershel)a by Aliraiiam, 
 liecause it is one of the few trees which will 
 llourish and grow to a great size even in the 
 4rid desert. If has also a name in Arabic, astd, 
 very similar to the Hebrew eshel. Besides the 
 advantage of allbrding shade in a hot country, 
 it is also esteemed on account of the excellence 
 of its wood, wiiich is converted into charcoal. 
 It is no less valuable on account of the galls 
 with wiiicii its brandies are often loaded, and 
 which are nearly as astringent as oak-galls. It 
 is also one of those frees which weie esteemed by 
 the ancients, being 'he fj^vp'iKij of Theophrasfus, 
 Dioscorides, &c. ' Haiic enim vaticinaturi manu 
 gestabani, ut Apollo m Lcsho, inde Mi/iicei<s 
 tlictui, *c." To lliis they were probably led, as 
 in some other instances, by Sliding that it was 
 es'ecmed in thos" eastern counti ies, from wliich 
 much of their information and opinions weie, in 
 the (irst instance, derived. The unly d'fhculty 
 is to iisceitain tlie exact s))ecies found in the 
 several situations we have indicated — a dilliculty 
 wliicli arises from their similarity to one ano.hcr, 
 rendering it almost imiKtssible to distinguisii 
 them in the state of dried specimens. Ehrehlierg, 
 who has most recently investigated the sj^ecies, 
 gives a ia»uirLc teiruyijna as a s()ecies oi Syria, 
 
 ESSEN KS. 
 
 661 
 
 and T. on'etitalis of Porskal as the species found 
 in Arabia, Persia, and India, and 7'. aiborca %■ 
 a variety of T. galtia foiwid near Cairo. But 
 as they are all so similar, any of I lie arf'oreoiii 
 species or varieties which lloiin.sh in the most 
 barren situations, would have the name «««/ ajr- 
 )>lied to it, ami this name would appear to an 
 .•Vrab of fhiise regions the most a|)priipr'ate trans- 
 lation for vslicl, in the passage where .-Vbraham is 
 desciilied as planting a tree, and calling on the 
 name of the Lord, the everlasting (Jod. — J. K. R. 
 ESSEN ES ('E(T(r7)i/o<), one of the lliiee i:re£il 
 Jewish sects, of which the other two were thePiiaii- 
 sees and the Sadilucees. The derivation of the 
 name Essenes is i)y no means certain. I'hilo {Quod 
 omiiis probiis liber. ^ \'1\ deduces it fioiii offioj, 
 'holy.' Some have found its origin in tln'Chaldee 
 word NDX, ' to heal ;' supporting their opinion by 
 reference to the fact that the Essenes weve a class 
 of men who ]irofessed to heal luith mind ii.id liodv. 
 De Wette gives tiie preference to the Syriac 
 < A m^ , signifying ' pious ' 
 
 These sects sprung, up in the decline of the 
 Jewish state, after the Baiiylonish captivity, 
 iiiduenced in their rise and spread not less bv as- 
 cetic ])liilosopliy than liy the national degradation 
 and the decay of molality. In all states religion 
 comes first, for it is S|)onfaneous, the natural 
 answer of the heart to God. Pliiloso[)hy is an 
 arter-flioiight, an act and an achievement of the 
 reiisoning faculty, which, if it has sometimes 
 puiilieil, has also sojihisticafed religion. 
 
 While the Pharisees gave their ci.untonance to 
 sustain the Jiast, with all its transmitted inlliiences, 
 indiscriminately, and the Sadducees adheieil 
 rigidly to the ancient Mosaic institutions, to the 
 rejection of what was traditionary and adven- 
 titious, the Essenes atteninteil to form a thirl 
 way, wiiich, without neglecting the past, should 
 bring new and powerful appliances to bear on 
 tiie actual ills of society; seeking not merely t,i 
 relorm and repair, but rather to heal and revivi'. 
 For this ]iurpose they gave themselves up to a 
 contenijilative mode of life, as well as to thosf 
 labours by which only thought and jiiiictice can 
 be uniled in harmony, and the gooii which (lod 
 designed be wrought out for man. Blaking small 
 account of the outward observances of the Pha- 
 risee, and standing religiously aloof from the 
 scepticism and narrow worldly spirit of his oppo- 
 nent the Saihiucee, the Essenes aimed at some- 
 thing jiractical — sought to originate .in influence 
 wiiich should stem tlie advance of corruption, and 
 jiour a sanatory and life-giving power into th.-^ 
 veins of society. For lliis ])ur|iose they foimdei.' 
 a brotherhood, devised institutions, and becamtf 
 the earliest example, if not the actual jiarent, (if 
 all the teeming lirood of hermits, monks, fiiars. 
 and nuns, which have since lieeii seen. They 
 were a moral and religious order, wiiile the Pln.- 
 risecs paitiMik more ofthe character of a paily (in 
 the modern and political sense of the word), and 
 the Sadducees exhibited not a few of he fealuies 
 of a se(;t 
 
 The Esicni^s were asretics. The ordinary plea- 
 sures of life they a\(iiilcd as soniitliing morallv 
 bad, and lii'ld self-control and freedom from lb"* 
 slaveiy ii( the passions to be viitiie. Marriace 
 tliey despised. Selecting among (he children .»/ 
 others those wiioni ^ jy c.onsidereil llie must jirw- 
 
 2 V
 
 658 
 
 ESSEN ES. 
 
 misiiig, Hi<!y eii'leax oured to form them arconlin^ 
 to their own model. In this coiTdiict flif»y ajipear 
 to liave lecn infliienred not so rniicli by any ;ili- 
 Bolnte disapproval of wedded life and its iiafiiral 
 fruits, as l)y fears«iiid cautions, wliicli tiie tminoial 
 cliaracter of their a^e may in some degree liave 
 justified. Ridies, too, they lield in coiifempt. 
 Whatever they had they were reatly to share with 
 others. Superlluily was unknown in a coniniunity 
 where all things were held in common. As soon 
 as a new-comer was received among them, he ])ut 
 his nroperty, whatever it was, into the common 
 stock ; or, if he had little or nothing', iiis wants 
 were tlience gratuitously sup])lied. Neiflier riciies 
 nor poverty, therefore, were known in tiieir body. 
 None had less, none more than enougli. 
 
 Stewards were appointed by them, whose busi- 
 ness \' was to take due care of wliat in each case 
 was enirusted to them, not for their own indi- 
 vidual advantage, but for the common good. 
 
 Dwelling as tliey .iid in various cities, tliey 
 would from time to tiine have to enter ])laces 
 where, as ind .vidu.its, tliey were nnl<nown ; but, 
 true to their principle cf a community of goods, 
 the brethren in any strange city received and 
 entertained tliem tiie same as if tliey liad come»to 
 tlieh- own ]iro])erly. Scarcely any occasion was 
 there, in consequence, for making provision when 
 thev travelled ; and they appear to have taken 
 nothing with them except weapons of defence, 
 which they judged the insecurity of the country 
 rendered necessary. In order that travellers 
 might by no possibility suller want or exjierietice 
 disappointment, there was in every city one of the 
 brethren, who was specially charged to provide 
 them with food, clothing, and other necessaries. 
 Tliese duties of hospitality, however, could not 
 have been so onerous then as they would under 
 similar circumstances be now, if what Joseplnis 
 states is to be taken literally, that theEssenes did 
 not change tlieir shoes or garments till they were 
 worn out and fattereil. Buying and selling, as 
 might be expected, were unknown amcmg them : 
 give and take was their simple jjlan, which ap- 
 jiears to lia\e been oltserved no less betvveen the 
 memiiers of diflerent communities than between 
 those of the same. 
 
 The account which Josephus has given of their 
 jjions exercises, and of their daily engagements, is 
 no less striking than it is in strict agreement with 
 their ascetic character in general. Rising bef ire 
 the sun, they abstained from all ordinary conver- 
 »atiiin, and put up their ancestral jirayeri, not 
 torgetting to beg for a renewal of the light of day. 
 Then, under the supervision of curators or fore- 
 men, they proceeded to exercise each one tlie art 
 in which he was skilled, labouring diligently fill 
 eleven o'clock in the forenoon. Then assembling 
 together, and being covered with white veils, they 
 bathed i» cold water ; alter which, entering their 
 refectory with certain religious solemnities, they 
 quietly seated themselves, when there being set 
 before eiich of them a loaf of l)read and a single 
 pl.ite of one sort of food, and a priest having in- 
 voked the divine l)lessing, they proceeded to take 
 refreshment. When tiie repast was over the same 
 priest made .an jfl'ering of thanks to the Great 
 Benefactor of the world, and the brethren all re- 
 turned to tlieir several employmejits. These being 
 terminated in the e\ ening, another meal with simi 
 lar ob*ervaaces was partaken by all it ommon. 
 
 ESSENES. 
 
 These set regtilations, and their TcoderatioQ U! 
 eating, jnoduced a regularity and order whica 
 appeareil something mysterious to tiie unifiitiateti ; 
 a feeling which was enhanced by the law v/hich, 
 forbidding any one to speak unh>ss in his turn, 
 keyyt tl»eir abodes free frum conlusion, and sus- 
 tained a tranquillity which was eminently con- 
 ducive to the exercise of the head and the 
 heart. 
 
 Their entire manner of life, indeed, w:i3 subjecl 
 to the strictest ride. Only in their ministrations 
 of charity were they left free to the spontaneous 
 movements ami imjitiTses of their breasts. Lest, 
 however, a sjjecies of nepotism s!-iouhl misguide 
 their hand in disjiensing mercy, ar»d thus mis- 
 apply and waste the cominnn resoincci, they were 
 ]Ti-ohil)ife<i from giving succour to any of their 
 Kindred who might be in need, unless under the 
 su[)ervislon of their overseers. 
 
 Next to God, Mosri was the oliject of their 
 reverent homage. To blas])lieme the name of 
 Mo'ses was a cajiital oll'ence. As might be ex- 
 pected, their observance of the Sabbath was more 
 strict than ordinaiT. Their food they cooked the 
 day beloie. On the S^blialh they would not re- 
 move a vessel from its place, even for tl>e most 
 pressing wants of nature. 
 
 If, indeed, all may be bpliere^l which Jose jih us 
 relates touching their opinions, a pious and self- 
 denying life (m their ]?art was ajiy thing but 
 unnatural. According to him, they regarded the 
 hotly as frail and corruptible, but the soul as 
 living for e\er. Ascetism was the necessary re- 
 sult of their conviction that souls came oi^rt o^ 
 the most subtle air, from the loftiest emjjyrseum, 
 and are lodged in bodies as in piisons, from which 
 when once set free, they rejoice and soar away tj 
 their native regions. After death jjuiiishment 
 awaits the liad. blessedness the irootl ; each ii 
 their own jilace. The fr'ar of the one and th« 
 hope of the other exerted, they believed,' a most 
 s.ilutary influence on t'.ie actions of men while 
 yet in this state of lieing. 'Th^■se,' adds Josephus, 
 ' are the divine doctrines of the E^-;enes aVx)ut th« 
 soul, which lay an unavoidable bait for such as 
 have once had a taste of their philosophy.' 
 
 Tliey even made pretens'ons to the gift of pro- 
 ]ihecy, drawinir their light from reading thesacreu 
 liooks, especially from the study of the prophetic 
 writings, and from the careful and diligent us*i 
 of puriKcations. Dean Aldri'h enumerates threo 
 successful efforts of this kind, as narrated by 
 Josephus (note to Winston's Trnnsl. Jeie. War, ii. 
 12), who himself asserts 'it is but seldom thai 
 they miss in their predictions.' It would have 
 heen surprising if, aided by tlieir scholars, no less 
 than by ' the chapter of accidents, they had not 
 sometimes ])roved true jirophets. esjjecially if they 
 were accustomed to do as dui one of them, who, 
 thinking ne had l<.i!ed in prophesy iiig the deatn 
 of one .'Vntigonus, thus complained to a numerous 
 band of pupils, who were not likely lo he deaf to 
 their teacher's wishes : — ' O strange ! it is good 
 for me to die now. since truth is dead before me, 
 and somewhat that I have foretcjM hath proved 
 false; for this Antigonus is this day alive, wlw 
 ought to have died tnis day ; and the jjace where 
 he ought to be slain was Stiatos tower, which ii 
 at the distance of si.K n mdieil fnrhmgs from 
 where we are.' News, how e\er, in *ime arrived, 
 which relieved the master's dejection, and esta*
 
 ESSEN KS. 
 
 KSSEN ES. 
 
 660 
 
 (tlislied tiie proijliet's'^shall we sty veracity, or 
 iiifliionce ? Aiitijjoniis was »l«"ail (Joseph. De Bell. 
 Jud. i. 3. ti\ 
 
 Tlu'ir pursuits, trade?, and professions were 
 sncli as conduce to iuinian good. They tilleil 
 tlie ground 5 tliey ma>le useful article^; tliey bred 
 and pastured cuttle : l/ut in the I'ahricatiou of 
 arms they liK)k no part. Even pcaetful pursuits 
 wliich nunistered to vice they carefully avoided. 
 It must not be concealed, however, that some of 
 their notions Iwrdeied on extravagance, and that 
 some of their practices betiayeil a fastidiousness 
 which amounts to the ridiculous. 
 
 In morals they seem to I'.ave attained no ordi- 
 nary excelletice. Over anger they kej.t a guaid 
 like just stewards. .\11 the passions \iiey knew 
 how to restrain. They were eminent for (ideiity, 
 md ministers of [x^ace. Their word was more to 
 lie trusted than some men"s oiUhs. Sweaiing in- 
 deed tliey studiously avoided, alleging, with no 
 small reiuson, that the man is already condtmned 
 who cannot he believed without an oath. 
 
 Tlie great aim of their inquiries, whether they 
 searched the books of the ancients or studied the 
 virtues of plants, was to gather such lessons of 
 wisilom as might rentier them able to administer, 
 like skilful physicians, to the maladies both of 
 the minii and the body. 
 
 Persons who are convicted of heinous crimes 
 are ex])elled from their society. Of those thus 
 excommunicated, some perisli miserably ; others 
 are leceived back oidv when they have undergone 
 the severest punishment which want and wretch- 
 edness can indict ; fur, being still -ander the vows 
 and legulations of their order, Ihey are jirohibited 
 from all food but such as tlie niggard products of 
 spontaneous vegetation may supply. 
 
 Admission into their communities was not easy. 
 A noviciate of twelve months was imposed, in 
 order that it might be ascertained how far the 
 candidate was able to endure t!ie rigours of the 
 svbtem. At tlie expi ration of the year those who 
 are approved are haliited in white, and receive a 
 giidle and a sort of small hatchet, being made 
 'partakers of the waters of iiurilica^ion,' that is, 
 probably, baptised. A fui flier probation of two 
 years must be undergone. If the novice is then 
 fouii'l worthy he is admitted into the society. 
 Ceitain vows,* however, are lirst to be taken — a 
 
 * If the long passage in Josephus respecting 
 the Essenes is now as it was when it left the liis- 
 toriaiTs hand, there seems on the face of it a 
 marked contradiction in what he says about oath- 
 taking — making them in one instance eschew 
 oaths altogether, and in another take oaths of (he 
 most solemn nature and widest application. The 
 rendering which we have given in the text, ' vow,' 
 seemo jusiilied by the nature of the communities 
 which they formed — a sort of monastic life; and 
 by usages which, at le;ist at a latrr date, we know 
 tx) have been connected with such institutions. 
 The rendering, however, is not unaccompanied 
 with ditKcullies. 
 
 Stiiudlm {Sittciilehre Jesit, i. 461)), referring to 
 the fact that it was only the novices from «hom 
 this vow or oath was exacted, sup|;oses that it 
 was truly an oath which they took (Josephus 
 terms it 'fearful oaths, opKovs Cixuvfft (pptKuSets) ; 
 and that this was the last oath they swoie — sworn 
 U candidates, nut a^ Essenes, for that *hose who 
 
 proceeding which seems scarcely compafib.e with 
 wiiat the same authority tells us legaiding the 
 aversion of the Essenes to oaths. Tiiese vows or 
 o.iths liind the neophyte to exercise jiiefy towards 
 God and justice towards m-^'n ; to hate the bail 
 and assi>t the good ; to harm no oi.e, eitlier of his 
 own a<-cord or liy the roniiuand of olhirs ; to lie 
 faithful to all men, es|Hcially to such as are in 
 authority; to love truth and reprove the liar; to 
 keep his hands clean from theft, and his soul 
 jiure from unlawful gain; to con;-eal nothing 
 from the brotherliood, and leval to others none of 
 their secrets, not even should life iheieby be put 
 in ]ieril ; to transmit the Esseiie <loctrinfs un- 
 changed (o others ; to preserve their liiKiks and 
 the names of their ollicers (iiyyfXoi, angels) in 
 strict secrecy. 
 
 When the time of tlicir preparatory trial is 
 come to an end, the newly-admitted biethren are 
 distiiliuted among four classes. Still a distinc- 
 tion is oliserved. If all are now Essenes, some 
 are younger tlian oiliers ; and the distinction ot 
 age is so rigidly observed that, if a senior do but 
 tou-h a junior brother, the first must undergo a 
 puii'.fication by water, as much as if he had been 
 in contact with a foreigner. 
 
 All events, the destiny of man not less than 
 other things, tlie Essenes referred to the ordinations 
 of the Divine will, without, nevertheless, attempt 
 ing to deny human freedom. It is not witii pUL- 
 losopliical jirecision that they spoKe on the sub- 
 ject, but with a view to pious edification they 
 taught that everything depended on a certain 
 Fate, which was lord of all, without which nothing 
 ha))pens to nian. 
 
 They olid not offer oblations in the Tenqile at 
 Jerusalem, though they sometimes sent presents 
 thither. A pure heart they held to be ttie best 
 ofVerinj^. Religious ablutions they considered 
 acts of holiness. 
 
 They had no slaves ; all were free, serving one 
 another. They repudiated loiiiship as unjust, as 
 destructive of natural equality, as iireligious, as 
 opposed to the laws of nature. Nature they held 
 to be the common mother and instructress of all : 
 and with them all men were brethren, not in 
 name, but in reality. 
 
 Thus, while they were careful to preserve a 
 practical subordination in their cimmiunities, 
 without which social existence is an impussibility, 
 those who weie highest among.st them held wflice 
 merely for the common good, and in themselves 
 were neither richer nor belter clad than others, 
 nor had they any [lolitical ]'ower. 
 
 They did not admit logic among their studies, 
 since, in their ojiinion, it dues iiotiiing fo.' the fur- 
 therance of virtue. Metaphysics they avoided, 
 as relating to sulijects which are too higii for 
 man ; yet they made an excejition in favour of 
 those blanches which refer to the existence of God 
 and the creation of the world. Molality — the 
 morality which they by their own jirocess leauil 
 from Moses — was the chief object of tiieir Ettidious 
 care. 
 
 Pliny (Hist. Nat. v. 17) seeina 1o have been 
 much struck with the Essenes 'They dwell,' he 
 
 were really Essenes swore not at all. There 
 seems, however, no little iiiconsi-tenvy in re- 
 quiring of the scholar that wiiicb the miuter can- 
 demned and shuiine<l.
 
 •60 
 
 ESSliLNES. 
 
 •ij's, ' along the Dead Sea, avoiding such proxi- 
 mity to its waters as wouhl ije Imrtfiil. They 
 are a solitnry people, ami more wonderful than 
 any oHier, as tliey are witlioiit fenriiiles, emaiici- 
 nated IVom sexual intercouise, having no money, 
 dwellers amiil jiaiiii-groves. Tiieir community 
 ■.s (iaily renewed l)y new conwrs — ])ersoMS whoaie 
 weary of lil'e, and wlio flee to their retreats from 
 its stormy waves. Thus a iieojyle amont^ whom 
 a birtli is never known remains (incrcdd)le as it 
 may ap]>ear) v.nimpaired throu^di successive ages : 
 80 prolilic to them '.s the vveaiiness of life wiiich 
 is felt by others." 
 
 Piiilo {Quod omnia probus liber, ^12) agrees 
 with Pliny in representing them as lleeing Irom 
 the ordinary dwellings of men, and living to- 
 ijether in villages or establishments s))ecially erected 
 by and for themselves. 
 
 T!'e same writer s|)eaks, in terms similar to 
 those employed by Josejihus, of their religions 
 views and spirit. They did not sacrilice animals. 
 They were very observant of institutions and i)rae- 
 tices received from tiieir fathers, which, especially 
 on the seventh day, they taught to their discijiles, 
 who a])pear to liave been very numerous (Joseph. 
 ne Dell. .hid. i. 3. 5). The seventh was with 
 lliem a sacred day, on which they al)^taineil from 
 all kind of labour, frequented th« sacred places, 
 called synagogues, where the young sat arranged 
 in classes according to age under the eye of their 
 elders. Here one took and read, and another 
 expounded, the sacred books. A system of allego- 
 rical interpretation prevailed. Among their in- 
 structions the virtue.s of holiness, justice, and 
 economy held a prominent place; nor did tliey 
 omit the duties which men owe to the state. 
 Tiieir teachings were accompanied by definitions 
 and rules, and were enforced by a regard to the 
 love of virtue, the love of man, and the love of 
 God. Of their love of (iod they gave very many 
 proofs; among wliicli Pliilo reckons their lile- 
 long chastity, tiieir abstaining IVom oaUis, their 
 abhorrence of lyhig, their referring to God all the 
 good and none of the evil (ound in tlie world. 
 Tiieir love of virtue they jiroved by their con- 
 temjit of wealth, honour, and ple.isuie, their self- 
 government, their jjatience, fortitude, the fewness 
 of their wants, their simple manner of life, their 
 mwlesty, their respect l()r the law ; while in iheir 
 benevolence, their practical equality, their doing 
 good to all irrespectively, and their community 
 of gootls, they gave distinguished exemplitications 
 of their love of man. Every Essene was for every 
 other a brother, and nothing more. Their hu- 
 manity was specially manifested towards the sick 
 and tiie aijed. The first were altentied in the 
 most careful ami loving manner. Never was old 
 age more honoured, or in a more felicitous con- 
 dition, than among the Essenes. Every one strove 
 to render to tlie old services of all kinds, and 
 they found themselves as if in the midst of im- 
 merous tender-hearted children. Among all the 
 Ititter, open and sccjet peisecutors and foes of tlie 
 Jewish people, no one (so says Philo > had con- 
 victed, or even imiieached, an Essene of any 
 crime. The virtue of these men cannot be de- 
 nied; all writers show tiiem respect as free-born 
 men, who were a law to tliemselves, distinguish- 
 ing With special praise their brotherhood and 
 tiieir community of goods. Even royalty ha? 
 expressed its a Imiration of their institutions, and 
 
 ESSENES. 
 
 held it an honour to «iiow lOwaMh them marks ot 
 its high esteejn. 
 
 Some minor ob^iervances and regulations may 
 be mentioned. The Essenes had a jteculiar liking 
 for white garments, not improbably because an 
 emblom of that purity of life to die practice o' 
 which they were nevo'ed. 
 
 The will of the niajoiity was law. 'Accord- 
 ingly," says Josephuo, 'if ten of them he sitting 
 together, no one of them will sj)eak while the 
 otiier nine are against it. They also avoid- spit- 
 ting in the midst of them, or on the right side." 
 
 in th"ir criminal pmcedures they were no less 
 just tlian accurate. No sentence could be iiassed 
 unless at least a hundred voices concurred: but 
 the resolves of that number were unalterable. 
 
 Their manner of lil'e was eminently conducive 
 to health and longevity. Many of them lived 
 above a Inuidred years. 
 
 Pain they disregarded ; the miseries of life they 
 iield of small account; and they even preferred 
 death to living always. 
 
 The calm and unmoved firmness with which 
 they endmed at the hands of the Romans, during 
 ' the Jewish war," the cruellest tortures, and death 
 itself, rather than be faiddess to their convictions 
 or forswear their order, serves to show that the 
 ascetic spirit and the martyr-spirit have no little 
 in common, and exhibits within the limits of 
 Palestine the very same results, from the very 
 same tiiscipline, as Spaita was proud to call her 
 own. 
 
 With their ascetic notions it was natural they 
 should disregard the body, and the usual caie 
 which, especially among the ancients, was taken 
 of it. Accordingly they considered oil a defile- 
 ment, and if any one was anointed contrary to 
 his will the body was carefully cleansed. 
 
 Josephus, in continuation of his account, makes 
 repoit of another kind of Essenes, vviio do not 
 a])|jear to have essentially difiwed from those 
 whom we have alieady described. The chief 
 point of diveislty was in regard to marriage. 
 This second kind entertained less unfavourable 
 opinions of female virtue and honour than did the 
 first, and, holding that marriage was a di\iiie 
 ordinance for the jjropagation of the human s] e- 
 cies, they did not think themselves justified in 
 condemning or avoiding it. At the same tune, 
 •with a sus])icion which was akin to the avoid- 
 ance of their brother Essenes, they used the best 
 jirecautions in their power, and specially gave 
 those females whom they thought of marrying a 
 trial for three years, at the expiration of which 
 they actually married them, provided they were 
 satisfied. Marriage, however, they consideied 
 merely as a duty, and accordingly did not neg- 
 lect the same ascetic principles which charac- 
 teiize the whole of the Essene life. 
 
 In tlie account which has now been given w€ 
 have followed in the main the authority of Jo- 
 sephus and Phllo. The latter s]ieaks of a sj.eciei 
 of Essenes under the name of Theraiieutae, wliom 
 we shall drscrilje when we come to that word, 
 when we shall subjoin son^e genera! refieclions on 
 ' the sul)ject, eonteuting ourselves at ))iesent witli 
 remaiking that, generally excellent as were the 
 institutions and jjractlces of the Essenes in their 
 peculiar circumstances, yet a good deal ot the 
 warm colouring of the jiicture, if not some of ita 
 objects, may iiuve been borrowed from 'he imii-
 
 ESTHER. 
 
 filiation of the arlists by wlioin it vas ori'|;inally 
 drawn. Besides Joseplais and Pliilo flic leader 
 may consult StUiidlin, Sittenlehre Jcsii, (Joltini;. 
 17519 ; De Wette, Sitfeiilekre, B<-iliii. l*-;},}; l)e 
 Wette, ArcJi(iolo(fie, Leipzig?, 18J0.— J. R. B. 
 
 ESTHER ("inpN ; Sept. 'Eo-flrjp), a damsel of 
 Hie tribe of Benjamin, born diniii;» tlie Exile, and 
 whose family did not avail its?!f of the permission 
 TO return to Palestine, niider the edict of Cyrus. 
 Her parents beiiiii; dead, Esther \va^ broui^ht up 
 by her uncle Mordecai. The reiLjrinj^ kinj; of 
 Persia, Ahasnerus, iiaving divorced liis queen, 
 Vashti, on account of the liecoming; spirit with 
 wliicli she refused to submit to the indignity which 
 a compliance with his ilruni-ien commands in- 
 voFved, search was made throughout the empire 
 for the most beautiful maiden to be her succeisur. 
 Those whom the otlicers of the harem ;!eemed the 
 most beautiful were removed thither, the eventual 
 choice amoni^ tiiem remainin.; with the kiii<; him- 
 self. That choice fell on Estlier, wiio found favour 
 in the eyes of Aliasnerus, and was advanced to a 
 station, enviable only l)y comparison with that of 
 the less favoured inmates of the royal harem. 
 Her Jewish origin was at tlie time unknown ; and 
 hence, when she avowed it to ihe king, she seemed 
 to be included in the doom of extirpation which 
 a royal edict had ]iroiiouiiced against all the 
 Jews ill the empire. This circumstance enabled 
 lier to turn the royal indignation upon Haman, 
 the chief minister of the king, wliose resentment 
 agaiiiit Mordecai iiad led him to obtain from the 
 king this monstrous edict. The law s of the em- 
 jiiie would not allow the king to recall a decree 
 once uttered ; but the Jews were authorized to 
 stand on their defence ; and this, with the kriowti 
 change in the intentions of the coiut, averted the 
 worst consequences of the decree. The Jews esla- 
 bliihed a yearly feast in memory of this deliver- 
 ance, whicii is ob^er' ed among ihem to this liay 
 [Pukim]. Such is the substance ol'the history of 
 Estlicr, as related in the book which bears her 
 name. The details as given in tiiat book afford a 
 most curious picture of the usages of the ancient 
 Persian court; the accuracy of which is vouclied 
 not only liy the historical authority of the S^ook 
 itself, but liy its agrtemeiit with the intimations 
 afforded by the ancient writers, as well as by the 
 fact that the san e usages are in substance pre- 
 served in the Persirtn court at the present day. 
 
 ' The objections which have (jeen advanced 
 against the book of Esther on the groiind of the 
 follies, wickedness, and citelties narrated in it, 
 have been ably refuted by Jahn and other critics, 
 who have shown that these things are not recorded 
 with approbation, but sini])ly as facts of history, 
 illustrative of the operations of the providence of 
 God, witli a view to eO'ect the deliverance of his 
 people' ('Hendersiin, Oh Inspiration, ]>. 48). VVith 
 reference to the S(;mewhat sanguinary character 
 of Es'her and Mordecai. Jahn remaiks that no 
 difficulty arises from iherue, seeing that they are 
 not represented as saints, but as ieliveiers of their 
 nation. 
 
 It should be observed that Esther is the name 
 which '.he danisid received up<in her introduction 
 into the royal harem, her Hebiew name having 
 been Haoassah (nDTH, vit/rtle, Estii. ii. 7). 
 Eitl er is most probably a Persian nord. Geseiiius 
 citet) from that diffuse Targum oa iiis book which 
 
 ESTHER, BOOK DF. 6fll 
 
 18 known as tiie second Targum on Esther, the 
 following words: -She was called Esther from 
 the name of the star Venus, which in Gi-e<k is 
 Aster.' (Jesenuis thin points to the Persian word 
 Satiira/i, star, us that of wjiich Esther is the 
 Syro-.\rabian modification ;' and l)iings it, as 
 lo signification, into connection with the planet 
 Venus, as a star of good fortune, and with tli? 
 name of the Syrian goddess Ashloreth, according 
 to the etymology of tlie word, already referred to 
 in that article. 
 
 The difTiculfies of the history of the book of 
 Esther, especially as reganis tlie identity of the 
 king, have been examined under AiiAsuBitua, 
 and arc also i.oiiced in the following article. 
 
 ESTHKH. HOOK OF. one of the eleven fwoks 
 styled h'ctiihi/n [HAGiotiitAPHA], and of the 
 five Mccjilh'h [Oantici.e.s]. It is called by the 
 Jews Mcgillah Esther, and sometimes simply 
 McgiUah, as it forms by it,self a distinct roll. In 
 the Christian Church it has been also called Aha- 
 sitrrns, mImcIi name it hears in some copies and 
 printed editions of the Vulgate. In the Hebrew- 
 it is jilaced with the other Me(/illot/i, after t!ie 
 Pentateuch, Ijetween the books of Joshua and 
 Ecclesiastes, and sometimes among the llarjio- 
 fffcip/ia, f)etween Ecclesiastes and Daniel. In 
 the Vulgate, Tobit and Judith are jdaced be- 
 tween Neheniiah and Esther. Luther placed it 
 immediately after Nehemiah, soas to make it the 
 last among the historical books, although the fiook 
 of Nehemiah was supposed to refer to a later his- 
 tory. His des'trn in this arrangement was to 
 prevent the liooks of Nehemiah and Ezra from 
 being disunited. It has continued to retain tliis 
 jjosition in the Refoimed versions. 
 
 The Jews hold this iiook in veneration next to 
 tiie boi.ks t<( Moses (see Carpzov's and Eicliliom's 
 Introductions), and tlieie ajipears to be no au- 
 tlientic foundation fir the statement of Ricliaid 
 Baxter (^Saints' Rest, part iv.), (hat the Iwok of 
 Esther was treated so ignominiously by the Je-vs 
 that they were in the h.abit of throwing it on the 
 ground before reading it. 
 
 tiiibjtct of Esther.— \i the subject of this hook 
 has been treated of under the article Ahaslekus, 
 it will lie suflicient to refer to that head ; only we 
 may l;ere observe that the book of Estlier has this 
 jieculiarity among the historical books, that al 
 though the author, a Persian Jew, records a re- 
 maikalile preseivation from destiuction of that 
 ]iortion of his countrymen which remained in 
 Persia after tlie exile, iie does not refer their deli- 
 verance to the act of God, whose name is not even 
 once nienti(jiied. This has been explained by 
 sujiposing that the author wished to avoid gi\ ing 
 oflence to the Persians, or that tlie whole was 
 taken from the Persian annals, which are ap- 
 pealed to, ch. X. 2. (See Paieau's Principles of 
 Interpretation, and Hottingcr's Thcs. I'hil. 
 p. 4R8.) 
 
 The historical and other difficulties of this 
 book have been the subject of much contioversv 
 and f mliarrassment. Not the least of these has 
 l-.e<n the solution of the question — What king of 
 Persia is meant by Ahasuerus ? For (here lias 
 been no Persian monarch from .Astyages, wIk) 
 died B.C. 603, and his son Cyaxares, to Darius 
 Ochus, who died B.C. 35^, or his son^ « ho ilied 
 twenty years later, who has not bee/i maintained 
 to be tlie husband of Estlier. Those who Lave
 
 662 
 
 ESTHER, BOOK OF 
 
 most suffrai^es are Darius Hystaspis, Xerxes, and 
 Arlaxerxes Lon^imamis ; for which iiist monarch 
 we have tlie authority of Josephiis ami of the Sep 
 tuagint Version, wherein he is called l^y tlie name 
 of Artaxerxe-i [Ahasueuus]. J:i\m (lutrocliiction) 
 falls in with the view of Scalij^er, who suj)- 
 poses that Amestris, the cruel and vindictive wife 
 of Xerxes, is no other tliaii Esther, as hoth the 
 name and the character of Amestris favour the 
 sii])]i(isition that siie is the Esther of the Bible. 
 Hut she is said by Herodotus to have been the 
 tiauijhter of Otanes, a Persia?!., and to have been 
 married to Xerxes before his Grecian expedition. 
 Bellarmine, who adoj)ts the view of Josejjhus, is 
 not allected by the circumstance that, in this 
 case, Mordecai's aiije must have exceeded 165 
 years, as he himself had known 'a hale old man 
 of 105, who was likely to live still many years.' 
 
 The ditKculties and appirent imjuobabilities in 
 the narrative have had theetVect of iuducin;^ some 
 of tlie learned to con^.Jer the boitk of Esther a 
 fiction, of w'-ich opinion is De Wette (Lehrbuch), 
 who conceives that this book betokens the utter 
 deshuction of Hebrew historical writing, and that 
 its only historical basis is the feast of Purim ; 
 which, however, he allows to have been ' occa- 
 sioned liy an e\eut similar to that related in 
 Esther." Eichhorn, who is admitted by De Wette 
 to have solved mostofth.e individual objections 
 ajjainst the credibility of the narrative, maintains 
 that the circumstance alone of a national I'estival 
 having been founded in commemoration of the 
 events described in the book of Ksther, and which 
 had been already of long standing in the time of 
 Jiiilas Maccabaeus (2 Mace. xv. 30). is a sufficient 
 vouct'.er for tiie correctness of the ])rincipal event 
 in the history, and that it would be absurd to 
 suppose that a national festival was founded 
 on a mere table. Pareau, who agrees with Eich- 
 horn in supposing Xerxes to be the husband of 
 Esther, and conceives that the principal difficul- 
 ties are removed by this su])position, describes 
 the author as accurate to minuteness, and e(iual 
 to any history, as having acquired his skill 
 among the uiore cidtivated Persians. De Wette, 
 also, whi.e he describes the l)ook as ' breathing the 
 spirit of revenge and haughtiness,' observes that it 
 is simple in its style, fiee from declamation, and 
 thusatlvanfageously distinguished from the similar 
 stories in the apocrypha {^Introduction, Parker's 
 transl.ition, Boston, lSi3). 
 
 Author and Af/e of Esther. — This is a question 
 involved in much difficulty. Of the autlinr no- 
 thing is known, nor have we any data on which 
 to form a rea-onable conjecture. Augustine (ZJe 
 Civitate Dei) ascribes the book to Ezra. Eusebius 
 (^Chronic, xlvii. d. 4), who observes tliat the 
 facts of the histoiy are posterior to the time of Ezra, 
 ascribes it to some later but unknown autlior. 
 Clemens Alexandrinus (Stromata, lii). i. ]i. 329) 
 assigns it, and the book of Maccabees, to Mor- 
 decai. The pseudo-Plulo ( 6Vi?'0/!oyr(j;^/a'a) and 
 Rabbi A/.arias maintain that it was written at 
 the desire of Mordecai by Jehoiakim, son of 
 Josluia, who was high-ijiiest in tlie 12th year 
 at' the leign of Artaxerxes. The subscrip ion to 
 the Alexandrian \ ersiou states that the epistle 
 /egarding the feast of Purim was brought by 
 Dosith«;;s info Kgvpt, under Ptolemy and Cleo- 
 patra (b.c. cir. 16i'}; but it is well known that 
 che«e SLdwcriptious are of little authority. Tiie 
 
 ESTHER, BOOK OF. 
 
 atitliors of the Talmud say that it was writter. 
 by the members of the Great Synagogue, who 
 also wrote Ezekiel and the twelve Propliets. Bui 
 the whole account of the Great Synagogue, saio 
 to have been instituted by Ezra, and concluded 
 by Simon the Just, who is said to have cy)se,d *ht; 
 canon, and wliose death took place b c. 2;>2, is 
 by most looked upon as a rabbinical romance 
 [EsDii\s]. De Wette (lor. cit.) assigns it to tiie 
 age of the Ptolemies and Seleticidae, whose era 
 commenced n. c. 312, while Jalin maintains that 
 it must have lieen written soon after the 'facts 
 which it recorils, and before the destruction of the 
 Persian monaichy (u.c. 330), to whose annals >t 
 a])i)Pals. 
 
 Canonicity of E.sther. — Some doubts have been 
 thrown on the canonical authoritj of this liook 
 from the fact tliat it is never referred to in the 
 New Testament, that it is not cited by Phiio, 
 and *hat it is omitted in several of the ancient 
 catalogues, some of which expressly exclude it 
 from tiie canon. As to tlie New Testament, 
 there are several other books whose canonicity 
 is unqucithiiied wiiich are never once referred to 
 therein, viz. the books of Ruth, Ezra, Nelieniiah, 
 Canticles, Lamentations, and Ezekiel ; and the 
 same may be said of Philo, who, allhoug!; he 
 mentions or lefers to all the other books of the 
 Jewish Canon, makes no reference to Ruth, Ciiro- 
 nicles, Nehemiaii, Esther, Lamentations, D.miel, 
 Ecclesiastes, and Canticles Car))zov (Intro- 
 duction) maintains that it is referred to in Matt. 
 i. IL Its omission by Melito (a.d. 170) [I^eu- 
 TKito-c.^NONiCAi.] has been accounted for by 
 supposing that he included it, as well as the bo.ik 
 of iSiehenriali, under tlie name of ICzra. and tliere 
 are, in fact, some manuscripts of the Vulgate 
 extant, in which Esther is called the sixth book 
 of Ezra (Whiston's Josep/nis, b. xi. ch. 6, note.) 
 The other ancient writers who are said to have 
 omitted or excluded Esther from the canon are 
 Amphilochius, Leontius, Nicejihoius, Juoilius, 
 Gregory Nazian/.en, and Athanasius. The first 
 of these (Iambics), alter giving the names of the 
 other books of the Hebrew canon, observes, * to 
 these some add Esther.'' Junilius, a.d. 500 {De 
 Partibus Div. Leg ), who divides the books of 
 Scripture into books of perfect, of middle, and 
 of no authority, omits the book of hsther from 
 those of perfect autliority ; Niceiihoius reckoni 
 among the antilegomena of the Old Testament, 
 three books of Maccaiiees, Wisdom, Jesus Sirach, 
 the Psalms, the Hymns of Solomon, J^sJiiiVy 
 Judith, Susannah, and Tobit. 
 
 Tiiere are two works attiibuted to Athanasius, 
 in bi.th of which the book of Estlur is excluded 
 from the canon, the Festal Epistle, and the Sy- 
 nopsis ScripturcB. The genuineness of the former 
 of these is generally but not univeisally acknow- 
 ledged, and as to the Syno/isis Scriptnra\ al- 
 though it has been by many, including the 
 learned Montfaucon, considered to be a genuine 
 work olSt.Athan .sius, it is now generally given up 
 as pseud-epigraphal, and is su()i)o.sed to be alumt 
 a century posterior to the time of Atliaiiiisius, 
 altliougli Whisfon conceived its author to have 
 been contem])oraiy with Origen. It is. however, 
 lield in great veneiation in the Greek Church, and 
 holds the same jiiace in the authoiized Bibles oi 
 that communion which Jerouie's prefaces do in the 
 Latin Vulgate. The canon of the Greek (^Ihurck
 
 ESTHER, BOOK OF. 
 
 leeans to lie cliit-dy founded on (lie authority of tliia 
 Sy»jo;Mii, altliougli it does not name the llirodiooks 
 of Ma.ccal)ees, tlie Psalms, nor llie twelve pioijlicts : 
 which are all nevertheless ccuitained iiitlie autho- 
 rized (Jieek Billies. Tiie canon of the (ireeks is 
 in efleet the same with »heSe{)tuai;iiil version, with 
 the addition of the fourth liook of K/.'a, uhicli they 
 have translated from the L;itin [Esdras]. There 
 L is indeed no distinction made in the modem 
 Greek Bihles l)etwoen canonical and aj)ocryitlial 
 books; liut tliat such distinction actually exists 
 amongtheiti isevidont (V(nn their authorized hooks 
 of theolos^y. Thus in the Doifinalic Tlieuloyy, 
 {lublished by atithority of ilie Theoloijical Aca- 
 demy of Moscow in ls3!t, after giving the cata- 
 logue of llie Iwoks of Holy Scripture. — thirteen 
 historical, five pmj^matical, and 15 ])ro]iiietical, — 
 if. is added, * All these hooks are called ccuioiiical, 
 from the word icavdy^ because they contain the 
 immutahle rule of faith and practice. The a^xt- 
 cryp/Hil books are so called from the word otto- 
 Kpvim., inasmuch as their origin is l(«t in un- 
 certainty. These books were written after the 
 prophetical age, during the last fiur centuiies he- 
 fore Jesus Christ, alter the completion of the 
 canon ; and on this acctumt, as they foi iiied no 
 {)art of the collection of sacred writings, they weie 
 neither preserved in the Temple, nor read in the 
 synagogues, but in the course of time they weie 
 added to the other books as worthy of respect fiom 
 the natui-e of llieir subject and the rich store of 
 editication which they contained. They are as 
 follows ; — Toblt ; Judith ; certain pa.ssages of the 
 book of Esther, which are not distinguished in 
 the Greek manuscripts nor in the Slavonic Bildes; 
 Wisdom ; Jesus Sirach ; the propliet Baruch ; 
 the Epistle of Jeremiah, atlded to Lamentations; 
 the Prayer of Manasses ; the Song of tlie Three 
 Children (Dan. iii.); Susanna (xiii.); Bel and 
 the Dragon (xiv.); 2 [3j Esdras ; 3 [1] Esdras; 
 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Maccabees.' The reader will 
 observe that, notwithstanding the authority of the 
 Spiojisis, the book of Esther is here reckoned 
 among the canonical boolis. 
 
 It has been questioned whether Josephus consi- 
 dered the book of Esther as written before or after 
 the close of the canon. Du Pin maintains that, 
 as Josephus asserts [see DELTEiio-CANONicAi.] 
 that tlie sacred books were all written between 
 the time of Moses and the reign (apxvs) of 
 Artaxerxes, and {Attiiq. xi.) places the history of 
 Esther in that reign, he consecpiently includes it 
 among those books which he saj's were of iid'erior 
 authority, as written under and since the reign of 
 that prince (Complete Hist, of the Canon, p. (!). 
 Eichliorn, on the other hand, favours the opinion 
 that Josephus meant to include the reign of that 
 prince within the prophetical period ; and con- 
 cludes that this historian consideied the book 
 of Esther as the latest of the canonical writ- 
 ings. All other ancient writers and catalogues 
 include Esther among the books of the Jewish 
 cai>3n. Jerome expressly names it as the ninth 
 book of the Hagiographa (I'ralogus Galeatus). 
 It has, however, been classed by Slxtus of Sienna, 
 Bellarmine, and others of the Roman church, in 
 the second order ul' sacred books, or ;is deutero- 
 eationical ; that is, according to these writers, 
 among those prophetical anil apostolical books 
 whose authority has not, been always equally 
 sertain, in opposition to those )f the tirst clas^ 
 
 ESTHER, BOOK OF. 
 
 603 
 
 respecting whose antlmrity there has never lieen 
 any disjxite among callmlics' (Sixtus Seiiensiii, 
 Bill. Siiui't.i Bt'lhui«ine, Lie Vcrbo J)ei, cli. iv.). 
 These writers define tiie t/iird class 1<i consist of 
 such bi«)ks as, although sometimes receive<l liy 
 the learne<l as ilivine and caiiiMiical. were not 
 ajijiroved liy the public judgment of the whole 
 churcli. In the -second onlev the same writers 
 place not oidy llie deutero-canoiiical bonks of 
 the Old Testament, iniduding that of Esther, lint 
 also tlie .\iitilegoni<'iia of tiie Kew, including 
 the last chapter of St, RIaik's G<«|X'l, the nar- 
 rative of Christ's bloody sweat, and his C(»iS'>- 
 lation by the angel in St. Liike(xxii. i3, 44), 
 and tlie history of the adulteress (Jcilin viii.). 
 Eicldiorn c<iii>idci-s as conclusive of Esthers 
 having formed part of the Jewish ■«anoii, the fact 
 (if its having Ijevii translato<l by the Seventy, 
 under the reign of Ptolemy Philonietor, about 
 the middle of the second century before Christ, 
 before the time usually assigned to tlte trans- 
 lation of the jirophets. For this date we have 
 tiie authority of the sub.scviption to theSeptuagint 
 V^ersion. 
 
 Luther has been accused of attacking the 
 canonicity of l^lsther, and the following ])assages 
 have been .idduced from his writings, and liis 
 Table Talk, in proof of tliis asseitiun : — ' The 
 book of yjsther I tiis; into the ?'lbe.' ' I am so an 
 enemy to the book of Esther, that I would it did 
 not e.vist; for it Judaises too much, and hath in 
 it a great deal of heathenish naughtiness ' (see 
 Edinburgh Uevietc, No. cxxi. p. 22S). And in 
 his work. De i>erv. Arbit., addiessed to Eias- 
 nuis, al'ier saying, ' in legaid to JCcclcsiasfifUi, 
 although I might justly refuse it, yet I receive 
 it, in order not to lose time in involving myself 
 in a dispute concerning the books received into 
 the canon of the Hebi«ws,' he ailds, * which 
 canon you do not a little re)miach. when you 
 compare the Proverbs and the Love-Song (as yon 
 sneeringly call it) with the two book.'* of Esdras, 
 and Judith, Susannah, th<! Dragon, and the book 
 of Esther ; but though therj have this last in 
 their canon, it is in mij judgment more worthy 
 than all of being excluded from the canon 
 (quamvis hiinc habcant in canonc, dignior omni- 
 bus, me judicc, qui extra canonctn habeatur).' 
 Sebastian Smith, iiowever, vindicates Lutiier by 
 observing that lie only sjieaks of Esther compara- 
 tively with the books of Solomon; and (^arpzov 
 thinks that Luther refers to the liook of E.ther as 
 it is extant in the Septnagint, with its spurious 
 additions. (.See also Miiller, Defcns. l.utheri, 
 p. 631.) However this may be, it is certain that 
 Sixtus of Sienn.i, one of the most learneil Roman 
 Catholic theologians, maintained the same views 
 regarding the effect of tiiese additions [EsrnK.u, 
 Apocuyphai, Addition.s to], saying that, in the 
 time of Gregnry and the other ancient fatheis who 
 doubted of the canonicity of Esther, ' its autho- 
 rity was rendered suspected liy the apocrv] hal 
 additions which had lieen rashly inseited into this 
 book ; so that although written in Hebrew, ami 
 received by the Hebrews, its recejition in the 
 Christian church was very late : and it was re- 
 jected ;is sjiurious by Athanasius,' that is, by the 
 author of the Festal Epistle, and of the Sgnopsis. 
 In the former it is said that ' there are other itooks 
 not in the canon, which our fathers commanded to 
 lie read for instruction in piety by catechumeti*
 
 «64 ESTHER, APOCRYPHAL. 
 
 as \V isdojn, Siiacli, Esther. Jmlitli, Tobit, the 
 Docfiiiie of tlie Ap.iatla"*, and (lie Slie|ihenl ;" and 
 it 13 stated in tlie Si/iiohsis, that there are some 
 coiifroveited liooks, as Wisdom — somt^a])0':i yphal, 
 as Enoch ; ai)d tit' Estlier it is ohser^ed, that ' some 
 of the ancients iiave saiil that it was* received by 
 the Helirevvs." \Ve have not dwelt on thecircnrh- 
 stauce of the book of Esfliei's i)eint; included in 
 the •'jyth canon of the Council of Laodicca, as 
 there exist stion^ suspicions tiiat this canon was 
 interiKjIated into the acts of that council in tlie 
 twelttii century. Viceiizi (Introd. in Script. 
 Deutarncan., p. 195) sujiposes that if may have 
 lieen inserfed from the catilot,'ne in the R3th of the 
 jjretended ap.)9tolical canons, v/ith which, how- 
 ever, it is far from beinir identical. It is ol>served 
 bv ])u Pin {On the Canon) that the genuineness 
 of these canons was firut called in question by 
 Erasmus. But wtiatever doubts may have existed 
 among some of the Christian fatliers as to tiie 
 authenticity of Esther, it does not ajjpear that it 
 was ever doubted l)y the Jews, or by the Christian 
 Cliurcli in its collective capacity. — W. W. 
 
 ESTHER (Apockyphai. additions to). In 
 the version of file Seventy the boak of Estiier, Ijjesides 
 other variations, is enriched with several detached 
 frajjments wliich are not found in tlie Heltrev/. 
 These were also contained in the old Latin, which 
 was tnuislated from the Greek, and were retained 
 in his own version by Jerome, who remcA'etl them 
 to the end of the book, in which position they are 
 still found in all manuscripts and printed editions 
 of the Vulgate, forming the seven last chapters 
 according to Cardinal Hugo's division. Luther 
 proceeded still fmtiier, and removed them to a 
 separate place among the Apocrypha. They are 
 as follows : — 
 
 1. The Greek version commences with what 
 forms the 11th chapter in the Vulgate, ' In the 
 fourth year of the reign of Ptolemy and Cleopatra,' 
 descriliing Mordecai's dieain of the two dragons, 
 and the conspirx.'jy of the two eunuchs (Vulg. xii.). 
 
 "2. Tlie king's letter fur tlie ilestruction of the 
 Jews (Vulg. xiii.) follows in the Greek the I3th 
 \erse of chap. iii. Xo ver. 14. 
 
 3. The Prayer of Esther (Vulg. xiv.), Sept. iv. 
 ».ommencing after the ITtli verse in the Vulgate. 
 
 4. A detailed and emliellislied description of 
 Estliw's visit to tlie king (Vulg. xv.), Sept. v. to 
 ver. 3. 
 
 5. Tlie king's letter in favour of the Jews 
 (Vulg. xvi.), Sept. viii. after 13tli verse. 
 
 (5. The whole concludes in the Sept. with Mor- 
 decai's recollection of his dream of the great and 
 little fountain and the two dragons (Vulg. i.), after 
 which is the subscription, purporting that the letter 
 concerning the feast of Purim was brought info 
 Egypt liy Dositheus, and translated by Lysima- 
 chus in tlie fourth year of the reign of Ptolemy 
 ^nd Cleopatra (b. c. 165). 
 
 Jerome {Preface to Esther) compares these 
 additions to the themes of schoolboys. .Sixtus of 
 Sienna (Bib. Sanct. 15(50) observes that these are 
 the work of some unknown Greek author (Jahn 
 adds ' of more than one), and that the same are 
 found word for word in the 11th chap, of the 
 Antiquities of Josephus. The Chaldee version of 
 them (from the Greek), as well as the Samaritan 
 and Arabic, are still extant. Sixtus of Sienna 
 wijects them as apocry|)hal, notwithstanding the 
 decree of the council of Trent, wherein it was de- 
 
 ETAM. 
 
 clared that, ' He is to be anathema who does no* 
 receive these entire books, nuth all their parti, aa 
 they have been accustomed to be read in the 
 Catholic church, and are foimd in the ancient 
 editions of the Latin Vulgate, as sacred and 
 canonical, and who knowingly and wilfully 
 
 despises the aforesaid traditions All 
 
 may, therefore, undersfanil, after the clearing up 
 of this foundation of the Confession of Faith, in 
 what order and methoii the Synod is to proceed, 
 and what evidences and guarantees it furnishes in 
 the conh'riTiation of lioctrlnes ami the reformation 
 of manners in the church.' ' Sixtus maintains 
 that this decree incUulfs only the genuine parts 
 of books, but not tlie achlitinns and interpolations 
 of unknown writers, which are rejected from the 
 canon not only by Hugo, de Lyra, and others, 
 but utterly repelled by Jerome and exj)loded by 
 Origen in his letter to Africanns." Origen, how- 
 ever, only asserts tliat they were wanting in the 
 Hebrew, from which he snpjioses they had been 
 lost (an opinion also held by Wliiston), and Bel- 
 larmine maintains, in opjiosition to Sixtus, that 
 the phrase all their jjarts in the decree of the 
 council of Trent can only refer to the portions 
 which were hereby declared to be canonical. 
 This is also maintained by Du Pin {('ano7i oj 
 Scripture), but denied liy Jahn {Introduction), 
 who further observes that they contradict tlie 
 canonical Estlier. It would a])]>ear to be the 
 sentiment of these divines (who denominate the 
 deutero-canonical portions liy the title of the 
 Church-Canon) that these books were not obli- 
 gato:y on Clnistiaiis for the first fifteen centuries, 
 or before the fourth session of the council of Trent. 
 Bellarmine further nhserves that these additions 
 to Esther are not only contained in the etlitions 
 of the Vulgate, but that a jwrfion of them is read 
 in the oflices of the church ; viz., part of the 13tli 
 chap, on the Thursday after the second Sunday in 
 Lent, in the mass against the Pagans, and Esther's 
 jirayer (ch. xiv.) on the third Sunday after Trinity. 
 De VVette conceives, from the religious tone of 
 these additions, that they are of Hellenistic and 
 Alexandrian origin. [Esduas.] — W. W. 
 
 ETAM (Dtp^y ; Sept. Mto-ij.), a town in the 
 tribe of Judah, which wiis decorated by Solomon 
 with gardens and stie.iins of water, and fortilied 
 by Reholioani along with Bethlehem and Tekoa 
 (1 Chron iv . 3. 32 : 2 C'hron. xi. 6 ; Joseph. An- 
 tiq. viii. 7 3). From this place, according to the 
 Rabiiins, water was carried by an aquetluct to 
 Jerusalem. J sepiius ])laces it at fifty stadia (in 
 some cojiies sixty) from Jeiu^alem (southward); 
 and alleges that Solomon was in the habit of 
 taking a morning drive to this favoured spot in 
 his chariot. Dr. Robinson { Researches, \. lf)8) 
 inclines to find Etam at a ])lace aliout a mile 
 and a half south of Bethlehem, wliere there is a 
 ruined village called Uitas, at tiie bottom of a 
 ]ileasant valley of the same name. Here tiiere are 
 traces of ancient ruins, and also a fountain, send- 
 ing forth a copious supjily of line water, which 
 forms a beautiful purling rill along the bottom ot 
 frlie valley. It is usually sup;iosed that ' the rock 
 Etam,' to which Samson withdrew (Judg. xv. 8, 
 11), was neaj' tiie town of the same name. Urfas 
 seems too far inland for this ; there is, however, 
 a little to the east, the Frank inountaiii. wbi'-ii 
 (this consideration apart^ would !»ave I'umi^hwi
 
 ETHAM. 
 
 Ji«l sucn A retreat as the hero seeins to have 
 found. 
 
 ETHAM, the third stalioii of Uie Israelites 
 when they quitted Etryjit [Exudus]. 
 
 1. ETHAN (;T\''X ; Sept. AiOduX one ol" llmr 
 persons (' Ethan the Ezrahife, and IXeinan, and 
 Cbalcol, and Darda, the sons of JVLihul ) wlio were 
 so renowned for their .sai^acity that it is mentioned 
 to tlie honour of Solomon that his wisdom ex- 
 celled theirs In 1 Kini^s iv. 31, Ethan is dis- 
 tinguished as 'tlie Ezraiiite." trom the others, who 
 are called ' sons of Mahol " — unless, indte-l, this 
 word Mahal l)e taken not as a pioper name, Iml 
 appellatively, for ' sons of music, dancing,' Ike, 
 in wnicli case it would ajiply to Ethan as well as to 
 the others. Ti:is interinetatioii is stren^jthened hy 
 our findinj; the otiier names associat<nl with tiiat 
 of Ethan in 1 Cluon. ii. 6, as ' sons of Zorali.' i. c. 
 of Ezra, the same as Ezialiites. Tlie evidence of 
 identity alVorded hy this collocation of names is 
 too strong to lie resisted ; and we nnist therefore 
 conclude that Ethan and the others, the tradition 
 of whose wisdom had descended to the time of So- 
 lomon, are the same who, in I Chron. ii. C, ajjjjcar 
 as sons of Zerah, wlit was liimseH' the son of the 
 patriarch Judaii. With this agrees tlie Jewish 
 chronology, which counts them as prophets dining 
 the sojourn in Egypt (Seder Olain Ilabba, )). 52), 
 although the Jews have alsci a tradition confound- 
 ing Ethan with Abraliam, Heman with Moses, 
 and Chalcol with Joseph. (Jerome, Cqinment. on 
 2 Kinrjs iv. 31.) 
 
 2. ETH.\N, a Levite, the son of Kishi, and 
 one of tlie masters of the Temple music (1 Cliioii. 
 vi. 44; XV. 17), to whom the 89th Psalm is 
 ascribed, and whom some interpreters suppose to 
 1 ^ the Ethan of 1 Kings iv. 31, to whose wisdom 
 Jiat of Solomon is compared. 
 
 ETHAN IM. [TlshriJ 
 
 ETHIOPIA (Aleioiria, Judith i. 10) is the 
 name hy which the English and most other ver- 
 siovis render the Hebrew Clsh. As used among 
 tire Greeks and Romans, the word was employed 
 in all the latitutle of its etymological meaning, 
 to denote atiy of the countries where the people 
 are of a sable, sun- burnt complexion — AiOio^p 
 (Acts viii 27), AlOiSiriaaa (Num. xii. 1), Aldioirfs 
 (2 Chron. xiv. 12), from aWofxai, to bunt, and covf/, 
 the face. But we have shown in the article 
 Clsk (to which we refer the reader) that its use 
 in the language of Scripture is much more re- 
 stricted, and that while it may sometimes include 
 part of Southern .-Vrabij, it for the most part 
 exclusively designates the ' Ethiopia of Africa,' 
 which is the subject of the jiresent article. ' Of 
 the four s.ins of Ham,' savs Joieplius (Antiq. 
 i. 6, 2), ' time has not at all hurt the name of 
 Chus ; t\)V tl'.e Ethiopians over whom he reigned 
 are even at this day, lioth liy themselves and bv 
 I'll men in Asia, called Chusites.' The Peschito 
 Syriac V^ersion of Acts \iii. 2T styles boLh Queen 
 Candace and her tieasmer Cushteans. 
 
 By Ethiopia, or African Cush, in llie wi<lest 
 acceptation of the name, the Hebrews iinderstood 
 the whole of the region lying south of Egypt 
 r,bove .Syene,* t'le modern Assouan (Ezek. xxix. 
 
 * Jablonsky and Cliampollion both seek the 
 derivation of Syene in the Coptic ; but the former 
 thiaka it denotes ' boundary,' the latter ' key,' 
 
 ETHIOPIA 
 
 66» 
 
 10; XXX. (i ; comii. Stralio, x\iii. p. SI7, Pliny, 
 Hist. Nut. v. 9; vi.35; Joscjih. l)c Jtcl/.Jud. iv! 
 10, a). Its limits on the we.-.t and .vuth wer% 
 undelined ; but liiey probably regaidfd il as ex- 
 tending eastward as far as the Red Si-a, if not 
 as including some of the islamls in Jliat »ea, 
 such as the famous Topaz Isle (Job xxviii. I'.t ; 
 Pliny, Jlist. .\al. vi. 29; xxxvii. 8; Stiabo, 
 xvi. 4, G; Diod. Sic. iii. 39). It fims corre- 
 sponded, though only in a vague and t'encMil 
 sense, to the countries known to us as Nubia ami 
 Abyssinia, so famous for the Nile iUid other gicat 
 rivers. Heme the alliisioui in Scripture (Isa. 
 xviii. 1; Zeph. iii. 11) to the far distant 'rixe.s 
 of Ethiopia," a country which is also sjioken of 
 (Isa. xviii. 2) in our version as the land ' which 
 the rivers have spoiled,' tlieie being a sujiposed 
 reference to the ravages committed by inunda- 
 tions (Bruce"s Travels, iii. p. I.'}'-', and Taylor* 
 Valm;t, iii. pp. 5i'3-4); but lectnf 1ran^lalors 
 prefer to render NTn l)y 'divide," q. d '■ a. land 
 intersected by streams." Isaiah likewise takes 
 
 notice of the KD3 VD. or ve.ssels of i)a])yrus, 
 which the Ethiopians employed u|u)n tlie walois, 
 a f;ct which is confirmed by Helioilorus in his 
 j-Etliiopica (x. ]>. 4G0j. and also by Bruce, who 
 states that the only kind of boat in Abyssinia is 
 that called Tciiicua, which is made of reeds, ' u 
 ])iece of the Acacia tree being put in tlie bottom 
 to serve as a keel, to which the jilants are joineti, 
 being first sewed together, then gathered up at 
 stem and stern, and the ends of the plants tied 
 fast flieie.' It is to the swiftness of these jiajiynis 
 vessels that Job (ix. 2li) compares the rajiid 
 speed of his days. 
 
 But that })art of the vast region of Cush 
 which seems ciiiefiy intended in these and most 
 other jiassages of Scri])ture is the tract of country 
 in U))per Nubia, which became famous in an- 
 ticprity as the kingdom of Ethiopia, or the state 
 of Meroe. The Ethiopian nations generally 
 ranked low in the scale of civ ilization ; 'never- 
 theless (to use tlie language of Heeien), there did 
 exist a better cultivated, and, to a ceitain degiee, 
 a civilized Ethio])ian jieople ; whodwelt in cities; 
 who erected temples and oilier edilices; who, 
 though without letters, had hieroglyphics ; who 
 had government and laws ; and the fame of whose 
 progress in knowledge and the social arts spread 
 in the earliest ages over a considerable jiart of the 
 earth.' Meroe Proper lay between the liver Asta- 
 boras (now the Atliara or Tacazze) on the east, 
 and the Nile on the west. Though nut completely 
 enclosed with rivers, it was called an island, be- 
 cause, as Pliny observes, liie various sfieams 
 which flowed around it were all consideied as 
 branches of the Nile; so that to it the above de- 
 scription of a ' country of livers' was peculiarly 
 ajipiojiriate. Its surface exceeded that of Sicily 
 more than a half, and it coiiesponded ]irelty 
 nearly to the [iiesent province of .Vlljarii, between 
 13° and 18" N. lat. In modem times it formed i 
 a great part of the kingdom of Sennaar, and the i 
 southern jiortion iielongs to Aliyssinia. Upon th« 
 island of Meroe lay a city of the .same name, th« 
 mefj-ojiolis of the kingdojn, the site of vvhich has 
 been discovered nmr a jdace called Assur, about 
 
 i. e. of Egypt, it was always considered tba 
 natural frontier towards Ethiopia.
 
 666 
 
 ETHIOPIA. 
 
 ETHIOPIA. 
 
 twenty miles N.of tlie town ofSliendy, under 17° 
 N. lat. The s-jilcmlicl ruins of temples, jiyraniids, 
 and oflier edilices t'oiind here and lliroiigliout the 
 district ha\e been deserihed by Caillaud, Gau, 
 Rij]'pell, Bel/oni. Waddiii^tim. Hoskins, and oilier 
 travellers, and attest the hi^ii degree of civilization 
 and;ut among the ancient Ethiopans. 
 
 Joseji'.M-;. in iii-; acronnt of the expedition of 
 Moses when roinmander of tlie Egyptian aimy 
 ajainst tlie Etiiioiiians, says that the latter 'at 
 length retired to Salii, a royal city of Kthio',:ia 
 which (-ahitiyses afterwards called Meioe, after 
 the name of h'so.vn sister* (^?^^''5. ii. 10. 2). The 
 same ori!.i;i of the naii;e is given liotii liy Straho 
 and Diodnrus Sicuhis. but see Manneit's Geoy. 
 of the (! recks and Romans, x. 199. There is 
 still a ])lace called Merawe consiilerably north of 
 the island and near Mount Berl<al, where Heeren 
 thinks there may ha\e been a settlement of the 
 paiepf state called liv the same name. The 
 0])inion (jf ,J;Hephiis thar'Meroe was identical witli 
 Seba acconis well witii tlie statement in Gen. x. 
 7, that SelKi was tiie, .eldest .son of Cttsh, and as 
 Ills name is wrrtten with usamech (X2D), lie is not 
 to be conf.iun:led with either of the Shebas (N3ii'), 
 who ire mentioned as descendants of Sfiem (Gen. 
 X. i>> ; XXV. 3). Now this country of African Seba 
 is classed wirh the Arabian Slieba as a ricn but 
 far-distant land (Pj. Ixxii. 10). In Isa. xliii. 3 
 God says- to Israel, ' I have given Egypt for thy 
 ransom ; Cii-h and Seba in thy stead :' and in 
 Isa. xlv. 14, 'The wealth of Egyjit and the mer- 
 chandise of Cush and of the SeUami men of sta- 
 t!ire shall ]>ass over to thee and shall lie thine.' 
 Charles Taylor, the ingenious but fancilul editor 
 of Calmet, had the singular notion that by ''K'JN 
 mo 18 meant men of short measure, or (Uvarf. ; 
 and hence he identifies the Ethiopians with the 
 Pygmies of antiquity (Fraff/nents to Calmet, 
 cccxxii). But the Hebrew plirase plainly denotes 
 'tallness of stature' (comji. 1 Ciiron. xi. 23), and 
 the Etliio]iians are described by Herodotus as 
 &uSpes fJ.fyi(TTot (iii. 1 14), /x^yicrToi dvdpuinuv (iii. 
 20); and Solinns allinns that they were twelve 
 feet in height (J'oh/hist. cap. xxx). In common 
 wTtli the other Cushite tribes of Afiicathe skin 
 wa< black, to which there is an ob\ ioas allusion 
 in Jer. xlii. 33: 'Can the Cushite change his 
 skin V Bruce finds Seba in Azab, a sea-port on the 
 east coast ol' Aii ii-a near the entrance to the Red 
 Sea, and in this he is followed by Heeren, while 
 others think of a ]ilace called Subali aliout lat. 
 IS"' N., where are s inie ol' the most remarkable 
 ruins of Nuliian grandeur ; but both opinions are 
 merely conjectural. 
 
 Among other tribes of Africa said to have 
 been in alliaiice with Egypt, the prophet Ezekiel 
 (xxx. 5) mentions along with Ethiopia the name 
 of (hub, wiiicli Miehaelis connects with Kobe, a 
 trading town desciibed fiy Ptolemy as on the west 
 coast of tlie Red Sea. But in the Arabic transla- 
 tion made fiom the Septuagint, instead of Chub 
 we find 'the [leople of Nubia.' The Hebrew 
 letters D and 3 might easily be confounded l)y a 
 transcriber, and in the ?.iS. 409 of De Rossi it is 
 not i13 Chub, but 313 Nt(b, wlilch is jirobably 
 the tiue reading. There are still two districts ad- 
 joining Meroe on the south-west, called Cuba and 
 Aubn, which are said to abound in gold. The 
 Svkkiim, who, along with the Cushites and 
 Lnbim or Lilijans, formed jiart of tiie host of 
 
 Shishak (2 Chron. xii. 3), are in thoSept- "lesig 
 nated Trogloilytes, t. e. cave-duellers, and were, 
 no doubt, the people known to the Greeks by th« 
 same name as inhabiting the mountain-cavema 
 on the west coast of the Red Sea (Diod. Sic. 
 iii. 32: Stiabo, xvii. ji. 785). They were noted 
 for swiftness ot' foot and expertness in the use of 
 the sling, and hence weie eiojiloved, as Heliodoni* 
 informs us (^AitJiiopica, viii. l(i), as light troops. 
 Pliny makes nu-ntion of a town of Suche in that 
 region (Hist. Nat. vi. 29. 34). and there is still on 
 the same coast a place called Siiakim,do-icribed by 
 Buickhardt in his Tiavels in Nubia. If, however, 
 the term Stikkiim be of Hebiew derivation, it 
 would specially denote those who lived in liooths, 
 i. e. tabernacles made of the boughs of trees ; and 
 it de>erves remark that the Siiangallas who in- 
 habit that country, still dwell during tiie good 
 season in arbours fitted up for tents, repairing in 
 winter to their rocky caves. 
 
 In the age of Herodotus, the countries known to 
 us as Nubia and Sennaar were occujiied by two 
 difl'eient laces, one of whom he includes under 
 the general appellation of Ethiopians, the other an 
 inmiigiatory Arabian race leading, for the most 
 ]iart, a nomadic life. This distinction has con- 
 tinued down to the pre.sent day. Among the 
 aboriginal inhabitarits the first place is due to the 
 Nubian.s, who are well-formed, strong, and mus- 
 cular, and with nothing whatever of the negro 
 physiognomy. They go armed with spear, sword, 
 and a shield of the skin of the hijipoiiotamus. 
 South of Doiigola is the country of the Scheygiiis, 
 whose warriors are horsemen, also armed with a 
 double-pointed spear, a sword, and a large shield 
 (comp. Jer. xlvi. 9, the ' Cushites who handle 
 the shield '). They were com])letel\' indej)e!ident 
 till subdued by Mehemct Ali, jiaclia of Egypt. 
 It is in their country that the jiyramidal monu- 
 ments which adorned the ancient Meroe are first 
 met with, and even its name has been preserved 
 in that of their chief place, Mei awe, though the 
 original Meroe must be sought farther south. 
 Next comes the territory of the Berbers, strictly 
 so called, who, though speaking .\rabic, evidently 
 belong to the Nubian race. Above these regions 
 beyond the Tacazze and along the Nile the great 
 mass of the inhaliitants, though sometimes with a 
 mixture of other blood, may be regarded as of 
 Arab origin. But between the valley of the Nile 
 and the Red Sea there is still, as of old, a variety 
 of scattered aboriginal tribes, among whom the 
 Arabic is much less common : they aie, doulitless, 
 jiaitly tlie descendants of the above-mentioned 
 Sukkiim, or Troglodytes, and of the Ichthyophagi, 
 or fish-eaters. Some of them spread themselves 
 over the })lains of the Astaboras, or Tacazze, being 
 compelled to remove their encampments, somfi- 
 tinies by the inundations of the river, at other 
 times by tlie attacks of the tlreaded zimb, cr gad- 
 fly, describ'd by Bruce, and which he supposes to 
 be the ' fly which is in the utmost pait of the rivers 
 of Egypt' (Isa. vii. IS). Another remarkable 
 Ethiopic race in ancient times was the Macro- 
 biatis, so called from their supposed longevity. 
 They were represented by the ambassadorj of 
 Cambyses as a very tall race, who elected the 
 highest ill stature as king : gold was so abundant 
 that they bound their prisoners with golden fetters- 
 circumstances which again remind us of Isaiab't 
 description of Ethiopia and Seba in ch. xlv. 14.
 
 ETHIOPIA. 
 
 With regard to t!ie ancient civilization of 
 Etliii)pia Proper, or the kinifdom of Meroe. it was 
 closely connecletl witli the religion of tlie country, 
 which was the woisliiu oi Anini(>n-in(l liis kindred 
 deities, anil tl>e 'Oracles of Au'tnini' were its 
 main snpporf. The govoniment Wiis in the hands 
 nf a race or ciV^le ol priests, who chose fruin anioii^ 
 iheinsel\es a kinir; and this fijrni continned tU)wn 
 to the reign in K-;ypt of tlie second Ptolemy, 
 when Ergamenes, at that time king, massacied 
 the priests in tlieir sanctuary, and became ab- 
 solute monarch. 
 
 Of tlie history of Ethiopia, previous to tiiat last 
 revolution, only scanty information has l)een jne- 
 served, but it is enough to evince its high anti- 
 quity and its eaily aggrandizement. In tlie Per- 
 sian period it was certainly an independent and 
 important state, which Cambyses in vain endea- 
 voured to subdue. But its mo^t llourisliing era was 
 between the years b.c. SOO and 700, when arose 
 three jiotent kings, Sabaco, Sevccbus, and Tailiako, 
 orTiihakah, who extended their contjuests over 
 a great part of Egypt. Seveclius is supposed lo 
 have been the So or Sua king of Egypt, to whom 
 an emiiassy was sent liy Hoshea, king of Isiael 
 (2 Kings xvii. 4), wiiose reign ended B.C. 722. 
 He was tiius the contemjioravy of Sahn.inassar, 
 king of Assyria, as was Tirliakah of the next 
 Assyrian monarch, Sennachtril), who (about the 
 year b.c. 714) was deterred I'rom the inva- 
 sion of Egypt merely by the rumour that Tir- 
 liakah Wi^ advancing against him (3 Kings 
 xix. 9). Theie seems no leason to d.-ubt that tlio 
 remarkable propliecy in the IRth chapter of 
 Isaiah was addressed to Tiihakah and his people, 
 to announce to tliem the s-adden overlhrow of tlie 
 Assyrian host iiefore Jeiusalem : ' Ho ! tliou land 
 with rustling wings [i. e. annus in the clangour 
 of battle, as in chap. viii. S] bey. nd the stieams 
 of Cush [for the country lay south of its great 
 rivers], which sendest itsmessengeis on tiie [Red] 
 sea, and in vessels of papyrus on the waters [of 
 the Nile]. Up! ye swift messengers, to the na- 
 tion robust and valiant, the r.atiun formidable 
 from tlie first and hitherto, the nation powerful and 
 all-crushing, whose country is intersected with 
 streams,' &c. This desmiption of the Ethiopian 
 nation is repeated at verse 7 almost vcrlmtim, and 
 it is intimated that, struck at the mighty deeds of 
 tiie God of Judali, this distant people should send 
 gifts to his d.elling-phice at Zion. Tiiey were, 
 no doubt, among tiie 'many' who are described 
 in 2 Clir. xxxii. 23, as having 'binught gifts unto 
 Jehovah at Jerusalem, and presents to king Ileze- 
 kiah, so that he was magnified in the sight of all 
 the nations.' But it is remarked Ijv Gesenius 
 (C'otnm. on Isaiah, in loc.) that the expectation 
 of the entire conversion of the Ethiopians is fre- 
 quently expressed by the Hebrew pruphets (Isa. 
 xlv.lt; Zepli. iii. 1(1 -jPs. Ixviii. 32 ; Ixxxvii. 
 4) ; and he adds, ' Those who take jilcasuie in 
 tracing the fullilineiit of such predictions in sub- 
 seijuent hiitory may find it in .\cts viii. 27 (the 
 conversion lioth to Juilaism anrl Christianity of 
 the treasurer of Queen CandaceJ, and still more 
 in the circumstance thai Abyssirda is to this day 
 the only great Christian state in the eastern world.' 
 Wilkinson informs us tliat the figiire and name 
 of Tirliakah, and the exjiedition he undertook 
 against Sennacherib, aie recorded on he walls of 
 a Thebau Temple. ' It is probaJ'e,' sa s he, ' that 
 
 nniopiA. 
 
 dc 
 
 in the early part of Ids reign Sethos divided tha 
 kingdom with him, and ruled in Lower Egypt, 
 while the Ethioinan monarch posscssul the domi- 
 nion of the upjier country ; and this wiodd ac- 
 count for the absence of the name if Si llios on 
 the monumerits of Tht.'lies. \V1. ether Tirliakah 
 and Sab.icos claims to the throne of Egy];t were 
 derived fiom any riglit acqiiiied by intciman iage 
 with the royal family of that connliy, am! wlirtlier 
 the dominion was at Hist conliiird to llie Theliaid, 
 it is ditlicult to deteimine; but the respect paid 
 by their successors to ihc monunu nts ihey erected 
 argues the ]ir(iliabilily of their liaiing succeeded 
 to the throne by right rather thaii by usurpation 
 or the force of arms ' {Ancicitt Kyijptiaiis, vtl. 
 i. p. HO ; com)). Rosellini, num. ii. tab. fi). Of 
 the mdifaiy renown of Tiihakali, Megasthcnes 
 speaks in Strabo (xv. 1. C), wlitie he mentions 
 Tiapicaiva. rhf A'lBloira along witli Scsostiis and 
 Nebuchadnezzar, as one who had pnetialed into 
 Europe, and advanced as far as the pillars of 
 Hercules — the usual limit of gieat concpierors. 
 Accoiding to Jidius Africanns, Tidiakah leigncd 
 eighteen years ; accor<ling to Eusebius twenty : the 
 former calls him To/jki^s, the latter TapaK6s. 
 'Contemporary with him," says Gestnius, 'there 
 existed two tlynasties in Sais and 1 inis. and, 
 without doubt, his ha<l its seat in Tliebais. In 
 the last years of his lelgn falls the Dodekarchy 
 at the end of wliich the Ethiopians withdrew into 
 their oiiginal kingdom (Herod, ii. 139). From 
 this connection we may derive a satisfactory ex- 
 jilanation of the fact, that Isaiah often mentions 
 Egypt and Etliiojiia in so clcse political lelation 
 (see esjiecially chap. xx. 3-()). The .same fact is 
 noticeable iir the latter ]irophets, and ]iroves the 
 continuance cA' a fiiendly understanding (Ezek. 
 XXX. 4, sq. : Jer. xlvi. 9 ; Nahum I'i. 9 ; Dan. xi. 
 43). In line, Ethiojiia is employed chiefly as the 
 name of the national and royal family that were 
 now in the ascendancy.' 
 
 If we go back about two centuries, to the reign 
 of Asa, king of Judah (u.c 9')0), we read of 
 Zeiah, or ratlier Zerach, an Ethiopian going out 
 against him with a host of a tlious.ind thousand 
 men and three hundred chariots (2 Chron. xiv. 9). 
 It is doubtful whether this was an Ethiopian 
 monarch or commander, or only a meie (^usliite 
 r.dventurer; but that his aimy v. as mainly of Afri- 
 can and nut Arabian original is evident from the 
 fact of its havixig inclmitd Libyans as well as 
 Cushi!es(2 Cliron. xvi. 8), and fu.m the mention of 
 wai-chariots, which never were in use in Aiabia. 
 Faither back than this the records of history are 
 silent. Pliny, indeed (Hist. Kat. vi. 35), after ob- 
 serving that Ethiopia was ruined by its wars with 
 Egyjit, wliich it sometimes suhdued and Mimetimes 
 served, aihls, that ' it was powerl'ul and illusliious 
 even as fir back as the Trojan war, when JVIem- 
 rion leigned.' Existing monuments conlirm that 
 high antiquity v/liich trailition assigns to fiie state 
 of Meriiti. The name of Rame-es, ot Srtsostiis, has 
 been found on many of ti'.e ruins of Nuliia, and 
 he is well known in history as its ci.nqnpn)r 
 (Herod, ii. liO). That the Pharaohs indeed 
 should have carried their conipiests into Kfliiopia, 
 ought not to seem strange to us in whose d.iys the 
 same scene has liee'i acted; for scaicely was 
 Mehemet Ali firmly ))osses~ed of Egypt than he 
 sent his son to subdue Ethiopia, and he not only 
 penetrated to Meroe, but much farliier south.
 
 668 
 
 ETHIOl'lA. 
 
 KTH UnnC LANGIJACK. 
 
 Tl:e eta of Ranieses cannot lie pliiced hitt'i (liaii 
 15(10 years u.c. lint tlir iiaiiio..!' Pliaiaili Tlicl- 
 iiutsi-, tlic expelleidf the H\ksos, has i/een louii'l 
 by CliainpoUiori on tlie Nubian Tenqile ol' Aniada, 
 ami the sculiitiires found there sIidw a de^iee 
 of civili^mtioi) tliat can only he ascrilied to a na- 
 tion '.vliich hi^d l<ia,i^ existed. We llius approach 
 the a^'e of Moses, at wiiich Jewish tradition, as 
 repotted by Josephus, assigns the <()n<jiiest of 
 Meroe to Moses hiuiselC, as {general of the army of 
 E^ypt; and the traditions ol the Ejjyptian priest- 
 IkmiI also agree in this, that tiie Etniopians laid 
 the foundation of the most ancient states of Egypt. 
 Tlie state of Meroe appears to have resembled 
 the larger states in the interior of Afiica at the 
 present day, comprising a number of dill'erent 
 rac's or triljes united together by no strong poli- 
 tical bond, but by a common form of worship, 
 which placed the rule in tiie hands of the priest- 
 hood, the dominant caste of tlie couiifry. There 
 is eveiy reason to conclude that the separate 
 colonies of the jiriest-caste spread from Meroe into 
 Egypt ; and the primeval monimients in Ethiopia 
 strongly conHrin the native traditions reported by 
 Diodorus Siculus, that the worship of Ammon 
 and Osiiis originated in Meroe, and thus render 
 liiglily probable the opinion that commerce and 
 civilization, science and art, descended into Egypt 
 fioni Nubia and the ujjper regions of the Nile. 
 One great cause of the early prosperity and 
 gr.indeur of Ethiopia was tiie carrying-trade, of 
 which it was the centre, between India and Arabia 
 on the one hand, and the interior of Africa, and 
 espec:ially Egypt, on the otiier. Tliis has been 
 well illustrarsd by Ileereii in his worlc On the 
 A/icient Nations of Afiica, vol. i. p. 289 sqq. 
 ' In proportion,' says he, ' ao we ascend into tlie 
 primeval ages, the closer seems tiie connectnjii 
 between Egypt and Ethiopia. Tiie Hebiew poets 
 seld.im mention the former witlii ut tiie latter ; 
 the itd'aiiitants of both are drawn as commeicial 
 nations. W lien Isaiah celebiates the victoiies of 
 Cyrus, their suljtni-sion is sjKiken of as his must 
 magniiicent reward (Isa. xlv. 14). When Jere- 
 niialt extols the greiit victory of Nebuchatlnt'zzar 
 over Pliaiaofi-nechoii, near Carcliemish, tiie Etlii- 
 f>[)ians are allied to the Egyptians (Jer. xh i. 9). 
 When Ezekiel threatens the downfal of Egypt, he 
 mites it witli the distiint Ethiopia (Ezek. xxx. 4j. 
 Every jiage, indeed, of Egviitian history exhibits 
 ])roofs of tiie close intimacy in which tliey stood. 
 Tiie primitive states of Egyjit derived their origin 
 from these remole regions. Tliebes and Meroe 
 founded in coiumoti a colony in Libya; Etiiiopian 
 conqueiors more than once invaded Egypt ; Egj'p- 
 tian kings in return forced tlieir way into Etlii- 
 o()ia ; t e same worship, tlie same manners and 
 customs, the same mode of writing, are found in 
 both countries; and, under Psammetichiis, the 
 noble nnd numerous party of malecontents retired 
 into Ediiopia. Egypt, aha, as tar as history 
 reaches back, abounded in all (iie commodities 
 of tlie soiitiiern regions. Whence did she obtain 
 the spices and drugs witli which she embalmed 
 her (lead 'i wlunce the incense tliaf burned on her 
 altars'? wlience that immense quantity of cotton 
 in wliich her inhabitants were clad, and whicli 
 her o»vn soil so s|iaring!y produced'? Whence 
 came into Egypt that early rumour of tlie Eihi- 
 opian gold countries, wliich Cambyses set out to 
 UisccH'er, and lost liulf his army in the attempt 
 
 \^'llen(•e t''at prnfu^hm of ivory and ebony whicl 
 the ancient ailists of (iieece and Palestii.e em- 
 beillshe'lf V\ lieiire tliat general and early .«piead 
 of the name of Etliio|)ia, whicii glimmers in th* 
 traditional history of so many nations, and wliicK 
 is celebiateil as well by the Jewish poets as by the 
 earliest Grecian bards"? Whence but from the 
 international commerce of wFiich Ethiopia w.u. 
 the seat and centre ? Its principal route is stil! 
 pointed out by a chain of ruins, extending fion. 
 llie sliores of the ln<lian sea to the Mediterranean. 
 Adule, Azab. and Axiim, are links of this chain 
 between Arabia Felix and Meroe; Thebes and 
 Ammonium between Meroe, Egypt, and Car- 
 thage.' 
 
 Queen C.indace, who is mentioned in Acts viii. 
 27, wa? doubtless the reigning sovereign of Meroe 
 [Candack], where it is likely a form of Judaism 
 was at that period professed by a portion of tiie 
 inhabitants, as seems to have been the case in the 
 adjacent region of Abyssinia. The prophets (e. r/. 
 Isa. xi. 11) sometimes allude to the Jews who 
 were scattered throughout Cush. Ebed-melech, 
 the benevolent eunuch of King Zedekiah, who 
 showed such kindness to the jnopliet Jeremiah, 
 was an Etiiiopian (Jtr. xxxviii. 7 ; comp. Acts 
 viii. 27). Josephus calls the queen of Sheba, 
 who visited Solomon, a queen of Egypt and Ethi- 
 opia, and with this agrees the tratlition of the 
 Ahyssinians, who claim her as a native queen, 
 give her the name of Maqueda, and maintain that 
 slie had a son by Solomon, called Menilek, who 
 bore the title of David I. Yet Sheba was un- 
 doubtedly in .Arabia Felix, though it is possible 
 that, in lemote antiquity, the soveieignty of iti 
 mouarchs extended across the Red Sea to 
 coast of Ethiopia. — N. M. 
 
 ETIIIOPIC L.A.NGU.AGE. As it is mai/i- 
 tained by competent judges that the Amharic and 
 the Tigre aie really dialects of the ancient luhi- 
 opic or Geez,* it may be expected, from the 
 recent progresi of comparati\e grammar, that fu- 
 ture scholars will apply them lo elucidate the 
 structure of the other Syro-Arabian languages. 
 At present, however, as even the Amharic is not 
 yet alile to boast of adequate and accessible 
 irieans for its study, and as neither jiossesses any 
 ancient version of any part of the Bible, the Geez 
 is the only one which claims a particular notice 
 here. 
 
 The anciciit Ethiopic or Geez, which is (he 
 only one of the three <lialects which either has 
 been, or is now, geneially used in written docu- 
 ments of a sacred or civil kind, is to be classed as 
 an ancient branch of the Arabic. This aflinity is 
 evident from tlie entire grammatical structure ol 
 the language : it is confirmed by the relation of 
 its written character lo that of the Himjarite 
 alphabet; and either supports, or is supported by, 
 the assumption (hat Habesh was actually peopled 
 by a colony from southern Arabia. The gram 
 matical structure of the Geez allows a largely 
 predominant identity with that of Arabic ; but it 
 
 * Adelung and Vater, in the MitLridates, ap- 
 pear to be the chief authorities for doubting the 
 intimate aflinity of the Geez and Amharic. In 
 this particular, and throughout the subject, w« 
 have followed Gesenius, in his two articles on the 
 Kthiopic and Amharic languages in Ersch and 
 Gruber's Allgemeine Eiicydopiidie.
 
 i-niUOPIC LANGUAGK. 
 
 ETHUN. 
 
 A69 
 
 also p-is5!fss(^s saiiio (liiit^ wliicli an? in closer ac- io l>o tlie vi>in.icM hr lanjuaKC o) <iny part of tiie 
 
 cordaaici' with till- oilier Syuj-Aiahiaii idioms, ami country, liavini; I. ecu snpplmitec. «t the coiiit of 
 
 tome whicli are pt-cnliar to itself alone. The tiie sovereign l>y tlie Amiiuric. It .still com in iok 
 
 main feafiires of its structure are as follow : — Tiie ncwever, to he the lat>i,'uage used in reiigintis 
 
 verb possesses the first ten conjugations of tlie rites, in domestic ulVairs of state, and in iirivate 
 
 Araijic veih. \iitli tlie exception of the eis^hth and corrpspondence. — ,1. N. 
 
 ninth: hesidos these it lias two other conjugations ETIIIOPIC VERSION. Tlie libraries of 
 which are nnkno«:i to tiie Araliic. The forma- Europe coiit.iin some, although very rarely com- 
 tion of nouns re.-temhles most that of Helnew ; pli'te, manuscript cojiies of a translation of the 
 l»ut nouns often have superduous end-vowels, liihle into the Geez (iialect. This version of the 
 which are modified in paiticnlar cases, and are Old Testament was made from the (iieek of (he 
 analogous to the Aral)ic iiunnation. As for the Septuagiiit, accoidiiig to (he Alexandrian recen- 
 dexion of nouns, the masculine and feminine pill- sion, as is evinced, among othiT tilings, l>y the 
 rals are either formed hy allixed syllaliles ((/«, a<^ arrangement df the IJihlical hooks, and hy (lie 
 on the priiicijile co:iimon to (lie whole Syro-Ara- admission of die Apociyplia without, distinction, 
 hian family ; or liy ciiaiiges within tlie conijia^s It is divided into four parts : 'J'/ic Law, or the 
 of flie radical letters, after the manner of the so- Octateucii, containing the Pentateuch and tlie 
 called broken plurals of the Arabic grammar, hooks of .Joshua, Judges, and Ruth ; I'hc Kings 
 The state construct, and that relation o) the noun in thirteen hooks, consisting of two Ixxiks of Sa- 
 which is eipiivalenf h) our objective case, aie de- niuel, two of Kings, two of Chronicles, two o) 
 noted hy changes in the final vowels. There is no Ezra (ICzra and Nehemiah), Toliit, Judith, Esther 
 form for the dual number either in the verb or tlie Job, the Psalms; Snlomon, in live books con- 
 noun. With regard to the vocaliulary of the sisting of Pi'jverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canticles, Wii- 
 language, one-third of the roots are to be found in dom, and Sirach ; Prophets, in eighteen books 
 the same state in Arabic. By making allowance consisting of Isaiah, Jeremiairs prophecy and 
 for commutations and tiansnositions, many other Lamentations, Barucli, Ezekiel, Daniel, and the 
 roofs may be identilied with their Arabic cone- twelve minor jirojihets : lastly, they have ulso 
 s])ondents: some of its roots, however, do not exist two luxiks of the Maecaliees. Besides this, they 
 in our present Araliic, but are to be found inAra- jiossess an apocryjilial book of Enoch, which they 
 mail; and Hebrew. Besides (his it has native place next to that of Job. The critical nseg of 
 roots peculiar to itself: it has adopted several this version are almost exclusively conlineit to 
 Gieek words, but shows no (races of the influence the evidence it gives as to the text of the Sejytiia- 
 of Coptic. giiit. The version of the New Testament was 
 Tlie alphaliet possesses twenty-six consonants, made direct from the Greek origii-.al. It follows 
 arranged in a peculiar order, twenty-four of the \eibal arrangement of the Greek very closidy 
 
 which lYiay be regarded as equivalents to th 
 same number of letters in the Arabic aljihabet 
 
 ,'tlie ones excepted being t^i^, jk, b, and c). 
 
 and has mistakes which are only to l)e explainecl 
 liy the confusion of words wliicli resemble each 
 otlier in that language. It is diilicult to deter- 
 ^ mine what recension it follows; but it frequently 
 Toe remaining two are letters adopteil to express agrees with the Peshito and the Itala. It is im- 
 the Greek n and 'V. The vowel-sounds, which are ])os-iili]e to ascertain the date of the execution of 
 seven, arenotexpressed by sepaiablesigns,asiii the eiflier of these translations; but ihev may both 
 Hebrew and .\rabic yiunctuation, but are denoted 
 by modifications in the original t'onn of the con- 
 sonants, alter the mariner of the Dovanagari alpha- 
 bet. The mode of writing is from left to riglit. As 
 for the written cliaiacters, Gesenius h;is tiaced the 
 
 be ascrilied with much probability to the he.;in- 
 ning of tlie fourth century. Only small poitious 
 of the former have been printed. The who'e 
 New Testament has, however, ajipeared. Tlie 
 Gospels were edited anew from MSS. by T. P 
 relation between some of them and their equiva- Piatt, M..\., in lS2(i, in 4to. — J. N. 
 lents in the Phosnician alphabet. Tliere is, how- ETHUN (pON) occurs in Prov. vii. 16, in 
 ever, the most striking resemblance between the connection with Egyjit, and as a ]jroduct of that 
 Geez letters generally and those in the Himjarite country. It is translated fine linen in (he 
 inscriptions; a circumstance which accords well Authorizetl Versio:). ' 1 have decked my bed with 
 with the supposed connection of Southern Arabia coverings of tapestry, with carved works, witii 
 and Habesh. Moreover, Lepsius, in an interesting fine linen {ethitn) of Egypt.' As Egyijt was 
 essay, Ueber die Anordniinrj vnd I'encandschaft fiom very early times celebrated lor its cultiva- 
 des Semitiachen, btdischen, Aethiopischen, ifc. tion of Hax and manufacture of linen, there can 
 Alphabets ^in his Zwei Sprachvergleiclutide Ab- lie little d(>ubt that ethna is correctly rendered, 
 handlungen. Berlin, l''3(), 8vo. vy. 7-1-bO), iias though some have thought tiiat if may signify 
 adduced some striking arguments to jirove that rope or string of Egypt, ' funis /-Egyptius,' ' funis 
 the Devanagari aljiliabet must have had some sal'gnus v. intubaceus;' but Celsius (Ilierohot. 
 inlluence on tiie de.elopment of the d'eez. ii. p S9,i observes, ' Elliiin non fiinem, sed liiimn 
 
 The liteiature of the Geez language is very et iinteum esse, clainat giajca vox oBSin) m;1 
 scanty indeed, and that little is almost excbi- oOSytov, qiiam ab ethiin esse deductiidam." So 
 sively of a Biblical or ecclesiastical character. Mr. Yates, in his 'Jcutrimim Aitliijuonini, p. 
 It piBsesses nothing, not even an imitation of ihe 2()), says of oSoctj, that ' it was in all probability 
 national jioetry, nor of tlie lexicographical and an Egyjitian word, adojited by the (ireeks to 
 
 irramniatical woiks, of tiie Arabs. Some few liis- 
 torii'al works in the shape of chronicles, and a 
 few medical treatises, constitute flie main tiody 
 jf (heir proiane literature. The (ieez has ceaseil, 
 W«r sii ce fiie beginning of the fourteenth century. 
 
 denote the commodity to which the Egyptians 
 themselves applied it.' For |*Di<, put into 
 (ireek letters, and with Gieek lei in nations, lie- 
 comes oOiivri and o66viov. llesychius stales, uo 
 doubt correctly, ' that odoirri viixA applied by tlie
 
 «7d 
 
 ET2-AB0TII. 
 
 ET:a-HAbAR. 
 
 Greeks to any fine ami thin clotli, though not of 
 line:!.' Mr Yates fmtln'r adduces from ancient 
 Schidia that odiivdi were made lioth of (lax and of 
 W(>i>l ; and also that the silUs of India are called 
 odiii'o.i (T^fiiKai by the author oi" the Peripltis of 
 tkc Eri/tkrcean Sea. We have also shown from 
 the same work, in the artirle Cotton, p. 473, that 
 the name o96i/iov was appl'ed to cloths ex[)i)rted 
 frcm Cutch, Oir^'in, and Baroach, and wlilch 
 must have Ijeen made of cotton Mr. Yates 
 moreover observes, that thoiii^h od6vr\., like (TiySiiv, 
 originally denoted linen, yet we find them both 
 applied lo co'ion clotii. As the manufacture of 
 linen extended itself into other countries, and as 
 the exports of India became added to those of 
 Egypt, all varieties, either of linen or cotton 
 cloth, wiierever woven, came to be designated by 
 :he originally Egyptian names ^Od&ft) and "Zivdwir. 
 
 In the New Te-jtament the word oOSuiov occurs 
 in John xix. 40 — • Ttien took they the body of 
 Jesus and wound it in li/ieii clothes ' (odo/iois)-. 
 in the parallel passage, Matt, xxvii. 59, the term 
 used is (Tii'^ii'i, as also in Mark xv. 4G, and 
 in Luke xxiii. 53. We meet with it again in 
 Jolin XX. 5, ' and he stooping down saw the 
 line/I clothes lying.' It is generally used in the 
 plural to denote 'linen bandages.' 'OQSvr] occurs 
 in Acts X. 11, 'and (Peter) saw heaven opened, 
 and a certain vessel descending unto him, as it 
 had been a great sheet knit at the four corners, 
 and let down to the earth,' and also in xi. 5, 
 where this jjassage is repeated. 
 
 From the preceding oljservations it is evi<lerit 
 that b&6viov may signify cloth made either of 
 linen or cotton, but most probably the Ibrmer, 
 as it was more common than cotton in S\ria and 
 Egypt [v. Cotton and Linen]. — J. ¥. R. 
 
 ETZ-ABOTII (nby yV) occurs in Lev. 
 Kxiii. 10, anil Neh. viii. 15, and in both jias- 
 sages is mentioned along witli etz-shernen. Tlisse 
 words occur also in Ezek. xx. 2'', where, as well 
 as in the other passages, they are translated thick 
 trees : ' For when I had brought them into the 
 land, &c., then they saw every high bill and all 
 the think trees yetz-ab'jth), and tliey otVered there 
 their' sacrilices.' Tlie word etz or otz, used in 
 8>everal places in Scripture to designate a tree, 
 is said to be derived from the verb otze, ' to fi.v' 
 'to make steady.' The word abuth, according to 
 Celsius {lUerobot. i. p. 3'i"2), is by the Rabbins, 
 as well as in the Chaldee and Syrlac vereion.s, 
 understood to mean the myrtle. But Celsius 
 himself follows the Septuagint, the Vulgate, and 
 several other authorities, in considering the etz- 
 aboth to signify a shady tree, ' foliis et frondibus 
 densa.' 
 
 Tlie shade of trees must always have been 
 highly esteemed in eastern, or rather in warm 
 climates. The planting of trees was early prac- 
 tised, as we have seen in the case of the eshel 
 planted by Al)rahani at Beershebit, when he called 
 on tlie name of the Lord. We know also that 
 among the nat <tns of antiquity the planting of 
 groves, and their consecration to their gods, were 
 antecedent to the building of temples and altars, 
 and were of almost universal adoption ; and that 
 groves were the scenes of tlieir idolatrous worship 
 and licentious lites. Hence probably the Jews 
 were jirobibited from planting trees around or near 
 tlie altai° of Gud. Shade and solitude seem 
 
 always to have been considered as giving an an 
 of mystery and devotion to religious services. 
 Seneca, as quoted by Dr. Carpenter, says, ' 11 
 you find a grove thick set with ancient oaks that 
 have shot up to a vast height, the faillness of (he 
 wood, the retirement of the jjlace, and the plea- 
 santness of the shade, immediately make you 
 think it to be the residence of some god.' The 
 prophet Hoseaalso gives the following description : 
 ' They sacrifice upon the tops of the mountains, 
 and burn incense upon the hills, under o.i'ks and 
 ])oplars and elms, because the shadow thereof is 
 good' (Hos. iv. 18). Hence, in the above pas- 
 sages, it is more than probable that ctzahuth has 
 a general, and not a specific, signification. There 
 is no ])roof of the myrtle being intended ; in fact, 
 it is not likely to have been found in any part of 
 the wilderness, and no better material can be 
 required for the construction of Ijooths than the 
 boughs of thick or shady trees. — J. F. R. 
 
 ETZ-HADAR ("inn yV) occurs only once in 
 Scripture, in Lev. xxiii. 40, where the Israelites 
 are directed, in remembrance of their dwelling 
 in tents or booths when they were brought out of 
 the land of Egypt, to leave their homes and dwell 
 in booths for a season every year. ' And ye 
 shall take you on the first (lay the bouqhs of 
 goodly trees l^peri etz-hadar), branches of palm- 
 trees, and the boughs of thick trees (etz-ahoth), 
 and willows of the brook ; and ye shall rejoice 
 before the Lord your God seven days.' Etz-aboth 
 has been noticed in the preceding article ; etz- 
 hadar has been variously tratrslated. The words 
 in the original, peri etz-hadar, the Septuagint 
 renders Kapvov ^vKov uipauov, and the Vulgate, 
 fnict}is arboris pidchcrriince, the ' fructus ligni 
 honoris' of Ursini. These translations are fid- 
 lowed in many versions, as enumerated by Celsiuj 
 (^Hieiobot. i. p. 252); but, as this author a'ao 
 shows, Onkelos and others consider the phrase to 
 signify ' fructus arboris citrei :' so R. Abcn Esra, 
 in Hebrew, but as translated by Celsius, ' Fructus 
 arboris speciosae est citrus. Nam certe nullns 
 fructus arboreus speciosior est illo.' The term 
 etragh or atriij is that translated citrus. This 
 interpretation has been adopted by the Jews, and 
 is that given by Josepiuis. The orange and lemon 
 have sometimes been adduced as the citrus of 
 the above passages, but both were unknown in 
 those early times so far north as Palestine ; while 
 the citron seems to ha\e been early introduced' 
 from Media, and was known to the Greeks and 
 Romans, as we shall show under the article 
 Taphuah. Some again are of o])inion (hat the 
 olive is intended by ihe word hadar, as the olive is 
 mentioned instead of this tree by Nehemiah (viii. 
 15), in reference apjiarently to the above [)assage. 
 Instead of fruit, however, some, as Tremellius and 
 Dr. Geddes, conceive that peri signifies young 
 growing shoots or boughs, as indeed it is inter- 
 preted in our authorized version. There can be 
 no objection to the citron being considered the 
 hadar, as is done by the Jews; since we leain 
 from Josenhus that they had them in their hands 
 m fesio Scenoper/iorum, when they threw them 
 at King Alexander Jannaeus; and they still con- 
 tinue to use citrons at the Feast of Tabernacles. 
 But this does not prove that the citron wai 
 common in Palestine, or rather in the desert, at 
 tlie time of Moses. The law giver, if he gpecified
 
 ETZ-SHEMEN. 
 
 any, would no doubt dire'-t tiie Israelites to tal<e 
 gucli fruits or l;iiinclies ;« were prociirabli" in tli*" 
 desert; Ijut it is ])rol)al)le, ;is inaiiitaiiicd by 
 the majority of commentators, that the term is 
 general, ralhcr tliaii specific, and tlu'rcfore ih, it tiie 
 fruit or liraii'lies of any goodly tree might be 
 thus em|iloyeti. Ursini has observed, ' Nam si 
 sjjecies aliqua defecisset, nee omnibus aeque ad 
 tnanum fuisset, im]K)sita fuisset necessitas Sceno- 
 pegia celebraturis, vel omittendi g^eslationem 
 horum ramusculorum, vel pravaricaiidi contra 
 legis praBscriptum. Co;;ita, si omiiilius citrctc 
 frondes fvuctiluis suis onustac, aut uleagi)i(e^ aut 
 myrtecc jfestauda; fuissent, quanta circa Hiero- 
 ■olyvnas hortorum quotaniiis fuisset calamilas; 
 quanta frcndium talium raritas et caritas ' 
 (Arboret Bibl. p. 57 7). -J. F. 11. 
 
 ETZ-SHEMEN C\W I'i') "'='="'■« ''"'^^ ^'™^^ 
 inScriptine, and is ditl'eiently translated in all the 
 three passai,'es in the Authcnized Veisi n. At the 
 in-titiilion of the Feast of Tabernacles (Lev. xxxiii. 
 .33 34), we have seen [K'lz-H \dau] tliat the Israel- 
 ites were directed to make liouths of tlie boughs of 
 pa'm-trees, oJ" willows uf the lirook. of goodly trees 
 (etz-Aadiir). and of tiiiek trees (cfz-abo/h). At 
 the reliiiilding of the temple, Neiieiniah (viii. 15) 
 directs tlie Israelites to ' go foith unto the mount 
 and fetch olire and pine branches (^ttz-shemen), 
 and wy>7fe-branclies, and pa/«i-l)ranches, and 
 branches of thick trees (elz-aboth), to make booths, 
 as it is written." Thus we see that two names arc 
 the same iu both passages, viz. the palm and 
 etz-abuth ; while etz-hadar and wil/oifs of tlie 
 brook are mentioned in tlie first, and myrtle 
 branches, olive branches, and etz-Uicmen in the 
 second. 
 
 This tenn occurs also in Isa. xli. 19 : ' I will 
 plant in the wilderness the cedar, the shittah-tite, 
 and the myrtle, and the etz-shemen [here trans- 
 lated ' oil-tree'] : 1 will set in the desert the fir-tree, 
 and the jjine, and the box-tree together.' The 
 third mention o( etz-shemen is in 1 Kings vi. 23, 
 where its wood is described as being employed : 
 ' And within the oracle he made two cherubim of 
 etz-shemen [translated o/Zre-tree], each two cubits 
 liigh.' If we collate the several passages in which 
 etz-shemen occurs, we shall find reason to con- 
 clude that it is not the olive tree, as it is translated 
 in I Kings vi. 23, since in Neh. viii. 15, the olive- 
 free (saiV) is distinguished from etz shemen, which 
 is there rendered jj/ne-^ree ; and that it is as little 
 likely to be the pine-tree, since in Isa xli. 19, 
 etz-shemen, translated oiY-tree, is mentioned as 
 distinct from both the fir and the jiine. 
 
 Though the above names, occurring in the same 
 sentences with etz-shemen, enable us to say that 
 if is not likely to have been any of them, it is 
 not more easy to say Vvliat tree is intended. Se- 
 veral have been adduced in adilitidii to those 
 mentioned aliove. as the dillerent kinds of pine, 
 including the cellar of Lebanon, the cypress, the 
 citrus, the iialsam-tree ; but there is no proof in 
 fav(iur of any of these. Ursini and Celsius are 
 both of ojiinicn that the term is used generically, 
 and theiel'ure that no particular kind of tree is 
 intended. This may appear to lie the case in the 
 earlier passages ; but in those of Isa. xli. 19, and 
 of 1 Kings vi. 23, a sjiecific tree seems to be 
 pointed tut; Imt we have no means of deter- 
 »iiiing the j"*vti(ular tree, though tliere are several 
 
 EVANGKLLSTS. 
 
 «71 
 
 ill Palestine which are not notireii in our versi'X" 
 of the Scriptures, and lliough it is proliable that 
 some even of the modern Arabic names may 
 bear some similarity to the Hebrew. The Anibio 
 shanuinat, signifying flagrant things, :ind tin' Per- 
 sian shamana/-,, signifying anything odiiriferoiid, 
 a flagrant smell, neem to be < onnecled with it. 
 But Hebrew scholars consider shcmcii as having 
 some reference to oiliness or fatne.ss. Thus (/'elsins 
 (Jlierob. i. 310) quotes K. 1). Kiniciii as com- 
 inentiug on I Kings vi. 23, as follows; ' Intel- 
 lige ))er jO'J' 'Vy s])eciem aliqiiain jiiiii, ex (jiia 
 m.uiat piiigiiedii, imde faciunt picem ; nam iiide 
 ilicitiir \'0'C' ]*y arbor pingiiedinis." The olgection 
 to etz-shemen being one of the pine tribe, is that 
 it is mentioned as apjiaiently distinct fium liofh 
 fh(! pine and fir in the ])assage of Isaiali, while in 
 that (if Kings a tree is reqniied having woo;l fit fuT 
 making the cherubim. .Is no tree has vet been 
 pointed out having a name similar e'thei in mean- 
 ing or sound to the Hebrew, and with I'.Kud of a 
 good quality, it is better to consider etz-shemen .is 
 one of those not yet ascertained, than to add one 
 more to the other unsati-ifactory guesses. — J F. li 
 EVANGELISTS (EL.a77€At(rTaO. This term 
 is a)iplied in the New Testament to a ceifain class 
 of ('hristian teachers who were nut fixed to any 
 p irticular spot, but travelleil either independently, 
 or under the direction of one or other of the Apos- 
 tle-;, for the ])urpose of propagating the Gospl. 
 Philip, one of the seven deacons, is termed the 
 Evanr/dist (Acts xxi. 8). St. Paul exhorts 
 Timothy 'to do the work of an Evan(/elist' (2 
 Tim. iv. 5); and though this name is not given to 
 Titus, the injunctions addressed to him, and the 
 services he rendered, are so similar as to render 
 the propriety .if applying it to him unquestion- 
 able. In the Hpistle to the Ephesians (iv. 1 I) tlie 
 EbayyeKtcrTds (^Evangelists) dxe. exjiressly disiiu- 
 giiished IViim the irot/xfyas Koi Si^aaKaKous (j)as- 
 tors and teachers). The chief points of dilleience 
 appear to be that the former were itinerant, the 
 latter stationary ; the former were emjiloyed in 
 introducing the Gospel where it w;is Ijefiire un- 
 known ; the business of the latter was t:) coiilirm 
 and instruct the converts statedly and pel ma- 
 nently. Such is the representation given by Eu 
 sebius (Hist. Eccles. iii. 37). Referring to the 
 state of the church in the time of Trajan, he says, 
 ' Many of the disciples of that time, whose souls 
 the Divine word had inspired with an ardent love 
 of ijliilosojihy, first fulfilleil our Saviour's precept 
 by distriljuting their substance among the ])oor. 
 Tiieii travelling abroad they jierforined the work 
 of Kvangelists {tpyuv firerfhovi' EvayytKiaTuv), 
 being ambitious to jireach Christ, and deliver llie 
 Scripture of the Divine Gospels. Having laid 
 the foundations of the faith in foieigii nations, 
 they appointed other pasfois (Troi^fVas re Kadi- 
 errauTfs iripous), to whom they entriHte.i the cul- 
 tivation of the ])arts tiiey had recently oeeujiied 
 while they proceeded to other countiie-; and 
 nations." He elsewhere speaks of Piintainiis and 
 others a* Evangel<s(s of the Word {E'v3.yy(\i(Tr(u 
 Tov \6yov (Hist. Eccles. v. 10). In the same 
 writer the term Evangelist is also ajiplied, as at 
 present, to the authors of the canonical guipeU 
 (Hist. Eccles. iii. 39). (CamiibeUs l.rrlares un 
 Ecclesiastical Histor;/, \o]. i. ])p. MS-lfjO; Nean- 
 der's History of the Planting of the Christian 
 Churchy Eng. transl. \ol. i. p. 173).— J. K. R.
 
 672 
 
 EVB. 
 
 EUPHRATES. 
 
 EVE, tlie name of the first woman. Her liis- 
 tory is contained in that of .\d.vm, wliicli see. 
 EVENING. [Day.] 
 
 EVir^MERODACII ("qllP 'PMK ; Sept. 
 EuiaAuapajSe/f, OvKaifjLaBaxo-p)^ son and successor 
 of Neljiicliadnezzar, kiiij^ nf Bal)y!on, who, on his 
 accession to tiie tinone (uc. o62), released the 
 captive king of Jnd.ih, Jehoiachin, from jnison, 
 treated liim witli kindfess and (iislinctl.in, and 
 set ids thione alt ive the tlnones of the otiier con- 
 quereil l<inj;s who were detained at Baliyhin (2 
 Kings xx\-. 27 ; Jer. In. 31-31) [CH.vi.UiEANs]. 
 A Jewisii tradition (n.iticed hy Jerome on Isa. 
 xiv. 20) ascrihes tliis kindness to a personal 
 frieiidsiiip which Evil-inHr.idaeli liad contracted 
 with the .Jewish kiriir, wiien he was himself con- 
 sia;ned to prison by Neliuchadne/.zar, who,, on 
 recover iiJ from his seven years' monomania, took 
 oBence at s ane pait of tlie conduct of his son. by 
 wliom the governineiit had in the meantime been 
 aJminlsteied. Tiiis story was proljably invented 
 to account for tlie fact. Evil-merodach is doubt- 
 ■ess the same as thf Ilvaroilam of Ptolemy sCa^iojj. ' 
 Tiie duration of his reign is made out variously 
 by cluonulo;^ers, some extendinsj; it to twenty-four 
 vears, others reducing it to two or three. Hales, 
 who adopts the last numljer, identifies hitn with 
 the king of Babylon who formed a powerful con- 
 federacy against tlie Medes. whicli was liroken up, 
 and the king slain by Cyrus, then acting for iiis 
 uncle Cyaxares. But tliis rests on the authiirity 
 of Xenophon's Ci/roprcdia. the historical value of 
 which lie estimates far tot» highly [Cykus]. 
 
 The latter half of the name Evil-iVIerodach is 
 that of a Babyloni.m god [Meuouach]. Two 
 motles iif explaining the former part of it have 
 been attempted. Since evil, as a Hebrew word, 
 means ' foolish,' Simonis jjroposes to consider it the 
 
 derivative of ?1N, in the Arabic signification of 
 ' to be first,' alfordiiig tlie sense of ' jjrince of Me- 
 rodach.' Tliis rests on the assumption that the 
 Babvlonian language was of Syro-Arablan origin. 
 Gesenius, nn the other hand, who does not admit 
 that origin, believes that some Indo-Germanic 
 word, of similar samd, but re|)utable sense, is 
 concealed under evily and that the Hebrews made 
 gjme slight perversion in its form to produce a 
 word of contemptuous signification in Hebrew, 
 just as is assimied in the case of Beelzebul. 
 
 EUNICE (EwiKT)), the mother oi' Timothy, a 
 Jewess, aiihough married to a Greek and bearing 
 a Greek h;ime, which signifies ffood victori/, and 
 is that of one of the Neieiiles, daughters of 
 Oceanus. Slie was a believer in Christ, and 
 even her mother Lois lived in the faith of the 
 expected Messiah, if slie did not live to know that 
 lie had come in the person of Jesus of Nazareth 
 (2 Tim. I. 5; Acts xvi. 1). 
 
 EUNUCH (fuyovxos). This word, which we 
 fiave adojited from the Greek, has, in its literal 
 sense, the harmless meaning of ' bed-keeper,' i. e. 
 one who has the charge of l)eds and bed-cham- 
 heis ; i»ut as only persons deprived of their virility 
 have, from the most ancient times, been employed 
 in Oriental harems, and as such persons are 
 employed almost exclusively in tins kind of ser- 
 vice, the word ' bed-keeper' Itecaine synonymous 
 With ' castratus.' In fact there are few eastern 
 Luiguages in which the condition of those ])ersons 
 M more diiectly exj)ressed than by the name of 
 
 some post ot station in which they are nsually 
 found. The admission to the recesses of th* 
 harem, which is in fact the domestic establisn^ 
 merit of the prince, gives the eunuchs such pe- 
 culiar advantages of access to the royal ear and 
 person, as often enables them to exercise an im- 
 portant inHiience, and to rise to stations of great 
 trust and ])ower in Eastern courts. Hence it 
 would seem that, in Egypt, for instance, the word 
 which indicated an eiuiuch was ap])lied to a?iy 
 court oflicer, whetlier a castiatus or not.. The 
 Willi', which describes Joseph's master as ' an 
 o/fi'-er of Piiaiaoli ' (Gen. xxxvii. (> ; xxxix. 1) ia 
 D^"1D salts, wljich is used in Hebrew to denote an 
 eunuch ; and in these jilaces is rendered J^3"l, 
 ' prince," in the Targum, and evvovxos, ' eunuch,' 
 in the Sei)tuagint 
 
 Authority would be superfiuons in proof of a 
 matter of such common knowledge as the employ- 
 ment of eunuchs, and especially of black eunuchs 
 in the courts and liarems of the ancient and mo- 
 dern East. A noble law, which, liowever, evinces 
 tlie prevalence of the custom prior to Moses, made 
 castiation illegal among the Jews (Lev. xxii. 
 21 ; Deut. xxiii. 1). But the Hebrew princes did 
 not choose to understand this law as interdicting 
 the use of those who had been made eunuchs by 
 others ; for that tliey had them, and that they 
 were sometimes, if not generally, blacks, and that 
 the chief of them was regarded as hohling an 
 important and inlluential post, appears from 1 
 Kings xxii. 9; 2 Kings viii. G ; ix. 32, 33; 
 XX. S ; xxiii. 11; Jer. xxxviii. 7; xxxix. 16; 
 xli. 16. Samuel was aware that eunuchs would 
 not fail to be employed in a regal court ; for he 
 thus forewarns the jieojjle, ' He (the king) will 
 take the tentli of your seed and of your \ineyard, 
 and give to his eunuchs [\. V. ' officers '] and 
 to his servants' (1 Sam. viii. 15). 
 
 Under these circumstances, the eunuchs were 
 probaldy obtained from a great distance, and at 
 an expense which must have limited tiieir employ- 
 ment to the royal establishment ; and this is very 
 much the case even at present. 
 
 In Matt. xix. 12, the term 'eimuch' is applied 
 figuratively to persons naturally impotent. In 
 the same verse mention is also made of persons 
 ' who have made themselves eunuchs for the 
 kingdom of heaven's sake;" which is a manifestly 
 hyperbolical description of such as lived in volun- 
 tary abstinence (comp. Matt, v. 29, 30); although 
 painful examples have occurred (as in the case of 
 Origen) of a disposition to interpret the phrase too 
 literally, and thus to act upon the following in- 
 junction, or permission, ' Let him who is cap.ible 
 of doing this, do it — 6 Swd/xevos x'^P^'*' x^'P*'''"''- 
 
 EUODIAS (E'joSios), a female member of the 
 church at Philippi, who seems to have been at 
 variance with another female member named 
 Syntyclie. Paul describes them as women who 
 had ' laboured much with him in the gosjiel,' and 
 implores them to be of one mind (Pliilip. iv. 
 2,3). 
 
 EUPHR.\TES (EiKppd.TTji'), termed in Deut. i. 
 7, ' the great river," where if is mentionfti as the 
 eastern boundary of the lan<l which (ver. S) God 
 gave to the descendants of Abraham. In Gen. 
 ii. 14, the Euphrates (JTIS) is stated to le the 
 fourth of the riveis which Howed from a common 
 stream in the garden of Eden. Divines and geo* 
 )i^ra]iher8 have taken much troidde in orde/ t«.
 
 I 
 
 EUniRATliS 
 
 ,«am the position of Eden iVoni flie proograpliical 
 particulars given in the Bihle, without rcmem- 
 beriiig (hat ]irohalily nofhin;,' more than a po- 
 pular (lescriptiiin was itit<'n(h"(l. It is true that 
 two of the rivers meTitioned in tiie passai,'e, namely, 
 the Tigris and the Euphrates, have their sources 
 in the same hiL,'h lands; l>ut scientific p;eoj^ra])hy 
 neither satictitms nor exjilains the Scriptural ac- 
 count, if Eden is to be sought in the mountainous 
 range in difliereiit and distant parts of whicii they 
 rise. 
 
 In consequence of its magnitude and import- 
 ance, the Euphrates was designated and known as 
 * the river," being by tar the most consideral)le 
 stream in Western Asia. Thus in Exod. xxiii. .'Jl, 
 v/e read, ' from the desert unto the river' (comp. 
 Isa. viii. 7). 
 
 It has two sources and two arms — a western 
 ttnd an eastern — which rise in the mountains of 
 Armenia. Of these streams the western is the 
 stiorter, and is called Kara Sou, or Melas ; the 
 eastern is itself made up of several stieams, the 
 longest of whicli bears the name of Hurad, or 
 Ptnat. The two arms unite about three days' 
 journey from Erzeroom, near which rise two of 
 the tiil)Utaries that concur in forming the Phrat. 
 Thus uniting, they give rise to the Euphrates 
 strictly so called, which, flowing to the soutii, 
 divides Armenia from Cap]iadocia ; but, being 
 driven westward iiy the Anti-Taurus and Taurus 
 mountains, it works its circuitous way througli 
 narrow passes and over cataracts, until, breaking 
 through a defile formed by the eastern extremity 
 of Mons Amanus (Alma Dagh), and the north- 
 western extieniity of Mous Ts'mus, it reaches the 
 plain country not far from Samosata (Schemisaf), 
 tiien winds soutii and soutli-east, passing the north 
 of Syria, and the nortli-east of Aral)ia Deserta, 
 and at length, after many windings, unites with 
 the Tigris, and tiius united tinds it^ termination 
 til the Persian Gulf. fHerod. i. ISO; Strabo, ii. 
 p. 521 ; Ptolem. v. 13; Plin. Hist. Nat. v. 20 ; 
 Q. fAut. i. 13; Orbis Tcrrarutn, C Kaercher 
 A<i(rt. ; Map to Report from the Sehct Committee 
 on Steam Navi'/ation to India.) In conjunction 
 with the Tigris, it forms the rich alluvial lands of 
 Mesopotamia, over which it flows or is carried 
 by canals, and thus difluses abroad fertility and 
 beauty. At Bagdad and Hillali (Babylon), tlie 
 Euphrates and Tigris approach comparatively 
 near to each other, but separate again, forming a 
 kinil of am])]e basin, till they finally become one 
 at Koorma. Under the Caesars the Euphrates was 
 the eastern boundary of the Roman empire, as 
 under David it was the natural limit of the 
 Hebrew monarchy. 
 
 Altliougli occasionally much more, the breadth 
 of tlie Euphrates varies lietween 200 and 400 yards ; 
 but for a distance of 60 miles through the Lemlun 
 marsl»es the main stream narrows to about 80 yaids. 
 The general depth of lim Uj)per Ei'.pinates exceeds 
 8 feet. In point of current it is (or the most {)art 
 a sluggish stream ; for, excejit in the height of tlie 
 Hooiied season, when it appujaches 5 miles an hour, 
 jt varies from 2^ to 3^. witli a much larger jior- 
 tim of its course under 3 than above. lis general 
 lescri])tion for some distance below Erzingan is 
 hat of a river of the first order, struggling tiirough 
 nigh hills, or rather low mountains, making an 
 exceedingly tortuous course, as it forces its way 
 ^^oir ft nebbly or rocky bed, from one natural 
 
 EUPHRATES. 
 
 673 
 
 l)arrier to another. As it wiiMh round I's lanner'am 
 harriers, it carries occasionally towards each of 
 the cardinal points a considerable boily of water ; 
 and is slialjow enough in some plac"s for louiici 
 camels to pass in autumn, the water rising to 
 their i)ellies, or alniut 4^ feet. The upper ]iuition 
 of the river is enclosed between two parallel ranges 
 of hills, covered for -the most part witiihigh brusi.- 
 wood and timber of moderate site, having a suc- 
 cession of long narrow islands, on se\eral of which 
 are moderate-sired towns ; the liorders of this 
 ancient stream being still well inhabited, not only 
 by iiedouins, but by permanent residents. The 
 following towns may be named : Samsat, Ilao- 
 HRim, Romkala, Bir, Giaber, Deir. Rava, Anna, 
 Hadisa, El Oos, Jibba, Hit, Hilhili, Lendun, 
 Konia, and Bussora. The scenery above Hit, in 
 itself vciy pictuiescpie, is greatly heightened by 
 the tVequent recuueiice o(' ancient in igating aque- 
 ducts, beautiful specimens '"•fart, •vhich are attri- 
 buted by the Arabs to the Persians, when fiie-wor- 
 shipjiers : they literally cover l)oth ljanks,and prove 
 that the borders of the Euphrates were once tiiickly 
 inhabited by a. Iiighly civili/.ed people. Thev are 
 of stone. Ten miles below Hit is tlie hist of ttiese. 
 The country now becomes (latter, with few hills; 
 the river winds less; and the banks are covered 
 with Arab villages of mats or tents, with beautiful 
 mares, cattle, and numerous (locks of goats and 
 sheep. Fiom Hit to Babylon the black tent us 
 tlie Bedouin is almost ti.e only kind of habitation 
 to he seen. Tliis distance is cultivateil only in 
 ])art ; ihe rest is dcseit, with the dale-tree showing 
 in occasional clusters. In descending, ('..e irri- 
 gating cuts and canals become more frequent. 
 Babylon is encircled by two streams, one aiiove, 
 the other below the principal ruin; beyond which 
 they unite antl jiroduce al)undance. I'or aiiouc 
 thirty miles below Hillah both banks 1 ave numer- 
 ous mud villages, imiiedde 1 in date-tiee.s : to these 
 succeed huts formed of bundles of reeds. The 
 country lower down towards Lemlun is level and 
 little elevated above the river; inigation is there- 
 fore easy : in conse(juence, both banks are coveied 
 with productive cultivation, and fringed with a 
 double and nearly continuous belt of luxuiiam 
 date-trees, extending down to the Persian Gulf. At 
 one mile and a half above the town of Dewania is 
 the first considerable deviation tioni this hitherto 
 majestic river: another takes place 22 miles lower ; 
 and nine miles farther — at Lemlun - it a^ain 
 scjiarates into two branches, forming a delta not 
 unlike that of Damietta, and when the river is 
 swollen, inundating the country for a s)iace of 
 about 60 miles in width with a shallow sheet of 
 water, foiming the Leitdun marshes, nearly the 
 whole of which is covered tvith rice and other 
 grain the moment the river recedes (in JuneJ. 
 Here mud villages are swept away by the wateT 
 every year. 
 
 Below Lemlun the Tigris sends a branch to the 
 Euphrates, which is thus increased in its volume, 
 and turning to the east, receives the chief branch 
 of the Tigris, thence rumiing in one united stream, 
 under the name of the Shat al Arali, as far as the 
 sea (the Persian Gulf). In this hist reach the 
 river luis a depth of from 3 to .') fathoma, varies 
 in l)ieadth from 5(10 to !'00 yarus, and jircsenta 
 lianks covered with villages and cultlvalioii, 
 having an appearance at once imjiosing and 
 majestic. The length ».f the navigable part o/ 
 
 2x
 
 «7'1 
 
 EUTYCHUS. 
 
 EXECRATION. 
 
 the river, recltoiiin;^ from Bir (o Biissova. is 
 143 miles; the Ipiif^tli of the entire streiim, 1400 
 '•liies. It is very uhiiiulant in fisii. The water is 
 Botiievvhat turbid ; but, when ])urified, is pleasant 
 and salubrious. The Arabians set a hit,'h value 
 tin it, and name it Murad Sou ; that is, Water of 
 desire, or longing. 
 
 Tlie river l)e;?ins to rise in March, and con- 
 tinues rising till tiie !<ifter end of May. The 
 consequent increase of its volume and rajiidity is 
 attril)utal)le to the early rains, wliich, falling in 
 the Armenian mountains, swell its mountain tri- 
 butaries; and also in the main to the melting of 
 the winter snows in ihese lofty regions. Ahout 
 the middle of November the Euphrates has reached 
 its^ lowest ei)b, and ceasing to decrease, becomes 
 traucjuil and sluggish. 
 
 The Euphrates is, on many accounts, an object 
 oCmoie than ordinary interest. 'The great river' 
 is linkt'il with the earliest times and some of the 
 /))ost signal events in the history of the world. 
 A])pearing among the few notices we have of the 
 liist condition of the earth and of htunan kind, it 
 continues, through the whole range of Scripture 
 history down to the present hour, an object of 
 curiosity, interest, wonder, hope, or triumph. 
 
 In ancient as well as in modern times the 
 Euphrates was used for navigation. Herodotus 
 stiites that boats — either coracles or rafts, floated 
 Ijy ii.'flated skins — brought the produce of Armenia 
 down to Babylon. Tiie trade thus carried on was 
 cot siderable. 
 
 The Emperor Trajan constructed a fleet in the 
 mountains of Nisibis, and floated it down the 
 Euphrates. The Emperor Julian also came down 
 the river from the same mouniains, with a fleet of 
 not fewer than 1100 vessels. 
 
 A great deal of navigation is still carried on 
 from Bagdad to Hillah, tlie ancient Babylon ; 
 but the disturbed state of the country jjrevenis 
 any above the latter place. In the time of Queen 
 Elizabeth merchants from England went by this 
 river, which was then the high road to India. 
 
 The pio]iliets made use of the Eupihrates as a 
 fl^urative description of the Assyrian power, as 
 the Nile with tliem represented the power of 
 Egypt; thus in Isa. viii. 7, ' Tiie Lord bringeth 
 up upon them the waters of the river, strong and 
 many, even the king of Assyria' (Jer. ii. 18). 
 Wahl's Asieji, p. 700 ; Ritter's Erdk. ii. 120 ; 
 Traits Element. Geographique, Bruxelles, 1832, 
 vol. ii. ; Mannert's Geogr. ii. 142 ; Reichard's 
 Kl. Geogr. Schrif ]>. 210 ; Parliam. Rep. of Steam 
 Kavii/ation to India., 1831.— J. R. B. 
 
 EUROCLYDON. [Winds | 
 
 EUTYCHUS (Ei/Tuxor), a young man of 
 Troas, who sat in the open window of the third 
 floor while St. Paul was prea'.liing late in tlie 
 night, and who, l)eing overcome by sleep, fell out 
 into the court lielow. He was ' taken up dead ' 
 {'npOrj veKp6s) ; but the Apostle, going down, ex- 
 tended himself upon the body and embraced it, 
 like the prophets of old (1 Kings xvii. 21 ; 2 Kings 
 iv. 34) ; and when he felt the signs of returning 
 life, restoroil liim to liis friends, with the assurance 
 tiiat 'his life was in him Before Paul departed 
 ill the morning the youth was brought to him 
 alive and well. It is disjiuteil whether Eutyi bus 
 was really dead, or only in a swoon; and iience, 
 whether a miracle was perliiimed or n.it. It is 
 admi'ted that the circumstances, and the woids 
 
 of Paul liimself, sanction the notion that the 
 young man was not actually dead; b'jf, on the 
 other hand, it is contended that tlie words of the 
 narrator, ' taken up dead,' are too j)lain to justify 
 us in receiving them in the modified sense of 
 'taken u)) for deatl,' which that inlet j)retdtion 
 requires (Acts xx. 5-12). 
 
 EXECRATION. The Greek word so ren- 
 dered, Ko.r6.pa, occurs in Num. xxiii. 8 ; xxiv. 9 ; 
 Josli. vi. 26 ; 1 Sam. xvii. 43. It is used 
 also in jirofane authors to denote the impreca- 
 tions which it was customary among ancient 
 nations to pronounce u])on their enemies for 
 the purpose of calling down the divine wrath, 
 branding them with infamy, and exciting against 
 tliem the passions of the multitude. By this 
 means tliey also devoted their enemies to the 
 ruin they considered tliem to tleserve. These 
 impiecations were chiefly pronounced by jiriests, 
 enchanters, or pi o])liets [Balaam]. Tlie .Athenians 
 made use of them against Philip of Macedon. 
 Tliey convened an assembly, in which it was 
 decreed that all statues, inscriptions, or festivals 
 among them, in any way relating to him or his 
 ancestors, should be destroyed, and every other 
 possible reminiscence of liim profaned; and that 
 the jiriests, as often as they prayed for the success 
 of the Athenian afliiirs, should |)ray for the ruin 
 of Philip II was also customary, both among 
 the (i reeks and Romans, after having destroyed 
 cities in war, the revival of whose strength they 
 dreaded, to jironounce execrations upon those 
 who should rebuild them. Sirabo observes tliat 
 Agamemnon pronounced execiatiois on those 
 who should reliuild Trny, as Croesus did against 
 those who should reb.uild Sidcna ; and this mode 
 of execrating cities Strabo calls an ancient 
 custom (Kara iraAathv idos, xiii. p. 898, edit. 
 1707). The Romans published a decree full of 
 execrations against those who should rebuild Car- 
 thage (Zonaras, ^»j«a/.). An incident somewhat 
 analogous is related (Josh. vi. 26) after the taking 
 of Jericho. From the words 'and Joshua ad- 
 jured them at that lime,' it is likely that he acted 
 under a divine intimation that Jericho .should 
 contiinie in ruins, as a monument of the divine 
 displeasure and a warning to ])osterity. The 
 words ' cursed be the man (the individual) before 
 the Lord that riscth up and buildeth this city 
 Jericho,' although transfor'?ied into an execration 
 by the word supplied by ine trai .^latois, amount 
 to no more than a. prediction that ' he shall lay the 
 foundation thereof in his tiist-boin, and in his 
 youngest son shall he set up the gates of it,' that is, 
 he shall meet with so many imjiedmients to his 
 undeitaking that he shall out-live a\\ his children, 
 dying ill the course of nature liefore he shall com- 
 plete it. Execrations were also pronounced upon 
 cities and their inhabitants beibie und«--taking 
 a siege (Macrobius has preserved two of the an- 
 cient forms used in reference to the destruction o1 
 Carthage, Saturnal. iii 9), and before engag- 
 ing with enemies in war. Tacitus lelatus tliat 
 the priestesses of ancient Britain devoted tlieir 
 Roman Invaders to de.stniction, witli imprecations, 
 ceremonies, and attitudes, which for a time over- 
 whelmed the soldiers with ter-or ( Anval xiv. 29). 
 The execrations in tlie S3r i Psalm, iTobabiy 
 writ tin on the occasion of the coiifederaiy against 
 Jt'liosliajiliat, and other instances of a like nature, 
 uaitiike of f' e execrations of the heathens ill
 
 EXODUS. 
 
 Milling but f^-ir, lieing tlie insjjiied ])re(lic(ums 
 or deminciafidns cf iliviiio v<'iiu'«iince a^'iiinst tlie 
 uvowed eiKetnies of" the God of Isnifl, iiotv.itli- 
 staiiding tl>e pnvtf's ihey liad wifiiesscd uf liis 
 supremacy ; and tlie oliject of these imnrecations, 
 as in many other instances, is charital)le, namely, 
 tlieir convcrsioTi to tlie tru€ ixjligion (vor. IS; soe 
 also Ps. lix. VI).— J. V. 1). 
 EXILE. fCu'TiviTV.] 
 EXODUS/ The intention of Jehovah to de- 
 liver the Israelites from Egyptian bondage was 
 made known to Moses from the hiuiiing liusl; at 
 Mount Horeh, while lie i<cpt tiie (lock of Jethro, 
 bis fatlier-in-law. Under tlhe divine direc- 
 tion Moi*3, in conjunction witli Aaron, assem- 
 bled tlie elders of the nation, and accpiaiiifed 
 them with tlw gracious design of Heaven, Al'ter 
 this tltey had iui interview witli Piiaraoli, and 
 requested permission for the jieojile to go, in order 
 to hold a feast unto God in the wilderness. The 
 result was, not only refusal, but the doubling of 
 all the burdens which tlie Israelites had previously 
 had to bear. Moses hereupon, suffering reproach 
 from his iieo})le, consults Jehovah, who assures 
 him that he would compel Pharaoh ' to drive 
 then, out of liis land.' ' I will rid j'ou out of 
 their bondage, and I will redeem you with a 
 6tietched-out arm ami with great judgments ' 
 (Exod. iii.-vi. 6). Then ensue a series of mi- 
 racles, commonly called the plagues of Egypt 
 (Exod. vi.-xii.) [Plague]. At last, overcome 
 by the calamities sent u,(K)n him, Pharaoh yielded 
 all that was demanded, saying, ' Rise uji, and get 
 you forth from among my jwople, both ye .and 
 the children of Israel ; and go serve the Lord 
 as ye have said ; also take your tlocks and your 
 herds, and be gone.' Thus driven out, the Israel- 
 ites, to the number of aJjout 600,000 adults, be- 
 «ities cliildren, led the laud, attended by a mixed 
 multitude, with tlieir tiocks and herds, even very 
 nnich cattle (Exod. xii. 31, s-;.). Being ' tliurst 
 out" ot the country, they liad not time to prepare 
 ('or themselves suitable provisions, and theieibre 
 tiiey baked unleavened cakes of the dough wliich 
 tiiey brought forth out of Egypt. 
 
 On tha night of the self-same day which ter- 
 minated a period of 430 years, during which they 
 nad been in Egypt, were they led forth fr(;m 
 Rameses, or Goslien [Goshen]. They are not 
 said to Ua.vt'. crossed the river Nile, whence we 
 may infej- that Goshen lay on t\^e eastern side 
 ef the river. Their tirst station was at Succoth 
 (Exod. xii. 37). The nearest way into the Land 
 ef Promise was through the land of the Philis- 
 tines. This route would have required them to 
 •kee[) on in a north-east direction. It jileased 
 their divine conductor, however, not to take this 
 path, lest, lieing ojijKwed by the Pliilistines, the 
 Israelites sliouhi turn back at the sight of war 
 into Egyjit. If, then, Philistia was to be avoided, 
 the course would lie nearly direct east, or south- 
 east. Pursuing this route, ' the armies' come to 
 Etham, their next station, ' in the edge of the wil- 
 derness" (Exod. xiii. 17, sq.). Here they encamped. 
 Dispatch, liowever, w;is desirable. Tliey journey 
 day and night, not without divine guidance, 
 for ' tl e Lord went before them by day in a 
 fiillar if a cloud, to lead them the way ; and by 
 night n a ]iiliar of (ire, to give them ligiit; to 
 go by day and night.' This special guidance 
 eould not well liave been meant merelv to slww 
 
 EXODUS. 
 
 67: 
 
 tlic way tlirough the desert ; for it can liardly I* 
 supi)ose(i that in so givat a multilude no |)rr.soii« 
 knew the ukuI ox-er a coinitry lying near to that 
 in which they and (heir ancest ts liad tJw^elt, and 
 which did not rxteiKl mow than s«nie foity milc« 
 aci-oss. Tlie divine guides were (hcibtless in- 
 tended tfl C(»nduct the Israelites in that way unit 
 to that spot whew the Iwnd of Ci<n[ would lit 
 most signally displayed in tlieir ii'sciw and in 
 the destruction of Pluiraoh. 'I will I.e l«miinre(1 
 uiK^i Phaiaoli and upoji all liis Ii/ist, that tire 
 Egyptians may know tiiat I am tlie Loirl." K(ir 
 this pur{)ose Moses is directed of Go I fo ' sp<„k 
 unto the children of Israel that tliey (urti ami 
 encamp before Pi-hahiiotli, between Migtinj aiiJ 
 the se:u, over against Baal-zeplion ; before it :--haH 
 ye encamp by the sea: and tliey did so' (Exod. 
 xiv. 2-4). We iiave already seen rea>s<Hi (o tliink 
 that the direction of the Israelites w;is tii the oa*f 
 or south-east; this turning must have been in the 
 latter direction, else they would have been '■,anie I 
 down towards the lajid of tlie Philistines, which 
 they were to avoid. Let the word • turn " be 
 marked; it is a strong term, and .seems to imj Iv 
 that the lii^eof the march was bent consideralilv 
 towards the soutli, or tlie interior of the land'. 
 The children of Israel then are now encamped 
 bc'fore Pi-hahiroth, between Migdol and tlie sea, 
 also 'by tie sea.' Their position was such tlia5 
 they were 'entangled in the land, tiie wikleiiiegs 
 hath shut them in." 
 
 A new scene is no>v laid open. News is carried 
 to Pharaoh which leads him to see that t!ie reason 
 assigned (namely, a sacriSce in the wilderness) is 
 but a pretext ; tliat tlie Israelites had really (led 
 from liis yoke; and also that, tlirough some (to liiiiiv 
 unaccountable error, they liad gone towards tlw 
 south-east, had reached the sea, and weiv henniied 
 in on all sides. He summons his troops and sets 
 out in pursuit — ' all the horses and chariots off 
 Pliaroah, and liis horsemen and his army ;' and 
 he ' overtook tliem encamjiing by the sea, beside 
 Pi-hahiroth, before Baal-zephon ' (Exod. kIv. Ti 
 The Israelites see tlieir pursuing enemy ap]iroach, 
 and are alarmed. Moses assures them of divine 
 aid. A promise was given as of God that the Israel- 
 ites should go on dry ground through the midst 
 of the sea; and that the Egyptians^ attemjiting 
 the same path, should be destroyed : ' and I will 
 get me honour upon Pharaoh and all his li.)st, 
 upon his chariots and his horsemen ' (ver. Ivi 
 Here a very extiaordinaiy event takes places 
 ' The angel of God, wliich went liefore the camp 
 of Israel, removed and went liehind tliem ; and 
 the pillar of the cloud went Crom liefoi-e their ("ace 
 and stood behind iheiii ; and it came between the 
 camp of the Egyptians, and tlie camp of Israel ; 
 and It was a cloud and darkness to tiiem, but il 
 gave light by night to these ; so thai tlie one came 
 not near tlie other all the night' (ver. 19, 20). 
 Tlien comes the division of the waters, which we 
 give in the words of the sacred histoiian : ' And 
 Moses stretched out his hand over the sea, and 
 the Lord caused the sea to go back l>y a stnmg 
 ea-st wind all that night, and made tfie sea dry 
 land, and the waters were divided. Afid tl"> 
 children of Israel went info the midst of the .sea 
 u[Hin the ilry ground; and the waters were a wall 
 unto them on their right harul and on their left. 
 And the Egyptian.? jjursued and went in aftw 
 them to t/ie midst of the sea, even all Pliars»ois%
 
 fi76 
 
 EXODUS. 
 
 EXODUS. 
 
 horses, his chariots, and his horsemen.' Delays 
 are now occasioned to the Ei^yptians ; their clia- 
 riot-wheels are sii],'eniafnrally taken oiT, so that 
 ' in the morning-watch tiiey drave them heavily.' 
 TlieEgy))tians are troubled; they urge eacli other 
 to fly iVom the face of Israel. ' Then Moses 
 stretched forth his hand over the sea, and the sea 
 returned to his strengtli wlicn the morning ap- 
 peared ; and tiie Egyptians fled against it ; and 
 the Lord overtiirew the Egyptians in the midst of 
 the sea. And the waters returned and covered 
 the chariots and the horsemen and all the host 
 of Pharaoh that came into the sea after them ; 
 there remained not as much as one of them. But 
 the children of Israel walked upon dry land in 
 the midst of the sea, and the waters were a wall 
 unto them on tlieir right hand and on their left. 
 And Israel saw the Egyptians dead upen tlie sea- 
 Siiore ; and the people feared the Lord, and he- 
 lieved the Lord and liis servant Moses' (ver. 2S-31). 
 From the song of triumpli which Moses sang ujxm 
 this occasion we learn some other paiticulars, as 
 that ' the depths covered Pharaoh's host, they sank 
 to the bottom as a stone;" language which, what- 
 ever deduction may be made for its poetic cha- 
 racter, implies that tlie miracle took ])lace in deep 
 water. 'Tiiou sentest ibrth fliy wrath which con- 
 sumed them as stubble, and witl) the blast of tiiy 
 nostrils the waters were gatliered together, the 
 floods stood upright as an heap, and the depths 
 were congealed in the hoart of the sea; thou 
 didst blow with thy wind, the sea covered them ; 
 tiiey sank as lead i?i the mighty iraters ' — all 
 which would he not poetry, but bomliast, had not 
 the wind, been as miraculous as any other part of 
 the event, and had not the sea been large and deep 
 (Exod. XV. ; comp. Vs. cvi. 9, scj.). 
 
 Such is the bearing and import of the sacred 
 narrative. If any intelligent reader, knowing 
 nothing of the theories of learned men, were to 
 peruse the account given in Exodus with a map 
 before him, he would, we doubt not, be led to 
 conclude tiiat the route of the Israelites lay to- 
 wards the south-east, up the Red Sea, and that the 
 5]X)t where they crossed was at, a place encircled 
 by mountains on the side of the desert, and fronted 
 by dee]) and im])assable waters : he would equally 
 conclude that the writer in Exodus intended to 
 represent the rescue as from first to last the woik 
 of God. Had tlie Israelites been at a place which 
 was fordal)le under any natural influences, Pha- 
 raoh's undertaking was absurd. He knew that 
 they were entangled, — mountains behind and on 
 ?itlier hand, while the deep sea was before them, 
 riieiefoie he felt sure of his prey, and set out in 
 pursuit. Nothing but the divine interposition 
 foiled and punished him, at the same time re- 
 deeming tlie Israelites. And this view, which the 
 nilearned but intelligent reader wouhl be led to 
 take, involves, in fact, all that is imjiortant in tlie 
 ease. But a dislike of the miraculous has had an 
 inlhience, anil erudition has tried to fix the pre- 
 cise S])ot ; whence have arisen views and theories 
 which are more or less discordant with the Scrip- 
 ture, or are concerned with comparative trifles. 
 So far as a\ersion to miracle has had an influence 
 in tlie hyjiotlieses which have been given, all we 
 sliall remark is. that in a case which is so evi- 
 dently represented as the sphere of miracle, there 
 \s but one alternative, — tii?y who do not admit 
 iJiC miracle must reject u.3 narrative; and far 
 
 better would it he to do si> franMy than to con- 
 struct liypolheses which are for tlie most part, i( 
 not altogether, purely arbitrary. A narrative 
 obviously miraculous (in the intention oi the 
 writer) can be explained satisfactorily on no ra- 
 tionali.stic jirincijiles : fhii is not to expound but 
 to 'wrest' the Seiiptiups ; a position which, il 
 our opinion, has been fully established, in relation 
 to the Gospels, against the whole of the rational- 
 istic school of interiiretation. 
 
 The account now given must, as being derived 
 immediately from the Scripture, lie in the niait 
 correct. If the authority is denied, this can bt 
 done elTectually by no ofiier means than by dis- 
 proving in general the authority of the books 
 whence it is derivefl ; and it may with truth bt 
 aflirmed, that no view opposed to that given can 
 jjossess greater claims on our credit, while any 
 mere sceptical opinion must rest on its own in- 
 trinsic probability, contested, so far as it opposes 
 the Scripture, by scriptural antliority. 
 
 When, however, we descend from generals to 
 particulars, and attempt to ascertain precise 
 localities and determine details, diversity of opi- 
 nion may easily ari.se, and varying degrees of pro- 
 bability only are likely to attend the investigation. 
 For instance, tlie immediate spot which Moses 
 proposed to reach, was, we know, on the Red Sea; 
 but the precise line which he took dejiended of 
 course on the place whence he set out. With dif- 
 ference of opinion as to the spot where 'he Hebrews 
 had tlieir rpndez^■olIs, theie cannot be agreement 
 as to the route they followed. 
 
 The position of Goslien, where the Israelites 
 v/ere settled, we shall endeavour to fix in another 
 article. It is enough here to say, that it was on 
 the eastern side of the Nile, probably in the pro- 
 vince of Esh-Sliiirkiyeh. Rameses vras the place 
 of rentlezvous. The direct route thence to the Red 
 Sea was along the valley of the ancient canal 
 By this way the distance was about thirty-fiv» 
 miles. From the vicinity of Cairo, however, ther. 
 runs a range of hills eastward to the Red Sea, thi 
 western extremity of which, not far from Cairo, i. 
 named .leliel-Mokaltem ; the eastern extremity i> 
 termed Jeliel-Attaka, which, with its promontorj 
 Ras Attaka, runs info the Red Sea. Between th« 
 two extremes, somewhere about the middle of tin 
 range, is an opening which afiords a road for cara 
 vans. Two routes offered themselves here. Sup 
 posing that the actual starting piint lay neare, 
 Cairo, the Israelites miglit strike in from the nortl 
 of the range of hills, at the opening just men 
 tioned, and pursue the ordinary caravan roao 
 which leads from Cairo to Suez; or they might 
 go southward from Mokattem, through the Wadj 
 .;1 Tih, that is, the A'alley nf Wandering, through 
 which also a rimd, though less usetl, runs to Snez 
 According toNielnihr tliey took the first, accord- 
 ing to ancient tradition. Father Sicard (/7c6er rfo 
 \^'eg der Isracliten, Paulu.s, Samml. v. 211, sq.) 
 and others, they took tlie last. Sicard foiinil 
 traces of the Israelites in tlie valley. He lielo 
 Rameses to he the starting point, and Rameses h? 
 placed aliout six miles from ancient Cairo, wheri 
 Bezatin is now found. Here is a cajiacioJJS sand) 
 plain, on which Sicard thinks the Israelites as 
 sembied on the morning when they began fheii 
 journey. In this vicinity a plain is still found 
 which the Arabs call the Jews" Cen etery, ano 
 where, from an indefinite neviod. the Jews hav«
 
 EXODUS. 
 
 buried their dead In the Mokatteni chain is a 
 nil], apart of which is callcil Mojaiiat Musa, 
 ' Moses' Station.' On another hill in the vici- 
 nity, ruins are fo\u»<l, which the Arabs name 
 Meravad Musa, ' Moses" Delight,' Tims s<^'veral 
 tiling's seem to carry the tnind back to liie time of 
 tlie Hebrew le-^islator. Tiirough the valley which 
 leads from Bezatin (the Valley of Wandering) to 
 tii€ Ked Sea, Sicard travelled in three days. He 
 reckons the length to be twenty-six hours, which, 
 if we give two miles to each hour (Robinson'), 
 would make the distance Kfty-two miles. This 
 length is also assigned by Girard (Descrip. I'opo- 
 grap. de la Va-llte de V Egaremcut). The valley 
 tunning pretty much in a plain surface would 
 aflbrd a convenient ])assage to the mixi'd bands of 
 Israelites. About eighteen miles from Bezatin 
 you meet with Gendelhy, a plain with a fountain. 
 The name signifies a military station, and in this 
 Sicard finds the Succoth (tents) of Exodus, the 
 first station of Moses. The haste with which they 
 left (were driven out) would enable them to reach 
 this place at nightiall of their first day's march. 
 Sicard places their second station, Etham, in the 
 plain Ramliyeh, eighteen miles from Gendelhy 
 and sixteen from the sea. From this plain is a 
 pass, (bur miles in length, so nariow that not more 
 than twenty men can go abreast. To avoid this, 
 which would have caused dangerous delay, the 
 wder was given to turn (Exod. xiv. 2). Etham 
 is said (Exod. xiii. 20) to be on the edge of the 
 wilderness. Jablonski says the wortl means ter- 
 minus maris, the termination or boundary of the 
 sea. Now, in the plain where Sicard fixes Etham 
 (not to be confounded with the Eastern El ham, 
 tlirough which afterwards the Israelites travelled 
 three days. Num. xxxiii. 8), is the spoi where the 
 waters divide which run to the Nile aiul to the 
 Gulf of Suez, and Etham is therefore truly ter- 
 minus maris. Kere the Israelites received com- 
 mand to turn and encamp (Exod. xiv. 2) before 
 Pi hahiroth, between Migdol and the sea, over 
 against Biial-zepln n. Pi-hahirofh (the mouth (,{ 
 the hiding-places) Sicard identities with Tiiuaiek 
 (small caves), which is the name still given to 
 tliroe or four salt springs of the plain Baideah, on 
 the south side of muunt Attaka, which last Si- 
 card identifies with Baal-zephon, and which is 
 the northern boundary of the plain Baideah, 
 while Kuiabeh (Migdol) is its southern limit. The 
 pass which leads to Suez, between Aitakaand the 
 K3., is very narrow, and could be easily stopped 
 by the Egyptians. In tliis plain of Baideah, 
 Pharaoh had the Israelites hemmed in on all sides. 
 This then, according to all appearance, is the 
 •pot where the passage through the sea was 
 effected. Such is the judgment of Sicard and of 
 Raunier (Der Zut/ der Israeliteii, Leipzig. 1837; 
 for a description of the Valley ol' Wandering see 
 also Ritter, Erdkunde, i. 85S). It cannot be denied 
 that this route satisfies all the conditions of the 
 case. Equally does the spot correspond with the 
 miraculous narrative furnislied by holy writ. A 
 difleient route is laid down by Niebuhr (^Arab. 
 p. 407 V Other writers, who, like him, endeavour 
 to explain the facts without the aid of miracle, 
 inutate h'ls example. 
 
 It is no siTiall corroboration of the view now 
 given from Sicard and Raumer, that in substance 
 it has the support of Joscphus, of whose account 
 Ire shall, from its inijxirtance, give an abridg- 
 
 EXODUS. 
 
 677 
 
 ment. The Hebrews, he says (^Aiitiq. li. 16), 
 took their journey by LafojioHs, where liabylun 
 was built afterwards when Cambyses laid Egypt 
 waste. As they went in haste, on the third liay 
 the}' came to a jilace called Baal-zephon, on the 
 Red Sea. Moses Ifd them this way in oriier that 
 
 the Egyptians might lie punished si ij ihey 
 
 venture in pursuit, and al.so because the Ilel'iewi 
 had a quarrel with the Philistines. \\'lien tls 
 Egyptians had overtaken the Hebrews they pre- 
 jiai-ed to fight them, and by their multitude 
 drove them into a narrow place ; for the number 
 that went in ))ursuit wiis 6(10 < harlots, 5(l.i 00 
 liorsemen, and 200 000 infantry, all armed. Tl. 'v 
 also seized the passages, shutting the Hibiews up 
 between inaccessible precipices and the sea; for 
 tiiere was on each side a ridge of mountains tlial 
 terminated at the sea, which were impassaljle. and 
 obstructed their (light. Moses, however, prayed 
 to God, and smote the sea with his rod, when the 
 waters parted, and gave the Israelitis free pa.ssage 
 The Egyptians at first sujiposed them distiacifd; 
 but when they saw the Israelites proceed in 
 safety, they followed. As soon as the entiie 
 Egyptian army was in the channel, the sea 
 closed, and the pursuers perished amid torrents 
 of rain and the most terrific thunder and light- 
 ning. 
 
 The opposition to the scriptural account has 
 been oi' two kinds. Some writers (Wolfenb. 
 Frac/m. ]>. 64, s(j.) have at once declared the 
 whole fabulous ; a course which appears to have 
 been taken as early as the time of Joseplais 
 (Anliq. ii. 16. 5). Others have striven to explain 
 the facts by the aid of mere natural causes ; I'or 
 which see Winer, Ilaiidioor/erbtwh, in Mter 
 Rothes. A third mode of explanation is ji-usued 
 by those who do not deny miracles as such, and 
 yet, with no small inconsistency, seek to reduce 
 this particular miracle to the smallest dimen- 
 sions. W'riters who see in the deliverance of tie 
 Hebrews tlie hand of (iod and the fulfilment t.( 
 the divine purposes, follow the account in Scrip- 
 ture implicitly, placing the p;issage at Ras 
 Attaka, at the termination of the Valley of \A"an- 
 dering ; others, who go on rationalistic principles, 
 find the sea here too witle and too deep (or thtir 
 purpose, and endeavour (o fix the passage a little 
 to the south lyr the north of Suez. 
 
 The most recent advocate of the passage at or 
 near Suez is the learned Dr. Roliinson {Bib/icul 
 Researches iti Palestine), from whom we hesitate 
 to dlfl'er, and should hesitate still more, did not 
 his remarks bear obvious tracts of being, however 
 the author may he ignorant of t!ie fact, i.:i(lueneed, 
 if not dictatett, by some foregone conclusion and 
 certain rationalistic habits of mind. 'iVhile, 
 however, we pay every projier ti ibute of respect 
 to Dr. Robinson's learning and diligence, v.e 
 must prefer the authority of Scripture and tl* 
 obvious facts of the case to all other consider- 
 ations. The raute taken by Moses was, accoiding 
 to Robinson, from Raniejies to the head of tie 
 Arabian Gulf, through Succotti, to Etham. The 
 last I'lace he fixes on the edge of the desert, on 
 the eastern side of the line ol" tiie gulf. Instead 
 of passing down the eastern side, at the top of 
 which they were, the Israelites thence niarcl^ 
 dov.-n the western side of the arm of the gulf^ 
 stopping in the vicinity of Suez, where the pajssag* 
 was effected.
 
 878 
 
 EXODUS. 
 
 EXODUS. 
 
 Tliis view re].reipnt3 Moses tis having actaaTTy 
 condiicleci liis jx'ople iirst out oi" all danj^er, anil 
 then leil tliem at once into it, by placing the gulf 
 between them and safety. Such i\ pjoceeding ill 
 became a pnuieiil leader having to di) with a 
 self-willed aiwl stilV necked hand. But tlie chief 
 t>lije<-troD to tiiis lepieicnlation-of the route is^ that 
 rt does n<rf answer to what Scriptine requires-, for 
 rn Exo<l xiii. IH, we arp told tltat 'God led the 
 people about titrongh the wilderness of ihe lied 
 S-'f. .' How, accortling to Roliinsoji, ilid he 'lead 
 fnein ab.)ijt," csjx'cially '■ tltrougli the wilderness 
 of the Red Sea,' which they must n-.erely have 
 touched iipm 1 
 
 T\\e pass<i(/e Robinson thinks tool; place 'across 
 shoals adja'.ent to Suez on the south and soutli- 
 west, ' where ttie broa(i stioals are still left bare 
 at the ebb, and tlie channel is sometimes forded,' 
 ' a distance of three or four miles from shore to 
 sliore;* or ' it might have l>een ell'ected througli 
 the arm of the gulf abo\e Suez.' A sinijjje 
 reference to the language of Scripture ])revious]y 
 dted confutes tliis supposition ; for where, in or 
 rear this place, are the deep waters of which 
 Moses speaks'^ Besides, is it for a moment to be 
 sup)»oseti that Pharaoh was not well acquainted 
 with the tides of a sea which lay so near his 
 capital? and would he have been .so infatuated 
 as to remain quietly in his position (for tlie 
 Scripture sliows that tlie two armies were .some 
 time in sight of each other) until the Israelites 
 had availed themselves of the ebb, and tiieu, 
 when ttie flood carne, quietly go into the sea 
 ftinl be destroyed? In order to help out his 
 iiyp;)tliesis, conscious, apparently, that the body 
 of water here was insuflicient. Dr. Robinson ad- 
 vances a supijosition (but for sujj-positions his 
 view would look as groundless as it really is), 
 namely, that with the Hood-tide the v^'ind was 
 clianged. But a ])Priisal of his soiiptnral refer- 
 ence (Exod. XV. S-10) shows that this alleged 
 change is without evidence — a ))u;e supposition: 
 the l.mguage in the ' tli verse has respect to the 
 wind which divided the sea; and the language 
 in the IO(h verse in no way implies any change 
 of direction wliatever; the .same wind, in the hand 
 of (jod, could botli diviiie and close the sea. 
 
 The great question, however, is the cause or 
 instrument employed in securing the Israelites a 
 passage on dry ground, and overwhelming the 
 Egyptians. On this ])i)int we complain of a want 
 of exjilicitness in Dr. Robinson. He does not 
 deny a miracle, but blends together the miracu- 
 lous and the natural, so as to confuse his own 
 and his readers minil. 'It (the miracle) was 
 v/i ought by natural means siipernaturally a|iplied.' 
 A north-cast wind was brouglit of God to act on 
 the water as the sea was ebbing, wiiich gave a 
 dry ))ass;tge to the Israelites. \Ve are tlierefore 
 ' to look only for tlie natural effects arising from 
 (he operation of such a cause.' The sole causes 
 then in the case were a north-east wuid, the ebb- 
 tide, the ll.iod, and a change of wind to aid the 
 "kClion of the Hood. Of these causes, the last, the 
 change of wind, is, as we liave seen, a gratuitous 
 aiuimption. From 'north-east wind' we must 
 strike out 'north,' as being another gratuitous 
 assumption — it is 'a strong east wind' of which 
 Moses .speak.s. An east wind, however, would (jy 
 ijo means ell'ect the ))urposes needful for Dr. Ro- 
 V/iusoa's hypothesis. Of his remainiog causes, the 
 
 ebb and flood tide, enough has already i.een sanl; 
 and, so far as an east wind, acting nnturally, 
 would have an etl'ect,, it woul<l drive the waterr 
 upon fhe stiallowa, which l>i-. Robiiison wantJ 
 dry. But we much question whether liis a>»- 
 snined 'north-ea.sf wind' wcHihi cause what he 
 requires, it would, he alleges, ' have the e.'Vect 
 to drive out the waters from the small aim of the 
 sea whicl) runs up by Suez, and al-o fi^om the 
 end of the gidf itself, leaving tlie shallower por- 
 ti.ins dry. while the more northern part of the 
 arm, which was anciently broa<lfT aj)d deej)er 
 than at jircsenf, would s.till remain covers* with 
 water. Thus the waters would l>e div ded, aiid 
 lie a wall to fhe Israelites on the light hand and 
 on the left." We desire the reader to considf the 
 map ajjpeiided to Dr. Rol)inson's first volume. 
 While C(,ns'dering the liy])othesis in question, he 
 must remember that the action of ebb and Hood 
 tide rests on no better ground than an assumption ; 
 the Scripture says nothing thereof. Now a wind 
 setting in at the head of the gidf would com- 
 mence its influence of cour.se at the end of the 
 arm which luns up to the east of Suez, and 
 would, so far as it acted, liear down the waters 
 from the top towards the very place which the 
 hyjiothesis requires to be dry, namely, the head 
 of the gulf, thus covering the shallows. But if, 
 to avoid this ditTflculty, Dr. Robinson fixes the 
 ])assage in the aim itself, then how could a wind, 
 acting on the waters in the arm, 'divide' them? 
 Drive them out, scatter them to some extent, it 
 might, but surely not divide them. Nor does 
 Dr. Robinson secure by his other suppcsition, 
 namely, the passage over the shallows, guch a 
 division as the Scrijiture requires. Sniiposing the 
 effect which he contemplates to be jiroduced, then 
 there would be on the north side of the shallows 
 so much of the sea as the v;ind had left in the 
 arm, and so much of the sea as lingered under its 
 ilriving impulse on the south side of the shallow*. 
 With this in his mind let the reailer jieruse the 
 scrijituial account, ' the waters were a wall to 
 them on the right hand and on the left.' By 
 Dr. Robinson "s account there was no wall at all, 
 but such a state of the sea and land as would 
 render the choice of the language enqiloyed l)y 
 Moses most iiia])]iropiiate. In tiutli, however, the 
 east wind of which Moses speaks was precisely 
 the influence to bring about the efl'ect which he 
 alleges to have taken place. Acting on the sea 
 at a right angle it would !iterally diviile the 
 waters, causing the mid-way to be dry, and a 
 wall to stand on either side. Such obviously is 
 the view which Mo.ses intentled to give. In en- 
 deavouring to define anil estimate tlie action of 
 this east \^ind, however, it must be borne in niirxi 
 that the Scriptine repre.sents the entire affair as 
 miraculous. It was from Hist, to last ' the hand 
 of tlie Lord,' — the east wind and its action, as 
 nmcli as the collapse of the .sea. The east wind, 
 indeed, is also termed 'the tdast of tliy no.stiils;' 
 and so 'thou didst blow with thy wind, the sea 
 coveied thern." 
 
 The miraculous character of the tran.saction, 
 as affirmed in Scripture, takes all jioint from tiie 
 question of time, which Dr. Robinsi.n says i« 
 fatal to the alternative hypothesis, namely, that 
 the Israelites crossed from Wady Tawarik ; since 
 there is no occasion, in onler to susi; in the nar- 
 rative of Moses, to calculate whether the interval
 
 EXODUS. 
 
 between the ebb and the flow of the tiili' atVortled 
 Bui£cient time ibr the Israelites to cross the lied 
 of the sea, a distance of twelve geoffraphical 
 miles. Tiie piissage ditl nm depend on ebb or 
 flow. It was not a question ef mere time. The 
 riyht hand of the Lord was at work. 
 
 It ajj])eavs thou very clear, by conipaiiiig Dr. 
 Robinson (vitii Moses and wiih facts, that liis 
 ' extraord.uary ebb, brouglit about by natural 
 means,' could not iiave produced such a state 
 of tilings as lie supjioses, still less such a state of 
 things as the miracle requires. The only resource 
 ,'s to deny the miracle, and disown tlie entire 
 account. If this bold coiuse is declined, then 
 the passage at Suez or across the arm must be 
 given up in favour of one lying far more to tlie 
 south. 
 
 These strictures on Dr. Robinsons hypothesis 
 are in no way prompted by any previous leaning 
 to a preference in favour of tlie jiassage at Ras 
 Attaka. lor they were penned exclusively under 
 the induence of the sciijitural narrative. And 
 if authority is needed as against one who has 
 been on the spot, what has already been given 
 from Sicard might be deemed suliicient, especially 
 when it so obviously agrees with the tenor of the 
 accounts found in E.vodus and in Joseplius. But 
 other witnesses are not wanting. Mr. Blumhardt, 
 in his missionary visit to Abyssinia, passed 
 through Suez (Oct. 1836, see Church Missionary 
 Record, No. 1, Jan. 1S38), and furnishes some 
 remarks on the subject. ' The Red Sea at Suez 
 is exceedingly narrow, and in my opinion it can- 
 not be that the Israelites here exjjerienced the 
 power and hjve of God in their passage through 
 the Red Sea. The breadth of the sea is at pre- 
 eent scarcely a quarter of an hour by Suez. Now 
 'f this be the part which they crossed, how is it 
 possible that all the army of Pharauh, with his 
 chariots, could have been drowned ? I am rather 
 inclined to believe tliat tlie Israelites experienced 
 that wonderful deliverance about thirty miles 
 lower down. This o})inion is also strengthened 
 by most of the Eastern churches, and tlie Arabs, 
 who believe that the Israelites reached the oppo- 
 site shore at a place called Geliel Pharaon, wiiidi 
 on that account has received this name. If we 
 accept this opinion, it agrees very well with the 
 Scripture.' Still more important is the evidence 
 of Dr. Olin (^Travels in the East, New York, 
 18J3). Many of his remarks we have antici- 
 pated in our observations on Robinson. Dr. 
 Olin, however, agrees with Robinson in fixing 
 Etbam 'on the border of the wilderness whicii 
 stretches along the eastern shore of the arm of the 
 sea which nms up above Suez.' At this point 
 he says the Hebrews were commanded to turn. 
 They turned directly southward and marcheil to 
 an exposed position, hemmed in completely by 
 the sea, the desert, and Mount Attaka. A false 
 confidence was thus exci'ed in Piiaraoh, and the 
 deliverance was macU V.a more signal and the 
 more impressive aliki to the Israelites and to 
 Egypt. Admitting the possiliility that the sea at 
 Suez may have been wider and deeper than it is 
 now, Olin remarks, ' it must still have been very 
 difficult, if not im])ossible, for the army of Israel, 
 encumbered with infants and aged people, as 
 well as with Hocks, to pass over (near Suez) in 
 the face of tiieir enemies" (i. 316). Besides, the 
 peculiarities of the 2>l^ce must liave had a ten- 
 
 EXODUS 
 
 679 
 
 dency to liisgiiise the charactei and impair the 
 elVi'ct of the miracle. The passage madf at th*" 
 intervention of Moses was ke|)t ojien all lught. 
 Tlie Egyptians followed the Hebrews fo th« 
 midst of the sea, when the sea enguljihed them. 
 'The tntlre night seems to have been consumed 
 in the passage. It is ha-rdly credible that so 
 much lime shoulil have lieen consiuned in cross- 
 ing near Sik?z, to accomplish which one or twr 
 hours would have been sutKcient.' ' Nor is it 
 conceivable that tlie large army of the Egvptians 
 should have been at once within the liaiiks .if so 
 narrow a channel. The more advanced troops 
 would have reached the o|.po-iite shme bcl'ore the 
 rear hail entered the .sea; and yet we knuw that 
 all Pharaoh's chariots and horsemen follo.ve<l to 
 the tnidst of the sea, and, together with all the 
 host that came in after them, were covered with 
 the returning waves" (i. 31^). Preferiing the 
 jjosition at Riis Attaka, Olin states that the gulf 
 is here ten or twelve miles wide. ' The valley 
 expands into a considerable plain, bounded by 
 lofty precipitous mountains on the right and left, 
 and by the sea in front, and is siilhciently ample 
 to accommodate the vast numlier of human 
 beings who composed the two armies.' ' An east 
 wind would act almost directly across the gulf. 
 It would be unable to co-operate with an ebb tide 
 in removing the wafei.s — no objection certainly 
 if we admit the exercise of God's miraculous 
 agency ;' but a very great impediment in the 
 way of any rationalistic hypothesis. 'The chan- 
 nel is wide enough to allow of the movements 
 described by Mose.s, and the time, which em- 
 braced an entire night, was suliicient for tlie 
 convenient march of a large army over such a 
 distance.'' 'The opinion which lixes the point o1 
 transit in tlie valley or wady south of Mount 
 Attaka derives confirmation from the names still 
 attached to tl^e ))rliici]ial objects in this locality. 
 Upon this ]ioint I acknowledge my obligation; 
 to the Rev. Mr. Leider, of Cairo, who has spent 
 rhore than ten years in Egypt, is familiar witii 
 the Arabic language, atid has devoted much at- 
 i^ntion to this vexed question. He recently 
 spent s"i?veral days in this neighbourhood in 
 making investigations and inquiries in reference 
 to the passage of the Israelites. Jebel Attaka, 
 according to Mr. Leitler, who only confirms the 
 statements of former travellers, means in the lan- 
 guage of the Arabs '' the Moiuit of Deliverance."' 
 Baideah or Bedt'ah, the name of this pa.t of the 
 valley, means "the Miraculous," while Wady el 
 Till means " the Valley of VVanderings.' Pi- 
 hahirolii, where Moses was commanded tn encamp, 
 is rendered by scholars " the mouth of Hahiroth. " 
 which answers well to the deep gorge south of 
 Attaka, but not at all to the bioad plain about 
 Suez' (1.350). 
 
 Other parts of the line of march pursued by 
 the Israelites will be found treated of un<b r the 
 heads Manna, Sinai, Wanukring. — J. R. B. 
 
 EXODUS (Gr. "EIoSpt, in the He.rew canon 
 niDi^* n7i<1), the second book of Ma*.«, so called 
 from the jirincipal event recorded in it, tiamely, 
 the departure of the Israelites from Egypt. With 
 this book begins the jiroper history of that people, 
 continuing it until their arrival at Sinai, and the 
 erection of the sanctuary tnere. If transports ui 
 in the first instance to Egypt, and the quarter in
 
 6R0 
 
 EXODUS. 
 
 EXODUS. 
 
 whicli (lie I.«iii('li(t'S were domii-ilcd in lliaf coun- 
 try. We do not find in I lie Pentaleucli <i real 
 history ol" the people of Isnie] durint^ this [leriod. 
 Such a history, in tlie moie strict acceptation of 
 the term, has no place in an historical sketch of 
 the kingdom of God, wiiere the mere description 
 of tiie sji'nation am! condition of tlie people is all 
 that is requisite. From that description we leiirn 
 satisfictorily how the people of tlie Lwd were 
 negatively prei)ared for the grejit ohicct which 
 Grod liaci decreeu with reg.ird to them. Tins is 
 the important theme of tlie history of tlie Penta- 
 lench during the whole long period of fom- hun- 
 dred years. Exodus is very circninstaiitial in its 
 account of the life of Moses, which, instead of 
 partaking of tlie character of usnal biography, 
 manifests in all its details a de^;i<led aim of 
 evincing liow, by the miraculous dispensation of 
 the Lord, Moses had been even from his earliest 
 years prepared and reared to become the chosen 
 instrument of God. In this book is developed, 
 witli ])aiticular clearness, the gummons of Moses 
 to his sacred office, which concludes the lirst 
 important section of liis life (Exod. i.-vi.). No 
 human choice and no self-will, but an immediate 
 call from Jehovah alone, could decide in so irn- 
 jKirtant an affair. JehovaJi reveals liimself to him 
 by his covenant-name (nin^), and vouciisafes him 
 tlie power to work miracles such as no man before 
 him iiad ever wrought. It was not the natural 
 disposition and bent of his mind tliat induced 
 Moses to accept the office, but solely his sub- 
 mission to the express will of God, his obedience 
 alone, that influenced him, the i..4wgiver, to 
 undertake the mission. The external relation of 
 Moses to liis peofile is also clearly delined (comp. 
 ex. gr. Exod. vi. 11, sq.). This furnishes the firm 
 basis on wliich is founded his own as well as 
 Aaron's jjersonal authority, and the respect for his 
 ])ermanent regulations. A new section (vii.-xv.) 
 then gives a very detailed account of the manner 
 in which the Lord glorified himself in Israel, and 
 released the jieople from tlie land of bondage. 
 This forms a turning-point in the narrative — with 
 it begins the real history of the peo])le of God. 
 Every day affords here an eternal demotish'ation 
 of divine grace, justice, and majesty. The rela- 
 tion of the theocracy to heatiieuism, the representa- 
 tive of which is Egypt, is here illnstiated by facts. 
 The history contained iu Exodus may very fairly 
 be described as the history of the triumph of 
 Israel, or rather of Israel's God, over the lieathen 
 ))ower, which appears here in its innermost spirit 
 of revolt against God. The world is conquered 
 progressively and with increased force ; and the 
 j)iss.iver manifests on the one hand the annihila- 
 ti ).T of worldly power, while on the other hand it 
 is the celebration of the birth-day of tlie people of 
 G >d. This section of the history tlien concludes 
 w'tli a triumphal song, celebraHng the victory of 
 Is ael. In ch. xvi.-xviii. we find the introduction 
 to tiie second principal part of this book, in which 
 ia sl<etched the mavifestation of God in tlie midst 
 of Israel, as we;l as the pronjulgation of the law 
 itself, in it.s original and fuudameiital features. 
 Tais preparatory section thus furnishes us with 
 additiu-:ial proof of the special care of God for his 
 people; how he provided their food and water, 
 an 1 how he protected them from the assaults of 
 the r foes. In .•li. xv. 22, sq., not ^ill, but only the 
 rema kable resting-places are mentioned, where 
 
 Jehovah took sjiecial care of his peoiile. In th« 
 account (xviii.) of the civil regulations framed by 
 the advice ol' Jetlno, a strong line of demarcation 
 is drawn between the changeable iiistilutions of 
 man and the divine legislation which began then 
 to be established, and which thenceforth claims 
 by far the greatest part of the work. At the com- 
 mencement of the legislation is a brief summary 
 of the laws, with the decalogue at their head (xix.- 
 xxiii.X The decalogue is the true f(nidamentaT 
 law, bearing within itself the germ of the entire 
 legislation. Tlie other legal definitions are only 
 fiiriier developments of the decalogue. Tliese 
 delinitions manifest the power and extent of the 
 law itself, showing what an abundance of new 
 regulations result from the simple and few words 
 of the decalogue. L'|)on this basis the covenant is 
 concluded with the Israelites, in. which God re- 
 veals himself in agreement with the understanding 
 and the exigencies of the people. Not imtil this 
 covenant was cornjiieted did it become jjossible 
 for the Israelites to ei'ter into a communion with 
 G.id, confirmed and consecrated by laws and offer- 
 ings, and thereby to receive further revelation* 
 from iiim (ch. xxiv.). Whatsoever after this, in 
 the twenty-Hl'th and in the following chapters, is 
 communicated to tlie people, concerns the dwell- 
 ing of Goil in the midst of Israel. By this 
 dwelling of God among Israel it is intended to 
 show, that the communion is permanent on the 
 part of God, and that on tiie part of the jieople it 
 is possible to persevere in communion with God. 
 Consequently there follows the description of the 
 sanctuary, the character of which is symbolical. 
 Tiie sacred symbols are, however, not so much 
 expressed in formal declarations, as contained in 
 the whole tenor of the descriptions. The svbolics 
 begin with the central point, the holy of holies, 
 which unites in itself the impeaching law and the 
 redeeming symbol of divine mercy, and thus sets 
 forth the reconciliation of God with tl»e peojile. 
 This is f(jllowed by the description of the sanc- 
 tuary, representing those blessings wLich through 
 the holy of holies were communicated to the sub- 
 jects of the theocracy, and serving as a perpetual 
 monument of Israel's exalted destiny, pointing at 
 the same time to the nreans of attaining it. Last 
 comes thedescri]itionof the fore-court, symbolising 
 the participation of the people in those blessings, 
 and their sanctifieil approach to the Lord. The de- 
 scription then ]iroceeds from the sanctuary to tba 
 persons otKciating in it, the priests, characterized 
 both fjy their various costumes (xxviii.), and the 
 manner of their inauguration (xxix.). Then fol- 
 lows, as a matter of course, the description of the 
 service in that sanctuary and by those priests, but 
 merely in its fundamental features, confining 
 itself simply to the burnt and incense off'erings, 
 indicating by the former the piieparatory inferior 
 service, and by the latter the complete and higher 
 office of the sacerdotal function. But. by contri- 
 buting to ihe means of establishing public worship, 
 the whole nation sliares in it ; and therefore the 
 desciiption of the officiating persons very pwperly 
 concludes with the people (xxx.). As a suitable 
 sequel to the fonrier follows the description of the 
 use and nature of the implements requisite for tht 
 service of the priests, such as the brass laver for 
 sacred ablutions, the prejiaration of the perfume 
 and anointing oil ^xxx. 17-38). These reg ilation* 
 being made, men endowed with (lie Spirit of God
 
 EXODUS. 
 
 were also 1o lie ajjpointeil for niakiiii^ llie sacred 
 fiilteniacle ajul all its fiirnitiiie (xxxi. 1-2). The 
 description of the sanctuary, priesthood, and 
 mode of worship, is next tbllowed hy tiiat of the 
 eacreil times anrl periods (xxxi. 12, srj). Of the 
 sacred times there is here only ajiiuiinted the Sal)- 
 hath, in wliicli the other r<-<^idatioMs are contained 
 as in tiieir >,'erin. God having dtliveied to Moses 
 the tahles of the law, the constrnction and airarige- 
 ment of the tabernacle might thus at once have 
 lieeii hegiiii. liad its fm' her progress not been in- 
 terrupted by an act of idolatry on tlie jiart of the 
 people, and their piiuishmeiit for that otVeiice, 
 which form the subject of tiie narrative in ch. 
 xxxii.-xxxiv. Contrary and in ojjpoeition to all 
 that had been done by Jehovah tor and in the 
 presence of Israel, the sulyective formidable apos- 
 tacy of the latter manifests itself in a most 
 melancholy maimer, as an ominously significant 
 propiietic fact, which is incessantly repealed in the 
 history of sul;seqiient generations. The narrative 
 of it is therefore closely connected with the fore- 
 going accounts — Jehovah's meVcy ami gracious 
 faithfulness on the one hand, and Israel's l)aie- 
 faced ingratitude on tiie other, being intimately 
 connected. This connection forms the leading 
 idea of the whole history of tiie tlicocracy. It is 
 not till after the narrative ol tliis momentous event 
 that the account of the construction and com- 
 pletion of the taliernacle can proceed (xxxv.-xl.), 
 which account becomes more circumstantial in 
 proportion as the siiljject itself is of gieater im- 
 portance. Above all, it is faitlii'ully shown that 
 all was done according to tiie comiirands of 
 Jehovah. 
 
 In the descriptive history of Exodus a fixed 
 plan, in conformity with the principles above 
 stated, is consistently and visibly carried tlirough 
 the whole of die book, thus giving us tiie surest 
 guarantee for the unity of botli the book and 
 its author. In vain have several modern critics 
 attempted to discover here also sundry sources and 
 manifold original documents, or even fragments, 
 but loosely connected vvitii each otiier (com]), ex. gr. 
 De Wette, Introd. to the Old Testament, ^ 151). 
 Such an assunnption proves in this case in jiar- 
 ticular to be notiiing moie than a last resource of 
 argument against the Mosaical comjjosition of 
 the book. ]Je Wette has of late been induced, in 
 favour of tiiis hypothesis, to declare that in some 
 poitions of Exodus the source is uncertain, and 
 that there took place a mixture of both sources, 
 the Mosaical and the non-JMosaical (comp. Pkn- 
 tateuch). Nor are other iTiodern critics more 
 successful in their attempts to show in this book 
 traces of a post-Mosaical origin. Among the 
 pa.ssages quoted in support of tliat assertion is 
 xxiii. 9, the law contained in which seems to imply 
 a later state of the people <iuring tiieir settled 
 abode in Palestine. Regulations about strangers 
 were, however, ol importance during their abode 
 in the desert, especially since a numlier of Egyj)- 
 tiaiis had joined the Israelites, and stood to them 
 'n the relation of strangers. Chap. xvi. K6, also, 
 !S quoted in favour of the above o])inion, because 
 *he oMcr is designated therein as the tenth ])art 
 of an ephah, implying that changes had in later 
 times been made in tlie Hebrew measures. Hut 
 they forget that tlie Hel.rew word IDi? does not 
 at all indicate a definite measure, but merely 
 a vessel, tl e size of wliich it was therefore neces- 
 
 EXODUS. 
 
 081 
 
 sary to specify l<y giving its exact measiiremeiir. 
 In vi. 2b, 27, also, they think they recogni.se the 
 hand of a later author, who refers to Moses and 
 Aaron, and licscribes tlieir character. The lea«l 
 attention, however, to the preceding genealogy, 
 and the descri])tive style of the Pentateucli in 
 general, must soon convince them that even a 
 conlenrpoi'ary wr.ter might h.ne spoken in tlie 
 way wliich Moses does in these paisages. 
 
 For neological criticism it w;is of the utmost 
 importance to stamp this book as a later pro- 
 duction, the miracles contained in its lirst part 
 but too manilestly clashing with the ])rinciples m 
 wliich that criticism takes its 'starling-point, its 
 votaries therefore have endeavoured to show that 
 those miracles were birt mythological (ictions 
 which had l)een gradually developed in jrroces.s of 
 tinre, so that the very composition of the book il.self 
 must necessarily have been of a later date. Neither 
 do we womler at such aitcnipts and elforts, since 
 the vei'y essence and central point of the accounts 
 of the miracles given in that book are altogether 
 at variance with the principles of rationalist): 
 and its criticism, which can by no means admit 
 the rise and formation of a people under siuh 
 mirac.ilous circumstances, sirch peculiar belief, 
 and, in a religious point of view, such an in- 
 dependent existence, at the side of all the other 
 nations of antiquity. Indeed, the spiritual sub- 
 stance of the whole, the divine idea which jier- 
 vades and combines all its details, is in itself 
 such a miracle, such a jieculiar and wondrous 
 phenomenon, as to lend natural supjiort ami un- 
 deniable cuntirmation to the isolated and ]ihvsical 
 wondeis themselves; so that it is impossible to 
 deny the latter without creating a second and 
 new wonder, an unnatui-il course in the Jewish 
 history. Nor is that part of the book which con- 
 tains the miracles delicient in numeious historical 
 proofs in verification of them. .'\s tiie events cf 
 this history are laid in Egyjit and Arabia, we 
 have ample opjwrtuiiity of testing the accuracy 
 of the Mosaical accounts, and surely we find nc)- 
 wliere the least transgression against Egyptian in- 
 stitutions and customs; on the contrary, it is most 
 evident that trie author had a thorough know- 
 ledge of the Egyptian institutions and the spirit 
 that pervaded them. Exodus contains a mass 
 of incidents and detailed description^ which have 
 gained new force from the modern discoveries 
 and re&earches in the field of Egyptian antiquities 
 (comp. Hengstenberg, Die Bitches Mosis uiid 
 ^■Er/yptcn, Berlin, 1811). The descrijifion of the 
 passage of the Israelites through the desert also 
 evinces such a thorough familiarity with the 
 localities as to excite the utmost respect of scru- 
 pulous and scientific travellers of our own time 
 for the authenticity of the Pentateucli (comp. 
 ex. gr. Raumer, Der Zug dcr Israeliten nus 
 A^gypten nach Canaan, Leipz. 1S37). Nor is the 
 passover-festival, its rise and nature, less cimlirm- 
 atory of the incidents connected witii it, if we have 
 not recourse to the des|)erate expedient — as ration- 
 alistic criticism really does — ofaicribiiig to that 
 festival a quite different signification originally, 
 namely, a ])urely physical one, an opinion which 
 brings its advocares in conflict with the whole ol 
 the Israfditish Instory. The arrangements of the 
 tabernacle, described in flic second jiart of Exodus, 
 likewise throw a favourable light on the historical 
 authenticity of the preceding events; and tli«
 
 682 
 
 EXORCISM. 
 
 EXORCISM. 
 
 least tenable of all the objections against it are, 
 that tlie architectural arrangements of the taber- 
 Dacle were too artificial, and the materials and 
 richness too costly and precious for the condition 
 and position of the Jews at that early period, &c. 
 But the critics seem to have overlot)ked the fact 
 tiiat the Israelites of that jjeriod were a people who 
 fad come out from Egypt, a people possessing 
 wealth, Egyptian culture and arts, which we ad- 
 mire even now, in the works which have descended 
 to us from ancient Egypt ; so that it cannot 
 seem strange to see tlie Hebrews in possession of 
 the materials or artistical knowledge requisite for 
 the construction of the tabernacle. Moreover, the 
 establishment of a* tent as a sanctuary tor the 
 Hebrews can only he explained from tiieir abode in 
 the desert, being in perfect unison with their then 
 roving and nomadic life ; and it is therefore a 
 decide<l mistake in those critics who give to tlie 
 sacred tent a later date than the Mosaical ; 
 while other critics (such as De Wette, Von 
 Bohlen, Vatke) proceed much more consistently 
 with their views, by considering the narrative of 
 the construction of a sacred tabernacle to be a 
 mere fiction in Exodus, introduced for the purpose 
 of ascribing to the temj)le of Solomon a higher 
 antiquity and authority. However, independently 
 of the circumstance that the temple necessarily 
 presupposes the existence of a far older analogous 
 sanctuary, the whole process of such a forced 
 hypothesis is but calculated to strike out a por- 
 tion from the Jewish history on purely arbitrary 
 grounds. The extremely simple and sober style 
 and views throughout the whole narrative afford 
 a sure guarantee for its authenticity and origin- 
 ality. Not a vestige of a poetical hand can 
 be discovered in Exod. xviii. ; not even the 
 most sceptical critics can deny that we tread 
 here on purely historical ground. The same 
 may fairly be maintained of ch. xx.-xxiii. How 
 is it then possible that one and the same book 
 should contain so strange a mixture of truth 
 and fiction as its opponents assert to be foimd 
 in it? The most striking proofs against such an 
 assum])tion are, in particular, the accounts, such 
 as in Exud. xxxii. sq., where the most velienient 
 complaints are made against the Israelites, where 
 tlie high-priest of tlie covenant-people participates 
 most shamefully in the idolatry of his people. 
 All these incidents are described in plain and 
 clear terms, witliont the least vestige of later em- 
 bellishments and false extolling of former ages. 
 Tlie Pentateuch, some critics assert, is written for 
 the interest and in favour of the hierarchy ; but 
 can there be more anti-hierarchical details than 
 are found in tliat book ? Tiie whole representation 
 indicates the strictest impartiality and truth. On 
 the literature of Exodus, see Pentateuch.— 
 
 H.A. CH. 
 EXORCISM ANn EXORCIST (^opKitrr^s, 
 Acts xix. 13). Tlie belief in demoniacal pos- 
 sessions, which may be traced in almost every 
 nation, has always been attended by tlie professed 
 ability, on the part of some individuals, to release 
 the unhajjpy victims from their calamity. In 
 Greece men of no less distinction than both Epi- 
 curus (Diog. Laer. x. 4) and ^schiues, were sons 
 of women who lived by this art; and both were 
 bitterly rejiroached, the one by the Stoics, and the 
 Other by his great rival orator Demosthenes (De 
 Cor.), for having assisted their parents in these 
 
 practices. The allusions to the ])ractice ottnot 
 cism among the Jews, contained both In tiien 
 own authois and in the New Testament, are to« 
 well known to render quotations necessaiy. In 
 some instances this jiower was considered as a 
 divine gift; in others it was thouglit to be ac- 
 quired by investigations into the nature of demons 
 and the qualities of natuial productions, as herbs, 
 stones. &c., and of drugs conqiounded of tliem 
 by the use of certain forms of adjuiations, in\o 
 cations, ceremonies, and other observances. In- 
 deed the various forms of exorcism, alluded to in 
 authors of all nations, are innumera? le, varying 
 from theliloody human sacrifice down to .ue finnes 
 of brimstone, &c. &c. The power of expelling 
 demons Josephus places among the endowments 
 of Solomun, and relates that lie left behind 
 him the manner of using exorcisms by which 
 Uiey drive away demons (for the pretended frag- 
 ments of these books see Fabric. Cod. Pseud, let. 
 Test. p. 1051). He declares that he had seen a 
 man, named Kleazar, releasing people that were 
 demoniacal, in the presence of Vespasian, his 
 sons, captains, and the whole multitude of his 
 soldiers. He describes the manner of cure thus : 
 ' He put a ring that had a root of one of those 
 sorts mentioned by Solomon to the nostrils of the 
 demoniac ; after which he drew out the demon 
 through his nostrils, and when the man fell 
 down he adjured him to return no more, making 
 still mention of Solomon and reciting the incan- 
 tations he composed.' He further adds, that when 
 Eleazar would persuade and demonstrate to the 
 spectators that he had such a power, he set a cup 
 or basin full of water a little way otf, and com- 
 manded the demon as he went out of the man to 
 overturn it, and thereby to let the spectators know 
 he had left the man (Aniiq. yiii. 2. § 5). He also 
 describes the mode cf obtaining the root Baaras, 
 wliich, he says, ' if it be only brought to sick per- 
 sons, it quickly drives away the demons,' under cir- 
 cumstances which, for their strangeness, may vie 
 with any prescription in the whole science of exor 
 cism (De Bell. Jud. vii. 6. § 3). Among all the 
 references to exorcism, as practised by the Jews, in 
 the "New Testament (Matt. xii. 27; Mark ix. 38; 
 Luke ix. 49, 50), we find only one instance wbicli 
 afiords any clue to the means employed (Acts 
 xix. 13); from which passage it appears that certain 
 professe'l exorcists took upon them to call over a 
 demoniac the name of the Lord Jesus, saying, 
 ' We adjure you by Jesus whom Paul preacheth.' 
 Their proceeding seems to have been in confoimity 
 with the well-known opinions of the Jews in those 
 days, that miracles might be wrought by invoking 
 the names of the Deity, or angels, or patriarchs, &c., 
 as we learn from Justin Maityr, Iienaeus, Origen, 
 &c., and Lucian (Frag. \i. 141). The epithet 
 applied to these exorcists (■nepLfpxojJi.tvuv, Vulg. de 
 circumeuniibus Judais) indicates that they were 
 travelling mountebanks, who, beside skill in 
 medicine, pretended to the knowledge of magic. 
 It is evident that theo))inlon we form of exorcism 
 will be materially all'ected by our views of de- 
 moniacal j/ossessions [Demon]. The neutral 
 course we have pursued in regard to both these 
 subjects will be completed ujioii observing, tliat 
 the office of the exorcist is not mentioned by Paul 
 in his enumeration of the miraculous gift* (1 Cor. 
 xii. 9), though it was a power which he jjosscssed 
 himself, and whicli the Saviour had promised
 
 EYE. 
 
 (Mark wi. 17; Matt. x. 8). Moslieim says thiit 
 the particular inler of exorcists did not exist till 
 the close of th« tliird century, arid he ascribes il5 
 introduction to the prevalent fancies of the 
 Gnostics (Ceii. iii. 11, c.4). Fairness also induces 
 us to notice Jaim's remark upon the silence of 
 It. John himself, in his Gospel, on the subject of 
 possessions, although he introduces the Jcics as 
 speaking in the custoniary way respecting demons 
 and demoniacal possessions, and although he often 
 speaks of tlie sick who were healed liy the Saviour; 
 coupled witli the f.ict fliat Jolm wrote liis Gospel 
 in Asia Minor, wheie medical science was very 
 flourishing and where it was generally known 
 that the diseases attributetl to demons were merely 
 natural diseases (Jalin, ArchcioL, large German 
 ed. pt, i. vol. ii. 232. ]>p. 477-180 ; see also Lo- 
 meirus, De Vet. Gent. Lustra. ; Bekkcr, Le 
 Monde enchante ; Whitby's note on Matt. xii. 
 27).— J. F. D. 
 
 EXPIATION. [Atonement; Sacrifice.] 
 EXPIATION, DAY OF. [Atonement, 
 
 DAY OF.] 
 
 EYE (l^y). In most languages this import- 
 ant oigan is used by figurative application, as 
 the symbol of a large numlter of objects and 
 ideas. In the East such applications of the word 
 ' eye ' have always been uncommonly numerous ; 
 \nt\ they were so among the Hebrews. It may be 
 serviceable to distinguish the following uses of the 
 word, few of which are common in this country, 
 unless so far as they have become so through the 
 translation of the Bible. 
 
 1. A fountain. This use of the word has 
 already been indicated [Ain]. It probably ori- 
 ginated from the eye being regarded as the foun- 
 tain of tears. 
 
 2. Colour, as in the phrase ' and the eye 
 (colour) of tl>e woman was as the eye (colour) 
 of bdellium' (Num. xi. 7). This originated 
 perhaps in tlie eye being the pait of the body 
 which exhibits ditl'erent colours in different per- 
 sons. 
 
 3. The sttrface, as 'the surface (eye) of the 
 land' (Exod. x. 5, 15; Num. xxii. 5, 11): 
 the last is the passage whicli ailbrds most sanction 
 to the notion that j^W cm means in some places 
 ' face.' This is the sense which our own and 
 otlicr versions give to 'eyg to eye' (Num. xiv. 
 14, &c.), translated ' face to face.' The phrases 
 are indeed equivalent in meaning ; but we are not 
 thence to conclude that the Hebrews meant ' face ' 
 when they said ' eye,' but tliat they chose the 
 opposition of the eyes, instead of that of the faces, 
 lo express the general meaning. Hence, therefore, 
 we may oliject to the extension of the significa- 
 tion in sucti passages as 1 Sam. xvi. 12, where 
 ' beautiful eyes ' D^J^J? HS* is rendered 'fair coun- 
 tenance.' 
 
 4. It is also alleged that ' between (or about) the 
 eyes' means the forehead, in Exod. xiii. 9, IG, 
 and the forepart of tlie head, in Deut. vi. 8 ; 
 but the passages are sufficiently intelligible if un- 
 derstood t(j denote what they literally express; and 
 with reference to the last it may be remarked that 
 there is hair about the eyes as well as on the head, 
 the removal of which might as well be inter- 
 dicted as an act of lamentation. 
 
 5. In Cant. iv. 9, 'eye' seems to be used poft- 
 ically for 'look,' as is uaial in most languages; 
 
 EYE. 
 
 68J 
 
 'Tliou hast stol ?n my heart with one of thy luolu' 
 (eyes). 
 
 6. In Prov. xxiii. 31, !ne term 'eye' is applied 
 to the beads or bubbles of M'ine, when jioured out, 
 but our version preserves tlie sense of' colour." 
 
 To these some other jiiirases, lequiring nolico 
 and explanation, may l>e added: 
 
 ' Before the eyes " of any one, meaning in iiis 
 presence ; or, as we should sav, ' before liis face ' 
 (Gpu. xxiii. 11, 18; Exod. iv.' .W). 
 
 'In the eyes" of any one, means what a|>- 
 jiears lo be so or so in his individual judgment 
 or opmion ; and is equivalent lo 'seeming' or 
 'a]ipearing" (Gen. xix. 8; xxix. 2U ; 2 Sain. 
 X. iii). 
 
 'To set the eyes ' upon any one, is usually to 
 regard him with t'avoiu- 1 (i<'i'. xliv. 21 ; .lob xxiv. 
 23; Jer. xxxix. 12); ijiit it occurs in a bad 
 sense, as of looking with anger, in .\mos ix. S. 
 But anger is more usually ex])ressed by tlie con- 
 trary action of turning the eyes away. 
 
 As many of the ]iassions, such as envy, piide, 
 pity, desire, are ex]iressed by the eye; so, in the 
 Scriptural style, they are often ascribed lo iha' 
 organ. Hence such phrases as 'evil eye' (Malt. 
 XX. 15); 'bountiful eye' (Prov. xxii. 9 j ; 
 'haugiify eyes' (Prov. vi. 17); 'wanton eyes' 
 (Isa. iii. 16); 'eyes full of adultery' ('2 Pet. ii. 
 14); 'the lust of the eyes' (1 John ii. 16). This 
 last j/hrase is applied by some to hiscivionsiiess, 
 by others to covetousness ; but it is best to take 
 the expression in the most extensive sense, as 
 denoting a craving for the gay vanities of tiiis life 
 (Comp. Ezek. xxiv. 25). In the same ciiajiter 
 of Ezekiel (ver. 16), 'the desire of thy eyes' is 
 put not for the jirophet's wife directly, as often 
 understood, but for whatever is ones greatest 
 solace ami delight; which in (his c;use was the 
 prophet's wile— but which in another case might 
 have iieen something else. 
 
 In Zech. iv. 10, the angels of the Lord are 
 called 'his eyes,' as being the executioners of his 
 judgments, and watching and attending for his 
 glory. From some such association of irleas, the 
 favourite mini-ifers of stare in tl(Aj^ersian mo- 
 narchy were call ;d ' tlis king's e^s.' So, iii 
 Num. X. 31, ' to be instead of eyes' is equi- 
 valent to being a prince, to rule and guide the 
 people. This occurs also in the Greek poets, 
 as in Pindar (Oli/mp. ii. 10), where ' the eye of 
 Sicilia' is given as a title to one of the chief 
 men in Sicily, sliowing his |)ower. In like man- 
 ner, in the same poet, ' tlie eye of the army' 
 stands for a g:>od commander ; Olymp. vi. 16). 
 
 The expression in Psalm cxxiii. 2, ' As the 
 eyes of servants look unto the hands of their mas- 
 ters,' has suggested a number of curious illustra- 
 tions from Oriental history and customs, tending 
 to show that maste'.s, rsjiecially when in the pre- 
 sence of others, are in the habit of communicating 
 to their servants oiders and intimations by certain 
 motions of their hands, which, although scarcely 
 noticcaljle by otlwr jiersons present, arecleai'y 
 understood and promjitly acted upon by the at- 
 tendants. This custom keeps them with their 
 attention bent ujion the hand of their master, 
 watching its slightest motions. 
 
 The celebrated jiassage 'Why beholilest thou 
 the mote that is i i thy lirother's eye, and coiisi- 
 (Icrest not the beam tiiat is in thine own eye' 
 (Malt. vii. 3), has occasiuied much waste of «
 
 884 
 
 EYE. 
 
 pliinatioii. It seems much lietter to understand 
 it as a liyperbolical proveiliial expression, tiian to 
 contend fi.at as 5ok6s cannot literally mean ' a 
 beam,' it inust here signify sonietliing else, a 
 disease, a thorn, &c. (see l)i)d(lridi^e and Camp- 
 liell, in loc.y As a proverbial phrase, (jarallels 
 have been produced abundantly from the Rabbins, 
 from the f.ithers, and from the classics. 
 
 Res)ieetiii:; blinding tlie eyes as a punishment, 
 or political disqualification, see Punishment. 
 
 ' Paintinq thb evks.' or rather the eyelids, 
 is more than once alluded to in Scripture, al- 
 though tiiis scarcely appears in the Autiiorized 
 Vevsion, as om- translators, unaware of the custom, 
 usually render 'eye' by 'face,' although 'eye' 
 is still Dreserved in the margin. So Jezebel 
 'painted her eyes,' literally, 'put her eyes in 
 paint,' before slie showed herself publicly (2 Kings 
 ix. 30). Tliis action is forcibly expressed by 
 Jeremiah (iv. 30), ' though thou rentest thine 
 eyes with painting.' Ezekiel (xxiii. 40) also 
 represents this as a ])art of high dress — ' For wliom 
 thou didst wash tliyself, paintedst thy eyes, and 
 deckedst thyself with ornaments.' Tlie custom is 
 also, very possibly, alluded to in Prov. vi. 25 — 
 ' Lust not after her beauty in thine heart, neitlier 
 let her take thee ^oith Iter eyelids,'' It certainly 
 is the general impression in Western Asia that 
 this embellishment adds much to tlie languishing 
 expression and seducement of the eyes, although 
 Europeans find some ditSculty in appreciating 
 the beauty which the Orientals find in this adorn- 
 ment. 
 
 ft 
 
 The following description of the process is from 
 Mr. Lane"s excellent work on the Modern Egyp- 
 tians (i. 41-43): 'The eyes, with very lew ex- 
 ceptions, are black, large, and of a long almond 
 f(um, with long and beautiful lashes and an 
 exquisitely soft, bewitching exjnession : eyes more 
 beautiful can hardly be conceived : their charm- 
 ing eliect is much lieightened by the concealment 
 of the other features (however pleasing the latter 
 may be), and is rendered still more striking by a 
 practice universal among the females of the 
 higher and middle classes, and very common 
 among those of tlie lower orders, which is that of 
 blackening the edge of the eyeliils, both above 
 and below the eyes, witli a black powder called 
 kokhl. This is a collyrium, commonly compo.sed 
 of the smoke-tilack which is produced by burning 
 a kind o{ lib rim. — an aromatic resin — a species of 
 frankincense, used, I am told, in preference to. 
 the better kind of frankincense, as being cheaper, 
 and equally good for the purpose. KjjIiH is also 
 prepared of the smoke-black produced from burn- 
 ing the shells of almgpds. These two kinds, 
 
 EZEKIEL. 
 
 though believed to be beneficial to the eyes, art 
 used merely for ornament ; but there are several 
 kinds used for their real or supposed medical 
 properties ; jiarticularly the j>owder of several 
 kinds of lead ore; to which are often added sar- 
 cocolla, long pejjper. sugar-candy, fine dust of a 
 Venetian sequin, and sometimes powdered pearls. 
 Antimony, it is said, was formerly used for paint- 
 ing the edgss of the eyelids. Thekohhl is applied 
 with a small probe, of wood, ivory, or silver 
 tapering towards the end, but blunt: .this is 
 moistened, sometimes witli rose-water, then dipjied 
 in the powder, and drawn along the edges of the 
 eyelids: it is called mir'toed; and the glass 
 vessel in which the kolihl is kept, mook' hhol'ah. 
 The custom of thus ornamenting the eyes pre 
 vailed among both sexes in Egypt in very ancieHv 
 times : tliis is shown by the sculptures and paint- 
 ings in the temples and tombs of this country ; 
 and kohhl-vesseLs, with the probes, and even with 
 the remains of the black powder, have of"ten been 
 found in the ancient tombs. I have two in my 
 possession. But, in many cases, the ancient mode 
 of ornamenting with the kohhl was a little dif- 
 ferent from the modern. I have, however,, seen 
 this ancient mode practised in the present day in 
 the neiglibourhood of Cairo ; though I only re- 
 member to have noticed it in two instances. The 
 same ciistom existed among the Gieek ladies^ 
 and among the Jewish women in early times.' 
 
 Sir J. (jr. Wilkinson alludes to this passage in 
 Mr. Lanes book, and admits that the lengthened 
 form of tlie ancient Egyptian eye, represented in 
 the paintings, was probably produced by thig 
 means. ' Such (he adds) is the efl'ect described 
 by Juvenal {Sat. ii. 93), Pliny {Ep. vi. 2), and 
 other writers who notice the custom among the 
 Romans. At Rome it was considered disgraceful 
 for men to ad^ipt it, as at present in the East, ex- 
 cept medicinally,* but if we may judge from tlie 
 similarity of tlie eyes of men and women in the 
 paintings at Thebes, it appears to have been used 
 by both sexes among the ancient Egyptians. 
 Many of tlie kohl-bottles have been found in the 
 tombs, together with tlie bodkin used for applying 
 the moi-stened powder. Tliey are of various mate- 
 rials, usually of stone, wood or pottery ; sometimes 
 composed of two, sometimes of three or four sepa- 
 rate cells, apparently containing each a mixture, 
 differing slightly in its quality and hue fiom the 
 other three. Many were simple round tubes, 
 vases, or small boxes ; some were ornamented with 
 the figure of an ape or monster, supposed to assist 
 in holding the bottle between his arms, while tiie 
 lady dipped into it the pin with which she painted 
 her eyes ; and others were in imifanon of a column 
 made of stone, or rich porcelain of the choicest 
 manufacture {Ancient Egyptians, iii. 3S2). 
 
 EZKKIEL (^Kp.Tn:' = "pX \>]n\ [ichoni] God 
 
 will strengthen, Gesen. Thes,, or ?t? pl.n*., God 
 will prevail, Rosenm. Sckol. ; Sept. 'le^eKi^X), 
 one of the greater prophets, whose writings, both 
 in the Hebrew and Alexandrian ^nons, are 
 placed next to tliose of Jeremiah. He was the 
 son of Busi the priest (ch. i. 3), ano, according 
 to tradition, was a native of Sarera (e/c -y^j 
 
 * This is not altogether correct. In Persia i« 
 is as common among the men as the vome 1. — J.K,
 
 EZKKIEL. 
 
 EZKKIEL. 
 
 6KS 
 
 iapr^pd. Carjizov, Intrnd.. j)f. iii. p. 200). Of 
 nis early liisto'v we li:ive no autlicrilic iiifoniia- 
 tUm. We lust find liini in tlie country of Meso- 
 pivfainia, * b/ tlie river Clicliav' (cli. i. I), now 
 Kkabur, a stream of considerable length (lowiii'j 
 into t'lie Euphrates near Circesiiim, Kirkesia 
 (Roseniniiller's Bihl. Gcof/. of Central Asia in 
 /iibl. Cabinet, vol. ii. p. ISO). On this river Ne- 
 buchadnezzar founded a Jewish colony from tlie 
 captives whom lie ljroui,dit from Jerusalem when 
 he l)esiej^ed if in tiie eighth year of kin*? Jelioia- 
 chim (2 Kin .s xxv. 14). This colony (or at 
 l{vist a pair of it) was settled at a jjlace called 
 Tel-AI)il). whlcii has been thoui^ht by some to an- 
 swer to the Tiiallalia of DWnville ; Rosen m., Hibl. 
 Geoff., vol. ii. p. ISS) ; and it seems to have been 
 iiere that the ])ropliet fixed his residence. Jose- 
 phns (Antiq. x. 6. § 3) states, that he was a youth 
 (irais civ) when carried away ca]itive: but, as 
 llA\em'\ck (Commentar iiber Ezcrhiel, Erlangen, 
 1813, p. viii.) justly remarks, the matured cha- 
 racter of a priest wliich appears in his writinirs, 
 and his intimate acquaintance with the temple 
 service, render such a suppositio.n hii,'hly impro- 
 bable. He received his commission as a proj.het 
 in the fifth year of his captivity (n.c. 501). Many 
 critics suppose (from ch. i. 1) that tliis event took 
 place in the 30tii year of his age. Thus Carpzov 
 (p. 201) understands the expression. Tliere is, 
 however, little reason to think that this is the 
 epoch intended. The more ])robable opinion 
 seems to be that the reckoning is from the com- 
 mencement of tlie reign of Naboj)olassar, the fatlier 
 of Nebuchadnezzar (Scaliger, De Emendatione 
 Temporum, Lug. Bat. 159S, p. 374 ; Rosenm. 
 Schol. in Ezech. : Eichhom. EinleHung in d. A. 
 T., vol. iii. p. 188. 3r(l edit. ; Winer. Bibl. Real- 
 w'&rterhuch. art. 'Ezech."). Others (as Ussher, Hii- 
 vernick, pu. 12, 13) take tlie era to lie that of the 
 finding the book of the law in tlie IRth year of 
 Josiab, which is nearly synchionoiis with the 
 former. The question is not of much imjjortance 
 in a chronological jwint of view, since the date is 
 sufficiently fixed by the reference he makes to the 
 year of the captivity. Ezekicl is remarkably 
 silent resjiecting his personal history ; the only 
 event which he lecords (and that merely in its 
 connection witii his ]mjphetic office) is the death 
 of his wife in the ninth year of the cajitivity (ch. 
 xxiv. IS). He cruitinued to exerci.se the pro- 
 phetic office (luring a ])eriod of at least twenty- 
 two years, that is, to the 27th year of the captivity 
 (ch. xxix. 17); and it appears probable that be 
 remained with the captives by the river Chebar 
 during the whole of his life. That he exercised a 
 very commanding influence o\er the people is 
 manifest from tiie numerous intimations we have 
 of the elders coming to inquire of him what mes- 
 aage God had sent tlirough him (ch. viii. 1 : xiv. 1 ; 
 XX. 1 ; xxxiii. 31, 32, &c.). Carpzov (pp. 2(13, I) 
 relates seveia! traditions respecting his death and 
 sepulchre, principally from the treatise De Vitis 
 Prophet., {-iXseXy attributed to E|iipliaiiius. It is 
 there said that he was killed at IJaliylon Ijv the 
 chief oi' tlie people (& T)-yov/j.tvos toC Kaov) on ac- 
 count of his having rejiroved him for idolatry; 
 fh.it he was Imried in the field of Maiir (fv ayp'fi 
 JAaovp) in the tomb of Shem anil Arjih.axad, and 
 that his sepulchre was still in existence. Such 
 traditions are obviously of very little value. 
 
 H»ekiel was contemporary with Jeremiali and 
 
 Dmiel. Tiie former had siist. lined the prophetic 
 ollire during a peritNJ of tliiity-lour years liel'oi* 
 KzekieFs first preilidions. and continiied to jiro- 
 jihesy for six or seven years after. It apiiears 
 probable that the call of Kzekiel to the ]irr.j;:ietic 
 otVce was coiiiiecled with the eommMtiieation of 
 Jeremiah's ]ire<li<'fions to Haliylon fJer. Ii. .59), 
 which took jilace tiie year jiieieiling the fiist leve- 
 lalioii to Iv.ekiel (Havernick, p. ix). The greali-r 
 part of Daniel's jirediefions aie of a later date 
 than those of Ezel>iel ; lint it a]i|iears lliat liis 
 piety and wisdom had liecome proverbial even in 
 the eaily ]iart of E/ekiel's mini.-tlry (ch. xiv. 11, 
 10 ; xxviii. 3). 
 
 Most critics have remarked the vigour and sur- 
 jiassing energy which are manifest in the charac- 
 ter of Ezekiei. The whole of his writings show 
 how admirably lie was fitted, as well by natural 
 tlisposition as liy spiritual endowmer.l, to oppose 
 the ' rel>el lions house,' the ' ijeojile of stubborn fioiit 
 and hard heart," to whom he w.is sent. Thf- figura- 
 tive representa'ions which aljound ihioughout Ids 
 writings, whether drawn out into lenglliened alle- 
 gory, or expressing matters of fact by means of 
 symbols, or clothing truths in tlie garb of enigma, 
 all testify by their definiteness the vigour of his 
 ciince]itions. Tilings seen in vision are described 
 with all the mimifeness of detail and sharpness 
 of outline which belong to real existences. But 
 this characteiistic is shown most remaikably in 
 the entire subordinatio!) of his wli(>le life to the 
 great work to which he was calleil We never 
 met t with liini asatiordiiiaiy man : lie always acts 
 and thinks and feels as a )>ropliet. This energy oi 
 mind develo])ed in tlie one direction of the pro 
 jihetic otlice is strikingly displayed i>. the account 
 he gives of thedeatli of his wife(ch. xxiv. 15-18) 
 It is the only memorable event of his personal 
 history which he records, and it is mentioned 
 merely in reference to his soul-absorbing woik. 
 There is something inexpres.iibly touching as well 
 as characteristic in this brief narrative — the 'de- 
 sire of his eyes* taken away with a stroke — the 
 command not to mourn — and the simple state- 
 ment, 'so 1 spake unto the jieople in the morning 
 and at even my wife died ; and I did in tlit 
 momiiig as 1 was commanded.' That he jios- 
 sessed the common sympathies and atVections oi 
 humanity is manifest from the beautiful touch oi 
 tenderness with which the narrative is introduced 
 We may even judge that a mind so earnest as 
 his would be more than usually alive to flu 
 feelings of afl'ection when once they had obtained 
 a place in his heait. He then, who could tliuj 
 completely subordinate tiie strongest interests oi 
 his individual life to the great woik of his pro 
 ])helic office, may well ccmimand our admiration 
 and be liniked upon as (to use Hiivemick's ex 
 jiression) 'a truly gigantic phenomenon.' It it 
 interesting to contrast Kzekiel in this respect witl 
 his contemporary Jeremiah, whose jiersonal his 
 tory is continually presented to us in the courst 
 of his writings ; and the contrast serves to show 
 that the peculiarity we are noticing in Ezekie; 
 belong* to his individual cliaracti-r, and was no. 
 necessarily coiineiMed witii the gilt of prophecy. 
 
 That Kzekiel was a jioet of no mean order it 
 acknowledged by almost .ill crilicit. Lowth {lU 
 sorr I Po'rsi Ilcbrixorum, ed. J. D. Michaelis 
 Gutting. 17 70, p. l.Jl) thus sums up his account 
 ol liiiii : ' In cxteiis a plerisoue vatibcs fuitaxM
 
 688 EZKKIEL. 
 
 supnatus ; ged in eo genere ad quod unice videtur 
 a iiatura coniparatiis, nimiium vi, iinpetii, pon- 
 dere, granditatc, nemo ex omni scriptoium nu- 
 tnero eutn unqiiam a;qiiavit.' Michaelis and 
 Datlie are the only critics of any eminence (an 
 far as we know) who tiiiiik slightingly of his 
 poetical genius. The former (to whom Dathe 
 assents; remarks, ' Mihi in Ezekiele non suhli- 
 mitas laudanda, nedum Isaiana, videtur, ut 
 jiotius in exoniandis amplificandisque imaginihus 
 plus artis et luxuriei eum habere dixerim, quam 
 cum imjietu et sublimitate poematis consistere 
 potest. Peri)etuiis alicjua ex parte imitator est, 
 et tamen novus ac suus, non grandis, sed inge- 
 niosus' (lb. p. 427). The question is altogether 
 one of taste, and lias, we imagine, been decided 
 liy commim consent against Michaelis. He re- 
 marks more truly that Ezekiel lived at a period 
 wlien the Helirew language was declining in 
 piuity, wlien the silver age was succeeding to the 
 golden one. It is, indeed, to 'Jie matter rather 
 than the langtiage of Ezekiel that we are to look for 
 evidence of poetic genius. His style is often 
 simply didactic, and he abounds in peculiarities of 
 ex|jiession, Aramaisms, and grammatical anoma- 
 lies, whicl), while they give individuality to his 
 writings, jjlaiuly evince the decline of the lan- 
 guage in which lie wrote. An extexided account 
 of such peculiarities is given by Eichhorn (Ein- 
 leittmg in das A. T. vol. iii. ]>. 196) and 
 Gesenius {Geschichte der Ileh. Sjjracheu. Schrift, 
 p. ;i5). 
 
 The genuineness of the writings of Ezekiel lias 
 been thesulijttct of very little dis])ute. According 
 to Jewish tradition doubts were entertained as to 
 the canonicity of the book on tlie grotnid of its 
 containing some apparent contradictions to the 
 law, as well as because of the obscurity of many 
 of its visions. These, however, were removed, it is 
 said, liy Rabbi Hananias, who wrote a com- 
 mentary on the book, in which all these dithculties 
 were satisl'actorily solved (Mischna, ed. Surenhu- 
 sius, Prief. ad Part. iv. HViy HDDD ; Carpzov, 
 Introd. pt. iii. p. 215) ; but still, on account of 
 their obscurity, the visions at tlie beginning and 
 close of the Look were foi bidden to be readby those 
 who were un<ler thirty yi arsofage(Car]izov, p. 212). 
 Some conlinental critics of the last century have 
 impugned the canonicity of the last nine chapters, 
 and have attributed them to some Samaritan or 
 Hebrew who had returne.l in later times to the 
 land of JiidiEa (Oeder, Frcye Untersuchuncf iiber 
 einir/e Biicher dcs A T., Hal. Sax. 1771 ; V^ogel, 
 in his remarks on the above; and Cor>-odi, 
 Beleuchtunr/ des Jiidisch. und Christl. Bibel- 
 hanons, pt. i. p. 10), quoted by Rosenmuller, 
 Schol. in Et. a(i c. xl.). These objections have 
 been fully answered liy Eichhorn {Einleltung, 
 vol iii. p 203), .lalin (Tiitrnd. in Lib. .Snc. V. F., 
 n. 35G), and others. Jalin has also taken notice 
 of and answered some objections raised by an 
 anonymous writer in tiie Monthly Magazine, 
 179?^, to the canonicity of c. xxv.-xxxii., xxxv., 
 xxxvi., xxxviii., xxxix. A translation i f Jahns 
 arguments will be found in Homes Introd. vol. 
 iv. p. 222. These and similar objections have so 
 little weight or ])robability that we shall content 
 ourselves with quoting tlie general remark of 
 Gesenius in reference to the whole of Ezekiel s 
 writings: 'Tliis book belongs to that not very 
 (sumeroas class whicl), from beginning to end, 
 
 EZEKIEL. 
 
 maintains by means of favourite expressions and 
 peculiar phrases such a oneness of tone as by that 
 circumstance alone to prevent any suspicion that 
 separate portions of it are not genuine' {Ge- 
 schichte der Heb. Spr. p. 35). The canonicity of 
 the book of Ezekiel in general is satisfactorily 
 established by Jewish and Christian authorities 
 There is, indeed, no explicit reference to it. Of 
 quotation from it, in the New Testament. Eich- 
 horn (Einleit. p. 218) mentions the following 
 passages as having apparently a reference to tliis 
 book: Rom. ii. 21; comp. Ezek. xxxvi. 21: 
 Rom. x. 5 ; Gal. iii. 12; comji. Ezek. xx 11: 
 2 Pet. iii. 4 ; comp. Ezek. xii. 22; but none of 
 these are quotations. The closing visions of 
 Ezekiel are clearly referred to, though not quoted, 
 in the last chapters of the Apocalypse. The jiro- 
 phet Ezekiel is distinctly referred to by the son ot 
 Sirach, "le^eKi^A &y elSey opaaiy SS^vs, %v i';7re3ei- 
 ^iv avTcS iirl apfxaros x^povfii/j. (Ecclus. xlix. R ), 
 and by Josepli'>s (Antiq. x. 5. 6 1 ; 6- § 3 ; 
 7. § 2; 8. § 2). The book of Ezekiel is 
 also mentioned as forming part of the canon in 
 the catalogues of Melito (Eusel/ius, Hist. Eccles. 
 iv 26), Origen (apud Euseb. I. c. vi. 25), Jerome 
 (Prologus Galeatus), and the Talmud (Eichhorn, 
 vol. iii. p 218; vol. i. pp. 126-137). One of 
 the passages of Josephus to which we hav« 
 referred has occasioned much controversy and 
 many conjectures, because he seems to allirm that 
 Ezekiel had written two books of prophecies. 
 Having spoken of Jeremiah and his predictions 
 of the Babylonian captivity, Josephus adds, ol 
 fx6vov 8e ouros irpo€d4(nn(re ravrM to7s tix^ots, 
 aWa Koi 6 irpocpriTTjs 'le^e/iir/Aos' hs Trpwros irep,, 
 rovrcau Suo ^i^Kia ypi^as KariKmev (Antiq. x. 5. 
 § 1). According to the ordinary and, indeed, as 
 it would seem, necessary interpretation of this 
 passage, Ezekiel was (l)e.Jirst who wrote twohooks 
 respecting the Baliylonian captivity. The ques- 
 tion, then, arises. Has one of his books been lost, 
 or are the two now joined into one "? Tiie former 
 supposition has been maintained by some in order 
 to account for certain professed quotations from 
 the prophet Ezekiel of passages v/hicli are not 
 found in his writings at present. Thus Clemens 
 Romanus (\ Ep. ad Cor. c. S) refers to such a 
 passage, which is given more at length by Cle- 
 mens Alexand. {Pfedagog. i. 10). Thus, again, 
 Teitullian (De came Christi, c. 23, j). 394, ed. 
 Semler) says ' Legimus apud Ezechielem de 
 vacca ilia quae peperlt et non peperit.' Other 
 instances may be seen in Fabricius (Codtx Psend- 
 epigraphus V. T. ed. 2da. ]). Ill 8), and quoted 
 from him liy Carpzov (Introd. pt. iii. p. 20S), 
 Both the>e critics, however, agree that the most 
 probable explanation of such references is that 
 they were derived from Jewish tradition. The 
 latrer hypothesis, that our present book was origin- 
 ally two, the second containing the last nine 
 chapters, has received the support of very many 
 critics (see Le Moyne, Varia Sacrr, t. ii. p. 332; 
 Carpzov, Introd. p. 208). This view, however 
 is not without serious difliculties. There is ii« 
 evidence that the book, as at present existing, 
 was ever considered two; and the testimoiiy ol 
 Josephus himself, that only twenty-two books were 
 received as sacred (Confr. Apion. i. ^\ ap])ear» 
 quite oyiposed to such a supposition, since in what- 
 ever way the division of the Old Testament into 
 twenty-two books is nuxle there caimot be ♦»«
 
 EZEKIEL. • 
 
 "lit of Uie number left for Ezekiel. Eielilionj 
 (^Binleitung ^ vol. iii. j). 1 Iti) maiiitaiiis thai it is 
 Jeremiah of whom Joscplius speaks, a position to 
 whicli we shoulJ at once assent if we could with 
 him consider tiie wonls &r TrpwTos as equivalent 
 to t) Sf irpccros. If this is what .Tosephus meant, 
 we must suppose some corriipfion of liis text. 
 
 The central point of Ezekiel's predictions is the 
 destruction of Jerusalem. Previously to this 
 catastroplie his chief ohject is to call to repentance 
 t]io«e wlio were living in careless secvuity; to warn 
 them against indulgini,' in blind coiiiidcnce, that 
 by tiie help of the Ej^yptians (Kzek. xvii. 15-17; 
 com]). Jeii xxxvii. 7} tiie Baliylonian yoke would 
 be siiaken oflF; and to assure tliem (liat the destruc- 
 tion of tlieir city and temjile was inevitable and 
 fast approaching^. After tliis event his principal 
 care is to console the captives by jiromises of fu- 
 ture deliverance and return to their own land, and 
 to encoiuage them by assurances of future 
 blessings. His predictions against foreign nations 
 stand between these two great divisions, and were 
 for ttie most part uttered during the interval of 
 suspense between the divine intimation that Nebu- 
 chadnezzar was besieging Jerusalem (ch. xxiv. 2), 
 and tlie arrival of the news tiiat he had taken it 
 (cli. xxxiii. ^1). The jiredictions are evidently 
 arranged o" a plan corresponding witli these the 
 chief subjects of them, and the time of their utter- 
 ance is so frequently noted tliat there is little 
 difficulty in ascertaining tiieir chronologi(;al 
 ortler. This order is followed throughout, except 
 in rhe middle portion relating to foreign nations, 
 wliere it is in some instances departed from to 
 seciuf greater imity of subject (e. ff. cii. xxix. 17). 
 Tlie want of exact chronological order in this 
 jKirtion of the book, has led to various hyjjotheses 
 respecting the maimer in which the collection of 
 the separate predictions was originally made. 
 Jahn {Introd. p. 356) supposes that the predictions 
 against foreign nations were placed in their pre- 
 sent ])osition by some transcriber in the order in 
 which they hap lened to come into his hands, and 
 that he tlirough forgetfidtiess omitted chaps, xxxv., 
 xxxviii., and :. cxix. Eichhorn (Zsr«/e2Y. vol iii. 
 ■j). 193) thinJfi it probable that the piedictions 
 were written on several greater or snvdler rolls, 
 which wen put together in their ])resent form 
 without si.f.Jcient regard to chronological accu- 
 racy. Be-.lholdt (Einleit. v. iv. p. 14^7. quoted 
 by Hiiveriiicl;) supposes tliat the collector of the 
 wiiole book found two smaller cotlectiins already 
 in existence (ch. xxv.-xxxii. and xxxiii. 21- 
 \xxix.~, and that he arranged the other predictions 
 chronologically. All such hypotheses belong, as 
 Iliiverniok remarks, to a former age of crilici.sm. 
 
 The arrangement, l)y whomsoever made, is very 
 evidently designeil, and it seems on many ac- 
 counts most jirolialjle that it was made by Ezekiel 
 liimself. This is maintained by Havernick on the 
 following grounds : 1. Tlie arrangement proceeds 
 ^irougliout on a plan coriesponding with the sub- 
 jects of the predictions. In tliose against foreign 
 nations chronological is unif?d with material 
 order, whilst i:i those which relate to Israel the 
 order of time is strictly followed. 2. The jire- 
 dictions stand in such connection with each other 
 that eve.y jiart has "-eferenceto what has jireceded 
 •t. 3. H storical notices are occasionally ap- 
 pended to the ])redioti(ins, which wcuild scarcely 
 h« d)iie by a tianscriber : e.ff the notice respecting 
 
 EZIONGEBER. 
 
 cs: 
 
 himself in chaps, xi., xxiv., xxv.,and the clo»e of 
 chap, xix., whicli Hilvernick translates 'Tiiis is a 
 lamentation and was for a lamentation.' Tlie 
 whole book is divided by HUvernick into nine 
 sections, as follows : — 
 
 1. Ezekiel's call to the prophetic oifice (ch, 
 i.-iii. 15). 
 
 2. Series of symbolical representatiori.s and 
 particular predictions foretelling the ai)]iroachiiig 
 destruction of Judali and Jerusalem (ch. iii. 
 16-vii.). 
 
 3. Series of visions presented to the prophet a 
 year and two months later than the former, in 
 which he is shown the teiujile polluted by the wor- 
 .shij) of Adonis — the consequent judgment on the 
 inhaliitants of Jerusalem and on thejiriests, — and 
 closing with promisesof happier times and a purer 
 worship (ch. viii.-xi.). 
 
 4. A series of reproofs and warnings directed 
 especially against tiie particular errors and jire- 
 judices then jirevalent a^moiigst his contempo- 
 raries (ch. xii.-xix.). 
 
 5. Another series of warnings delivered about a 
 year later, announcing the coming judgments to 
 be yet nearer (ch. xx.-xxiii.). 
 
 6. Predictions uttered two years and five 
 months later, when Jerusalem was besieged, an- 
 nouncing to the captives that very day as (he 
 commencement of the siege (comji. 2 Kings xxv. 
 1), and assuring them of its complete overthrow 
 (ch. xxiv.). 
 
 7. Predictions agahist foreign nations (ch. 
 xxv.-xxxii.). 
 
 8. After the destruction of Jeruealem a pro- 
 phetic representation of the triunqili of Israel and 
 of the kingdon'- of God on earth (ch. xxxiii. - 
 xxxix.). 
 
 9. Symbolic representation of Messianic times, 
 and of the establishment nnd prosperity of the 
 kingdom of God (ch. xl.-xlviii.). 
 
 The latter part of the book has always been 
 regarded as very obscure. It will be seen by the 
 brief notices of the contents of the sections which 
 we have given above, that H;ivernick considers 
 the whole to i^late to Messiaiiic times. The pre- 
 dictions respecting Gog (ch. xxxviii., xxxix.) have 
 been referred by some to Antiochus Ejiiphanes ; 
 by others to Camhyses. to the Chalda'ans. the 
 Scythians, the Turks, &c. Mr. Granville Penn 
 has iiiterjiieted them of Napideon and the French 
 (T/ie Vrophccij of Ezekiel cuiicerni/iy Gogiie, &c., 
 1815). The description of the temple (ch. 
 xl.-xliii.) has been thought by many to contain 
 an account of what Solomon's trmjile was; by 
 others, of what the second tem]ile sliould he. The 
 difficulties of all these hypotheses seem to be in- 
 superable. We have only sjiace to say that we 
 fully accord with the view of Haveini.'k, and art 
 glad to take this ojiportunity of reconin lending 
 his Cotnmeiitcrry to the notice of English scholars. 
 We do this the more readily because we believe 
 his book (publisheil only this vear, 1843) is very 
 little known at present in Enghintl. To him we 
 are greatly indei>ted for the niateiials of the pre- 
 sent article, and only regret that we could not 
 obtain his work soon enougli to make a more ex- 
 tended use of it — F. W. (>. 
 
 EZIOXGEBER 05? FVi/ ; Sept. Tamu, 
 ro/3ep ; and \'\i]i;. Asiotif/aber), a very ancient 
 city lying not far Irom Elatli, on the eastern am.
 
 (W8 
 
 EZRA. 
 
 EZRA. 
 
 •f the Rpil Sea. It is first mentioned in Num. 
 EXxiii. 35, as one of the stations where the Hebrews 
 iialted in their journryings tlu-ough tlie desert 
 fDeut. ii. S). From its harbour it was that Solo- 
 mon (1 Kiiij;s ix. 26) sent the fleet wlii.ch lie lia'' 
 tliei '' built to llie land of Ophi-r, whence they 
 fetciieii four hundred and twenty talents of gold. 
 Here, also, .Tehoshapliat (I Kings xxii. 47; 
 2 Chron. xx. 33) built a lleet ' to go to Opliir," 
 but because he had joined himself with Atiaziah, 
 'king of Israel, who did wickedly," 'the sh'ps 
 were broken that they were not able to go to Tar- 
 shish.' Josephus (^Autiq. viii. 6. V) says that 
 Kziongeber was also called Berenice, and that it 
 lay not far from Ailath. It is proba'oly tiie same 
 with the once populous city Assyan (Burckhardt, 
 ii. 831). Robinson {Biblical Researches, i. 250) 
 says, 'no trace of Eziongeber seems now to remain, 
 unless it be in the name of a small wady with 
 brackish water, el-Ghudyan opening into el- 
 Aral)ah from the western mountain, some dislance 
 iioitli of .A.kaljah. However difierent the names 
 el-Glmdyaii and Ezion may be in apj)earance, 
 yet the le'.ters in Arabic and Hebrew all corre- 
 spond ' [Elath]. — J. R. B. 
 
 EZR.l. We shall bring the statements of this 
 article under the following heads : — 
 
 I. Name. 
 
 II. Parentage. 
 
 III. Doings. 1. Historical; 2. Doubtful. 
 
 IV. Writings. 1. Canonical ; 2. Apocryphal. 
 
 I. Name. — t^^ty. Ezra means help ; Sept. 
 'EcrSpas. The form of the name is Clialdaic or 
 Aramaic; and it is equivalent in meaning to tlie 
 Hebrew name "ITJ?, from the root "ITJ? ; Arab. 
 
 jj^, he surrounded, protected, helped. 
 
 II. Parenfa(fc. — The celebrated Ezra was a 
 Jewish scribe (~IDD) and priest (JHS), who, about 
 the year b.c. 458, led the second expedition of 
 Jews back from the Babylonian exile into Pa- 
 lestine. This Ezra ought to be distinguished 
 from tlie Ezra who went up as one of tlie chiefs 
 of the priests and Levites under Zerubbabel 
 (Neh. xii. 1. 12, 33). » 
 
 Ezra was a lineal descendant from Phinehas, 
 the son of Aaron. He is stated in Scripture to 
 be the son of Seraiah, the son of Azuriah; which 
 Seraiah was slain at Riljlali by order of Nebu- 
 chadnezzar, having been brought thither a captive 
 by Neliuzaradan. But, as 13() years elapsed be- 
 tween tlie deatli of Seraiah and the departure of 
 Ezra from Baitylon, and we read that a grandson 
 of Seraiah was the high priest who accompanied 
 Zerubbabel on the Hist return to Jerusalem, 
 seventy years before Ezra returned thither, we 
 may suppose that by the term son here, as in 
 some other places, the relationsliip of grandson, 
 or of a still more remote direct descendant, is in- 
 tended. In addition to tlie information given in 
 the books of Ezra and Nehemiah, that Ezra was 
 a ' scribe,' a ' i-eady scribe of tlie law of Moses," 
 ' a scribe of the woixls of the Commandments of 
 the Lord and of his statutes to Israel," ' a scribe 
 of the law of the God of Heaven,' and 'a priest,' 
 vir. are told by Josvphus that he was high-priest 
 of the Jews who were left in Babylon; tliat tie 
 was particularly conversant with the laws of 
 Moses, and was held in universal esteem on ac- 
 count of his righteousness and virtue. 
 
 Ill D(:ing$ of Ezra. — The rebuilding of ihf 
 temple of Jerusalem, vvliicl) had been ilect»»od 
 by Cyrus in the year u.c. 536. was, after much 
 poweifiil and vexatious opposition, completed in 
 the reign and by tlie permission of Darius Hys- 
 taspis, in the year j'.c. 515. 
 
 In the year u.c. 457 Ezra was sent by * Arta- 
 xerxes Loiigimaiius and his counsellors to inquire 
 concerning Judali and Jerusalem, according tc 
 the law of liis God which was in his hand ; and 
 to carry the stiver and gold which the king and 
 his counsellors freely otl'ered unto the God of 
 Israel.' Permission was also granted toliim to 
 take with him all the silver aiW. the gold wliii h 
 he could find in all the province of Babylon, to- 
 gether with tlie free-will ofi'erings which the 
 people and priests offered for the liouse of God at 
 Jerusalem. Of this treasure he was directed tc 
 employ as much as was requisite in the purchasf 
 of offerings according to tiie law of Moses, and 
 tiie suriilus he was to lay out acconliiig t« hi.< 
 discretion for the maintenance of tlie externals ol 
 religion. Ezra was al'JO charged to convey vessels 
 for the liouse of God in Jerusalem ; and, lest these 
 gifts should be insufficient, he was empowered to 
 take from tlie king"s treasure-house as much as 
 should be wanted to supply everything needful 
 for the house of the Lord. At the same time that 
 this commission was given to Ezra, Artaxerxea 
 Longimanus issued a decree to the keepers of the 
 king's treasure beyond the river, to assist Ezra ir 
 everything in which he needed help, and to supply 
 him liberally with money, corn, wine, oil_ a»"l 
 salt. It was further enacted that it should not hr 
 lawful to impose tribute upon any priest, Levite, 
 or other person concerned in ministration in the 
 house of God. Ezra was commissioned to a])poini 
 ' according to the wisdom of God which was in 
 his hand," magistrates and judges to judge all the 
 people beyond the river, that knew the laws of liis 
 God ; and was enjoined to teach them to those 
 who knew them not. The reason of the interest 
 for the worship of God at this time evinced liy 
 Artaxerxes, appears to have been a fear of thi 
 divine displeasure, for we read in the conclusioi 
 of the decree to the treasurers beyond the river 
 ' Whatsoever is commanded by the God of Heaven 
 let it be diligently done for the house of the GoO 
 of Heaven ; vov. wiiv shouj.d there be wrath 
 
 AGAINST THE REALM OF THE KING AND HIS 
 
 SONS?' We are also told (Ezra, vii. 6) that tiif 
 king granted Ezra all his request; and Josepliiu 
 infoims us that Ezra, being desirous of going tf 
 Jerusalem, requested the king to grant him re 
 commendatory letters to tlie governor of Syria 
 We may therefore sujipose that the dread whicl 
 Artaxerxes entertained of the divine judgment.' 
 was the consequence of the exposition to him b; 
 Ezra of the history of the Jewish people. Some 
 writers suppose that this favour shown to the Jews 
 was consequent upon the marriage of Esther witb 
 Ahasuerus ; liut tliis could not be, even if w» 
 sh(iuld grant, wiiat is unlikely, that the Artaxerxes 
 of the book of Ezra and the Ahasuerus of th» 
 liook of Esther were the same person, becausf 
 Ezra set out for Jerusalem in the Jirst month in 
 the seventii year of the reign of .Artaxerxes, and 
 Estlier was not taken into the King's house un- 
 til the tenth month in the seventh year of th« 
 reign of .\hasuerus, and did nut declare her roi- 
 nection witli the Jewish people, and obtain favou'
 
 E/K.A. 
 
 fjrACTnvmtil after the plot of Ilaman, in flie 
 twelfth ypar or,Vlia.->aei<is. 
 
 K^r.i iis-;einl)ieil tlie Jews wlio accomfviiiieil 
 hini on the liaiikj of tlie river Aliava, wliere lliey 
 n.iUed tdife days .11 teiiu. Hon; l''zia )iroclaiinr'(l 
 a last, as an act of liiiiniliatii)ii lit'l'iire (nxl and a 
 ««iison of piayer for divine ilirecfioii and safe con- 
 duct; for, on setting out, lie 'was ashamed to 
 require a ban'l of soldiers and horsemen to help 
 them against the enemy liy the way,' liecause lie 
 had asserted to the hin^' that the hand ot iiis (iod 
 is upon all tiiem that seek him f,ir good. Ezia 
 next committed the care of the treasures which he 
 carried with him to twelve of f lie cliief priests, 
 assisted l>y ten of their brethren, appointing these 
 to take charge of the treasures hy tiie way, 
 and deli\er them s;ifely in the house of tlie Loid 
 at Jenisalem. On the twelftli day from tiieir 
 first Setting out Ezra and his companions left 
 the river Ahava, and arrived safely at Jerusalem 
 in the (iftii month, having heen delivered from 
 the hand of the enemy and of such as lay in wait 
 by the way. Three days after their arrival tlie 
 treasures were v/eighed and detivt'red into tiie cus- 
 tody of some Levites. The returning exiles olVcred 
 burnt-otVerings to the Lord They delivered also 
 the king's commisiions to the viceroys and gover- 
 nors, and gave needful hel)) to the people and the 
 ministers of the Temjile. \Vhen Ezra had dis- 
 charge<l the various trusts committed to him, the 
 princes of the Jews came to him and complained 
 tliat the Jewish people generally who had returned 
 from the captivity, and also the priests and Le- 
 vites, hut especially the rulers and princes, liad 
 not kept theuiselvej separate liom thej)eo])le of the 
 land, but hail done according to the abominations 
 uf theiemnaut of tlie nafinns whom their fore- 
 fathers had driven out, and married their daugh- 
 ters, and allowed their children to intermarry 
 with them. On hearing this Ezra was deeply 
 •»niicted ; and, accoiding to the Jewish custom, he 
 •ent his mantle and tore the hair of liii head and 
 >eard. There gatheieil round him all those who 
 itill feared God, and diculed his wrath l'i)r tlie 
 Vansgression of those whom he had brought back 
 Troin captivity. Having waited till the time of 
 'he evening sacrilice, Ezra rose up. and, having 
 igain rent his hair and liis garments, made jjuldic 
 ;)rayer and confession of sin. The assembled 
 leojtle we]it bitterly, and Shechaniah, one of the 
 ions 01" Klam, came forward to propose a general 
 wvenanf to ))ut away the foreign wives and their 
 ■children. Ezra then arose ami administeied an 
 «iith to the people that they would do accordingly, 
 Proclamation was also made that all tiiose who 
 had returned from captivity should witliin three 
 days gather themselves together unto Jerusa'em, 
 under pain of excommunication and forfeiture of 
 ■•.heir goods. The peo[)le assemliled at the time 
 appointed, trendjlmg on account of their sin 
 and of the heavy rain that I'ell. Ezra addressed 
 them, declaring to them their sin, and exhorting 
 them to amend their lives by dissolving tiieir 
 illegal connections. The jieople acknowledged 
 f'he justice of his rebukes, and promised oliedience. 
 They then requested that, as the rain fell heavily, 
 and the rnimber of transgressors was great, he 
 vouid appoint times at wliich «hev miglit seve- 
 rally come to he examined rcsjiectnig this matter, 
 Bccomjxinied by the juilges and elders of every 
 xily. A commission was tl»erefoie farmed, con- 
 
 EZHl. 
 
 M» 
 
 sisting of Ezra .ind some others, to invcti^iiijatc the 
 extent ol the evil. This investigation occupied 
 three months. 
 
 in Nell. viii. we read that, on the occixsion 0^ 
 the celeluation of the least of the seventh monih, 
 suiisecjuently to Nehemiah's nuinl)ering the |X'ople, 
 }C/ra was reipiested to liring the book of the law 
 of Moses; and that he read therein standing 
 upon a pulpit of wood, which raised him abovn 
 all the people. 
 
 Josephus relates the afTecting scene whicli oc- 
 curred on the reading of the law l>y Ezra. The 
 account given hy Josephus agrees with that of 
 Nehemiah in all leadin;} puiticulars, except that 
 Josephus places the date and occasion twelve 
 years afterwards. 
 
 Josephus tells us that Ezra died soon after this 
 celel)ration of the Feast of Tabernacles, and was 
 buried at Jerusalem willi great magnilicence. 
 According to some Jewish chmniclers he died 
 in the year in which Alexander came to Jerusa- 
 lem, on the tenth tlay of the month Tebeth 
 (that is, the lunation in December), in the same 
 year in which took jilace the death of the pro- 
 jihels Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, anil in 
 which prophecy became extinct. According to 
 other traditions Ezra retiuned to Babylon and 
 died there at the age of 12i) years. 
 
 The Talmudic statement is that he died at 
 Zamzumu, a town on the Tigris, while on his load 
 from Jerusalem to Susa, whither he was going Ko 
 converse with Artaxerxes aijout the allairs of the 
 Jews. A tomb said to be his is shown on tha 
 Tigris, about twenty mile.s above its junction with 
 
 
 2sr,. [ I'oml) of *;.£r:i.] 
 
 the Euphrates. An interesting descrljilion an I 
 wood-cut of this tiimb aie subjoined to the note* 
 on the bo(ik of Ezra in the 'Pictorial IJible." 
 
 Some traditions asseit that. Ezra was. about a.m. 
 3113, the president of the n7n3n nDJ3. St/na- 
 (for/a Magna, and the father of all iVIislinic doctors. 
 In ]/iety and meekness he was like unto r>Ii«e« 
 (ftic/insiii, ]). 13. See ZcmruU David). When 
 he went from IJabvlon to Jerusalem, he look with 
 him all persons whose descent w.is either illegi- 
 timate or miknown ; so that the Jews left in 
 Kabylon shoidd lie n^IDD *p3, pure IU<£ flour 
 (Kidtln.sliin, <:. J, 1, (Icm.). l'"zra is said to have 
 introduced the present scpiare Hebrew .iharacter, 
 and, in conjunction with some other elders, to 
 
 2»
 
 696 
 
 EZRA. 
 
 Kavi> mavle the inasora, the puftefiJation, art<l ac- 
 centuation of the whole Bihle (Abarbaiiel, Vra-fat. 
 ad Nachahtth Atoth ; Klia*, l>rcpf. 3 Masor.). 
 
 Ezra is also said to have vigorously resisted tlie 
 8e<-.t of the Saddiicees, which sprang up in his days; 
 and therefore to have put the words D^iyH |0 
 n'piy *iy, " sa-culo in sa'culum, at the liead of all 
 prayers, as a syinhol by which the oithoilox could 
 be distinguislied {Bab. Deraclioth. fol. 54). 
 
 Since the peoi:le, during the Babylonian cajj- 
 tivity or exile, hail become accustomed to the 
 Aramaic language, and scarcely understood 
 Hebrew, Ezra established the office of turgoman 
 IDJIin, dragoman, or interpreter, who stood near 
 ;the public reader in the synagogue, and translated 
 every verse after it was read {Slegillah, fol. 74). 
 
 Ezra ordained that the year of jubilee sliould be 
 reckoned from the seventh year after the rebuild- 
 ing of the temjile fMaimon. Hal. Johel. cap. lt>). 
 Ezra is considered to be the author of the 
 canon, and wortiiy to have been the lawgiver, 
 if Moses had not preceded him {Bab. Sanhed. 
 c. ii. f. 21 ; compare the article Canon). He 
 is even said to have re-written tl>e whole of 
 the Old Testament from memory, the copies of 
 which had perished by neglect. But we must 
 abstain from recounting all the traditional ampli- 
 fications of the doings of Ezra, since, if all were 
 to be received, it would be dillicult to say what 
 he did not do, so strong has been the inclination 
 to connect important facts with the person of 
 Ezra (compaie 2 Esdras, xiv. ; Irenasus, Adv. 
 Hceres. iii. 2b; Clem. Alex. Slrom. i. p. 142; 
 Augustin. De Mirabil. Script, ii. 23; Hieron. ad 
 Halrid. p. 212; Vail. Buxtorf, Tiberias, ),. 88, 
 sqq. ; Bertholdt, £tV;/ei<. i. 69, sqq. ; De Wette, 
 Einleit. p. 17, sq. ; Sauer, Diss, canonem Vet. Test. 
 etc. Altorf, 1792, 4to. ; Sanhedrin, fol. xxi. 1; 
 Rau, De Synag. Magna, pp. 31, 89; Hartmann, 
 Verbitidung des Alien u>id Xeuen Testamentes, 
 pp. Ill, sqq. Arabian fables about Ezra are men- 
 tioned in Hottinger's Thes. rhilol. p. 113, and 
 in Herbelot, Bibl. Oiientale, p. (597, etc.). 
 
 IV. Writii>gs.—\Ve now tuin to the writings 
 of Ezra. The canonical writings of Ezra are, 
 besides the book which bears his name, inost 
 likely the two bocks of the Chronicles. ' Esram 
 libros Paralipomenou lucubrasse Kbrworum om- 
 nium est fama consentlens ' (lluetius, Dem. 
 Evang. iv. 14, p. 341). But as the reasons for 
 ascribing the books of Chronicles to the author- 
 ship of Ezra have already been investigated m 
 the article Chronicles, we confme ourselves here 
 to the book of Ezra. .Some authors have ascribed 
 the I'ooks of Neliemiah and Esther likewise to 
 Ezra, although they differ in style. [EsTHEit; 
 Neiikmiah.] , 
 
 Contents.— T\\6 book of Ezra contiuns a-Trofivv 
 fiovtvuara, memorabilia, or records of events oc- 
 curring abou* V-i termination of the Babylonian 
 exile. "" It comprises accounts of the favours 
 bestowed upon tho Jews by Persian kings; of 
 the rebuilding of the temple; of tlie mission of 
 Ezra to Jerusalem, and his regulations and re- 
 forms. Such records forming the sul)ject of the 
 Ujoh. of Ezra, we must not l>e surprised that ite 
 parts are not so intimately connected with each 
 fcther as we might have expected if die author 
 bad set forth his intention to furnish a complete 
 ^01 y of liii ti ues. 
 
 £ZRA. - 
 
 The evei'ts narrated in he book of Efra aiK 
 s=])read over a period of about 79 years, nnder 
 the reigns of 
 
 Cyrus • ^ 
 
 Cambyses ...•••* ^ 
 
 Magus, or Pseudo-Smerdis . 7 
 
 Darius Hystaspis .... 36 
 
 Xerxes ^I 
 
 Artaxerxes (in the eighth year 
 
 of whose leign the reconls of [ 
 
 Ezra cease) ° . " 
 
 80 
 
 The beginning of the book of Ezra agrees ver- 
 batim with the conclusion of the second book of 
 Chronicles, and terminates abruptly with the 
 statement of the divorces ellccted by his authority, 
 by which the marriages of Israelites with foreign 
 women were dissolved. 
 
 Since the l)Ook of Ezra has no marked conclu- 
 sion, it was, even in early times, conside-ed to 
 form part of the book of Nehemiah, the contents 
 of which are of a similar description. As, how- 
 ever, the book of Ezra is a collection of <letached 
 aTVoixfTjixoyivixaTa, or records of remarkable events 
 occuiring at the conclusion of the exile and m 
 the time's immediately following it, attemiitmg 
 no display of the art of l>ook-making, the meie 
 want of an artificial conclusion cannot be con- 
 sidered a sufiicient reason for regarding it as the 
 first nortion of Nehemiah. It is, however, likely 
 that "the similarity . f the contents of the books 
 of Ezra and Nehemiah was the cause of their 
 being placed together in the Hebrew li»'''^- 
 
 The arrangement of the facts in the book of Ezra 
 is chronologi^cal. The book may Ije divided into 
 two portions. The/;;sj! consists of chajiteis i.-yi., 
 and contains the history of the rt-turning exdes 
 and of their rebuilding of the temple, and tom- 
 prise* the period from the first year of Cyrus, 
 B c. 53(3, to the sixth year of Darius Hystaspis, 
 B.C. 613. In the liist six chapters the use of 
 the third iierson (iredominates in the narrative, 
 except in passages where, by ffwiadsxT}, occm-s 
 N3~IIDX, J^eb. i3")D«, wu said, or wliere tlie 
 nairative contains alistracts from documents to 
 which Ezra had access. In tliese abstiacts the 
 Aramaic or Chaldee language of the ongmal 
 documents has l)een i.veserveil from ch. iv. 8, to 
 vi t!S and vii. 12-26. These jioitions exist m 
 Kennicotfs Cod. 210, in a collateral Hebrew 
 translation, reprinted in Keniucotts edition of 
 tlie Hebrew Bible, and separately in C/ialdat- 
 cortim Danielis et Esrtt cu^pilnm interpretaiio 
 Hebraica. Prinws e.r aodire antiquo illatn 
 ed. B. Kennicott. In usus exidi.'orum sei:rsim 
 eacndi citravd, et commentationem de indole et 
 usu Inijus translutionis jntemiiit Ludovicus 
 Schulze, Halae, 17S2, 8vo. 
 
 An argument has been raised against the opi- 
 nion tharEzra was the audior of the whole book 
 that bears his name, from the use of the first per- 
 son plural in the 4th verse of the 5th chapter, 
 which would seem to im})ly thai the iwrrator was 
 present on the occasion ilesciibed ; l)Ut, setting 
 Lide oth^r replies to this argument, it appe.us 
 that the word we refers to Tatnai and his corw- 
 panions, and not at all to the Jews. 
 
 The second portion contains tht /<rs.:nal 
 history of the migration of Ezra to l-alestin*
 
 EZRA. 
 
 in the. «evei-th yeai of Artaxerxes. This latter 
 portion, emi racing ihapteis vii.x., is an autu- 
 bioijrapliy of Ezra durii:;^ aliuut twelve or 
 tliiiteen nioi.tlis, in the seventh and cifjhth years 
 of tin; reiiijn of Artaxerxes Lonjjimamis. Ezra 
 speaks from ch. vii. 27, to ch. ix. 15, in the first 
 person. * There is an essential ditlerence be- 
 tween public events vvhich a man recollects, 
 ttioii^'li only as in a dieam, to 1 avc iieard of at the 
 tinie when tliey occurred, and those which pre- 
 cede! Iiis biitli. The former we tiiink of with re- 
 ference to ourselves; the litter are fureif^ii to us. 
 The ejwcli and duration of the former we measure 
 by our own life ; tlie latter belong to a jteriod for 
 which our imagination has no scale. Life and 
 definitcness are imiurted to all tiiat we hear or 
 read witii respect to tlie events of our own life' 
 (Niebuhr, On the Distinciiun bciireen Atmals 
 and lUstorij). Tiiese remarks, wliici) Niehuhr 
 Diude in reference to Tacitus, are, in a great mea- 
 sure, applicable also to Ezra, and account for 
 leveral of those dill'erences between the various 
 parts of his book, wliicii have so mucti startled 
 some modern biblical scholais, tliat tliey iiave 
 presumptuously undertaken to siiow the precise 
 seams or sutures by means of which various frag- 
 ments of difl'erent authors were brought together. 
 In this attempt riiey have been esjiecially guided 
 by iiie ciiange of tiie third to the lirst person, for 
 which ciiange we account by the above remaiks 
 of Niebuhr. 
 
 Instances of similar change of person are so 
 frequent in ancient authors, that ihetoricians have 
 introduced it among tlie riietorical figures, under 
 the name of enaHaffe personariim. Tlie [irojihetical 
 writings of the Old Testament furnish examples 
 of such iviXKayt}. For instance, Eztk. i. 1-3 ; 
 Zech. i. 1; vi. I; vii. 1, 4, S; Jer. xx. 1, sq. 
 compared with v. 7, sq. xxi. 1; xxviii. 1-5; 
 xxxii. 1-8; Hos. i. 2-3; iii. 1. So also in Ha- 
 bakkuk, Daniel, &c. Tlie frequency of this eVoA- 
 Xayr;, especially in the prophetical parts of the 
 CMd Testan?ent, arifes fiom either the more ob- 
 jective or ir.ore subjective tendency of the style, 
 which of course vanes iu harmony with the con- 
 tents of the chapter. We may observe this eVoA- 
 Xayij even in our own writings, from which we are 
 certainly taught by modern scholastic usage to 
 eradicate it, although it wnuld, if preserved, 
 frequently give greater freshness to our commu- 
 nications. We have made these remarks in order 
 to show the perfect futility of the chief argument 
 adduced hy modern writers against the original 
 unity of the book of Ezra ; simie of wlujni, on ac- 
 count of the enallape personortnn, as^.-i^rt thatch, 
 vii. 1-26 was writiei' by an aaUior dillt cot from 
 that of the fX)rtion nnniediately following, up to 
 ch. ix. 15 ; and that, again, the subsequent jwition 
 to the end of the book was indited by a still dif- 
 ferent writer. We pass over other still more futile 
 arguments against the authenticity of the hook, and 
 express our opinion that even Hilvernick does not 
 rightly set fortii the truth of the matter when, in 
 his EiiiU:Uunff, he says that this ^^oAAaTTj arose 
 fiom Ezra's imitation of the prophetic usa;,'e, and 
 when he appiovingly quotes Scliirmer's Obscrva- 
 Uones excgtticce ct critlccf in librum Esdrce, vol. 
 ii. p. 8 (Vratislaviae, 1830) : ' initio autem narra- 
 tionis rerum a se gestarum Esdra certe consulto 
 terlia usus est persona, rationem dicendi stilumque 
 pr&^etarura elatioreoi videlicet iuaitaturus. Uni- 
 
 EZRACH. 
 
 8». 
 
 verse non alieruim videtur, sed facillime potiut 
 auinnnn suhit, Esilram quodammoilo pr(i)>helaruni 
 imifatoreni qualem seijisum ovtendit, aL'Uoscere.' 
 There was certainly as little imitation of the 
 )>rophets in the enalluge peisotuiivm of Ezra, ii» 
 theie is imitation of the prophets if we change 
 from the first to the tliiid person in tiurt>wn cdin- 
 munications. 'EvoAAo^tj never arises Croin imita- 
 tion, but unly from the more subjective or morp 
 objective tuinof our mintl. and fiom t; at vivacity 
 of style which renders it iiicumlent upon tlie 
 reader rather than upon the wiiter to supply that 
 IDS'1, which, as in Jonah ii. 3, forms the iiaii- 
 siticin from the use of the l/iird to the ado|.'tion of 
 'Aie_first person. 
 
 We hare siKiken thus far of the canonical book 
 of Ezra; there aie, however, four books iha* liav*- 
 received this name, \iz. the book noticed above, 
 the only one which was iecei\ed into tl e Hebrew 
 canon under that name, the book of Nelnmiuh, 
 and the two a)iocryphal books of Esdras, concern- 
 ing which see Esuras. — C. II. F. B. 
 
 EZRACH (n"1T^). This word occurs only 
 e::ce in Scripture, na— .cly, in Ps. xxxvii. 35 : 
 ' I have seen the wicked in f,reat jiower, spread- 
 ing himself like a green bai;-tre'-' (ezradi). Gim- 
 mentators and translators have diJlered re8[)ecting 
 the meaning of this wo;d, some supposing it to in- 
 dicate asi)ecilic tiee, as the laurel ; and others, sup- 
 ))orted by the Sejituagint and Vulgate, :!ie cedar 
 of Lebanon. It is by sorrie considered to meari 
 an evergreen tree, and by otlieis, a gieen tree that 
 grows in its native soil, or that has net suflered 
 by transplanting, as such a tree s]ireads itself luxu- 
 riously. Others, again, as the unknov.'L' author 
 of the sixth Greek e.lition, who -s quoted by Cel- 
 sius (i. p. 104), consider the word as leferring tc 
 the 'indigenous man:" ' Vidi inipium et impu- 
 dentem, in terocia sua gloriantem, et dicentem : 
 sum instar indigens?, airibulanti in justitia;' and 
 this opinion is adojited by Celsius himself 
 
 Celsius states that recent interpreters have 
 adopt; (1 the lauiel or bay-tree for no otiier reason 
 than because — 
 
 viret semper laurus, nee fronde caduoa 
 
 Carpitur. 
 
 Sir Thomas Browne, indijed, says, 'as the sense 
 of the text is sulhcienlly answeied by this, we are 
 unwilling to exclude that nolle plant fVom the 
 honour of having jU name in Scri)ituie.' Isidore 
 de Barriere, on the contrary, coiicludes that the 
 laurel is not mentioned in Scriptjire because 
 'non debuit coclestis scriptuia contaminari men- 
 tione illius arboris, quam in tantoprelio hahcreiit 
 gentiles, ad labulas et fictiones poeticos udlii- 
 berent,' &c. This, Celsius justly observes, is a 
 verv insufficient re.ison, as the aliuse of a thing 
 should not prevent its proper use; and if such a 
 princi))le had l)eeii acted on, we giiould nut have 
 fiiund in Scripture mentiun of any trees or |)l.ints 
 employed by the Gentiles in their suj>er>litious 
 ceremonies. He might have added, as examples, \ 
 the vine, the olive, and the cedar, which, for such ' 
 a leason, might have all been excluile<i. 
 
 The cause why the laurel is n*)t more fre- 
 quently mentioned in Scripture, '«, proliably^ 
 because it was never very common in Palestine, 
 as otherwise, from its pleasing ajtpeaiance, giafe- 
 ful shade, atid tlie agreeable odour of its leaves, 
 it could hardly have failed to attract attenliuo.
 
 692 
 
 EZRACH. 
 
 Thoui^h Celsius and others have remarked that, if 
 czrach does indeed sigDity a tree, it must he some 
 one distinct (Vom tlie Imnel, and one'qtup in 
 Judaja lVeq.iipns fuerit, et altitudine, frondium(]iie 
 utnljra, alque amosnitate praecelluerit caeteris,' 
 
 "Z^^^^ 
 
 28" [Bay-tree. Laurus noliilis ] 
 
 yet no evidence is adduced by any of the above 
 authors in Ijelialf of the bay tree, as tliat intended 
 in trie passage referred to. It ajipears to iis that 
 liie Hebrew word must have been derived from 
 
 the Arabic ^yuvff ashriik, which is descril)ed in 
 
 j\raf)ic works on Materia Medica as a tree having 
 leaves like tlie gliar, that is, the bay-tree or lauj-iis 
 Hoinlis of botanists. If czrach, tlierefore, was 
 originally the same word as ashrvk, then it 
 would indicate some tree resembling the bay-tree, 
 r4tlierthan the bay-tree itself; but, until that can 
 be discovered, the latter is, upon tlie whole, well 
 suited to stand as its representative. 
 
 Tiie laurel or bay-tree, laurus nobilis of bo- 
 tanists, is well known to the Asiatics by its 
 
 Arabic name of jw>- ghar, under which it is men- 
 tioned by Seraplon and Avicenna, wh(T quote 
 chiefly Dioscorides and Galen, thus indicating tiiat 
 they had not m\icli original information of their 
 own respecting a ti'ee which is probably not indi- 
 genous in the countries in which they wrote. The 
 leaves and berries of the laurel, as well as the 
 bark and the root, were employed in medi- 
 cine: the berries continue, even in the present 
 day, to be exported to India, where we found 
 them in the bazaars, under th.e name of hiih- 
 al-r/har [Illust. Ilim. Bot p. 326), being still 
 esteemed as a stimulant medicinal, tiiough not 
 |)oss«ssed of any properties superior to those of 
 tiie iaurels of more southern latitudes. Tlie 
 Arabs give tafncc and zaknee as the Greek 
 names of the ghar-X\ee. These are corruptions, 
 110 doulit, of 5(t(pr)j, the name by which the bay- 
 tree was known to the Greeks. It does not 
 apjiear to occur in Palestine, as travellers, «ucli 
 ,as Rauwolf and Belon, do not rpention it. Has- 
 jelquist expressly states that he had not met 
 wit'a it in Judaea or Galilee, but had re»,*i.i \'.vsit''\! 
 
 FACE. 
 
 very onmfoifal ly nn(!er it< "Tiswle nrar tJie moun- 
 tains beyond While ('ape, "ii ihc- r lad from j*cr« 
 to Sidon. In the iieighlioinhin.il ,if Aiitiocli biy- 
 trees were fomieily very abuiViant, especially at 
 the village and grove of Dapliiie, famous for the 
 tem[)le of Ap.iHo and its llrentionn rites. Tliough 
 the cypress-grove and the consecrated bay-trees 
 have disaT'peared from the immediate vicinity o/ 
 Antioch. Dr. Hococke states that tliey are in great 
 abundance at some little distance. Capts. Irby 
 and Mangles describe the beauty of the scenery 
 on the banksof the Oroiites as sur|)assing anything 
 they expected to see in Syria, and the luxuriant 
 variety of the foliage as prodigious. The laurel, 
 laurestinus, bay-tree, fig-tree, wild vine, plane- 
 tree, English sycamore, arbutus, both common and 
 Andrachne, dwarf oak, &c. were scattered in all 
 directions. Capt. M. Kinneir describes a delight- 
 ful spot, called Babyle, about seven miles from 
 Antioch, which he was tlisposed to consider the 
 ancient Daphne. A number of fountains boil up 
 from amongst the rocks, and flow in difl'erenl 
 channels through a meadow, shaded with luxn- 
 riant bay-trees, walnut-trees, and groves of myrtle. 
 The bay-tree is well known to l)e common in the 
 south of Europe, as in Spain, Italy, Greece, and 
 the Levant. It is usually from 20 to 30 feet in 
 height, often having a bushy appearance, from 
 throwing: up so many suckers; but in England it 
 has attainoil a height of 60 feet, which is not un- 
 usual in warmer climates. It is unnecessary to 
 allude further to the celebrity which it attained 
 among the ancients — a celebrity which has not 
 yet passetl away, the laurel-wreath being still th« 
 symbolical crown as well of warriors^s of poets. 
 Its ever green grateful appearance, its thick shade^ 
 and the agreeable spicy odour of its leaves, poiii 
 it out as that which wiis most likely in the eye of 
 the Psalmist.— J. F. R. 
 
 F. 
 
 FABLE. [PAiJABi.E.J 
 
 F.-VCE, in Scripture, is often used to 'Tenot* 
 presence in the general sense, and, wher- apjilied 
 to the Almighty, denote? such a complere mani- 
 festation of the divine presence, Ijy sound or sight, 
 as was equivalent, in the vividness of the impres- 
 sion, to the seeing of a fellow-creature ' face to face.' 
 The ' face of God' therefore denotes in Scripture 
 any thing or manner by which God is wont ti» 
 manifest himself to man. Thus, v/lien it is said 
 that Adam and Eve hid themselves iVom 'the face 
 of Jehovah,' we understand Oiat they hid them- 
 selves from his presence, howe"er manifested ; foi 
 D"'3D peiiiin, not only signifies presence, as well 
 as (literally) /f'cp, but is the very word for pre- 
 sence, h;>wever manili?sfed. There is no other 
 word to denote presence in the Hebrew language. 
 ^Vllenever ' presence' occurs in our transl.ation, 
 the word in tlic original is the same which is rer. 
 dered ' face' in otlier places. This is very ])ropei ; 
 and the respective teims ' face" and 'presence' are 
 usually applied in the Autliorized Veision with 
 much propriety and discretion; the latter term 
 being employed wherever the efl'ect of the word 
 'face" might have seemed harsh or unseemly. 
 
 It was a very ancient and common opinion 
 that our mortal frame could not survive the 
 liure seifisible manifestations of the d.'viue prfc"
 
 i 
 
 FAIR HAVENS. 
 
 ■cnoe, or 'see God face to face and live' (Gen. 
 xxxii. 30). Hence, in (his j)assaj,'e, tlin patitude 
 mid astuiiisliment ut' Jacub, tliat lie still lived 
 ufter G(>d had manifested himself to him more 
 sensibly than hy di'eams and visions. This im- 
 liiession was confiimed to Moses, who w;ls told, 
 'Thju canst not see my face: no man can see 
 my tace and live' (Exod. xxxiii. 20) ; which 
 clearly sijjnilies tiiat no one cun in tliis j)resent 
 itate of bein^' endure the view of tiiat glory whicii 
 belongs to Him. The ancient lieatlien enter- 
 tained the sam" notion, whicli is remaikably ex- 
 pressed in the celebrated mytliolojjical story of 
 Semel« vho, having prevailed on the reluctant 
 Jove to appear to her in his heavenly splendour, 
 was struck dead l)y the lightnings of his presence 
 (1 Cor. xiii. 12; 1 John iii. 2; Rev. xxii. 4). 
 
 It is to be borne in mind that God is usually 
 represented to us in Scripture under a human 
 form ; and it is indeed dilficalt for even more 
 njjiritualized minds tiian those of tiie Hebrews to 
 conceive of Him ajjart from tlie form and attri- 
 butes uf tiie iiighest nature actually known to us. 
 The Scripture sanctions this concession to the 
 weakness of our intellect, and lience arise the an- 
 thropomorphous phrases which speak of tlie face, 
 the eyes, the arm of G^d. The apjiearances of 
 the angels in the Old Testament times were ge- 
 nerally in the human form (Judg. xiii. 6, &c.); 
 and from this cause alone it would have been 
 natural, in the iniugination, to fransftr the form uf 
 the messengers to Him by whom they were sent 
 [Anthropomokphis.v:]. 
 
 FAIR H.VVENS (KoAol Aififyts), a harbour 
 or roadstead of Crete, tiie unsafeness of which to 
 winter in occasioned that attempt to make for 
 Phenice, on the other side of the island, which 
 led to the eventual loss of the vessel in which 
 Paul sailed for Rome (Acts xxvii. 8). As the 
 name of Kalos Limenas is still preserved, tiiere is 
 no dilliculty in fixing the situation to a small 
 bay a little to the :>jith-east of Cijitj Leon, the 
 present Cajie Mataia. 
 
 FALLOW DEKR. [Ail.] 
 
 FAMINE (jj?!!). Considering the early period 
 in the history \)f the world to which the Biblical 
 records, especially the oldest of tiieni, lefer; and 
 considering also iiow small a proportion to the 
 world at lar^^e, or even to the inhabited jiart of it, 
 the jwpulation bore in the primitive ages, we should 
 not antecedently expect to find fiequcut merit ion 
 of famines. Yet does it apjiear, from the testimony 
 of -liese records, that mankind sull'ereil gieatly from 
 dearth of food in the earliest jH-iiods of which we 
 have any account; and the Scriptural history in 
 this, as in otiier particulars, will be found interest- 
 ing and \aluable to the economist and philosopher, 
 as well as to the divine. In truth famine a])pears to 
 depend, not on the extent of cultivable or of cul- 
 tivated land, nor <in the proportion which such land 
 bears to the actual [jopulation — though, doubt- 
 less, both tiiese elements enter into the inliuences 
 wh ill defeimine the question of abundance or 
 scarcity — but rather on human tinethought and 
 thrift Si applied, as, in the actual circumstances, 
 whatever they aie, to make a suitable provision in 
 kll cases against sucli contingencies as may occa- 
 «i.in dearth. In the almost entire absence of this 
 .'orelhought, barljarous and half-civilized nations 
 lisvs I nen found, scanty tliough the population 
 
 FAMINE. 6N 
 
 may be in relation to the tracts of land ov« 
 which they roam, to Ire most iie<|uenlly on llut 
 verge of destitution, and not seldom to sutler the 
 greatest privations fromdvarth and famine. Vain 
 is the almost unlimited opjiorlunily wliich Nature 
 spieadsaroiind them foi the supply oftiieir animal 
 necessities, since they want eiiher (he intelligence 
 anil skill which are nece.ssary to turn these opjxtr- 
 tunities to account, or the moral qualities wiiich 
 would spaie soinelhiiig from actual abuiidunce iii 
 order to provide against coming wants. 
 
 Since the B:ble gives its uiKpiestionable evi- 
 <lence to show that deaitli was by no means an 
 unfrequent or an inconsideralde evil in tlie early 
 ages, it su)iplies a very cogent nroof, in answer to 
 those who maintain either that the world is worse 
 or no better than it was if. ancient limes, that, at 
 least in those moral (pialilies on which maii't 
 physical well-l)oiiig depends, mankind have madb 
 uiiquestionalile advances. Indeed if any large 
 portion of the earth now sutler fiom famine, the 
 cause may be looked for not so much in the want 
 of forethought and savingiiess as in the operation 
 of passions and piej'.uiices arisiiiir from miscon- 
 ceived self interest, wiiich pre\ent the free inter- 
 change of the bounties of divine Providence, — 
 jiassions and piejudices which characterize not 
 mankind at large, but only certain small }x)rtions 
 of society, and which, in consr.juence, Low jiower- 
 ful soever they may for a time be, have not the 
 vitality of vices of character that belong to a 
 semi-baibaious age, and must, in a day like the 
 present, soon disappear before the generous and 
 dissoUing anlour of enligliten«d Christian love. 
 
 The Ihst mention of a famine which occurs in 
 Scripture is in Gen. xii. 10, where we read that go 
 early as the days of the patriarch Abraham ' there 
 was a famine ill the land,' which is described a« 
 so grievous, as to compel the father of the faithful 
 to quit Canaan. Tlie country to which he resorted 
 was, as we might expect, the land of Egypt, the- 
 early and lasting feitilily of which is a well- 
 known historical fact. In Gen. xxvi. 1, tliis 
 famine is designated as ' the first,' that is, the first 
 l;r.oivn, or of wiiicii there was any record. The 
 same ]iassage informs us nf another famine, whicil 
 afflicted ' the land ' in the days of Isaac, who 
 seems to have contemplated a descent into Egypt; 
 but who, being instructed of God, removed to a 
 ])art of Arabia Petra'a (Gen. xxvi. 17) named 
 Gerar, a city of the Philistines, whose monarch's 
 name was Abimelecli. 
 
 Even Egypt, however, was not exempt froai 
 the desolations of famine (Gen. xli. 30). Tfie 
 ordinary cause of dearth in Egypt is connected 
 with the annual oveidow of the Nile. If the rise 
 of the waters is in any year below a certain 
 standard, the country all'orils scanty supplies of 
 food, and may for the greater part remain a desert. 
 But more than local causes must have been >n 
 ojieration in the case before us ; for we are told 
 that ' tiie famine wiis sore in all lands,' that 
 'the famine was over all the fee of the earlh ' 
 By the foresight and wisdom of Joseph, however, 
 provision against the evil had In'en made in 
 Egypt, while other countries were left to sutler tlie 
 unniiti;;ated consequences of their neglect. The 
 provision made by Joseph must have been of a 
 most abundant nature, since the jjeriod during 
 which the dearth lasted was no less than seven 
 yearsj and the ]>euple of other parts 5oii);ht and
 
 091 
 
 FASTS. 
 
 receiver! supplies in Egypt — 'all countries came 
 into Egypt lo buy corn.' Among otlier lands, 
 Canaan sutlered from the famine ; which was the 
 immetliate occasion of Jacobs sending liis sons 
 down into Egyjit, of tlie discovery which they 
 made of flieir lost brotlier, and of tiie settlement 
 ni tliat land of the descendants of Abraham : an 
 event of the highest consequence in the sequel, 
 and .servini>;ti) illustrate the benigniiy and wisdom 
 of divine Providence in the evils with which, 
 under its intluence, the world is afflictcnl. 
 
 This farrnne was made l)y Joseph the occasion 
 of one of the greatest social revolutions which 
 histi)ry records. The details may be found in 
 the book of Genesis; and it is enough to say here 
 that, as the special administrator of tlie affairs of 
 the country, Joseph got into his hands all the 
 propel ty of the kingdom, including the land (ex- 
 cepting that which belonged to the priests), and 
 gave the same b.ick to the jieople as tenants at will, 
 on condition of their paying to the king ' the 
 lil'th,' jjrobaljly, of the animal produce. 
 
 From these statements it appears that three 
 successive generations were in these e.iily days 
 visited by famine. Tlie Scriptural narrative (the 
 details of which may be easily ascertained by the 
 help of a Concordance) .shows that in after ages 
 famines were, in ancient times, more frequent 
 than they are now ; and this justiHes the use 
 which is made of so terrible a scourge by the 
 sacied writers, and esjiecially the prophets and 
 our Lord himself^ in the highly figiinitive lan- 
 guage which they employ in their rigliteous en- 
 deavours to turn wicked mm and wicked nations 
 from the evil of their ways (Ezek. vi. 11 ; Matt, 
 xxiv. 7). In Amos viii. 1 1, sq., a heavier woe 
 than even the want of bread is appropriately 
 sj)oken of under the appellation of a famine : 
 ' Behold, the days come, sailh the Lord God, that 
 I will send a famine ni the land ; not a famine of 
 bread nor a thirst for water, but of liearing the 
 word of the Lord : and they shall wander from 
 liea to sea, and from the north even to the east, 
 they shall run to and fro lo seek the word of the 
 Lord, and shall not lind it : in that day shall the 
 fair virgins and the young men faint for thirst.' 
 The ensuing verse shows that idolatry was the 
 moving cause of this heavy punishment. — J. R. B. 
 
 FASTS (D"IV; Anglo-Saxon _/«'s/la?i, jejunare, 
 found in our present KngVis\\ break-fast) properly 
 denote an entiie or partial abstinence IVum fo.id. 
 In the early ages (»f the world, when the spon- 
 taneous productions of nature and the spoils of 
 tlie chace foime.i mans chief aliment, lasting 
 from time to time vva> compulsory, in consequence 
 of the niicertainty of obtaming food when wanted. 
 It would be easy for superstitious ignorance to 
 interpret this compulsion into an ex]nession of 
 the divine will, and so to sanction the observance 
 of liisMug as a leligious duty. The transiticn 
 woula he the earier at a time and in countries 
 when the olilice of ])hysician was united in the 
 same person with that of jniest ; for in hot cli- 
 mates occasional abstinence is not without its 
 advantages on the health ; and an abstinence 
 which the state of the body reqniicd, but which 
 the apiiftite shunned or lefu.sed, the authority of 
 the priest and the s;mc(ions of leligion would 
 exact at once with ease and certainty. In the 
 earlier stages of civilization no idea is moie pre- 
 raleut and operative tlian that the Deity is pro- 
 
 FASTS. 
 
 pttiafed by voluntary snflerings on the part of hi* 
 creatuies. Hence ensued all kinds of boc.ilj 
 mortifications, and even the sacrifice of life itself 
 Nay, ' the fruit of the body ' — the dear pledges oJ 
 mutual all'ectiou, the best earthly gift from tin 
 Heavenly Father — children, were saci diced in * x- 
 piation of ' the siti of the soul.' Human enjoy 
 ments were helil to be displeasing in the sight ol 
 God. Tiie notion that the gods were jealous ol 
 man's hajipiness runs through the entire texture 
 of Gieek antl Roman mythology ; and the de- 
 velopment of this falsehood, as piesenteil in 
 Greek tragedy, has given biith to some of the 
 finest productions of the human mind. But 
 what moie pleasurable than food to man, espe- 
 cially to the semi-barbarian? The denial of 
 such a pleasure must then be well-jjleasing to the 
 Divinity ; the rather because on occasions of 
 family bereavement, of national disaster, or any 
 great calamity, the appetite is naturally allected 
 under the influence of grief, and is ma le to loathe 
 the food which in its oidinary condition it finds 
 most grateful. A connection between sorrow and 
 fasting would thus lie established which would 
 carry with it a sort of divine sanction in being 
 natural and inevitable in its origin. Accordingly, 
 abstinence which seemed imjwsed by Providence, 
 if not in expiation of guilt, yet as an accom- 
 paniment of sorrow, easily became regarded as a 
 religious duty, when voluntarily prolonged or 
 assumed, anil grew to be considered as an e.i'ica- 
 cious means for appeasing the divine wrath and 
 restoring prosperity and ])eace. 
 
 No wonder thai inider inlluences so strong as 
 these the observance of religious fasts established 
 itself in the world at a very early period, and is 
 found to have prevailed in most of the nations 
 of antiquity. 
 
 In such a religion as Moses was commissioned 
 by the creator of the world to offer to the chosen 
 jjeople, it was not likely that an observance 
 which, such as fasts, seems to have had its origin 
 in false and heathen conceptions, should hold a 
 very prominent position, or be invested with much 
 importance. There is but one fast etijoiied l^y 
 the great Hebrew lawgiver. And this injunclion 
 we are disjxjsed to ])lace among those things 
 which Moses allowed rather than originated, bore 
 with rather than approved, in consideration of the 
 foice of establisheu custom, and from a wise fear 
 of defeating his own good ends by attempting too 
 nnich. The manner in which this observance is 
 sjwken of in Scri])ture (Lev. xvi. 29; xxiii. 27) 
 seems to imply that it was no new institution that 
 the lawgiver was establishing, but merely an old 
 and well-known j/iuctice, to whicii he gave a 
 modilied sanction. Had it Vteeu otherwise, hail 
 the law been a new one, details woidd have been 
 both needed and given, as is ciisioniary with 
 Moses in his injunctions. Instead of that ihe 
 cliiidien of Israel are required in general terms to 
 'alllict their souls.' But this language is not 
 (irdy vague, it is figurative, and could have no 
 delinite meaning unless lo jiers ns with whom 
 afflicring the soul was in general use. Thii f ict 
 is established by the consideration that the words 
 Convey no delinite ideas to the KngliJi leader 
 unless when exjihiined in the light of Hebri^w 
 antiijuity. Tlieie seems, howevi'r, no le.ison to 
 doubt that -to alllict the .soul (1L''23 H^V, in tlia 
 Scjituagint, Tair^ivovw ttjp 'pvx'h^'J '''"'^ Wf- it XM
 
 FASTS. 
 
 Baeanmg of fastmq;. To a mere English reader 
 
 Ae pliiiise seems focinnpiiseall kinds of voluntary 
 mortiti(uticiiis, Imt ' soiil ' in IIel)iew not seUloiii 
 denotes the ' apjietite " (Prov. xxvii. 7). Accoid- 
 ingly tiie woiiis regard immediately alistiiieiice 
 (rom footl, and most probably (so far as tliey go) 
 nothing more. 
 
 Tlie sole fast required by Moses was on tlie 
 great day of ana al atonement This observance 
 seems always to .Save iiefained some prominence 
 as 'the fast" (Acts xxvii. 9). But what tlie oli- 
 eervance of the enjoined duty involved we are 
 nowhere ex;>rjss1y infonrwd, and can approximate 
 to a know'.adge of juecise details oidy so far as 
 later practices among tiie Jews may be considered 
 lU allbrding a i'aitliful picture of this divinely 
 sanctioned ordinance. In thee remarks the 
 opinion is implied that 'the fast,' wliatever im- 
 ^rtance it may have subsequently acquired, was 
 originally only an incident, not to say an acci- 
 dent, in the gieat solemnity of the annual atone- 
 ment. Other general hists, however, were in 
 course of ages introduced, which were celebrated 
 at fixed times every successive year. In the 
 reign of Zedekiah Nehiichadnezzar besieged and 
 captured Jerusalem, which Ciilamity led to the 
 establishment of a f;ist on the scvetiteentli day of 
 the fomth month (Tlumimuz, July), (Jer. Hi. 
 6,7; Zecli. viii. 19). In the last pissage other 
 fasts are enumerated, namely, 'the fast of the 
 fifth, and the fast of the seventh, and the fast of 
 the tenth.' That of the lifth nonth (Ab, Au- 
 gust) was held on the ninth liay, in mournful 
 commemoration of the burning of the city by 
 * NeLuzar-adan, a servant of the king of Bal»ylon,' 
 who ' burnt the house oi' the Lord, aiid the'^king's 
 house, and all tlie houses of Jerusalem, and every 
 great man's house' (2 Kings xxv. 8, sq. ; Jer. 
 Hi. 12; Zech. vii. 3-5; viii. 19). The fast of 
 the seventh montii (Tishri, October) was esta- 
 blished to bewail the murder of Gedaliah at 
 Mizpah (Jer. xli. 1, sq. ; 2 Kirgs xxv. 25). 
 That of the tenth month (Teheth, January) was 
 held on (he tenth day to commemorate the com- 
 mencement of the siege of Jerusalem on the part of 
 Nebuchadnezzar (2 Kings xxv. I ; Zech. viii. 19; 
 Bee also Hieron. ad Zech. c. viii., and llieros. 
 Taanith, 68 ; Reland, p. 471). 
 
 On particular and signal occasions extraor- 
 dinary fasts were appointed. Thus when Nalioth 
 was condemned lor blasphemy because he would 
 not eive up the inheritance of his fathers to Ahab, 
 Jezebel, as a part of her jdan for gratifying 
 the evil desires of her royal husband, ordered 
 a fast to be ])roclaimed (1 Kings xxi. 9; comp. 
 Jer. xxxvi. 9 ; 2 Chnin. xx. 3). So in Judges 
 XX. 26, the children of Israel ' came unto the 
 house of God and we])t, and sat there before the 
 Lord and fasted until even, and oll'eretl l)urnt- 
 offerings and peace-oflierings before the Lord,' 
 when they iiad sulfered a calamitous defeat at 
 tiie hands of the Benjamites. Other instances 
 of fasting on occasion of loss in battle may be 
 found in I Sam. xxxi. 11-13; Baruch i. 5. In 
 Joel i. ii. a fast is en-joined with a view to turn 
 away the wrath of God as displayed in the ter- 
 rible consequences of the invasion of the land of 
 Judaea by an army of derastating locusts (Cred- 
 oer's Joel). Tiie notion also ]>revailed that a 
 sf«cial fast might have the eflisct of averting the 
 diviae «lisjileasire and securing the divine co- 
 
 FASTS. 
 
 6M 
 
 opentlon in »nv great undertaking ( Tonah ill. 6; 
 
 1 .Sam. vii. 5,' C, 8, 10, 12; I Mace. iii. 47; 
 
 2 Mace. xiii. 12; Judith \v. 11 ; vi. 19). Loral 
 fasts were at a later }«ricd sometirnes lield in 
 order to avert calamity or procure a favour from 
 iieaven ; ;uid the Sanhe<lrim onlered general fast^ 
 when the nation was threa<cne<l witii any great 
 evil, such as drought or lumine (Jo.sepii. \'it. 
 § 5(i ; Taanithy i 5), as was usual with tlie Ro- 
 mans in their sujiDlirafions (Liv. iii. 7 ; x. 23 ; 
 SmillTs Diit. of (j reek <tnd Roman A/i/iq). 
 
 Tiiere were also )iiivate fiists, though the Mosaic 
 law liid not require them. They weie held in 
 connection with individual or family incidents, 
 and agreed in aim and tendency witli fasts of a 
 general and puldic nature. Examples may l>e 
 found in 1 Sam. i. 7 ; xx. 34 ; 1 Kings xxi. 9; 
 Ez. X. 6 ; Nell. i. 4. After the exile piivate 
 fasts became very frequent (Liglitfoot, j). 3 IS), 
 awaiting the call of no special occiision, but en- 
 tering as a regular pait of the current religious 
 worsliip (Suet. Auff . 7() ; Tacit. Ilist. v. 4. 3j. 
 In Judith viii. 6, we read that Judith fasted all 
 the days of her widowhood, '.save the eves of tlie 
 salibaths, and the sabbaths, and the eves of the 
 new moons, and the new moons, and the fe.ists and 
 the solemn days of the house of Israel." And in 
 Tobit xii. jirayer is declared to be good with fast- 
 ing; see also Luke ii. 37; Matt. ix. 14. The 
 parable of the Pliarisee and Publican (Luke 
 xviii. 9 ; comj). Mat^. ;x. 11) shows "now much 
 the Phariiiees were given to voluntary ap.J private 
 fasts — ' 1 fast twice a week.' The liist was on 
 the fifth day of the week, on which Moses as- 
 cended to the toji of Mount Sinai ; the second 
 was on the second ilay, ou which he came down 
 (Taanith, ii. 9; llieros. Mcgillah, 75. I). The 
 Essenes and the Theiaiienfie also were much 
 given to such observances (Philo, Vit. Contenipl. 
 p. 613; Euseb. Pripj). Evan. ix. 3). Fasts were 
 considered as a useful exercise in preparing the 
 mind for special religious impressions. Thus 
 Dan. X. 2, sq., ' In tiiose days I Daniel was 
 mourning three full weeks. 1 ate no pleasant 
 bread, neither came flesh nor wine in my mouih. 
 Then I lifted up my eyes and looke<l, and behold 
 a certain man,' &c. (see akso Acts xiii. 3 ; xiv. 
 23). From Matt. xvii. 21, ' Howbeit tliis kind 
 (of demons) goetli not out but by prayer and 
 fasting,' it would ajijiear that tlie practice under 
 coneideration was considered in the days of Christ 
 to act in certain sjiecial cases as an exorcism. 
 Fasting was accompanied by the ordinary signs 
 of griff among the Israelites, as may he .hnu in 
 I Mace. iii. 47, 'Then they fasted that day and 
 put on sackdoth, and cast ashes upon their heads 
 and rent their clothes.' The fast ordinarily lasted 
 from evening to evening, but was not observed 
 on the sabbath or on festival days (Jose]ih. Antiq. 
 iii. 10.3; Judith viii. 6 ; Mischn. Taanith, Vi. 
 10). The abstinence was either partial or total. 
 In the case of the latter food was entirely fore- 
 gone, but this ordinarily took place only in fasts 
 of short duration ; and abstinence from food in 
 eastern climes is more e;isy and less detrimental 
 (if not in some cases jiositively useful) liian keep- 
 ing from food would be with us in these cold, 
 damp, northern regions (K.stiier iv. 10). In the 
 case of paitial abstintnce the time was longer, 
 the denial in degree less. When Daniel (x. 2) 
 was 'mourning full three weeks,' he ate no ^ plea-
 
 99t 
 
 FASTa 
 
 lO^U brpaJ, neither came Jfcuh nor tvine in my 
 mouth.' Tlicve tloe; not annear to hive heen 
 any fixed and lecugniiod periixU during uliich 
 these (tV-iti endured. From one day lo I'orty days 
 fa-ts were ohserved. The latter |>firii)d appears to 
 have l)ecn regarded with feelings of i>e(uliar 
 sanctity, owing doubtless to certain events in 
 Je.visli liistory. Thus Moses 'was with the Lord 
 on Moint Sinii foily days and foify night.>, he 
 dill !ieither eat Ijread nor diink water' (Kxod. 
 xx.viv. 28). So Elijah (1 Kings xix. 8) 'arose 
 •mil did eat and drink, and wejif in the strengtii 
 of tli.it meat forty days and forty nights unto 
 Hiireb the mount of God.' The same was tlie 
 munlier of days thatonr Loid fasted in the desert 
 in connection with his temptation (Matt. iv. I- 11; 
 Mark i. 12, 13; Luke iv. 1-13}. -In the latter 
 case the al)sthience appears to have been entire, 
 for Luke expressly declares he ate nothing — koI 
 ovK ((payev ou^tv. It does not ap])ear to be a 
 necessary inference fiom the other passages that 
 Moses and l^lij.ih wiioUy al)stained from food 
 during the said foity days. In Dan. i. 10-16, a 
 passage is found whicli shows that abstaining 
 from meat and wine did not imply total absti- 
 nence, for Daniel and his friends had ' |)ulse to 
 eat and water to diink' (VVetstein, p. 270; De 
 Wette, Kiiiik dcr'Mos. Gea. \). 24.5). 
 
 We have already seen iiow qnalilied the sanc- 
 tion was which Moses gave to the observance of 
 fasting as a religious duty. In the same s))iiit 
 which actuated him, the prophets b'ore testimony 
 against the lamenfalde abuses to wiiich the prac- 
 tice was turned in the hi])se of time and' with the 
 increase of social corruption (Isa. Iviii. 4, sij. ; 
 Jer. xiv. 12; Zech. vii. 5). Continuing the same 
 species of inliuence and ])erfeciing tliat spiiit- 
 uality in religion which Moses began, our Lord 
 rebuked the Pharisees sternly lor tiieir outward 
 and hypocritical pretences in the lasts which they 
 observed (Matt. vi. 16, sq ). and actually ab- 
 stained from appointing any fast whatever as a 
 ])art of his own religion. In Matt. ix. 14, the 
 question of the reason of this avoidance is ex- 
 pressly j)ut — '• Why do we (the disciples of John) 
 and the Pharisees fast oft, but thy disciples fast 
 not T Tlie answer involves an ciitire disajiprovai 
 of fasting in the Chii^tian Church — 'Can tiie 
 children of the bride-chamber fastV' It is true 
 that a period is alluded to when these chililien 
 'shall fait;" but the general scope of the ])assage, 
 taken in connection with the fact that Christ's 
 discijiles fasted not, and with the other fact, that 
 while John (Malt. xi. IS, 19) 'came neither eat- 
 ing nor drinking,' the son of ?nan ' came eating 
 and lb inking,' clearly shows that our Lord, as he 
 signided his disapproval of religious fasting, so by 
 the assertion thiit a time would come when, being 
 deprived ol' the (personal presence of the) bride- 
 groom, his disciples would fast, meant to intimate 
 the a]i])ioacii of a period of general mourning, 
 and employed the term ' fist' derivatively to sig- 
 nify rather sorrow of mind than any corjioreal 
 self-denial (Neandor, Leben Jesu, j)p. 231, 30.5). 
 Frcm the passages in question this at least is 
 clear, tliat Jesus ascribed to fasts no essential 
 worth, nor retjuired any such observance from his 
 followers. \Vliether and how far he allowed fast- 
 ing as a means of religious imjirovement, is a 
 question which our space does not peimit us to 
 discuss. That the early Christians observed t e 
 
 FAT. 
 
 ordinary fasts which the public practice of the^ 
 day .sanctioned, is clear from more ihan one \}an 
 .sage in the New Tcstameni Sciiptmes (Acta xiii 
 2; xiv. 23; 2 Cor. vi. 5); but in this tl>ey pro- 
 bably did nothing more than yield oi)edience, al 
 in general they thought themselves buiind to do. 
 to the law of iheir fathers so long as tlie Mosaic 
 institutions remained eiit le. And though th« 
 great body of the Chiistian Church lield them- 
 selves fiee from all ritual and ceremonial ol)serv- 
 ances when G id in his providence liad brought 
 Judaism to a termiiiation in the rasure of' the 
 holy city and the closing of the temple, yet the 
 practice of fasting thus originated inigiit have 
 easily and unobservedly been tiaiismitted from 
 year to year and fioni age to age, and that the 
 rather because so large a portion of the disciples 
 being Jews (to say nothing of tiie inliuence of the 
 Ebioniles in the pi imitive church), thousands 
 must have been accustomed to fasting fiom th^ 
 eailiest days of their existence, either in their own 
 practice or the practice of their fathers, relatives, 
 and associates. 
 
 Those wiio wish to prosecute the study of this 
 religious observance among other nations, may 
 consult Meiner, Gesch.der Relig \\. 139; Lake- 
 niacher, Aniiq. Grcec. Sacr. p. 626 ; Wachsmuth, 
 Hellen. AUerthum. ii. 237; liottiger, Kunstmy- 
 thol. i. 132— J. R. B. 
 
 FAT. In Lev. iii. there are minute details 
 of the p-arts of victims which were to l>e spe- 
 cially approjjri.ifed to the altar. Among these all 
 the internal J^«i is minutely sjiecitied, jjarticular'v 
 the i'at of tlie kidneys ; and of external pirts the 
 tail of til*" sheep, which, in the common 8])pcies of 
 Western Asia, is a mass of fat (iii. 4, 9, 10, 15) : 
 and the whole concludes with 'Ail the fat is the 
 Lord's; ye shall eat neither fat nor blood ' (iii. 
 17). The reason assigned, namely, that the fat 
 was consecrated to the altar, could only a])ply 
 with resj)ect to tliat of animals used in sacriHce, 
 whicl; were also usually enij)li>yed for food. 
 Accoidingly. in Lev. vii. 2, we lead, ' Ye shall eat 
 no manner of fat of ox, or of sheep, or of goat,' 
 which would seem to inijdy that the fat of other 
 animals might be eaten ; ulthough it would appear 
 that the Jews interpiet the jirohibition absolutely, 
 as may be inl'eired fiom the fact that they rarely 
 eat any other llesh than that of the animals thus 
 indicated. One point seems to have been very 
 generally overlooked, wliich i.s, that not fat al>so- 
 lutely but particular fat jiarts only are interdicted. 
 They might eat the fat involved in the musculaj 
 tissue — in short, fat meat ; and we know that ani- 
 mals weio actually fattened for food (1 Kings iv. 
 23; Jer. xlvi. 21 ; Luke xv. 23). This was, how- • 
 ever, not a usual practice; and even at this day 
 in the East, domestic cattle seldom undergo any 
 jireparatory feeding or fatteiiing l)elbre being k illed. 
 Hence llieie is little fat in the caicase, exce]it that 
 belonging to the jiaits specified in tte prohibition, 
 which is all more or less of the nature of suet. 
 
 Various reasons have lieen assigned for this 
 somewliat remarkable restriction. Tlie secondary 
 cause, that the fat was consecratetl to the altar 
 and therefore was to be abstained from, is not all , 
 for it is usually considered that it was ihiis conse- 
 crated to give a religious sanction tua I'lohil-iiiiin 
 ex])edient on other grounds. The leniaik ot Mai- 
 monides (.1/ore N ovc^iim)^' that men aie ^enei.iliy 
 fond of it," alVords no satisfactory reason, ui.ltiis i*
 
 FATH KR. 
 
 sreie a principle of ili« l.iw to fixbid to men tlie 
 things wliicii they lilceil. Tlio alleged I'.icl ol' lliis 
 gener.il |);iiti.ility inigiit also I'e (li'])iiteil : Imt llie 
 rvniark lias jjnint when the sjx'ci.il reference tj the 
 fat riiniji of the Sviian sliL'ep is consitleieii, for that 
 is highly jirized. It iilVonis a ilolicale nuiiiowy 
 'at, <iiiil is much useil in pillaiis and other messes 
 •vliich re(iiiire to he liibricateil hy uniinal juices. 
 Tlie reason iussigned by Michaelis, that tiie prohibi- 
 tion was de.-iignel to encourage the sulislitulion of 
 olii'e-oil for animal I'at, anil hence to iiiouinte agri- 
 culture amon.f the Heluevvs. and turn tliem from 
 the habits of nomaile life, is ingenious, but some- 
 what far-fetched. The truth ])rol;ably is, that this 
 suet or suet-like fat is not rarticularly whelesome 
 or digestible in warm climates, if anywhere, and 
 is particularly unsuitable for persons subject to 
 cutaneous diseases, as tlie Israelites ajipear to lia\e 
 been at llie time of liieir leaving I'^gypt. 
 
 ' Fatness,'' in Scripture, expresses phimpness or 
 exuberance, whether in men, animals, or vege- 
 tables ; and is hence often applie<l metaphorically 
 to any kintl of abumlance, as to large possessions, 
 ar to excessive fertility in tlie ea'rtii. 
 
 FATHER. This wonl, besides its obvious and 
 primary sense, bears, in Scripture, a nuuiber of 
 other applications, most of whicii have, through 
 tlie use of the Bible, become more or less common 
 in all Christian countries. 
 
 1. The term Father is verv often ap])lied to 
 God himself (Gen. xliv. li>, 20; Kxod. V 22; 
 Deut. xxxii. 6 ; 2 Sam. vii. 41 ; Ps. Ixxxix. 27, 
 28; Isa. Ixii'. 16: Ixiv. R). Pnifeisor Lee states 
 that it is only applied to God as having ad(i[)ted 
 the chostn ])ei>ple as his children ; and he denies, 
 with some harshne-s, that it is applied to him in 
 the general sense as flie Creat(jr, and thence the 
 Father, of all mankind {Lex. s.v. 2N). Neverthe- 
 less, he admits that mans creation is occasionally 
 mentioned in connection with this use of tlie woril; 
 and thi.=, coupled with the clearer intimations of 
 tiie New Tesfaineiif, leaves little room to question 
 lliat it is th'j intention of the sacied record to set 
 GikI iiefore us as the Father of all men, in the 
 general sense of creator and preserver of all men, 
 hut more esjiecially of believers, whether Jews or 
 Christians, indeed the analogy of language would 
 ))oint to t.'iis, steiiig that in the Old Testament, and 
 in all the Syro-Arabian dialects, the originator 
 i;!' anything is cmistaiitly called its fatiier. To tlie 
 Barne ell'ect is also a passage in Josephus's ])ara- 
 phia.se of tlic law (l^eut. xxi. 18-21), respecting le- 
 liellious sons, koI aurus (0et>y) Trorr/p roii -/rafThs 
 a.ydpdnwi' yivovs, ' because he (God) is himself tiie 
 father of the w iiole human race' {AiUiq. iv. 8. 2-1). 
 
 Without doiilit, liowever, God is in a more 
 esjiecial and intimate manner, even as liy cove- 
 nant, tiie Father of the Jews (Jer. xxxi. 9 ; Isa. 
 Ixili. 63. 16; !xiv. S; John viii. 41; v. 4.'); 2 
 Cor. vi. 18); and also of Ciiristians, or rather of 
 all pious and believing persons, who are called 
 ' sons of God ' ( J jjiii i. 12; Uom. viii. 16, etc ). 
 Thus Jesus, in speaking to his disciples, calls Gotl 
 their Fatiier (Matt, vi 4, 8, 15, 18; x. 20, 29 ; 
 xiii. 43, etc ). Tiie Apostles, also, for themselves 
 and other Chri.stians, calliiim 'Fatiier' (Rom. 
 j. 7 ; 1 Cor. i. 3 ; 2 Cor. i. 2 ; Gal. i. 4 ; and 
 EDM'y olher places). 
 
 2. Father is ajijilied (o any ancestor near or 
 remote, or to ancestors ('fathers') in general. 
 The progenitor, or fouivder, \it patriarch of a tribe 
 
 FKASTS. 
 
 601 
 
 or nation, was also jire-eminently its fatiier. aa 
 .\liraham of tlie Jews. Kxamjihs of tins ..biMind, 
 See, for instance, Deiit. i. II; 1 Kings »iii. 13; 
 Matt. iii. 9; xxiii. 31); Marl< \i. It); Luke i. 
 32, 73; vi. 23, 20; .lohn vii. 22, Hic. 
 
 3. Father is also apjilied as a title of re.<i.ecl to 
 any head, chiel, ruler, or elder, ami especially to 
 kings, projihcts, and priests (Jmlg. xvii. It); xviii. 
 19; 1 Sam. x. 12; 2 Kings ii. 12: v. 13; vi. 
 21; xiii. 14< Prov. iv. 1; Mall, xxiii. 9; Actj 
 vii. 2; xxii. 1 ; 1 Cor. iv. Ij, etc.). 
 
 4. The author, soiiictr, or beginner of anything 
 is also called the Fatiier i-f the same, or ol' those 
 who follow him. Thus Jabal is called 'the 
 father of those who dwell in tents, a:id have 
 cattle;' and Julial, 'the liither of all such as 
 handle the harj) and the org.ui ' (Gen. iv. 21, 22; 
 comp. Jol) xxxviii. 28; John viii. 41 ; Rum. iv. 
 12). This use of the word is exceedingly com- 
 mon in the Ivist to this day, especially as ap|ilied 
 in the formation of jiroper names, in winch, also, 
 the most cirious Ilebiew examples of this usage 
 occur [Au]. 
 
 Tlie authority of a father was verv great in 
 jiatriarchal times; and although the power of lil'e 
 and death was virtually taken from the paieiit by 
 the law of Moses, which requiirti him to bring his 
 cause of complaint to the public tribunal-, (Deut. 
 xxi. 18-21), all the moie real powers of the pa- 
 ternal character were not oiJy left nnimpaiied, 
 but were made in a gieat degree the b.isis of the 
 judicial polity whicli that law established. Tlie 
 children and even the grandchildren continued 
 under the roof of the father and grandfather ; they 
 laboured on his account, and were the most sub- 
 missive of his servants. The (iioperty ol' the soil, 
 the ijoucr of judgment, the civil rights, be!oi>ged 
 to him only, and his sons were merely" his in.-<tiu- 
 ments and assistants. If a family be ci>m|iaied 
 to a body, then the father was the head, and the 
 sons the members, moving at his will and in his 
 service. There were exceptions, doubtless; but 
 this was the rule, and, with some modihcatloiis, 
 it is still the rule throughout tlie Fast. 
 
 Filial duty and obedience were, indeed, in the 
 eyes of the Jewish legislator, of such high im- 
 ])ortance that great care was taken that the paternal 
 authority should not be weakened by the with- 
 drawal of a power so liable to fatal and baibaious 
 abuse as that of capital iiunishnient. Any out- 
 rage against a parent — a blow, a curse, or incon i- 
 gible profligacy — was madcacajiital crime (K.\od. 
 xxi. 13, 17; Lev. xx. 9). If llie ollence was 
 public it was taken up by the witnesses as a crime 
 against Jeiiovah, and the culprit was brought lie- 
 fore the magistrates, wiielher the ];arent consented 
 or not; and if the ollence was hidden within tli^ 
 jiaternal walls, it devolved on the jiaieiits to de- 
 nounce him and to lequiie his punistinient. 
 
 It is a beautiful circumstance in the law of 
 Moses that this iilial respect is exacted for the 
 mother as well as for the father. The threats and 
 promises of the legislator distinguish not the one | 
 from the other; and the lil'th commandment asso- 
 ciates the father and mother in a precisely equal 
 claim to honour from their childien The <le- 
 velopment of this inteiesting feature of tlie Mo 
 saical law belongs, iiowever, to another iiead 
 [\A'omkn]. See Cellerier, Esprit du la Legisla- 
 tion Mosd'que, ii. 69, 122-129. 
 
 FEASTS. This woid comes to us immeUiatelj
 
 <98 
 
 FEASTS. 
 
 FEASTS. 
 
 from tlie French fete, which is an alihreviatcd 
 form of the Latin /c'S^ion — ' Festus dits," hdlyday 
 or holiday. In the Greek we liud ecrriSy, the 
 ji-iLrinal offcsttiiH ; iariav itself is from tlie nimn 
 i(r-rla (Latin V'esta), a hearth ; so that the root-idea 
 jf the word is to lie found in what we sisoiild term 
 tiie pleasures of tiie tahls, the exercise of iiospi- 
 tHlity. Hut in all aijes eatiu'^, drinking, ami 
 hospitality, have lieen connecleii with religions 
 ohservances ; while tlie meetini,' of Iriends, llie 
 enjoyments of the palate, atid the exercise of the 
 devotional ailed ions, would conspire to make 
 a festive holiday. In [irocess of time some one 
 of tiiese elements woiildj in particular cases, 
 be dropped. Thus the French word J'e'te now 
 scarcely comprises t!ie idea of eatinj^ and drink- 
 ing, and certainly involves \ery little of a reli- 
 gious n.iture, wliile with \\s feast (ienofes, at least 
 in ordinary usage, scarcely any thing else than the 
 pleasures whicii accompany the entertainments of 
 hospitality. .\t an earlier period of our language, 
 however, it retained much more of its original 
 imjiort, and is frequenlly use<l to indicate that 
 which is now mostly conveyed hy the woni festi- 
 val. In the common translation of the Sciiptuies 
 it is repeati'dlv used in this manner; and accord- 
 ingly we read in tlieological woiks of ' ihe feast of 
 Passover,' '■ iUe feast of Pentecost,' ^t\ie feast of 
 Lots,' &c. But as the word feast is now geneially, 
 if not exclusively, ap|/lied, in ordinary usage, to 
 hospitable entertainments, we think we consult 
 precision and perspicuity hy siieaking under the 
 present heail s.ilely of such events, leaving the 
 religious institutions of the Jews, sometimes so 
 denominated, to Ijo tieated of under tlie now more 
 appropriate term Festival. 
 
 To what an early date the practices of hospi- 
 tality are referahle may he seen in Gen. xix. 3, 
 where we find L it inviting the two angels — ' Turn 
 in, I jiray you, into your servant's house and tarry 
 all night, and wash your feet ; and he pressed upon 
 them greatly, and they enteied into ins house; 
 and he maile them a least:" whicli was olnionsly 
 of a religious nature, since it is added, 'and did 
 hake unleavctied bread, and they did eat' (Judg. 
 vi. 19 ; and Winer, Ilandwinterbuch, s. v. Sauer- 
 teig). It was usual not only thus to receive per- 
 sons with choice viands, but also to dismiss them 
 in a similar manner; accordingly Laban, when 
 he had oveitaken the lleeing Ja-ob, complains 
 (Gen. x\xi. 27j, ' Wherefore didst thou steal away 
 from me anil tlidst not tell me; that 1 might have 
 sent thee away with mirth, and with songs, and 
 with tablet, and with liai]!?' See also 2 Sam. iii. 
 20; 2 Kings vi. 23; Joli viil. 20; I Mace. xvi. 
 15. This practice explains the teason why the 
 prodigal, on his retum, was welcomed by a feast 
 (Luke XV. 23). Occasions of ih.mestic joy were 
 hailed with feasting; thus, in (iien. xxi. S, .\bra- 
 ham ' made a great feast the same day that Isaac 
 was Wfane;l.' Birth-days were thus celebrated 
 ((ien. xl. 20), 'Pharaoh, on his biith-day, made 
 a feast unto all his servants' (Job i. 4 ; Matt, 
 xiv. 6; com]!. Herod, i. 133). Marriage-feasts 
 were also common. Samson (Judg. xiv. 10) on 
 such an occasion ' made a feast," and it is added,' 
 'for so used the young men to do.' So Lahan, 
 when he gav(,' his daughter Leah to Jacob (Gen. 
 xxix. 22 J, 'gati.ered together all the men of the 
 place, and made a feast.' These festive occasions 
 ««(nn originally to have answered the important 
 
 pm-])Ose of serving as evidence .and attestation of 
 the events which they celebrated, on wIiIl:!. account 
 relatives and neighbours were invited to i>e jiresent 
 (Ruth iv. 10; John ii. 1). Those jirocesses in 
 rural occupations by which the Divine bounties 
 are gathered into the hands of man, have in all 
 ages been made seasons of fcstiviiy; accordingly, in 
 2 Sam. xiii. 23, Absalom invites all the king's sons, 
 and even David himself, to a shuep-.shearing feast, 
 on whicli occasion the guests became 'merry with 
 wine' (1 Sam. xxv. 2, sq.). The vintage was 
 also celebrated with festive eating and drinking 
 (Judg. ix. 27). Feasting at funerals existed 
 among the Jews ("i Sam. id. 33). In Jer. xvi. 7, 
 among other funeral customs mention is made of 
 ' the cup of consolation, to drink for their father 
 or their mother,' whi< h brings to mind Ihe indul- 
 gence in sjiirituous liquors to which our ancestors 
 were given, at intermcnt-s, and which has not 
 yet entirely disappeared in Lancashire, nor, pro- 
 bably, in Ireland (Carleton's Iriih Peasantry ; 
 England iti. the jS'incteenth Centiiri/, vol. ii.). 
 To what an extent expense was sometimes carrie<l 
 on these occasions, may be learned from Josephus 
 (I)e Uell.Jnd. iv. 1. 1), who, having icmarked that 
 Archelaus ' mounied for his father sevm days, and 
 had given a very expensive funeral feajt to the 
 multitude,' states, ' which custom is the occasion 
 of poverty to many of the Jews,' adding, ' Ix'cause 
 they are forced to least the multitude, for if any 
 one omits it he is not esteemed a holy jieison.' 
 
 As among heathen nations, so also among fh» 
 Hebrews, feasting made a j)art of tiie ohservances 
 wliitdi took ])lace on occasion of animal sacrifices. 
 In ])eut. xii. 6, 7, aftei- the Israelites are enjoined 
 to bring to the place chosen of God, their bumt 
 olVerings, tithes, heave-ofi'erings, vows, freewill 
 olferings, and the firstlings of their herds and flocks 
 they are told 'tlieie shall ye eat before the Lor«i 
 your God, and ye shall rejoice in all ye put yciB 
 hand unto, ye and your households, wherein tbt 
 Lord thy God hah blesseil thee' (1 Sam. iy 
 19; xvi. 3, 5; 2 Sam. vi. 19). These saciificia2 
 meals were enjoyed in connection with peace- 
 ofl'erings, whether eucharistic or \otive. The kid 
 neys, and all the inward far, and ihe tail of the 
 lamb, were burnt in the daily sacrifice; the breast 
 and right shoulder fell to the ]iriest; and the rest 
 was to be eaten by the oft"eier and his friends, on 
 the same day if the oiVering were eucharistic, on 
 that and the next dav if it were votive (Lev. iii. 
 1-17; vii. 11-21 ; 29-36; xix. .VS ; xxii.29, 30> 
 To the feast at the second tithe of the jiroduce of the 
 land, which was to be made every year and eaten 
 at the aimual festivals before Jehovah, not only 
 friends but strangers, widows, orphans, and Levites, 
 were to be invited as well as the slave;. If the 
 tabernacles were so distant as to make it inconve- 
 nient to carry thither the tithe, it was to be turned 
 into money, which was to be sjient at the |)lace at 
 whicli the festivals were held in jiroviding feiists 
 (Deut. xiv. 22-27 ; xii. 1 4 ; Tobit i. 6). Charitable 
 entertainments were also piovided, at the end of 
 three years, from the tithe of the increase. The 
 Levite, the stranger, the fatherless and the widow 
 were to he jiresent (Deut. xii. 17-19; xiv. 38, 29; 
 xxvi. 12-1-5). At the fast of Pentecost the com- 
 mand is very ex]!ress (Deut. xvi. 1 1), ' Thou shalt 
 rejoice before the Lord thy God, thou, and thyaoOj 
 and thy daughter, ami thy man-servant, and tliy 
 maid-servant, and the Levite that is within thj
 
 FELIX. 
 
 §ai«.<i, and (lie stranger, niid tlie fiitlierlcss, and the 
 widow, that are amon^ you.' Accordingly Tohit 
 (ii. 1, 2) affirms, ' Now wlien I was come lioine 
 ftjrain, in tlie feast of Pentecost, when 1 Siiw 
 abundance of meat, I >aid to my son, ^o ami bring 
 what pior man soever tlion shalt (iiid out of onr 
 brethren, wlio is mindful of the Lord.' Tiie 
 Israelites were forhiihlen to partake of fiwd olTered 
 in sacrifice to idoh (Kxod. xxxiv. 15), lest they 
 should be thereby enticed into idolatry or a|)jH,Mr to 
 give a sanction to idolatrous observances ( 1 Cor. 
 X. 2S) [AiiAPE].— J.H. B. 
 
 FKLIX (*SA(|), a Roman procurator of Jtidwa, 
 before whom Paid so ' reasoned of righteousness, 
 temperance, and judgment to come,' that the judge 
 trembled, saying, 'Go tiiy way for this time; 
 when I liavc a convenient season I will call for 
 thee" (Acts xxiv. 25). The context states that 
 Felix had ex])ecfed a bribe from Paul ; and, in 
 order to procure tliis bribe, he appears to have had 
 several interviews witii the Apostle. The de- 
 pravity which such an expectation implies is in 
 agreement with the idea which the historical 
 fragments preserved respecting' Felix would lead 
 the student to form of the man. 
 
 The year in which Felix entered on his office 
 cannot be strictly determined. From the words 
 of Josephus (Antiq. xx. 7. 1), it ajipears that his 
 appointment took place before the tivelfth year of 
 the Emperor Claudius. Eusebins tixcs tlie time 
 of his actually undertaking his duties in the 
 eleventh year of that monarch. 
 
 Felix was a remarkable instance of the elevation 
 to distinguished station of persons born and bred 
 in the lowest condition. Originally a slave, he 
 rose to little less than kingly power. For some 
 unknown, but probably not very creditalile ser- 
 vices, he was manumitted by Claudius Cicsar 
 ;_Sueton. Claud. 2S ; Tacit. Hist. v. 9) ; on which 
 account he is said to have taken the prsenomen of 
 Claudius. In Tacitus, however (/oc. cit ), he is 
 sumamed Antonius, probably because he was also 
 \ freedman of ,Antonia, the emperor's motlier. 
 He was a brother of P.iUas, who had also been 
 set free by Antonia, and had great iidlnence wltli 
 Claudius; sj)eaking of whom, in conjunction with 
 another freedman, namely. Narcissus, the im])erial 
 private secretary, Suetonius (Claud. 2S) says that 
 the emperor was eager in heaping iijH)n them the 
 highest honours that a subject cov.ld enjoy, an<l 
 Bullered them to carry on a system of plunder and 
 gain to such an extent, that, on complaining of 
 the poverty of iiis exchequer, some one had the 
 Ixildness to remark that he would abound in 
 wealfii if he were taken into partnership by his 
 two favouiile freedmen. 
 
 Tlie character which the ancients have left of 
 Feiix is id' a very <lark complexion. Suetonius 
 Bpeaks of the military honoms which the emperor 
 loailed him witli, and specifies his a]))N)intment as 
 governor of the jirovioce (d' Judaa (T'/uMf/. 2S) ; 
 adding an innuendo, which loses iinthing by its 
 breviiy, namely, that he was the hu-.band of three 
 .queens or irytil latlies(trium reginaiuni maritum). 
 Tacitus, in his History {\. 9), declares that, during 
 nis governorshij) in Judaea he inilulged in all kinds 
 of cruelty and lust, exercising regal jiower with 
 the disposition of a slave; and, in Ins Annals (xli. 
 51). he represents Felix as conddering himself 
 licensed to commit any crime, lelying on the iii- 
 fliiep'x' which he possessed at court. The countiy 
 
 TELIX- 
 
 699 
 
 was reany for rehellion, and the nnsuifable re- 
 medies which Felix applied serveil only to inllainc 
 the passions and to incite to crime. The contemj)* 
 which heand ('unianus(who, areording toTacitus, 
 governed (ral dec while Felix ruled S.imaria ; but 
 see Jose]ih. Antiq. xx. 7. 1) px(:ile<l in llie mi)id» 
 of the peojile, encouraged them to give fiee sco|)e 
 to the jKissions whiid) arose from the old enmity 
 between the Jews and Samaritans, while the two 
 wily and base procinators weic enriched by Ijooty 
 as d' it had been s])oils of war. Tins so far 
 was a [ileasant game to these men, but in the 
 ))rosecufioii of it Koman st)ldiprs lost tln'ir life, 
 and, but for the intervention of Quadratus, 
 governor of Syria, a rebellion woidd liave iteen 
 inevitable. A court martial was he'd to inquire 
 info the caiises of tliis disalleclion, when Felix, 
 one of the accused, was teen by the injured Jews 
 among the judges, and even sealed on the judg- 
 ment-seat, |)laced there by the ))resideiil, Qua- 
 dratus, expressly to outface and deter the accusers 
 and witnesses. Josephus (.-Iw^/iy. xx. 8. 5) iej)ortS 
 that tuider Felix the atlairs ol tlie country grew 
 worse and worse. The land was filled with rob- 
 bers and impostors who dtlud(?il the multitude. 
 Felix used his jwiwer t>) rcpiess these disorders to 
 little purpose, since his own example gave no 
 sai'ction to justice. Thus, having got one Dineas, 
 leailer of a l)and of assassins, into his bauds, by 
 a promise of imjjunily, he sent liim to Rome 
 to receive his ))unisliment. Having a grudge 
 against Jonathan, the high-priest, who had exj)os- 
 tulated with him on his misrule, he made use o« 
 Doras, an intimate friend of Jonathan, in ordei 
 to get him assassinated by a gang of villains, who 
 joined the crowds that were going uj) to the temple 
 woishiji, — a Clime whicli led subsequently to 
 countless evils, by the encouragement which it 
 gave to the Sicarii, or leagued assassins of the 
 day, to whose excesses Josephus ascriltes, under 
 Providence, the oveithrow of the Jewish state. 
 Among other crimes, some of these villains misled 
 the ) eo])le under the jiromlse of perf'urming mi- 
 racles, and were pimishcd by Felix. An Kgyp'ian 
 impostor, who esca])ed himself, was the occasion 
 of the loss (d" life to four hundred followers, and 
 of the loss of liberty to two bundled more, thus 
 severely dealt with by Felix (Joseph. /J);</'^. xx. 8. 
 6 ; I)e Bell. ,lud. ii. 13. 5 ; conip. Acts xxi. 38). 
 A serious misundeistanding having arisen between 
 the Jewish and the Syrian inhal)itants of (."aesarea, 
 Felix em])loyed his troops, and slew and plun- 
 dered t'll prevailed on to desist. His cruelly in 
 this afl'.iir lirought on him, after he was superseded 
 by Festiis, an accusation at Rome, which, however, 
 he was enabled to render nugatoiy by the inlhience 
 which Ids brother Pallas had. and exercised to 
 the utmost, with the emjM'ror Nero. Jostj)!ms, 
 in his Life {\ iii.), rc))orls that 'at the lime when 
 Felix was procurator of Judaea ihere were certain 
 jiriests of my acquaintance, and very excellent 
 persons they were, wl om, on a sn>ali and liilling 
 occasion, he hail put into <H)nds and sent to Rome 
 to jilead their cause befori CiPsar.' 
 
 VVhilc in his otlice, being inflamed by a ]xission 
 for the beautiful Drusilla, a daughter of Kuig 
 Herod Agripjia, who was married to A<iius, king 
 ol Kinesii, he employed orie .Simon, a niagiciiuj, 
 to irse Ills aits In order lo persuade iier to li)rsake 
 her husband and niairy him, nrwmising that if 
 she would comply with his suit he w >ul<l m»kt
 
 7UO 
 
 FESTIVALS. 
 
 FESTIVALS. 
 
 ber a liapjjy woman. Dnisilla, piiitly imjielle*! by 
 ai vlesive to avoid liie envy ol' ht-r si-fer, Beifiilce, 
 was prevailed on to triiis-fifss tlie laws of litr 
 ftiiff.iiht'is, and consented to a union with Felix.. 
 In llii'i niairia_;c a. son was lioiii, wlio w is named 
 A(;;ri|i[i;i : i)o'h mollier anil son peiisiieil in an 
 eruiition of Mount Vesuvnis, wliicli tjok place in 
 tlie days of Tit i is Caesar (Josejjii. Antiq. xx. 7. 2). 
 With this adulleiess was Felix seated when Paul 
 reasoned Ixifoie the ju<lge, as alieady stated (Acts 
 xxiv. 24), An(;lher Drusllla is mentionec] liy 
 Tacitus as being tlif wife (the^/t/ s< u iCe) of Felix. 
 This woman was niece of Cleopatra and Antony. 
 By this mai liaise Felix was cotinecteil with Clau- 
 dius. Of his tliiiil wife nothing is known. 
 
 Paul, being ajipieliended in Jerusalem, was sent 
 by a letter fiom Claudius Lysias to Felix at 
 CiEsarea, wlieie lie was at first confined in Herod's 
 judgment-hall till his accusers came. They ar- 
 rived. Tevtullus appeared as their spokesman, 
 and had the atiilacity, in order to conciliate the 
 good will of Felix, to express gratitude on the 
 part of the Jeas, ' seeing that by thee we enjoy 
 great quietness, and that very woithy deeds aie 
 done unto this nation by thy providence' (Acts 
 xxiii. xxiv.), Paul jileaded his cause in a worthy 
 fijieech ; and Felix, consigning the Apostle to the 
 custody of a centurion, ordered tiiat he should 
 have such liberty as the circumstances admitteil, 
 with j)e<'missioti that his acquaintance might see 
 him and mii;ister to his wants. This iminison- 
 ment the Apostle s'.ifl'vred for a jieriod of two years, 
 l)eing left hound when Felix gave place to Festus, 
 as that unjust judge ' was willing,' not to do what 
 was rigJit, but ' to show the Jews a pleasuie ' 
 (C. W. F. Walch, Diss, de Felice Jwl. procut: 
 Jen. [7t7).— J. R. K. 
 
 FERRET. [Lizard.] 
 
 FESTIVALS (C-IO). The Hebrew festivalt 
 were occasions of public religions observances, 
 recurring at cei-tain set and somewhat distant in- 
 tervals. In general they may be divided into 
 two kinds: — I. Tiiose of divine institution; 2. 
 Those of human origin. Those which owe their 
 existence to tiie authority of God are, the seventh 
 liay of the week, or the Sabbath ; the Passover ; 
 Pentecost; the Feast of Trumjiets; the Day of 
 Afonemttit; the Feast of Tabernacles ; the New 
 Moon. Festivals which arose under purely human 
 influences ai-e, the Feast of Lots, or Pnrim ; the 
 Death of Ilolofeines; the Dedication ; the Sacred 
 Fire; the Death of Nicanor. 
 
 Reserving details for separate articles on such 
 of these as shall seem to leqtiire and justify a dis- 
 tinct tieatnient, we confine ourselves liere to a 
 general outline, with simie remarks on the origin 
 and tendency of tlie chief festivals. 
 
 We have inserted tlie Saljliath for the sake of 
 completeness, and, with the same view, we proceed 
 to .set noun a few liiief paiticulars respecting the 
 daily service, so that we may at once present a 
 general <iutline of the temple worship. 
 
 At tl.e daily service two laml's of the first, year 
 were to lie olliered at the door of the tal)emacle ; 
 one in the moining, the other in the evening, a 
 continual fiuint-ollering. With each lamb was 
 to Ix" ollered one-tenth of an ephah of flour, min- 
 gled with one-littiiih of a liin of fresh oil, for a 
 meat-ollering, and one-fouith of a bin of wine for a 
 drink-ofl'ei ing. Frankincense was to be placed on 
 
 the meat-offering, a han<iful of which, with tb» 
 liankincensa, was to be burnt, and the remaindei 
 was to be eaten liy the piiest in the holy placA 
 without leaven. The priests were to oiler (iailj 
 the tenth of an ejihah of fine flour, naif in thf 
 moining and half in the evening, for themselves 
 The lii^di-piiest was to (bess tlie lamps in tliC (a 
 f)ernacle every morning, and light them every 
 evening; and at the same time burn incense on 
 the altar of incense. The peo))le provided oil foi 
 the lamps wiiicii were to bum from evening to 
 morning : the ashes were removed by a priest, 
 dressed in his linen garment and his linen drawers, 
 and then carried by him out of the camp, in hiii 
 common dress. Great stiess was laid on the re- 
 gular observance of these requirements (Num. 
 xxviii. 1-8; Exod. xxix. 3'-42; Lev. vi. 8-23; 
 Exod. XXX. 7-9; xxvii. 20; Lev. xxiv. 1-4; 
 Num. viii. 2). 
 
 Labour was to last not longer than six days. 
 The seventh was a Sabbath, a day of rest, of holy' 
 convocation, on which no one, not even strangers 
 or cattle, was allowed to do any seri'ile work. 
 ITie ollender was liable to stoning. 
 
 On (he Sabbath two lambs of tl>e first year, 
 without lileniish, were to be ofl'ered for a burnt- 
 olleriiig, morning and evening, v/ilh two-tenths of 
 an ephah of flour, mingled with oil, for a meat- 
 olfeiing, and one-half of a hin of wine foradrink- 
 otfering, thus doubling the oflering for ordinary 
 days. Twelve cakes of fine flour were to be placea 
 every Sabbath upon the table in the tabe.nacle, ir. 
 two piles, and pure frankincense laid on the 
 uppetTuo-t of each pile. These were to lie fur- 
 nished liy the jjeople ; two were oflcrcd to Jehovah, 
 the rest were eaten by the priests in the holy place 
 (Kxod. xxxi. 12; Lev. xxiii. 1; xxvi. 2; Exod. 
 xix. 3-311; XX. 8-11; xxiii. 12; Deut. v. 12-15:, 
 Lev. xxiii. 3 ; xxiv. 5-9 ; Num. xv. 35; xxviii. 9). 
 
 At the New Moon festival, in the beginning of 
 the month, in addition to the daily saciilice, two 
 heilers, one rain, and seven lambs of the tirst year, 
 weie to be ollered as burnt-ufl'erings, with three- 
 tenths of an ejjhah of flour, mingled with oil, for 
 each heifer; two-tenths of an ephah of flour, min 
 gled with oil, for the ram; and one-tenth of an 
 e[ihah of flour, mingleJ with oil, for every lamb ; 
 and a drink-offering of half of a hin of wine fijr 
 a heifer, one-third of a hin for the ram, and one- 
 fourth of a hin for every lamb. One kid of the 
 goats was also to be offered as a sin-offering. 
 
 The first day of the seventh month was to be 
 a Sabliath, a holy convocation, accompanied by 
 the blowing of trumpets. In addition to the daily 
 and monthly sacrifices, one ram and sevsn lambs 
 weie to be oliered as burnt-oUisrings, with iheii 
 respective meat-otleriiigs, as at the usual New 
 Moon festival (Num. xxviii. 11-15; xxix. 1-6 
 Lev. xxiii. 23-25). 
 
 Three times in the year — at the Feast of Un- 
 leavened Bread, in the month Abib; at the Feast 
 of Harvest, or of Weeks ; and at the Feast of In- 
 gathering, or of Tabernacles — all the males were 
 to apjjear before Jehovah, at the place which Ire 
 should choose. None were to come empty- 
 handed, bat every one was to give according as 
 Jehovah had blessed him ; and there before Je- 
 hovah was every one to rejoice with his family, 
 the Levite, the stranger, tbe fatheile^s, and tb« 
 widow (Exoil. xxxiii. 14-17; xxxir. 2'^M ; 
 Deut. xvi. 16 17).
 
 FESTIVALS. 
 
 FESTIVALS. 
 
 roi 
 
 Tlie first of tiiesp three p-eat festrvals, that of 
 CJnleaveiiP'l Bre.nl, called also tlie Passover, was 
 kept in the nioiifh Ahib, in coinnicmoration of the 
 rescue of tiie Israelites l>y Jehovah out of Kjfvpt, 
 K-hich took ))]areiii that month The cereinonies 
 that were connected with it will he detailed under 
 the head PA.s>ovKit. Every one who was riliially 
 clean, and not on a jomney, and yet omitted to 
 keep the Passover, was to be cut off fiotn the 
 people. Anv one who was disabled for the ob- 
 servance, either by nncleaiiness or being- on a 
 journey, was to kee]) the Passover on the four- 
 teenth day of the next month. In order to make 
 the season more remarkable, it was ordained that 
 henceforward the month in which it took place 
 shoultl be reckoned the first of the national re- 
 ligions year (Kxod. xii. 2). From this time, ac- 
 cordingly, the year began in i*ie month Abib, or 
 Nisan (March — April), while the civil year con- 
 tinued to be reckoned from Tishri (September — 
 October) (Kxod. xii. 3, 14, 27; 13-19; Lev. 
 xxiii. .5; Num. xxviii. 16 ; Dent. xvi. 1-7). Tlie 
 Passover lasted one week, including two Sabbaths 
 (De Wette, Archdol. p. 214). The first day and 
 the last were holy, that is, devoted to the ob- 
 servances in the })ul)lic temple, and to rest from 
 all labour (Exod. xii. 10 ; Lev. xxiii. (5 ; Num. 
 xxviii. IS; Dent. xvi. S). 
 
 On the day after the Sabbath, on the Fea.st of 
 Passover, a sheaf of the first fruits of the barley 
 harvest was to be brought to the priest to be wavoil 
 before Jehovah, accompanied by a burnt-olVeriiig. 
 Till this sheaf was presented, neither I, read nor 
 parched corn, nor full ripe ears of the harvest, 
 could be eaten (Exod. xii. 15-20; xiii fi-10 ; Lev. 
 xxiii. 6-X ; Deut. xvi. 2-S ; Num. xxviii. 17-25). 
 
 The Feast of Pentecost or of Weeks was kept 
 to Jehovali at the end of seven weeks fiom the 
 day of the Festival of Unleavened Bread, on 
 wiiich the slieaf was j)re.sented. On the morrow 
 «fVer the seventh comjilete week, or on the fiftieth 
 day, two wave loaves were presented as Hrst fiuits 
 ot the wheat-harvest, together with a burnt- 
 ofl'ering, a sin-ollering. and a peace-otrpriuj-, &c. 
 The day was a holy convocation, in wiiich no 
 servile work was done. The fe tival lasted liut 
 one day. It is said to have been designed to 
 commemorate the giving of the law on Mount 
 Sinai (Brown's Antiquities of the Jews, vol. i. 
 
 &494; Deut. xvi. 9-11; Lev. xiii. 15-21; 
 urn. xxviii. 26-31 ; xv. 17-21). 
 The Feast of In-gathering or of Tabernacles 
 oegan on the fifteenth day of the seventh month, 
 and continued eight day.s, the first and last being 
 Salibaths. During the feast all native Israelites 
 dwelt in booths made of the stioofs of beautiful 
 trpes, palm-branches, boughs of thick-leaved trees, 
 and ot' tiie willows of the brook, when they re- 
 joiced with tlieir families, with the Levite, the 
 stranger, the fatherless, and the widow, before 
 Jehovah. Various ofi'erings were made. At the 
 end of every se^cn years, in tlie year of release, 
 at the Feast of Tal>ernacl'es, the law was reipiired 
 to l)e read by tlie ])rie3ts in the hearing of all the 
 »ra:elites (iJeut. xvi. 13-15; xxxi. 10-13; Lev. 
 xxiii. 30-43; 33 3(5 ; Num. xxix. 12-3S, 40). 
 
 The Feast of Tal)ernacles was appointed partly 
 to l.* an occasion of annual thanksgiving after 
 iht in-gathiring of the harve-it (Exod. xxxiv. 22; 
 Lev. xxiii. 39; Deut. xvi. 13). and partly to 
 ■twmind the Israelites that their f.ithers had lived 
 
 in tents in the wililernMs (Le.' xxiii 10-4.3). 
 This feast took nlace in the ei J of the yea». 
 S<'pternbpr or Octol)er. 
 
 Tlie tpiith day of the seventh month was the 
 D.iy of .Atonement — a day of abstinence, a dav of 
 noly convocation, in which all weie to afllict 
 themselves. Special oflerings were made [.Itdnb- 
 mknt] (Lev. xxiii. 2(5-32; xvi. 1, 31; Num. 
 xxix. 7-11; Exod. xxx. 10). 
 
 Brown, in his Antiqni ics (vol. i. p 520), re- 
 marks that the time of the year in which the thiee 
 great festivals were observed was during the dry 
 season of Judaja. The latter rains fr;li before the 
 Passover, the former rains alter the Feast cl" Tal>cr- 
 nacles; so that the country was in llie i)e8t 8tat» 
 for travelling at the time of the-e festivals. 
 
 On these solemn oi'casions food came partly 
 fr im hos])tta1ity (a s])lendid inst.ince of which 
 may be found in 2 Chron. xx_xv. 7-9), partly from 
 the feasts which accompanied the sairifices in the 
 tem))le, anil partly also from provision exi'vessly 
 niaile by the travelli'rs themselves. It apjiears 
 that the ])ilgrims to Mecca carry with them every 
 kind of food that they need, excej.t flesh, which 
 tiiey j)rocnre in the city itself Lodging, too, 
 was allbriled by friends, or found in tents erected 
 for the pinpose in and around Jerusalem (Helen's 
 rilgnma(ie ; Brown's AutirjJtities). 
 
 'i'he three great festivals have correstxmding 
 events (but of far greater importance) in the new 
 dispensation. The Feast ?f Tabernacles was the 
 time when our Saviour was l)om ; he was crucified 
 at the Passover; while at Pentecost the efl'usion 
 of the Holy S;)irit took place. 
 
 Brov/n {AntiqxiitieSy voi. i. p. 522) nas s|)okcn 
 of the defenceless state in which the cov.ntiy lay 
 when all tlie males were gathered together at 
 .Terusalem. Wliaf was to jnevent an enemy from 
 devastating the li»nd, and slaying women and 
 children V He refers the ])ro1ection of the country 
 1o the express interposition of God, citing • the 
 ]iromise,' as found in Exod. xxxiv. 23, 24. He 
 adils, ' During the whole period between Moses 
 and Christ we never read of an enemy invading 
 the land at the time of the tiiree festivals. '^''•• 
 fir^t instance on record was thirty-three years 
 after tliey hail withdrawn from thems'ves the 
 divine ])iotection by imbruing their hands iii the 
 Saviour's hlood, « hen Cestius, the Roman ge- 
 neral, slew fifty of the ])eo])le of Lydda, while all 
 the rest were gone wy to the Feast of Tabernacles, 
 A.D. 66 (Joseph. De Bell. Jud. ii. 19). 
 
 The objection, however, which this writer thi.8 
 meets is founded on the assumption that the law 
 was strictly, unifoimly, and lastingly obeyed. 
 But the leqiiirement that all males should ajipeiir 
 three times a year before Jehovah is rot williout 
 some ])raclical ditliculty. During the sojourn in 
 the wilderness its observance would not only 
 be easy, but highly useful in jneventing tie 
 disjiersion of individuals or nnmliers from t.'.fc 
 main body — an influence the mi:re needful '.at- 
 cause manv jiersons would, doubtless, stray ftom 
 time to time in search of jiasture. In sulwequent 
 and moreseltleil times it must ha\ e been a serious 
 inconvenience for all the males of the nation itt 
 leave their families nnjirotected and their liusinex.t 
 neglected for .so many days e\ ery year as would 
 l»e necessarv in going to and from .lenisateni. It 
 is true that the seasons of the festivals were «ell 
 tixe<l and di.stribufed for the convenience of as
 
 702 
 
 FESTIVALS. 
 
 agricultmal jieope — tlie Passover taking place 
 just lii'Coie Iwiley-liaivest ; Pentecost iiniTieii lately 
 after tiie same; and Tuliemacles aCttr tlie wlieat- 
 haivf jt ; while in winter, wlitn tiavelling was veiy 
 difficult, there was tio (Vstlval. Yet to have to 
 visit JenisulfJn tlivice in seven months was a 
 serwis thint;, especially in later times, when 
 Israelites were scAtltretl (kr abroad. Kven if tlie 
 expense was, as Winer thinks {llaiulwnrterbuth), 
 a small consideration, yet the inteniijitidii to do- 
 mestic life and tiie pursuits of business must have 
 been very great ; nor would it be an exa{,fgeration 
 to say that the observance was an impossibility to 
 the Jews, for instance, who weie in Babylon, 
 Egypt, Italy, Macediinia, Asia Minor, &c. How 
 far the law was rigorously enforced or strictly 
 obeyed at any time after the settlement in Pales- 
 tine, it would not be easy to say. Palfrey (^Lec- 
 tures on the Jewish Scrip, vol. i. p. lt!9) supposes 
 that 'a man miglit well be said to have virtually 
 executed this duty who ajiwared before the Lord 
 (not in jierson, but) with his oHifcilng, sent by the 
 hand of a friend, as a suitor is said in <iur com- 
 mon speech to appear in a court of justice, wlien 
 he is lepresented theie by liis attorney ;' a conjec- 
 ture whicii, to our mind, savours too much of 
 mo<lern ideas and usages. That some relaxation 
 rook place, at least in ' the latter days,' appeals 
 from Jolin vii. P, in which more or less of what Is 
 voluntary Is obviously connected in the mind and 
 practice of our Lord with 'the feast,' though, it 
 must be allowed that the passage is an evidence 
 of the general observance, not to say the universal 
 obligation, in his days, of at least the Feast of 
 Tabernacles. 
 
 Ki however, there was in practice some abate- 
 ment fiom the strict requirements of tiie law, yet 
 obviously time enough was saved from labour by 
 tlie strung liaiid of religion, to secuie to the 
 labourer a degree of mo t desirable and enviable 
 rest. Not, indeed, that all the days set ajiart 
 were emanc pated from labour. At the Feast of 
 Talternacles, for instance, labour is infeidicted 
 on. y on the first and the last day. So on other 
 occasions business and pleasuie were pursued in 
 co^.t-ction with religious observances. But if all 
 males ajuieaied befoie Jehovah, even only once a 
 year, they must, in going and returning, as well 
 as in lieing jiiesent at the festival, have spent no 
 small {Kirtion of time in abstinence from their 
 ordinary pursuits, and could not have tailed to 
 derive singular advantages alike to their bodies 
 and their minds. 
 
 The rest and recreation would be tne more 
 pleasant, salutary, and beneficial, because of tlie 
 joyous nature of the religious services in which 
 they weie, for the greater part, engaged. These 
 solemn ftstivals were not only commemorations of 
 gieat national €\ents, but they were occasions for 
 the reunion of friends, for the enjoyment o( hospi- 
 tality, and for tlie interchange of kindness. The 
 feasts whicii axomjianied tiie sacrifices opened 
 the heart of the entire family to joy, and gave a 
 welcome which bore a religious sanction, even 
 to the stranger, the fatherless, and the widow 
 (Michael is, Mos. RedU, ait. 199). 
 
 Kow much, too, would these gatherings tend to 
 foster and sustai'.i a spirit of nationality! By 
 intercourse the feslings of tribe and clan would be 
 worn away; men from dlHerent paits became 
 ■cquaiuted witti and attactieU to each other ; pai- 
 
 FESTIVALS. 
 
 tial interest* were found to be moie imaginary than 
 real ; while the pretlominant idea of a ccmmoa 
 laitli and a common ral lying-place at Jerusalem, 
 could not fail to fuse into one strong and over- 
 powering emotiun of national and brotherly love, 
 all the higher, nay, even the lower feelings, of each 
 Hebrew heart. 
 
 ' If,' says Micliaelis (Mos. Recht, art. 198, 
 Smifli's Transl.), -any of the tribes hajipened to 
 be jealous of each other or involved in civil war, 
 their meeting together in one place for the purjioses 
 of religion and sociality, had a tendency to'pre- 
 vent their being totally alienated; and even 
 though this had iiappened, it gave them an oj.-jior- 
 tunlty of re-unltlng.' He adds that *the sejiara- 
 tion of the ten tribes from the tribes of Judah 
 under Rehoboam and Jeroboam could never have 
 iieen permanent, had not the latter aiiiogated one 
 pait of the law of Moses relative to festiviils. 
 In order to perpetuate the sejmration, he prohi- 
 bited the annual pilgrimages to Jerusalem, and 
 a]ipointed two jilaces lor divine service within his 
 own territories' (1 Kings xli. 27-30 j. 'He also,' 
 adds Michaeli.-i, 'transferred the celelnation of the 
 feast of Tabernacles, and probably the other two 
 festivals likewise, to a difl'erent season from that 
 appointed by Moses' (1 Kings xii. 33). 
 
 Another elfect of these festivals Micliaelis has 
 found in the furtherance of internal commerce. 
 They would give rise to something resembling our 
 modem fairs. Among the Mahometans similnr 
 festivals have had this ellect. 
 
 In Article 199, the same learned writer treats 
 of the important influence which the festivals 
 had on the Calendar, and the correction of its 
 errors. 
 
 These festivals, in their orig'si, had an obvious 
 connection with agriculture. Passover saw the 
 harvest upon the soil; at Pentecost it was ripe; 
 and Talieinacles was the festival of gratitude for 
 the fruitage and vintage (Micliaelis, art. 197). 
 The first was a natural ]iause after the labours of 
 the field were completed ; the second, after (he 
 first-fruits were gathered ; and the third, a time of 
 rejoicing in the feeling that the Divine bounty 
 had crowned the year with \ti goodness. Spring, 
 summer, and autumn, whicii have moved all 
 nations of men with peculiar and characteiistic 
 emotions, had each its natural language and smii- 
 bols in the great Israelitish feslivals, a regard to 
 which may well be supposed to liave had an in- 
 fluence in the mind of the legislator, as well as in 
 the consuetudinary practices of the jieople. How 
 far a merely natural influence prevailed in these 
 observances, how far Moses found consuefudinaiy 
 usages, which, in establlshini; tiiese festivals, he 
 adopted with such modificAlions and sanctions as 
 he judged Ijest, and had at his command, it is at 
 this period imjjossible to determine, and no great 
 aid, probably, can be derived in the case from the 
 practices of other nations ;• but the reader who 
 wishes to investigate the subject in this view may 
 consult a recent work entitled De Feriarum lie- 
 bnearvm originc ac raiioiie, auctore H. Ewald ; 
 Gottings, 1841 ; and Creuze*-. Symbol, ii. 597. 
 
 The Feast of Purim or of Lots originated in the 
 gratitude of the Jews in escaping the j)1ot ol 
 Haman, designed for their destruction. Il took 
 its name from the lots which were cast beto?a 
 Haman by the astrologers, wiio knew his liatred 
 against Mordecai and his wish to destrof bis
 
 BESTUS. 
 
 taniily und rialioii (Estlior iii. 7: ix. 3, .">). Tlie 
 ■east was siif.'i^esli'(l l)y lOsMier ami Rlonle'^iii, and 
 was cell' I Milted on the 13tli, l4tli and I.5tli il:iys 
 of the trttit'tli month (Adar). The 13lh was'a 
 fast, bein;^ the ihiy on which the Jews w ere to have 
 been destvoved ; and the 1 Itli and l')(li were a 
 feast held in cominemor.ition of tiieir deliverance. 
 Tlie fast is called tiie Fast of Estlier, and tlje feast 
 still holds tlie name of Ptnim. Prideaux (('i.n- 
 ticx. ; lirown, Antiq. i. 575) olyles it the Jiacciia- 
 nalia of the Jews. 
 
 The slauglitcr of ni,\>fernes by flie hand of 
 Juditii, the consequent defeat of the Assyrians, and 
 the liberation of the Jews, were commemorated by 
 (he institution of a festival (Judith xiv. xv). 
 
 The Fe;ist of Dedication was appointed by 
 Jniias Maccabaeus, on occasion of the purilicatioii 
 of the temjile, and reconstruction of the altar, after 
 they liad been ixilluted by Antiochns Epiphane-i. 
 Tlio hatred of this monarch towards the Jews had 
 l>een manifested in various ways : lie forliade their 
 children to be circumcised, restraineil them in tlie 
 exercise of their religion, killed many who dis- 
 obeyed his mandates, burnt the liooks of the law, 
 set up idolatry, carried olV the altar of incense, 
 the shew bread-table, and the golden candlestick, 
 with the other vessels and treasures of the temple ; 
 and went to such extremes as to sacrifice a sow 
 npon the altar of burut-ofi'erings, build a heathen 
 altar on the top of that sacred jii-le, and with brotli 
 of swine's flesh to sprinkle the courts and the 
 temple (I Mace. i. ; 2 Mace, v, ; Prideaux, 
 ttib A.c. 1G7-8, 170). 
 
 The new dedication took ]>lace on the 25th 
 day of the ninth month, called Chisleu, in tiie 
 vfar before Christ 170. Tins would be in De- 
 cember. The day v/as chosen as being that on 
 which Antiochus, three years before, had polluted 
 the altar by heathen sacrilices. 
 
 The joy of the Israelites must have been great 
 on the occasion, and well may they liave prolonged 
 the observance of it for eight days. A general 
 illumination formed a part of tlie festival, whence 
 it obtained the name of the Feast of Lights. 
 
 In John X, 22 this festival is alluded to when 
 our Lortl is said to have been picsent at the Feast 
 of Dedication. The historian marks the time liy 
 jtating ' it was winter.' 
 
 The festival 'of the Fire' was instituted by 
 Nehemiah to commemorate the miraculous re- 
 kindling of the altar-fire. The circumstances 
 are narrated In 2 Mace. i. IS. 
 
 The defeat by Judas Maccabfeus of the Greeks 
 when the Jews 'smote off Nicanor's head and' 
 his right hand which he stretched out so jiroudly,' 
 caused the peojile to 'rejoice greatly, and they 
 kept that day a day of great gladnts-:; moreover, 
 they ordained to keej) yearly this day, being the 
 thirteenth day of Adar ' — February or March (I 
 Mace. vii. 47). 
 
 Some oilier minor fasts and festivals may ne 
 fotmd noticed in Brown's Antiquities, i. 38(5 ; 
 and in Simon's Dictionnaiie de la Bible, art. 
 ' Fetes.'— J. R. B. 
 
 FESTL'S. Poicius Feslus was the successor 
 of Felix as the Roman governor of Judoca, to tiie 
 duties of which otlice he was ajipi^inted by the 
 etnjwror Neio (Joseph. Anliq. xx. 8. l) ; De Bell. 
 Jud. ii. 1. I) in the liist year oi' his reign (Winer, 
 Uandtviirtcrbuch, in voc). On i of Ills first ofliclal 
 acts was Leaiing the cose of the apostle Paid, 
 
 FIRE. 
 
 901 
 
 who had been left in piison by his prcdtcpssoi 
 He was at least not a ihoroughlv coirupt jiulge; 
 for when the .Jewish hierarcliy beggeil him to 
 send for Paul to Jerusalem, and <!iiis ;itVoid an 
 opportunity for his being iissa8sir;'.'»d on liie load, 
 he gave a refusal, pruinislng to Investigate tiie 
 facts at Ctesaiea, wiieie Paul was in custody, 
 alleging to them, ' it is not the maiuier of llie 
 Rinnans to ileliver any man to die liefore ti'at lie 
 which is aicused liu\e the accuser.' nee to face, 
 and have licence to answer for liimseii uncerning 
 tiie crime liiid against him' (.Acts xxv. 16). On 
 reaching Ciesarea lie si-nt for J'aul, lieaid What 
 he had to say, and. finding tliat the matters whli i» 
 ' ills accusers had against iilm' were ' ipies'-ons 
 of their own superstition, and of i ne .(esus w l.-ch 
 was dead, whom Paul atliimed to lie ali\e,' he 
 asked tlie apostle whether he was willing to go to 
 Jerusalem, and there be tried, since Festus did 
 not feel himself skilled in such an affair. Paul, 
 doubtless liecause he was unwilling to put liims^'lf 
 info the liands of his implacalile enemies, re- 
 quested ' to be reserved unto tire hearing of 
 Augustus," and was in consequence kept in cus- 
 t.idy till Festus liad an o])])oitunily to send liiin 
 to Ca;sar. Agvippa, however, with Ids wife Ber- 
 nice, having come to salute Festus on his new 
 appointment, expressed a desire to see and ' hear 
 the man.' Accordingly Paul was biought liefoie 
 Festus, Agrippa, and Bernice, made a famous 
 speech, and was declaied innocent. But having 
 appealed to Ciesar, lie was sent to Rome. 
 
 Festus, on coming into Judaea, found the 
 country infested witii robbers, wlio plundered f'ne 
 villages and set them on fiie; the Sicaiii also 
 weie numerous. ]\Iany of iioth classes were 
 captured, a^^ put to deatli by Festus. He 
 also sent forces, liotli of horse and foot, to fall 
 v,])ou those that had lieen seduced by a ceilain 
 impostor, wlio ])roniised them deliverance and 
 fieedom from the miseries they weie under if 
 they would but follow him as far as tl e w ilder- 
 ness. These troojjs destroyed lioth the impostor 
 and his dupes. 
 
 King Agrippa had built himself a splendid, 
 dining-room, which was so jjlaced that, as he 
 reclined at his meals, he commanded a viev/ of 
 what was done in the Temple. The iiiiests. 
 being displeased, erected a wall so as to exclude 
 the monarch's eye. On which Festus took part 
 with Agrippa against tlie jiriests, and ordered the 
 wall to be pulled down. The priests ap]jeale<l 
 to Nero, who suffered the wall to icmain. lieini} 
 influenced by iiis wife Pr;.paca, ' who was a 
 religious woman' (Josep't:. Antiq. xx. 8. 11), 
 Festus died shortly afterwards. The manner in 
 which Josephus speaks is favourable to ids cha- 
 racter as a governor {De Bell. Jud. iv. 1 i. I "* — 
 
 J II. B. 
 
 FIGS. [Frlits.] 
 
 FIG-TREE. [Teenah.! 
 
 FIGURES. [TvFEs.] 
 
 FIR. [BEK08H.] 
 
 FIRE. Besides the ordinary senses oi t!ie word 
 ' file,' which need no explanation, there are nther 
 uses of it in .Scripture which require to Ije dis- 
 criminated. Tiie destructive energies of tli-s 
 element and the torment whicli it iiiflicis, ren- 
 dered it a fit syndni! of — 1. ^Miatcver don 
 damage and consumes (Piov. xvi. 27; Isa. ix. 
 18) J — 2. Of severe trials, vexations, and mtsfo*'
 
 lOi 
 
 FIRK. 
 
 tunes (Zech. xii. 9; 1 Cor. iii. 13. 15; 1 P.t. 
 i. 7): — 3. Of llie piinislimiTits beyond the grave 
 .'Matt. V. 22; Mark ix. 41; Rev. xiv. 10; xxi. 8) 
 [He:...]. 
 
 •<i"iie from heaven,' * fire of llie Lord,' usually 
 denotes lijrlitiiing in tlie Old Testament ; (jiit, 
 when connected witli sacrllices the ' li;« of the 
 Lord ' is often to be uiulei-stood as tlie tiie of the 
 altar, and sometimes the liulocaust itself (Exod. 
 xxix. IS; Lev. i. 9; ii. 3; iii. 5, 9; Niun. 
 xxviii. 6 ; I S.im. ii. "iS ; Ui. xx. 16 ; .Alal. i. 10). 
 
 Thy uses of lire amon^' the Hebrews were 
 Tarimts : — 
 
 1. Tlie domestic use, f.ir cooking, roasting, 
 anil baking [ilitKAu; Kood]. 
 
 2. In uiuterthey warmed themselves and their 
 anartmenti Ity ' a (ire of coals " (Jer. xxxvi. 'I't, 
 23; Luke xxii. 3-0). In the rooms it would 
 seem that a brazier with charcoal was usually 
 employed, as is still the case in weitern Asia, 
 although the ovens and tiie-places used in baking 
 bread might have been, and doui)tless were, as 
 now, often employed to keep rooms jiroperly 
 warm [BitK\u; Coai.]. 
 
 3. The religious use of fire was for consuming 
 (.he victims on tlie altar of burnt-oflerings, and in 
 burning tlie incense on the golden altar : henc* 
 the leniarkable plnase in Isa. xxxi. 9 — ' the Lord, 
 whose (iie is in Zion, and his furna*<r in Jeru- 
 salem.' 
 
 4. In time of war torches wvre often carried by 
 the soldiers; wliich explains the use of torches in 
 >lie attack of fxide.in u[iom the camp of the Mi- 
 dianites (Jodg. vii. 6). This military use of 
 torches was very general among ancient nations, 
 and is alluded to by many of their writers (Sta- 
 fius, T/ieh. iv. 5. 7; Stob.eus, Serni. p. 191; 
 Miciiaelis, in Symbol Liter. Bremens. iii. 251). 
 
 .5. Barniag criminals alive does not appear to 
 have been known to tlie Hebrews; but as an addi- 
 tional disgrace the bodies were in particular cases 
 burnt after death had l)een indicted (Josh. vii. 
 25; compyre ver.^e 15); and it is in this sense 
 tliat the allusions to launing as a jjunishment are 
 to be understood, except wlien the iderence is to 
 a foreign usage, as in Dan. iii. 22, 21, sq. 
 
 6. In time of war towns were often destroyed 
 by fire. This, as a war usage, lielongs to all times 
 and nations; but among ihe Hebrews there were 
 some particular notions connected with it, as an 
 act of strong abhorrence, or of devotement to 
 abiding desolation. The jirincipal instances his- 
 U.rlcally (Commemorated are the destruction by 
 fire of Jericlio (Josh. vi. 21); Ai (Jcsh. viii. 19); 
 Hazor (Josh. xi. LI); Laisli (Judg. xviii 27); 
 the towns of the Benjainites (Judg. xx. 48); Zik- 
 lag, Ijy the ,A.nialeki!es (I Sam. xxx. 1) ; Jazer, 
 b/ Fiiaiaiih (I Kings ix. 16); and tlie temjjle 
 and ];ala<cs of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar 
 (2 Kings XXV. 9). Kven the war-chariots of the 
 Canaanites were burnt by the Israelites, proiiably 
 on the iiriiiciple of precluding the jiossibility of 
 t'.^coverv, liv the enemy, of instruments of strength 
 for wl'.ich they had tiiemselves no use. The fre- 
 quency witii which towns were fired in ancient 
 wiirfaie is shown by tlie very rnnnerous threats by 
 tlie prophets that the towns of Israel should be 
 burned by their foreign enemies. Some great 
 towns, not of Israel, are jiarticularly named ; and 
 it woul.l be an interesting task to trace, as far as 
 the matsrials exist, the fulfilment of these pro- 
 
 FIRMAMKNT. 
 
 phecies in those more maiked examples. Among 
 the places thus thifateiied v.e find Damasv us (Isa 
 xliii. 12, 13), Gaza. Tyre, Teman (.-Vmos i. 7 
 10, II). The Icmjdes and idols i.f a conquereo 
 town or people Avere very often burned by tin 
 victors, and this was enjoined as a duty to tin 
 Israelites (Deut. vii. 5, 25; xii. 13; xiii. 6; Isa 
 llii. 12, 13). 
 
 There were some special regulations respectinj 
 the use of fife among the Israelites. The nios 
 remarkable of these was the prohibition to light ) 
 fire on the Sabbath (Exod. xxxiii. 3). As th> 
 jirimaiy design of this law appears to have bs'ei 
 to prevent the propel privileges of the Sabbath-ilaj 
 from being lost to any one through the care anf 
 time required in cooking victuals (Exod. xvi. 23) 
 it is doubted whether the use of fire for warmth oi 
 the Salil)ath-day wa-i included in this interdiction 
 In [iractice, ii would appear that the tire wai 
 never liglited or kept up for cooking on th» 
 Sabbath-day, and that consequently there wen 
 no fires in the houses during the Salibaths of ilw 
 greater part of the year; but it may be collected 
 that, in winter, fires for warming apartments weit 
 kept up from the previous day. Michael is is 
 very much n>'staken with respect to tlie climate 
 Oi Palestine, iir supjrosing that the inhabitants 
 could, without miicli discomfort, disjiense with 
 fires for warmth <liiring winter [Mosuisc/ies Recht, 
 iv. 195). The modern Jeivs, although there is 
 no cooking in their iiouses, have fires on the 
 Sabl)ath-day, wliicli are attended to by a Christian 
 servant ; or a charwoman is hired to attend to the 
 fires of several houses, wliicli she visits repeatedly 
 during the day. 
 
 Another law required tlie damage done liy a 
 coiifiagration in the fields to be made got-d 
 ity tire yiaity tlirough whose incaution it had been 
 kindled (Exud. xxii. 6). Tliis was a most useful 
 and necessary law in a country where the warmth 
 and drought of summer soon render the herbage 
 and underwood higlily combustible, so that a fire 
 once kindled often spreatls most ex'ensively, and 
 jiroduces disastrous coiise([uences (Judg. ix. 15; 
 XV. 5). This law was calculated to teach caution 
 in the use of fire to the herdsmen in the fields, 
 who weie the parties most concerned. And it ii 
 to be remembere.l that the herdsmen were gene- 
 rally substantial persons, and Irad their assistant 
 shepherds, for who^e imprudence they were mad€ 
 responsible. Still no inference is to be drawr 
 from this law with regaid to fires breaking out ii- 
 towns, the circumstances being so very dilfeient 
 
 In the sacei'dotal services no fire but that of tl»« 
 altar of burnt-olVerings could lawfully be use<l 
 Tliat fire was originally kindleil supeinatuially 
 and was ever after kept up. From it the firt 
 used in the censers for burning incense was al 
 ways taken; and for neglecting this and usinj 
 commun fire, Nadab and Abihu were struck deac 
 by 'fire from iieaven ' (Lev. x. 8, sq. ; Num. iii 
 4,26,61). 
 
 Respecting 'passing through the fire," see M> 
 i.ocH ; and for the ' pillar of fire," see Exodus. 
 
 FIR.MAMENT is the translation given in thf 
 Autliorized Version and the V^ulgate for tlie He- 
 brew ^'^\y^ rakeeah (Gen. i. 0). which ia more 
 fully defined by D'DCn ypT (Gen. i. 14. 
 15, 17), that which is distended, expanded— the 
 expanse of heaven, i. e. the visible arch or yviJX 
 of hcifven restjuj; on tlie ew tli.
 
 Fn;ST-BORN. 
 
 FIRST-FRUITS. 
 
 toa 
 
 With some old astroViomers tlie fimxametxt is 
 the oil) oC the HmjiI slars, or llie hiifhcst of all 
 tlie heave!is. But in Sc-ri|)tnip, ami in common 
 language, it is ii'^od for the middle legioiis, the 
 S])ace or expanse appearing like an arch innne- 
 diatt'ly above ns in tiie l)eavens. Many of the 
 ancients, and of tlie moderns also, accou'it the 
 firmament a fluid suli?tance ; hut those who gave 
 it the name of ' fiiiuamcnt ' mnsl have regar-.led 
 it as solid, and so we would infer from Gen. i. 6, 
 where it forms the division between water and 
 water. 
 
 Plato, in his Timerus, malces mention of the 
 visible heaven nnder the notion of raais (from 
 Tfii/ti), t"^ extend), not unlike the Hebrew deriva- 
 tion. 
 
 The Hebrews seem to have considered the 
 ftrmoment as transparent, like a crystal or sap- 
 phire (Ezek. i. 2'2 ; Dan. xii. 3; Kxod. xxiv. 10; 
 Rev. iv. 6), thus niid<ijig it dillerent from the 
 brazen or iron heaven of Homer. 
 
 In the Ptolemaic astronomy, \he firmament is 
 called the eiglith tieaven or sjliere, with respect 
 to the seven S]ilieies of the ])lanel5, which it sur- 
 rounds. It is supposed to have two mcitions, 
 a diurnal motion imparted to it hy \.\\e prhint7n 
 mobile, from east to west, about the poles of the 
 eclijitic, and another ojiposite motion Irom west to 
 east ; which last in coiuplefed. according to Tycho, 
 m 2.'), 412 yeais-, according to Ptolemy, in 
 36,0O(J ; and according to Cojjeinicus, in 25,^00 ; 
 in which time the (ixed stars lelurn to the same 
 points in which they were at the beginning. This 
 
 feriod is called the Platonic, or Great Year 
 Asthonomy] — E. M. 
 FIRST-BORN. The privileges of the first- 
 horn soil, among the Hebrews, are indicated under 
 
 BiKTHRKJHT. 
 
 FIRST-FRUITS. There are various regula- 
 tions ill the law of Moses respecting fiist-fVuifs, 
 which would be of much interest to us could we, 
 in every case, discfin tiie prec'ise object in view. 
 No doubt the leading object, as far as regards the 
 oflering of the liisl-fiuits to God, was, that all the 
 after-fiuits and after-gatherii-.gs might be conse- 
 crated in and through th lU ; and it was not less 
 the dictate of a natuial iiujiulse that the first- 
 fruits should be offered to (iod in testimony of 
 thankfulness for his bounties. Hence v e find some 
 analogous custom among most nations in which 
 material offerings were used. Tlieieare, however, 
 •ome particulars in the Mosaical regulations which 
 these consideratiiins do not adequately explain. 
 
 1. FlU.ST-FuL'ITS OK FliUiT-TRKKS. It WaS 
 
 directed that the first-fruits of every tree whose 
 fruit was used for food, should, for the fiist lliree 
 years of liearing, be counted ' uncircumcised," and 
 regarded as unclean (Lev. -xix. 23, 24). It was 
 unlawful to sell them, to eat them, or to make 
 any benefit of (hem. It was only in the fourth 
 year of bearing that they were accounted 'holy,' 
 and the fruit of that year was made an oU'ei ing of 
 fiist-IVuits, and was cither given to the ])riests 
 (Num. xviii. 12.1.3), or, as (he Jews themselves 
 understatid, was eaten by the owners of it 
 ' bef'oie the Lord, at Jerusalem," as was the 
 case with secoiul tithe. After the fourth year 
 all fruits of trees were available for use l)y the 
 owner. As the general principle of the law was, 
 that only that which was perfect should lie used 
 in offerings, it i^ an obvious inference that the 
 
 friiits of trees were considered imnerf«H-t until tlie 
 fourth ye.ir; and if so, the law ma} '■-ve iiad l!ie 
 ulterior object of exdudiiig from use crude, Im- 
 inatuie, and Iherefoie imwii(dcsi]iiie fiuils. \Ii- 
 chaelis (iii. 267-h}, indeed, finds a lienilif t« tlie 
 Iwes them.selv<'S in this regula(ion : 'The ef jbo- 
 mical object of the law is very sti iking. ^ very 
 gardener will (each us not to let friiit-ti-ee bear 
 in (heir earliest years, but to |)link off tht blos- 
 soms ; and for (his reason, that (licy will thus 
 thrive the lietter, and licar more abundantly after- 
 wards, siiue, if we may not taste tiie fiiiit the first 
 three years, we shall be tlie more disposed to pinch 
 off the bliLssoms, and the sou will learn to ('o this 
 of his father. Tiie very exjiression " to regar ' (liem 
 as uncircumcised,"' suggests the ]ii())iriety ('f lindi- 
 ing tlieni off; I do nut say cuttiixj them olf, 
 because it is generally the hand and not a knife 
 that is emjihiyed in (lie ojieration.' 
 
 2. FlltST-FuUITS OK THE YkaHI.Y IncUKASK 
 
 Of these there were two kinds — 1. The first-fruits 
 in the slieaf (Lev. xxiii. 10). 2. Tlie first- 
 fridts in tlie tico wave-loaves (Lev. xxiii. 17). 
 These (wo bounded tlie liarxest, (ha( in (he sheaf 
 being oflered at the beginning of (he liaivst, upon 
 the 15tli of the month Nisaii ; (he otiier a( (he end 
 of the harvest, on the Feast of Peniecost. These 
 two are both called niDIJIl tciivj/liotli, ' slake or 
 wave-otl'eriiigs.' 3. 'J'lic fii st of t/ic ilonr/li, being 
 (he (vven(y (muth part thereof, ivhicii was given to 
 (lie jiiie.s(s (Num. xv. 2C) ; and (his kind of 
 oflering was not neglected even after (he re(urn 
 from Babylon (Neli. x. 37). 4. Tlie first-/niit$ 
 of /lie ihresliing-floor. These two last are called 
 ri1D1"in terionoth, or ' heave-ofleriugs ;'' the one, 
 the ■ lieavc-otVei ing ol the thieshing-floor," the other 
 ' the lieave-otVeriiig of the dough." T!ie words 
 tcnuphoth and ieiitmoth liolh signify 'shake- 
 offering,' 'heave-offering," or ' wave-ofVeiing :' but 
 with the difference that \\ie ternmol h wasofieied liy 
 a waving of elevation, moving the oblation njiwaid 
 an<l downward, to signify, as we are told, that 
 Jehovah was the God botlmf the heaven and earth; 
 but the tenvphoth was offered liy waving of agita- 
 tion, to and fro, from the right hand (u llie left, 
 from east (o west, from north to suutli ; which \h 
 alleged to have been in (he way of an acknow'- 
 ledgment that Jehovah was the Loid (,f the whole 
 world (See Godwyn"s Moses and Aaro7i, vi. 2. 
 pp. 214, 215; also, Lewis"s Origines. i. 1 13-1 16). 
 The oblation of tlie first-fruits of the thie-shiug- 
 fiocr was distinguished liy the Jewish writers into 
 two sorts, lihe first of these was the first-fruits of 
 seven things only, namely, wheat, liarley, graj>es, 
 figs, jioniegraiiates, olives, and dales. These the 
 Talniiidists distinguish by (he name of liilchirim, 
 which signifies '(he choicest j'ait,' or, what Wiu 
 first rij;e. The treatise or section liearing that 
 title in the Talmud contains all the regulafiono liy 
 which praciical effect was given, or sought to be 
 given, to the law. It is tlieie stated (lia( the owner 
 was at liberty to biing in what (jiiaiitity he jileased 
 as first-fruits ; but in gathering, he always bound 
 about with rushes the jKirtions he designed lor tiie 
 priests, and said, ' Let this lie l"or tlje firs'.-friiilg.' 
 The s«'o?i6it sort consisted of corn, wine, oil, and 
 whatever other produce was fit for the suppiiit of 
 human lii'e. Lnd(»r this ckiss of fiist-fiuits wiu 
 included the first i.f the fleece, by which the jiriestii 
 were provided with chillies, as by the other i^fle.-- 
 ings with food. The hair of goats, wiiich arc
 
 7H6 
 
 FISH. 
 
 nhwm in the 'East, was included under this deno- 
 mirulion. 
 
 The Hrst-fniits were lirnnght np to Jerusalem 
 with }{ve;it ])Ojn]) and cerewiony. All the people 
 of a given district assemhled on an apjioinled day 
 »n one ol' the towii'?, and hedged in tiie streets. On 
 the rollinving nwrning the chief ot" the jiarty gave 
 .ne sigiuil fur depai tiire in the words, ' Arise, let 
 us go to Zion, to the house of the Lord our Ciod !' 
 An ox, destined for a thasik-ollering, went hefore 
 them, witii gilded iiorns, and an olive crown upon 
 his head; and a ]/i])e was also played hefore them 
 ats they marched on, laden with the linest products 
 of their land. When they drew nigh to Jerusalem 
 they ' crownivi their first-fruits,' that is, they 
 adorned the liaskets with (lowers, and arranged 
 tijeir ollerings so as to make the most advantageous 
 and impising ilisplay on entering the city. On 
 cowing nearer, the chief men, high officers, and 
 freaiurer of the temple, came forth to meet them 
 and receive them with honour; and as they went 
 hy, all liie workmen of the city stood up and sa- 
 luted them, saying, ' O, our brethren, inhabitants 
 
 of the city N , ye are welcome.' The pipe 
 
 still played till the ])arty came to the mount oi' 
 the temple; every one then, however high or 
 noble, took his own basket upon his shoulder, and 
 went (orwavd till he came to the court of the 
 temple. Tiie Levitesfhen sang,' I will extol thee, 
 <) Lord, because thou hast exalted me, and hast 
 not made mine enemies to rejoice over me.' The 
 nlTerer, having the basket still upon his shoulder, 
 fheii began to recite the passage, 'I profess (his 
 day,' &c. (Deut. xxvi. 3-10); and when he came 
 to the jiart, ' A Syiian ready to {)erish was my 
 father,' he took down the basket from his shoulder 
 anil paused, while the priest waved the ollering 
 hefore the altar ; the rest of the passage was then 
 recited ; after which the ofl'erer placed the basket of 
 oli'erings before the altar, worshipjjed God, and 
 went out. Jt was usual with those who were 
 liberally dis))osed to hang turtle-doves or jiigeoiis 
 about their baskets, and these formed part of the 
 olTcring. As each oll'ering was left in the basket, 
 tiiat receptacle formed, in fact, a beneficial, though 
 not a ceremonial part of the ofl'ering, and the Tal- 
 mudists tell us of ju'inces who, for that reason, 
 presented their ofl'erings in baskets of gold. The 
 first-fruits became the property of the couise of 
 jHiests uhich was in actual service. The party 
 who brought them was obliged to spend the nigii* 
 following his ofl'ering in Jerusalem, but was at 
 liberty to return home the ens\iing morning. 
 
 It is obvious that this and some other of the 
 ap))arently onerous obligations of the law, cannot 
 Iw propeily apjirecialed or understood when re- 
 garded in the 'dry light' of abstract duties or 
 exactions. They were surrounded l)y engaging 
 and pictures(pie associations, calculated to make 
 tiieir obsei vaiice a matter of pride and pleasure lo 
 all the partiis concerned. 
 
 FISH (j'7 darj ; Gr. IxOvs, Gen. ix. 2; Num. 
 li., 2-2; J.aiah ii. 1, 10; Matt. vii. 10; xiv. 17; 
 XV. 31; Luke V. 6; John xxi. 6, 8, 11). Fishes, 
 euictly so called, that is, oviparous, veittbiateil, 
 ta Id-blonded animals, breathing water l)y means 
 nf gills or liranchiae. and generally ))iovided with 
 fiuR, are not uid'requcntly mentioned in the 
 Kible. but nevei spcciiicai'y. In the i\Iosaic law 
 ff>cv xi. {'-I'i), oe sjjecies proper for food aie dis- 
 txttgtuW"}! by having scales and tins, while those 
 
 FLSH. 
 
 witli:)uf scales are held to be unclean, and tnew- 
 fore rejected. The law may have given rise to 
 some casuistry, as many fishes have scales, whichj 
 though imperceptible when first caught, are very 
 apparent after the akin is in the least dried. The 
 species which were known to tlie Hebrews, or at 
 least to those who dwelt on the coast, may have 
 l)een very numerous, because the usual current of 
 the Meiliferriiiiean sets in, with a great depth 
 of water, at the Straits of Gibraltar, and passes 
 eastward on the African side until the shoals of 
 the Delta of the Nile begin lo turn it towards the 
 north : it continues in that tlirection aleng the 
 Syrian shores, and falls in'o a broken coinse only 
 when turning westward on the Cyprian and 
 Cretan coasts. Every sjiring, with the sun's re- 
 turn towarrds the north, innumerable troops of 
 littoral species, having passed thi winter in the 
 offings of Western Africa, return northward for 
 spawning, or are impelled in that direction by 
 other lujkuown laws. \ small j)art only ascend* 
 along the Atlantic coast of Spain and Portugal 
 towards the British Channel, while the main bodies 
 pass chiefly into the Mediterranean, follow tlie 
 general current, and do not break into more scat- 
 tered families imfil they have swept rotind tlie 
 shores of Palestine. The Pelagian, or ti uly deep 
 sea fishes, m common with the indigenous species, 
 remain the whole year, or come about midsummer, 
 and follow an tmcertain course more in the centre 
 and towards the deepest waters. Off Nice alouf 
 Risso (^IchtJiyol. de Nire) found and describen 
 31o species; and there is eveiy reason to believe 
 that the coasts of Tyre and Sidon would produce 
 at least as great a number. The name of the 
 latter ])lace, indeed, is derived from the Piio'nician 
 word fish, and it is the oldest fisiiing-estal)lishmerit 
 for conmiercial pin poses known in history. In- 
 dustry and security alone are wanting to make 
 the same locality again a flourishing place in this 
 respect. The Hebrews had a more imjierfect ac- 
 quaintance with the species fcmnd in the Red Sea, 
 whither, to a certain extent, tlie majority of fishes 
 found iji the Indian Ocean resort. Beside the.se, in 
 Egy])t they ha<i anciently eaten those of the Nile; 
 subsequently those of the lake of Tiberias and of 
 the rivers falling into the Jordan ; and. they may 
 have lieen acquainted with species of other lakes, 
 of the (Jrontes, and even of the Euphrates. The 
 supply, however, of this article of food, which the 
 Jewish people appear to have consumed largely, 
 came chiefly from the Mediteivanean ; and we 
 have the aulhority of Neh. xiii. 16, for the fact, 
 that Phoenicians of Tyre actually resided in 
 Jerusalem as dealers in fi.sh : which must have 
 led to an exchange of that comnu>dity for corn 
 and cattle. Those which might lie eaten. I)ecause 
 thev had scales and tins, were among the most 
 nutritious and common, probably such as still 
 abound on the coast ; being genera of I'eriic/ce, 
 l<c>r/-?tida?, and other families. It is difliciilt to 
 .select the most interesting of these, and to jioini 
 them out with other names than are absolutely 
 scientific, liecause many are unknown on our 
 coasts, and otheis have names indeed, f)ut nearly 
 all lepetitions of such as occur in England, with- 
 out being of. the same species. Tlie best catalogue 
 hitheito attempted is in Kitto's i'alestine, vol. i. ; 
 to wliicli numerous additions might be made, bu! 
 that it a])pears preferrdile to give here only a ge- 
 neral outline, with some exceptions as to the moc'
 
 FISH. 
 
 iTn]»oi1airt si)ecies. TakingtheCuvieviaiisystem for 
 our guide, wo liavc r I' tlic I'ercidcc^ ur jiercli trilies, 
 both in the seas aii<l rivers of Palestine and Ejjypt, 
 •€veral sj)ecies nf [H'rcli [I'erca) {jroiK-rly so culkil ; 
 •Late.s calcanjh; or jutch of tlie Nile, once licid 
 sacred at Latopolis; Basse (Z,ft/»r<w:), of wliiclt the 
 I.. Ltipiis ascends the fiesli water of rivers, and 
 ttncieiilly hroiigiit an incredible price at Rome, 
 if caught in the Tiber above a certain liridi^'e, 
 and weighed soniewliat heavy. It frequents the 
 whole circle of the Mediterranean and lilack Soa. 
 Silla^o sihama of the Red Sea, known l)y the 
 Oriental Krankisli name of U'eckc, transferred from 
 the Mediterranean side, where it is bestowed upon 
 tvi'o sjK'cies of the cod-(isli f.imily, Iwcause all 
 these sjiccies are o<" eKipiisile ilavom .; tiioiinh it 
 n«ay Ite duulitw! whether these, . like many others 
 having very small scales, were considered ad- 
 missible iu the Hebrew market. A propoition of 
 Oie eight or ten sjjeciesof Merrow (.S<.vrrt«?«) and 
 Barbers (^Anthias) may have been held similarly 
 objectionable. The Sp/ii/r-ce»a, or banacnta of 
 the Mediterranean ; snrmwllels {MtcUtii), several 
 fpecres of gurnard (^Trirjlay, and of Hying gurnard 
 (Dactttlopie)-Ks), fi-equent the seas ol' Palestme. 
 But Sciaenoid and Sparoid genera otler the gieatest 
 number of species, and are particularly iibuiidaiit 
 in all ]KUts of tiie Mediterranean, coming in troops 
 at certain seasons. They are edible, and mostly 
 resplendent witii large scales. Scieena umbta 
 (AguilaY), or gjvat sea-ltream, sometimes near 
 keven feet long ; Corvitia scucna nigra, Umbrina 
 cirrhosa, &c. The Sijaroiile of the Levant con- 
 tain several sjjecies of Su7-yus (slteepsheads), 
 Vhri/sop/tris (giltheads), Pagrus, or rosy Sparus ; 
 Payelhis, among which the celebrated Pag. Mor- 
 myi-iis runs up tlie ?iiile; Dentex nuiJiscna and 
 D. harak of the Reil Sea ; several sj^cies of 
 Hoops and Gerres, or rock-tisli ; Gerres oi/etia, 
 &c. 
 
 Next we have the great tribe of Scomber idee, 
 or mackerels, witlr numerous genera, and still 
 nioie altundant species, frequenting t!ie Mediter- 
 ranean in prodigious numliers, and mostly excel- 
 lent for the table; but, being often without per- 
 ci-ptible scales, ti)ey may have been of question- 
 able use to tlie Hebrews. All the species resort to 
 the deep seas, and foremost of them is the genus 
 T/tirnnus, our tunny, a name that may lie de- 
 rived from the Hebrew or PlicEiiician ]r\ than 
 [VVhaj.k], It is abundant at certain seasons in 
 tiie otiing of every jiart of the Mediterranean, but is 
 most successfully pursued in the western part and 
 alx)ut Sicily, and is frequentl}' seen on tlie ciwsts 
 of Camlia and Cyprus. The thiee or four sjiecies 
 which enter or remain in the seas of the Levant, 
 commonly called Boniielos and Albicores, are all 
 observed to delight in moving against the current. 
 I Of this tamily, Imt less frequent, is the great 
 sword-fish (Xiphiiisy, bflenest set^n to the eastward 
 of Sicily. The genus Scomber (mackerel, pro- . 
 perly so called) otlers two or tiiree, and of the 
 Scad {('aranx) at least six sjK'<;ies. Holh are 
 very numerous in their seasons. Among them 
 C'aranx petuurista (skipjack) is often seen 
 dancing on the calm surface of deep water, and 
 even in shore about Tyre and Sidon ; but SerLola 
 ^pcciosu belongs to tlie Red Sea. Omitting sjje- 
 cies of the Auxis, Sarda, Cibi'j/n, and A'aitcratcs, 
 «r pilot-lisb, found in every sea, we may name 
 Vomer Alexatidruius, Gimel-el-JBaln-, or camel- 
 
 riSH, 
 
 707 
 
 fi«h of the .-Vralis-, Stroinaieus Jixih-Ui^ moat com- 
 mon on the liarliaiy and Syiiaii chores; the genua 
 ('oryp/itviui (dolphin of wanjeti^, wheieof <'or. 
 iltpptirus is <iftiii noticu'd diasing the fl) in,'-li»li 
 (^l.xoc<-tits) off Cypms ; ami Iheie ;uv seveial 
 ofiiei- subgenera l)elonging to this faiinly in eveiy 
 pait of the Levantine seas. 
 
 Passing witljout notice a great iniinber of less 
 important gcneia, we couie to the Mtigiloid family 
 {Miigi/i</fe). Tlie s<a-niulle.ts {Mugi/, piii|ieily 
 so called) afford at le;ist live s]i%cies, ami among 
 these the real Mugil ( 'cp/ialus is one found all 
 round the coast of AlVic^i, fVoni the Red Sea to 
 Alexandria, and is vaUia.ble in every jiajt of the 
 Mediteiiailean There ;Ie l)esides several othen 
 in both seas. M;uiy sjiecies of other tiimilies exikt 
 on the coast of Palestine, but aie of no gejieral 
 iinjKirtance, excepting, perhaps, one of tiie ,i;enus 
 Lop/titis, or sea-de\il (fisliiiig-IVog, or angler), 
 reaching in tiie Mediterranean to five feel in length ; 
 and another sj^'cies in tlie Red and Eastern seas, 
 little le.ss : both are hideous nionsteis in appear- 
 ance, with the moulli of suflieient width to swal- 
 low their own bulk. They lia\e tenlaciila or fili- 
 foim appendages on the head ; and in hot som 
 they crawl over locks and in the sanils paitiallj 
 aiiove water. It seems that one of this genus, th» 
 Kapa Moramola of Malaliiir, is typical of Vislino^ 
 in his avatar of Matsya, when he is falJed, nnUej 
 the form of a Hsli, fu have drawn the aik of' Moali 
 by the lilaments on his Iwad to the uiountain of 
 Naubundana, the Aiarat of Hiiulu legends, 'i he 
 idol is still worshipped by the name of Jugger-nat, 
 or Somriauth, in the likeness of a Lophius, almost 
 obliterated in tlie carving so that it resemides a 
 human fist, having a wide mouth at the knuckles, 
 with a nose and eyes on the back. Such was the 
 image which Mahmoud, sultan ofGliiztii, slialteied 
 in 1025,aiidfouni' tobea leceptacleol'riches. That 
 of Poor-Bunda bears the same sha]jc; and the figure 
 at the lilack pagoda of Juggernauth still lelains 
 some trait.s of the primitive legend, llioiigh de- 
 formed by otiieis still more alisurd ; liut they serve 
 to trace one of the many pagan reminiscences cif 
 the patriarch Noah, and form anolher veision of 
 the Philistine Dagon, 
 
 Among other families of fishes not yet adveitod 
 to, the labroid (Labridee, Wrasse of Pennant) 
 abounds in genera and species ; as also the Scams 
 ([)arrot-lisli), whereof two species ui least fiequeiit 
 the seas of Alexandria, Crete, and Cyprus. Scarus 
 viridis and Scdrus Cretensis. one *>f wbicL, luj 
 doubt, was the green sjiecimen wbich Dr. Claike 
 did not recognise at Jalla when shovtn Jiim by an 
 Arab: the Cretan species was once consideieil of 
 sutlicient inijxirtance among Roniau epicuies to 
 cause an otlicer of high rank to be sent with a 
 squadion of vessels for the sole j)urjK)se ol'olitiiining 
 and conveying a certain niu»)lier of liv itig tiah to 
 stock the Tyrrhenian sea. Genera of caips {('y- 
 priirixUe) iwe ]>articulaily abundant in ilie fiesi) 
 waters of .-Vsia, It was from thence Knrope and 
 Kngland olitained them. Among these llie mle 
 is still deemed sacred at Oifali (Ur of Sciipture Y^, 
 where numliers are kept in the jiiscina of tlic 
 mosque dedicated to Abraham. Of jiikes (A'ao- 
 cidte) aie found chiefly marine geiiera, »u<-.Ji aa 
 gar-fish {Belone), mackerel-ja'-k (^Scomber ti«i), 
 and Balalioo {Uvmiramphus), to which may Ue 
 added flying fish { Exaccetus), all fre(iuenting tiie 
 Syrian cuast. Alter tliese aiay be raiiytxf tli«
 
 70S 
 
 FISH. 
 
 FLEA. 
 
 g«nus Mormynis, wlieieof the sjipcies, amountinj^ 
 to six or seven, are almost exclusively tenants o(" 
 th« Nile and the lake of Tiheiias, and held among 
 *.he most palatal)le lisli wliich the fresh wafers jiro- 
 duce. One species. Mormyrtis Oxyrinchus, was 
 woi-shipjied l)y the idolatrous E;:fyp.fian3. 
 
 Cat or Sheatlish {Siluridee), with from two 
 to eight barliels at the moutli, are a family of 
 numerous j^enera, all of which, excepting the 
 Loricarife, are destitute of a scaly coverinL^, and 
 are consequent!/ imclean to the Hebrews ; and 
 some species are said to he ]K)isonous or electrical. 
 Several of them were held by the ancient Gentile 
 nations, and by some of the modern, in higii esti- 
 mation, such as tlie black (isli (Siina/t tl-aswad) 
 of Aleppo, ])robabiy Silurus Clorias GronorAi, tlie 
 shilbe ii^ Xhv Nile, and several others. Of sal- 
 mons (Salmonidee) Myletes dentex, or Ilassel- 
 giiisti. belongs to the best edible fishes of the 
 Nile; and Clupeidce (herrings), beside a specie 
 of shad (Alosa), offer several delicate sardines 
 \Eugraulis), abundant on the coast of Africa ; 
 and tlie fierce liechir (^Polypterus) of the Nile is 
 praised for the tal)le. Next follow the cod or 
 gadoid species (Gadidce), already partially noticed, 
 being, besides several others, siicli as Merluccius 
 Lepidlon, present about Tyre. PIeiironect.es, or 
 flat-fish, found off the Egyptian coasts, and eel- 
 shaped genera, bred aljunilantly in tlie lakes of 
 the Delta. Finally, tliere are tlie cartilaginous 
 orders, where we find the file-lisli (genus Halistcs), 
 having a species {B. Vetuia) in the waters of the 
 Nile; and true cliondroijterygians, containing the 
 sharks, numerous in genera and s])ecies, botii in 
 tlie Mediterranean and Red Sea. We notice only 
 Carcharius Lamin, the wliite or raging shark, 
 often found of enormous size of!" Alexandria, and 
 always attended by several jjilot-lisii (N^aiicrates), 
 and the saw-fish {Pristis Antiquorum), most 
 dreaded liy the pearl-fishers in tlie Persian Gulf, 
 and which has been seen in the Red Sea pursuing 
 its prey e\ en into the surf, with such force and 
 velocity that, on one occasion, half of a fish cut 
 asunder by the saw flew on shore at the feet of an 
 officer while employed in the surveying service. 
 On rays we shall only add that most of the genera 
 are represented by species in either sea, and in jiar- 
 ticular the sting rays ( Triynn), and electric rays 
 {Torpedo), with which we close our general review 
 of the class, although many interesting remarks 
 Blight be subjoined, all teniling to clear ii]) exist- 
 ing misconce[)tion3 respecting fishes in general — 
 such as that cetaceans, or the whale tribe, belong 
 to them ; and the misapplication of the term when 
 tortoises and oj'sters are denominated fish ; for the 
 error is general, and the Arabs even include lizards 
 in the ajipellation. 
 
 Though the Egyptian priesthood abstained from 
 their use, all the other castes dwelling in the valley 
 of the Nile chiefly subsisted on the fish of the river, 
 while they capriciously abhorred those of the sea. 
 There was a caste of fishermen ; and allusion to 
 the artificial reservoirs and fish-ponds of Egypt 
 occurs in the Prophets (Isa. xix. 8-10). 
 
 But the Hebrews could draw only a small 
 supjily from the lake of Tiberias and the affluents 
 of the Jordan On the coast the great sea-lisheries 
 weie in the slack waters, within the dominion of 
 ihePhtrnicians, who must have sent the supply into 
 the interior in a cured or salted state ; although the 
 fact involves the question how far in that condition, 
 
 coming out of Pagan hands, conBum[ition >y a 
 
 Hebrew was strictly lawful : perhaie it may b*!pre 
 Slimed that national wants had siillicieni influence 
 to modify the law. The ait of curing fish waj 
 well understood in Egy])t, and unquestionably in 
 Phoenicia, since that iiiilii.srrioi's nation had early 
 establishments for the]mi)X)se at the Golden Horn 
 or Byzantium, at Portus Symlioloruin in Taurio 
 Chersonesus, and even at {^aljie (Bisepharat V), in 
 the present bay of Gibraltar. With regard to the 
 controversy respecting the prophet Jonah having 
 been swallowed by a huge sea-monster [Wwai.e], 
 it may be observed that great cetaceans occur in 
 the Mediterranean, as well as great sharks, and 
 that, in a case where the miraculous intervention 
 of Almighty power is manifest, learned trifling 
 about the presence of a mysticete, or the dimen- 
 sions of its gullet, is out o-f )ilace. 
 
 The form of a fish (Notius Poseidon') was, from 
 remote ages, a type of protective dominion, which 
 the 8yml)olizing sjiirif of the ancients caused to 
 pass into Christianity; as apjiears from Eusebius 
 {Life of Cmistaiitine), and St. Augustine {De 
 Civitate Dei). On the walls of the oldest cata- 
 combs of Rome the representation of the IX0T2 
 is frequently discernible, and always interpreted 
 as an emblem of the Saviour. 
 
 Bochart"s conclusions {De pisee Tobice, p. 748), 
 respecting the fisi> which a.ssailedTobit, are totally 
 inadmissible. Hilurria Glanis is not a fish known 
 in South Western Asia ; but it may he worth no- 
 ticing that the Seesar of the Indus is a crocodile, 
 jirobably of the genus Gavial] which grows to a 
 great size, is eaten, and has a gall bladder, still 
 used to cure ol)Stlnate wounds and deiluctions. 
 Whether any great saurian now ascends the Eu- 
 jihrates or Tigris may be a question; l)ut as these 
 animals in the East are ranked with fish, and 
 ])ass from fresh water into salt, they are probably 
 still found along the wliole southern coast of 
 Persia, and may anciently have frequented the 
 rivers in question. We notice these particulars 
 as they answer the conditions of Tobit's fish mora 
 completely than any other hitherto ]iointed out. — 
 
 C. H. S. 
 
 FITCHES. [Kbt-sach.] 
 
 FLAG. [AcHu.] 
 
 FLAGON {T^'^V; Sept. Xciyavop . The 
 word thus rendered in the English Bibles (2 Sam. 
 vi. 19; 1 Chron. xvi. 3; Hos. iii. 1 ; Cant. ii. 5) 
 means rather a cake, es])eeially of dried figs or 
 raisins, pressed info a par'^icular form [FiiuiTs]. 
 
 FLAX. [PlSHTEH.] 
 
 FLEA (Ci)"!Q, pules irritans. Class aptera, 
 Linn.; siphonaptcra, Latr. ; aphanaptera,K.\t\)yy 
 occurs only 1 Sam. xxiv. 14; xxvi. 20, where 
 David thus addresses his persecutor Saul at the 
 cave of Adiillam : 'After whom is the king ot' 
 Israel come out '? after whom (lost thou pursue"/ 
 ^altera flea;' 'The king of Israel is come out 
 to seek a fiea !' In both these passages our trans- 
 lation omits the foice of the word ^^K, which 
 is found in the Hebrew of each : thus, 'to jiursue 
 after, to seek one or a single flea.' In the former 
 ■ passage theSeptuagint |ireser\es it — i\/vWov kvos ; 
 in the latter it omits all mention of the flea, and 
 reads KaQuys Kara5iciKei b vvicriKopa^ fV to?* 
 opeari, ' as the owl hunteth on the mountains.' 
 But another Greek version in the Hexapla read*
 
 FLESH. 
 
 FLY. 
 
 70» 
 
 f^AAof fya. The Vulgate jjreserves tlie word in 
 both passages, pulicem nnuni. J)avid"s allusion 
 to the flea displays great aililicss. It is ati ajijical 
 founded upon tiie inimense disparity hetwecn 
 Saul as tlie king of Israel, arul iiliuself ;is tlie 
 poor con.euij)til>lo ot)ject of the inonarcli's lahox'^- 
 ous jiurs lit. Hunting,' a flea is a comparison, in 
 other anrient writings, for a uch labour exj^nded 
 to secure a worthless resu^'. 
 
 Although this iusec^ Sas oeen used as a po- 
 pular emblem for insignificance, yet, wiien consi- 
 dered by itself, it has high claims upon the atten- 
 tion of the naturalist. Kven to the naked eye 
 there is something pleasing in its appearance, and 
 elegant in its pastures ; but it is indelited to the 
 microscope for our acquaintance witii the flexible, 
 highly jwlished, and ever clean suit of armour in 
 which it is encaseil cap-a-pie, its finely-arched 
 neck, large beautiful eye, antennae, muscidar 
 jointed legs, its piercer and sucker — forming one 
 most complicated instrument — the two long, 
 hooked, sliarp claws, in which its legs severally 
 terminate. Tlie agility of the flea places it at the 
 head of all the Iea])ing insects, wiien its strength 
 is considered in relation to its size, it being able to 
 leap, unaided by wings, 200 times its own length. 
 It was certainly witli misplaced v/it that Aris- 
 tophanes (Nub. 145) endeavoured to ridicule 
 Socrates for having measured if^uAAay oiriaous 
 aWotrc Tols aurris trSSas, ' liow many of its own 
 lengths, at one spring, a flea can hop.' Such is 
 the happy cliange in the state of science that 
 pi ilosophers have since done this witli impurjity : 
 they have also traced the hiteresting career of this 
 insect from the round smooth egg deposited on 
 the creatures tiiat can afford food to the larva, 
 falling down tlirougli the hair to the skin ; the 
 shining pearl-colcured active larva, feeding on 
 the scurfy surface of tlie cuticle, rolling itself into 
 a ball when disturbed ; the cocoon or silken bag 
 which it spins around itself; and its re-appearance 
 as a perfect insect. It is more than likely tiiat 
 the flea, besides partici()ating in the happiness of 
 all animated nature, and supplying a link in 
 the universal chain of being, as well as serving 
 the incidental useof chastising uncleauliness, may 
 also, along with many other tril)es of insects, 
 serve the purpose of the scavenger, in clearing 
 away some source of disease (see Cuvier's Animal 
 Kingdom, Lond. 1834, art. Pulex). Litmaius 
 has assigned a personal service to mankind to 
 some other insects, with which popular associa- 
 tions are even less pleasing, but wliich unerringly 
 appear where the habits of mankind render their 
 presence needful. Owing to tlie habits of the 
 lower orders, fleas abound so profusely in .Syria, 
 especially during the sjning, in the streets and 
 dusty bazaars, that persons of condition always 
 change their long (hesses upon returning home. 
 There is a popular saying in Palestine that ' the 
 king of the fleas keeps his court at Tiberias;' 
 though many other jilaces in that region might 
 dispute the distinction with that town (Kitto's 
 Physical Histonj of Palestine, p. 421). — ^J. F. D. 
 
 FLESH ("lb'3\ This word bears a variety 
 of significations ir Scripture: — 
 
 I. It is applied, generally, to the whole ani- 
 mated creation, whether man or lieast ; or, to all 
 beings wliose material substance is flesh (Gen. vi. 
 13, 17, 19; vii. 15, &c. 
 
 2. But it is more particularly applied to ' man- 
 kind' ; and is, in fact, the only Hel)rew word 
 which answers to that term (Gen. vi. 12; Ps. xlv. 
 ij ; cxlv. 21 ; Isa. xl. 5, (5). In this sense it is 
 uscl somewhat figuratively to denote that evil 
 principle which is o^poseil io the S]iirit, and to 
 Goil, and which it is nices.sary to coriect himI 
 subdue (Gen. vi. 5; Job x. 4; Isa. xxxi. 3; 
 Matt. xvi. 17; Gal. i. 16, &c.). 
 
 3. The word ' flesh' is opposed to t'Q3 nenhesh, 
 'soul,' or 'spirit,' just as we oppose ior/y and soul 
 (Job xiv. 22; Prov. xiv. 30 ; Isa. x. 18). 
 
 4. The ordinary senses of the word, namely, 
 the flesh of men or beasts (Gen. xli. 2, 19; Jot) 
 xxxi. 23, 25), and flesh as used for food (Kxod. 
 xvi. 12; Lev. vii. 19), are both sufhciently ob- 
 vious ; and with respect to the latter see Foou. 
 
 5. The word ' flesh' is also used as a modest 
 general term for the set'ret jiarts, in sucli j.nissages 
 as Gen. xvii. 11 ; Kxod. xxviii. 42; Lev. xx. 2; 
 Ezek. xxiii. '20 ; 2 Peter ii. 7, S, 10; Jude vii. 
 In Prov. V. 11 tlie ' llesh of the intemperate' is 
 descrilied as being consumed by infamous dis- 
 eases. 
 
 FLOCKS. [P.4STLUAGE.] 
 
 FLOOD; [Dei.ucib.] 
 
 FLOUR. [Bui:.\d; Mill; Offehings.J 
 
 FLOWERS. [Plants.] 
 
 FLUTE. [Music] 
 
 FLY. This word is used in the English Version 
 to represent the two Hebrew words 3^)^ and 
 3inj. I. any occurs Exod. viii. 21, 2'2. 24, '29, 
 31; Ps. IxxA-iii. 45, and cv. 21 ; all which pas- 
 sages relate to the plague of flies inflicted ujx)n 
 Pharaoh and his jieople. In the Sept. it is uni- 
 formly rendered Kui'6fivia, or the dog-fly. In 
 Exodus Jerome renders it by the following phrasts 
 and words, omne genus muscarum, nuiscas diversi 
 generis, muscae hiijusmodi, musca gravissima, and 
 musca. In the Psalms he rendeis it cynomyia. 
 It seems most probable that a siiujle species only 
 is intended, whatever it may be, from the way in 
 whicli it is introduced, ' I will send SiynTIN, 
 the arob,' compared with verses '29. 31, 'llieie 
 remi.;ned not THX one,' that is, one arob, ovSefiia, 
 nee u.ia 'jnidem. The words, the arob, may he 
 substituted for 'swarms of fli(;s,' throughout llie 
 narrative, with only an apparent exfeiition in the 
 24th verse; but tliere, the words "1 3D ^IJ/, &c. 
 may be rendered, the arob came mniieronsly or 
 grievously, (Sejit. irapeytvero r] KWii/xvta 7r.\f;6()i, 
 'the dog-fly arrived, a multitude'); since instances 
 of a similar use of the word 133 occur Gen. 1. y ; 
 Exod. ix. 3 ; x. 14, &c., where it appears to tie 
 used like the word gravis by the Romans. It has, 
 however, been mucli debated what particular spe- 
 cies is meant. Nothing can be galhereil from the 
 references to it in the Helirew, liullier than tlitt it 
 wiis ' upon Pharaoh, and upon the Egyptians,' 
 that it filled their houses, covered the ground, 
 corru])ted or destroyed the land (Query, Ihe inha- 
 bitants, Gen. vi. 12), and devoured their ]>eisons. 
 (See also \\ is. xvi. 9.) The rendering of tlieSe|)- 
 tuagint, /ci/i/J^uio, is entitled to much consideratiiin. 
 It is evitiently comjiounded of kvoiv, a dog, and 
 jj.v7a. a fly ; and because b(ith ihe one and the 
 other of these creatures come uninvited, on some 
 occasions, and though driven away, as often return, 
 so the word formed of the union of the two, is used 
 by ancient authors, to indicate consummate im
 
 710 
 
 FOOD. 
 
 FOOD. 
 
 pudettre. Thus Hont^r re])resenfs Mars as ap- 
 [ilyitig \\\e epifliet to Minerva, for iiistiiratiiig ilie 
 gods to (jiiiirre) [IL xxi. 39i). It is also re (erred 
 to, as a I insect, l>v y^^tian. wlio, in desciiliing the 
 n>yoj)s, tal)aniis, or liorse-Hy, says, it is similar to 
 wliat is called the Kvi'6/j.via (Hist. Anim. iv. 
 5T). Philo, in his Life of Moses (i. 23, p. 401, 
 el. Mnngey). expressly descrihes it as a biting 
 insidious c.ieatoie, which conies like a dart, with 
 Kieat noise, and rvishin:^ with gieal impetuosity 
 on the skin, sticks to it most tenaciously. It 
 st>en s likely that Jerome, in translatini; Exodus, 
 deriv ed the word from 3"TJ?, 'to mingle," and uniier- 
 sTOod hy it a mixture of noxious creatures, as did 
 ,Fose))hus, Aqiiila. and all the ancient translators. 
 Tiie diversity of Jeromes renderings in Exodus, 
 however, betokens his uncertainty, and in the 
 Psalms he has adojjfed that of the Septuagint. 
 More modern writers, reasonini^ on otlier senses ol' 
 the Hi hrew word, and which are very numerous, 
 have proposed several difl'erent insects. Thus, 
 one oi" the meanings of 3"ny is ' to daiken," and 
 Moufiet observes tbat the name cynomyia ai^rees 
 with no kind of mes better than with those black, 
 large, compressed Hies, which boldly l)eset cattle, 
 aiirl not only obtain ichor, as other tiies, but also 
 suck out lilood from beneath, and occasion great 
 pain. He observes that they have no jiroboscis, 
 but, instead of if, have donlile sets of teeih, like 
 wasps, which they iniix deejily in the skin; and 
 a<lds that they greatly infest the ears of dogs 
 (Theat. Insect, cxi.). Pliny describes an insect 
 of this kind {Hist. Nat. xi. 40). So. also Co- 
 lumella (vii. 13). See Pliny by Grandsagne 
 and Cuvier, Parisiis, 182^, vol. ii. ji. 4G), note. 
 Others have ]in)posed the blatta Orientalis or 
 /^jgyptia of Linnaeus, as answering considerably 
 to the characteristics of voracity, intrusion into 
 bouses,&c. &c. (Forskal, Descrip. Animal., Praef. 
 p. 22). The miracle involved in the |)lague of (lies 
 consisted, partly at least, in the creature being 
 brought a;.,'aiiist the EL^yjjtians n: so great an 
 abundance during icinfer. The particular s])ecies 
 i.s, howexer, at present undetermined. 2. 313? is 
 probably the generic word for fly. It occurs 
 Eccles. X. 1, and Isa. vii. 18, Sept. juma, musca. 
 It enters info < ompisition in the word 31I1T /'V^. 
 (ly-Baal, i. e. tlie god Baal (2 Kings i. 2, 3, 1(5), 
 an oracular deity of the Ekionites [IJAALZKBun I. 
 Tlie phrase hissing, or ratlier liisting. for the fly 
 (Isa. vii. IS) is explained in the aiticle Bke. 
 (Bochart, a Riisenmiiller ; Rosenmiiller, in loc. ; 
 Michaelis, Siippl. ad Hebraic. Lex. No. 1962; 
 Oedmann's Verm. Sammlungen, H. ii. p. 150 ; 
 Winer, Dibl. Ha/tdtviht.) — J. F. D. 
 
 FOLD [P.^STUKAOB.] 
 
 FOOl) The necessary act of taking food was, 
 at a \eiy early period of the world's history, con- 
 nected immediately with religion. If regard was 
 had to the source whence came the means of 
 Bubsistence, it was natural that there should 
 be some distinct recognition of that great and 
 hoimtifnl Being who gave rain from heaven, 
 and fiuilful seasons, tilling men's hearts with joy 
 and glndness (.\cfs xiv. 17). If scope was given 
 to the feelings which bind man to man, and 
 lead him (o eat and diink in commimion with 
 his brelhrrn, tlie additional pleasure hence exne- 
 nenced, .and a due resj)ect for the laws of hosjii- 
 tallty, would awaken in tiie heart the religions 
 
 sympafliie'ij and the sanctions of religion woulu. 
 soon con^e !o cement bonds which convenieuc* 
 had originated, and to raise and hallow enjoy- 
 ments which were designed and titled for the pre^ 
 servation of the species. Man, too, has in all a^ca 
 been led to set a))art and ofi'er to the Divinity a 
 portion at least of what in each case was esteemed 
 of highest value. But food is of all things the 
 most valuable, since it is our life. In the grosser 
 anthroponiorphitic svsteius of religion, the godg 
 would also l)e considered as being grati(ied l)y 
 food-ofl'erings ; if, indeed, some sort of ambrosia 
 and nectar were not needed by them. Then those 
 who served at the altar seemed to have a right to 
 live by the altar (1 Cor. ix. 13); jniesfs would 
 there(()re encourage, not without a correspotiding 
 approval on the jiart of the worshipjier. such oll'er- 
 ings and such approjjriafions to themselves as 
 would at least su])])ly tlie recnirring wants of 
 nature. And if we look at the final cause of tiii* 
 connection between the act of eating and the ser- 
 vices of religion, we shall find a yet deejier reason, 
 as well as a more powerful one, for their being 
 occasionally united. Eating implies not only 
 personal but social gratifications, if not of a very 
 high order, yef of a very intense degree; and the 
 appeal of religion to man vvliile in the enjoyment 
 of these pleasines is likely to be welcomed, heard, 
 and obeyed. The social and tlie religious alliec- 
 tions are thus aroused, made deep and intense, 
 and then permanently blended 'o^^^efher. The 
 pleasing feelings which arise from the gratifica- 
 tions of the jialafe, and the enjoyment.s, if not 
 endearments, of social intercourse, are thus, at 
 least in part, transferred to religion, with which, 
 by the nattiral workings of the heart, they l)ecome 
 permanently and indissolubly associafetl. 
 
 How wise, then, was the jirovision whicli con- 
 nected eating with the oliservances of the Mosaic 
 religion. Especially when any signal event was 
 to be commemorated, what could be so ell'ectual 
 as a ceremonial involving eating and iliinkingl 
 The paschal lamb, for instance, and the uidea- 
 vcned laead, spoke in pleasing tones and by 
 s'riking emblems, to eiicli successive generation, 
 of the great historical fact of which tliey were 
 designed to be the perpetual rnemenfo. In like 
 manner 'the Lord's Supper' (I Ca)v. xi. 20), the 
 breaking of liread fiom house to liouse (.-\cts ii. 
 46). and the a-yoTrai, or love-feasts, ' feasts of 
 charity' (Jude 12), were all, especially the first, 
 i)otli wisely designed and admirably fitted to 
 bring into play, in connection widi religion, the 
 bef'ter feelings of humanity, to maintain in ever- 
 lasting lememlirance tlie events which they sym- 
 bnlized, to make eating and di inking an act of 
 religion, and to make religion a pleasuie. Sfiange, 
 indeed, would it have been if (Christianity, pro- 
 ceeding as it did from Him who knew well what 
 was in man, and therefore knew well the powers by 
 whicli man is swayed, and being, as it is, so won- 
 derfully adaj)ted to meet and siii)])ly our wants, 
 had not made, on l)ehalf of its great purjioses, an 
 ajipeal to that a])])etite and to those wants and 
 pleasures which are not least among the great 
 moving powers of both individual anil social 
 existence. 
 
 The jnoductions of a country, at an early T)P- 
 riod of the world, necessarily determined its food. 
 Palestine abounded with giain and various kinds 
 of vegetal)les, as well aa with animals of diSiemil
 
 FOOD. , 
 
 tpecies. Such, accordingly, in peneriil, w;u tlie 
 gustenaixe wliicli its inhabitants took. 
 
 Tlie use of fire, and the state of tlie arts of 
 life in a country, must also liave important in- 
 fluence on its cookery; in other words, will go 
 far to determine the state hi which the natural 
 productions of the earth will he eaten. If vhe 
 grain is to hecome hread, a lony; and by no 
 means easy process has to l)e gone tiiroii;.;h. Skill 
 in preparing food is therefore held in iiigii repute; 
 BO that, as in Homer, princes slay the cattle, and 
 poetry details tiie process by wiiich the carcass is 
 made ready for being eaten (Iliad, i. 4.')7). 
 
 Bread formed ' the stall" oi' life' to the am-ieut 
 Hebrew* even more than to ourselves; but the 
 .nodes of preparing it have been noticed under 
 ctii3T lieads [Bukad ; RIii.i.]. 
 
 On a remarkable occasion a calf, lender and 
 good, is taken, slain, dressed (roasted, most ](ro- 
 bably, Judg. vi. 19 ; Gen. xxvii. 7 ; 1 Sam. ii. 13 ; 
 Exod. xii. 8, 9; boiling was not known till long 
 afterwards), and set before the guests, while the 
 entertainer (Aliraham) resjiectfully stood at their 
 side, doubtless to render any desirable service. 
 The sauce or accompaniments on this occasion 
 were butter and milk. From cb. xix. 3, it may 
 be inferred that the bread was unleavened. 
 
 The cases, however, to which reference has been 
 made were of a special nature; and fiom them, 
 as well as from what is recorded toucliing Isaac 
 and Esau and Jacob, it apjwars that llesh meal 
 was reserved as food for guests, or as a dainty for 
 the sick ; lentils, pulse, onions, grain, honey, and 
 milk being the ordinary I'are. 
 
 The agreeable, and perhaps in part the salu- 
 brious qualities of salt, were very early known 
 and recognised : in Lev. ii. 13, it is expressly en- 
 joined, ' Every oblation of thy meat-ollering shalt 
 thou season with salt ; with all thine oH'eriiigs 
 shalt thou offer salt.' 
 
 Locusts were a permitted (Lev. xi. 22) and a 
 very common food. At the present day they are 
 gatliered by tlie Bedouins in tlie beginning of 
 April, and lieing roasted on ])late3 of iron, or 
 dried in the sun, are kept in large bags, and, 
 when needed, eaten strewed with salt by hand- 
 fuls. 
 
 Of four-footed animals and birds, the favoiuite 
 food were sheep, goats, oxen, and doves. There 
 are few traces of the eating of fish, at least in 
 Palestine (Num. xi. 5 ; Lev. xi. 9-22 J. In the 
 last passage a distinction is made between certain 
 fish which might be eaten, and others which were 
 forbi<iden. ' These shall ye eat of all that are in 
 the waters: whatsoever hath fins and scales in the 
 waters, in the seas, and in the rivers, them shall 
 ye eat ; and all that have not fins and scales, 
 tliey shall be an abomination unto you.' 
 
 The distinction of clean and unclean animals, 
 and of anunals whicli- might and those which 
 might not be eaten, is found to have existed to a 
 great extent in ancitnt Egy],t. Among fish the 
 oxyrinchus, the pliagrus, and the lepidotus, were 
 sacred, and might not even be touched. The 
 inhabitants of Oxyrinchus objected to eat any 
 fish caught by a hook, lest it should liave been 
 lefileil by the lilood of one they held so sacred. 
 The phagrus was the eel ; and the reason of its 
 ianctity, like that of the oxyrinchus, was jirobably 
 owing to its unwholesome qualities; the most 
 fffectual method of forbidding its use being to 
 
 FOOD. 
 
 Tit 
 
 a«sign it a place among the sacred animals of Ibe 
 ( oiuilry. 
 
 Neither the hi])poi>otamu» nor the crocodile aj*- 
 pears to have been eaten l)y the ancient Egyptians. 
 Some of llie E;;y))lians considered the crocodde 
 sacred, while oliiers made war upon it (Herod, ii. 
 69\ In Some places it was treatetl witii tiie ukmI 
 marked res|K'Cf, fed, attended, aihirned, and aflei 
 de.itii embaimed. But the |)eople ol'.\i)ollin(»j)i)liH, 
 Tentyris, Heracleopolis, antl other places, lulil 
 the animal in abhorrence : how far they carrieii 
 their dislike may be seen in Juvenal {Sat. xv.)\ 
 thougii something, i)robalily, must be deducte<l 
 from the accoimt, in consideration of j)(>etic 
 licence. 
 
 (Jats as well as dogs were held in high e^fec;!) 
 by tlie ancient Egyptians. The former especially 
 were objects of suiierstitious rei:ard. Wlien a cat 
 died in a house a natinal death, a general mourn- 
 ing throughout the family ensued ; and to kill 
 one of these revered animals was a capital 
 olVence. 
 
 Though it appears that swine frequently formed 
 part of the stock of an Egyptian I'aim-yard, yet 
 was the animal unclean and an abomination in 
 the estimation of the Egyjitians. Herodotus felU 
 us (ii. 47) that if any one but touched a pig in 
 j)assing, he was compelletl to bathe himself and 
 wash his garments; and those of the natives who 
 were swineherds were a degradeil caste, with 
 whom others would not intermarry. It ajiTjcars, 
 however, from the historian's narrative, that, at the 
 time when they sacrificed swine to the moon and 
 to Bacchus, the Egyptians were wont to eat ol 
 their llesh, though on other occasions they scriv- 
 pulously abstained from it. 
 
 Usages, if not laws, of a similar tendency, have 
 existed among all nations. In our own country 
 such usages are found. We ab^^tain from some 
 animals, we devour others. Often it would iw. 
 very difficult to assign any reason, still mote 
 difficult to assign a sufficient leason. The cat is 
 S])ared, the rabbit eaten. The beetle children tor- 
 ture, but value and preserve tlie lady-cow. A 
 Frenchman delights in a frog, but, in comaion 
 with an Englishman, loathes the idea of a rat. 
 C;i])rice, custom, and casual associations, have 
 often more to do in this matter than any definite 
 or intelligible reason. 
 
 The Mosaic laws which regulated the uie of 
 animal food may be iuund in Lev. xi. ami Deul. 
 xiv. The grounds of many of these re.;ulalions 
 may lie ascertained with a greater or less (ie.;ree 
 of probability, provided the student is well ac- 
 quainted with the mind and spirit of Hebrew 
 antiquity. Considerations drawn from iilolatious 
 usage-, regard to health, the fuitheratice of agri- 
 culture, and established customs and tistes, ha/1 
 in each case an infiiience in the promulgation <;f 
 the-'^e laws. 
 
 In the earliest times water was the common 
 drink. That wine of an intoxicating tendency 
 was drunk at a very early period appears froiri 
 what happened to Noah (Gen. ix. 20 ), who seems 
 to have made as well as drunk wine, liiead 
 and wine are spoken of in Gen. xiv. IS, as of!ered 
 for refreshment to Abraham by Melchizeil. k, king 
 of Salem. Water was sometinus put to tiie wine; 
 at others a strong drink was made by mixing with 
 the wine aromatic herbs (Ps. Ixxv. 9 ; Isa. v. 22), 
 or a decoctii^n derived from them; myrrh wa«
 
 v% 
 
 Toon. 
 
 Vited Tor (1 is )7nrp(isp. J>,ite-w!ii(! was in use, and 
 pTu.'iably llic K^yp'i'iii or tii;ilt-vvine, (^vOos. olvos 
 Kpldivos (II('iT)(l. ii. 77). Jt'iiinie ( 0pp. iv 301. ed. 
 Bened.) say^ flmt ' drink, called Siceia l)\ the He- 
 brews ("IDK', \n eveiy kind wliicli can inehiiate, 
 or tliat wliich is made fVoin grain, or of the juice 
 of ap])](>s. or wlien the iioney-cond) is made (deco- 
 qr.iiiitiir) into a s vect and liarhaious licveia;j;e, or 
 (he I'mit of ilje Dalm ex)iiej-;ed iiilo a licjiior, and 
 when water receives a colour and a consistency 
 from prej)ared lierhs.' 'The common ].'eople ' 
 (Maik xii. 37) drank an acrid soit of wine, 
 whicli is rendered vinegai in our Enu;lish Version 
 (Ruth ii. 11; Malt, xxvii. 48). The Orientals 
 frpqiiciitly used wine in ex<ess, so as to occasion 
 Jntoxic:ifii n, wlieiice are drawn many striking 
 fij^'iires in Holy ^Vlit (Is. v. II ; xxviii. 1 ; xlix. 
 9.fi ; Jer, xiii. 11: ix. 14; xvi.48; Dent, xxxii. 
 42; Ps.lxxviii.C5). Tliat indulgence in wine 
 was jn'actised in very ant'ient davs is manifest 
 from there beinjj in the court of Pliaraoh, at the 
 time of Jose)ih, statj-ofiicers, who had cliarge of 
 the wine, and served the monarch with it vvhen 
 he drank (Gen. xl^ 1, 11 ; comp. Neh. i. 11 ; 1 
 Kings X. 5 ; 2 Ciiron. ix. 4). 
 
 For drinking-vessels there were used the cup 
 and the bowl (Jer. xxxv. 5 ; Amos vi. 6 ; Exod. 
 XXV. 33 : Num. vii. 13, 84). The cup was gene- 
 rally ol' brass covered with tin, in form resembling 
 a lily, sometimes circular. It is still used by 
 
 288. [Wine-cups. Persepolis.] 
 
 travellers, and may be seen in both shapes in the 
 ruins of Persepolis (1 Kings vii. 26). The bowl 
 (Exod XXV. 33) assumed a variety of shapes, and 
 b'.'ars piany names. Some of these 'chargers' 
 appear, from the presents made by the princes of 
 Ismel (Num. vii.), to have been of large size and 
 great splendour ; some were silver, some gold (1 
 Kings X. 21). ^ 
 
 In Eastern climes the chief meal, or what we 
 term dinner, is, in consequence of the heai; of the 
 middle period of the day, deferred till tov/ards 
 e rening, a slight repast being taken before noon 
 
 - FOOD. 
 
 xliii. 16, 25, it a])pears to have been tlie custom fc 
 dincat noon in tiieihiysof rhep itriarchs. Tlie sam6 
 seems to have been the case in Palestine at a latei 
 period (1 Kings xx. 16; comp. Acts x. 10; Liik« 
 xi. 37)i. Convivialities, however, were j)ostjK)ned 
 till evening, and sometimes protracted to the 
 following morning (Isa. v. 11; JVIark vi. 21* 
 Luke xiv. 21). The meal was preceded by wash- 
 ing of iianils (Luke xi. 3S ; Mark vii. 2), which 
 the mode of eating rendered necessary ; and by 
 an invocation of the divine blessing (1 Sam. ix. 
 13), termed in Samuel nD"13, and in. Greek 
 fv\oyia, fuxapicTTia, Idessing, giving of thankj 
 
 289. [Egyptian Tahle with Dishes.] 
 
 Adam, Rom. Antiq. p. 377, ed. Major ; Potter, ii. 
 625; Chard ill, i v.; Jahn, i. 2j. But from Gen. 
 
 290. [Modern Syrians at Meat.] 
 
 (Luke ix. 16; John vi. llj. Similar customs 
 prevailed among the Greeks and Romans. Jahn 
 (^Bib. Antiq p. 68) has given tlie short ])rayer, aa 
 preserved in the Talmud, which tlie Jews usea, 
 as follows : ' Blessetl be fhou, O Lord our God, 
 King of the woild, wiio hast produced this food 
 (or this drink) from the eartii (or the vine) ' 
 (Matt. xiv. 19; xv. 36; xxvi. 27). 
 
 The Hebrews, like the Greeks and Romans in 
 their earlier history, ate silting (Gen. xxvii. 19; 
 Judg. xix. 6 ; 1 Sam. xx. 25). A carpet was 
 spread, on which the meal was partaken. At a 
 later period, however, j)articularly when Palestine 
 came under the inihience of Roman manners, ti)e 
 Jews reclined on cushions or couches (Esth. i. 
 6; Amos vi. 4; Luke vii. 37; aueK\lSr}, not 
 ' sat,' as in the common translation, but ' re- 
 clined'). The custom of giving preference in 
 point of seat or ])ositioii to guests of ijigh consi- 
 deration ap])ears from 1 Sam. ix. 22, to liave been 
 of ancient date (Amos iii. 12). In the time of 
 Christ (Luke xiv. 8) the Pharisees, always eager 
 for distinction, coveted tlie place of iionour at 
 meals aiirt feasts. Women were not admitted to 
 eat with the men, but had tlieir meals supplied in 
 their own private apartment (Esth. i. G-9). In 
 Babylon and Persia, however, females mingled 
 witli inales on festive occasions (Dan. v. 2). In 
 general the manner of eating was similar to what 
 it is in tlie East at the present day. Special car« 
 was taken of favoured persons (Gen. xliii. 34 ; 
 1 Sam. i. 4; ix. 22; John xiii. 26). Neither 
 knives, forks, nor spoons were employed for eating. 
 Tlie food was conveyed from the dish to the 
 mouth by tlie right hand. Tire jjarties sat w'jtb 
 their legs bent under tiiem round a dish placed 
 in the centre, and either took the flesh meat with 
 their fingers from th.e dish, or dijiped bits of theil 
 Ijread into the savoury me.ss, and conveyed theia
 
 FOOL. 
 
 FOREHEAD. 
 
 7U 
 
 to flieir mouilis. In Ruth il. H, Boaz says to 
 Ruth, 'Dip tliy morsel in the viiieL,'ai' ;' wliicli 
 explaiuij tlie laiiL,'ua;j;e of out Lord, John xiii. 26, 
 
 • He it is to whom 1 shall f,^ive a sop wlii'ii I have 
 dipped it." This ]iivsentinj; of food to a ])ersoii it 
 itill customary, and was desis^iied or.pjinally as a 
 mark of distinciion, tlie choice morsels heiiii; se- 
 lected hy the head of the family lor the purjjose. 
 Drink w;is handed to each one of the (,Miests in 
 ca])s or gohlets, and, at a very ancient period, in 
 a separate cup to each person. Hence the word 
 cup is useil as equivalent to what we term a 
 
 • •lan's lot or destiny (Ps. xi. G ; Ixxv. 8 ; Isa. 
 i. 22; Matt. xxvl. 39>— J. R. B. 
 
 FOOL. The fool of Scrijjture is not. an idiot, 
 but an absurd person ; not ene who does not 
 reason at all, but one who reasons wroni;; 
 also any one whose conduct is not reii;ulated l)y 
 the dictates of reasi)n and religion. Foolishness, 
 therefore, is not a privative condition, but a con- 
 dition of wrong action in the intellectual or 
 sentient being, or in lioth (2 Sam. xiii. 12, 13; 
 Ps. xxxviii.5). Li the Proverl)s, however, ' fool- 
 ishness ' ajijiears to be sometimes used for lack of 
 understanding, although more generally for per- 
 verseness of will. 
 
 FOOT. Of the various senses in whicli the 
 word ' foot' is used in Scriptme, the following are 
 the most remarkable. Such ])hrases as the 'slip 
 ping" of the foot, the 'stumbling" of the foot, 
 ' from head to foot' (to express the entire body), 
 and ' foot-steps" (to express tendencies, as when 
 we say of one that he walks in anothei 's footste[)s), 
 require no explanation, being common to most 
 languages. The extreme nodesty of the Hebrew 
 language, wiiich has perhaps seldom been suffi- 
 ciently a]))5reciated, dictated the use of the word 
 'feet,' to express the parts and the acts which it 
 is not allowed to name. Hence such phrases as 
 the ' iiair of the feet," the ' water of the i'eet," ' be- 
 tween the feet,' 'to ojieri the feet," 'to cover tlie 
 feet,' all of which are suthcieutly intelligible, 
 except peihaps the last, which certainly does not 
 mean ' going to sleep ' as some interpreters sug- 
 gest, but 'to dismiss the refuse of nature.' 
 
 ' To be under any one's feet' denotes the sub- 
 jection of a suljject to his soveieign, or of a ser- 
 vant to liis master (Ps. viii. 6 ; comp. Heb. ii. 8 ; 
 I Cor. XV. 2ti} ; and was, doubtless, derived 
 from the symbolical action of conquerors, who set 
 their feet upon the neck or body of the chiefs whom 
 they had vanquished, in token of their triumj]h. 
 This custom is expressly mentioned in Scripture 
 (Josh. X. 23), and is figured on the monuments 
 of Egypt, Persia, and Rome. See an instance 
 •in the cut No. 256. 
 
 In like manner, 'to be at any one's feet,' is 
 used for being at the service of any one, fol- 
 lowing him, or willingly receiving his instruc- 
 tions (Judg. iv. 10). The last passage, in which 
 Paul is described as being brought up 'at the 
 feet of Gamaliel,' will appear still clearer, if we 
 understand that, as the Jev/isli writers allege, 
 pupils actually did sit on the floor before, and 
 therefore at the feet of, the doctors of (be law, 
 wiio themselves were raised on an elevated 
 ■eat. 
 
 ' Lameness of feet' generally denotes affliction 
 or calamity, as in Ps. xxxv. 1."); xxxviii. 18; 
 Jet. XX. ID ; Micah iv. 6, 7 ; Zech. iii. 9. 
 
 ' To set one"s foot' iu a place signiiies to take 
 
 possession of it, as in Deut. i. 3G ; xi. 3i, and 
 
 elsfwliere. 
 
 'To w.iier wiih the feet" (Deut. xi. 10) injijli'ei 
 that the soil was watered witii as mucli ea.se a.s a 
 garden, in which the small channels for inigatioD 
 may be turne<i, &c. with the I'oot [(Jakukn j 
 
 An elegant j)lirase, l)orro.\ed from tlie I'eet, 
 occurs in Gal. ii. 1 I, wheie St. Paul says,' Wljeu 
 1 saw that tliey walked not upriglitiy' — liteTally. 
 ' not with a straight foot,' or ' did not foot it 
 straightly." 
 
 Nakedness of feet expressed mourning (Ezek. 
 xxiv. 17). This must mean appearing abuiad 
 with naked feet; for there is reiLson to think that 
 the Jews never used their sandals or shoes within 
 doors. The modern Orientals consider il dis- 
 respectl"ul to enter a room without taking oil" the 
 outer covering of their feet. It is with tiiem 
 equivalent to uncovering the head amoni; Eu- 
 ropeans. The practice of feet-washing implies 
 a simUar usage among the Hebrews [Fkkt, 
 \Vasuinq ok]. Uneo\eiing the feet was also a 
 maik of adoration. Woses put oil' his sandals to 
 ai)proac!i the burning where the ])reseiice of God 
 was manifested (Exod. iii. 5). Among the mo- 
 dern Orientals it woidd be regarded the height of 
 profanation to enter a ])lace of worshij) with 
 covered feet. The Egyjitian priests officiated 
 barefoot; and most commentators are of opinion 
 that the Aaronite priests serveil with bare feet in 
 the tabernacle, as, according to all the Jewish 
 writers, they did afterwards in the temple and 
 as the frequent washings of their feet enjoined 
 by the law seem to im])ly [S.\nu.\i-.s]. 
 
 The passage, ' How beautiful ujion the moun- 
 tains are the feet of liim that bringeth glad 
 tidings, that ])ublislieth jieace' (Isa. Iii. 7), ap. 
 pears to signify that, altiiough the feet of mes» 
 sengers and travellers are usually rendered dis- 
 agrt.'eable l)y the soil and dust of tlie way, yet the 
 feet of these blesse<l messengers seemed, notwith- 
 standing, even beautiful, on account of the glad 
 tidings which they bore. 
 
 Respecting the ' washing of feet,' see Ablution 
 and ^VASHINO. 
 
 FOREHEAD. Marks ujjon the forehead, for 
 the jiurpose of distinguishing the holy from the 
 profane, are mentioned in Ezek. xi. 4, and again 
 in Rev. vii. 3. These passages may be explainetl 
 by reference (o the customs of odier nations. 
 Thus the Rev. J. iMaurice, speaking of the riles 
 which must be perl'urmed iiy the Ilinuoos before 
 they can enterthe great jjagoda, says, 'an indispen- 
 sable ceremony takes jjlace, which can only be 
 ]ierformed by the hand of a lirahmin; anil that is, 
 the impressing of their foreheads uilh the tiluk, 
 or mark of dillerent colours, as they may belong 
 either to the sect of Veeshnu or Seeva. If the 
 temple be that of V^eeslinu, their foreiie.ids are 
 marked with a longitudizial line, and the colour 
 used is vermilion. If it be the temple of 
 Seeva, they are marked with a jiarallel line, and 
 the colour used is turmeric of sallVon. But ihese 
 two grand sects being again sub-divided into 
 numerous classes, both the siiie and the shape of 
 the tiiuk arej varied in jiroportion to their sujierior 
 or inferior rank. In regard to the tiluk I must 
 observe, that it was a custom of very ancient date 
 in Asia, to mark their servants. It is alluded to 
 in these words of Ezekiel, where the Almighty 
 commands his angels to ' Go through the midst
 
 714 
 
 FOREHEAD. 
 
 of the tity, and set a mark on the foreheads of 
 the men who sigli lor thealioininations committed 
 ID the midst tlieieof ' (ix. 4). 
 
 The classical idolaters used to consecrate them- 
 ■el\'es to particular deities on the same principle. 
 The marks used on tliese occasions were various. 
 Sometimes tliey contained the name of the god; 
 sometimes his particular ensign, as the thunder- 
 bolt of Jupiter, the trident of Neptune, the ivy of 
 Bacchus, &c. : or else they marked themselves 
 with some mystical number whereby the ^od was 
 describe<l. Thus, the sun, wlio was signified by 
 the number 60S, is said to have been rejiresented 
 by the two numeral letters XH. 
 
 If this analogy be admitted, the mark on the 
 forehead may be taken to be derived from the 
 analogous custom among the heathen of bearing 
 on their foreliead the mark of the gods whose 
 votaries tliey were. Some, however, woukl rather 
 understand the allusion to refer to the custom of 
 marking cattle, and even slaves, with the sign of 
 ownership [Stigmata]. 
 
 There has t)een much speculation respecting 
 the mark itself. It was a Jewish notion that it 
 was the letter n, because that was the first letter 
 of the Hebrew word min ' the law,' as if it 
 pointed out those who were obedient to the sacred 
 code; or because it was the first letter of the 
 word iTTin, ' tliou shalt live.' It is indeed 
 alleged that the angel had orders to write this 
 mysterious letter with ink upun the foreheads of 
 the righteous, and with blood upon the foreheads 
 of the wicked ; in the one case signif'ving, ' thou 
 ahalt live,' and in the otlier, ' thou shalt die.' The 
 early Christian commentators readily adopted 
 the notion that the mark was the letter fl, but 
 alleged that its form was that of a cross in the 
 old Samaritan alphabet, which was used in the 
 time of Ezt-kiel. Indetd t)oth Jerome and Origen 
 Jiutinctly allege that the letter still bore that 
 5orm in their time : and although the letter does 
 not retain that form in the jnesent Samaritan 
 alphal)et, there is certainly evidence of its being 
 
 represented on old coins by the character t; and 
 
 another proof arises from the fact of its being re- 
 
 FOREST. 
 
 presented by T in the Greek aljihi bet, which il 
 derived from the Phoenician. It having l)e«i 
 thus settled that the cljaiacter marked on the 
 forehead was the letter fl in its ancient cruciform 
 shape, it was easy to reach the conclusion that 
 the mark on the forehead denoted salvation by 
 the cross of Christ. 
 
 This is very ingenious; but there is no jiroof 
 that the mark was the letter Jl, or anj' letter al 
 all. The word employed is in tav, and means 
 simply a mark or sign (not a letter), and is sa 
 rendered in the Septuagint, tlie Tarf.-,iun, and bj 
 the best Jewish commentators. The 7iaine (if tii» 
 letter n is, however, probably from this word, and 
 in this fact we have {lerhaps the source of tht 
 conjecture. It is, however, a curious circum 
 
 stance that the anah)gous Arabic word (^»J de- 
 notes a mark in tlie form of a criras, wiiich was 
 branded on the flanks or necks of liorses and 
 camels (Freytag's Lex. Arab. s. v.). See Hil- 
 vernick's Conimentar. iiber Ezekiel, and Gill's 
 Exposition, on Ezek. ix. 4. 
 
 FORESKIN, the prepuce, which was taken off 
 in circumcision [Cikcumcision]. 
 
 FOREST. Tracts of wood-land are men- 
 tioned by travellers in Palestine, but rarely what 
 we should call a forest. The word translated by 
 'forest' is iy\ which does not necessarily mean 
 more than ' wood-land." There are, however, abun- 
 dant intimation? in Scripture that the country was 
 in ancient time.s much mure wooded than at pre- 
 sent, and in parts densely so. The localities more 
 particularly mentioned as woods or forests are — 
 
 1. The forest of cedars on Monnt Lebanon 
 (I Kings vii. 2; 2 Kings xix. 23 ; Hos. xiv. 5,6). 
 which must have been much moie extensive for 
 merly than at present ; although, on the assump 
 tion that the eres of Scripture (5J*"1K) is i\\epimt* 
 cedrus, or so-called ' cedar of Lebanon/ its 
 growth is by no means confineil, among those 
 mountains, to the famous clump of ancient trees 
 which has alone engaged the attention of travelleM 
 [EresJ. The American missionaries and others, 
 travelling by unfrequented routes, have found 
 woods of le.ss ancient cedar-trees in other places. 
 
 The name of ' House of the Forest of Le- 
 banon is given in Scripture (1 Kings vii. 3; 
 X. 27) to a palace which was built by Solomon 
 in, or not far frcm, Jerusalem, and which is sup- 
 posed to have been so called on account of the 
 quantity of cedar-trees employed in its con- 
 struction; or, perhaj)s, because the numerous 
 pillars of cedar-wood suggested the idea of a 
 fort st of cedar-trees. 
 
 2. The forest of oaks, on the mountains of 
 Bashan. The trees of this region have bn-n 
 already noticeil under Am.on and Bashan. 
 
 iJ. The forest or wood of Ephraim, already 
 noticed under Epiiuaim, 4. 
 
 4. The forest of Uareth, in the south of Judah, 
 to wliich David witlulrew to avoid (he fury of 
 Saul (1 Sam. xxii. 5). The precise situation is 
 unknown. 
 
 FoitKST is used synd)olicaily to denote a city, 
 kingdom, polity, or the like (Ezek. xiv. 26). 
 Devoted kingdoms are also represented under the 
 image of a forest, which God tlireatens to burn or 
 cut down. S^e Isa. x. 17, 18, 19, 31, where the 
 briers and tlorns denote the common people; 
 ' the glory of the forest' are the nobles arx 1 those
 
 FORNICATION. 
 
 of highest rank and importance. See also Isa. 
 xxxii. 19; xxxvii. '2t : Jer. xxi. 14; xxii. 7; 
 xlvi. 23; Zed), xi. 2. (VVeinyss's Clavis Sym- 
 bolica.) 
 
 FORNICATION. In Scripture this word 
 occurs more frequeiitly in its symbolical than in 
 its ordinary sense. 
 
 In the Prophets woman is often made tlie sym- 
 bol of the clmrch or nation of the Jews, «hicii is 
 regarded as aHiance<i to Jehovah hy tlie covenant 
 on Mount .Sinai. In Kzek. xvi. tiiere is a long 
 description of f iiat people under tlie symbol of a 
 female ciiild, growing up to tlie srature of a 
 woman, anii tiien wedded to Jehovaii by entering 
 into covenant with iiim. Tlierefore when the 
 Israelites acted contrary to that covenant, l)y 
 forsal<ing Gud and following idols, they were 
 very properly represented by the synilxd of a 
 harlot or adulteress, offering iierself to all comers 
 (Isa. i. 2; Jer. ii. 20; Ezek. xvi.; Hos i. 2; iii. 
 11). And thus fornication, or adultery ''which 
 is fornication in a married state), became, and is 
 used as, the symbol of idolatry itself (Jer. iii. 8, 9; 
 Ezek. xvi. 26, 29 ; xxiii. 37). See \Vemyss"s 
 ('lavis Synih., art. ' \yoman." 
 
 FORTIFICATIONS. < FENCED CITIES." 
 Inventions for the defence of men in social life 
 are older than history. The walls, towers, and 
 
 FORTIFICATIONS. 
 
 718 
 
 walls, like the Etruscan. Indeed, .Viiia Minor, 
 Armenia, Syria, and e\eu Jeriualem, still beat 
 
 S03. [a. Wet ditches.] 
 
 marks of this most ancient system, notwithstand- 
 ing that this rei^ion, the connet-ting link between 
 Asia and Africa, between the trade of the P2ast 
 and the West, and between the relgious feeling* 
 of the whole earth, has been the cotnmoii battle- 
 field of all the great nations of anticpiity, and of 
 modern times, where ruin and desolation, often- 
 times lepeated, have been suread over every habit- 
 able ])lace. Stones fiom six to lifty feet in 1cn'j:Th, 
 with suitable proportions, can still l)c detected in 
 many walls of the cities of those legions, \slierever 
 
 gates represented on Egyptian monuments, though 
 dating l)ack to a period of fifteen centuries before tlie 
 Clnistian era, bear evidence of an advanced state 
 of fortifications — of walls built of squared stones, or 
 of squared timber jutliciously placed on fiie smn- 
 m:t of scarped rocks, or witliin tlie circumference 
 of one or two wet ditches, and furnisheil on the 
 summit witli regular battlements to protect the 
 defenders. All these are of later invention than 
 the accumulation of unhewn or rudely -shipped 
 uiicemented stones, piled on each other in ti, form 
 of walls, in the so called Cyclopean, Pelasgian, 
 Etruscan, and Celtic styles, where there are no 
 ditches, or towers, or other gateways than mere 
 openings occasionally left between the enormous 
 blocks employed in the work. As the three first 
 •tyles occur in Etruria they show the jirogressive 
 advance of military architectiue, and may be 
 considered as more primitive, though ))crhaps pos- 
 terior to the era when the progress of Israel, under 
 the guidance of Joshua, expelleil several Canaan- 
 itish tribes, whose system of civilization, in com- 
 mon with that of the rest of Western Asia, l)ore an 
 Egyptian type, and wliose towers and battlements 
 were remarkably high, or rather were erected in 
 very elevated situations. When, therefore, the Is- 
 raelites entered Palestine, we may assume that the j.j_^ 
 'fenced cities' they had to attack were, according 
 
 to their degree of antiquity, fortified with more or quarries rxisted, from Nineveh, where beneath *t» 
 laes of art, but all witii huge stones in the lower surface there still remain ruins and walls of hug«
 
 716 
 
 FORTIFICATIONS, 
 
 itones, sciiliituieil with lias-reliefs, .iginally 
 painted, (o lidl)yloii, and Bassovah, wlieie Ir.-icks, 
 •uii-dried or baked, and stamped with letfeis, 
 are yet found, as well as in all the plains of tlie 
 rivers where that mateiial alone could be easily 
 procured. Tliewall, HDin chonia, was sometimes 
 double or triple (2 Chron. xxxii. 5), successively 
 giriling a rocky elevation ; and • building a city ' 
 originally meant the construction of the wall. 
 
 m^iaaa^ 
 
 
 Before wall-towers, n"l?T!lO migdaloth, were 
 introduced, the gate of a city, originally single, 
 formed a kind of citadel, and was the strongest part 
 of a.11 the defences : it was the armoury of the com- 
 munity, and the council-house of the authorities. 
 ' Sitting in the gate' was, and still is, synonymous 
 with the possession of power, and even now there 
 is commonly in the fortified gate of a royal palace 
 in the East, on the floor abo\e the door-way, a 
 council-room with a kind of balcony, whence the 
 sovereign sometimes sees his people, and where he 
 may sit in judgment. Hence the Turkish go- 
 vernment is not unfrequently termed the Porte, 
 and in this sense allusion to gates often occurs in 
 the Scriptures. The tower, TVyi tsaroch, was 
 another fortification of the earliest date, being 
 often tiie citadel or last retreat when a city was 
 taken ; or, standing alone in some naturally strong 
 position, was intended to protect a frontier, com- 
 mand a pass, or to be a place of refuge and deposit 
 
 of treasure in the mountains, when the plain should 
 be no longer defensible. Some of these are figured 
 among the Egyptian monuments, and in the west 
 of Englantl the round towers of Launceston, Res- 
 tormel, Trematon, and Pl)'mpton show that simi- 
 lar means of defence were once employed by tlie 
 Celtse of this island, who may have derived their 
 knowledge from Phoenician or Carthaginian tra- 
 ders. Watch-towers, ilDTJD mizpah., and n"'ruD te- 
 rah, niTD teroth, used by shepherds all over Asia, 
 And even now built on eminences above some city 
 in the plain, in order to keep a look-out upon the 
 distant country, were already in use and occa- 
 tiona'ly converted into places of defence (2 Chron. 
 sxri. 10 ; xxvii. 4). The gateways were closed 
 
 FORTIFICATIONS. 
 
 by ponderous folding doors, '1J?kJ' shaer, D*^yK* 
 shaerlin, the valves or folds, DTI/'T delcthim, 
 being secured by wooden bars : l>otli the doors 
 and bars were in after times plated with me-al. A 
 
 ditch, ?^n ?n /(a/, where the nature of the Utcality 
 required it, was dug in front of the rampart, and 
 sometimes there was an iinier wall, with a second 
 ditcli before it. .\s the experience of ages in- 
 creased, huge ' counter forts,' double buttresses, or 
 masses of solid stone and masonry (not bulwarks*^ 
 were built in particular parts to sustain the outei 
 wall, and afford space on the summit to place 
 military engines (2 Chnin. xxvi. 15). 
 
 As there was no system of construction strictly 
 so called, but simply an apjilication of the means 
 of ilefence to the localities, no uniformity of 
 adaptation existed, and, therefore, we refej to 
 No. 292 of our illustrations, representing some pri- 
 meval fable of the rats besieging the cats in their 
 strong tower, where regular hewn courses of stones 
 in the walls show skill in structure, and the in- 
 clined jambs of the door, with double impott. 
 
 experience in obviating a too great pressure from 
 above. In the following cut (No. 299), taken from 
 another Egyptiaii work, we have a series of lowers, 
 that in the middle being evidently the citadel or 
 keep, and a gateway indicating that the wall is 
 omitted, or is intended by the lines of the oval 
 surrounding the whole. In No. 292 there is a 
 scaling-ladder. In No. 299 we see a regular laba- 
 rum, the most ancient example extant of this form 
 of ensign, and the towers are manned wiin armed 
 soldiers. In No. 293, another towered fortress, 
 garrisoned with troops, is surrounded by a double 
 ditch, and approached by bridges, both in front 
 and rear. This representation refers to a city 
 in Asia, attacked by one of the Egyptian con- 
 quering kings, anterior to the rise of the Assyrian 
 and Babylonish power. No. 295 is taken from 
 a seal, and is a symbol of Babylon, where (he 
 city, sustained by two lions, is shown standing 
 on both sides of the Euphrates, having an outer 
 wall ; the inner ramjiart is flanked by numerous 
 elevated and embattled towers. There is another, 
 but less antique representation of Babylon, witV 
 its lions and towers, &c. ; but the battlements 
 are squared, not pointed, as in the first. Not very 
 different from these double walls are those repre 
 sented in the Egyptian painting copied in No. 296 
 The towers are here crowded with soldiers, sofn* 
 
 * Bulwark, from the Dutch bohoerk, anciently 
 called a mound, and in the sixteenth century al« 
 ways referable to bastion. Buttresses of the kind 
 above mentioned still exist in the Celtct-Romaa 
 walls at Pevensey in Sussex.
 
 FORTUNATUS. 
 
 *f wKom, from the form of tiieir sliiclils, are ob- 
 riouiil)' Ej-'Vptiiiiis. Tliese are suflicicnt to give a 
 
 FROG. 
 
 717 
 
 jfpneral idea of cities fenced cntiiely I'V mt ; l)nt in 
 No 297 weu^ive tlicTsarocii tower, taken from one 
 still extant in Persia, showing; a ditcii and gate- 
 way iieK)W in tlie monnd or rock, its douhleouter 
 walls and inner keep, very like Lannceston castle. 
 Tliis was the kind of citadel wliicli defended 
 passes, and in the monntaiiis served for retreat in 
 times of calamity, and for the security of tlie royal 
 treasures; and it was on account of tlie confined 
 sjiace within, and the great elevation of the ram- 
 parts, tliat private houses frequently stood <ipon 
 their summit, as was the case when the harlot 
 Raiiab received Joshua's spies in Jeiicho (Josh. 
 ii. 1).— C. H. S. 
 
 FORTUNATUS (iovprovvuTos), a disciple of 
 Corinth, of Roman iiirth or oriL,nn, as his name 
 indicates, who visited Paul at E])hesiis, and re- 
 turned, along with Stejihanus and Achaicus, in 
 charge of that apostle's lirst Epistle to the Corin- 
 taian cluirch ; B.C. 59 (1 Cor. xvi. 17). 
 
 FOU^'TAIN, a stream of 'living' or con- 
 itantly running water, in opposition to standing 
 or stagnant jwols, whetlier it issues immediately 
 from the ground or from the bottom of a well 
 [Ain]. Oi> the more remarkable natural foun- 
 tains of Palestine, see Spuimgs ; Water. 
 
 From the value of such sup]jlies of water in 
 arid counfiies, fountains (igure much in the 
 poetry of tlie East as the natural images of peren- 
 nial blessings of various kinds. In the Scrij)tines 
 fountains are made the symliols of refreshment to 
 tlie weary, and also denote the perpetuity and in- 
 exhaustible natuie of the spiritual comforts which 
 God imparts to his peojile, wliether by the inllu- 
 ences of the Spirit, or Ihrough the ordinances of 
 public worship. There are also various texts in 
 which children, or an e.xtendetl posterity, are, by a 
 beautifully apt image, described as a foimtain, 
 tnd the fatlier or jirogenitor as the source or spring 
 from which that fountain flows (Deut. xxxiii. 28; 
 Ps. Ixviii. 26 ; Piov. V. 16, IS ; xiii. U, &c.). - 
 
 FOWL [Bird; Cock]. 
 
 FOX. [Shuai..] 
 
 FRANKINCEXSE [Lebonah]. 
 
 FROG. V'ill^'^ izfiphardca ; Atah. akurralc } 
 Gr. ^arpaxos (Exod. liii. 2). Although the com- 
 mon frog is so well known tliat no description is 
 needed to satisfy the reader, it may 1)6 necessary 
 to mention tliat the jnly species recorded as exist- 
 ing in Palestine is the gieen (liana csndenta), 
 and that of all the authorities we have been aide 
 to considt, Dr. Richardson alone refers the species 
 »( Egypt to the green speckled grey frog (liana 
 punctata). ]i\it consideiing the immense extent 
 of *he Nile from south to north, and the amazing 
 abundance of lli^se animals w lich it contains in 
 Uts state of spawn, tadpole, and complete frog, it 
 
 is likely that (he speckled is not tiie only s] eciei 
 found in il.s waters, and that dillcien' ejiecics, if 
 tiiey do not occur in the same locality are at leatt 
 to be mel willi in dillirenf lalitmies. .^tork.? and 
 other waders, togellier with a multitude of vari- 
 ous enendes, somewhat restrain their increase, 
 which, nevertheless, at the sjiawniug seiison is sc 
 enormous llial a bowl can scaicely liedipiied into 
 the water without iuuiiediateiy (umlaimng a num- 
 ber of tadpoles. The spe<:k led species is found 
 westward even to the noilh f France, but is not 
 common in Europe, and divs not appear to cioak 
 in concert on tliis side o) the Mediterianean : 
 most likely it is not noisy in Ei^ypt, since M 
 Si'iinini, who wrote a detailed hstory of the 
 Batiachi.ins, and was jiersonaily well acipiainieil 
 with the Nile, does not nienii, n this s| ecie.«. It 
 is lively, but no strong swimmer, ilie webs on the 
 hinder toes extending only hiilf their length : 
 hence, peihajis, it is more a terrestrial animal than 
 the common green fiog, an<l, like the laown si e- 
 cies, is given to roam on land in luoist weather. 
 
 Although it is very hazardous, in transactions 
 of an absolutely miraculous nature, to attempt 
 to ])oint out the instruments that m ly have served 
 (o work out the ])ur};oses of the Almighty, wc 
 may conjecture that, in the plague of fiogs, a 
 species, the one perhaj)s we have just men- 
 tioned, was selected for its agility (in land, and 
 that, although the fact is not expressly men- 
 tioned, the awful visitation was n ndered still 
 more ominous by the presence of dark and rainy 
 weather — an atmosjiheric condition never of long 
 duration on the coast of Kgyjit, and giatlually 
 more and more rare u)) the coiuse of the liver. 
 We have ourselves witncssetl, during a stoim of 
 rain, frogs crowtling into our cabin, in the low 
 lands ot Guiana, till they were j'aeked uji in the 
 corners of the ajiartmoil, and continually falling 
 back in tlieir attempts to iiscend above tlieii 
 fellows; and the door could not be o]ieiied with- 
 out others entering more rajiiilly than lliose within 
 could be expelled. Now, as the temples, palaces 
 and cities of Egy])t stood, in gmeial, on the edge 
 of the ever dry de>ert, and always above the level 
 of the highest inundations, to be llieie visited by 
 a continuation of immense number of frogs was 
 assuredly a most distressing calamity; and as this 
 phenomenon, in its oidinaiy oecinrence within 
 the tropics, is always acconi])anied by (hestoims 
 of the monsoon or of tiie setlin'^' in of the rainy 
 season, (he dismay it must have caused may be 
 judged of when we reflect that the plague occurieil 
 where rain seldom or never fall.s, wlieie none ol 
 the houses are fitted to lead oil the water, and t!ia. 
 the animals ajijK'ared in hx-alities w'lere they had 
 never before been found, and where, at all otl.er 
 times, the scorching sun would have dealrcyed
 
 718 
 
 FRUITS. 
 
 tneni in a few minutes. Nor was the selection of 
 the frog as an instrument of God's displeasuie 
 without portentous meaning in the minds of the 
 idolatrous Egyptians, who, considered tiiat ani- 
 mal a tyjie ol Ptliah — tlieir creative power — and 
 also an indication .f man in emliryo. The ma- 
 gicians, indeed, appeared to make frogs come up 
 out of the waters; hut we must not understand 
 that to liiem was given also the power of pro- 
 ducing liie animals. The ell'ect which tliey 
 claimed as tiieir own was a simple result of the 
 continuation of the pn digy etl'ected by Moses 
 and Aaron ; for that tli. y had no real power is 
 evident, not only fuim ti eir inability to stop tlie 
 present plague, the control which even Pharaoh 
 discovered to be solely in the hands of iVIoses, but 
 also the litter failtue of their encliantments in that 
 3f lice, wtiere their artilices were incomj)etent to 
 impose ujxjn the king and liis people. — C. H. S. 
 FRONTLETS [rHYi.AciEiiiEs]. 
 
 FRUITS. ^"IS peri, fruit in general, vege- 
 table or animal (Deut. vii. 13, it's; xxviii. 51, 
 bis). It originated the English word ' fruit,' 
 oy tlie S being sounded as ph, and sulisequenfly 
 converted into f. Uniler this lK?ad may perliaps 
 be most ap])roi)riately noticed a classilication of 
 produce of great importance to a right under- 
 standing of the Bible, since tlie beauty and force 
 of more tlian fort}' passages of the sacred record 
 are impaired .by inattention to it. We propose 
 to show tliat the Hebrews had three generic 
 terms designating three great classes of the fruits 
 of tlie land, closely coiresponding to what may be 
 expressed in English as, 1. Cvrn-frui\. or field 
 produce; 2. ViuUtge-fruit ; 'i. Orchard-fruit. 
 
 The term V*"'p kai/its, ' summer-fruits," ap))ears 
 to denote tliose less important species of fruit 
 which were adapted only to immediate consump- 
 tion, or could not be easily or conveniently con- 
 served for winter n ;e (Jer. xl. 10, 12). Katjiis 
 may have lieen included as a species under the 
 head of Orchard-fiult : it would seem to iiKlicafe 
 either the existence of some contrasted term, as 
 winter-fruits,' or to imply that the product.s of 
 the cliiss under winch it ranked as a species were 
 genera'ly di.stinguislied by their capability of 
 being ])reserved throughout the year. It is con- 
 ceived that the products denoted by the tiiird 
 of the generic terms now to he considered, were 
 chiefly chaiacterized l)y (heir capacity of l)eing 
 stored up and preserved like our own orchard- 
 fruit ; and thus their generic name might be in- 
 clusive of kai/tts, ' summer-fruifs,' though mainly 
 and (jriginally referring to ' winter-iruits.' The 
 three terms spoken of as lieing so fiequently asso- 
 ciated in the Scri[)tures, and expressive of a most 
 comprehensive triad of blessings, are Dagan, 
 TluosH. and YiTZHAii. 
 
 1. pT (kii/au, ' fruit of the field,' or agricul- 
 tural produce. Undtr this term the Hebrews 
 classed almost every oliject of j^e^c^ culture [.\gki- 
 cli.tijue]. Dr. Jahn says, ' the word is of ge- 
 neral signification, and comprehends in itself 
 ditlerent kinds of grain and pulse, such as wheat, 
 millet, spelt, wall-barley, barley, beans, lentils, 
 meadow-cumin, jieiiper-wort, flax, cotton, various 
 species of the cucumber, and )ieiha]is rice' {Bib, 
 Autiq. ^ ."JS). TiK"" is now no doul)t among 
 scholais that dagan comprehends the largest and 
 B) >st V iluahle species of vgetable produce; and 
 
 FRUITS. 
 
 therefore it will be allowed that the rendering of 
 the word in the common version i)y ' corn,'' and 
 sometimes by ' tvheat^ instead of ' every species 
 of corn^ or field ])roduce, tends to limit our 
 conceptions of the Divine bounty, as well as to 
 impair the beauty of the passages wliere it occurs. 
 The same objection may be urged against the 
 ordinary rendering of the associated terms, tirosh 
 and yitzhar, as ' wine and oil.' Indeed, it is 
 somewhat surprising that the almost universal 
 acknowledgment of dagan as a very generic 
 term has not, ere this, induced the l.earned io 
 question the accuracy of this rendering of the 
 sister terms, since it is neither usual nor natural, 
 except by way of climax, to commingle very 
 generic or abstract terms with names of specific 
 articles, much less cotistantly to a5.sociate a ge- 
 neral class of natural produce with particular 
 articles of artificial preparation. In reading of 
 * a land of every species of corn,' we should na- 
 turally expect the declaration to continue con- 
 sistently, ' of grapes and of fruit :' when, there- 
 fore, the transition is suddenly from growing 
 ' corn of every kind' to specific and prepared 
 products, 'wine' and ' oil,' a suspicion is raised 
 as to tiie correctness of the rendering, which 
 resolves itself into absolute certainty on con- 
 sulting and comparing the passages of the He- 
 brew text. The in frequency of the mention of 
 gra])es and raisins, the natural or solid ' fiuit of 
 tlie vine,' in our version of the Scriptures, as 
 compared with wine, the liquid preparation, has 
 been a subject of reniark. It is true that V» 
 yayin [VVinb] is sometimes employed in tlie 
 sense of grajjes (as Cato and others of the Latins 
 use vinum), and in this use of the word ' a land 
 of corn and wine' really means, what Palestine 
 was, ' a land of corn and grapes ;' but this se- 
 condary and accommodated use 'of the term 
 yagin does not supersede the necessity for a more 
 generic word expressive of ' vintage-fruit,' viewed 
 not merely as the -t/ielder of wine, but as a valu- 
 able ]!o-sessioii in itself. 
 
 2. t^lTn tirosh, * the fruit of the vine' in its 
 natural or its solid state, comprehending grapes, 
 moist or dried, and the fiuit in general, whether 
 in the early cluster or the mature and ripened con- 
 dition (Isa. Ixv. 8, which is lendered by ^oTpvX, 
 grape, in the Septuagint, refeis to the youug 
 grape; while Judg. ix. 13, where ' the vine said, 
 Shall 1 leave my tirosh (liuit* which cheeietli 
 God and man'?' as evidently relers to the ripened 
 produce wliich was placed on the altar as a tust- 
 fruit offering in grateful acknowledgment of the 
 Divine goodness). ' Sometimes," says Dr. Jahn, 
 ' the grajies weie dried in the sun and preserved in 
 masses, which were called D33y gwnabhi/n, 
 ''t/*"'C'N eshishah, D^plOV tzmnnookini, 1 Sam. 
 XXV. 18; 2 Sam. xvi, 1; 1 Chron. xii.lO; Hos. 
 iii. 1 ' {Bib. Antiq. 6 t)9). Tirosh is derived 
 from tlie verlial noun ti'1* yarash, ' to possess liy 
 inheritance ' (whence Latin hares, English kcir }, 
 and was very naturally applied to de^igllate the 
 vintage- fruit, which, next to dagan, constituted 
 one of the most valuable ' possessions ' of tlie 
 Jews. 
 
 It is also distinctly rel'erred to as the yielder of 
 wine, and theiefore was uiit wine itself, but tiie 
 raw mateiial from which it was expiess'>d or pre- 
 ])areil. Dr. Conquest's amended translation of 
 Micah vi. 15, is, * Thou ghalt itow, f<ut ihuu si<^t
 
 /RUITS. 
 
 cot reap, thou s'halt tread the olives, but thou 
 ihalt not anoiiu thee with oil (shenicn, not 
 yitzhar); and the (/rape {tiiosh), but shalt not 
 drink wine" {ijayin). As the trciulin^ of the 
 olice is rejjieseuted as yielding oil, so is tlrosli re- 
 presented as tliat which, being trodU -w in the vat, 
 should yield tcinc, which flowed out from an 
 opening into the laciis or recejitacle l)eneatli. 
 A.rclil)i.shop Newconie, in his version of this text, 
 ti,i%' thb grape vf tiie choice wine ;' wliile Julius 
 Bale, M.A. observes on this passaf^e— ' Hence it 
 is plain that titosh is what is pressed, the (/rapes ' 
 (^Critica Hebrcea, 1767). 
 
 Dr. Jahn apjilies tirosh to the juice whicli flows 
 from the {jrajie-vat into the lower receptacle, and 
 says, it is also called tieio wine and yXevKos 
 (Acts ii. 13). This view, however, will, on ex- 
 amination, be found erroneous, opposed liy tiie 
 clear eviilence of the context in the great bulk of 
 tii« passages where the word occurs, classed with 
 corn, first-i'ruits. titiies, and other natural pro- 
 duce, and countenanced only by its association 
 with an equivocal rendering in two ])laces. Joel 
 ii. "24, tlie (irst of these texts, ' .the lioors siiall be 
 full of wheat, and the vats shall overflow witlj 
 tirosh,' cannot be understood of the juice of the 
 jjrape, but must refer to the fruit itselt". It is 
 most certain that grapes weie put into the vat, 
 not wine. Tlie wine (lowed oat tiuough an 
 orifice into the receiving vessel, as tlie grapes 
 were being trodden. These vats were very large, 
 and were the tieader to be j)laced in one so full 
 tliat tUe juice would overflow tlie brim, he would 
 be incapable of treading tiie grapes, if not ac- 
 tually in danger of sull'ocation [A'at]. The 
 text presents a striking contrast to tlie picture of 
 drought and desolation described in tlie preceding 
 chapter, and represents, not only that the jieople 
 slioi Jd he sati^Jied with dagan, tirush, and yitzhar 
 (ii. \9), but more than satislied ; for the floors 
 usually devoted to threshing ci/in should be 
 full of 13 (the best species of corn already 
 threshed), and the vats (vessels nut designed as 
 stores for fruit, and which are incunveiiient for 
 treading when overfilled) should be heaped up 
 will) vintage and winter fruit so full that it wouhl 
 roll off to the ground, since they could hold no 
 more. In the same sense we freijueutly emjiloy 
 the word '■ overjivic," as, for exauijile, ' The house 
 was tilled to overflowing.' A similar picture of 
 plentj' occurs in Prov. ii. 9, 111, where the grajie- 
 vats are to be tilled even to bursting, wliicli cer- 
 tainly cuinot mean that the wine shall be wasted! 
 isa. Ixii. R, 9 is the second text favouring a liquid 
 interpretation of tirosh The hitter verse is thus 
 translated by Dr. Lowth — ' They that reaji the 
 Harvest shall eat it, and praise Jehovah ; and they 
 tliat, ^«.'Aej- the vintage shall drink it in my sacred 
 couits.' He justly observes that this has reference 
 to the Law of Moses (Deut. xii, 17, 18 ; Lev. xix. 
 2>-2r>), which comiu.uids the Israelites to cat 
 {achai) the tithe of their dagnn, tirosh. and yilzltar 
 befoie tlie ?l,ord, and, when they have planted all 
 si^nrier of liees for food, to count the Iriiit as uii- 
 circumcised for three years, then in the fouith year 
 all the fruit thereof shall be holy to praise llie Lord, 
 anii in the liflh they shall cat (achul) the fruit. 
 ' liiis/ says Dr. Lowth, ' clearly explains the 
 Jorce of rlie expiessions, " Shall prai-e Jehovah, 
 and .si.ali drink it in my sacred courts"' The 
 H>pareiit oj))osition between the passages will l>e 
 
 FRUITS. 
 
 7lt 
 
 removed by understanding shathnh, whii;. pri- 
 marily signifies ' to drink,' in its secondary sense 
 of to suck.' It is thus ap])ro])riately rendered 
 in the Prayer Ihiok version of Ps. Ixxv. 8. On 
 a similar principle we modify the meaning of ' to 
 ea(,' when we speak of 'eating an orange;' thus 
 too tlie Latins derived their generic word for 
 fruits, ;>ow!J«m, from Trw^o, drink ; a<id their name 
 for the fruit of the service-tree from sorbere, 'to 
 suck.' Dr. Lowth fuither adds, that ' five MSS. 
 (one ancient) have in"l/3V fully expressed, 
 and so likewise 1^1^1t^'* is found in nineteen MSS., 
 three of them ancient.' Supposing t/ishtoohoo \o 
 be the original reading, the alteration to yoicch- 
 loohoo must have been m.ide by the ancient 
 copyist under the iiiqiressioii which a)>peais also 
 to have rested on Dr. Lowth "s mind, that a mode 
 of consuming the fruits of the vintage different 
 from drinking, was here designed by the use of 
 shaihah. This view is confirmed by the use of 
 the verb V3p kabhats (the jiarticiple of which is 
 translateil, ' They that have brought it together'), 
 which implies the collecting of scattered things 
 into a heap. 
 
 Dr. J.ihn's definition of tirosh, as the juice 
 which flows from the trodden graiies, is ahso 
 negatived by the fact that another word exactly 
 expressive of the same thing, already exists, 
 namely, D''Dy ausis, from ausas, ' to Iiead down 
 together.' Neither is it likely that it should lie 
 a generic name for wine, since sucli a term is 
 found in J** yayin. 
 
 3. '^iT!f* y/^j/iar, * orchard-fruits,' especially 
 winter or kee]iing fruits, as dates, figs, olives, 
 pomegranates, citrons, nuts, &c. The eiymology 
 
 of yitzhar (whence perliaps the Saxon onCTeajib 
 
 ortgeard, and the old English word hortsyard, 
 now orchard) quite accords with the claim ad- 
 vanced for i(, as denoting a large and valuable 
 class of fruits. Lexiconists jiroperly lefer it to 
 the loot *1^^{ tzhar, exjiressive of a blight, glow- 
 ing, and shining a])pearance. The name of the 
 class was obviously suggested iiy the bright anil 
 glowing hue jiresented by many of the sjiecies, 
 as the olive, the Matron, ami the orange. The 
 name for tiie olive, H^T, sometimes called ' (he 
 s])lendour-tree,' originated in a similar way, the 
 root being H, ' biight,' 'sjilendid.' The name of 
 another of the class, the orange, had a similar 
 origin. The Latin aiirantiitm, from aurum, 
 'gold,' by a slight change of spelling became the 
 Italian arnncia, whence, through the Pioveni^al, 
 the French oiange. Through (he Syro-Aiabia;i 
 channel we trace (he Suracenic and Spanish 
 name for the orange-flower, azahar, wiiicli 'jjio- 
 bably sjiiang from sotne common stem with the 
 Hebiew tzahar. Thus, Um, owronfh, 'pot-heibe," 
 menus ^ shining thi)igs of a grceni.di line,' (lom 
 miN, ' light, ' lirighlness;' wliencealso the Latin 
 name for gold, aurum, (he Freiicii or, and our 
 woid for .'•hining metals, ore. 
 
 As we distinguish dagun from hitittahh (wheat), 
 and tirouli from niisis And yayin, tin mu>( we 
 yitzhar froiri |CE^ siievieri, 'oil,' which are uii 
 fortuiialely conlunnded together in llie commun 
 version. Shctncn. beyond c^'-.iestion, is (he ]iiot)»r 
 wold for oil, nol yitzhar: lieni-e, being a specific 
 thing, we (ind it in connection wiih a great 
 vaiiety i(f specific pur))ose«, as sacrilii ial ana 
 holy uses, e<'ibles, trufiic, vessels, and used iu
 
 720 
 
 FRUITS. 
 
 ninsfration of tcite, sniootliness, pluiiipiics!S, in- 
 liliuatiun, comJition, fertility, and Inxury. Yitz- 
 her, as to (he iiioile of its use, jireseiits a comjilete 
 contrast to shemen. It is not, even in a single 
 passage, employed either by way of comparison, 
 or in illustratidii of any parlicnlar quality com- 
 mon to It with (jther specilio ai tick's. In one 
 passage only is it joined witli n"'T zai/ith, ' oli\e, 
 the oil of which it has been crioneously supposed 
 to signify; and even here (2 Kings xviii. 32) it 
 retains as an adjective the generic sense of the 
 noun, ' preserviiiff-i'mxt.' It should be read, 'a 
 land of prescrvin(/-oViVfs (zaijifJi. i/itzAar) and 
 dates {dehhash);' Cato has a similar expression, 
 oleam cundaua.m, ' jireserviiig-olive-tree ' [De 
 lie Bust. vi.). It may be observed that the 
 Latin terms malum and pomum had an ex- 
 tended meaning very analogous to the Hebrew 
 yitzhar. Thus \'ano asks, ' Non arl)oribus con- 
 sita Italia est, ut totA pomariuni videatur'^' ' Is 
 not Italy so planted with fruit-trees as to seem 
 one entire pomariuitiV i. e. orchard (Z>e Re 
 Rustica, i. 2). 
 
 Thus the triad of terms we have been con- 
 sidering would comprehend every vegetable sub- 
 stance of necessity and luxury commonly con- 
 sumed by the Hebrews, of which first-fruits were 
 presented or tithes paid ; and this view of their 
 meaning will also exj)lain why the injunctions 
 concerning offerings and tithes were sutficiently 
 expressed by these terms alone (Num. xviii. 12, 
 Deut. xiv. 23). Had dar/an in these texts been 
 restricted to tc/ieat, no oliligation would thereby 
 have been imjKised to jnesent tlie first-fruits or the 
 tithes of barley and other grain : had tirosh sig- 
 nified grape-juice, then this law could have been 
 easily evaded by drying the fruit as raisins, or 
 preserving it in other ways ; and had yitzhar sig- 
 nified oil, it would have lieen diflicult at all, and 
 from these texts impossible,' to educe the obligation 
 to pay tithes or present first-fruits of a large and 
 most valuable class of products, as date.', citrons, 
 pomegranates, &c. But these texts are the most 
 definite we can find in relation to the subject, and 
 are evidently designed to be very comprehensive; 
 and, consequently, as tithes rccrc paid of all those 
 fruits, the practice must interpret these expressions 
 as iticluding, 1st. Fruits of the field or land ; 
 2iid. Fruits of the vintage; and, 3rd. Fruits of 
 the orcliard, including both summer a-iid jire- 
 serving fruits. 
 
 In conclusion, we will briefly recapil"ulate the 
 results of our examination of the Scripture pas- 
 sages referring to Dagan, T(rosh, and Yitzhar, 
 and exhibit their relative positions : — 
 
 a. They are found mutually associated in nine- 
 teen places. Dagan occurs with tirush alone 
 eleven times , with yayin only once, and there 
 (Lam. ii. 12) yayin is used for grapes. Tirosh 
 cccui-s thirty-eight times; in thirty places it is 
 associated with the confessedly generic word 
 dagan; in twenty-one with yitzhar; and it is 
 found only six times without either dagan or 
 yitzhar. 
 
 b. Tirosh occurs seven times with rayshyth 
 or biccoicr, 'first-fruits;' ten times with teroob- 
 hah, ' otlerings,' or tiiagnasayr, ' tithes,' which 
 wena mainly the first of gathered fruits and grain 
 'n their natural state. 
 
 c. Tirosh is cotmected with yayin in three pas- 
 ng«f cBily ; twice by w?v of climax mer^;' 
 
 FULLER. 
 
 (Hos. iv. 11; Is. xxiv. 7-10), and once (Mic 
 •/'i. 1.5) as the yielder of wine, not wine itself. 
 
 d. Tirosh is not directly united with shemen 
 (oil) in a single place. 
 
 e. The three teims are constantly and closely 
 connected with cxpiessions indicating increase of 
 vegetable p'oduce, or tlie spontaneous grow'h of 
 the iruits of tlie earth, or the iiicrea.se ol'objecis of 
 culture, esjiecially the fiuits of the field and the 
 vineyard : they also occur 'u cmnecfion with 
 terms expressive of fr^ital or 4;uinal jjrodfice, 
 sometimes with the vine, olive, fig, or jiahn tree, 
 but scarcely ever w'*!; their specific fruit, oi- wi^V 
 particular articles of diet ; still more rarely are 
 they connected with terms evincing the process of 
 preparing or preserving ihem, or the vehicle or 
 mode of their consumption. In all these rej]>ecfs 
 they ]iresent a complete contrast to terms de- 
 noting specific products or artificial jjreparation;', 
 as zayith (olive), shemen (oil), yayin (wine), oi 
 lehhem (food or bread). 
 
 f. In the very rare instances in which they do 
 occur in connection with specific articles or cir- 
 cumstances, special reasons obviously exist for the 
 fact, confirmatory of *he view advanced as to their 
 generic signification. The exceptions prove tb^ 
 rule. 
 
 g. Lastly, though the three terms are employed 
 throughout a period of one thousand years (Num. 
 xviii. 12, B.C. 14S9, to Neh. xiii. 12, b.c. 409) 
 by a series of foo.rteen authors, the bulk of whom 
 also use yayin and shemen, occasionally in con- 
 junction, yet not in one instance have they crossed 
 tirosh with shemen, or yayin with yit~har. On 
 the contrary, the triad of generic terms have Ijeen 
 cautiously and correctly discriminated from 
 words merely denoting s()me of their species, or 
 artificial preparations from them. — F. R. L. 
 
 FULLER. At the transfigurati. ., our Sa- 
 viour's robes are said to have been wniLe. ' so as 
 no fuller on earth could white them ' (Mark ix. 3). 
 Elsewhere we read of ' fullers" soap ' (Mai. iii. 2), 
 and of 'the fullers' field' (2 Kings xviii. 17). 
 Of the processes followed in the ait of cleaning 
 cloth and the various kinds of stuff among the 
 Jews we have no direct knowledge. In an early 
 part of the operation they seem to have trod the 
 cloths with their feet, as the Hebrevv Ain Rugel, 
 or En-rogcl, literally Foot-fountain, has been ren- 
 dered, on Rabbinical authority, ' Fullers' foun- 
 tain,' on the ground that the fullers trod the clo'.tw 
 tliere with their feet. A subsequent operation was 
 
 y^. 
 
 probably that of rubbing the cloth on an inclined 
 plane, in a mode which is figured in the Kgj-pt.vie 
 paintings, and still preserve(i in tiie East. 
 
 FULLERS" FOUNTAIN [En-Roqel]. 
 
 FULLERS' SOAP fBoiMTiil. 
 
 FUNERALS [Bluiai.; MouuminqJ
 
 GAAI, 
 
 GABBATII.V. 
 
 7M 
 
 \ 
 
 G. 
 
 GAAL (?y|, mUcarrtarje ; Srpt. ToAk), son 
 of Klied. He wpriT l«> Slieclinu witli liis brothers 
 wlien ilie iiili.iljilants became discontented with 
 Al>imelecli, and so enf!;a,'e<l their Cdiiliilence that 
 they placed iiini at tlieir head. At tiio festival at 
 which the Shechcniites dlVei-ed tlie (iist-fmits of 
 their vintatje in the teni))le of Haal, Gaal. by A\y- 
 parently (iViinken bravailoes, ru-ed the valoui of 
 the jieople, and strove yet more to kindle tlieir 
 wrath a;;ainst the absent Abimelcdi. It would 
 Keem as if llie natives had been in some way inti- 
 mately connected with, or (h^scended from, the 
 ori^'inal inhabitants ; tor Ga^il eiideavoined to 
 awaken their attachtnint to the ancient funily of 
 Ilainor, the f.iiher of Shecheni. wiiich ruled the 
 place in tiie time of Aliraham (Gen. xxxiv. 2, G',, 
 and which seems to tiave been at tliis time repre- 
 sented by GluiI and liis lirotliers. Althou;^h de- 
 prived of SI lecliem, the f.iiiiily aj)[K'ars to ha\e main- 
 tained itself in some )iower in tlie nei;.'hbonrhoiid ; 
 which induced the Shechemifes to louk to Gaal 
 when they l)ecanie tired of Abiinelech. Whether 
 lie succeeded in awakening; amonij them a kind 
 feelin;^ towards the descendants of the ancient 
 masters of the place, does not appear; l)nt event- 
 ually they went out under his command, and 
 assisted doubtless by his men, to intercp])t and 
 give battle to Abimelech, when he ajijK'ared before 
 tlie town. He. however, (led liefoie Abimelech, 
 and hi.s retreat into Snechem liein;^ cut o(V ljy 
 Zebul, the cotnnuuidant of that ])!ace, he went to 
 ids home, and we hear of liim no more. The 
 account of this attempt is infeiestiTi;^, chietly 
 from trie slight i;liiti|ise it atlonis of the ])osition, 
 at this ]ieriod. of what had been one of liie reign- 
 ing families (>f the land befoie its invasion by tlje 
 Isiaelites (Judg. ix. 2G-48) d.c. 1U2C. 
 
 GABBATHA occms .Tolm xix. 13, where the 
 Evan;^elist states tliat Pontius Pilate, alarmed 
 at liist in his attempts to s.ive Je^us. by the art- 
 ful insinuation ofliie Jews, 'If thou let I his man 
 ^0, thou ait not Caesar"s friend.' went into the 
 praetoriiim again, and brought Jesus out to them, 
 and s.it down once more u[)on the ^~)fia or tiiliunal, 
 ill a place called Aidocrpurov, but in the Hebrew 
 Gabliatha. The Greek word, signifying literally 
 stone-paved, is an adjective, and is general'y used 
 as sucli by the Greek wrfers; but they also 
 siimetirnes use it sulistanlively fir a stone pa\ e- 
 ment, when e5o0oj may be undtistood. 1:: the 
 beptuagiiit it ai.s.iers to nS^*"l (2 Cliroii. vii. 3; 
 Kstlier i. G), Jerome reails, ' Sedit pro tribunali 
 111 loco qui dicitor Lithostr.itos ' The Greek word, 
 a« well as the Latin, is frequently iiseil to denote 
 a oavemeiit foime.l of oiuamental .-tones of various 
 colours, commoniy called a tcsselatpd ir mosaic 
 pavement. The iiaitiality of the Romans fir this 
 kind of pavement is well known. 1; is stated by 
 Pliny ^Ilisl. \at. xxxvi. 6{) that, alter the time of 
 Sylla, the Romans decxjiated their houses with 
 such pavements. They also introduced them into 
 • lie provinces. Soetoniiis lelates that Julius 
 Cil'sar, in his military expeditions, took witii bim 
 the materials of tesselated pavements, readv jtie- 
 jiaied, tliat, wheiever he encainjjed, they might lie 
 laid down ir the prx-toriuin (Ciiiub-Dn, ad Sueton. 
 
 p. 3R, &c., edit. IfiO')). l'"rom the'^e facts it lia.s Im-cii 
 inferred by many eminent writers, that ih • tottoj 
 \td6(TrpwTo^, or place where Pilate's tribunal \\n» 
 set on this (x.citsion, was covered bv a tesselated 
 pavement, which, as a piece of Komaii magnili- 
 cence, was appended to the practoriuin at Jeiusa- 
 lem. The emphatic manner in which St. John 
 speaks of it agrees with this conjecture. It further 
 a]i]>ears from his narrative that it was (.nlside the 
 piu'toiiiim ; lor l^ilate is said to have ' cume out ' 
 to the .lews, who, f.ir ceremonial reasons, ilid not 
 {TO into it, on this as well as in other occasions 
 (John xviii. 2S 20, .-iS; xix. 1, 13). Besides 
 which, the Roman goveinois, although the;, tried' 
 causes, ;uid coideired with their eoiincri (A' *.i xxv. 
 12), tritliin the ])r;etorii',m, always ]iionounced 
 sentence in the (i])en air. May not then this' 
 tesselated jiavement, on which the tiibunal was 
 now jjlaced, have been inlaid on sonte part of 
 the terrace, &c. running along one siile of the 
 )ir*t.)riiim, and overlooking the area where tbe 
 Jews were assembled, or upon a lain ling-place 
 of the stairs, immediately before the grand en- 
 trance? 
 
 It has been conjectured that the pavement in 
 question was no other than the one relirieJ to in 
 2 (Jhron. vii. 3, and by Josephus. De Bell. Jiid. vi. 
 1. R, as in t/ic outer cvurl of the te/np/e , but though 
 it ajipeais that Pilate sometimes s.it upon his tri- 
 bunal in diiferent ])lace-:, as, for iiislatice, in the 
 o}H'n maiket-place (/^e hell Jtid ii. 9. 3), yet the 
 sup]iosilion that he would, on thi.'S occasion, wiien 
 the Jews were pies-ing lor a S])eedy judgment, and 
 when he was overcome with alarm, adjaurn the 
 whole assembly, con-.isting of rulers of e\ ery grade, 
 as well as tlie po])ulace, to any other place, is very 
 unlikely ; and the sujiposition that such place wiis 
 any pait of the temple is encumliered with addi- 
 tional liilViculties. The word d'abbatha remains 
 to be considered. It is not certain that St. John 
 intends AiQ/iarpoiTos as a translatiori or inteijiie- 
 tation of (iabliatha : lie may simply mean tl'.at the 
 same ]i'a:-e wa^ called by these two names in (JreeL 
 and Hebre.y ie<)!eftively. Yet it may be said 
 that the names JITIN and 'AToAAvau/, which he 
 introduces in a simi'ar way (Rev. ix. 11), are 
 syniinymous; and if the word (labbatha be de- 
 . riied from 33, 'a surface, it may coi respond to the 
 idea of a pa\ ement ; but if, as is usual, it be dt rived 
 from n33. 'to be high or elevated,' it may lel'er 
 chielK to tlie ten ace, or up]ieimost landing of the 
 stairs, &c., which might have bren iidaid with a 
 tesselated pavement. Schleiisner undei'>tands an 
 elevated mo-saic jiav^ment, on which the jSPz/ua v/d» 
 jilaced, befoie the pia;toiium. The most natiiial in- 
 feience I'lom St. John's statement is, that the word 
 Galibatha is ' liebiew ;' but it has Inen (onlended 
 that the wi iters of the New Tesiameiit usi-d t'.ii 
 wor<i, by way of accommodation, to denote th« 
 language [Si/riae, or i>ijro-Clial(Uiic, i( is .said) 
 which was commonly spoken in Judsra in th'ir 
 time, and that, wlien St. John tni/.v 'E/S^ciVrri, be 
 meuui in the .SMo-('haldaic ; I ut into the exten- 
 sive controversy respecting the vernacular lan- 
 guage of the Jews at Jerusali'in, in the time of our 
 Saviour, this is not tiie ]i!ace to enter. It may 
 sullice for tlie (iresent ) urpose to reniaik, that the 
 ancient .Syii.ic version, instead of (iabbalha, leadj 
 (iepiptha, Jli.sserf. lie Ai6o(jTf)iir(;; a ('oliiad 
 Ikeii, Biemae, 172'); Lightfool's U'orks. vol. ii 
 I p. Gl 1,015, Loud IG84 ; Fa'.eranhuel, |. UlS.f 
 
 3 a
 
 74» 
 
 (SABRIEL. 
 
 Hamelsvel.l, Bihl. Geogr. ii. 129; Seelen, Mediti. 
 Eveg. i. dii ; Jahns Archceol. Bib.) — J. F. D. 
 
 GAHIilEL (bsnni, the mighty one [or hero] 
 of God), llie lieaveiily niessent^er wlio was sent to 
 Daniel to explain tiie virion of tlie lam and tlie lie- 
 poat (Dan. vii.), and l()coinninnicatetlie]iiediclion 
 oCtliH Seventy Weeks (Dan. ix. 31-27> Under the 
 new dispensation lie was emi)lo\ed to announce the 
 birth of John the Ba])tist to liis father Zecliariah 
 (Luke i. 11), and that of the Messiah to tlie 
 Virgin Mary (Luke i. 2(5). Botii liy Jewish and 
 Christian writers, (ialiriel has heen denominated 
 fen archangel. The Scriiitures, however, atKrni 
 iiotiiing- jiosiiively res|)ecting his rank, though tiie 
 ini|)ortance of tiie commissions on which he was 
 employed, and his iiwn words ' I am Gahriel. that 
 stand in tiie jiiesence of God' (Luke i. 19), are 
 rather in favour of the notion of his sn.perior dijj- 
 nity. Hut the reserve of the Inspired Volume on 
 such (loints strikingly distinguishes it.' angelology 
 from that of the Jews and Mohammedans, and, 
 we may a(l(l, of the Fathers and some Liter 
 Christian writers. In all tlie solemn glimpses of 
 the otiier world whicli it gives, a great moral pur- 
 pose is kept in view. Whatever is dividged tends 
 to elevate and refine : nothing is said to gratify a 
 .n'urient curiosity. 
 
 In (he B,)ok of Knoch,'tlie four great archangels, 
 Michael, liapliael, Gabriel, and Uriel,' are de- 
 scribed as rejiorting (he corrupt state of mankind 
 to the Creator, and receiving their several com- 
 missions. To Gahriel he says, 'Go, Gahriel, 
 against the giants, the spurious one?, the sons of 
 fornication, and destroy tiie sons of (he watchers 
 from among the sons of men ' (^Greek Frag- 
 ment of the Book of Enoch, preserved liy Syn- 
 cellus in Scaliger's notes on the Chronicon of 
 Eusehius, Amstel. IS.IS. p. 404). In the ralj'i- 
 nical writings Gabriel is represented as standing 
 in front of the divine throne, near the standard of 
 the tribe of Judah (Buxtorf, Lex. Taliniid. s. v. 
 
 ?><''niN). The rabbins also say that he is the Prince 
 of Fire, and appointed to preside over the ripening 
 «f fruit; that he was tiie only one of the angels 
 who understood Ch.ddee and Syriac, and tauglit 
 Joseph the seventy languages spoken at the dis- 
 fiersiou of Haliel ; that he and .Michael destroyed 
 the host of Sennacherib, and set fire to the Temple 
 at Jerusalem (Frisenmenger's Eittdecktes Juden- 
 thiim, th ii. ss. 3(i.^, 379, 380, 3.S3). 
 
 Bv the Mohammedans Gabriel is )egarde<l with 
 prol'ound veneration. To liini, it is atlirmed, a 
 copy of the whole Koran was committed, which 
 he imparted in su<;cessive portions to Moliammed. 
 He is sivle<l in the Koran, the Spirit of Truth, and 
 the Holy Spirit. In Ids han<ls will be placed 
 the sc.iles ill whicli the actions of men will be 
 weighetl at the last day (Sales Koran ; D'Herlie- 
 lot's Hibliothfque Orientale). — J. K. R. 
 
 G.\I) CIJ). 1. A son of Jacob by his concu- 
 bine Zilpah Gen. xxx. 10, sq ). and wlio became 
 the progenitor of one of the twelve tribes. The 
 sons of Gad are enui«erate<l in Gen. xlvi. 16, sq., 
 and Num. i. 4, sq. At the time of the conquest 
 of Canaan, the trilie of Gad counteil 45,650 
 warriors TNiim. i. 21) : the jiosition of tlieir camp 
 in the desert is given Num. ii. 14, and the names 
 of their chiefs, vii. 10, sq. 
 
 As a revvar<l for their having fomied the van- 
 ^r*! ii war of the army -jf the tribes :ollectively, 
 
 GAD. 
 
 they were allowed to a))))ro])riate '.,:. rlieir excl* 
 sive use some jiastora! dibtiicti beyond the Jordan 
 (Num. xxxii. 17, stj.). 
 
 The iniieritance of this tril>e, called the land of 
 Gad {\ .Sam. xiii. 7; Jer. xlix. 1), was sitiialfd 
 beyond tiie Jortian in (iilead, no)th of Reuben, 
 and se]iaiated on tlie east froiri .Amnion by tiie 
 river Jaljbok. According to 1 Ciiron. v. 1 i, the 
 Gaibtes liad extended their jxHsessions on tiie east 
 as far as Salcaii, tiiough tlie latter had been allilted 
 liy Moses to Manasseii (Dent, iii. 10, 13}: a proul 
 how dillicult it is to draw a strong line of demar- 
 cation between tlie possessions of jwatoral tribes. 
 Tiie territory of Gad forms a part of the present 
 Belka (Buiikhardt, Sgria. ii. 59Sj. 
 
 In Josh. xiii. 25, the land of Gad is called 'halt 
 the land of the children of Ammon :" not because 
 the latter werv. then in }X)sses8ion of it, but probaldy 
 because the part wes^t of tlie Jahbok hud formeily 
 borne that name (comp. Judg. xi. 13.). 
 
 The principal cities of Gad pixss by the general 
 appellation of the Cities of Gilead (Jo.'sh. xiii. 
 25) 
 
 The Gadites were a warlike people, and were 
 com])elle.l to l>e conJinnaily armed and on the 
 alert against the inroads of tlie sinvuunding Arabian 
 hordio (com]). Gen. xlix. 19 j Deui. xxxiii, 20; 
 1 Chron v. 19, sq). -E. M. 
 
 2. GAD. a ])ro]>iiet contemporary with Darrrl^ 
 and probably a piijiil ut' San>uel, who early at- 
 taciied liimself to the sou of Jesse (1 Sam. xxir. 5). 
 Instances of iiis jiropiietic intercourse with David 
 ocaur in 2 Sam xxiv. ll.sq. •, 1 Chron. xxi. 9, 
 sq. ; xsix. 25. Gad wrote a history of the reign 
 of David, to which the aiitiior of the 2iid book ol 
 Samuel seems to refer for further information 
 re9])ecting that leign (I Chron. xxix. 29), ».c. 
 1002-1017. 
 
 G.\D (^| ; .Sq)t. SatfxSvtov, or, according tc 
 the reading vi' Jerome and of some MSS., rrixv) 
 is mentioned in Isa. ]\y. 11. Tlie word admits 
 of two dilferent significations. If it he deijvcd 
 from nni in the sense oitomt, it may TneMialot^ 
 
 and, by a combination with the Arabic Jk^, 
 
 which means to be neic, to occzir, to be fortunate, 
 may be legitimately taken to denote fortune. 
 Indeed, some lind this ' foitune,' althougli not as 
 an ill il, in (ien. xxx. 11, where the Sept. Iiaa 
 rendeied the Kethib "J33 I'y «V Tt'x»/, wliich is 
 approved by Stldcii, and es|)ecially by Tuch, 
 who iloes not even wish to ciiange the jmnctua- 
 tion, but asciil>es the Qametz to the iniluence ol 
 the pause (^Comment, ubcr die Genesis, ad loc). 
 Tiiis is the saise in whicli (iesenius. Hif/ig, and. 
 Kwald have taken Gad in tlieir resjvctive ver- 
 sions of Isaiah. All render the clause, ' who 
 spread a table to Fortune." This view, m l>icli is 
 the general one, makes Fortnire in (his pa.ssage to 
 l)e an oliject of idolatrous woishij). There is 
 great disagreement, iiowever, as to the jxiwer ol 
 nature which this name was intended to denote, 
 and, from the scanty data, tliere is little else than 
 mere oijinion on (he subject. Tiie niajnrity, 
 among whom are some of the chief rabt)inical 
 commentators, as well as (leseiiius, Miinter, and 
 Ewald, consider Gail to be the form under which 
 the ))lanet Jujiiter was worshippeil as tiie greatet 
 s'ar of good l()itiine (see especially Ge«enia«, 
 Comment, iber der lesaia, ad loc). OtUenk
 
 GA». 
 
 GADARA. 
 
 723 
 
 •mong wboni i-; V'ifiiii^iL, sn]»jx><:e Gad to have 
 tepiTseiiteil the Sun ; and JViiK-ers, tlie latest writer 
 of any eminence on Syn>-Ai;ibiim idiilatry, akes 
 it to Lave been the planet Venus {Die I'hoy.izier, 
 i. 851)). 
 
 Ou tlie other hand, if Cud l)e derived from TM 
 iu tiie sense of to press, to cruicd, it may mean 
 a troop, a heap (to which sense ti-ere is an allu- 
 •i(»K in Gan. xlix. 19); and Iloli?isel, as cited 
 iti RoseninU'.li'i's Schalia, ad hic, as well as 
 Deylin^c, in his Obseroat. MUcell. j). (573, have 
 each attemjiled a mode liy whicli the passau;e 
 migiit l)e explained, if O'a^and Mcni weie taken 
 in tlie sense ol' troop and number.— J. N. 
 
 GAD Ol) occurs in two places in Scripture, in 
 btith of which it is translated cort'rtHrf^r. viz. Exod. 
 xvi. 31, ' And it (manna) w;is like coriander {gad) 
 seed, white; and the lasteof it was like wafers made 
 of iioney ;' N.um. xi 7, ' .\nii the manna was as 
 coriander seed, and the cidiiur tiiereof as tiie colour 
 of l»dellium." Tiie manna which fell in tiie desert, 
 anii on which the Israelites weie fed <lurin<i their 
 sojourn there, is usually deicrilied, from a collation 
 of the did'erent passa.L^fs in whicli it is inentioiieil, 
 as white, round, and like gad, which last has 
 almost universally been cnnsiilered to mean 'co- 
 riander ' seed, thoujrh some prefer other seeds. 
 
 sot. [Cortaadrum ntivum.] 
 
 The chief, and indeed only ])roiif of gad sif;nify- 
 111^ the coriander, has heen adducwl hy Celsius 
 (Ilierobot. vol. ii. p. fil): Toi'S, (piod .'\fri<-anis 
 coriandrum est, ut doeet auctoi i;,'riotus sed 
 utllissimus. qui Dioscoridem synonymis exoticis 
 auxit et illustravit AlyvirTiot, inquit, oxtou, 
 A(ppol yoiS : cori.indrum yf^j^yptii ochiotx aj)|)el- 
 lant, Afri gold.' Tlii< p issai^e S]ireiii,'ei incorjwrafes 
 wi^h the text of Dios: oride^, as well as the other 
 synonyms, which are siip[iosed liy others, as al)0\ e, 
 to he atldifions l>y another hut unknown ancient 
 author. RosenmiiUer, referrin.; to this ]:assage, 
 observes : ' the .\!ricans, t. e. Carflia^finians, « hose 
 Jan<!;uat;e, the Punic, wa-s cognate with the Hebrew, 
 called the coriander PofS, which word is not at all 
 dillerenl (t tin the Hebrew gad.' Celsius states that 
 
 the coriander is fie(]uently mentioned in the Tal- 
 mud. It was known to an<l used metlicinally bj 
 Hi|>i)Ocrates : it is metitione<l by Tiie<)|)hni>itu«, as 
 well as l)ios<'()ride8, uridi'r tiie name of Koptuv ot 
 Kopiavvov ; ai.d the Arabs, in their works on Malo- 
 ria Medico^ K'^e korion as the (Vieek synonym of 
 
 coriander, which they call jy' iS kuaereh, t.te 
 
 Persians kushnecz, and the natives of India 
 dbtaiga. It is known throughout all th<>se coun- 
 tries, in all of which it is <-ulfi\ ateil, being uni- 
 ver-allv eiriphiyed as a ;x>'aleriil spice, and as one 
 of the in ;iodients of ciiiiie-powder. It is also roin- 
 mon in Kgy]jt. * Uliiipie," says Pr()S]ier Alpinus 
 'in viridariis coriamlium provrnit cop'tsisinuin), 
 quod omnes ('usbard apiiellant. Heiba»(pie 
 virentis usus in cilio est apud cmnes j^>gyptio8 
 familiarissimus. Ktenim ferculiim non ])arunt 
 sine foliis mriandii " (l)c I'lantis yKgypti, c. xlii. 
 p. (51). Pliny also, h.nu; befoie, mentioned ' co- 
 riandrum iu y^^gyp'o |ira;cipiium.' It is now very 
 common in the south of Kuiope, and also in this 
 country, lieiui; cultivated, es[ncially in K'sex, on 
 account of its seeds, which aie retjuired by 
 confectioners, druggists, and distillers, in 1 irge 
 quaniities: in gardens it is reaieii on account of 
 its leaves, which are used in soiijis and salads. 
 The coriander is an urrdielliferous plant, the 
 Coriandrum sativum of botanists. The fniit, 
 commonly calleil seeds, is globular, greyish-co- 
 loured, about tiie size of jieppercorn, having its 
 surface marke<l with fine striae. IJolh its ta9<e 
 and smell are agreeable, de|)ending on the jin!- 
 sence of a volatile oil, which is separated by ilis- 
 tillation.— J. F. R. 
 
 GADARA was the chief city or metrojxilis of 
 Peraea, lying in the district termed Gadaritis, 
 some small distance from the soutiierii extremity 
 of the sea of (ialilie, sixty stadia from Tiberias, 
 to the soutli ol" the ri\er Hieromax, and also of 
 the Scheiiat-al-Manilhur (Joseph. Antiq. xiii. 
 13. 3; Polyb. v. 71. 3 ; Joseph. l)e Hell. Jud iv. 
 8. 3 ; Plin. Hist. Nat. v. 1.5). It was fortified, and 
 stood on a hill of limestone. Its inhabitants were 
 mostly heathens. Jose])hus says of it. iu conjunc- 
 tion with Gaza and Hippos, 'they were Gieeian 
 cities' (Antig. xvii. 11. 4). After the place had 
 been destroyed in the domestic quarrels of the 
 Jews, it was reljuilf by Pomj)ey, in order to gra- 
 tify Demetrius of Gadara, one of his fieedmen 
 (Joseph. De Bell. Jtid. i. 7. 7). Augustus added' 
 Gadara, with other jilaces, to the kingdom of 
 Heioti (Joseph. Antiq. xv. 7. 2) ; from which, on; 
 the death of that piince. it was sundered, and 
 joined to the pro\ ince of Syria (J<iseph. l)e Hell. 
 Jud. ii. 6. 3). Stephen of Byzantium reckone*! 
 it a part of t^ade Syria, and Pliny (Hist. Aat. v. 
 16) a part of tiie Deca])ol;s. At a later ]eriod it 
 was the seat of an episco[)al see in Pala's^ina Se- 
 cunda, whose b sho])S aie named in the councils 
 of Nice ami Kphcsus (Reland, I'aleesl. pp. 176, 
 215, 2-^3. 226). ,_ 
 
 Most modern authorities (Winer, Ilandwi rtcrh.. i 
 Raiimtr in his J'alastina, liurckhaidt, Sectzen) 
 (in<l Gadara in the piesent village of Om-keia. 
 Buckingliani, however, identities Om-keis witlj 
 Gamala (Trav. in I'a/est.); though it may Ik* 
 adiied that his I'acts, if not iiis leasonings, leail \o 
 a conclusion in f.ivour of the general opinion. 
 Accordingly, taking Om-keis to tie the ancwait 
 Gadura, we may avail ourselves in this article et
 
 734 
 
 GADARA. 
 
 tfae (le?ori))tions of its ruins and scenery which 
 Ijucklni^liain lias given. 
 
 Limestone is a species of rock in wliich caverns 
 of greater or less (liiiiensions are easily and often 
 nuturally formed. Accordin^dy tlie hills on wliidi 
 Gadara was j)laced were fidl of caverns, wliicli 
 were used for tf.nd)s. Biickirii^liam sj)eal<3 of 
 •everal grottoes, wiiich formed the nerropolis of 
 the city, on the eastern Itrow of the liill. The 
 first tM'o examined i)y liim were plain chambers 
 hewn down so as to ])rcsent a per[iendicul.ir fiont. 
 Tile thinl tomb iiad a stone door, as perfect as on 
 ■Jie day of its heing lirst iinng. Tlie last wiis an 
 excavated chiimber, seien feet in height, twelve 
 |iacef long, and ten broad ; within it was a 
 smaller room. Other tombs weie discovered by 
 Buckingham as lie ascemled tlie hill. He entered 
 ciie in which were ten sepidchres, rani;od alone 
 the iimer wall of the chamber in a line, Ijeing 
 pierced inward for fiieir greatest length, and di- 
 vided by a thin partition left in tlie rock, in 
 each of which was cut a small niche for a lamp. 
 Still more tombs were found, some containing 
 8arco])hagi, some without them ; all, however, 
 displaying more or less of architectmal ornament. 
 
 On reacliirig the summit of the hill, Bucking- 
 ham was rewarded Ity a very line view. Tliougli 
 the country is stony and bare, and the hilis ilesti- 
 tute of woid anil verdnre, ' it was impossilde,' he 
 says, 'not to admire the commanding view and 
 tilt! grandeur, as well as the extent of tlie scene.' 
 On t.;e N.E. (lowed the Nahr-el-Hami, the an- 
 cient Hieromax, coming westward, through high 
 dill's on its northern bank, and a bed of verdant 
 shrulis on its southern, and bending its way, by 
 the hot sj^ings and ruins of the Roman bath on 
 its edge, to increase the waters of the Jordan. On 
 the N.W., in a deep ludlow surrounded liy lofty 
 hills, was the still sea of Galilee or lake of Gen- 
 nesaretli, on the soulhein bank of which stood the 
 small village of Samnk, and on the western the 
 town of Tibeiias, still preserving nearly its an- 
 cient name. From this lake tlie Jordan was seen 
 to issue and wind its soutliern course through a 
 desert plain. 
 
 The city. formed nearly a square. The upper 
 part of it stood on a level s;>ot. and ;ipi>ears to 
 nave been walled all round, the acclivities of tiie 
 hill being on all sides exceedingly steep. The 
 eastern gate of entrance lias its poitals still re- 
 maining. Among the ruins Buckingham found 
 a theatre, an Ionic temple, a second tiieatre, be- 
 sides traces and remnants of streets and houses. 
 The prevalent orders of arcliilecture are the Ionic 
 and the Corinthian. 
 
 Bnrckhardt also found near Gadara warm sul- 
 phurous springs. They were termed Thermae 
 HeliiE, and were reckoned inferior only to those 
 of Baiae (Kiisel). Ononiast.). According to Kpi- 
 phaniiis (/Irfy. lleeres. i. 131) a yearly festival was 
 held at these baths (Reland, p. 775). For coins, 
 see Fckliel (Doctr. Xum. iii. ])..'$1S). The caverns 
 in the rocks aie also mentioned by Epiiihaiuiis 
 ^l. c ) in terms which seem to show that they were 
 in his day used fordwellings as well as I'or tombs. 
 
 Gadara is the scene of the miracle leco.ded in 
 Matt. viii. 2? ; Mark v. 1 ; Luke viii. 26. BncU- 
 ingliam's remarks on this event are well wortii 
 ijuoting:— ' The accounts given of the habitiitlon 
 •f the demoniac from whom the le^'ion of devils 
 fas csist out here struck us very fori ii>ly, while 
 
 GALATL\. 
 
 we ovirselvcs were WHnu^iii); Anung f»»g(;<^ 
 mountains, and 8nrii.<i...lnl by mnilis stiil u«eu 
 as dwellings liy individiiuij ^^.id whole families. 
 A (iiier subject lor u mastei'i expression of th« 
 passii ns of madness in all their vioh-nce, C(in- 
 trasied with the .stn nil \ urviitiieaud benevolence 
 in liim wlio went aitont d.iing goml, could hardly 
 be chosen for the pencil of an artist; and a lailli- 
 fill delineation of the logged and wild majesty 
 of the mountain-sceiK ry lure on the one hand, 
 with the still calm of tlie waters of die lake or» 
 the other, would give an additional charm to th» 
 picture.' One of the ancient tombs was, When 
 our traveller saw it, used as a car])enter"s shop, 
 the occujiier of it b.-ing employed in construcling 
 a rude plough. A perfect sarcojihagus remained 
 within, which was used by the family as a pio- 
 vision-chest. 
 
 The text of the original narratives which record 
 the cure of the Gadarene demoniac, or demoniacs, 
 has more than its share of dilliculty in regard to 
 the name of the locality where the event took 
 jilace. Maik and Luke indeed agree in de- 
 scribing it as 'the country of the Gadarenes," Lot 
 iVIattheiv calls \t * rlis country of the Gerge.senos.' 
 One various reading gives 'of the Gerasenes, 
 ai;other 'of the Gadaienes.' But Gerasa | Gisit as.v] 
 lay at a wide distance from the lake of Galilee, 
 and jiossibly the ilifiiculty which hence arose was 
 that which led Origen to conjeciine that the 
 reading should be 'of the Geigesene.s,' for with 
 Origen this reading took its rise (Rosenmiiller, 
 ii. 2. 22; Reland, pii.774. 80()). Indeed to him ihe 
 jdare as well as the name owes its existence, 
 (iergesa is found in some nia])s, but the best au- 
 thorities omit it (Kieppert s yl(/a.sj ; for it is not 
 found either in the Bible or Jo-.eiihiis. and Scholl 
 has substituted in his text VubapTjvitiv for Fc^- 
 yearivwv. These remarks and emendations re- 
 move the difhculty presented in the texlus re- 
 ccptiis and the common veision. — J. R. B. 
 
 GALATIA (TaXar'a, v raKariKri x't'/'a), a pro- 
 vince of Asia Minor, bounded on the nortlj by 
 Bithynia and Pajjhlagonia, on (he south by Ly- 
 caonia, on the east by Pontus and Oappadocia, 
 and on the west liy Plirygia and Bithynia, It 
 derived its name from the Gallic or Keltic tribe? 
 who, about 2*^0 years B.C., made an iiriiption into 
 ivlacedonia anil Thrace. At the iriviiatioii ot 
 Nicomedes, king of Biiiiynia, they passed over 
 the Hellespont to assist fhatpiinre against his 
 brother Ziboeta. Having accomplisheil this ob- 
 ject, they were unwilling to retrace their steps ; and 
 strengthened by the accession of fiesh hordes from 
 Eurojie, they oveiran Bitli\nia and the neigh- 
 bouring countries, and 8u])ported themselves by 
 ])redatory excuisions, or by imposts exacled from 
 the native chiefs. After the lapse of foity years, 
 Attains I., king of Perganius, succeeded in 
 checking their nomadic habits, and conlined tliKn 
 to a fixed territory. Of the three princi|)<il bribes, 
 the Trociid (TpoK^oi) selth-d in the eastern part 
 of Galatla near the banks of the Halys ; the 
 Tectosages (TeKToaayfi) in tlie conntry round 
 .\ncyra; and tht-Tolistobogii {ToKiffro^Syioi) in 
 the south-western parts near Pessinus. They re- 
 tained their independence I ill the year bc. 189 
 when tliey were broughl under the j)Ower of Rome 
 by the consul Cn. M..nlius (Livy, xxxviii.; Poly- 
 bius, xxii. 21), Inough still governe«i by 'heir cwc 
 j)rinces. In the year u.c. 25 Galat a licc«ine t
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 Roman province. Under »lie successors of An- 
 giistus tlie lioimdaries ol' Galatia were so mticli 
 ejilary-etl that it nMclieil IVmn tlie sliores of tlie 
 Kiixiiie to the Pisiiliaii Taurus. In the lime of 
 Cuiiscantiiie a new division was made, which re- 
 duced it tu its ancient limits' and hy Tlieodosius I. 
 or Valens it was separated nito (lu/aliu I'rima, 
 the noilliern part, occupiei hy tlie Tro< mi anil 
 Tectttsaijes, and Galatia Secuuda or Scdufans : 
 Ancyra was llie caiiital ol' tlie Ibrmer, and Pessi- 
 ous of the latter. 
 
 From tlie intermixture of Gauls and Greeks 
 Galatia was also called Gallo-Gisecia (FaWo- 
 ypaiKia, Stralio, xii. 5}, an<l its inhalii'ants 
 Gall')-Grajci. But even in Jerome's time they 
 liad not lost their native langua;;e : ' Galatas 
 excepto seiinone Graeco, (pio omnis Oriens loqui- 
 tur, ]iro|)riaui 1 n^uam eanilem paene haheie 
 qnatn 'Ireviros, nee rel'eire si aliqua inde corru- 
 
 Eirint,' &c. {I'rol. ad Coinitient. in Ep.ad Gal.; 
 e VVette's Lehrbuch, ]). 231). ' 
 
 The (ioji)el was introduced info this province 
 hy the Apostle Paul. His Kist visit is lecorded 
 ill Acts xvi. (), and his second in Acts xviii. 23. 
 (I'cimy Cijclupadia, aits. ' Celtte' and ' GaUrtia;' 
 Mainieit's Geograplne der Griechen wid Homer, 
 vi. 3, ch. 4 ; JNleileker's Lehrbiick der Hintorisck' 
 comparntiven Geo'/rap/iie, iv. l,p 2S1 ) — J.E II. 
 
 GALATIANS; KFISI'LE TO THE. The 
 Pauline ori^^in of tUis ejiistle is attested not only 
 by the su[)erscripiion whicli it hears (i. 1), hut 
 also by fie([uent allusions in the course of it to 
 the ijreat A|)o>lle of ihe Gentiles (conip. i. 13-23 ; 
 ii. 1-14), -.luA liv the unanimous testimony of the 
 aiicient church (Laidner, Wor/is, vol. ii. 8vo.). 
 It is corroliorated also liy the style, tone, and con- 
 tents nf the epi.tie, which are perfectly in keeping 
 with those of the A|)ostles otiier writings. 
 
 The parties to whom this ep'stle was addressed 
 are descrilied in the epistle itsell' as 'the churches 
 of Galatia' (i. 2; com)), iii. 1). Into this dis- 
 trict the (rospel w.is liril introduced liv Paul 
 hi.oiself (Acts xvi. G: Gal. i. «; iv. 13, Ii'). 
 Churches were then also prohahly fiirmed ; for 
 on revisiting this district some time after his 
 fiist visit !t is mentioned that he 'strengthened 
 the disciples' (Acts xviii. 23). These churches 
 geem to have lieeii com|io^ed ])iiiu'i|)ally of con- 
 verts diiectlv (ioni Heallitnism, hut ))aitly, also, 
 of J<;wisli convt'its, hotli pure Jews and ])iost'lytes. 
 Unhap|)ily, the latter, not thoroughly emanciiiated 
 fromVarly opinions and ))re|xissessions, or prohalily 
 intluenced liy Jndaizing teachers who had visited 
 these churches, had heen seizeil with a zealous 
 desire to inc«>ipoiate the lites and ceremonies of 
 Judaism with the sjiiiitiial truths and simple 
 ordinances of CInlstianity. So active had this 
 jwrty heen in disseminating their views on this 
 lieail through the churches of Galatia, that the 
 majoiity at least of .the members had been se- 
 duceil to adopt them (i. 6 ; iii. 1, &c.) To tliig 
 resub, it is iirol.'.ible that the previous religious 
 cor.iteptiorrs of the Galatians contributed ; for, 
 Kcciis'.omed to the worship of Cybele, which they 
 iiad learned from their neighbours tlie Plirygians, 
 and to the tiieosophistic doctrines with whicli that 
 woiship was associated, they would be the more 
 itiidily induced to believe that the ftdntss of 
 t!liiistianity could alone be i)evelo;!e<! thfjugh t!ie 
 Kymbtjlical aduinbralions of an elaborate cerenio- 
 «nal ( Neander, Apostul. Zt itaUer,s. 400, 2te Autl.). 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 73t5 
 
 From some pa.ssages in this epistle (e. f/r. i. 1 1-24 j 
 ii. 1-21) it would apjH'ar also that insiniiatioiii 
 had been disseminated amung the tialuliaii 
 churches to the «'lVeit that Paul was not a di- 
 vinely-commissioned ,\poslle, but only a mes- 
 senger of the chur<di at lerusalein : that Pet«- 
 and he wre at variance upon the .subject of the 
 relation of the Je.vish rites to Olirislianily ; anil 
 that Paul himself was not at all times so strenu- 
 ously o))]viseil til those lites as he had chusi n lo be 
 among tlie Galitians. (.)(' Ibis stale of things in- 
 lelligftici.' having been conveyed to the .A post If, 
 he wrote this epistle lir the pur) ose of vindicating 
 his own jiieti'iisions and conduct, of counteracting 
 the inlliience of these false views, and of recalling 
 the Gal.itians lo the sini])llcily of the Gospel 
 which thev had leceived. The im|K)rtance of the 
 case was prohalily the leason why the Ajmstle put 
 himself to the gi'eat labour of writing this epistle 
 with his own hand (vi. 11). 
 
 The epistle consists of three parts. In lhe^r»« 
 part (i.-ii.), after i.is ii-ual salutations. Paid vin- 
 dicates his own .\|H)Slolii; authority and inilepen- 
 dence as a ilirectly-commissionevi ambassador jf 
 Chiist to men, and especially to the Gentile por- 
 tion of tiie race; asseiting that the Gospel whicli 
 he jireached was the only Go.spel of Christ, — ex- 
 jiressing his surprise that the Galatians had al- 
 lowed themselves lo be so s()(>n turneil from iiim 
 who had called them to a dillerent Gospel, — 
 denonncing all who had thus seduced then, sm 
 tioublers of llie church, pcrverters of the doclriuf 
 of Christ, and deserving, even had they been 
 angels from heaven, to lie jilaced undei- an ana- 
 thema instead of being followed, — maintaining 
 the divine origin of his Apostolic commission, 
 which he illustrates by the history of his conver- 
 sion and eaily conduct in the service of Christ, — 
 and declaiing that, so far from lieing inferior lO 
 the other Apostles, he had ever tieated with ihem 
 on equal tei ins, and lieen welcomed by ihein as 
 an equal. Il.iving in the close of this ]jail of lh» 
 epistle been led to lefer lo his zeal for the gre»a 
 docirine uf salvation by the grace of God througli 
 faith in Christ, he enters at large, in ihe secufia 
 jiait (iii.-iv.). uimn the illustiation and defence of 
 this cardinal truth of Chiistianity. He ajipeaU 
 to the foimer expeiience of the Galatians as to flie 
 way in which they had received the Spiiit. lo the 
 case of Aiiraham, ami to the testimony of Scrip- 
 ture in suppirt i.f his p sition that it is by failli 
 and not by the woiks of the law that men are 
 accepted oi' (rod (iii. !-*.•). He ])roceeds to re- 
 mind ihem that the law has brought a curse upon 
 men because of sin, a curse wliicli it has no 
 jjower to remove, and I'lom vviiich the siinier can be 
 ledeemel only ihroiigh the substitutionary work 
 of Christ, by whose means the blessing of Aiiraham 
 comes u))(.n the (ientiles. And lest any should oli- 
 ject that the law being of moie lecent origin than 
 the covenant must supersede it, he shows that thia 
 cannot be the case, Imt that the covenant must be 
 l,>erpetnal. whilst the law is to lie regarded only itk 
 the light of a temporary iuul inteicalaiy aiiange- 
 ment, die design of which was to forwaid the fullil- 
 ment of the ]in>mise in Clnist (10-29). The lelation 
 of the Jewisli church Ivi theChii^tian is then illus- 
 trated iiy the case ol' an heir uniler tutors and 
 goternors as contrasted with the case of the s.im« 
 |ierson when he is of age and has liecome master of 
 all i and the Galuliaiib are exhorted nut williuglj to
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 Amcvnil from the imporlant ami dignified position 
 of sons to fliiit of mere servants in God's house — an 
 eKlioitation wliicli is illustrated and enforced l)y 
 ail al]e'<orii;al comparison of tlie Jewish chnrcii to 
 Ishmael, the son of Hagar, and of the Cinistian to 
 Isaai', the son of S;irali, and tiie Child of Promise 
 'jv. 1-31). The third part of the Kjnstle (v.-vi.) 
 is chieily lioitatory and admonitory : it sets foith 
 ♦lie necessity of steadfast aciheieiice to the lil>erty 
 of the Gos])el in connection with obedience to tlie 
 moral law as a rule of duty, the im]ioitance of 
 mutual forhearar^e and love among ('inistians, 
 and the desirahlenpss of maintainini^ a firm adhe- 
 rence ro liie doctrine ol' Chi ist and Him ciucitied. 
 Theepisilecoiicludes with lienedicti. nsand jnayeis. 
 Respecting the time wiien and the place where 
 ihis epistle was written, great diversity of opinion 
 prevails. Marcion held this to he the earliest of 
 Paul's epistles (Rpiphanius, Aclv' Ila-res. xlii. 9); 
 and Teitultian is generally supposed to favour the 
 «ame opinion, fiom his speaking of Paul's zeal 
 against Judaism displayed in tliis epist'e as cha- 
 racteristic of his being yet a neopliyte (^Adv. 
 Marc. i. 2l)) ; though, to us, it does not appear 
 that in this passage Teitullian is referring at 
 a)l to tlie writing of this epistle, hut only to 
 Paul's personal intercourse with Peter and otiier 
 of tiie Apostles mentioned hy him in the epistle 
 (.ii. 9-14). Mici)aeli3 also has given his suf- 
 frage in favour of a date earlier than that of 
 tlie Apostles second visit to Galafia, and very 
 shortly alter that of hi.s first. Kop])e's view (iVor. 
 Test. vol. vi. p. 7) is ti e same, though he su])- 
 poses the Apostle to have ]ireached in Galati.-i 
 before the visit mentioned liy Luke in Acts xvi. 
 8, and wliicli is usually reckoned his first visit to 
 that district. Otiieis, again, such as Mill {Prolog. 
 in Nov. 'J'cst.-p. 4), Calovius { BibLa Jllust. t. iv. 
 p. 529), and. more recently, Schrader (ZJer /!;». 
 Paulns,t\\. i. s. 2"26). jilace tlie date of this epistle 
 at a late period of the Apostles life : tlie last, in- 
 deed, advocates the date assigned in the (ireek 
 MSS. and in the Syriac and Arabic versions, 
 whicii announce that it was ' written froni Rome' 
 during tlie Apustles imprisonment tiiere. The 
 Biajuvity, however, concur in a medium view 
 between these extremes, and Hx the date of this 
 epistle at some time shoitly after the Apostle's 
 second visit to Galatia. Tliis o])iniciii appears to 
 us to be the only one that has any decided sujiport 
 from tlie ("iiistle itself. Prom the Ajjostle's abiupt 
 exclamation in ch. i 6, ' I marvel tliat ye are so 
 tooti removed from him that called you,' <Sc., it 
 seems just to infer that he wrote this ejiistle not 
 very long after he had left Galatia It is true, as 
 has Ijeen urged, fiiat outu to,x(<^^ in this verse 
 may mean ' so quickly ' as well as 'so soon ;' but 
 the abni))tne.ss of the Apostles statement appears 
 'o us rath?i to favour the latter leiiilering-. for. as a 
 complaiit of the qiiicktiess of their change re- 
 spected the mamier in which it had lieen made, 
 and <is the Ajiostle could be aware of that only by 
 rep at. and as it was a matter on whch there 
 •nigiit be a dilVerence of ojiin'on between him and 
 them, it wmild seem nece-isary tiiat the grounds of 
 8u<.h a charge should lie stated ; whereas if the 
 coinjilaint merely related to the shortness of t me 
 diirinsr which, alter the Apostle had lieen among 
 tliem, they had lem. lined steadf.ist in tlie faith, a 
 mere allusion to it was snlVicicnt, a-; it wiis a 
 •Utter not admitting of any diversify of opinion. 
 
 We infer, then, from this expression tliat fhU 
 epistle waa written not long after Paul had licAi 
 in Galatia. The (piestion, however, still remains 
 which of the two visits of Paul to Galatia merv 
 tioned in the .Acts was it alter whch this epistle 
 was wiitien'? In reply to this Michaelis and som« 
 others maintain that it was \\\e Jirst ; but in 
 coming to this conclusion they appear to have un 
 accountably overlooked the A| ostle's ])liraseology 
 (iv. 13), wheie he speaks of circumstances con- 
 nected with his )Tearhiiig the (jospei am<ing iho 
 Galatians, tJ> trpSripov. the former time, an ex- 
 jiression which cle-arly indicates that at the ] eriod 
 this ejiistle was written, Paul had been at least 
 tvice ill Galatia.* On tlie,«e grounds it is probable 
 that the Ajiostle wiote and despatched tiiis ejiistle 
 not long after he had left Galatia for the second 
 time, and, jierlmps, whilst he was residing at 
 Ephesus (comp. Actsxviii. 23; xix. l.sqcp). Tli« 
 reasons whicli*Michaelis urges for an earlier date 
 are of no weight. He ii])peals, in the Hist jilace, 
 to ch i. 2, and a>ks wlietliir I^aul would have 
 used the vague expression, 'all the biethien," with- 
 out naming them, had it not been that the parties 
 in qiie;!;on we^e those by whom he I ad lieen ac- 
 companied on his first visit to G.ilatia, viz. Silas 
 and Timothy, and, ' perhaps, some others.' The 
 answer to this obviously is, that had Paul refened 
 in this exiiression to these individuals, who were 
 known to the Galatians, he was much nioie likely 
 on that very aixonnt to have named them tliaii 
 otherwise; and be.sides, the ex])ression 'all the 
 biethieii that are with me ' is much moie natuialljr 
 understood of a considerable nnnii.er of persons, 
 such as the elders of the church at E])hesus, than 
 of txoo ])er<oiis, and, ' /ler/iaps, some otlieis.' 
 Again, he uiges the fact that, about the time of 
 Paul's lirst visit to Galatia, .Asia Minor was full 
 of zealots fur the law, and that cotisecjuently it is 
 easier to account for the seduction of the (Jala- 
 tians at this jieriod than at a later. But the pas- 
 sage to which Michaelis refers in sujijioil of this as- 
 sertion (.\cts XV. Ijsiinjily informs us that ceirain 
 Judaizing teachers visited Anlioch, and tjives nis no 
 information whatever as to the lime when such zea- 
 lots ei tered Aiia Min ir. In line, he laysgieat stiesj 
 on the circumstance that Paul in recapitulating 
 the history of his own life in the first and second 
 chajifcrs brings the narrative down only to the 
 jieriod of the conference at Jerusalem, the reason 
 of which is to lie found, he ti. inks, in the fact that 
 this epistle was written so soim after that event 
 that nothing of moinent had subseipiently oc- 
 curred in the Apostle's historj'. But even ad- 
 mitting that the jieriod lel'eired to in this second 
 chapter was that of the conference mentioned 
 Acts XV. (though rhis is much donbted bv maiiy 
 writeis of note), tlie reason assigned by Michaelis 
 for Paul's carrying the narrative of his life no 
 further than this cannot he admitted : for if oi er- 
 
 * Prof .Stuart says, in bar of this ci ncliision, 
 tliat ' TrpoTfpov means imly a lime niitecedeiit to 
 that in whicli he (Paul) wrote.' ( \ot/:s to Fos* 
 dick's Tranxlatiim of llvg's hitrod. ]>. 748.) But, 
 in making this lemaik, the haiiied professor has 
 not observed that Pauls e.\|iiession is not simply 
 Tzpirfopv, but TO iTp6T(oov, which makes all the 
 ditleience between the iend< ring 'in Ume past' 
 and the reinleimij; ^ tlie former time.' Tlie iatnel 
 alone is proper here.
 
 GALILEE. 
 
 loolt* »lie (leiiRn of the Apostle in fnmisliinp timt 
 narrative, which was not ceitainly <o liflivi-r liini- 
 lelfof a piei'e of mere aiitol)io;,'ra|ilii<-al lietail ; 
 tut to show rrom certain leailiiig iiiciileiits in his 
 early Apostolic life how from the first lie lia<l 
 ilaiine'l oiid exercise*! an iiidejieiKJeiit Apostolic 
 authority, aiul how iiis rights in this i-esiicct had 
 been admitttxl hy the pilhirs of tlw> cliiirch, IVler, 
 ^ James, ao'l John. For 'his purpose it was not 
 necesparj tiua tlie nariMtive sliouhl he hrouj,'ht 
 down to a lower date tiian the jK'ricKi wiien Paul 
 went forth as the Apostle of tlie Gentiles, formally 
 recognise<l as such hy tlie other Apostles (>f Christ. 
 Tiiisfact, then, is as little in I'avour of Micliaelis's 
 theory as any of the otlier arguments which he has 
 •ddu' ed. 
 
 Of comm«itanes on this epistle the most im- 
 portant ait; liie following : Borger, Intcrpretatio 
 Ep. VauJi ad Galatas, ^vo. Lngd. liat. IS07; 
 Wiiir,-, Pattli Ep. ad Gal. peipctua Aiwot. illiis- 
 travit, fi\'o. e<I. teitia, Lipsi;r, IS29 ; Riickert, 
 Commentar uh. d. Brief I'atdi an d. C'al., Svo., 
 Leipzig, IR33 ; Usteri, Comm'enlar iib. d. Br. 
 Pauii an d. Gal. ii\o. Ziiricii, 18;l.'J ; Hermann, 
 De Pauli Epist ad Gal. tribus jrriiuis capitibtis, 
 i-a. Lips. 1832— \V. L. A. 
 
 GALBANUM. [Chai.baneh.] 
 
 GALILKK(raXiA.aia), tl.e Greek form of the 
 name given to one of the tiiree principal divisions 
 of Palestine, the o( her two hein^' JudseaiintI Sama- 
 ria. Tliis name of the region was very ancient. It 
 occurs in the Hehiew forms of Galil and Galilah, 
 Josh. XX. 7; xxi. 3; 1 Kings ix. 11; 2 Kings 
 XV. 29 ; and in Isa. viii. 2.? we have D^ISD 7v3 
 'Galilee of tlie nations' iVaKiKaia aKKo<pv\oiv, 
 \ Mace. V. 15; .Matt. iv. 15). 
 
 (ialilee was the noitheinmost of the throe divi- 
 eioiis, and was divided into lip)ier and Lower. 
 The lormer di.stjict had Miunt I>ehanon and. 
 the countries of Tyie and Sidon on the north; 
 the Me<l iterr.'inean Sea on the west; Ahilene, 
 Ituraea, and the country of Decai>olis on the east ; 
 *nd Lower (jalilee on the south. This was the 
 portion of Galilee which was tlistinctively called 
 ' Galilee of the nation*,' or of llie ' fientiles,' fiom 
 itsliavingamoie mixed ] o]:uIalion, i.e. less purely 
 Jewi.-ih, liian the others. Caesarea Pliili()pi was its 
 i>rinci|ial city. Ix)wer Galilee had Upjier Galilee 
 on ihe noitii, the Mediterranean on tiie west, the 
 Sea of Galilee or Lake of Geniiesaretii on tlie east, 
 and Samaria on the south. Its pvinci])ai towns 
 were Tiherias, Choiazin, Beliisaida, Nazareth, 
 Cana, Ca))ernaum. Nain. Capsarea of Palestine, 
 and Ptoleniais. This is the district wiiich was of 
 all others the most honouied with the piesenceof 
 imr Saviour. Here he lived entirely until he was 
 thirty \ears of age; and although, after tiie com- 
 mencement of his ministry, he frequently visited 
 tfie otlier jir.ivinces, it was here that he chiefly 
 fcsideti. Here also he made his first apjiearance 
 to (he apostles alter his resurrection; for they 
 were all ofliiein natives of this region, and iiad 
 retmned hither after the sad evtnts at Jerusalem 
 \Malt. xwiii. 7). 
 
 Hen.' 'he disciples of Christ were called 'Ga- 
 lilcKUis.' Tliev were easily recognised as such ; 
 for theGalileans spoke a dialect of the vernacular 
 Syriac dill'erent I'lom that of Juda>a, and which 
 WM of course accounte<l lude and impuie, as all 
 prort. 'ciil lialects are considered to be, in com- 
 
 GALL. 
 
 rfn 
 
 parison with that of the metropolis. It wm thit 
 whicii occasioned the detection of St. Peli'r ils on« 
 of Christ's disciples (Maik xiv. 70). The (iali- 
 leaii dialect (as we leani tioiii Buxtorl', 1,'ghll'oot, 
 and others), was of a hroa*! and rustic tone, which 
 art'e<ti'<i the pronunciation rmt only of hlleig iiut 
 of words. It ]iarto<ik much of the Sani.iii'aii and 
 Syiiac idiom; hut, in tiie instance of I'etei, il 
 must have l)(«n the tine wiiich liewraved liim, tlie 
 words lie'tig seetriingly tiKi W'w lor tliat ell't ct. 
 
 The Galileans are mentioned hv .losephu* 
 (Autiq.x\\\. 10.2; l)€ Bel!..lu(i.\\.\\) «> ; iii. i. 
 2) as a luiliulent and reliellious jieople, ready on 
 all occasions to rise against the Roman antlioiify. 
 This ctiaracter of tliem explains wvixX is said in 
 Luke xiii. 1, with i*gar<l to ' the (iai ilea lis whose 
 lilootl Pilate had mingled with their sa«-ri(ice«.' 
 Josephus, indeed, does not mention any (i.ilileanil 
 slain in the Temiile hy Pilate; Imt tiie cliaiacter 
 which he gives tliat j)e(>ple sufficiently corro- 
 liorates the statement. The tumults to whicli life 
 alludes were, as we know, chielly laisi'd at the 
 great l<?stivals, when sacrifices were slain in great 
 ahundance; and on all such occasionsihe (i:ililearvs 
 were much moi-eacti\e than the men of Jiida?aaiin 
 Jenisalem, .as is pruvtd hy the history of .Aiciielaiis 
 (Joseph. Antiq. xvii. 9. 10); whicli ca.se, indeed, 
 furnishes an answer to those wluxleny that thefiali 
 leans attended the (ipasts with tlie rest ol the Jews. 
 
 The seditious character of Ihe (lalileiins also 
 explains why Pilate, when sitting in judgment 
 u])(iii Jesus, caught at the wor<l Galilee when use<l 
 hy the chief ))riest.s, ami asked if he were a tJali- 
 lean (I.uke xxiii. fl). To he known to helong to 
 that country was of itself sulMcient to prejudice 
 Pilate against him, and to give some countenance 
 to the charges, unsiipjHirletl hy impaitia! e\ ideiice, 
 whicli were prefeired against him, and utiich 
 Pilate himself had, just iiefore, virtually declared 
 to Ix! false. 
 
 GATJLEE, SKA OF. [Sba.] 
 
 GALL occurs in its primary and proper 
 meaning, as denoting the sulistance secreted in 
 the gallhladder of animals, comnn.nly called 
 1,'ile, in tiie following jiassages : .loh xvi. 13, 
 ' He jioureth out my gall,' ^m"lf.3 ; Sept. t^j» 
 Xo\r,v uov ; \ u\s;. viscera mea. The metaphors 
 in this \erse are taken from the jiraclice of 
 huntsmen, who first suiround the lieast, then 
 jhoot it, and next take out the entrails. The 
 meaning, as given hy Bp. Heath, is. ' he entirely 
 destroyeth me.' .Fob xx. 14 (describing the re- 
 moise of a wicked man), CiHC milO. ' the 
 gall of adders' (whicli according to (he ancients 
 is the seat of the r jxiison. I'lin. Hist. Na(. ii. 37); 
 Sejit. xoXtj odTTi'Soy ; \'u]\:^. fcl aspidutn. Jobxx. 
 2.'), wliere. to desciilie the certainty of a wicke<l 
 man's ilestiuction, it is said, ' the glittering sword 
 Cometh out of his gall,' im"HDlD ; Sept. Sia/rcus 
 avTov, /lis vitals; Vulg. amaritiidiitc sua. lu 
 the story o( Tidiit the gall of a tish is .siiid to have 
 been used to cure his father's l<lindness (Tobit 
 vi. 8; xi. 10, 13). Pliny refers to the use of tbe 
 same substance for diseases of the eye, • ad ocu' 
 loium medicamenta utile halietur' (Hist. Atti. 
 xxviii. 10); also sjieaking of the tish caltionymtt\ 
 he says, ' Pel cicatrices sanat,.et carnes oc.ulorum 
 superlliias consumit" (xxxii. 4. 7). (ialeii and 
 other writers jiraise the use of the liver of the tiiU' 
 ms in cases of dimness of sight. For the other 
 senses of gall, see Komi. — J. F. D.
 
 728 
 
 GAl. LI J. 
 
 GAUVS. 
 
 GALLIO (FaAAiW). Jiiiiiiis Annasus Gallic), 
 eltlei- bioilier of Seneca llie jjliilvJ-ioplifi-. His 
 name was Diiirinally M. Aiiii. Novatus, Init 
 ciuuii^eil I.I .liin. Ann. Gallia in conswiueuie of his 
 udiiptoii l>y .Will Gallii) the Uielovician ('pater 
 Giillio,' Qnintil. [tist. Oral. iil. 1. 6 H ; ix. 2. 
 p 1)1). Seneca dedicated lo liim his tieatise De 
 •Vita li •at(i. and in the preiace to the loiiith Ikk))! 
 t)f his Stitara'es QiKeslii»ies dejciilx-s him as a 
 man iini\er<ally beloved (' nemo mortal inm nui 
 fain dull' s e>t, cjnam hie omniUns'j; and who, 
 while exempt t'lom all other vices. e.5i)eci.illy 
 abhorred (lattery (' inexi»iij^nalii)em virnm adver- 
 8U)i in>idiai, (juas nemo non in siiium recipt'). 
 ^.ccor.iiii,' to Eiisehins, he conmiitted suicide 
 before tiie death of Seneca (■ Junius (jalllo, tra- 
 ter Senec*, e^'re^'ios declamator, projiriase m inn 
 mteil'eci!,' 'J'hdsaurus 'J'e/nporn/ti, &c., p. 101, 
 Am-.tel. 16)'''); iiut Tacitus sjieaks of him as 
 alive alter that event (^Annal. \v. 73), and Di»>n 
 Cassius states lliat he was piit. to death liy onler 
 of Neio. He was Proconsul {ayduirartuoyTos, 
 Tex. rec. avdowaTov ivros. Tiscliendorf ) of 
 Acliaia (Acts xviii. 12) under the Emperor Clau- 
 dius, when Paul first visited CvMinth, and nol)ly 
 refused to al>et the |)ersecuti(>n raised by the Jews 
 .against the .Ap,)3tle. Dr. Lardner has noticed 
 the strict accuracy of Luke in givinj^ him this 
 designation, which is ohscuretl in the Auth. Vej-s. 
 by tlie use of the term deputi/ {Crfiiibility, part i. 
 Iwok i. ch. i. ; Works, i. 31). — J. E. R. 
 
 GA.MALIKL (^Vs'h'Ql, Gud is my rrwarder), 
 a member of the Sanheiirim in the early times of 
 Chiistianity, who, by his favourable interference, 
 save. I the Apostles from an ignominious death 
 (Acts V. 34). He was the teacher of the Apostle 
 Paul before the conversion of the latter (.\cts xxii. 
 3). He bears in the Talmud the surname of (pTH 
 hazokeii, ' the old man,' anil is representeil as the 
 Sim of Rabbi Simeon, and grandson a\' the famous 
 Hillel : he is said to have occu])ied a se.it, if not 
 the presidency, in the Sanheiliim during the r»?igj)s 
 of Tiberius, Caligula, and Claudia-, and to have 
 die<l eighteen years alter the destruction of Jeru- 
 salem. 
 
 There are id'e traditions about his having been 
 cornerteil lo Christianity by Peter and John 
 (Phot. Cod. clxxi. p l»V)j; but they are altogether 
 irreconcilable with the esteem and res])ec,t in 
 which he was held even in later times by the Jew- 
 ish Rabtiins, by whom his opinions are freipiently 
 quoted as an all-silencing authority on jioints of 
 religious law. Neither does his inlerference in 
 behalf of the .\postles at all prove — as some woulil 
 have it — that he secretly approved their docfiines. 
 He was a dispassionate judge, and reiis<med in 
 that atl'air with the tact of worldly wisdom and 
 exijerience, urging that religious opinions usually 
 gain stien.(lh by opposition and persecution (Acts 
 V. 3G, 37), wiiile, if not noticed at all, they are 
 ■vire not to leave any lasting impression on the 
 minils of the jieojile, if devoid of truth (ver. 3S) ; 
 and that it is vain to contend against them, if true 
 (ver. 39) Tliat he was more enlightened and 
 tolerant than his colleagues and contemporaries, 
 IS evident from the very fact tiia: he allowed Ins 
 sealous jjupil Saul to turn his mind to Gieek 
 literature, which, in a great measure, qualilied 
 nim alterwards to become the Ap.istle of the 
 Gentiles; while In' th<» .'ewish Palestine laws. 
 
 after the Maocal'iean wars, even '.he Greek lan> 
 yutitie was prohibited io be taught to the Hebrew 
 youth (Mishiia, HDID Sotah, ix. U). 
 
 An.ither jiroof lif the liigli lespei.'t in which 
 (ianialiel stoovl with the Jews long afler his death 
 is allbrded by an anecilote told in the Talmud 
 respecting his foinh, to the elVect lliat Onkeloj 
 (the celebrated Chaldspan fiaiislaior of the Old 
 Testament) spent seventy jiounds of incen-eat his 
 grave in hunoiir of his memory ^pDriT I'oiichsin, 
 59).— K. M. 
 
 GAMES If by the word are intended mere 
 secular amusements, which are the natural ex- 
 ]ir"ssion of vigorous health and joyous feeling, 
 litleil, if not designe<l, to promote lieaJtii, liiJarity, 
 and fiiendly leeling, as well iis to aid in the 
 development of the corporeal frame, we must 
 look to other (juarters of the globe, rather than to 
 Pale-tine, for their origin an I encouragement 
 Tiie Hebrew temperament wi\s too deep, too ear- 
 nest, too fidl of icligious emotion, to give vise to 
 games having a national and permanent cha- 
 racter. Whatever of amusenient, or rather of re- 
 cieati<m, the descendants of Aliraliam poscsessed, 
 j)aitiKjk of that religious comjilexion which was 
 natural to them ; or rather the piedomiuant re- 
 ligiousness of their souls gave its own hue, as to 
 all their engagements, so to their recreations. 
 The iiiHuence of religion jiervadetl their entiie 
 being; so that whatever of rtcieatioii they needed 
 or enjoyed is for the most part founil blended 
 with religious exercises. Hence their great na- 
 tional festivals served at once lor the devimt ser- 
 vice of Almighty God, and the recreation au>i 
 refieahment of their own minds and bodies. 
 
 Games, however, aie s-o natuval to raan, espw- 
 cially in the ]ieriod of childhood, that no nation 
 has l»een or can be entirely wiSlicut therr*. Ac- 
 coidingly a few traces are fouml in the early 
 Hebreiv histoiy of at least jjrivate and childish 
 diversions. The heat of the climate too in Syiia 
 would indispose the mature to more lx»iily ex- 
 ertion than the duties of life impose;;, Viiiiie tbs 
 giavity which is chaiacleiistic of the Oriental 
 character might seem compromised by a.iything 
 St) light as s])orts. Digfiilied ease therefore cor- 
 responds with the idea which we foim of Oriental 
 recreation. The father of the family sits at tFi« 
 door of his tent, or reclines on the housetop, oi 
 appears at the city gate, and tiieie tianquilly 
 enjoys repose, bioken by conversation, under th» 
 light and amid the warmth of the bright and 
 breezy heavens, in the cool of the retiiing day, oi 
 before the sun has assumed his huining ardoui°8 
 (Deut. xvi. 14; Lam. v. 11). Even among the 
 active Egv])lians, whose games have been tigmed 
 on their miual tablets, we lind little which sug 
 ge.sts a comparison with the vigoions contests of 
 the Giecian games. One of the most remarkable 
 is the following (No. 302), showing what j^ppears 
 to be i)lay with the s iigle-stick. 
 
 Zechanah (viii. 5) alludes to the sportivcness 
 of childien in the stieets as a sign and conse- 
 quence of that peace and })ros])erity which aie so 
 fiee from alarm that the young lake their usual 
 games, and aie allowed entire lil)e\fy by their 
 jiarents : — 'and the stieets of the city .-^h.ill i>i 
 full of boys and girls ])li"ii!ig in tl? s!iet»» 
 thereof (comp. Jer. xxx. 19). .An iu'eu-o! :g 
 jia.ssage illustrative of tiiese street -amii-i-Dien's 'S 
 found in Matt. xi. 16 ; — ' This geiieralii.'n 1» Mlt«
 
 GAMKS. 
 
 unti> rliildipn sitting in the iriiukets and calling 
 onto tlieir fflloivs. We luive piped unto you ami 
 ye liav»' not danced, we have niuuiiie<l unto you 
 fead y« iuve nut lamented.' 
 
 GAMES. 
 
 72f 
 
 That t'ne elegant amusement of jdaying witli 
 (amed and uaine<J birds was not rniusual may 
 be learnt from Job x.li. 5:— 'Wilt tliou play 
 witii liim (leviallian) as witlj a bird?' Com- 
 menting on ZhcIi. xii. 3, .Jerome mentions an 
 amusement of the youn^, wiiich we have seen 
 practised in moie tlian one jiart of the nortlj of 
 England. ' It is customary,' he says, ' in the 
 cities of Palestine, and has l)een s;) fiom ancient 
 times, to place up ami do ah large stones to serve 
 for exercise for tiie youni^, wiio, according in each 
 case to tlieir degree of strength, lift the^e stones, 
 some as liigh as tiieir knees, others to the'r middle, 
 otliers aliove tlieir heads, tiie iiands being kept 
 horizontal and joined umh>r tlie st.)ne.' 
 
 Rlusic', surig, and dancing were recreations re- 
 served mostly lor tlie yoimg or for festive occa- 
 sions. l''rom Lam. V. 16, 'the cro.vn is fallen 
 from our heail ' (see the entire ])assage on the 
 gul)ject of games), it niiglit lie inleired that, ;is 
 amjng the Greeks and Latins, cliajdets of llowers 
 were sometimes worn during festivity. To tiie 
 amusements just mentioned frequent allusions 
 are f,>und in iioly wiit, among winch may be 
 given Ps. XXX. 11; Jcr. xxxi. 13; Luke xv. 
 25. In Isaiah xxx. 29, a pas-age is found which 
 serves (o .sii;;>v how niucli of festivity and miith 
 was mingled witii religious observances; the 
 journey on festival occasions up to Jeiusalem 
 was enlivened by music, if not by dancing; — 
 ' Ye shall have a song as in tlie night when a 
 holy solemnity is kept ; and gladness of heart, as 
 when one goeth with a jiipe to come into the 
 iiiiiuritaiii of the Lord, to tin; Mighty One of 
 Israel." .\ passage occurs in 2 Sam. ii. 11, 
 which may indicate the practice among the an- 
 cient I-raelites of games somewhat similar to the 
 jousts and touriiariieiits of the middle ages. On 
 the subject of dancing see Michaelis (Mvs.Ilcc/tt, 
 dit. 197j. No tiace is found in Hebrew antiquity 
 of any iX the oiilinary games of skill or hazard 
 which are so numerous in the western world. 
 
 The (iiccian iiilluence which maile itself felt 
 aller the Kxile led to a great change in the man- 
 ners and customs of the Hebrew nation. They 
 were soon iiii almost dilTerent jieople from what 
 we find them in the days of their national inde- 
 ^)endene«' and primitive simplicity, in Mace. i. 
 14, we find i vidence that the Grecian games were 
 introiluced ; and that a gymnasium was built un- 
 der Antiochus Epipli ;nes :— ' Tlu^y built a place 
 ff exercise at Jerusalem, accordinj; to the custom 
 
 of )!ic heathen.' Compaie 2 Mucr. iv 12, l.J, 14, 
 
 wheie special mention is maile of the ])iei ale/ic* 
 of 'Greek fashiiin,' and Mlie game of J>iscus;' 
 though, as appears clear'y lioin the la-t |)ass;tg« 
 (v. 17), the.^e piaetiees weie coiiaide-ed cimlrary 
 to the Mosaic instiliitions, and weie haiei'ul to 
 pious Isiaelites. Tlie lierndian jjrinces had the- 
 uties and amphithe.ities built in Jeiusalem and 
 other cities of Palestine, in which were held 
 splendid games, sometimes in honour of theii 
 Rtmian masters. \^ e lite a leiiMikaidc passage 
 to this etlect from Jo-ephus (/l/i/'y x\. S. \y. — 
 * Herod revolted from the laws i>l' liis eonnlrj, 
 and coiiupted the ancient constitution by intro- 
 dticing foreign piactices, while tho->e leligious 
 observances wiiicli used to lead the multitude to 
 jiiety were neglected. He aiijioiLled solenm 
 games to be celebrated every lil'th year in honour 
 of Caesar, and built a theatre at .leiusalem, aa 
 also a very great amphilheaiie in the ]dain — Iwtb 
 costly works, but contiaiy to J(!wish customs 
 He also called men together out of every nation : 
 wrestlers and others, who strove liir piizes in these 
 games, were in\ ited by the hope of rewaid and 
 the gloiy of victory. The most eiiiiiient were got 
 together, for the lewards were vety i,ieat. not only 
 to those thjt pel formed their exeicise naked, but 
 to musicians also He moie.iver oll'ered no small 
 rewards to tliuse wlio ran for jiiizes in chariot- 
 races, when they weie drawn by two, three, or 
 four pairs of horses. He made a'so great prepara- 
 tion of wild beasts, and even of lions in great 
 abundance, and of such other be.ists as were either 
 of uncommon stieiigih or rarely seen. These 
 fought one with another, or men condemned to 
 death fought with them. .Above all the rest the 
 trojihies gave most displeasure to the Jews, who 
 imagined them to lie images. (See also Aiitiq. 
 xvi. 5. 1; xix. 7. 4; xix. S. 2; Kichhoin, De 
 JudcBor. re scenica, in the Comment. HoetUng. 
 Bee.) The diama does not ap|)ear to have been 
 introduced, but Jews were in foieign countries 
 actors of jilays (Jo.seph. \'U(i,^'i). Tlie pJissage 
 already cited (see the oiiginal) is full of evi 
 dence how distasteful these heathenish games were 
 to the more sound-inindetl pait of the nation. 
 
 These facts make it the less sui]irisiiig that 
 allusions should be found in the New Testament 
 wiitings to the Giecian games, on which w« 
 think it desirable to supply somewhat detailed 
 information, in ordir to seive as illustrations of 
 Scriptural language. 
 
 The fact that, as we have seen, the game? of 
 the amphitheatre were celebrated even in Jeru- 
 salem, serves to make it very likely that Paul, 
 in 1 Cor. XV. 32; iv. 9, alludes to these deteit- 
 alile practices, though it is not piobable that the 
 ajxistle was himself actually e.\|H)seil to the fuiy 
 of the raging animals. Contrary to the opinion 
 of some wiiters, the reference to llu-se cumbats 
 apj)ears to us very clear, though it was only 
 metaphorically that Paul ' fought with beasts at 
 Kjihesus.' 
 
 The word which the Apostle (1 Cor. xv. 32) 
 uses is emphatic and descii]itive, iOrjptofxdxv^a. 
 The drjptofxax'a or beast-light {venaliu in Latin) 
 con-tituted among the R-mians a part of the 
 amusements of the circus or amphitheatre. It 
 consisted in the combat of human beings with 
 animals. The jiersons ilestincd to this baiba 
 rou3 kind of amusement were teiitied Oqp.onix^^
 
 730 
 
 GAMES. 
 
 bestiarii. Tliey were geiierally of two classes — 
 I. Vuluiitaiv, liiat is, jKn'sons who fdiiKlit either 
 for ainusemciit or loi- jiay : these wcie clothed and 
 provided with otl'eiiaive and deCetisive weajjous. 
 
 2 Condeiniipd person's, who weie mostly exposed 
 to the fniy ()(' the :inini:ils unclothi'd, unarmed, 
 and sonieiiiiics houinl (CJic. }'ro Sexi. (51; J:^p. 
 ad Quint. Fiat. ii. (J; Seiiec. D: Bene/, ii. 
 19; TertiiU. Apol. 0). As none Imt the vilest 
 of men were in i;eneral deviiteil to tliese heasf- 
 lights, no punishment conld he more <'ondign and 
 cruel than what was rreijnently inllicted on the 
 primitive Ciiristians, wlien tiiey were liurried 
 away ' to the lions ' (as the ).hrase was), merely 
 for their ^delity to conscience and t(( Christ, its 
 Lord, ^jihesus appears to liave had some nn- 
 enviahle distincti<in in tiiese hrntal exhihitions 
 (Schlensner, in vac), so that tiiere is a jieculiar 
 projiriety in tiie lanj,'n,ige ofilie Apostle. 
 
 Of these iieast-tj^hts tiie Rom.ms were pas- 
 sionately f nd. riie ntnnl'er ol" animals which 
 appear to iiave been I'rom time to time engay;ed 
 in them, is such as to excite in the rea(hn"s mind 
 hotli pit) and aveision. Hylla. <lnriiig his prjetor- 
 ship. sent into the arena no I'cwer than 100 lions, 
 whii'h weie hntchered by heings wearing the 
 human shape. Hompey cansed the destruction 
 in this way of fiflll lions. On the same occasion 
 tliere peiished neaily twenty elepliants. Tliese 
 numlifis, liowever, aie small compared witti the 
 hutcheiy which took ])la(e in Liter perioda. 
 Under Titus .50()() wild and 1000 tame animals, 
 and in tiie ieii;n of I rajan 11,000 animals, are 
 •aid to have Ijeen destroyed. 
 
 Tlie New Testament, in several ])laces, con- 
 tains referenees to the celebrated Grecai! (iames, 
 though it may lie alhiwed that some commenta- 
 tors have imagined aUusions wheie none were 
 designed. As might, from his lieathen learning, 
 be ex]ie<:ted, it is Paul who chiefly supplies the 
 passages in question. In Gal. ii. 2, ' Lest by 
 any means I should rtui in \ain;' v. 7, ' Ye did 
 *un well, wlio did hinder you Y' Phil. ii. 16, 
 That I may rejoice in the <hiy of Chiist that I 
 .nave not run in vain nor hilioured in vain;' Heb. 
 xii. I, ' Riui with |iatience the lace set befojeus;' 
 xii. 4, ' Ye have not resisted unto blood, striving 
 against sin' ■{a.vTa.yoivi^i/Xivoi); Phil. iii. 14, 
 I press to.tard the maik for the prize;' 2 Tim 
 t\. 5, ' II a man strive he is not crowned except 
 he stiive lawfdly." The most siirnal ])assage, 
 however, is found in 1 (Jor. ix. 21-27,' Know ye 
 Dut that tiiey whicli run in a race run all, but one 
 receiveth the prize? So run that ye may obtain. 
 And every man that striveth for tiie mastery is 
 temperate in all things. Now they do it to obtain 
 a corru[ililile crown ; but we an incorruj)tible. I 
 therefore so run. not as unceitaiidy ; so liglit I, not 
 Muiie that bealeth the air ; but 1 keej) under my 
 
 GAMES. 
 
 body, and bring it into sidijection, lest tliatW anj 
 means, when 1 have jjreached to others, 1 myseft 
 should be a castaway.' In the Old Testament 
 two passages contain a clear reference to games ; 
 Ps. x:x. 5, * Rejoiceih as a stiong man to lun a 
 race;' Eccl. ix. 11, ' I said that the lace is not to 
 tlie swift.' 
 
 These Scriptural allusions .are the more ajipro 
 priafe, because tie Grecian games weie in tlieir 
 oiigin anu in their best days intimately connected 
 with religion. Games in Greece weieveiy numer- 
 ous. They are traceable l)y tradition back to the 
 eailiest jjeiiods of Grecian civilization. Indeed, 
 much of the obscurity which lests on their oiigiii 
 is a conseijuence and a sign of their high and even 
 mythic anti(piity. 
 
 Pour of these ganries stood far above the rest, 
 bearing the appellation of Upoi, 'sacied,' and de- 
 riv ing their support fiom the gieat Hellenic family 
 at large, though each one hatl special honour 
 in its own locality : the.-^e four weie tlie Olymjiic, 
 Pythian, Neinean, and Isthmian. The Mist were 
 held in the highest lunoiu-. The victors at the 
 Olympic games were accounted ihe noblest and 
 happiest of mortals, and every means was 'akeii 
 that could show the lesjiect in whicb they were 
 held. These games weie celebrated every five 
 years at Olympia, in Elis, on the we.'.t side of 
 the Peloponnesus. Hence the epoch called the 
 01ympia<ls. 
 
 Tlie gymnastic exercises were laid down in a 
 well-[)lanned systematic seiies, lieginning with 
 the easier (^Koixpa), and proceeding on to Uie mora 
 
 difficult (j3a/)/a). Some of these were s])ecially 
 fitted to give strength, others agility; some edu- 
 cated the hands, others the feet. Among tb« 
 
 ligbter exercises was reckoned rxinnm^ (^p6fimj^ 
 leaping (oA/xo), quoiting (SiV/cos), hurling tM
 
 GAMES. 
 
 lavelm [^aKSvTu v). When skill had been obtained 
 in thwf, anil ihe consequent slrength, then Ibl- 
 lowe<l a f^verer ojiiise itl' ilisciplinc. This was 
 Iwoi'old — 1, sim])le; 2, conijiound. The sinn)le 
 consisted of wrestling (iraA»j), boxing (xtry/*^) : 
 
 OAMKS. 
 
 7tl 
 
 the cotnponnd we find in the Pentathlon (the five 
 contests), and the Pankiation (or general trial o\ 
 
 Btrcngth). The Pentatliloii was made up of the 
 union of ]e-i))in^', running, qnoiting, wrestling, 
 and hnrling the spear ; llie Paiikration consisted 
 of wrestling and boxing. It is not necessary hert 
 ♦o speak in detail of the distinctions whicii Galen 
 makes between the ordinaiy motions of the Itody 
 and those wliich were required in these exercises, 
 since the names tiiemselves are s'lfticient fo make 
 maniftst liow manifold, severe, long, and diflicult 
 the boiiily disci])line was, and the inference is 
 easy and una\oidal>le that the etVecton the bodily 
 frame nnist have been of the most decided and 
 lasting kind. 
 
 Itaciiig inay be traced back to the earliest 
 periods of (iiecian anticmity, iind may be re- 
 garded as the first friendly ci.ntest in which men 
 engaged. Accordingly the Olympic and Py- 
 tliian, prol)ably also the otlier games, opened 
 with foot-races. Foot-racing, perfected by sys- 
 Icmatic jiiactic*, was divided into dillVr(nt 
 kinds. If yon ran meiely to tbe end of the 
 course (.rrtiSiov), it was calle.l stadium; if you 
 ueiit ti.ither and back, you ran tiie double course 
 
 ^^. 
 
 309. 
 
 [HavXoi Tie longest course was the SoAixoJ 
 ohicli re initeil exiiaordiiuiry s| ee.i and juvvir if 
 <>vdurauce. \\ hat it involved tliu ancients liave 
 
 left in no tnnall uncertainty. It is somrtimM 
 given as seven times over the stadium ; at ulbers, 
 twelve limes; at others again, t>\enly ; and e\eii 
 the number of l'iiur«ind twenty tintes is menlioiied. 
 These lengtiis will give some itl^a of the si-veritjr 
 of tbe trial, and sen e to ilhistrate the meaning of 
 the Aj)ostle wiien he speaks of innning with pa- 
 tience the race set lielbre him (uTTo/xoin), piiticjice, 
 mutaiiiecl rjfhrt). Indeed, one Ladas, a victor at 
 the Olymjiic vanies, in the SiiXt^os or long lace, 
 was so exhausted by his elVorts that, immediately 
 on gaining the honour and being crowiK-tl, he 
 yielded nji liis bieatli : a lact wliich al.>o serves 
 to tlirow light on Scriptnial language, as sliciwng 
 witli what intense engeiness these aspirants (5oAi- 
 )(oSp/ilJ.oi, li)ng-runneis) stio\e fi.r ]H"iisliing ( hap- 
 lets {<p6apTuv artipavoy'r In tlie piepaiatoiy ilis- 
 ci|iline e\ ery thing was dune wliich could coi>- 
 «liice to swiftness and .strength. The exercise* 
 were ])erf()in)eil witli tbe body naki-d and well 
 oileib Minute diieclions were est.iblished in oidei 
 to jireveiit foul ])hiy (Ko>coTex'''o, KUKOtpyia) of 
 any kind, so that all the comjelitors niiglit start 
 and inn i<n terms ofentiie e()uality — illustrating 
 the words of Paul on the necess'ty of running 
 lawfully. Tiie ronfest was geneially most severe; 
 to reach Ihe goal soolier by one foul was enough 
 to decide the victory. How tine and giaohic 
 then tlie desciipiions given by Paul: it «as. as 
 the Apostle states, t'y (ttoSiV, in the lacc-coinse, 
 tliat the contests took place ; every i ne striving 
 for the victory was tem])erate in all things; nay 
 more, he kfpt under Ins body and lirought it into 
 subjection. A jiassage is tbnnd in the F.Tirhiri' 
 dion of K]iictetus, which slinws witli what ]iro» 
 jiriety the ter i s which the Apostle emjiloys wera 
 chosen iiy him: ' You wish to con(iner at the 
 01ym]iic games'!? so also do 1; for it is honour- 
 able; l)ut bethink youiself what this attempt im- 
 ])lies, and then begin the undertaking. You must 
 subject yourself to a determinate course; must 
 sulimit to dietetic discipline (ai'a7K0T^(^f ji') ; 
 must pursue the estalilisbeii exeicises at Hxe«l 
 hours in heat and cold; must absla'n fiom all 
 delicacies in meat and ilrink ; yield yourself un- 
 reserved'y to the control ot the jnesidnig jiliysi- 
 cian, and even e)idure Hogging. 
 
 It may well be su])po,sed that the coinjx'titora 
 enqiloyed all their ability, and displayed the 
 greatest eagerness to gain the |nisie. The neaier, 
 too, they apjiroached to the goal, tl e moiedid tliey 
 increase their elliirts. Sometimes tlie victory de- 
 ])ended on a iiiial sjaing; liap]iy he that leiained 
 jiower enouj^h to leap lirst to tlie goal. The sjiec- 
 tators, al.so. use<l e>eyy encouragement in their 
 )>ower, these favouring one competitor, tlios« 
 another : — 
 
 ' Veiliaqiie dicentum, nunc, nunc incumhere 
 
 tenijius, 
 Hippomene. projiera. Nunc viribusutere totis.* 
 All these rmiaiks gi. to show how wisely Paul 
 acted in selectiii,' the figure, and how caiefiilly 
 lie has jiieseived the imager f winch lielongs to it. 
 A word eiiijiloyed in the Common Ver-.ion, 
 1 Cor. ix. 27, ' Lest when 1 have prcnche^l to 
 Others I myself .should be a cas'aivay ' — namely, 
 preached, mais ihe ligiire. The original is 
 KTjpi'loj ■ ' acted the pait of heraul,' «lio.se bosineM 
 it was fo call the comjietilois to the contest and 
 proclaim their victory, functions whicb Paul 
 spent his lile in per.'uiining.
 
 732 
 
 GAMES. 
 
 GAMES. 
 
 Pa<;l sjK'ik? in tiie same coimeclion of rnniiln.!; 
 not ;is iinccitaiiily, of li^'litii,; t\ot. as due who 
 U^atetli th(^ .lir : alliidiii^ to flie j.iolutiial exer- 
 cistfs^ tc'als (iC iri<livi(liKil athA ol' c(ini{)ii)uti< e 
 BtieiijTtli. which tonk placf in tlit? course ol' tiutri- 
 iiijj. These mniiin^s and Ijoxiiisis !i.ui no iitmie- 
 diate aim nor resulf, and implied no leai ••om 
 petitor ; heiice the |iidiiiii;ty oC the tonus which 
 tlu* .s.icied writer employs. Statins ( I'heb. vi. 
 S*^?) has given a lively picture of some of tVi 
 jiraclices liy wiiich tlie runners endeavoured to 
 give suppleness and agility to their limljs : 
 
 time rile citatns 
 Explorant, actiuntque gradus, varias(jue jier artes 
 Exstimulant d.icto larijjuentia iiiemhra tumultu. 
 Poplite nunc licxo sidunt, nunc lidivica I'orti 
 Pectova coUidiirit )>lausu ; nunc ignea tolKint 
 Crura, lireveiixjue I'u^ani necojniio (iue reponunt. 
 
 Artertlie herald had called the competitors into 
 the lists, they sometiiiies tiied their streni.Mh and 
 exercised (heir I'raiues, hy naming out and hack 
 on I he course. Viigil (jf'^ii. iv. 370) lepresents 
 Dares as di'^p'avmg the size and Uexiliility of his 
 arms pri..r to his comhat with Evyx : 
 
 Ostenditcpie liumeros latos, alteinaqne ja^^tat 
 Brachia proleinlens, et verherat ictihus auras, 
 
 where, in verberat ictibvs auras, we have even a 
 
 verlia! agreement willi the Apostle's phraseology. 
 (Compare /!■!,». v. 4, 4(>.) Among liie projirieties 
 of language Cur which the passage in 1 Cor. ix. is 
 dislnigui^hed. may he i)la<:ed the teim which Paul 
 employs to descrihe the prutr-. ll is tlie speciiic 
 woid used in the cas<', namely fipa^iiov : this 
 wa-s the ciisfornary term, the employment ofwhicli 
 was rejidereil proper t'rotsi the name of iheoiHcers, 
 PpafieuTcu, xviio gave the compieror his crown. 
 Tiie entire passage indeed is singularly !iap]iy in 
 its phraseology, thereliy adding conliimation lo 
 the ground-; on whicli the authority ol' the Epistle 
 rests. We cannot, ho.vever, think one word well 
 rendered ui oin lutglish version, a.Z6iciixos, 'cast- 
 away ;" or, il'this he a good rendeiin/, tlie Aposlle 
 lias at least (ailed in stiict verbal jiropriety ; lor 
 wiio were tli«!y in c( nnection with the games who 
 were, or were ternu'd, castaway '< AoKifiLa.<ria was 
 tJie leim em])loyed t.idesciihe tlie seveie scrutiny 
 which Ciodidates (or otlice underwent at Alhens. 
 Peis.«s who were i'ouiid unlit were teimed aS6Ki- 
 fMt, and as this veulict uas a declaration ot' civic 
 and s^icial incapacity, not to say of moral turpi- 
 tude, liie Word cnme to mean ' dishonoured.' This, 
 or the word rcjeclcd. seems liie jirojer leiidering in 
 Hie last veise ol' tiie ninth ch.ip. ol' 1 Corinthians. 
 The A|«islle's ('ear evidently was, lest, alter having 
 put others on this tiolile undeitaking, he himself 
 slioiild heat last found unlit lo engage therein; 
 for the alliisloii seems to he deri\ed Crom the }ire- 
 paraiory exeici-es oC wliieii he is immediately 
 g|eakin.,'. and not Crom the is>ue of the contest; 
 aijd -if the end oC these pre|)a".atory exercises, a 
 very severe exarnination had to lie undergone liy 
 such as wished lo ' run the race.' This inler- 
 preafiofi may |ierhaps servo to set the Aposlles 
 iiinuility In a strong light; since he exprejises his 
 fear k*t he should not he even adniilled to enter 
 the list^ Cor 'the glorious prize.' IC, however, any 
 cue ]ireleis reCeiring tlie word to tlie final issue of 
 the eoniest oflife. then the same meaning remains, 
 at'ti the Apuatle says, tli.it, alter all liisi striving, he 
 
 may lose the crown, jiroving at laet miequ'.il t» 
 tlie achievement ol ihe victory. 
 
 In wiitliig to the ('liristians at Corinth th*«r« 
 was a special propi ietv, on the part of tlie Apostl« 
 in making allusions to (he puhlic games, Coriiitb 
 was (he place wlieie one oC the fviur Gieek national 
 games was ceiehiated, namely, the Isthmian. 
 These games were so called from heing held on 
 the i--tlimus whicii joins northein with southern 
 Greece — a s|)otof land most celebrated iii(Tiecian 
 histoiy, alike in martial and commeicial tr.iatters. 
 No spot could well lie chosen for such a purpose bel- 
 ter than this isthmus, which lay in llieveiy centre 
 of Grecian civilization. In the narrowest ))art of 
 this tongue of land, hetween Leihseum and Schoe- 
 nu5, stood the lamous temple, sacied Xo the Isth- 
 mian Neptune. It was shaded by a jiine giove. 
 Here began the Isthmian games. Heie also was 
 a sjilendid theatre, and a race-course adorned with 
 while maible. Other distinguished woiks of art 
 adorned and hallowed the vicinity. 
 
 If we attempt to trace these games to their 
 origin we are lost in the mists which envelope the 
 mythical periods of tiie Gieek national life. They 
 were oliviously connected willi the worship of 
 Neptune; the wi«le (lill'ii^ioir of which tended 
 greatly to secure for the Isthmian games the great 
 celebrity which they enjoyed, c<i11ing, as they did, 
 comjietitors and spectators from all j"iits. The 
 Persian war ga\e a new impulse to the Isthmian 
 games. The Feloponnesian war, on the contrary 
 — as lieirig a contest of Greek against (ireek — 
 dimmed their glorv, and abated their inlliience. 
 l''veii when, at a later period, Corinth became a 
 Roman colony, the games, so far from losing their 
 importance, were exhibited under the Csesius with 
 an incieased celebrity, so that Paul, in the pic- 
 ture wliith he drew, w;is writing to (he eye of the 
 Corinthian Christians. AikI, if corroboration of 
 the creilibility of the first letter weie ineded, we 
 might (ind all we could wish in antiqiiitie^s yet in 
 existence ; for p. coin of Marcus Auielius, and 
 another of Commodus (and indeed othei'S of a 
 
 later period), liear each rne the inscription of 
 ISTH M I A, the Isthmian Games. The Co- 
 rintiiians api)ear to have been inordinately fond of 
 these amu-einents. They weie held every three 
 years. They comjirised tliiee leading divisions — 
 musical, gymnastical, and equestrian contests. 
 In tlie lirst the tyrant Nero cairied ott'acrown, hy 
 destroying his too highly-gifted antagonist. The 
 gymnastic contests were thesiimeas those of which 
 we have already spoken. A few words, however, 
 may here be introduced a.s to the hoi se-racing, which 
 has not been hldieito liescjilied. (ienerally the same 
 kinds ]irevailed as at the Olymjiic and Pytliian 
 games. Chariot-races seem to have been prautiae<l 
 ill tlie earliest heroic times, since choriotB wer« ai
 
 GAMES. 
 
 teirly a» !>i-a used in battle, ami the notices which 
 nax^ cum* I'.ywn to ih lelVi tliis kiml of 8]ii>it to 
 the CAily ,»^ii(Hl no.v imiicated. It stood ine- 
 
 OAMKS. 
 
 73t 
 
 eminently before other games. The skill and 
 outlay wliicli it required prevented any Liit 
 persons ot distinction — the wealtliy, govt mors, 
 princes, and kings — IVom engagin^' in its enjoy- 
 ments. Ti)e Homeric competitors ma<ie use in 
 rheir game^ of their two-horsed war-chaiiots, wliicii 
 they occupied each one alone, and drove tiiem- 
 selves, tiion„'h in battle it was not Mnusu.il for the 
 reins to lie enlr^isted to a charioteer. In tliC i;eroic 
 ajres these contests openeil the games. To tliem 
 i)e]oiiged tiie hi^diest ])rizes. In tlie 01ynij)ic 
 games horseand cliariot racing gradually Inanched 
 out into ditl'erent kinds. So much ini)iortatice 
 was attached to these games tliat iiistoiiuns have 
 reriaded the exact time w!ien ])articu!ar kiniis 
 were flr:t introduceu, and imniuital poets sung the 
 
 praises alik,e of the victors and their horses. Tl e 
 four-horsed chariot-iace (apfxa TePpnrwoy) took its 
 origin in tlie twenty lifiii Olympiad. In tlie 
 ninetv-lhird {)lym])iad was he'd the first contest 
 with two-horsed chariots. Foals were now made 
 U8e of, as well as horses. For a time mules also 
 were employed. Otlier varieties, mostly designed 
 for a display of skill and splendour, came and 
 went as fashion dictated. The numher of chai iots 
 tliat might a;;pear on the course at once cannot 
 lie accurately determined. Pindar {Pyth. v. 46j 
 praises Arkcslas of Cyrene for having ca'mly 
 hroijght olV his chaiiot uninjnreil, in a contest 
 wliei-e no le-ver than forty took ijirl The coiuse 
 had to he gone over twelve t'ines Tlie urgency 
 of the drivers, the speed and exhau-tion of tlie 
 hcrsps, may easily he ima'.rined The greatest 
 pkdl was needed in turning the jiillar which 
 maikeil the extien\ity of the course, especially 
 «he:i the C(intending chariots weie immemus. 
 (!oiv tn axiid the danger of collision, liow to turn 
 iS near tlie pillar as jKHsihle, so as to save ground, 
 «ete jioiiils of the greatest consetpience, as So- 
 [rl'ocles in his I'lerfra intimates (\Ve>t's Tians.) . 
 Th Athenian, wi:ii consummate art, 
 H!j ".ourse obliquely veered, and steering wide 
 
 With steady rein, the wild commotion p,-is>'ii 
 Of t«nd)ling chariots and lumulluous sieed*. 
 
 .•\t tlio 01\m])ic games the pii/.e was simply a 
 chajilet made of wild i.live. Ti.e cio-.vns «ert laiil 
 on a liipod, and phired in the midd'e of the 
 course, so as to he i-een of all. On the same tal<1e 
 theie weie also exposed to view ]'aliiil:ranche8, 
 one of which was given into tl e hand ol each con- 
 queror at the same time with the clia])let. The 
 vicrois, having been summoned iiv proc)am;ition, 
 were presented with the ensigns of victory, and 
 conducted along the stadium, |ireceiletl hy a 
 heiahl, who ])r<)<dainied their lionoms, and an- 
 nounced their name, paicntage, and <-(;untry. 
 
 The leal reward, however, was in the lame whi':h 
 eiisueil A chaplet won in the chaiiut- races al 
 ()iym))ia was the liighest ofeaith'y honours. \Ahat 
 congr.itiilal ions from fiinids; how was lie ])id)lic 
 eye ilirec.ted to the foitunate compieior ; what 
 honour had he conferred on his native city, and 
 lor what dlTice was such an one unlit! What 
 intense and deep deliglit must his bosom lia\e 
 been lilled with when the full acclainj of as- 
 sendilcd Greece fell ii)K)ii liis ear, cc.niing in lond 
 salutations and applauses IVom every part of the 
 crowded ccrn-se ! Then came the inoie ];rivate 
 attentions ol" individual friends. One bioughl a 
 cha])1et of Howers ; another honrid his heati with 
 iil)b(ins. Afterv.auls came the l-inmi'lMl sacri/ice 
 made to the twelve goiis, acconi])anied by sump- 
 tuous least ing. The jioet now began his othce, 
 gaining, in st)me cases, both for himself and the 
 liapjiv victor, an unex])ecfed inmiortality. JMusic 
 also lent her aid, and iiis name was sung wheiever 
 tlie noble accents of the Greek tongue asseitcd 
 their supremacy. In order to jerpeinaie tiie 
 memory of these pi eat men, their names and 
 achievements were entered into a public register, 
 whicrh w;is under tlie care of suitable ofticers. A 
 no less jiiivilege was that of iiaving a statue of 
 themselves )ilaced eithci- at the expense of tlieir 
 country or tlieir friends, in liie saci<»d giove of 
 Jupiter. A ]ieiha])s sliil gieater honour awaited 
 the victor on his return home. 'I he coTiqueiors at 
 the Isthmian games were wont to be received in 
 tlieir chaiiots, snpeibly attiied, amid throngii.g 
 and jubilant multitudes. 
 
 One or two other jiiivileges lielonged to these 
 victors, 8uci) as immunity from jinblic oHices. and 
 a certain yearly sti]iend. If to all this be added 
 the strict scrutiny which competi'airs vicre oi>liged 
 to undergo (in the best ages), so th.». none could 
 enter the lists l>ut such a^ wtie of ]iiiie Greek 
 blood, and incorinjit in life, noi e l»ut such as had 
 undergone the reqiured discipllnaiy tiaining, and 
 (in the case [>\' the chaiiot and horse-races) none 
 but those who could alVord to )'osse,-s and train 
 liorses in a country in which, as h: Gieece, iiorses, 
 ]iaiticulaily in the eailier agi-s. weie veiy seaice 
 and (lear ; it will lie seen that tlie distinction of 
 the ])iize was not over-rated, when it was com- 
 jiared with a Roman triumph, nor that the dt» 
 8<:rij,tion of Horace 's too highly coloured — 
 pilniaque ik bills 
 Terranim dominos evehit ad Deos. 
 
 At the Isthmian giinr.es the piizc was [wrxlpy 
 dining the m>thic jieiiods. In later ages the 
 victor was cKiwned with a chaph-t of | iiie leaves. 
 I'arslev, however, ajijeais to have been al-o eni 
 ployed. If the cuntjneror tuid come olY v ictoriintt^
 
 T3i 
 
 GAMES. 
 
 in the t!»iee ^reat dixisioii* — music, gymnastics, 
 and ucing — lie was in tlie Pyll«iaF>, a« well as in 
 the v/tiier sacrecl games, in-esented also with a 
 ^alin-(jiaii(li. Tiie names of aUuu': se^en'^y \)er- 
 ioris ai« preserved wlio gained iumours at tiw 
 Istlimiau frames, anting which occurs tiifit c*" the 
 emjjerctr Nero, who is recoiiled to lia\e gained tlic 
 victory in the ciiaracter of harper, and thai; oi 
 lienl.L 
 
 Liet it not We thought that the use which espe 
 cially Paul makes of the Grecian games is tin 
 becoming the lol>y siiliject of religion. Such 
 an itlea casi lie entertain^ d hy none hut those who 
 have the mo^t sii|ier(icial notions on the subject, 
 and who jwssess no acquaintance with the spirit 
 of classical antiquity. A full vinilication of 
 tbe projM iety of these allusions would require 
 a detailed ex]iosil ion of the good which the games 
 conferred on the Gieck communities. One or two 
 points only can he spoken of. 
 
 These gamfs, taken in connection with the early 
 and long training by which they were preceded, 
 and ol' which ihey weie h.ith the nifural result 
 and reward, weie a grand educational system, 
 bearin^' |ivimaiily indeed in favour of the physical 
 development, hut also tending directly and power- 
 fully to advance the highest intellectual and 
 moral culture. The exercises tlirough which the 
 child, the youth, and the man were stage hy stage 
 conducted, each in succession hecouiing mure 
 ditKcuU and more complex, as the Iwdily powers 
 came into play and acquired vigour, were ad- 
 mirahly adajited to give that union of strength 
 and heauty in which physical ])eifection consists, 
 and i«i which the Greek nations prohahly sur- 
 passe<i every other known jieople. liut the 
 vigour and energy wliich ensued imply health 
 and hilarity ; lunce arise humane, kind, and 
 generous disiMisitions ; so that a good state of 
 i.lie vcily promoted moral soundness, and moral 
 soundness, comliined with iKfdily vigour, gua 
 ranteed intellectual activity atui mental power. 
 The existence of these exercises and these games 
 in each separate state secured the development 
 and activity of those feelings which made his 
 own country to each one dear and venerable ; 
 while a nairow and seKish ])atriotism was greatly 
 prevented, and emotions which embraced the 
 whole 'lelhnic race were enkindled and fostered 
 by those general meetings which, from time to 
 time, called together, especially at Olympia, all 
 who were not aliens from the Greek common- 
 wealtii, niaiked out by the use of that noble in- 
 strument ol'sjreech, tlie Greek tongue. 
 
 It is im|><»ssihle not to look with admiration on 
 the wise and caieful measures which' were taken 
 in order to make the gymnasia schools of order and 
 ef moral juopriety as well as of physical beauty. 
 Awaie o( tlie imp.irtance of the training, Solon 
 took tlie business under his special caie, laying 
 down minute regulations as to time, ])lace, and 
 extent, so th.it nothing miglit be left to chance or 
 caprice. Then the school, in general, had its 
 president— gymna.siarch, — and each separate de- 
 jiartment a separate head; as in the case of the 
 lorch-race, which had its lamparchy, or govem- 
 irrent, charged with the office of making, in con- 
 nection with it, all necessary arrangements. 
 There were, however, two officers whose names 
 and functions stiikingly serve to show how greatly 
 tJMte Greci<m institutions had a lavuurable in- 
 
 GAMES. 
 
 fli-»nce on character : the first was the kosmetei' 
 who.-e name comes from a word (kScthos) signify 
 Lnjj order and beauty, and whose olhce consisted 
 
 S\3. [T<iK;h-f»ce.] 
 
 in the special super'n<er'd«nc« of fvery thing 
 fitted to further these liigh qi.alities ; the otheT 
 officer was termed sophroniSU'S , end his business 
 was still more intimately condixivc to inform the 
 mind and give shajie and preb«u*-e t) the life, 
 since, as his designation (from aJtKpov) proves, hrt 
 was require! to guide the pupils to cwl^oojiii-ri, n 
 term for which we have no English ^qcivalent, 
 but which may ];ei haps he approximately -endere*' 
 by ' sound-mindedness.' The elder AthcK'ai.s vroty 
 so solicitous to give a right direction to tht uAiv 
 ence of the gymnasium, the palsstra, and tt» 
 stadium, that they annually elei;ted ten so 
 phronists (one out of each tribe), and the honou* 
 which wa.s attached to the oflfire may Ije learni 
 from the fact that, in some inscri|)tions, their name 
 stands before that of the gymnasiarchs (heads ot 
 the gymnasia) themselve.s. The usual province 
 of the sophronists extended beyond the limits of 
 the exercise-groimds, for they exercised over 
 the youth a general legal oversight. Even Iheii 
 play-houis were under the eye of the sophronist. 
 ^Vhen the young men joined in the solemn [iro- 
 cession of the grand national Panathenaa they 
 were under the guardianship of the sophronists. 
 Weie they ])vesent at the nocturnal festival lield 
 in honour of Hebe, they weie still attended by 
 and subject to tl)eir wise, exjierienced, and judi- 
 cious sophronist. That something even of a 
 sacred character belonged to these preparatory 
 exercises appears from the fact that the kosmetes 
 bore also the designation of iepfvs (priest), having 
 charge of certain sacrilices. 
 
 Were there no other consideration in their 
 favour, yet the severe examination to which can- 
 didates for admission to these contests were com- 
 jielled to submitf would suffice to s;itisfy tlie 
 reader that the tendency of the games was gooil 
 not less in a moral than a social joint of view. 
 Besides being questioned as to their condition — were 
 tlioy freemen or slaves? — and as to their blood — 
 were they really Greeks? — they had also to satisfy 
 their judges that their characters were fiee froi.> 
 all moral stain. In the ])ub}ic stadium the 
 herald, laying his hand on the head of the candi* 
 date, intpiired with a loud voice, 'Can any one 
 accuse this man of any crime? Is he a robber or 
 a slave? or wicked or depraved in his life?' 
 If he successfully passei) this ordeal the euidi*
 
 KAllDEN. 
 
 Jate wag then conducted to the altar of Jupiter, 
 tlie |,>iiii»lier ol" the i)erjiireil, wlieie wiili sdlt-rim 
 rites he was r*<iiiire<l to swear (if he could witli 
 truth aiid safety) that he liad ^iiie Ihioiigli llie 
 required ))re|i;iialoiy coiuse of disciidine, and 
 would al)stain fruin e\eiy hieacli of the laws in 
 the CDiite^t heloie hitu. On the suliject liere 
 treated of see West's Odes of Pindar, 2nd 
 edit.; Potters Antiquities of Greece. By Car 
 tlie hest work, however, is Kranses Die Gym- 
 nastik und Agonistik der llclUiun ; and his l)ie 
 Pythien, Nenuen uiid Jsthmien, Leipzig, lS'4l. 
 
 J. R. B. 
 
 GARDEN. Several gardens are nieiitiotied 
 >n tiie Scriptures, as the (garden of Eden (Gen. ii. 
 9,9, 10, 15), Allah's garden of herbs (I Kings 
 xxi. 2), the roviil garden near liie fortress of Zion 
 (2 Kiuj^-i xxi. H; XXV. 4), the royal garden of 
 the Persian kings at Susa (Estlier i. .') ; vii. 7, 8), 
 the garden of Joseph of Ariinatliea (Jolni xix. 
 41), and tiie gari en of Gelhseniane (John xviii. I). 
 It is clear, from Josh. v. 2, and Lam. li. 6, that 
 gardens were geneially hedged or walled, as indeed 
 Josephtis expressly slates lesjiecting the gardens 
 near Jerusalem {l)e Bell. Jud. v. 7). In Neh. 
 ii. 5, and John xx. 15, g irdeners and keepers of 
 gaidens hy occupation are indicated. 
 
 Gardens were jilantt-d not only with fragrant 
 end heautilnl ]iliints, hut with various IVuit- 
 l)earing and oilier tiees (Gen. ii. S; Jer. xxix. 5; 
 Amos ix. Ii). Thus h'c find mention of nut- 
 gardens (Ca!>t. vi. I'l), j,><)niegiaftat e-gardens 
 (Cant. iv. i;i), olive-gardens (j)eu<:. viii. 8; 1 
 Chron. xxvii. 28), vine-gaidens (Cant. iv. 2; 
 viii. 8). Here, however, we are not to suppose that 
 the gardens were exclusively occupied hy these 
 fruits, but that tliey were severally predominant 
 in the gardens to v/hich ttiey gave name. The 
 distinction, for instance, between a vine-garden 
 and a vineyard would he, that, in the latter, the 
 vine was cultivated solely for use, whereas in the 
 former it was ]ilanted for solace and ornatAent, 
 to cover walls, and to be trained in arbours and 
 on trellises. « 
 
 Gardens were, when possible, planted near 
 8tream.s, which afforded the means of easy irriga- 
 tion. This explains such passages as Gen. ii. 9, 
 »q., and Isa. i. iiO. But streams were few in Pales- 
 tine, at least such as aflorded water in summer, 
 when alone water was wanted for irrigation : hence 
 rain-water, or water from the streams which dried 
 up in simimer, was in winter stored up in re- 
 »ei-voirs, sjmcious enough to contain all the water 
 likely to l)e needeil during the dry season. In 
 fact many of our own large nurseries are watered 
 in the same maimer from leservoirs of rain-water. 
 The water was distributed through the garden in 
 numerous small rill-i, which traversed it in all 
 directions, and which were siqjjjlied either by a 
 continued stieam from the reservoir, or had water 
 poured into them by the gardeners, in the manner 
 ■liown in the Egyj)tian monuments. These rills 
 being turned and directed liy the foot, gave rise to 
 tlie j)hrase 'watering by the foot,' as indicative of 
 farden irrigation (l)eut. xi. 10). The following re- 
 presentation (No. 313) very clearly shows the way 
 in wiiich water was raised, by a balanced lever, 
 from the stream or reservoir, and jxmred into a 
 trough, whence it flowed into the various canals 
 for uiigafion. This method is still in use. 'ilier; 
 if a curious account of ancient garden irrigation 
 
 GARDEN. 
 
 in Pliny (nisi. yat. \].<.' 4\ wnich the 
 may consult with advantage. 
 
 7.W 
 
 314. [Waterin;; liarden.j 
 
 Gardens were dedicated to various uses ariictig 
 the Hebrews, such as we still lind prevailing in 
 the East. One most essential dill'eiencf between 
 them and our own is that they are not attached 
 to or in any way coiuu cted with tlie residence, 
 but are situated in the suliurbs, We have known 
 gardens from half a mile to a mile di-tant fi(im 
 the houses of the persons to whom they beUinged. 
 It is manifest that all the gardens mentioned in 
 Scripture were outside the several towns. Thii 
 is, however, to he understood of regular gardens, 
 for shrubs and (lowers weie often planted in the 
 ojien courts ol the dwelling-houses. 
 
 People re])air to their subuibau gardens to take 
 the air, to walk, and to refresh and solace them- 
 selves in various ways, for tlieir use tliere it 
 
 :t!5. [Ganlen-houfies ] 
 
 mostly in each gjirden a kind of gummer-houst 
 or pavilion, fitted up with much neatiiew, gailf
 
 736 
 
 GARDKN. 
 
 painted, and fnniis'ioii with seats, wlier* tlie visit- 
 ants may sit ami eiij y tlii!n:-(.i /cs. Here soine- 
 time-i lianqiicls ueie .mil aie si ill .^nven, attfiuied 
 by siti^'in^ .uul iiiiisic (Isa. li. 3; Ixv. 3). The 
 r.ustoiii ('f l(tn yiii^' llie^di ad in '^'aniens is iiidi- 
 caied in Gen. xxiii lit, i'O ; 2 Kini;s xxi. 4; 
 I Sain. XXV. 1 ; Mark xv. 4i) ; ami still (icrAirs 
 fometiinei in the Ka-t, but is not very prevalent. 
 We tin d it also anion^' tiie (iieeks ( Ilelindonis, 
 ^t/iL.i/j i. '2, ji, .J.jj, a, id the Ruinaiis (^Suetonius, 
 Galba, -20). 
 
 It is evident lliat the trarden? ,if the Hebrews 
 were ia a very c.insiderahle degiee deviitinl tii the 
 culture of medicinal herbs, the ]ue|iarati()n of 
 which in variiiiis ways was a malter of much 
 solicitude witii them (Jer. \ 'li. 2:1). This is still 
 the case in the East, wheiC vejetalile siini)los are 
 as tnncii eiii|)li)yed in medicine as tiiey were in 
 .his coimtry in the times of Gerarde and Cul- 
 pe})|)er. 
 
 It wtmld seem lliat the .lews were much in tlie 
 habit dt" peilorniin.^ their devotions in g^aidens 
 fGen. xxiv. G.'5 : Matt. xvi. 30; John ii. 4->; 
 xviii. I, %). Tins inteiesling j)racti(e, iiowever, 
 was ididatroiisly abnseil ; for die worsinp of idols 
 in these shady seclusions was not of mdVecjr.pnt 
 occurrence, and is often menlirned in Scri[jtine 
 (1 Kin-s xiv. 23; 2 Kind's xvi. 4; xvii. 10; 2 
 Chron. xviii 4; Isa. Ixv. 3; Ixvi. 17; Jer. ii. 
 20; iii. 3 ; K/.ek. xx. 2Sj. 
 
 Sucii are the ):rincipal points of information 
 concerning gardens which may be collected from 
 Scripture, or wliicli may be connected with the 
 Scriptural mtitnatioirs. 
 
 Tlie.le.vs in their cerea.onial treatises, have fre- 
 quent occa^i,>n to mention gardens, chiefly ibr the 
 purpose of showing what plants or seeds might 
 or might not lie planted or sown together under 
 die law against heterugene.iiis jiropagations (Lev. 
 xJx. 9 ; Dent xxi. 9, II). From this source some 
 curious facts rclaling t.i the arian^'einents of gar- 
 deTis may be g'e.ined. The l.illowing aie fr^^m 
 the Mi->ht)ic tieaflse Kilaim, whicli is devoted to 
 the- general subject: "Trees must not '>e gralled 
 on trees of adilVeient kind, n:)r one kind of shiub 
 on anotlier kind of shrub, nor yet trees on shiubs, 
 nor .shrubs on tree.s.' Rabbi Jehudah, however, 
 8ancti<ined this last practice. • Shrub, must not 
 be planted in a sycamore-bush; rne must not lie 
 grafted on white cassia, because that would lie a 
 shrub on a tree ; a sei.in of the Hg-tree must not be 
 planted among chalzub (sn];po-ied ' ivy '), to cool 
 it ; a vine brancii must not be suiil< (trained) info a 
 melon Ijed, to instil it^ juices fiierein. because that 
 is a tree on a ]i'ant ; puinpk n-seed must not beset 
 among mallow, in onler that it may be jjieserved 
 therein, as that is lieili in herb.' • In a gardeti 
 b«d that is six hands square live ditterent kinds ef 
 seeds may be .sown, namely, four kinds in the four 
 corners >t!' the bed, and a lift h in tiie centre. If 
 the bed has a lidge (l)order), thiiteeu dilferent 
 kinds may be .sown, three in each coiner, and one 
 ir. tiie middle of the bed." 'AH kinds of tield- 
 leeds mu-it not be sown in a garden bed ; but all 
 kinds of herbs (garden seed) may be sown therein." 
 'A ridge (border) that had been one hand high, 
 but is ibcreased in height, still remains good l)e- 
 causc it liad been orisrinally of lawful heigiit." 
 This applies, of course, to the ridges by which d f- 
 ferent [ilants which miglit not lawfully mingle 
 wevr seoarated. 'in a trench or dry kennel, one 
 
 GARDEN. 
 
 hand deep, three dilTerent kind? of seeds may b* 
 .sown, namely, one kind on each side and one kind 
 in the middle.' 
 
 It is very evident that where such careful dis- 
 tinctions a-id rules of sejiaialion existed, great 
 attention must have been leijuiied to tiie means of 
 dividing the dill'eient ])Iants fiom eacii other. 
 This was elVected not only by ri(La>s and tienchas, 
 but by ligiit f. nces of cane. Tiiis appears from 
 what I'oUo.vs: 'A partition of c.mes is cotisidered 
 a fence, provided the space between eacli I'uiiie ia 
 less than three hands wide, so that a young kid 
 cannot pa>s thiough. Iftheieisa breach in t'le 
 fence to the extent of ten amoth, it is consider' d as 
 a gate (entrance). ShouKl a gieater portion of 
 the fence be broken down, it is unlaw I'ul lo sow or 
 plant towards the lireuch. If tlieie are several 
 breaches in the fence, sliould the poilion stil! 
 standing be gieater than that broken down, it ii 
 permitted; but slionld the poition br(»ke/i down 
 be greater than that stan<ling, it is forbidden.' 
 Tliese examples aie selected only as sjiecimens of 
 tlie enilless modes by which the later Jews sought 
 to cany out with minute and impossilde exactness 
 the useful regulation of the Mosaical law. For 
 that law var;t:us reasons have been given, on which 
 we are not le'jtiiied to jiionounce any juiigmetjt: 
 but if ajipears to us that the economical grounds 
 which may be collected from the ell'ects which 
 ap]iear to result from the interdicted iiiactices, are 
 qinte sulKcient in themsel-.cs, wlietlicr oihers exist 
 or not. Tlius we (ind en.mieiated among the 
 radical defects (d' Hindu husbandry — 'the bar* 
 barons system of sowin,' tAO or three s]iecies of 
 grain in one (ield....The mode of reaping is 
 equally ilefective; if two or thiee species of grain 
 are sown in ihe same held, the Indian husband 
 man tieads down a great part ol'iiis crop in order ^ 
 to collect each kind sepaiately ; indeed, so fond 
 is he of this method of proceeding tliat he puisnes 
 it even when the crop is all of one kind, that he 
 may select what he deems the ripest ' (Teiinant's 
 Indian Recreations, in Ediiib. Itcciew, iv. 320). 
 There is no reason to suppose tl^at die gardens o( 
 the ancient .lews differed in any material respect 
 from those which are still found in Palestine. 
 Such ditVereiice as did exist was doubtless oc- 
 casioned cliielly by the minute rules which were 
 fviiinded ujiiin the law forbidding ihe iu'eimi-x- 
 tuie of diverse jilants and seeds. T iie gardens 
 of the Holy Land have l)e:n mentioned by 
 travellers in terms too vague and general to 
 alVord the basis of a satisfactory description. 
 Dr. Oliii seems to have )'aid most attention to 
 them. Of the gardens near .Siiechein he says, 
 ' Upon tinning an angle in the steep gorge we 
 found ourselves, as ifdiy enchantment, in the midst 
 of friiilful gaidens (illed with vegetaldes, (lowers, 
 and fruit-tiees, and all in the liigiiest peifectionot 
 luxuriance and beauty. t)lives, vines, acacias, 
 ]M)megraiiiites, tigs, mulberries, and several species 
 of ireej which I did not lecognise, are crowded 
 together in small enclosures, foitning an iinjier- 
 vious shade as well as an impeiielrahle thiid^et : 
 and yet the capabilities of the soil seem not to be 
 overburdened. Each separate tree and plant 
 thrives to admiration, and seems rather to protit 
 than sillier from the thick dark eanipy of branches 
 anil foliau^e, which entirely exclu.es the sun's rays 
 from the tangled huddle of trunks and roots. \ 
 beautiful mountain stream ninsihrougl the nudsl
 
 GARDEN. 
 
 of this forest of gardens^ in ii tliannel mostly avtl- 
 ficial and sometimes covcie'i : l)iit f he water often 
 rises into small I'oiinlaiiis, and Coinis several cas- 
 cades ' (Travels, in the East, ii. 3 ")()). TlieoraTi^e 
 ajid citron trees uliicli uboiind in these (j.irdeiis 
 near Sliecliem (see Sclinliert, Reise ins AJorycn- 
 lande, ii. 1 l(i} were prohably tiiose not recognised 
 by Dr. Olin, from their not being in fruit at tlie 
 time of his \isit. 
 
 The mural paintings of the ancient JCgyptians 
 iflbrd us much information respecting their gar- 
 dens and pr()ces-;es of gardening. Hut the 
 diflerence of climate, soil, and produce, in Egypt 
 and Palestine, was too material to justify us 
 in expecting nuich information from this source 
 respecting tlie gardens of the Hebrews. As, how- 
 ever, some notions on this head must have been 
 common tv* both countries, we subjoin the observa- 
 tions of Mr. VVafiicn on the gardens of Kgypt 
 {Arts, ^c. of Ancient Egypt, p. 108). 
 
 ' The ancient plans of gardens sliow that the 
 Egyptians were not less fond than our ancestors 
 of mathematical figures, straiyiit walks, archi- 
 tectural decorations, and vegetable avenues ; and 
 that they as tiiorougiily entered into the idea 
 of seclusion and safety suggested by enclosures 
 witliin encli)sures. It has been remarked that 
 in some old English ])laces tiiere were almost 
 as many walled comp.utments without, as a))art- 
 menls within doors ; and the same may t)e said of 
 Egyptian coimtry-iiouses. Tiiis ]Tinciple of se- 
 clusion, and an excessive love of uniform arrange- 
 ment, are remarkably dis[)layed in tiie plan of a 
 Jarge .square garden given in Professor Kosellini's 
 great wiik (/ Momunenti delV Egiitd). Here — 
 " Grove nods at grove, each alley iias a brother, 
 
 Anii iialf the platform just reflects the other." 
 This royal garden must iiave formed a most envi- 
 able retreat from "the intolerable day" of an 
 Egyptian summer. Tlie whole was shut in by an 
 emiiattled wall. On one side a canal nms along 
 just witiiont the walls. In the centre of the enclo- 
 suie is ai) oblong walled vineyard; tliC 'ines, 
 p'anted in rcws or avenues, are trailed above on 
 trellis-work form'ng shady arciied walks. The 
 space on one side this central vineyard exactly 
 corresponds to that on the other. In each there is 
 a row of palms, fcn oblong tank with water fowl, 
 four flower-beds on a lawn, and an open s\immer- 
 house on the margin overlooking tiie pool; an 
 oblong walled com|)artment of trees; a second 
 tank with water-fowl and flowers; and all along 
 within the wall of v-ircuit a row of trees of three 
 Kinds in regular alternations. At one end of the 
 girderi next the entrance is a building containing 
 ai)]uircntly one lar^e room, ]»erhaps for the royal 
 enfcrtaiinnents ; at the other end or back is a house 
 of tluee stories, which commanded a view of llie 
 vhole. This garden, with its sheltered walks, its 
 groves and tanks of water, its seclusion and pri- 
 vai;v. reminds us of the 'fair garden' of Joacim 
 at Babylon, with its baths, its deep shady coveits, 
 and its "privy gate,"' in the apocryphal story of 
 Susanu ill. 
 
 ' Obelisks anil jiylons, with flagstafTs and stream- 
 ers, seem to liave Ijeen occasionally introduced as 
 warden decorations. In the parched climate of 
 Egypt a large supply of wafer is aljsolutely neces- 
 lary for a thiiving vegetation; hence tanks and 
 C«<:ah form a chief feature in these villa scenes 
 W \*h rowi of palms laden with fruit on their 
 
 GATE. 
 
 731 
 
 margin, tliey recall Jeremiah'* poet cal roni]tii- 
 rison of " the man tliat friisteth in the Lord" to "n 
 trie ])Ianted by the waters, and that spieatleth oui 
 lier r(K)ts by theriv<r, atid shall not .see whon licfu 
 Cometh, liut her leaf shall Ije gre<'n : and shall 
 not be careful in the year of drought, neither .slia.-. 
 cease from yielding fruit," contrasted with " Ine 
 man who trustetli in man,'' who is " like the healii 
 in the desert, and shall not .see wli-n good comelh, 
 but sli.ill inhai)if the ]iiircheil j,laces in the wil- 
 derness, in a salt land and not inhabited" (Jer. 
 xvii. 8).' 
 
 GARLIC. [Shom.] 
 
 GATE, DOOR (INt;' ; Sept. ttiJatj), the en- 
 triince to enclosed grounds, buildings, ilwelli.'ig- 
 luiuses, towns, &c. Thus we find mentioned — 
 1. Gates of cities, as of Jeiusalem, its sliee])-gate, 
 fish-gate, &c. (Jer. xvxvii. 13; Neh. i. .'5 : ii. 3; 
 V. 3); of Sodom (Gen. xix. 1); of Gaza 
 (Judg. xvi. 3). 2. Gates of royal paiarcs 
 (Neh. ii. S). 3. Gates of the Temple. Tiie 
 temple of Ezekiel had two gates, one towards the 
 noith, the other towards the east ; the latter clased 
 (Ezek. xliv. 1, 2), the other must have beeno|)eM. 
 4. Gates of tumbs (Malt, xxvii. 60). 5. Gatc$ 
 ofpiisons. In Acts xii. 10, mention is made 
 of the iron-gate of Peter's prison (xvi. 27). 
 Prudenfius {Ufpicntf. Ili/inn. v. 316) speaks 
 of gafekee)iers of prisons. 6. Gates of cavern* 
 (I Kings xix, 13). 7. Gates of camps (Exod. 
 xxxii. 26, 27; see Hebr. xiii. 12). The cam)« 
 of the Romans had generally four gates ; of 
 which the first wa^ called porta prcetoria, tha 
 second dectimana, the tliird;;?oic(yja/w, the f'oinlli 
 quintana (Rosin. Antiq. Horn. x. Wa). The 
 camp of the Trojans is also described as having 
 had gates (Virgil, .^«. ix. 721). 
 
 We do not know of what materials the encli>- 
 sures and gates of the temjioiary camps of the 
 Hebrews were formed. In Egyptian monuments 
 such enclosures are indicated liy lines of" upright 
 shield-s, with gates ajiparently of wicker, defeiidtxl 
 by a strong guard. 
 
 310. [i;(;yptiaii Camp-gate.] 
 
 Gates ok Towns — As the gates of lowni 
 served the ancients as places of security [Fuktiki- 
 CAriONs],a durablf material was leijuiied forthem, 
 and accoidingly we find mentioned — I. Gates «/ 
 iron and brass (Vs. cvii. 16; Isa. xlv. 2; .Act* 
 xii. 10). It is piobable tint gates thus de.scril'ed 
 were, in f'a(;f, only sheeted with ])lates of coppet 
 or iron (Falier, Archwol. p. 297); and it is ]iiii- 
 bably in this sense we are to interpiel the hundred 
 brazen gates a.scrilied to the ancient Babyli'ii 
 Thevenot ( Voyayc, p. 2''3) ilesciiiie^ the six garra 
 of Jerusalem iis covered with iron : Hliicii is j,-n> 
 bably still the case witli tl e four giitos new cp^ 
 
 3 H
 
 738 
 
 GATE. 
 
 Other iron-covereil gates are n'.enlionfd by (ra- 
 velWs. such as some of the town piles ol' Alfi'iers 
 (Pitts Letter, viii ]) 10), ami of tlie towers of 
 the 90-calle«l iron bridge at Antiocii (Pococke, 
 vol. Ji. IT". 1. p. 172). Tiic ))rincipal gates of tlie 
 gre.ii nio-qiie at Diiiiascns are covered witli bras.« 
 ,'Miimidreli, p. 126), Gates of iron are also 
 mennoneii liv Hesiod {'I'hcofj. 732), by Virgil 
 \f-':n. i. 4*^2'; vii. 609), aiici by Ovid {Metam. 
 vii. 126). 
 
 2. Gates of stojie, and of jjearls, are men- 
 tioned in Isa. liv. 12, and Rev. x\i. 12, whicli, it 
 ■»a» justly iieen supposed, refer to such doors, 
 ^ut cut of a single slab, as are occasionally 
 liscL'vered in ancient countries. At Essouan 
 ^Syeue), in Upper Kgypt, there is a granite 
 gateway bearin j tiie name of Alexander, the son 
 .if Alexander the Great (Wilkinson, iii. 403). 
 The doors leading to the several chambers of 
 u\e so-called ' Tomljs of the Kings' near Jeru- 
 Kilem, were each I'ornjed of a single stone seven 
 iriclies thick, sculptured so as to resemble fiur 
 T-anels : the styles, muntins, and other parts were 
 ..ut witli great art, and exactly resembled tiiose of 
 1 door made by a carpenter at the present day — 
 Uie whole lieiog coui])lete!y smooth and polished, 
 tiid most accurate in their proportions. The doors 
 Uirned on ].ivo(s, of the same stone of which the 
 'jgat of tlietn wcrR composed, wliich were inserted in 
 corresponding sockets aliove and below, the lower 
 {enon Ijeing of course short. This is one of the 
 otodes in which heavy doors of wood are now 
 hung in tlic East. One of these doors was still 
 ranging in RLuuidrell s time, and ' did not touch 
 its lintel by at least three inches.' But all these 
 di'(>rs are now tlirown down and broken (Mon- 
 conys. p. 30S : Thevenot, p. 261 ; Pococke, ii. 
 21 ; Maundrell, sub March 2Sth ; Wilde, ii. 299; 
 Robinson, i. 530). Similar doors are descril)ed 
 by Dr. Chuke (Travels, pt. ii. vol. i. p: 252) in 
 the remarkal'le excavated sepulchres at Telmessus, 
 on the southern coast of Asia Minor; and others 
 were noticed by Irby and Mangles (Travels, p. 
 303 in the sepulciires near Bysan (Betlishan). 
 There are stone doors to the houses in the Ilaourau 
 beyond the Jordan (Burckhardt, p. .is) ; and 
 the present writer has repeatedly seen in thenoith 
 of Persia the street doors of suj)erior liouses com- 
 posed of a single slab of a kind of slate. In the 
 ancient sepulchre recently discovered, as described 
 by Dr. Wilde (Nurrative, ii. 343), the outer door 
 is i'ovmeii by a single shib, an 1 moves on horizontal 
 oivots that run inro sockets cut in the jiilasters at 
 the top, in the manner of a swinging hinge. 
 
 3. (Mtes of icood. Of this kind were jjrobably 
 the gaf^isof Gaza (Judg. xvi. 3). They had gene- 
 rally two valves, which, according to Faber's 
 ilcscriiifion (Archa-ol p. 30lt), had sometimes 
 smaller doors, or wickets, to afl'ord a passage when 
 the principal gate was closed — a fact which lie 
 applies to the iilu fralion of Matt. vii. 13. 
 
 Gates were generally ]irotected by some works 
 against the surprises ol' enemies (Jer. xxxix. 4). 
 Sometimes two gates were constructed one behind 
 another, an outer and inner one ; <^' there were 
 turrets on both sides (2 Sam. xviii. 2-1, 33; 
 ten Faber's Arclufol \i. 301). The gates of 
 the ancients were generally secured witli strong 
 hJ-r.vy liolts auil locks of l)rass or iron (Dent. iii. 
 5- I Sam. xxiii. 7; 1 Kin,'s iv. 13; 2 Chron. 
 rivi. 5; Jer. xlv. 2; xlix. 31: Ps. cxlvii. 13). 
 
 GATE. 
 
 This was probably d'.;ne with a vi» v to the lafetf 
 
 of the town, and to prevent liustile inroail? (Har- 
 mer"s Observations, vol. i. j). 188). TIa keys 
 of gates, as well as of doors, were generally ol 
 wood ; and Thevenot observes that gates might 
 be opened even witli the linger jiut into the key- 
 hole — from which Ilarmer elucidates the passage 
 in the Song of .Solomon, v. 4. 
 
 Tlie gates of towns were ke[it open or shut ac- 
 cording to circumstances : in time of war they 
 were closed against the inroads of tlie enemy (Josh, 
 ii. 5), but they weie ojieiied when the enemy had 
 lieen conquered. On festive occasions tliey were 
 also thrown wide open ; to which Ps. xxiv. 7 
 alludes. Tiila opening of llie gates, as well as 
 closing them, was done by means of keys. 
 That near the gates toweis were often constructed, 
 serving for defence against attacks of the enemy, 
 may be inlVried from Deut. iii. 5; 2 Sam. xviii. 
 2t; Judg. ix. 35, comp. with .'>2. So Juvenal 
 (.Sa^. vi. 200 j ])u(s the towers of the gates for 
 the gates tiiemselves. Virgil (/En. vi. 5.50) 
 represents the infernal gate as having a tower. 
 Enemies, therefore, in besieging towns were 
 most anxioug to obtain possession of the gates as 
 quickly as possilile (Deut. xxviii. 52; Judg. ix. 
 40; 2 Sam. x. 8; xi. 33; 1 Kings viii. 37; 
 Job V. 4; Isa. xxii. 7; xxviii. 6); and generally 
 
 3*- 
 
 tlie town was conquered when its gates were 
 occupied by the invatling troops (Deut. xxviii. 
 57; Judg. V. 8). Tliis observation is made also 
 bv several Greek and Roman autli irs (Herodian, 
 Ilistor. i. 12, § 11; Vugil, Jfi'^j. ii. P02. sq.). 
 In or near the gates, therefore, they placed 
 watchmen, and a sufliciently string guard, to 
 keep an eye on the mov ements of the enemy, and 
 to defend tlie works in ease of need (Ju Ig. xviii. 
 16; 2 Kings vii. 3; Neli. xiii. 22; see Herodian, 
 Ilistor. iii. 2, 6 21 ; Virgil, ./v'n. ii. 2ti5, sj. 
 335). 
 
 \Ve read that some {rirtions of the law wet* 
 to be written on the gates i.f towns, aw well a* 
 on the doors of houses (Deut. vi. 9; xi. 20); and
 
 GATE. 
 
 ]t tiiis is t6 1)0 literally unileislooil, it i-ecoives 
 illtisti'iition Hum ilie practice of tlie Mo>letn> in 
 painting passiii^^es ol' the Koran on (lieir [uiMic 
 and ])iiv.i(e gales. Various aidlicial figtnes anil 
 inscriptions were ciigraveil on tiieir gates liy tlie 
 Romans (Virgil, deorij. iii. 26, sq ). 
 
 Ciiminals were juiiiished without tlie gates 
 (1 Kings xx'i. 13; Acts vii. 59). wliicli explains 
 the jWLssage in Ileb. xiii. 12. Tlie same custom 
 existed among the Romans (see I'laut. Mti'U. Glo- 
 rios. act ii. sc. iv. (>, 7). At lionie exectitious 
 took place willumt the Porta M<.-tia or Ks(inilina. 
 As to the gale tiiiongh which Olni't was led, 
 liefore liis crucilixion, ojjiiiions difler ; some taking 
 it to have been tlie dnng-gate (Lamy. Apparat. 
 Geof/raph. c. 13. ^ 3, p. 321); others, following 
 Hottinger (Cipp. Ilcbr. p. 16) and Godwyn, un- 
 dersfiind it of'llie gate of judgment. But for all 
 that concerns the gates of Jerusalem, we must 
 refer to the article .iKiiUsAi.Eu. 
 
 Gates are often mentioned in Scripture as places 
 at which were holden courts of justice, to admi- 
 nister the law ind determine points in dispute : 
 (lence judges in the gate are sjioken of (^Gen. 
 xix. I; xxiii. 10, 18; xxxiv. 20 ; Dent. xvi. 18; 
 ivii. 8 ; xxi. 19; xxv. 6, 7 : Josh. xx. 4 : Rnth iv. 
 1; 1 Sam. iv. IS; 2 Sam. xviii. 24; xix. R; 
 1 Kings xxii. 10; Job xxix. 7; Prov. xxii. 22; 
 xxiv. 7; Lament, v. 11; Amos v. 12; Zcch. 
 viii. 16). The reason of this custom is ajjparent ; 
 for the gates being places of great concourse and 
 resort, the courts held at them weie of easy ac 
 cess to all the people; witnesses and auditors to 
 . all transactions were easily secured (a matter of 
 mucli impDitance in the absence or scanty use 
 of written documents); and confidence in the 
 integiity of the magistrate was ensured by the 
 publicity of the proceedings. There was within 
 the gate a particular place, wliere the judges 
 sat on chairs, and this custom must be undfrslood 
 as releri-ed to wtien we read that courts were held 
 vnder the gates, as may be jnoved from I Kings 
 xxii. 10 ; 2 t/hron. xviii. 9. A])art from the 
 J.olding of cour's of justice, the gate served for 
 reading the law, and for proclaiming oidinances, 
 &c "i Chron. xxxii. G ; Neh. viii. 1, 3). We 
 See irom Prov. xxxi 23; Lam. v. 14, that the 
 inferior magistrates held a court in the gates, as 
 well as tlie supeiior judges (Jer. xxxvi. 10); atjd 
 even kings, at least occasionally, <iid the same (1 
 Kings xxii. 10 comp. wiili Ps. xxvii. 5). The 
 gates at Jerusalem served the s^ime purpose; but 
 for the great number of its iniiabitant.s, many 
 places of justice weie required. Thus we (ind that 
 Nehemiali (iii. 32) calls a i)articular gate of this 
 city tlie coiinsel-gate, or justice-gate ; which seems 
 to Jiave had a im fcrejjce, thougli not exclusive, 
 since courts must have been iiidden in the other 
 pat«s also. Alter the election of I lie second temple, 
 the<)elel)rated great Sanhedrim, ijidecd, assembled 
 in the so-called cuucluie caesuroe oi the temple; 
 but we rind that one of the Synedria of Jerusalem, 
 consisting of twenty-three memlieis, assemble<l 
 ill the cajt-gato, leading to tlie court of Isniel, the 
 other in the gate looking to the teinplt; mount. 
 »he same oistom prevails to the piescnt day 
 amon^ otlier Oiiental natiuns, as in tlic kiiigdom 
 iif AIwoccxj, where courts of justice are linUien in 
 tiie gate of the capital town ^Dopter, ThecUitun 
 fXBnartim^ p. 9, sq.). R«s])ect i/.g t li« Aby ssinians 
 Uid iniuUu ants of liindostau, «ve are likewise 
 
 GATE. 
 
 739 
 
 assured that they employed their gales foi courtf 
 of justice. Honwr (I i',(id^ i. 198, sq.j siafes ot 
 the Trojans, that their eldd-s a-sembled in the 
 gates of the town to deterinine causes aixl \'irgii 
 (./'.'«. i. .i09, sq.) says the same. Finni Ju\enal 
 {S(i/ir. iii. 11) it apjK'ars that with the R. in. ins 
 the jiorta Capeiia wiis used lor this puipose 
 (Griiv's TkesdicrtiS Aittfy. liummi. torn. x. p. 
 1 79). We may reller to J. 1). Jacobi's Dis.s'nt. 
 de furo in portis, Leipzig, 171 I, where the cus- 
 tom of holding courts in tlie gates of towns i;j ex- 
 plained at large. 
 
 Ill Palestine gales were, moreover, the plices 
 where, soinetimt'S at least, the priests delivered ti.eir 
 sacred addies.ses and iliscourses to (he jieople : and 
 we (ind that the prophets often jiroclaimed ihe.r 
 warnings and ))iopliecies in the gates (Pruv . i. 21 ; 
 viii. 3; Isa. xxix. 21; Jer. xvii. 19, 20 ; xxvi. 
 10; xxxvi. 10). 
 
 Among the heathen gates were connectid 
 with sacrdices, which were ollered in their imine- 
 Jiate vicinity; in which respect the hills near the 
 gales are mentioned (2 Kind's xxiii. fi). In Acts 
 xiv. 13, the gates of Lyslia are referred to, near 
 which sacrifice was olfered ; in which j-assage 
 Cameiarius, Dedien, and Ileinsius take nvKwvas 
 to mean the town-gale. 
 
 The gate was, lurther, a public place of meet- 
 ing and conversation, where the people a-seiii- 
 bled in large nmnliers to learn the news of the 
 day, and by various talk to while awav the tuo 
 tedious hours (Ps. Ixix. 13). It was ])iobably 
 with this view that Lot sat under the gate ik 
 Sodom (Gen. xix. 1); which is more ■ proliable 
 than the Jewish notion that he sat there as one 
 o( the judges of the city. 
 
 Under the gates they used to sell various mer- 
 chandises, jirovisions, victuals, e. g. at Samaria 
 (2 Kings vii. 1); and for this purpose there were 
 generally vece ses in tlie space under them (see 
 Herodian, vii. 6. ^ 6). The same is stated by 
 Aris'ophanes {Eqiiit. 1245, ed. Dlnd.) of the gates 
 of the (rieeks. But with respect to the markets at 
 gates, the present wiiler would note what has often 
 occurred to his own notice in dillerent ])aitsof tlie 
 East, which is, that the commodities sold at the 
 gates are almost exclusively ciiuntry produce, 
 animal or vegetable, for the supply of the city, 
 and not manufactured goods, which are invariably 
 sold, in the bazaars in the heart of the town. The 
 gate-markets also are only held for a lew houi-s 
 early in the morning. 
 
 On an u])roar having broken out at Jerusalem, 
 the headsof (he [leople met under tlieNew-gate(Jer. 
 xxix. 26), where they were snie to find insurgents. 
 The town-gates were to the ancient Oiienfals what 
 the coneehouses, exchanges, markets, and cciurts 
 of law, are iii our large towns: and such is slill 
 the case in a great dcj^'ree. although (he ii.tnMliiot'on 
 of co(lt'e-li..uses lia-s in this, and other le-pectg, 
 caused some alteration Of Eastern nianneis. In 
 capital liiwns the quidnuncs occasionally sat with 
 the same views near the gate of the royal [Kilace, 
 where also tlie ollicers and messengers of the [alace 
 loungeil about; and where jiersons having suits to 
 oilier, favours to beg, or wishing to recommend 
 themselves to favourable iintice, wculil wait day 
 after day, in tlie hoiie of attracting (he notice ol 
 the prince or great man at his entrance or coining 
 forth (E.stli. ii. 19: 21, iii. 2). 
 
 Gates are put figuratively for public platM of
 
 740 
 
 GATE. 
 
 OATE. 
 
 towns aniJ i)akces. Tlie gates of a town arc also residence of Pluto (see Virgil, Jin. r'l. 417, iq.) 
 rtit ijj8tea<l of the town itself (Gen. xii. 17; Jn tlie i)asi;ige, tl.tn, Matt. xvi. 19, by ' gate* ol 
 K»iv. 60; Deut. xii. 12; Ps. Isxxvii. 2). ' l>eir nmat be uiideratooii all aggvessions by tlw 
 
 SIS. [P«lMe-G«t»1 
 
 Tlie gates of death, and of hell, occur in Job 
 xxxviii. 17; Ps. ix. 14; Micah ii. 13^. Diiors 
 and gat«3 of hell are chiefly introduced, Prov. 
 V. 5; l!?a. xxxviii. 10; Matt. xvi. 19; and the 
 Jews go so far in their writings as to ascril)e real 
 gates to hell (Wagenseil. Sota, p. 220). Virgil 
 (^n. vi. 126) also speaks of infernal gate*. 
 The origin of this metaphorical expression is not 
 dilTicult to explain ; for it was very common 
 »o use the woid gates as an image ©f large 
 
 ot 
 
 infenial empire Jipon the Christian churrh. 
 
 A-nong the ancient Egyptians doors were fre» 
 quen'ly stained so as ti) iuiitate foreign wood. 
 They were eitlier of one or two valves, turning on 
 pins of metal, and were secured within by bars 
 and bolts. Some of the l)ronze j)ins have been dis- 
 covered in the tombs of Thebes, and two of ihcm, 
 after Wilkinson, are tigiiied in No. 319, Ijgs. 2, 3. 
 They weie fastened to I lie wood with nails of the 
 same metal. The stone lintels and lloor behind 
 the thresliold of the tombs and temjiles still ex- 
 hibit tlie holes in wliich the pins turned, as well 
 as those of tl.'C bolts and bars, and the recess foi 
 receiving tlie opening valves. The folding-doors 
 had bolts in the centre, sometimes above as well 
 as l>elow ; a bar was placed across fiom one wall 
 to the other; and in many cases they were secured 
 by wooden locks jiassing over the centre (No. 320, 
 fig. 4) at the junction oi' the tw«> folds. 'It is 
 difficult (remaiks Sir J. G. Wilkinson) ta say il 
 tliese last were opened by a key, or meiely siided 
 backward and forward like a bolt; but if they 
 were really locks, they were probably upon tiie 
 
 principle of those now used in Egjrpt, winch an 
 of wood, and openeil by a key furnished with 
 ■everal pins answering to a smaller niimt>er thai 
 fall down into the hollow movable tongue, int« 
 which the key is rntrodnced when fliey open oi 
 fasten tlie lock.' For grejiter security they ar« 
 also occasionally sealed with a mass of clay. 
 This was also a custom of the ancient Egyptians, 
 as apj>ears from Herodotus (ij. 121); from tombo 
 actually so closed at Tlietjes ; and from the sculp- 
 tures, as in No. 32t), Hg. 3, where the door is thus 
 closed and sealed. To this custom there is an 
 allusion in Joli [Ci.ay]. At a later pericnl, when 
 iron cume into general use, keys were made ot 
 that metal, of the s^haiie shown in No. 319, fig. 4 
 Of the kind tlius indicated were prol>ably the 
 
 ero'iiies (Ps xxiv. 7); and in pagan authors llic lock and key which fastened tlie summei-parloii? 
 ■Unle of deiiaited souls is rq>resented as the of King Eghm (Jndg. iii. 23, 2&). In tJ»»»
 
 GATE. 
 
 use Ehud locked the iloor, and took away the 
 key ; but when tlie servants liecanie alarmed, they 
 Ciisily ojteneil it with another key, wliich suggests 
 that tlie lock, as in ancient Kgypt or tlie inoilern 
 East, was notiiing nioie tlian a iR'culiiuly con- 
 structed 0()eti holt <"l' wood, whicii Uie wooilen or 
 iTHjtal key was adii|)ieil to raise and thrust back. 
 The forms of tlie Egyptian dixirs may be seen 
 from the cuts. Fig. I, No. '6l\i, is from a curious 
 ancient model, in the Uiitish Mu.-eum, of a 
 small ancient Kgy|itian house, and may serve to 
 bliow very clearly how the doors of small houses 
 were formed, hung, and secuied. The elegant 
 cornice of the door, tig. 2, No. 320, will not 
 escape observation; (ig. I is a remaikable in- 
 stance of a folding-door. Tlie chief entiaiice to 
 houses was through a [lyramidal pylon on a pro- 
 jecting {)oi«li of coluHuis. whose capitals were 
 often ornamented with ribtwiis. 0\er the door- 
 way was sometimes a brief hierogiyphical legend 
 (Watlien, p. 101). This last circumstance le- 
 minds owe of the writing on their doors recom- 
 BieiMled to the Israelites, as already noticed. 
 
 GATH. 
 
 V41 
 
 321. 
 
 A companson of tlie ancient Egyptian doors with 
 hose now used in the East will probably suggest 
 ao incorrect notion of the provision among the 
 ancient Hebi'ews in this respect. A sort of in- 
 termediate idea arising from this comparison 
 *ill be found to furnish very satistiictory illus- 
 trations of most of the p^issages of Scripture 
 which relate to the subject. The present cuts 
 wonire little explanation. No. 321 is a very 
 
 sn. 
 
 usually painted in while or black. It tiieAii*, 
 ' He (i. e. God) is the Cieator, the Eveilaslinjf,' 
 and brings strongly to mind the Hebiew cubtont 
 to which we have more than once alluded. Iti 
 No. 322 (fig. 2) is another stieet«d(M>r of a inoii* 
 simple character. Doors are generally luipaintt'J 
 througiiout Western Asia and in Egypt. Tlie 
 other doors shown in the cuts belong to t)i« 
 internal front of the houses, and not to the e*r 
 teinal frontage or screen. Fig. 2, No. 32'.!, Iiaa 
 an 0{)en lattice over the door, and the elegant 
 proportion ol' the whole entrance claims allentinn. 
 No. 323 shows difl'erent forms of common d'xiia, 
 
 m \mm]^ 
 
 rrrr^ 
 
 ML 
 
 and the whole piece afl'ords an interesting illus- 
 tration of the basement of an Eastern house, with 
 the stone steps leading to the gallery, into whici* 
 all tlie state rooms anil family rooms Ofjen. In 
 conclusion, we introduce an engraving intended 
 to illustrate the higlily-tnriched doorways laed 
 in ornamental buildings, such as gardeu-housefl^ 
 summer-houses, &c. 
 
 ^ '--<'> 4, I 
 
 umial form of the street-door of a private house. 
 The ifiscri^ ion on the central compartment is 
 
 In the interior of houses it is not unusual 'o 
 see curtains instead of doors, esi^ecially in sum- 
 mer. This heljis to keep the apaituient cool, 
 and also enaiiles servants to enter without noise. 
 This custom originated in the use of tents. .Ac- 
 cordingly we tiiid that all the entrances of the 
 tabernacle had curtains, although the framework 
 was of woo<l (Kx(mI. xxvi. 31-33, 30, 37) ; and 
 even in the temple a curtain or ' vail' liirmed the 
 Be[>aration between the Holy and the Most Iluly 
 place. 
 
 GATH (n? ; .Sept. TeO ; Joseph. F/tto n» 
 riTTTj), one of the five princely cities of the Pb:« 
 listines, of which mention is made in Josh, xiii.8
 
 »43 
 
 GATH. 
 
 GAZA. 
 
 It was r>i-:e of tlie cities iipun wliicli tlie ark is 
 laid Ui have brou'^lit calamity (1 Sam. v. S, 9), 
 and wliidi (ifleieil in connection therewitii a ties- 
 pass-ofl'eiiiiu:, e icli due a u-oldeii enieiod (1 Sam. 
 vi. 17). Goli.itii, of tlie tainily of jjiaiits which 
 J(>shua spared (Josii. xi. 22), of which other 
 mcmhf'M niav l>e found meiitione<l in Scii|)tuie 
 
 Chion. xxi'. .5-8 ; 2 Sam. xxi. 19-22), has len- 
 (li'red (iath a word familiar from our diildhootl ; 
 but it is not cert.iiii whetiier Goliatt) was a native 
 or meiely a residnnf of (iath (1 Sam. xvii. 4). To 
 .•\clii.sh, king of (ialh, David lied for fear of Said 
 (I Sam. xxi. 10; xxvii. 2-7; Ps. Ivi.). At his 
 o.vn entreaty Davi I received from Acliish flie city 
 ofZikhi^'. David dwelt in the country of tiie Pid- 
 Jistines ' a full year and four months.' Da\ id's 
 connection with Gath throws lii,dit on the feelinj^s 
 wliich dictated the words (2 Sam. i. 20), ' Tell 
 it fihe cleat. I of " Saul and .Jonathan his son ') 
 not in Gath.' iJicali also (i. 10) says, ' declare 
 it (ihs wound come unto Judah, ver. 9) not at 
 Gatli." It was conquered liy David, and f,irlitie(l 
 both by him and by Rehoboam (2 Sam. viii. 1 ; 
 
 1 Chron. xviii. I ; 2 Chroii. xi. 8). From 2 Sam. 
 XV. 18, it a])pears that David had a band (600 
 men) of Giftites in his service at the rime of the 
 rebellion of Absalom. Tlieir devotedness to him 
 under Ittai their leader forms a beautiful e])isode 
 in the history of Da\id"s varied fortinie (2 ^'am. 
 XV. 19, sq.). Shimei's visit to Gath and its fatal 
 consp(]uences to himself may lie read in 1 Kings 
 ii .'59-46. In tlie reign of Solomon mention is 
 made of a king of Gath (1 Kings iv. 24), who 
 was doubtless a tributary ])rince, but ])owerful 
 enougli to cause ap])rehension to Solomon, aa 
 appears fjom the ])unishmetd he inflicted on 
 Shimei. Under Jehoash, Hazael, king of Syria, 
 look Gath (2 Kings xii. 17); from his successor, 
 Beiihadad, the place was recovered (2 Kings 
 xiii. 24). It must, however, have soon revolted; 
 for Uzziah (2 Chron. xxvi. 6), Knding it necessary 
 to w:n- against flie Philistines, ' l)roke down the 
 wall of Gadi.' Probaidy the coiKpiest was nof 
 of long diuafion. This c(;nstant withstanding of 
 tlie [lower of .lenisalem shows that Gath was a 
 place of great resonrces and high eminence — a 
 conclusion which is coiiHrmed by the language 
 Thployed by tlie ))rophets (Amos vi. 2; Micah i. 
 10). 'Gath,' Says Jerome (un Micah i.), 'is one 
 of the live Philistine cities lying near tlie confines 
 of JimUUi, on the road from Elenthercpolis to 
 iiiiy.a.: now it is a very large village." On 
 Jt-rem. xxv. the same authority declares that 
 Gjilh was n;it far from Azotus. Modern tra- 
 V "Mers give no descriiition of the place (Reland, 
 Pdliest. p. 7.S5, sq.). 
 
 Tlieie was a Gath-heplier lielonging to the 
 children of Zebulnn (.fosh. xix. 10, sq.), the 
 birth-|)!ace of the jirophet Jonah (2 Kings xiv. 
 2'), lying not far from Sepjilioris on the road to 
 Tiberias. Another Gath (G.ath-rimmon, Josh. xix. 
 45) lay in the territory of D.m. It was a Levite 
 city (Josh. xxi. 24; 1 Cinon. vi. 69). In the time 
 of Eusebius it was a very large village, ' twelve 
 miles from Diospolis, as yon go hence to Elen- 
 theropolis' (Onomast.). The Gath-rimmon men- 
 tioned in Josh. xxi. 25. as being in the tribe of 
 Manasseh, Raimier (Palusfinn) sun])oses to be 
 another Levite city; but Winer i lla^HltForfer- 
 bttch), with more likeliliood, iiscrilies its origin to 
 a mistake of the transcriber, who took the word 
 
 from the prece mg verse. Tl»e Septuagin( '„^ 
 haiecrav — .(. K. H. 
 
 GAULONITIS. [Goi.AN.] 
 
 GAZ.\ (rjy; .';ept. TdCa; Arabic, Ghuueh) 
 lies on flie roail leading from .\kabah to IIn,ron, 
 which pisses along nearly the whole lengtii ol 
 the great \Vady-el-.-\iab,ih. It is on '\\^ sea- 
 coast, in lat. 31'' 29', l..ng. ST 2!" (Hobi.nson), 
 in tiie country of the Philisliiies (Josh. xv. 47). 
 It is a very ancient place, as we lind if n»en- 
 tioned in Gen. x. 19, where it is given as one 
 of the border-cities of the Catiaanites. In Deut. 
 ii. 23, it is found as the jilace unto which the 
 Avinis dwelt. Joshua sn)ole die Canaaniles as 
 
 'm 
 
 .'■<^:* 
 
 
 
 far as Gaza (Josh. x. 41). but s)iarcd the .^na- 
 kims (giants) that dwelt theie (Josh. xi. 21 
 22). In the division of the land, Gaza fell to tin 
 lot of .(nrlah (Josh. xv. 47), and was taken by 
 him with the coast thereof (.(mlg. i. 13), bnt iti 
 inhabitants were not exterminated (Judg. iii. 3) 
 Gaza was one of the live Philistine cities whicl 
 ga\e each a golden enierod as a lresjia.<s-oli'erini 
 to the Lord (1 Sam. vi. 17). N)lonion's king 
 dom extended as far as Gaza (1 Kings iv. 24) 
 Hii' llie place appears always as a Philistine citj 
 in S":>;i'inc (Judg iii. 3; xvi. 1; 1 Sam. vi 
 17; 2 Kings x\iii. 8). Kezekiah -sniotetlie Phi 
 listines as far as Gaza (2 Kings x\ iii. 8). Gazt 
 fell into the hands of the Egyptians, jiioliabl) 
 Pharaoli-Neclu) (Jtr. xlvii. 1 ; conip. Herod, ii 
 159). The jiinphets speak in severe terms agains 
 it (Jer. xxv. 2t) ; xlvii. 5; Amos i. 0, 7; Zeph 
 ii. 4; Zech. ix. .5). After the destruction of Tyrt 
 it sustained a siege of two months against Alex- 
 ander the Great (Josejih Antiq. \\.9:. \'). Joualhai 
 Maccabaens (1 Mace. xi. 61) destroyed iti 
 suburbs; Simon .MaccabiEus (1 Mace. xiii. 43' 
 took the city itself, though not. without extraor 
 dinaiy ell'orts. Alexander .binnaeus s])ent a yea, 
 in besieging it and jiunisliing .ts iniiabitauti 
 {Antiq. xiii. 13. 3'. The ])lace was rebuilt b) 
 Gaiiiniiis {Antiq. xiv. 5. 3). It was among thi 
 cities giien iiy Augustus to Herod {Antiq. xv. 
 7. 3), after whose death it was united to the pro- 
 vince o!' Syria (^-l«i'/<p. xvii. 11. 4). 
 
 (iaza is celelnated lor the exiiloit recorded oi 
 Samson (Judg. xvi. 1-3), who ' took the doors at 
 the gate of the city, and the two posts, and w»nl
 
 GEBA. 
 
 away with them, bar and all, aiul put tliem on 
 his alioulileis, and carried tliein up to tlie t<)|) of 
 a hill that is liefoie Hebron." Tlie Hhilisliiies 
 afterwards took S.imson, and put out his eyes, an<l 
 brought liim to Gaz;i, and lioiiud liiui with fctlers 
 of brass, and lie di I grind in the ])ris(in-h(nise : 
 he, however, pulled down the teni[ile ol' Dug-on, 
 god of the Philistines, and slew, together witii 
 himself, 'all the lurds of the Philistines," besides 
 men and women (Judg. xvi. "21-30). It was 
 near Gaza— on the road from Jcni>alem to that 
 place — that Philip baptized the eunncli 'of great 
 authoritj' under Canduce, queen of the Ethio- 
 pians " (Acts viii. 2(5, stp). 
 
 (iaza lay some "listance from the sea (Arrian, 
 ii. 2(5), though it liad a jwit on the sea, called 
 rd^a irpls OaKaffaav, ' Gaza on the sea,' called 
 also Majunia (6 Maiovfias), which Constantine 
 called Constantia, from the name of his son, 
 giving it, at the same time, miinici|)al rights. 
 Julian took away this name and ordered it to be 
 culled the port of Gaza. Subseciuent emperors 
 restored the name and the privileges of the jilace. 
 It was afterwards called the sea-coast of Gaza. 
 Further particulars may be read in Reland 
 (J'alastina, p. 791, sq.), where mention is nude, 
 from Fausanias, of something like a parallel to 
 the feat of Samson ; and where, as well as in 
 Kuinoel (in loc), and in \V \nei(IIa)ultoirttef buck, 
 m voc.'), explanatory circumstances may be found 
 of the words in Acts viii. 26 — ' Gaza, which is 
 desert.'— J. R. B. 
 
 G.IZELLE. [Antelope.] 
 
 GEBA (yaJ ; Sejjt. To^aa). It is often stated 
 tliat G'el)a and Gilieah were names of the same 
 
 filace. The two names are indeed only mascu- 
 ine and feminine f"orms of the same word, signi- 
 fying 'hill;" hut that they were two dilVerent 
 places is evident from Josh, xviii. 2-1; com]i. 28 ; 
 1 Sam. xiii. 2, comp. 3 ; Isa. x. 29. Geba be- 
 longed to the tribe of Benjamin (Josh, xviii. 24), 
 and was assigned to the priests (Josli. xxi. 17 ; 
 1 Chron. vii. 40). The Philistines were smitten' 
 from Geba unto Gazer by David (2 Sam. v. 2)); 
 Asa rebuilt Geba and Mizpeh with the stones of 
 Ramah (1 Kings xv. 22 ; 2 Chron. xvi. 6). ' From 
 Geba'(in the north) to Beersheba ' (in the south) 
 (2 Kings xxiii. S), expressed the whole extent of 
 the separate kingdom of Judah, just as 'from 
 Dan til Beersheba' expressed the whole length of 
 Palestine. It would seem, from the manner in 
 wliicli Geba (Gaba) and Uamah are coupled in 
 Nell. vii. 30, that they were very near each other, 
 but the site of Geba is ncnv uiiknown. 
 
 1. GEBAL (^5.? ; Sept. re0d\), a district, or 
 perhaps sovereignty, south of Judaea, in the land 
 oi' Edoin. Gebal signifies a mountain, and ap- 
 parently belongs not to the most ancient times, 
 as it does not occur when the Israelites were actu- 
 ally in this quarter, but is first (bund in Ps. 
 Ixxxiii. 8, which was jirobably written in the 
 time of Jehoshapliat. The coiuitry south of tlie 
 Dead Sea. and on the east of tlie Glior, or great 
 falley, bears the same name (Jelial or Djebal) at 
 fJie present day (Burckhardt, p. 401, sq.), and is 
 doul)tle3s the same as the (xebal of Scripture, the 
 Gcbalitia (or rather Gobolitis) of Josephus, and 
 the G-balene of tlie itomans. Josephus says, 
 bideed^ that the sons of Eliphaz, son of Esau, 
 
 GEDER. 
 
 1«2 
 
 settled in that part of Iduma'a wliioh was called 
 Gebalilis, and that ilenominated from Amaiek 
 Amalekilis: ' Eor Iduuiiua (lie addK) was tiie 
 name of a large country, which in it^ scvenil 
 jiarls retaineil the names of its ^culiar inha- 
 i>\tMiU' (Autiq. ii 2. I). We may llierel'iire take 
 Geba! as til ' name of.tlie norlheiniiiii^t {Rirtiun of 
 Iduma-a, which was ne.irest to Pale-itine. 
 2. GEBAL. [Giui.iTKs.] 
 
 GEDALIAII (n;'?13, God-educated; Sept. 
 
 ToBoAia , son of Aliikam. and appointed liy Ne- 
 buchadnezzar go\eriior oi Juiia-a after the de- 
 struction of Jciu-ialem. lie uas piobably of 
 the numl>er of tho<e who quitted the city at llie 
 instance of the jnophet, justly desjiaiiing of (he 
 successful defence of a place which (.'od had uban- 
 doncd. Gedaliah had inherited his I'ather'ii 
 respect for Jeremiah (Jev. xl. 5, sq.), and was 
 moreover enjoined by Nebuzaiadan to look to 
 his safety and welfare. Gedaiiah was in c-.eiy 
 way worthy of the diflicult |)ost he had to till ; 
 and he adojited as the principle of his conduct 
 tiiat submission to existing circumstances whi(;li 
 was requisite in one who l«elie\ed tiiat Judah 
 liad, according to the declared will of God. l>eeii 
 jiistl)' doomed and punished for her iniquities, 
 and who yet believed that His loving^ kiii(lpi>s8 
 had not utterly departed fnim her. He esra- 
 blishcd the scat of his melancholy government 
 at Mizpali in the tribe of Benjamin : and iheie 
 the Jews, who had iled at the advance of the 
 ChaUhean armies, or when the lroo|is of Zedekrah 
 were disjiersed in the plains of Jericho, quilting 
 their retreats, began to gather around him. 
 Gedaliah wisely counselled them to submission 
 and quietness; and he promise'! on that condition 
 to ensure them the undisturbed eiijoymmt of 
 their possessions, and of the prnduce of the giound. 
 In this lu)j)e the labours of the field were le- 
 suined, and the extraordinary returns of that 
 season secured as if sjiecially given to repair the 
 recent injuries of war. But this calm was of 
 short duration. Among those who reti med was 
 a member of the royal family, named Ishmael, 
 who had taken rel'uge with Baalis, king of the 
 Ammonites. He ap])ears to have been irritated 
 at seeing one who was not of the house of David 
 seated upon even the shadow of David s throne; 
 and some of the I'riends of Gedaliah believed 
 him to be in a plot with Baiilis to take away bis 
 life. But the noble-minded goveiiKir lel'iised to 
 enteitain such a suspicion, and rejected with 
 honor the proposal of an over-zealous friend, wlin 
 ofi'eied to assassinate Ishmael. The susjiicion 
 which he thus generously repelled wa.s, however, 
 correct. He was murdered in (he midst of a 
 repast by this very Ishmael, whom he had receiveii 
 as a friend. This event happened about two months 
 after the destruction of Jerusalem, and by it thf 
 present ruin of Jiuhea seemed to be coiisum 
 mated, b.c. 588 (2 Kings xxv. 22-2G ; Jer. xxvix 
 14; r.\. 5; xli. 18). 
 
 GEDER 01.^. ; ^q't. FaStp). This woul sig- 
 nifies a wall, eiiclostiire, or fortijicd place, and 
 must be understood in this sense in tlie ensuing 
 names. Geder itself was the name of an ancient 
 town of the Clanaanites, in the plain country <jl 
 Jiidali (Josh. xii. 13), anil was perhui>s the same 
 as (rcderah.
 
 lU 
 
 GKHKRAH. 
 
 GEDKRAfI Cn"1"».)-, Se])!. rddripa). a city in 
 'iie pl.iin of Jn.lali f.losli. xv. ."(i i. ])rol)al)Iy the 
 (tanne witli the ]ire(re(tin;; (Teder, ami with Beth- 
 pailer of 1 (Jlnon. ii. 51 II seems to have be- 
 loii|,'e(l to the faiDil y nt' Caleb. 
 
 GKDEROTH (nh't? ; Sej)!. TfiScip). a city 
 in the ];laiii countiy of JnilaTi (Josh. xv. 11), and 
 one of those whicli the Philistines took fruni king 
 Ahaz (2 Chniii xxviii. IS). 
 
 GEDOR ("I'nil; Sej,?. FeSScip), an ancient 
 city in the m mnta'ns of .Ii;ih\li (Josh. xv. 58), 
 eoiue of wliosp inhabitants joined Da\iil at Ziklag 
 (] Cljron. xii. 7). It is (l()iil)tfnl wlietlur this be 
 the same Gedor in whose fertile \ alley tiie .Simeun- 
 iles found good ])a8tiMe lor their flocks ( 1 Ohron. 
 iv. ,'^9). Dr. Rol>insi)n, travelling from Jemsalem 
 to Ga/,:i, came in -sij^lit of a place ca'led Jednr, 
 with 1 iiins, on the bvow of a mountain ridge, which 
 he identilies with (iedor. 
 
 GKH.\ZI C\7\i. visioii-vaUei/ ; Tie^T). a servant 
 of Elisha, whose entire confidence he enjoyed. 
 Uis history is involved in that of his master 
 [KlishaJ. He jjersonally appears in reminding 
 his master of the best, mode of reu ardiiig the kind- 
 ness of tiie ShiinaiTiite (2 Kings iv. 14). He was 
 jiresent at the i)itervieiv in which the Shunainite 
 Jnade knowii to the prophet that her son was dead, 
 and was sent forward to lay Elislia's statV on the 
 ciiild's face, which he did without effect (2 Kings 
 iv. 31). The most remarkable incident in liis 
 career is that wliich caused his ruin. \\ hen 
 Elisha, with a noble disinterestedness, declined 
 tl»€ rich gifts pressed upon him by tlie illustrious 
 leper w bom he had healed, Gehazi felt distressed 
 that so favourable an opportunity of proliting l)y the 
 gratitude of Naaman had been so wilfully thrown 
 away. He therefore ran after the retiring chariots, 
 and re<{Mested, in liis master's name, a jiortion of 
 the gift-i which had before been refused, on the 
 ground tliat visitors had jiist arrived for whom he 
 was unable to provide. He asked a talent of 
 silver and two d?psses ; and tlie grateful Syrian 
 made nim TaKe two "alents instead of one. Having 
 dejj(vsited this sjwil in a jrlace of safety, he 
 again aj)p!'ared before Elisha, wiiose honour he 
 had so seriously comjjromised. His master asked 
 him where he had been'? and on his answering, 
 * Thy servant went no whither,' the prophet put 
 oil the .severities of a judge, and having denounced 
 his crime, jjassed ii])on him the terrible doom, that 
 the lejjrosy of which Naaman liad been cured, 
 sliould cleave to him and his for ever. ' And he 
 wejit forth from his jire^ence a leper as white as 
 snow ' (2 Kings v. 20 27). ii.c. 894. 
 
 We altervvards find Gehazi recounting to king 
 Joram t!ie great (U^eds of Elisha, and, in the pro- 
 vidence of God, it so happeneil that when he was 
 relating the restoration to life of the Sluinamite's 
 son, the very woman with her son appeared before 
 tlie king to claim her house and lands, which had 
 been usuri^ed while she had been ab'^ent abroad 
 iluring the rfcent famine. Struck by the coinci- 
 dence, ilie king immediately granted Ler applica- 
 tion (2 Kings viii. 1-6). 
 
 Lepers weie compelled to live apart oi.tside the 
 towns, and were not allowed to come too near to 
 uninfected persons. Hence some difliculty has 
 arisen with respect to Gehazi's interview with 
 the King. Sever»' mswers occur. The interview 
 
 GENEALOGY. 
 
 may have taken jilace outside the town, in a gar- 
 den or ganlen-liouse ; and the king may hav« 
 kept Gehazi at a distance, with the usual precau- 
 tions which custom dictated. Some even sup[)08e 
 that the incident is misplaced, and actually 
 occurred belbre (iehazi was smitten with leprosy. 
 Others liasten to the o|)])osite coitclnsion, and 
 allege tlie jirobaliility that the leper had then 
 rejx'iited of his crime, and had been restored t4 
 health by bis master [Lepeus]. 
 
 GEHENNA. [Hinnom, Vai.i.ey ov.] 
 GEMARA. [Talmud] 
 
 GE.MARIAH (nn)?|, Ood-per/ected ; Sept 
 Ta/^apias), the son of Shaphan, and a scribe of the 
 tem|)Ie in the time of Jelioiaivim. Baruch read 
 aloud the jirojihecies of Jeiemiah to the people at 
 tlie official chaudier of Gemaiiah, which wa» 
 attached to the new gate of the Itmple built by 
 king Jotliam (Jer. xxxvi. 10; comp. 2 Kings xv 
 35). Gemariah's son Micliaiah having reported 
 this to his father, Baruch was invited to repeat the 
 reading at the scribes" chamiier in the palace, 
 liefore Gemariah and other scribes and council- 
 lors, who gave an account of the matter to tb« 
 king (Jer. xxxvi. 10-26). B.C. 607. 
 
 2. Gbmakiah, son of Hilkiali, who, with 
 Elasah, son (A' Shaphan, was sent to Babylon by 
 king Zedekiah with his tribute-money for Nebu- 
 chadnezzar. He also took charge of a letter from 
 Jeremiah to the Jewish cajitives at Babylon, 
 warning them against the I'alse prophets who 
 deluded tliem by promises of a speeily returr» to 
 tiieir own land (Jer. xxix. 3, 4). b c. 599, 
 
 GEMS. [Stones, Precious.] 
 
 GENEALOGY (from the Greek ytyea^^la, 
 compounded of ytvos, race, and Myos, discoune) 
 signifies a list of ancestors set down both in their 
 direct and collateral order. 
 
 We read of no nation which was more careful 
 to frame and preserve its genealogical tables than 
 Israel. Their sacred writings contain genealogies 
 which extend through a j^eiiod of more than 
 3500 years, from the creation of Adam to the 
 captivity of Judah. Indeed, we tind from the 
 books of Ezra and Nehemiah that the same care- 
 fulness in this matier was observed after the 
 captivity ; for in Ezra ii. 62 it is expressly 
 stated that some who had come up from Babylon 
 liad sought their register among those that were 
 reckoned by genealogy, but were not found ; 
 tiierelbre were tliey, as ])olluteil, removed from the 
 priesthood. The division of the whole Hebrew 
 nation into tribes, and the allotment to each 
 tribe of a specified portion of the land of Ca- 
 naan as an inalienable jKissession, rendered it in- 
 dispeiisatde that they should kee[i genealogical 
 tables. God had, however, a still higher object 
 than that of gi\ iug stability to property in Isiael, 
 in leading successive generations of His [leopU* 
 thus to keep an accurate list of their ancestry, 
 That they shouhl do tliis was especially required 
 from the moment that the voice of prophecy 
 declared that the jnomised Messiah should Ije o/ 
 tlie seed of Abraham, of the (losterity of Isaac, oi 
 the sons of Jacol). of the tribe of i idah, and of 
 the family of David. 
 
 The Rabbins afhrm that after the Captivity tn« 
 Jews were most careful in keeping their pedi- 
 .grees {Babyl. Ge7nar. Gloss, fol. xiv. 2). Josepbus
 
 GENEALOGY. 
 
 '^De Vita sua., ji. 998, D) states that lie traced liis 
 own descent (Vom tlie tiil)e of Levi by public 
 rcgittera. And lie inlorms us tliat, however dis- 
 jiersed and deinessed his nation were, lliey never 
 rieglectetl to have exact j;eneaK)4ical tah!i-s |)ie- 
 iKirfd from the authentic documents wliich were 
 Kept at Jeiiisalein ; and tliat in all their sulVer- 
 ings they were (laiticularly caii'l'iil to jiieserve 
 those tables, and to have tliem leiiewod I'lom lime 
 to time. Since, hnwever, the |)erio<l of their de- 
 struction ;is a nation by tlie Romans, all their 
 tubles of descent seem to be lost, and now they 
 are utterly unable to trace the j)edi,i<iee of any 
 one Israelite who might lay claim lo be their 
 promised, and still expected, iMessiali. Hence 
 (JliTUitiaiis assert, with a force that no reasonable 
 
 GENKALOGY. 
 
 7M 
 
 and candid Jew c;in rcsiat, tiial S/iiloh inuit hatM 
 come. 
 
 We find traces of the existence of the public 
 tables of descent, to which ,!(Kephus lelcrs. in tlie 
 New Testament: the taxation sjiiiken of by St. 
 Luke ii. 2, 3, would clearly indicate this; for 
 how could each one be ai)!e to ^o to his iiwii <;iiy, 
 unless he knew tiie sijecilic tribe lo which he 
 bclonj;eil1? Hence it was, we think, that Si. Paul 
 was able with confidence to appeal to the He- 
 brews concerning the lineage ol" Ohrist; ' for it is 
 evident,' s.iys he, ' that our L<ird spruiig out o/ 
 Jiulali' (Heb. vii. 11; 2 Tim. ii. S). To evince 
 this lieyond reasonable doubt, il plca-'ed (iod to 
 give in by his iiH[)lred siTvanli, St Matthew and 
 St. Luke, tlie following genealogies: — 
 
 Matthew i 2. 
 
 1 Abraham . 
 
 2 Isaac . . 
 
 3 Jacob • 
 
 4 Judas 
 
 5 Phares . 
 
 6 Esrom . 
 
 7 Aram 
 
 8 Aininadab 
 
 9 Naasson . 
 
 10 Salmon . 
 
 11 Bo<iz . . 
 
 12 OI«d . . 
 
 13 Jesse . . 
 
 14 David . 
 
 1 Solomon .... 
 
 2 Roboam .... 
 
 3 Abia 
 
 4 Asa 
 
 5 Josaphat .... 
 G J Oram ...» 
 
 7 Ozias 
 
 8 Joatham .... 
 Ach.iz .... 
 
 10 Ezekias .... 
 
 1 1 Manasses .... 
 
 12 Amon .... 
 
 13 Josias .... 
 
 14 Jechonias, t. e. Jehoia- 
 
 kiiu or Eliakim 
 
 
 GrOO. 
 
 1 
 
 Adam , 
 
 2 Seth . . 
 
 3 
 
 linos . 
 
 4 
 
 Cainan 
 
 5 
 
 Maleleel . 
 
 6 
 
 Jared . 
 
 7 
 
 Enoch 
 
 8 
 
 Mathusala 
 
 9 
 
 Lamech . 
 
 10 
 
 Noe . . 
 
 11 
 
 Sem . 
 
 12 
 
 Arpiiaxad , 
 
 13 
 
 Cainan 
 
 14 
 
 Sala . . 
 
 Lj 
 
 Heber . . 
 
 If) 
 
 Phalec . 
 
 17 
 
 Ragau . 
 
 IS Saruch 
 
 19 
 
 Nachor 
 
 Thara . 
 
 Abraham 
 
 Isaac . 
 
 Jacob . 
 
 Juda . 
 
 Phares . 
 
 Esrom . 
 8 Aram . 
 y Aminadab 
 
 10 Naasson 
 
 1 1 Salmon 
 
 12 BooE . 
 
 13 Obed . 
 
 14 Jesse 
 
 15 David . 
 
 16 Nathan 
 
 17 Mattatha 
 
 18 Menan. 
 
 19 Melea . 
 
 Li;kb iii. 23. 
 
 . . . 1 Eliakim 
 
 . . . 2 Jonaii . 
 
 . . . 3 Joseph 
 
 . . . 4 Juda 
 
 . . . 5 Simeon 
 
 . . . 6 Levi 
 
 . . . 7 Maithat 
 
 , . , 8 Jorim . 
 
 . . . 9 Eliezer 
 
 . . . 10 Jose . 
 
 . . . 11 Er 
 
 , . .12 Elmodan 
 
 . . 13 Cosam 
 
 . . . 14 Addi , 
 
 . . . 15 Melchi 
 
 . . . 16 Neri , , 
 
 . . . 17 Salathiel , 
 
 , . . 18 Zorobabel 
 
 . . . 19 Rhesu . 
 
 1 Jechonias, I. e. Jebaiachio. 
 
 2 Salathiel. 
 
 3 Zorobabel. 
 
 4 Abi.id. 
 
 5 Eliakim. 
 
 6 Azor. 
 
 7 Sadoc. 
 
 8 .\chim. 
 
 9 Eliud, 
 
 10 Eleazar. 
 
 11 Mattlian 
 
 12 Jacob. 
 
 13 Joseph. 
 
 14 Jesus. 
 
 1 Joamu. 
 
 2 Juda. 
 
 3 Joseph. 
 
 4 Semei. 
 
 5 MattathiMk 
 
 6 Maath. 
 
 7 Nagge. 
 
 8 Esli. 
 
 9 Naum. 
 
 10 Amos. 
 
 1 1 Mattathiaa. 
 
 12 Joseph. 
 l.'i Janna. 
 U Melchi. 
 
 15 Levi. 
 
 16 Mat that, 
 
 17 Heli. 
 IS Joseph. 
 19 Jesus. 
 
 VVe do not find that there was any objection 
 iiiade til these genealogies, eiflin- by Jew or Gen- 
 tile, during the fh-st century. Had any ditliculty 
 on this head existed, we may reasonably sujjjjose 
 that the Jews, of all others, would have been but 
 too ready to detect and expose it. We may there- 
 fore fairly conclude tliat, whatever ditKculty 
 meets us now in harmonizing our Lords p,edigree 
 as given by the two Evangelists, it could have 
 had no place in the first age of the Christian 
 church In sidisequent ages, howiver, objections 
 were a.id still are made to the genealogies of 
 Mattliew anil Luke. We shall now consitler 
 ieni, 1st, as they apply to the Evangelists indivi- 
 dually ; amd 2iidly m compared one with the 
 »thei. 
 
 1st. It is objected that Jechoniah was not the soa 
 of Josiah, but his grandson. — Answer: Mattliewr 
 does not mean to say he was his son ; for verses 1 1 
 and 12 are obviously intended to designate two 
 dill'ereut persons, viz. Jchoiakim, and his son Je- 
 /loiachin. That the former is tiie person meant iu 
 verse 11, is evident from the addition of ' his bre- 
 thren.' Whose brethren? Not Jehoiachin's (or 
 Jechonias), lor he had none, but Jehoiakim's, viz. 
 Jehoahaz and Zedekiah, the former of whom 
 reigned before him (tiiougli a younger brother), 
 and the latter after him (1 Cliron. iii. 1.5. 16, 17). 
 Admitting this, we see the consistency of the Evan* 
 gel ist as to the ninnber of general ions in the second 
 and third series; whereas they who make JcchoniM 
 (verses II, 12) to be the same ]>erson leave vdf
 
 74« 
 
 GENEALOGY. 
 
 fcJENEALOGY. 
 
 thirtern in the second series, if Jeclionias be added 
 to the tliird ; or in tlie tliird, if lie be placed to 
 the second, ll" the objection had any truth, tlie 
 Evangelist would be pal|wbly inconsistent witli 
 aiinself! St. Jerome (ill MatthceiDH, cap. i.) con- 
 firms iliis view : — ' If Jeclionias be included in the 
 first tessarodecade there will not be fourteen gene- 
 rations : we tnay therefore assume that the lirst 
 Jeclionias meant Joakim and the latter Joachin — 
 the one spelt with the letters k and m, the otiier 
 with cli and n ; which letters, in the course of 
 time, by fault of transcribers, were confounded 
 oy Greeks and Latins.' Porphyry broiiglit tbrward 
 this objection against St. Matthew's genealo;^y, and 
 we find the same Fatlier, in his Comment, on Da- 
 niel, thus replying: — ' In the Gospel of Matthew 
 one generation seems to be wanting, for the second 
 tessarodecade ends with Joakim, the son of Josiah, 
 and the third begins with Joachin, tlie son of Joa- 
 kim ; Por])hyry, ignorant of tiiis, would exhibit 
 his own skill in ])roving the falsity of tlie Evan- 
 gelist St Matthew.' 
 
 2nd. It is objected that Matthew omits three 
 kings, viz. Ahaziah, Joash, and Amaziah (comp. 
 1 Chron. iii. and 2 Kings viii.), from his second 
 series. In reference to this objection it might 
 gudice to say that Mattliew, finding fourteen 
 generations from Abraliam to David inclusively, 
 contracted, most likely in order to assist memory 
 and give uniformity, the second, and possibly the 
 last series. If we compare Ezra vii. 1-5, with 
 1 Chron. vi. 3-15, it will be seen that Ezra, in 
 detailing, with apparent particularity, his own 
 lineal descent from Aaron, calls Azariah, who 
 was high-priest at the dedication of the First 
 Temple, the son, not of Johanan iiis fatlier, but 
 of Meiaiotli, his ancestor at the distance of si.\ 
 generations. Doubtless the desire of abriUgment 
 led him to omit those names with which there 
 were connected no very remarkable associations. 
 Some of tlieearly Fathers, however, give a dillereid 
 solution oftliis dirticulty. Hilary (in Matlhcenm, 
 cap. i.) says : ' Three generations are designedly 
 passed over by Matthew ; for Jaras is said to liave 
 begjtten Ozias, when, in fact, he was the fourth 
 from him, t. e. Jaras begat Ocbazias from the 
 Gentile family of Aliab, whose wife was Jezebel.' 
 That the omission of the three kings was a 
 punishment inflicted upon the house of guilty 
 Joram, to the fourth generation, is the view yet 
 more pointedly jiut forth by St. Jerome also, and 
 by many of our own best commentators. 
 
 3rd. Moreover it is said that St. Matthew terms 
 Zonibabsil the son of Salathiel, whereas in 1 Chron. 
 iii. 19, he is called the son of Padaiah. How is 
 this? We answer that tlie S^ptuagint version of 
 1 Clirori. iii. agrees with Matthew, and that this is 
 the manner in which Zorobabel is designated in 
 Eira, Nehemiah, and Haggai. Josephiis also 
 calls him the sou of Sataihlel. Were he not the 
 immediate son of Salathiel, but of Padaiah, yet 
 is it suitable to the language of the Jewish 
 uatioij, to count (lie grandson the son of the 
 grandfather. Thus Laban is called the son of 
 Nahor (Gen. xxix. 5), as being the son of Bethuel, 
 who was, in fact, the son ol' Nalior (ch. xxiv.47). 
 If, accordiii,' to another manner of renilering 
 ver. 17 and IS, Sal itliiel and Pailaiah were bro- 
 thers, Zoroiiabel might have been, by the Levirate 
 law, the natural son of the one and tiie legal son 
 of the other. 
 
 4th. 1 is again asked, if it be, as Mattnew 
 states, that Salmon, son of Naasson, prince o< 
 Israel, had married so reniarkaiile a person -At 
 Rahab, how then comes it that such a circum- 
 stance is not noticed in the book oi Josiiua if 
 This objection will have no firce if we remeinbci 
 that this l)ook, full as it is in describing the par- 
 tition of Canaan among the se\ eral tribes, is yet 
 very silent concerning the exploits, and even 
 names, of the subordinate leaders of Israel. There 
 is nothing therefore surprising in the circiini- 
 stance that it sliould pass over in total silence 
 Salmon's marriage with Rahab. Had the matter 
 in question been the espousal of Rahab by Joshua 
 himself, the presumption against its truth would 
 be very dilVerent. And indeed Kimchi, in Ids 
 Commcntanj on the Book of Joshua, adduces a 
 tradition to this elfect, taken from tlie Baliyloniaii 
 Talmud. Every consideration, moreover, of a 
 chronological character is in favour of the cir- 
 cumstance of the son of Naasson, born to him iu 
 the wilderness, being married to Rahab. 
 
 5th. But a far graver objection than that which 
 is alleged against St. Matthe\v for having omitted 
 names, is brought against St. Luke for having in 
 serted that of Cainan, as son of Arjjhaxad — a 
 name neither to be found in the Hebrew nor 
 Samaritan text, nor yet in any of liie Targunis 
 or versions, save the Septuagint, We may infer 
 from the fact that neither Philo nor Josephus, who 
 in other respects followed this version, receive this 
 name as genuine, that it was not found in the 
 earlier co]iies of the Septuagint. And it is clear, 
 moreover, that Irenaus, Atricanus, Eusebius, and 
 Jerome, reject it as an interpolation. See on 
 this subject Whitby's Preface to the Reader, and 
 Lightfoot's Harm.; also Uslier's Dissertation on. 
 Cainan, and Kidder's Demonst. of Messiah, • 
 
 We are now to compare the Evangelists as to 
 the points on which they agree and differ. 
 
 It does not ajipear that Celsus attacked the 
 genealogies on the score of any inconsistency \\'\X\\ 
 each other. Not so the Emjieror Julian ; lie made 
 their discrepancies the specific ground of attack. 
 Jerome (in Matt, i.) thus writes ; — ' Jul ianus Au- 
 gustus in this place attacks the Evangelists on the 
 ground o( discrepancy : Matthew calls Joseph 
 the son of Jacob, whereas Luke calls liim the son 
 of Hell! Had Julian been better acqiuiinted with 
 the modes of speech of the Jews, he would iiave 
 seen that one Evangelist gives the natural and the 
 other the legal pedigree of Joseph.' 
 
 The first solution of the apjjarent discrepancies 
 of the Ev-;mgelists (and to which this ancient 
 father obviously here alludes) is that of Africanus, 
 which, he informs us (Euseb. Hist. Ecclcs. i. 7J, 
 lie received from the relatives of our Lord, who, 
 because of their consanguinity to him. were called 
 Aia-irSirvvoi. It is to the efl'ect that Matthan, the 
 third in the list from Joseph, in Matthew's ge- 
 nealogy, and Melchi. the third in Luke's list, 
 married successively the same woman, by whom 
 the former begat Jacob, and the latter Heli. Hsli 
 dying without issue, his maternal brother took his 
 widow to wife, by whom heliadJose|ili, who. accord- 
 ing to law (Dent. xxv. 6), was registered by Luke 
 as the son of Heli, though naturally the son of 
 Jacob, as Matthew records him. This is the ex- 
 planation wriicii was generally admitted by Euse- 
 bius, Nazianzen, the writer oi Ad orlhodoxos, and 
 others, yw ages.
 
 GENEALOGY. 
 
 GENEALOGY. 
 
 740 
 
 Grutiu», however, availing himself of tlie tra- 
 iitioii tiiat Heli and Jacob were l)otli sons of the 
 fame motlier, but of (Jifl'eienl fatiiers (Mattlian 
 and Melchi), snjjposes tliat Litlte traces the na- 
 tural jiedigree of Clirist, and Matthew tlie legal. 
 This lie ar_<,'ues on two grounds. Fiist, tliat 
 Salathiel could not have been tiie natural sou of 
 Jechonias, wlio was childless — according to the 
 declaration of (iod by Jereniiali (xxii.) — and 
 was, tlierefore, as LuKe slates, the son, jirojierly so 
 uaii'ed, of Neri. of Nathan's line ; and, secondly, 
 that tlie Leviratc law imposed no necessity on 
 Jacob to marry Hell's widow, they being only 
 uteritie brothers. The learned commentator might 
 have been led ;o this view by St. Ambrose, who, 
 in his Commentary on Luke, says, ' Ileli, fratie 
 sine lil)eris decedente, co])uIatus est fratiis uxori, 
 et generavit filium Josepli, qui juxta legem 
 Jacobi (ilius dicitnr.' But both the reasons as- 
 signed by Grotius for diftering from the solution 
 of Africanus would seem to be founded on a 
 petitio principii. It does not appear an ascer- 
 tained fact that Salathiel was not the natural son 
 of Jechonias, nor yet that the law which oliliged 
 a man to marry the widow of -his tleceased bro- 
 ther might be departed from wlien they were only 
 maternal b'.ethven ; for even in cases of distant 
 relationship the law seemed obligator)', as v/e see 
 in the case of Boaz marrying Ruth, the widow of 
 his distant kinsman. Whitby defends Afiicanus' 
 account; Hammond, Le Clerc, and Wetstein, 
 agree with Grotius. 
 
 Dr. Barrett, wlio, in his preliminary disserta- 
 tion to a curious facsimile of a most ancient 
 MS. of St. Matthew's gosjjel, brings to bear upon 
 this difKcult question a large share of sound 
 learning and correct criticism, objects to the 
 above theory as given by Africanus and altered 
 by Grotius, on the ground principally, that it 
 refers entirely to the descent of Joseph from David, 
 without attempting to prove that the son of Mary 
 was the son of David. Dr. Barrett then states 
 his own hypothesis, viz., that Matthew relates the 
 genealogy of Josejih, and Luke tliat of Mary. 
 He sujiposes a suflicient reason, that after Mat- 
 thew had given his genealogical table another 
 should be added by St. Luke, fully to prove that 
 Christ, according to the flesh, derived his descent 
 from David, not only by his supijosed father 
 Josepli, but also by his real mother Mary. Tlie 
 writers who agree in this ojiinioii. Dr. B. divides 
 into two classes. First, those who assert that the 
 families of Solomon and Nathan met in Salathiel 
 and Zorobabel, alter which they sejiarated, and 
 were again re-united in Joseph and Mary : se- 
 condly, those who suppose that Salathiel and Zo- 
 robabel were distinct individuals, and deny that 
 any union took place between them previously to 
 the marriage of Joseph and Mary. He rejects 
 this latter opinion because it seems to contradict 
 the divine promise (2 Sam. vii. 12-lG), which in- 
 timates that Christ should be lineally descended 
 from David through Solomon. He therefore re- 
 ceives the former hypothesis, and supports it by 
 numerous and profound arguments. (See his 
 Preliminary Dissertation to Codex Rescriptus ; 
 Bee also, on both hypotheses, Lightfoot's Harmony 
 Ev. ; South's Sermon on Rev. xii 16, vol. iii. ; 
 Wetstein, ad Matthaum, i. 17; B.<6hop Kidder's 
 Demonst. of Messiah, part ii. to c. xiii. ; Hale's 
 Analysis oj' Chronology, vol. iii.). 
 
 In constructing their genealogical tables, it ii 
 well known that the Jews reckoned wholly by 
 males, rejecting, where the blood of the grand- 
 tatiier passed to tlie grandson through a daugliler, 
 the name of the daughter hersell', and couiitiliit thai 
 daughter's husband for the son of the rn.uenial 
 grandfather (Nutii. xxvi. 33 ; xxvii. i-l). Uii thi> 
 princijile Joseph, liegotteii by Jacob, niiuriesMiuy 
 the daughter of Heli : and in the genealu^'ical 
 register of his wife's family, is counted for Heli's 
 son. Salathiel, begotten by Jecuniah, niarriei 
 the tlaughter of Xeri, and, in like manner, is ac- 
 C0Mnte<l his swn : in Zorol)al)el, the onsjiring of 
 Salathiel and Neri's daughter, the lilies of Solo 
 mon and Nathan coalesce; Joseph and iSlary art 
 of the same tribe and family; they are Ijotii de- 
 scendants of David in the line of .Solomon; the) 
 have in them both the blood of Nathan, David't 
 son. Joseph deduces his descent tioni .Xiilud 
 (Matt. i. 13), Mary lioni Rhe.sa (Luke iii. 27) 
 sons of Z Jiobabel. Tlie genealogies of Matthew 
 and Luke are parts of one peifect whole, and 
 each of them is essential to the expLuialion of the 
 other. By Matthew's talile we prove the descent 
 of Mary, as well as Joseph, from Solomon ; by 
 Luke's we see the descent of Joseph, as well a^ 
 Mary, from Nathan. 
 
 But still it is iisked how know we tliat Mary 
 was the daughter of Neri ? 
 
 1. Because the angel Galiiiel, at tlie .Annuncia- 
 tion, told the Virgin tliat (rod would give hei 
 divine son the throne of his father David (Luke i. 
 32), and thus it was necessary to prove this by 
 her genealogy afterwards. , 
 
 2. Mary is called by the Jews vynS, ' the 
 daughter of Heli ;' and by the early Ciiristian 
 writers, 'the daughter of Joakim and Anna' 
 (Lightfoot, on Luke iii. 23). But Joakim atid 
 Eliakim (as dilTerent names in Hebrew foi 
 God) are sometimes interchanged (2 Cliron. 
 xxxvi. 4) : Eli or Heli then is the abridgment 
 of Eliakim. 
 
 3. Tlie Evangelist Luke has critically distin- 
 guished the real from the legal genealogy by a 
 parenthetical remark : 'ItjitoGs Lv {cis iyo/j.t(eTo) 
 vlhs 'lwcrri<p, rov 'H\i. ' Jesus being (as was re- 
 puted) the son of Joseph (but in reality), the son 
 of Heli,' or his grandson by the motlier's side, for 
 so the ellipsis should be snpjilied. Moreover, on 
 com])aring the two tables, we find that from .\bra- 
 ham to David they agree with each other because 
 they are in accordance with the genealogies ol 
 Genesis, Ruth, and 1 Cliron. iii. ; but from David 
 to Joseph they are evidently distinct lines of 
 ])edigree, agreeing only in two persons, viz., Sala- 
 thiel and Zoiobabel. 
 
 Again, it is objected, that the're are now in 
 Luke's genealogy seventy-sei;t'M names : whereas 
 Irenaeus, AtVicanus, and other eaily fathers, ac- 
 knowledge but seventy-two. But if, with fhein, 
 we omit the names Levi, Matthan, and Cauian, 
 as being interpolations, and also not count ili( 
 first and the last, then the number will be reduced 
 to seventy-two. 
 
 It i.s said that Abiud and Rhesji are called by 
 the Evangelists the sons of Zoiobabel, though in 
 1 Chron. iii. 19 we have no mention of there 
 among his sons. We remark that it was a cu« 
 tom with the Jews to call the same person bj 
 dillcrent names, and that t)\is custom was jiccu- 
 liarly prevalent about th» time of the captivilj
 
 U9 
 
 GENERATION. 
 
 (Dan. i. 6, 7; also compare 2 Sam. iii. 3 with 
 I Cliron. iii. 1). 
 
 Lastly, it is irKjuired, whence the Evanjj^el ists 
 had (heir genealogies IVonri Zorobabel to Christ, 
 there being nothinjj of" tiiem to be found in Scrip- 
 ture. We answer, froni tiiose authentic })ul)lic 
 tal)le3 kept hy the Jews, of which, as before 
 noticed, Josephiis speaks; and regarding which 
 also Eusebius (Hist. Eccles. i. l)says, ' Omnes 
 Hel)raB(nam generationes descriptae in Arciiivis 
 Tempi! secretioribiis habebatitur.' It was doul)t- 
 less from this source that they had the above 
 named parts of our Lord's legal and natural 
 pedigree; for, otherwise, they would have ex|)osed 
 tiieinsehes to tlie cavils of the Jews ; nor could 
 the Apostles have appealed, as they did, with con- 
 fidence, to Chiist"s jjedigree, as answering all the 
 requirements of prophecy. 
 
 In addition to tlie works already referred to on 
 this subject, tlie reader will do well to consult a 
 learned essay by trie Rev. VV. H. Mill, D.D., 
 being tiie Christian Advocate's publication for 
 1842. —J. W. D. 
 
 GENER.\TION. Considerable obscurity at- 
 tends the use of this word in the English Version, 
 which arises from the translators having merged 
 the various meanings of the same original word, 
 and even of several diflerent words, in one com- 
 mon term, 'generation.' The remaik is too just 
 that, in the literal translations oi the Scriptures, 
 the word ' generation' generally occurs wherever 
 the Latin has generatio, and the Greek ytvio. or 
 yeveats (Rees's Enoj. art. ' Generation). The 
 following instances seem to require the original 
 words to be understood in some or other of their 
 derivative senses — Gen. ii. 4, ' These are the ge- 
 nerations ' (niviri; Sept. 7] /81'^A.oy yevio-eccs; 
 Yu\g. ge>ierati<)nes), rather 'origin,' 'history,' &c. 
 T!ie same (Vreek words. Matt. i. 1, are rendered 
 'gerwalogy,' &c. by recent translators: Campbell 
 has ' lineage.' Gen. v. 1, ' The book of the genera- 
 tions' (mpin *1DD; Sept. as before; Vulg. liber 
 generationis) is properly a family register, a his- 
 tory of Adam. The same words. Gen. xxxvii. 2, 
 mean a history of Jacob and his descendants : so 
 also Gen. vi. 9, x. 1, and el.«ewliere. Gen. vii. 1, 
 'In tiiis generation' (HTH "IHl : Sept. ev ttj ytvea 
 rdurrj, Vulg. in generatione hac) is evidently ' in 
 this age.' Gen. xv. 6, » In the fourth generation ' 
 (^n ; Sept ytvio. ; Vulg. generatio) is an instance 
 of the word in flie sense of a certain assigned 
 period. Ps. xlix. 19. 'The generation of his 
 fatiiers' (1'n"l3K IITIJ?, Sept. yeveas irarfpuy 
 auTov) Geseriius renders ' the dicellitiff of his 
 fathers,' n e. the grave, and adduces Isa. xxxviii. 
 12 Ps. ixxiii. 1.5, ' Tlie generation of thy children' 
 ("^^J!! in, Sept. yevfS. riiiv vlHiv <rov} is ' class,' 
 'order,' 'description;' .as in Prov. xxx. 11, 12, 
 13, 11. Isa. liii. 8, ' Who shall declare his gene- 
 lation T (niT ; Se|)t. TTjf yfveav aiiToi) rls Siriyf)- 
 ctrai; Vulg. generatio) Lowtli renders ' manner of 
 life,' in translation and note, Init adduces no pre- 
 cedent. Some consi'ler it equivalent to yiTj ver. 
 10 : yevea (Sept.) answers to yiT, Esther ix. 28. 
 josephus uses -KoWiiv yevedv, Antiq. i. 10. 3 
 (Hengstenberg, ('hristoJogy of the Old Testament, 
 vol. i. Washington, 1830-9; Pauli, Analect. IJe- 
 hraic. p. 162, Oxford, 1839). Michaells renders 
 «t 'Where was the providence that cared for his 
 life?' Gesenius and Rosenmiiller, 'Who of his 
 
 GENESIS. 
 
 contemyKiraries reflected V Seller, ' Who c*a 
 describe his length of life 1?' In the New Test*. 
 ment. Matt. i. 17, -yevea/ is a series of i)ersons, a 
 succession from the same stock ; so used by Jose- 
 phus (Antiq. i. 7. 2); Pliilo (Vit. Mos. vol. i. p. 
 603); Matt. iii. 7, yeyir{jfi.aTa ix^^vuv, is well 
 rendered by Doddridge and others ' ' brood oi 
 vipers.' Matt. xxiv. 34, ■^ yivea ourij means the 
 generation or persons titen living contemporary 
 toith Christ (see Macknight's Harmony for an 
 illustration of this sense). Luke xvi. 8, els t^» 
 ytveav t^v eavrau, ' in their generations,' &c., 
 wiser in regard to tlieir dealings with the me/t oJ 
 their generation. Rosenmiiller gives, inter se. 
 1 Pet. ii. 8, yei/os fKKfKTOf, is a 'cho>en ))eople,' 
 quoted from Sept. Vers, of Isa. xliii. 20. The an- 
 cient Greeks, and, if we may credit Herodotus and 
 Diodorus Siculus, the Egyptians also, assigned a 
 certain period to a generation. The Greeks reck- 
 oned three generations for every hundred years, 
 i. e. 33,j years to each. Herod, ii. 142, yivftd 
 rpels auSfiOiv fKarhu trtd icni,, ' three generatioiu 
 of men make one hundred years.' This is nearly 
 the present computation. To the same effect 
 Clem. Alexandrinus speaks (Strom, i. 2) ; so also 
 Phavoriuus, who, citing the age of Nestor from 
 Homer (II. i. 250), tw S" ijSr} Svo fiivyevfai, ' two 
 generations,' says, it means that vnep€0i) ra f^ri- 
 Kovra (TTJ, ' he was above sixty years old.' The 
 Greeks, however, assigned ditt'erent periods to a 
 76*^0 at diti'erent times (Perizonius, Orig. .^gypt. 
 p. 175, sq. ; Jensius, Fercul. Literar. p. 6). The 
 ancient Hebrews also reckoned by the generation, 
 and assigned difl'erent spaces of time to it at dif- 
 ferent periods of their history. In the time of 
 Abraham it was one hundred years (comp. Gen. 
 XV. 16, ' in the fourth generation they shall coma 
 hither'). This is explained in verse 13, and iit 
 Exod. xii. 40, to be four hundred years. Caleh 
 WSLS fourth in descent from Judah, and Moses and 
 Aaron were foxirth from Levi. In Deut. i. 35 
 ii. 14, Moses uses the term for thirty-eiglit years 
 In later times (Baruch vi., in the Epistle of Jere- 
 miah, ver. 2) yivih. clearly means ten years. In 
 Matt. i. 17, yivik means a single descent from 
 father to son [Geneai.ogvI. Homer uses tli« 
 word in the same sense (II. 1. 250) ; also Hero- 
 dotus (i. 3).— J F. D. 
 
 GENESIS (Sept. Vfve<ns\ the first book ol 
 the Pentateuch, is, in Hebrew, called fl^CKIS, 
 from the word with which it begins. This vene- 
 rable monument, with which the sacred literature 
 of the Hebrews commences, and which forms 
 its real basis, is divided into two main parts; 
 one universal, and one special. The most an- 
 cient history of the whole human race is con- 
 tained in chapters i.-xi., and the history of Israel's 
 ancestors, the patriarchs, in chajjters xii.-l. These 
 two parts are, however, so intimately connected 
 with each other that it would be erroneous to 
 ascribe to the first merely the aim of furnishing 
 a universal history. The chief aim which jer- 
 vades the whole is to show how the theocratic 
 institution sidisequently founded by Moses was 
 rendered possible and necessary. The book, there- 
 fore, takes its staiting-jjoint from the original unity 
 of the human race, and their original relatiort to 
 God, and proceeds thence to the interruption 0/ 
 that relation by the appearance of sin, which 
 gradually and progressively wrought an extenui 
 and internal division in tne human race for
 
 GENKSIS. 
 
 wuit of file ]*inci]iles of divine life wliich 
 originally dwelt in man in j^enoial. l)iil wliicli 
 liad suljseqiientiy heen pieseivi'd (jmIv aniotiif a 
 gniall and sejiaiaie race — a lace w'liicli in j)ro- 
 gress of time liecame more and more isolated 
 from all the other trihes of tiie earth, and enjoyed 
 for a series of generations tliesjjecial care, hlessing, 
 and guidance of the Lord. The Mosaical theo- 
 cracy ajijiears, therefore, by the general tenor of 
 Genesis, partly as a restoration of the original re- 
 lation to God, of tiie communion of man with 
 God, and partly as an institution which had lieen 
 preparing hy God himself througli a loug series 
 of manifestations of his power, justice, and love. 
 Genesis tiins furnishes us with tiie inimary view 
 and notion of tiic whole of the theocracy, and 
 may llierefure be consideied as the historical 
 foundation without whicli the subsecpient history 
 of the covenant people would be incomplete and 
 unintelligible. 
 
 The unity and composition of the work, which is 
 a point in dis|)ute among the critics in regard to all 
 the books of the Pentateuch, have l)een ])articularly 
 questioned in the case of Genesis. Tiw question 
 wiis raised whether the sources from which the 
 writer of Genesis drew his information were written 
 documents or era. tradition. Wi iters as early as 
 Vifringa ( Obs. Sac. i. 4), Richard Simon, Cle- 
 ricus, and others, tliough they were of opinion 
 tliat Genesis is founded on written sources, did 
 not undertake to describe the nature and quality 
 of those sources. Another opinion, ailvanced iiy 
 Otmar, in Henke's Magaz. ii., that Egyptian 
 pyramids and other monuments of a similar 
 natine were the sources of Genesis, was but 
 transient in the critical world; while the attempt 
 of some critics not only to renew the previous 
 assumption that Genesis is founded on \Vriiten 
 •ources, but also to determine more closely the 
 character of those sources, has gained more last- 
 ing approval among the learned. Why dilTerent 
 names of God are prevalent in dilTerent jioitions 
 of Genesis is a question much discussed by early 
 theologians and rabbis. Astruc, a Belgian ])hy- 
 •ician, in his Covjcctures stir les Mhyioircs ori- 
 ffinaiix, &c., Bruxelles, 1753-8, was the first to 
 apjjly the two Hebrew names cf God, Jehovah 
 anil Elohim, to the subject at issue. Astruc's 
 denioiistiation had many feeble points. He as- 
 sumed that there had originally existed a number 
 of isolated documents, which had subsequently, 
 by the fault of transcribers, been joined and 
 gtnuig together in the present form of Genesis. 
 Eiclihorn's critical genius procured for this hy- 
 pothesis a favourable reception almost tiirougii- 
 out the whole of Germany. Eichhorn ])runed 
 away its excrescences, and confined his own 
 view to the assumption of only two difl'rent 
 d.icnments, respectively characterized by the two 
 •ames of Jehovah and Elohim. Other critics, 
 such as Ilgen ( Urkundcn des Jcnisalem Tem- 
 ftel-Archivs, 17'JS), Grambcrg (Adumbratio libri 
 Geveseos secundum /otitis. 182S), and others, 
 went still faither, and )'.re-sti'|iposed three dilTer- 
 ent documents in Genesis. Vater went much 
 beyond Eiciihorn. He fancied himself to be 
 able to combat the authenticity of the Ptnla- 
 teucri by producing a new hyiH)fhesis. He sub- 
 •tituted lor Eichlio-n"s ' liocumpnt-hyi) ^thesis ' 
 his own * fragmeiit-hyp .thesis,' which obtained 
 gnui authority e8i)ecijlly on account of its being 
 
 GENES1.S. 
 
 74S 
 
 adopfe<l liy De Wette. According to this opinion 
 (iencsis, as well as the giealer pail of the l'"n- 
 tatciich, consists of a great ntinibcr ol' very »n ail 
 detached fragments, inteiiiaily uMconne<Ied with 
 eacli other, but transcril)ed striiitini, uh\nH\^\\ oii- 
 ginJiling in very dilTerent times am fio-)i dilTeimt 
 authors This ' fragment-hypolhtsis ' luis now 
 been almost generally given up. Even its zealona 
 del'endeis, not excepting l)e Welle iiimseif, havf 
 relitii.iuished it. In its place tije Ibimer * docu- 
 ment-by (xitiiesis" has been resumed by S(.nie critics, 
 simplilied liowever, and supported by new and 
 better arguments. There is at piesent a grt-at 
 vaiiely of opinion among divines con<'erning ibis 
 hypothesis. The leading feulures of thi* diver- 
 sity may he comprised in tiie following sum- 
 mary. Accoriling to tiie view of Staiielin, i)e 
 V>'ette, Ewald, Von IJohlen, Tuch, and otlieis, 
 Genesiii is founded ou two jnincijMl original do- 
 cuments. Tiiat of Elohim is closely coimecfed 
 in its paifs, ami forms a whole, while that of 
 Jehovah is a mere complementary document, 
 supplying details at those ]ioinls wliere the former 
 is abiiipt and deficient, &r. These two docu- 
 ments aie said lo iiave been subseijnently com- 
 l)ined by tiie hand of an editor, so ably as ifieii 
 to render their sejiaration difficult, if not alto- 
 gether im])ossible. Hut Raiike, HengsienLieig, 
 Drechsler, Hiivernick, and others, maintain lliat 
 Genesis is a book closely connected in all its 
 parts, and composed by only one author, while 
 the iise cf the two dilleient names of God is not 
 owing to two dilTerent .sources on which Genesis 
 is founded, but solely to the dilTerent signilica- 
 tions of these two names. The use of eacii ol 
 the two nanies, Jehovah and Eloliim, is eveiy- 
 where in Genesis adajited to the sense of the 
 passages in which the writer has puqiosely in- 
 serted the one name or liie other. Tins jioint ol 
 view is the more to be considered, as it is the [le- 
 culiar object of the author to )ioint out in (leiK-sis 
 the gradual and jirogiessi^e development of the 
 divine revelations. The opponents iiave in vain 
 attemjited to discover in (jenesis a few contta- 
 dictions indicative of dilTerent documents in it; 
 their very admission, that a fixed ])lan and able 
 compilation visibly ]iervade the whole of the 
 book, is in itself a refulal ion of such sn])j)osed con- 
 tradictions, since it is hardly lo be conceived, 
 that an editor or compiler who has shown so much 
 skill and anxiety to give unity to the book should 
 have cared so little aliout tiie removal of those 
 contradictions. The whole of Genesis is |)er- 
 \aded by such a freedom in the selection and 
 treatment of the existing traditions, such an ab- 
 sence ol all trace of any previous source or docu- 
 ments which might in some measure have con- 
 fined the writer within certain limits of views and 
 exjiiessions, as to lender it quite impracficalde to 
 se[)arate aiMl fix upon them specifically, even if 
 ihere weie portions in Genesis drawn from earlier 
 wiillen documents. 
 
 That first question concerning the miity of the 
 book is closely connected with another (jneslion, 
 respecting its authenticity, or whetlier Moses wai 
 the author of Genesis. \Ve confine ourselves her* 
 to only a few remaiks on the authenticity of 
 (ienesis in ])articular, and refer the reader foi 
 fuither infoimation to the aitii le Pkntatkl'ch 
 Some critics ha\ e atietn|ited to ascei lain the period 
 when (ienesis Wiis com)K>sed, from a few passages
 
 ISO 
 
 GENESIS. 
 
 GENESIS. 
 
 in it, wliicli tliey say must be anachronisms, if 
 Mases was really Ilie author of the book (v. ex. gr. 
 Tuch, Commeniar iiber Genesis, p. Ixxxv. sq.). 
 Among' such jKissages are, in particular, Gen. 
 xii. 6; xiii. 7; ' And the Canaanite was then 
 in the land." This remark, they say, could only 
 nave licen made by a writer who lived in Pa- 
 lestine after the extirpation of tiie Canaanites. 
 But the sense of the passage is not that the 
 Canaanites had not as yet been extirpated, but 
 merely that Abraham, on his arrival in Canaan, 
 had already found there the Canaanites. This 
 notice wiis necessary, since the author subse- 
 quently desciibes the intercourse between Abra- 
 ham and tiie Canaanites, the lords of the country. 
 .According to the explanation given to tlie passage 
 by the opponents, such an observation would be 
 quite a supeifluous triviality. Also the name 
 Hebron (Gen. xiii. 18; xxiii. 2), they say, was 
 ruit introduced till after the time of Moses (Josh. 
 xiv. 15, XV. 13). This, however, does nit prove 
 anything, since Hebron was the original Hebrew 
 name for the jjlace, which was subsequently 
 changed into A7'ba (^by a man of tiiat name), 
 but was restored by tiie Israelites on their entrance 
 into Canaan. The opponents also maintain that 
 the name of the place Dan (Gen. xiv. 14) was 
 given only in the post-Mosaical period (Josli. 
 xix. 47; Judg. xviii. 29). But the two last 
 pa.ssages speak of quite a dillerent place. There 
 were two places called Dan; Ddxi-Jaati (2 Sam. 
 xxiv. 6), and V)a.n~ Laish, or Leshem. In Genesis, 
 they further add, frecjuently occurs the nam« 
 Bethel (\\\. S; xxviii. 19; xxxv. 15); wliile even 
 in the time of Josiiua, tiie place was as yet called 
 Ltiz (Josh, xviii. 13). But the name Bethel was 
 not first given to the place liy the Israelites in 
 the tiirie of Joshua, there being no occasion fur 
 it, since Betliel was the old patriaichal name, 
 wliich the Israelites restored in tlie place of Luz, 
 a name given by the Canaanites. Another pas- 
 s ige in Genesis (xxxvi. 31), ' Before tlieie leigned 
 any Iving over the children of Israel,' is likewise 
 supposed to have been written at a jieriod wiien 
 the Jews had already a king over them. But 
 the broachers of these objections forget that this 
 passage lefers to those promises contained in the 
 Pentateuch in general, and in Genesis in par- 
 ticular (comp. (Jen. xxxv. 11), that there .should 
 hereafter be kings among the Isiaelites as an inde- 
 jiendent nation. In comjiaring Israel with Kdom 
 (Gen. xxxvi ), the sacretl wiiter cannot refrain 
 from observing that Edom, tliougii left without 
 divine jiromises of jiossessiiig king.s, nevertheless 
 possessed them, and obtained the gioryof an inue- 
 pendent kingdom, long before Israel could think of 
 such an independence; and a little attention to the 
 sense of the passage will show h:n\ admiraiily the 
 oliservation suits a writer in the Mosaical jieriud. 
 Tiie jiassage ((j'en. xv. IS) where the land of 
 Israel is described as extending from the river 
 of Egypt (the Nile) to the great river (Eupiirates), 
 it is .illeged, coidd only have been penned during 
 the s-])lendi(i [leriod of the Jewfe, tlie times of David 
 and Sohmion. Litcralhj taken, however, the re- 
 mark is inapplicable to any jie iod, since the king- 
 dom of the Jews at no jieriod of their iiistory ex- 
 teniled so far. That promise must, theiefoie, be 
 taken in a rhetorical sense, describing the central 
 point of the proj'cr cuuntry as situated between 
 ibe lv«9 rivers. 
 
 Tlie historical character of the contents rf 
 Orenesis forms a more comprehensive subject at 
 theological discussion. It is obvious that the 
 opinions regarding it must be principally influ- 
 enced by the dogmatical views and principles 
 of the resjiective critics them-elves. Hence the 
 great variety of opinion that still prevails on that 
 subject. Some, such as ^'atke, Von Bohlen, and 
 others, assert tiie whole contents of Genesis to be 
 uiihistorical. Tuch and others consider Genesis 
 to be interwoven with mythical elements, but 
 think that tiie rich historical elements, especially 
 in tiie account of tiie patriarchs, can be dearly 
 discerned. Some again limit the mythological 
 part to the first two chapters oidy ; while others 
 jierceive in the whole biok a consistent and truly 
 historical impress. The field of controversy is 
 here so extensive, an<l the arguments on both sides 
 are so numerous, that we must content ourselves 
 in tills article with a very i'ew retnaiks on the sub- 
 ject. Gettesis is a book consisting of two con- 
 trasting jiarts : the fiist jiart introduces us into 
 the greatest proljlems of the human mind, such 
 as the Creation and the fall of man ; and the 
 second, into the quiet sol ittide of a small defineii 
 circle of families. In the former, the most sub- 
 lime and wonilerful events are described with 
 childlike simplicity; while, in the latter, on the 
 contrary, tlie most simjile and commun occurrences 
 are interwoven with the sulilimest thoughts and 
 reflections, rendering the small family circle a 
 whole world in history, and the ])rlncipal actors 
 in it prototyjies for a whole nation, and for all 
 times. Tlie contents in general are strictly 
 religious. Not the least trace of mythology ap 
 pears in it. Consequently tliere are no mythical 
 statements, because whatever is mythical belongs 
 to mythology, and Genesis plainly shows how 
 very far leniote the Hebiew mode of thinking 
 was from mythical fioetry, which might have 
 found ample opportunity of being brought into 
 play wiieti tlie writer began to sketch the early 
 times of the Creation. It is true that the nar- 
 rations are fraught with wonders. But jirimeval 
 wonders, the marvellous deeds of God, are the 
 very subject of Genesis. None of these wonders, 
 however, bear a fantastical impress, and there is 
 no useless prodigality of them. Tiiey are all 
 jienetrated and coniiecied by one coTDUion leading 
 i ilea, and are all related to ilie counsel of God 
 fur the salvation of man. This principle sheds 
 its lustrous beams through the whole of Genesis; 
 theieliire the wonders therein related are as llttlf 
 to be ascribed to the invention and imaginatic.i 
 of man as the whole plan of Goc for human 
 salvation. The foundation of the divine tiieo- 
 ciatical institution throws a strong light ujion 
 the eaily patriarchal times ; tlie reality of the one 
 proves the leality of the otiier, as described ii? 
 Genesis. 
 
 The se])arate accounts in Genesk^ also mani- 
 fest gieat Internal evidence of truth if we closely 
 examine them. They bear on (heir front the 
 most lieautiful impress of truth. Trie cosmogony 
 in Genesis stands unequalled fimong all others 
 known in tlie ancient world. No mythology, 
 no ancient philosojihy, lias ever come up to the 
 idea of a creation out of nothing. All the 
 ancient systems end in Pantheism. Materialism, 
 emanatli n-theory, &\, But the Bililical cos- 
 iiiogony occupies a place jf its own. aiu/ tli*f»
 
 GENESIS. 
 
 fore must not be ranked amoiip:, or confounded 
 with, any of the ancient systems of niytliolou'y or 
 philosonliy. Ttie niytliological and ])liilo3oi)l)ical 
 cosniogonie-! may liave l>een derived from tlie Bi- 
 blical, as being later depravations iiiui misrepre- 
 sentations of Biblical trulli ; but the contents of 
 Genesis cannot, rice versa, have lieen (ierive<l from 
 mythology or jiiiilosopliy. Moreover, only with llie 
 Biblical fundamtiital idea of the relation of God to 
 his creatures, con-eqnently only with the doctrine 
 of creation out of nolliiug, is it ]M)ssihle to fmiiish 
 an historical representation of creation. Every sys- 
 tem deviating fiom this coiitains an internal con- 
 tradiction against history, because it necessarily 
 substitutes the idea of eternity for that of time; 
 and consequently does not admit of any history, 
 but only of eitlier mytliology or abstract re- 
 flection. The historical tielineation also of the 
 Creation and i.f the fall of man does not bear 
 tiie least national niterest or colouring, but is of 
 a truly universal nature, Avhile every niythus 
 be-Ms the stamp of the national features of tlie 
 nation and country wliere it origiiiated and ibund^ 
 lievelopment. All mythi are subject to con- 
 tinual development and variati6ns, but among the 
 Hebrews the accoiuits in Genesis stand firm and 
 immutable for all times, without the least thing 
 being added or alteie.l in them for tlie purpose 
 of further (level o^ iiient, even by tlie New Testa- 
 ment. What a solid guarantee must there be 
 ill this foundation of all subsequent revelations, 
 since it has l)een admitted and niaintained by 
 all generations with such immovable firmness ! 
 The ancient iieatiien traditions coincide in many 
 jwints with the Biblical accouTit.s, and ser\e to 
 illustrate and confirm them. This is especially 
 the case in tlie ancient traditions concerning tht 
 Deluge (Gen. vi. 9), aiid in tlie list of nations in 
 ,he tenth chanter; for instance (Gen. x. 4), Tar- 
 sliish is called the son of Javan. Tliis indicates 
 that the ancient inhabitants of Tarshisii or Tar- 
 tessus in S])ain were erroneously considered to 
 be a Phoenician colony lilce those of other towns 
 in its neigliltuurhood, and that they sprang from 
 Javan, that is, Greece. That they were of Greek 
 origin is clear from the account of Herodotus (i. 
 163). Also (ver. S), Nimiod, the ruler of Bai)el, 
 is called tlie son of Cush, which is in iemarl<able 
 unison with the mythological tales concerning 
 Bel and his Egyptian descent (comp. Diodor. Sic. 
 i. 2f^, PI ; Pausan. iv. 23, .5) Sidon alone is 
 mentioned (ver. 15), but not Tijrns (comp xlix. 
 13), wiiich arose only in the time of Joshua 
 (Josh. xix. 29,; and that Sidon was an older 
 town thai) Ti/rus, liy which it was afterwards 
 ec!i})S(jd, is certified by a number of ancient 
 reports (comp. Hengstenberg, I)e Rebus Tyrio- 
 ru'/i, \t[). 6, 7). 
 
 Willi the ijalriarchal history (xii. sqq.) begins 
 an !ii,~toiica' sketch of a peculiar character. The 
 circuuistantial details in it allow, us to examine 
 III ire close'y flie historical char;icier of these 
 Accounts. Tiie numerous descriiitious (if the 
 mj ie of life in those days furnish us witli a very 
 vivid pictvuH We meet everywhere a sublime 
 simplicity quite worthy of patriiidial life, and 
 never to l)e found again in later history. One 
 cannot sLppo e t!iat it would have been jiossible 
 ill H later peiiod, estranged from ancient simpli- 
 tifv, to itiv(?nt such a picture. 
 
 The autiienticitj of the patriarchal history 
 
 GENES1.S. 
 
 751 
 
 could 1)6 attacked only by analogy, the tfii« 
 historical test of negative criticism ; but tlie 
 ])aniarchal history iias no analogy ; while u 
 great historical fact, the Mosaical theocracy 
 itself, miglit here lie adduced in favour of the 
 truth of (ietiesis. The theocracy stands without 
 analogy in the history of the liuiiian race, ami is, 
 nevertheless, true above all historical doubt. But 
 tiiis theocracy cannot have enlered into hi«l(>iy 
 without ])reparatory events. Tue facts which led 
 to the introductiun of the theocnicy are contained 
 in the accounts of Genesis. Moieover, this pre- 
 jiaration of the theocracy could not consist in the 
 ordinary jirovidenlial guidance. The race of 
 jiatiiarchs advances to a marvellous dtstinalion : 
 the road also leading to this destination inust lie 
 peculiar and extraordinary. The ojiponents of 
 Genesis forget that the marvellous events of 
 jjotriarchal history which olVend them most, jiar- 
 take of tliat character of the whole, by which 
 alone this history becomes commensmale and 
 possible. 
 
 There are also many separate vestiges warrant- 
 ing the antiquity of these traditions, and proving 
 that they were neither invented nor adorned ; for 
 instance, Jacob, the progenitor of the Israelites, 
 is introduced not as the firstborn, which, if an 
 inihistorical and merely external exaltation of 
 that name had been the aim of the author, would 
 have been more (or this purjose. 
 
 Neither the blemishes in the history of Abra- 
 ham, nor the gross sins of the sons of Jacob, 
 among whom even Levi, the progenitor of the 
 sacerdotal race, forms no exception, ai-e con- 
 cealed. 
 
 The same antiior, whose moral jirinciples are 
 so much blamed by the o]iponents of Genesis, on 
 account of the descrijition given of the lite of 
 Jacob, produces, in the history of Abraham, a 
 picture of moral greatness which could have 
 originated only in facts. 
 
 The faitliliilness of the author manifest.- itself 
 also esjiecially in the description of the expe- 
 dition of the kings from Upjier to Western Asia; 
 in his statements concerning the person of Mel- 
 chizedek (Geri. xiv.); in the circumstantial 
 details given of the incidents occurring at the 
 purchase of the hereditary buriai--<lace (ch. 
 xxiii.); ill the genealogies of Arabian tribes 
 (ch. XXV.); in the genealogy of Kdom (ch. 
 xxxvi.); and in many remarkable details which 
 are interwo\ en witli the general accounts. In the 
 hisiory of Joseph the ];atriarclial liisT(-iry comes 
 info contact with Egypt; and here the accoinits 
 given liy ancient classical writers, as well as the 
 monuments of Egyjjt, frequently furnish some 
 splendid confii mat ions. Eor instance, the account 
 given (xlvii. 13-2(5) of the manner in wliich the 
 Pliaraolis became jinij^ietors of all the lands, with 
 the exception of those belonging to the priests, 
 is confirmed by Heiodotu- i^ii. Ill9), and liv l)io 
 dorus Siculus (i. 73). The niamier of embalming 
 descril)ed in (io. 1. entiiely agree> with the de- 
 si-.ripfion of Ilfrc.dotus, ii. 81, &c. For other data 
 of a similar kind, compare Hengstenberg (Die 
 Biicher Mosis mid Acyijptcn, ji. 21, s(j.). 
 
 For the im]u>itaiit ci,iiim''ntaries and writing» 
 on Genesis, see'the article Pkn'i-.vtju cii. 
 
 GENNESARETH. [CiNNKitR-rn.] 
 GENNESARETH, LAKE OF. [Ska. J
 
 ns 
 
 GENTILES. 
 
 GENTILES (D^ij ; Sept. rei/oi), awoid which, 
 botl) in tlie Hebrew Gnj/im, and in the Anglo- 
 Latin 'Gentile,' by wliicSi we translate it, 
 means literally, 'the nations.' It was ajiplied 
 by the Hebrews to all individuals or commniii- 
 ties not iimler the law — that is, all the nations 
 of the world exce])tini,' the Jews. But in later 
 times some small states, and many individuals, 
 embraced tlie law; and they were distinguished 
 from the Gentiles, as well as tVom the Jews, by 
 the name of Pkosei.ytes firpoflr/jAurot). In 
 Rime places om- authorized version h.is tlie word 
 'Gentiles' wlieie the ori^'iiial has ''E\ATj'/es, which 
 is usually and projierly rendered 'Greeks.' 
 
 GEOGRAPHY, considered as a systematic 
 description of liie earth, took its rise at a much 
 later period than other sciences, prol)ably because 
 it is of less essential necessity to man ; yet the 
 elements of the knowledge out of which scientific 
 geography is constructed must have existed as 
 Bonn as men turned their attention to tlie earth on 
 which they dwelt, and found it necessary to 
 journey from one part of its surface to another. 
 
 Like most other sciences, geography owes its 
 elementary cultivation as a science to the Hellenic 
 race, who, from the mytliic period of tiieir history 
 down to the destruction of the Westein empire 
 (a.d. 476), continued to )irosecule the study with 
 more or less system, and to more or less delinile 
 results : yet it must be added that it is only in a 
 qualifieil sense that the ancients may be said to 
 have Known or advanced scientific geogra]>hy. 
 
 It is the Hebrews who present us with the earliest 
 written information of a geographical kind. In 
 tlie account of creation mention is made of a spot 
 called Eden, out of which a river, after watering 
 Paradise, ran, and ' from thence it was parted, and 
 I)ecanie into four heads' (I'ountains) which sentforth 
 as many rivers, Plson, Gihon, Hiddekel, Piirat or 
 Euphrates. Of these the last is the only stream 
 that is identified. Joseplius, on this j)oint, says 
 (^Afitiq i. 2). ' The gaiilen was watered by one 
 river which ran round about the whole earth and 
 was parted into four parts.' Pison he identifies 
 with die Ganges, Gihon with the Nile, Hiddekel 
 with the Tigris, and the Phrat with the Eujiliiates. 
 The idea here presented is that of a vast circular 
 plain (the earth), with water, a river, or the sea 
 (wKeaySi in Homer, 11., xxi. I9G) encircling it, 
 from which encircling body of water ran the said 
 four rivers. Such, whetlier derived from the 
 Hebrew Scriptures or not, was the earliest con- 
 ception entertained of the earth. Any attempt to 
 reconcile such a view with geographical facts 
 must lie futile. That some such idea was en- 
 tertained among the Hebrews, even at a later 
 period, apjiears from the words (bond in Ps. xxiv. 
 2, ' He liaih founded it (the enrth) upon the seas, 
 and established it upon the floods' (see also Prov. 
 riii. 27); though Job xxvi. 7, 'He stietchelh 
 out the north over the empty jilace, and hangeth 
 the earth upon nothing ' (comp. Job xxxviii. 4, 0), 
 wculd seem to intimate (hat the writer of that book 
 entertained sup(^rior not ons on tlie point. That, 
 however, (he gt'neral idea was that the earth 
 formed an immense disk (' the circle of the 
 earth '}, alwve which were the substantial and 
 finiily fixed heavens, the aliode of God, while the 
 earth beiieatli was his footstool, appears from the 
 |;eneral phraseology employed in the sacred books, 
 
 GEOGRAPlir. 
 
 and may he found specially exhibited or implied 
 in the following ])assages : — Isa. xl. 2\, sq. ; Jofi 
 xxxvii. 18; Ps. cii 25. Of this wide ciiciilar 
 expanse Jerusalem was considered the centre, 
 Ezek. v. 5 : 'I iiave set Jerusalem in the midst of 
 the nations and countries that are round alioui 
 her." See the ensuing verses. The highland* of 
 Armenia would appear to have been the first 
 known to the human family. Descending from 
 these some may have gone eastward, others west- 
 ward. The latter alone are. spoken of in Scrip- 
 ture. Coming south and west the progenitors of 
 the world lirst became acquainted with the ci.un- 
 tries lying between the Eupiirates and the Tigri*. 
 roughly termed Mesopotamia, whence they ad- 
 vanced still more soutli and west into Aram oi 
 Syria, Arabia, Canaan, and Egypt. These are 
 the chief countries with which the ancient 
 Hebrews seem to have ]K>sses9ed an acquaint- 
 ance: yet if tlie national genealogical talile found 
 in Gen. x. is to be. referred to the early |)eriod 
 which its ])osition in the Bible gives it, it would 
 appear that tlie geographiial knowledge of the 
 Hebrews was, even before the Hood, far more ex- 
 tensive, embracing even ' the isles yf the Gentiles.' 
 ^^'iner (Handirorterb., note to art. * Eide'), how- 
 ever, with others, denies its historical value, and 
 certainly other parts of Scri))ture by no means 
 warrant us in ascribing to the Hebrews, before the 
 Babylonish captivity, a wider range of knowledge 
 than we have indicated above. This national 
 calamity had the effect of enlarging tiie circle of 
 their knowledge of the earth, or at least of making 
 tlieir knowledge of Assyria, Media, and Baby- 
 lonia more minute and definite. It was to their 
 neighbours the Phoenicians that the Israelites 
 owed most of their geographical knowledge. This 
 commercial peo]ile must have early acquired a 
 superficial actpiaintance with remote regions, 
 while engaged in their maritime commercial ex- 
 fiedifions. The knowledge they brougiit back to 
 Palestine would spread beyond their own honlers 
 and reach the Hebrews, though tiiey may not 
 have been given to inquiry and study on subjects 
 of the kind ; nor is it safe to attempt to define at 
 how early a period some rough notions of the isles 
 of the Gentiles may, by means of the Phoenician 
 navigators, have been spread about in the East. 
 According to Clemens Alexandrinus {Strom, vi. 
 4. 36), the Egyptians had in circulation writings 
 on geogra])hy. Their king Sesostris may have had 
 maps (Schul. ad Apoll Ehod. iv. 292 ; Goguet, 
 Orig. des Loiz, ii. 227), though probably the 
 first attempt to form a. ma]) (that is, a written 
 catalogue of places, with something like thcii 
 relative positions and distances roughly guessed^ 
 is to lie ascribed to the men whom Joshua (Josh, 
 xviii.) sent with orders to ' go through the land 
 and describe it ;" and the men ' went and passed 
 through the land' and described it by cities into 
 seven parts in a book. 
 
 At a later period, it is unquestionable that the 
 IIel)iews possessed a knowledge of the north-west, 
 and a wider know ledge of the east, and ex en of the 
 north of Asia (Ezek. xxvii ; Isa. li. 27). From 
 the ])eriod of the MaccalR'es the Jews enteri'd into 
 relations of a meicantile and jk)1 if ical character, 
 which extended their knowledge of the ea-.th. and 
 made them better acquainted with Asia Minor, 
 Greece, and Italy. In the time embraced by tht 
 New Testament history they must liave been
 
 GEOGRAPHY 
 
 widely arqnainfeil wifli t!i€ then known world, 
 fince c<il>)iii<-j ami iiidiv'iiiialj of tlieir naliori 
 Wfie sjiiead ovoi inMily llie eiiiiie siirlace covfied 
 liy uii(::fiit civil</.ali>iii, and idfnii(i<.'d with the 
 Roman empire. T'le titt^asiuiiul, if not |i<'ii(idii-al, 
 H'tuiii of llie Jews llnis sciit'eied aliiuad, ii|- at 
 least liie lelatioiis wlu'cli tlicy would sustain witli 
 (lieir niotiier cminliy, nnisl lia\e greatly widened, 
 ind made les^ iii.iccniate, tlie knowledge enter- 
 tained in Palestine of other jiaits nf the woild. 
 Accoidin^dy we lead (Acts ii. 5, mi.) that, at the 
 elliision ol tiie Holy Sp lit on I he day of Pentecost, 
 there were dwelling at Jerusalein Jews out iif 
 every nation tinder leaven." See the einimeiation 
 of the countries whence tliej- came in llie context. 
 For a knowledge of the coinnieicial enler|irises of 
 the Plia'iiicians cuiisult Leruy, Mtin. de l' Acad, 
 des [user, xxwiii. .512-, Bahr, Excws. ad Iltrud. 
 ii. 667. Inroiinaliuii i.n the ^'eo^'rapiiical know- 
 ledj^e of the Ileliipws may he I'oniid in Iliiet, in 
 Ugolini's Thesaurus Aiitiq. >^:;cianini, vii. 2tl ; 
 d'Anville, Menujires de I' Acad, dcs /user. xxx. K;]- 
 Bredow's Un/ersuch. i ber Gesc/t. und Geoyr. 
 ii. 203; IJelleimann, ii/(!.;. l.rdbeschr. i. 1 l.'J ; 
 Zeiine's Eidausic/iten, p. 2. On the iiistnry of 
 geography among tlie ancients the follnwing 
 works also n;av he coiisiilteil : ]Jangondy, lissai 
 rur rilisloire de la Ghxj. Paris, I /Go ; Ijlair, 
 History of (he Uise and I'royrcss of Gcor/ruii/iij, 
 London, 1781; Spiengel, Gcsc/tic/i(e der W'lcn- 
 liijsten Geot/r. EutdcckuiKj, Halle, 17!I2; Ukeit, 
 Geogr. der Gricc/icn und limner, ISlvi; For- 
 jiger, llandbiuh der Allen Gcof/r , Lei[iz. IS12 ; 
 a< well as the standard r.diks of Riller and Man- 
 neit. Among the (diler works, UelarrUs J'a/cstiiic 
 {l'a!a-siiiia ex MonHineniis let il/ustra/a, No- 
 rimhergse, 171(5} coiitiiitiei to lio!»l a distinguished 
 place. Relaiid was professor <(f Oriental laiignages 
 and ecclesiastic il hisfuiy at Ulr. cht, and <lied in 
 171 S. There have lu'eu sexeral euitions i.f liis woik. 
 It is divided into fluee luHiks : the (irst tieais uf 
 the names, situations, liiiiimlaiies, division.':, rivers, 
 moiip.^ains, and pi .ins i,f Pa!e>ti;ie ; the second, 
 [)f the «listaiices of the piincijal jilaces ; und the 
 third, of the cities and villages. His diligence in 
 amassing iiifotmatiun 's lery gieat. Jfla) s, tahles, 
 luul cngiavings of coins, e licli the woik. It 
 IS repi'iiK^l in the sixth volume of L'golinis 
 great woik, Tlu-sauriis Antiq. SKicrartan. Much 
 valualile, accurate, and inteiestiug information, 
 liiought down to a leceiit »late. may lie found 
 in Kitto's I'iclorial llisturij of J'altstine, Iftll. 
 
 Among the maps of P.ilestine the liillowing 
 deserve s|KH:ial m(ntii;n : — tiiat of Mont;uius, in 
 nis Antiquitates Jvdaict/; I.)72 ; l.a J'alcitine, 
 par d'Anville, l7Sj; (arte I'hijsique et I'oli- 
 tique de la Si/rie, par C Paultie, Paiis, UOiS; 
 i'alustiiM, von ReicharUt ; Catte Topoyrap/aqtie 
 de I Eijypte et de plusieurs iiaijs liini(rupjies, 
 levee ]>cuditHt I Ejcjieiiitio'i de t'Ar/itee Ennifaise, 
 construite {»ar Jacoiiiii Tins author accompanied 
 Napoleon in hi, ex|ie<litiiin to Kgypt, in the ca- 
 pj,city <jf geogiajihical engineer. He was ai(le«l 
 by otiiei- odicers of (he aimy. IJohiusoti siiys it 
 • is valuahle tinly in the paits actually visileil l»y 
 the French engineeis, namely, ak^ng the coast as 
 far as to Akka, the legi.m nC Na^uetli, and uiound 
 Mount Tatxir. The ottier paits are worthless, 
 being ajiparently mere (aiicy sketches" {Patent. 
 Pref, p xi ). Karle run >(/;•»■/«, von H. lieigiiaus, 
 G»»tha, ItJi"5; of ■^lhu•^• Kauinei i i'fUusttiui, 2nd 
 
 GWXJRAPHV. 
 
 7M 
 
 e<lit. p IS) s^K-aks in favniiralde terms. The .''k*- 
 ininulcd AtUts of Scripture Geoiji aphii, liy W. 
 Hii<lies, L>nil. I^'KI, is a iisiful woik. 1 1« nii- 
 deiil would do well to consult the majis :>i lijtdiii- 
 son's I'aleslhie. 
 
 Amiiiig the original sowces of our k ■ .\ iedjjo 
 of l.ililical ge.igiaphy stands liist and chief the 
 Hihie itself. The value of the liit)le in (his ies|iect 
 is iiicomparalile, and allogedier peculiar, not only 
 liecaiise it contains the eiiiliest au'heiiiic l.istory 
 in the world, hut hecanse its stalements are moie 
 minute and more accmate than can he founil iii 
 ofTier ancient authoiities. Tlie le^limonv of 
 Oriental tiavelleis on (his [xiinl. whetiiei direct 
 or iiicliioct, is full and unanimous. The more 
 we have come to know, hy actual insj.ectioii. ol (he 
 countiies und jilaces of which the liil<le .^|ieuks, 
 the greater n ason has there Ijeen t'oiind to lejioM 
 cnlideuce in the jiaiticulais whicli it sujiplicj; 
 ami e\ en to the piesenl day (lie he.st itinerary 
 throiigli the Holy Land is (he Uil/le, when ex< 
 ]Kiuniled and ujiplied hy the aid of the i.alive 
 AratUcCan ixipulation (Rohinsons I'nlesiine, In- 
 troduction). If piefereiice is to he given l.i any juri- 
 ticular paits of the holy volume, the Pentaleucli, 
 Joshua, tlie (ii.S|iel<, and the .-Vi ts desen e special 
 nieiilion. Ill tlie New Test.iment, it is to some 
 extent a new woild that is opened out hifore the 
 ge>igra|. Ideal student. Ceitainly, as might be 
 expected, many places. loiind in the Old Testa- 
 ment are sought in vain in the New ; while, on 
 the other hand, the J\'ew Tctanient mentions 
 many hills, .streams, cities, and countiies, nut 
 presented in the Old. In u similar way, jilacea 
 whicli hultl a high importance in the one : ink or 
 dis,ip[:ear in the other. 
 
 The lemaiks whicli were made under (lie head 
 AM'iiiuiriK.s, in lelalion to the value t.f tl)« 
 wiiiings of Josephus, aie e«jually api.licalde in 
 the siihject now under consideia'ion. 
 
 Among the profane wi iteis, Herodotus mention* 
 Palestine, and |ii(it>alily Jeitisalein. wliicii his 
 names Cad yt is (Herod, i. 105; li. h fi, l.}7, 139; 
 iii. 0,62, 61, SI ; iv. 39). Stialn) (in the lime 
 of Augustus) lieats of Palestine in (he .-.eci-nd 
 ciiap(er of his sixleenlli Uiok on (jeogiaphy, nnn- 
 gling togedier much Iriith and much eiror. 
 Piolemteus, who died 161 years alter Christ, 
 treat.s of Palestine anil the neighlMiuring countiies 
 in chapters xv.-xvii. of his tilth book. Dion 
 Cassius relates (he concpiest of Palestine by 
 Pompey (xxvii. \')-\l), the siege of Jeiu.sttlem 
 by Titus (Ixi. 4-7), the lestoiation of the temple 
 by Hadrian, and the iiiiuuection oi the Jews 
 under tie same em])eror (lix. 12-N). Of the 
 Roman writers, Pliny, in his ^utuial llislory 
 (v. l;}-19\ (re.its of Syria, including Palestine, 
 and suppi es much useful inform.it u.'i. Tacitus' 
 History^ fi tin (he liist to (he thirteenth chapter ut 
 the liflti li Kik, also relates to our suttject. He 
 hated (xith Jews anil Chiistiaiis (Annul, xv. Ai\ 
 and in cons tpience gaxe false colouiings to imich 
 of what be s lid relating to them ( lint. v. 3, 4 : ii. 
 79; Annul, ii. 42; xii. 23). Some inCoimation 
 may also be lound in Justin (xxxvi. 2;, in Siie~ 
 toniiu {AH(^tislus, 93; I'luudius. 25, 2S ; IV.v/aj- 
 sian, 4, 5 ; 'Titu.s, -1, r>), in I'oinpiJiiius Mi-ia 
 (i. 2), and in Ammiainis Maicellinus (xiv. 8, 
 xxiii. I). 
 
 A nungt\ie Fathersof the Chtiich much service^ 
 able knowledge on tne «ul>jecl ui liinlical ge» 
 
 3c.
 
 7&1 
 
 GEOGRAPHY. 
 
 gxnvliy "I.")' 1)6 foMiul in the expository writings 
 ot Tiieoiloret ami Jerome. Tlie most iin|x>itant 
 work, lio.vi'vei', is Onomaslicon xirhiain et luconim 
 %acrcc Sci iplura, sen liber de locis Ifcbraicis, 
 (irtBci! jiri/niim ah Eiisebio Cwsarieiisi, deinde 
 I.atine sriipttis ah llierouymo, opera J. Bon- 
 frerii, 1707. Livin;r as lliey did for a loiii; time 
 in Pa!e-itine, the wriiiiii^s butii of Enseliins and 
 Jeroine possess peculiar value, wliicli, iiowever, 
 prows less as llie limes of wliicii tliey speak recede 
 from their own. 
 
 Somp Ar diian writers are not without, value. 
 We have lidrisi, Gcoffraphia Nubienais, Paiis, 
 1619; also AliulCedae Tabula Stjriet, and his 
 Annales Miislondci. Schultens, in his Index 
 (leofp-aphictts in Vitain Saladini, Liiu;diuii 
 U.itav. 1732, has collected many observations of 
 Arabian authors on Palestine. See also Rosen- 
 muller, Handh. Bibl. Alter, i. 31; Ritter, Erd- 
 kunde, ii. 178. 
 
 Certain itineraries or travelling guides are also 
 of value as sources of information. These itine- 
 raries are of two kinds: 1. Itincraria aaripta ; 
 2. Itincraria picta. Tlie last horrowcil assist- 
 ance fr.im the art of drawing, and seem to have 
 fxisted in earlier times under the Greek name of 
 <riW| yea>ypa(piKiis (Stral)O, i. ]). 7 ; Ptol. i. G, 20), 
 orsimply rr/i-a^ (Stral)o, ii. |)p. S7, 90), or t!ie Roman 
 designation oi' tabula {C'lc. ad .-Jtt vi. 2; Propert. 
 iv. 3. 35): sometimes also tiie Greek word, in 
 IjJitin Iftters, pinax, was used (Cassrwl. De Inst. 
 Div. 25). SvTe Reingannm, Geschiclite dcr F.rd 
 und Lander abhildunr/en dcr Alfen, Jena, 1839, 
 i. 32. Tiie lirst class were a kinti of u'uide-bojks 
 which were designed chielly for official purjioses, 
 and gave, without any geogra])liical lemarks, tiie 
 names of jilaces met with on ceifain road-;, with 
 tlie distances, and the chief stopjiing ))laces. 
 Tliese are collectetl in P. Bertii Thcalrum Geo(/r. 
 Vet. (Liigd. Bat. 1618), and in Vetera Ilomati. 
 Itineraria, curante P. \Ve3^eling!o (Amstelod. 
 1735). We may specify, as of most service, the 
 Itinerariuin Uierosolyinitaini.m sen Bnrdigo- 
 lenxe, which belongs to the fourth century. It 
 was made l)y a Christian, and gives the route 
 from Bordeaux to Jerusalem, and from Heraclea 
 through Rome to Milan, with some fuhiess and 
 accuracy, mentioning the smaller intervening 
 ])laces wli?re liorses were changed (mutatioiies) or 
 the night passed (manslones). with a few scatleied 
 historical notices, and, so far as Palestine and 
 Jenis.ilem are concerned, witii ))retty exact state- 
 ments as to the localities of sacred history. The 
 Itinerariuin Antonini, whicii gives the routes 
 through all the provinces of the Roman emjiire, 
 has been ascribed to the emperor .Antoninus him- 
 self; lint, though it may have taken its rise under 
 his patronage, it must, in its actual state, l)e of 
 a later date, since it mentions jilaces which did 
 not exi^l till a subseijuent jieriod. Extracts and 
 siiecimens may be seen in Reland's Palastina, 
 ]). 422, &c , wliere also (p. 421) may be found a 
 specimen of *he / ineraria Picta, executed in cop- 
 j)er-))late. Of the Itineraria Picta there is a 
 collection which, fuim its first possessor, Conrad 
 Peutiii^'er of Augsburg, is commonly called 
 Tabula Peutingcriana. and probably comes down 
 from the t me of Alexander Seveius, about a.d. 
 230. Tliere is no original of it, but only a trust- 
 worthy transcript, made by a monk of the tliir- 
 tMQth century, ou twelve fiilio parchment leaves. 
 
 GEOGRAPHY, 
 
 Tlii^se tables are a sort of rough cnart or mnf\ 
 describing to the eye distances and direction, 
 without regard to the »ha)ie or size of coiintriea cr 
 the L;e.)L,'raphi(Ml positli/U of places. 
 
 Of the works wliicii have appeared treating 
 directly or indirectly ou the geogriiphv of I'ale*- 
 tine from the eighth century ilo.vnwauls, tlie list 
 is far too long to lie here admitteil, fhougli many 
 of (hem .nusl be regarded in the liglif of valuable 
 as well as original sources. 'Die titles of a few 
 we sliill give, refe-riiig the reader t) the worku 
 before sjiecified for fuller details: — (ivsta I.'ri per 
 Francos, sice Orientaliiioi Expeddtontun < t rer/ttt 
 Francoruni Iliervsoli/mitani Uistoria, 1611; 
 Voi/ai/cs de liahbi lienjamin Jils de Jojia de Tit- 
 dele, ))ar Barafier, Ainsterd. 1734; Elncidatio 
 Terrcp Sanctec IHstorica, auc.fore F. Q'.aiesmio, 
 olim T. S. Pr;pside, Antweq), 1639; A .hiiirnet/ 
 from Aleppo to Jerusalem at Easter, 1697, by 
 Henry Maundiell, sixth edit. Oxf T740 ; T. 
 Shaw's Travels m liarbary and the Levant, 
 173S ; R. Pococke's Tiavels in the East, 1713; 
 Voyayes en Syrie et en Eoypte, jiar Volney, 
 4tii etlit., 1807, — an interesting and accurate 
 woik, notvvitlistaniling tl)e jieciiliar opinions of 
 the writer; Travels in rorious (mi7ttries oj Eii- 
 rope, Asia, and Africa, i>y K. 1). Clarke, 4tliedit.. 
 Lund. ISJS; Seetzen, in Zach's Munatlicher 
 Correspondcnz, IStlS ; Burckhardt says »)f him 
 tliat he wa,s the most indefatigable traveller that 
 ever visited Syria; Travels in. Syria and tki 
 Holy Land, by Burckliaru,, Lon.l. 1822: Hall- 
 fahrten in Moryenlande. vuu O. T. von Ri<;hter, 
 Berlin. 1823; Travels in Palestine, \>y Buds- 
 intfiiam, Lond. 1821 ; Voyayu de I' Arubie Pitrie_ 
 jiar Leon de Laluirde, Paiis, l*-;}!). 
 
 \\ ith the pulilication (vf Uol)inson's Biblical 
 Researches in Palestine (London, 1811), anesT 
 era in some soit may be said to have conniieiicej 
 in Biblical geography. We do not allude to the 
 ]>repaiation of mind whicli the author carried inro 
 the personal iiKjuiiies an<l oliservalions whicJj he 
 made in the llolv Laud, nor to the accuracy with 
 whicli he both conducted and lecorded his inves- 
 tigations, so much as to the principle on which he 
 was, by the course of his ie~eiirci.es, leil to act, 
 and on the recognition of whicli his \'aluab)e work 
 is constructed, nanielv, the prel'eience which he 
 has wisely given to popular.tradition, in regard to 
 localities and facts, over the monkish legends thai 
 prevailed liel'oie his visit. He lays it down jjs a 
 general ])rincij)le (i. 371) ' that all ecclesiastical 
 tradition respecting the ancient places in and 
 around Jerusalem and throughout Palestine is of 
 no value, except so far as it is sujiported l)y cir- 
 cumstances known to us from the Scrii)tuies or 
 from other contemporary history.' Tiie etl'ect of 
 sn])erstitioii has been Ihecieatinn and transmission 
 of a vast mass of false and legendary njatter, 
 which has im))osed on the credulity of successive 
 travellers. ' Even within the last two centuries, 
 so far as the convents and travellers in Palestine 
 are concerned, I fear tlie cause of Biblical geo- 
 graphy can hardly be said to have greatly ad- 
 vanced" (Robin. Pref. p. ix.). * But there is in 
 Palestine another kind of tradition with whicli 
 the monasteries have had nothing to do, and of 
 which they have apparently in every age known 
 little or noliiing — 1 mean tiie jiieservation of the 
 ancient names of ])laces among tiie cninmmt 
 people. This is truly a natural and native tr»>
 
 GERAH. 
 
 diiion, not cleiiv?il in any decree frum the in- 
 fluence <>(' foreign convenls or masters, but drawn 
 in liy 'he pcasmt with liis nuiiliei's milk, and 
 deeply seali'<i in tlif j^cnius ot" the Semitic l.in- 
 g\;age ■ (Riihiii. I'alest. i. 376). Al^er lemaikinj^ 
 tliat S^elzeii and Uuicklianll had |K»ir.ted out a 
 better cmn'se l»y seekinj^ inrirm.ition amony; tiie 
 Arab peasantry, Rulrnson s.iys he a(h)|ited two 
 Unnci les in iiis exitmination of the Huly Land : 
 I. To avoid contact witli the convents, to exa- 
 mine witli liie Scriptures in his hands, and to 
 apply fur informaiion solely to the native Arali 
 p()]Hi1atiiiM ; 2. To leave the lieiiten track, atul 
 direct attciitinn to the least visited poitions of the 
 country (i. •'177). Thiee ])eriiids of f(ireii,'n tra- 
 dition i.ave had an inHuence in roi-niptiti^ onr 
 kno«led;,'e of the i^eo.^rapliy of Palestine. The 
 first falls alwnt a.u. 3.J3, wlien the inlluence of 
 Constantine, Helena, and tiieir like, gave rise to 
 mucii topngraphical falsfiiood. The Ono»iasticon 
 of Kiisebius and the Jerus'ilcin Jtitierciri/ are a 
 record and a .'j)ec men of this period. The 
 seconil is the age of the Crusades in tjie twolftli 
 and thirleetilli centuries ; the tradition of which 
 is best legisteied in the tract (tf lirocardus ahoiit 
 A.D. 12S3. Tiie thiid {)erii>d occurs at the l)e- 
 ginninjj of the seve:iteeiitli century, when the 
 Volumes of Quaresmius exhibit in full the state 
 of the tradition then current in the convents, the 
 
 f;reat source fr.im which mostKuropean travellers 
 lavediavn iheir iidormatioir During these tlirte 
 periods the light of truth gradually became dim, 
 and was at Ien.:th ften quenched in ilaikness. The 
 OiioiiiiisticoH, however, with all its ilefects and 
 i\r. iig hy|iotheses, has yet preserved much of the 
 tiadition (.f the common people, and contains 
 n'lany names of place? never since discovered, 
 though still existing; while the few jiagest of 
 Brocardus are worth more, in a topographical 
 respeet, than the unwieldy folios of Quaiesmius 
 (Robinson, J\eface).—J. R. H. 
 GKFIIKiX {a/Aire\os). [Vine.] 
 (iKRAH (IT13 ; Sept. o/3o\<is), the smallest 
 piece of Uioiiev among the Ilebiews. Twenty 
 ■«, made a shekel : one of them would theref re be 
 worth three liair))enee, according to tiie present 
 value of silver (l<2xod. xxx. 13). 
 
 GKR.\R (TJ^ ; Sept. Vepap), a town ami dis- 
 trict uii the Southernmost borders of Palestine, 
 in the cwintiy of the Philistines^ and not far 
 fiom (iaza. It was visited by Abialiam alter 
 the destiuctiori of S.idom ((len. xx. I), and by 
 Isaac when there was a deaith in the rest of 
 C*anaan ((ien. xxvi. 1). Tiie inciib'iits of their 
 cojourn show th.it the <listrict was veiy firtile. It 
 was the seat of the liist Philistine kingdom we read 
 of, and gave name to it. The int. reourse, diller- 
 cr.ces, and alliances of the Heiirew fatlieis with tiie 
 king and j»eople of Gerar foini a very cuiious and 
 inteiesling poition of patriarchal liistoiy. It was 
 ittill an important place in later times, as we may 
 gather fiom I Cl.ron. xiv. l;j, 1 i. Acciiiding »o 
 ti.e ancient accounts (ierar lay in or near a valley, 
 which apjiears to ije no other than the great Wady 
 Sheriah (or one of the branches of it), that 
 cotnes down from Heersiielia ; liesi<les we know 
 that it was in the Icirid nf the Philistines, and that 
 it was nut far from Beerdiel>a when Isaac resiiled 
 diece (Gen. xxvi. 1, 2l\ i 1 ; 'i(i-3'5 ; comp. xx. 1). 
 The name continued 'i exist (jierhajis as a mutter 
 
 jSKRASA. 
 
 75> 
 
 of tradition") for several centuries after the Cliri^ 
 tian era. Knsebins and .leroiue (Ouoma.st. g. v. 
 Gerar) place it t«enty-live Roman miles soulli> 
 waid from Kleutliero|)olis ; and Hmmnvii {IJist. 
 Kcclcs. vi. 32; ix. 17)ie]Kii?s that a large and 
 celebrated monastery sIihkI theie near a wiiil4>t 
 torrent. The abbot Silvanus resided iheie to- 
 V uds the end of the foiiith ceutuiy, and the na'ne 
 (It Marcion, bishoji of (lerar, ap|ieais among the 
 signatures of the council of C^iialieilon in a lit 
 '151. The name seems to have U-en afterward* 
 lost, and Dr. Roiiitisoii was tmalile to di.saiver 
 anv traces of it in the locality ; but it is to ti« 
 hoped that some possible remains of the conteiti 
 may heieafter assist in recovering the knowledge 
 of the site. 
 
 GKRAS.\, now .Ikkasii (not named in the 
 Bil)le), was m the Decapolis, ami I'oimed the eastern 
 boundary <if Peijea. It lay on elevated <;ronn(l, 
 according to Ptolemy, in (iS^ l.y = 3l° 4.y. 
 Its inhabitants were mostly heathen (Jose|)h. De 
 Hell. Jud. iii. 3 3; coinp iv. 1). I ; ii. IH. Jj 
 Auliq. xiii. 15. 5). Oiigen s;:eaks of it as a city of 
 Arabia {Vfpaaa rf/s 'Apa^ias (arlv ttSKis). which 
 arose fiom the tact tli.it it was a Ijoider city of 
 Pera;a, and lay next to Arabia. Alter the Roman 
 conipiests in the I'^ast, the country in which 
 Gerasa lies liecame one of their favoui ite cidoides, 
 and ten ]iiincipal cities were built on the east 
 of the Joidan, giving the name of Decapolii 
 to the land in which iliey stood. Gerasi was one, 
 but not the greatest of tliese. Ti.e plate wai 
 taken by storm by Alexander Jaiin:eus, who waa 
 acluated bv a desiie of gaining a l.irge treasure 
 (Joseph. IJc Hell. Jud. i. I. «; Aiitiq. vVu. 2. 3). 
 Alexander died near it while besieging Rej^afaa 
 
 (Antiq. XV. 5). B«'fore the ]ilace liad time to 
 lecover fii ni this calamity, it was included 
 among the mnnlier of those cities wbicii were 
 liuriit by the enraged .Ie\is in their vengeance on 
 tiie Syiians, and tin the Roman power geneially, 
 for the inassacie of a niimlter of tlieir nation at 
 Cirsiirea (Joseph. De Bell. Jud. ii. IS. 1). .\ ter- 
 rible levenge was taken by other cities. butGeiaiia 
 is hoiiouiably ex<ept<(l {I)e lUUl Jud. ii. 1*>. .'>). 
 Anniiis, g<'neral under Vespasian, took the city; 
 'after which he set lire to iheii hon.ses,' 'anil what 
 was remaining was all liumt down" yl)e Bell. 
 Jud. iv. i'. I), (iibbon enumeiales this city 
 among the line of foitiesses fiom liosra to I'etia, 
 which formed the fiontier of the Syrian uroviocet
 
 ■56 
 
 GERSIIOM. 
 
 Mi tlie lower empire. BaltUviii II. of JeiTisalptn 
 deitroyeil its c.istle it» the year 1122 (Will. Tyr. 
 I>. 825; Ilistor. Iherosol. p. G15). Tliis was the 
 n.itive place of NicDinaclms Geiasenus. Coins of 
 (TCiiisii may beseeii in Eckliel {Num. Vet. iii. 350). 
 Its ruins were Hist discovered liy Seet/eii, and 
 nave ofttn been SLibsecjiiently visited. Tuey lune 
 bee:i pronounced sujieridr to liiosi; (if Palmyra. 
 
 On approaciiiii^ Gerasa on tiie sonthern side, 
 Bnckin,'liain first saw a triumjilial gateway, 
 nearly entiie, wiiich was of tlie Corintliian oider. 
 Within this gateway, on the !• ft, lie observed a 
 fine iiauriiacliia for the exhil)ilion of sea-lij;hts, 
 the channels for lilling wliich with water were 
 Rtill visible. Corn was growiii.,' near it. Passing 
 on amid heaps of mined fragments, lie came to a 
 second gateway. Entering tlie city tlirough this 
 its sonthern g;ite, he came into a large and beau- 
 tiful circular cohmnadeof tiie Ionic order, having 
 passed a ]ieripteral temjile, al)^>\e wliich on the 
 left was an open tiieatre. A long avenue of 
 coiimins of the Corinthian order, led through the 
 whole len.'fh of the city. Climbing over inige 
 iT.asses of fallen columns and masoiu'v, he noticed 
 four coltHTins on each siile of llie way of much 
 greater size and iieight tliaii tl)e re-,t Beyond 
 this he came to a s(pi:Lie. iipp:uently once lined 
 on both sides by an avenue of columns. He 
 afterwards came to a portion of a semi-circular 
 temple. A liroken altar was near the rnins. on 
 which was made out the name of Marcus ."Vu- 
 relius. Beyond this again were temples, colon- 
 nades, theatres, bridges, aqueihicts, 8ic. These 
 remarks will give an idea of the magnificence of 
 these ruins, 'particularly when we add that the 
 nortliern exit is a mile .apart from the southern 
 entrance. A necrojxdis lies not far fiom the 
 northern wall, in which were found nearly a 
 hundred scul|);ured sarcophagi above ground, 
 having the a])pe.irance of having been ransacked 
 for treasure. Ne.u' the necropolis were the re- 
 mains of a small temple. T'le city stood on the 
 facing sl.ipes of t.vo opjjosite hills, but, I'rom the 
 neighbouring heights, it a[)i)ears to be seated in 
 the hollow- of a dtej) valley, encircled on all sides 
 by lofty and verdant mountains. Near this spot 
 is the modern village ol' Aioode. Some inscrip- 
 tions found on the ruins may be seen in Buck- 
 ingham's Tmcefs in Palestine, p. 41)5. — J. R. B. 
 
 GERGESKNES. I G.u>.ut a. | 
 
 GEUIZlM, MOUNT. [Ku.u, and Geui- 
 
 tlM.J 
 
 GERSHOM (Db""!)!, a .stranger here; Vtiptrifji), 
 one of the two sons (the other was Eliezer) who were 
 •jorn t» Moses in the land of Midian l)y Zinporah 
 (Exod. ii. 22; xviii. 4). The e sons of the great 
 lawgiver held no other rank fiian that of sim|)le 
 Levites, while the sons i}i their imcle .-\arou 
 enjoyed all the privileges tif the jiriesthood 
 (I Chron. xxiii. 14). The glory of being the 
 clilldren of such a father doubtless availed tliem 
 more than the highest dignities ; but we must 
 nevertheless admire the rare disinterestedness of 
 Mo.ses in making no public provision — as he 
 might so easily have done — fir his own childien. 
 
 GERSHON CiitJn.V banixJwr; Sept. Tttptrdiv), 
 eldest son of the jiatriarch Levi, born in Canaan 
 netVjre the going down into Egypt. He is only 
 cnowii from his name having Ijeeii given to one 
 af thetliree great liranches of the Levitical tribe. 
 
 (.KTHSEMANE. 
 
 Tlie office of tlie Gersiioniies, dnriiy the ma>-cl)M 
 in tie wihhrnef^, was to carry tlie vads and cur- 
 tains of the tabernacle, and tlit*i: |4ii'.--e in tin 
 cam); was west of the tabpinaclu (Geu. xlvi. 11 ; 
 Exod. vi. 16; Num. iii. 17). 
 
 GESHEM (D)^3, Cfl/rftse; Sept. V-qaap.), on< 
 of the enemies of the .lews nnacr Nehemiah 
 ^Neh. vi. 6). He was probably a Samaiitan, 
 although on some account or otlier designated an 
 Arabian (Neh. ii 10), and seems to 'lave l)een 
 a subaltern ollicer af Jerusalem. II* ;ipposed llie 
 designs of the Jewi>h governor, talking of iliem 
 as seditious, and turning them into ridicule. 
 I'^ventually he took part in the j)1ots of Tobiali 
 a.'ainst the life of Nehemiah (Neil. ii. 19; vi. 
 2-9), about II c. 4 Jo. 
 
 GKSHUR {'y\m ; Sept. TeScrovo). a district o/ 
 Syria (2'Sam. xv. 8 ; 1 Chron. ii. 23). which ad- 
 joined, on the east side of the Jordan, the northern 
 border of the Hebrew ten itory, and lay between 
 Mount Heinion. Mauchah, and Ha>han (Deut. 
 iii. 13, 11; Josh. xii. 5), According to (lie 
 bouiuiariei of the Holy lian.l, as delined by 
 Moses. Geshur would have formed part of it ; but 
 in Josh. xiii. 2, 13, it isstatetl that the israelitea 
 had exjielled neither the Geshiirites nor the Maa- 
 chatliites, but dwelt f4)gether with them. That 
 the Hebrews did not afierwanls ]ieniiaiien!ly sub- 
 due Geshur appears from the circum.itance that, 
 in David's time, this district had a king of its 
 own, called 'I'almai, whose daughter, Maacah, 
 was one of the wives of David (2 Sam. iii. 3). 
 She was the mother of Absalom, who took refuge 
 with his grandfather after the murder of Amnon, 
 and remained ihiee years in (ieshur (2 Sam. xrii. 
 37: XV. S). The woid Gt'A7/!t>- siguilies a bridge, 
 and co:res))onds with the .\rabic Jisr, and in the 
 same region where, according to the aliove data, 
 we must lix Geshur, between Mount Herinon and 
 the lake of Tiberiiis there still e.vists an ancient 
 stone bridje over the upper Jordan, called Jisr 
 Beni-Jakub, or 'the bridge of the chililren of 
 Jacol),' /'. e. the Israelites. (See a ligure of tliii 
 bridge in No. 176.) The ancient conimercial 
 route to anil from Dam;iscus and the East seem* 
 to have lain in this diiection in the most uncieni 
 times (Gen. xxxvii. 25) ; and hence the proba- 
 bility that theie wiis even then a bridge over the 
 river, which (in times when bridges were lare^ 
 gave its name to the adjacent district. 
 
 GESHURITES, GESHUHl : 1. The inha- 
 bitants of the above region [Gksuuu], 2. A 
 ))eo])le in the south of Palestine, near the Philis- 
 tines (Josh xiii. 2; I Sam. xxvii. 8). 
 
 GETH.SKMANE {TfdaiiiJiavri. seemingly froit 
 the Hebre'v T\l. press, and N3pC.'-*, oil, i.e. oilr 
 press), the name of a small lield, or garden, just 
 out of Jerusalem, over the bnMik Ki<lron, and al 
 the foot of the Mount of Olives. Tiiat which ii 
 now pointed out as the garden in wliich our I^orci 
 underwent hi< agony, occupies part of'a level spae« 
 I etween the brook and the foot of the Mount, and 
 corresponds well enough in situation and distaiic* 
 with all the conditions which the narrative requires. 
 It is about fifty paces square, and is encloswl bj 
 a wall of no great heiglit, formed of rough loos* 
 stones. Eight veiy ancient olive-trees now occup) 
 .this enclosure, some of which aie of very largi 
 .size, and all exhibit symjitotiis of decay clearlj
 
 GEZBR. 
 
 denolin:^ flieir grea a'fc. The (jarden l)el<)n;;s to 
 Oiie of llie moiiiist c esf.iUlislitjieiits, and nmcli 
 care l)as heeii tak«'ii to pieserve tlie old trees Cii.ni 
 de.tiuction. Several youn^ trees luue bei-n 
 planted to sniiply the jilaee oC tlinse which ii.ive 
 iisapiieareil (Oliii's Travels, u. IIJ). l)i. Iloliiii- 
 son remarks lli.it tiiere is noiliiir^^ )iariiciilar in 
 tliis plot to tnaik il as the }? irden o(" (iethseniane ; 
 -for i'.djacenf to it aie many similar enclosures, 
 and many olive trees eijiially old [Ilcsearc/ies, i. 
 34()). Tliis. however, can [)e no ground Tor the 
 (loul)t as to its identity which this leameil wriler 
 •lli^.i^ests ; for it is elsewhere a matter cif complaint 
 with liim tha; the sites of Scriptural events are 
 not tiius left in the simplicity of tlieir natural 
 ■tate, hut are over-crowded witli extran<'ous addi- 
 tions. Dr. Roltiii-on admits the prohiihility that 
 tliis is the s.'le wiiich Husel'ius and Jerome had 
 in view; and, as no otiier site is sujjgested as pre- 
 feral.'e, we may be content to receive the tradi- 
 tional indication. 
 
 GEZKR (ir.5 ; Sep. TaC^p and rdCapa). for- 
 merly a royal city of tiie GLina.niitej, and situated 
 in what hecaine the western pari of the trilie of 
 Kphraitn. TiieCanaanites were not expeiied from 
 it at the conoueit (Josh. x. 33; xvi. 5, 10: Judc. 
 i. 29). It was, nevertheless, assigned to the Levites 
 (Josh. xxi. 21). In after times, having l)een, on 
 Kime occasion. de~tioyed by the Kgyptians, it was 
 lebuilt by Solomon. 
 
 GIANTS. Tiie English word is derive<l im- 
 mediately fiom the Latin (ji'jas, which is oidy 
 Greek in Roman letters; ami yiyas itsell'i-, in all 
 likelili.iod. made up of ytvetrdai and yfa or YOy 
 thus signifying ' the eaith-born,' in allusion to 
 classical I'alile. 
 
 These beings of imusual height are found in 
 the early history of a'l nations, sometimes of a 
 ])ureiy human origin, but more fieijuently snp- 
 ])05ed to have pai taken also, in some way, of the 
 supernatural and the divine. 
 
 The Sciiptuial history is not without its giants. 
 The Englisli word has several ie])reseiitatives in 
 the original IIel)rew, a consecutive notice of 
 which will lead us to sketch the history of Bib- 
 lical giants. 
 
 1. In Gen. vi. 1. we have the (irst mention of 
 
 giants (Dv"'Q3j — 'There uere giants in the eailh 
 in those days ; and al-o after that, when the sons 
 of God came in unto the daugiiteis of men, aiul 
 Ihey liaie c?iiil<hen to them, the same liecame 
 mighty men which weie of olil, men of renown.' 
 A Somewhat similar intercomse is made mention 
 of in the .--econd verse of tiie same cha[)1er — ' tlie 
 (Oils of God saw the dau,'hters of men that ihey 
 were fair, and tley took tliem wives of all which 
 they cliose." WeliI.eloved (in loc.) and others 
 '.ranslate and iiiterpiet tlie pas-age so as to make 
 it S]ieak meiely of • men of violence; men who 
 beat down, o])pies^ed, and plurnleied tlie weak 
 and defenceless." Doubtless this is in agieement 
 with li.e meaning of the original word, liut these 
 giants, as in ot. er cases, would natiually be de- 
 • iguated by a descri|itive name, nd great strength 
 is geneially accompanleil by violence and oppies- 
 sii.n. In our judgment the l)earing of the passage 
 obviously favoi rs the common notion of giants, 
 AZtl that tiie rather because their origin is tiaced 
 to futue unexplained cunnectiun with ' the sons of 
 
 GIANTS. 
 
 •Hit 
 
 God,' that is, with beings of high endowmen's, if 
 not of a superior nature. 
 
 2. In Gen. xiv. 5, we meet with a rare termed 
 Rephaim (D*{<D'l), as settled on the other side of 
 the Jordan, in .\shleroth-Kainaim, whom Clie- 
 dorlaomer defeated. Of this race was C)g, king 
 of liasi.'an, who alone remained, in the days of 
 Moses (Deiit. iii. 10), of the remnant of :be 
 Itephaim. A ))assage, whicli is obviously from 
 a later hand, goes on to say — ' Hehohl, Ids ciiffin 
 (see Michaelis, Dalhe, Ro-.enmiiller) was a c.illiii 
 of iion ; is il tint in Rabbatii of the children of 
 Amnxin ? nine culiits is its le;igtii and foiu' cubits 
 its bieadth, accoiding to the cidiit of a man,' or 
 tlie natuial lengtii of the cubit [Cuurrj. It does 
 not appear to us to be enough to say that Og wa» 
 ' no doubt a man of iimisual statute, liut we can- 
 not decide with accuiacy what his staime was 
 from the length of the iron coUiii in which he was 
 placed" (Wellbeloved, in loc ). Whatever iheoiy 
 of ex])lanation may be adopted, the wiiter of the 
 ])asjage cleaily intendeil to speak of Og as a 
 giant, and one cjf a race ol' giants (com]), .losh. 
 xii. 4; xiii. 12). This lace gave their name to 
 a valley ni-ar Jerusalem, termed by flie Seventy, 
 7) KoiKas Twv mavwv. In Jul) xxvi. ."i, Rephaim 
 is reniieied, in tiie common version, ' dead 
 things," to tiie entire loss of the force of the ori- 
 ginal. The Douay Bible gives the passage with 
 truth as well as spiiit, making it obviously refer 
 to the old myth of the subjugation of the earth- 
 born by divine power : — ' Behold, tl.e gyantes- 
 groan under the waters, and they that dwell with 
 them. Hell is naked befoie them, and theie is no 
 coveit to iieidition." 
 
 ;{. The AnaKim (p3y '•ja or DVi*)- I" N"""- 
 xiii., the spies sent liy Mo»es l(ei'ore his arrny 
 to survey the promised land, report among otiier 
 things —' Tlie ]H\)|)le be strong that dwell in the 
 land ; and, moreover, we saw the children of 
 Anak " (\er. 2S). This indiiect mention of the 
 children of .\nak shows that they were a well- 
 known gigantic race. In the 32nd and 33rd 
 verses the statement is enhanced, — * it is a land 
 that ealetti uj) the iiihabit.mts ; and all the (leojile 
 that we saw in it are men of great stature. And 
 theie we saw the giants, the sons of Anak which 
 came of the giants ; and we weie in our own sight 
 as grasshoppers, and so we were in their sight.' 
 However much of exaggeration fear may have 
 given to the description, the passage seems beyond 
 a doubt to show the writer's belief in a race of 
 giants (Deut ix. 2j. From Dent. ii. 10, ij 
 appears thit the si/.e of the Anakim became pio- 
 veibial. and Wds used as a standard witli which 
 to coinpaie others. In the time of Moses they 
 dwelt in the eiivuons of Ilelaon (Jodi. xi. 22i, 
 They consisted of three branches or clans — ' Ahi- 
 man, Sheshai, and Talmai — the childien of .-Vnak' 
 (Num. xiii. 2;J). They we:e destroyed by Joshua 
 (Josh. xi. 21) ' fuim the mountains, from He- 
 bron, from Deliir, from Anab, and from all the 
 mountains of Judah, and from all the mountains 
 of Israel: Joshua destroyed them utteily with 
 their cities. There was none of the Anakim Mt 
 in the land of the childien of Israel : only in 
 Gaza, in (iatli, and in .\shdod, there remained' 
 (Judg. i. 20; Josh. xiv. 12). 
 
 4. From this remnant of the Anakim thus left 
 in Gath of. the Philistines, )iroceeded the famouj" 
 Goliath (Hvl), I Sam. xvii. 4. Tliis ((iact it
 
 758 
 
 GIANTS. 
 
 GIANTS. 
 
 •aid to Iiavc hpen in neij^lit »\x niliits and a span. 
 He cliiilleii{;f(l ilie army (if Israel, and ])iit tlie 
 •oiilicM in gre.it alarm. Tlte army of tiie Piii- 
 listiiips and tliat (>f Israel wero, however, on the 
 point of en^'ag'n„', v ncn David, the yoiin;,'fst son 
 of.Iesse, came near, bringing' at the command of 
 Ills father, a siipjily of jiioiision; to his three 
 eldest Ill-others, who li.id followed .Saul to the 
 'jattle ; and, hecominy- aware of tlie defiance 
 whiih haii hren a;,',dii just hiii'led at ' the aimies 
 of the living God," he at once went an<l presented 
 himself as a champion to the kini,'; was oU'ered, 
 hut refused, a coat of mail ; and arniin;jf himself 
 solely with a slins;, sni.ite the Philistine in his 
 forehead, so that he fell ii])on Ids face to the earth, 
 and was decapitated hy David witli his own 
 «wiird. A |j:eneral victory ensnetl. This achieve- 
 ment is asciibed to the divine aid (v. IG, 47). 
 In 2 Sam xxi. 19, ' (ioliath the (iittite, the stall' 
 of wliose spear was like a weavers heam,' is said 
 to have heen slain hy Eliianan, a chief in David's 
 army. This aj'parent contradiction the common 
 vers'on tries to get over hy insertiiii; words to 
 make this Goli.ifh ihehrolher of him whom David 
 put to death. Winer {Hnndicorterb s. v. Goliath) 
 supposes that the former was a descendant of tlie 
 latter, bearing the same. perliaj'S a family name. 
 St-e, however, the ])aiallel ]iass,ige in 1 Ciiron. 
 XX 5. Other giants of the Philistines are men- 
 tioned in the passage belbre cited, 2 Sam. 
 xxi. 16, s(|., namely : — 1. ' Ishbi-benob, which 
 was of the son; of the giant, tiie weight of 
 whose spear weighed three hnndred shekels of 
 brass, he being girded with a new sword, tlionglit 
 to have slain David; but Abisliai, the son of 
 Zerniah. suocouieil him. and smote the Piiilistine 
 and killed liim.' 2. Sa])h, which was of the sons 
 of the giant who was slain liy Sibliechai. .3. 'A man 
 of great stature, that had on every hand six fingers 
 and on every foot six toes, four and twenty in 
 number, and he also was born to the giant ; and 
 when lie defied Israel, Jonatiian. the .son of Shi- 
 nieah, the brother of David, slew him ' These 
 fuiir were sons of the giant in Gafh, tliat is, jno- 
 lab'y of tlie Goliath of Ciatii whom David .slew 
 \ Kings XX. 8 ; 2 Sam. xx. 22 : 1 Sam. xvii. 4). 
 
 5. Another race is mentioned in Deiit. ii. 10, 
 the Kinim (D*!D'N), wiio dvielf in the country of 
 the Moabites. They are described as a jieople 
 ' great and many, and tall a.s tiie .\n.ikiins, which 
 were Also accounted giants ' ''Gen. xiv .'ji. 
 
 6. The Zamznmmim also (□V0T-"3T) (Dent. 
 xxi. 20), wliose home was in the land o\' .\mmon 
 — 'tli.it also was accounted a land of giants; 
 giants dwelt therein ( f old time, and the Am- 
 monites called them Zamzummims, a people 
 great and many, and tall as the .\iiakinis ; but 
 the Lord destroyed tiiem before them, and they 
 ffi:e Israelites) succeeded them, and dwelt in 
 their stead.' 
 
 From this enumeration it is clear that the 
 Seiiptiires It'll of giants in tlie olden time, and of 
 races of giants ; and that, though giants are men- 
 tioned as something singular and coiisecpienfly as 
 comparatively rare, they ajipear to have be ii, 
 relatiely to the numbers i.f the population, of 
 fv'ipient occurrence. W hatever deduction may 
 be niacie for the influence of the passions in tiie 
 oirra'ives which have passed under review; anil 
 though it is true tluit moie tlian ne p.ssage liears 
 trace* of interixjlation ; yet there is evidence that 
 
 Scriptural writers believed in \ anta ami rac«i & 
 giants as a reality. 
 
 That the )irimitive races of men greatly sur- 
 passed others in stature is an opinion which find« 
 ample siipput in ancient aiitiiors generally ; an«' 
 at an early period and tmder favourable circum- 
 stances, individuals and even tiib»>s may hav« 
 reached an unusual luight and been of extraor- 
 dinary strength. liiii manv things concur to 
 show that the size of tl.e lace il (1 not dill'er ma- 
 terially from what it is at ]ireseiit. Tliis is seen 
 in the remains of human beings found in tombs; 
 especially among the mummies of Egypt.. To 
 the same elVect is the si/.e of ancient armcuir, as 
 well as aichitectur.il dimensions, and the mea- 
 sures of iengtlt which have been received from 
 antiquity. Ancient writers who aie fiee from 
 the influence of fable, are found to give a con- 
 curl ent testimony. 'Homer, wlieti s|)eaking ol 
 a fine man, gives him four cubits iu height and 
 one in bieadth ; V'itrnvius fixes the usual 
 standard of a man at six Koman feet; .\iistotle'j 
 admeasmenient of beds was six feet' (MillingeJi*. 
 C\<riositii'S of Medical E.rperienre, p. i 1). 
 
 That great diversity as to height and size ]>re- 
 vails in the human family, is well known. What 
 the precise limits may be witiiin which nature liai 
 worked in \\\j f.irmation of man, it would lie dif 
 ficult to determine. Tlie account whiidi Aristotli 
 anil otheis have given both of |)igmies and oi 
 giants may be safely tieated as fables. IJiit tin 
 inhabitants of noithem latitude; aie well kuowc 
 to be below the ordinary standard, many of their; 
 scarcely exceeding four feet ; while in temperatt 
 climates the height of the human race averages 
 friim four feet and a half to six feet; and in- 
 stances are not wanting of persons who meastued 
 eight or nine feet. Some authors go so far as tei 
 and eighteen, but these assertions seem to lefer t( 
 fossil bones erroneous! V attributed toman. Hum- 
 boldt says diat the Guayaipiilists meiisure six feei 
 and a half, and that the P.iy.iguas are equallj 
 tall, while the Caiibbees of Cumana aie distin 
 guislied by tlieii almost gigantic size from all tin 
 other nations he had met with in the New Woild 
 The Patagonians were stated by the Spanisl 
 early navigators to measure seven feet l(>ur implies 
 This account appears to be an exaggeration ; bii. 
 more recent travellers — such as Houg.iinville 
 Byron, Wallis, Caiteiet, and Falkner — afhim that 
 their height ranges f'lom six to seven feet. 
 
 Cases of gre.it individual height and strength 
 are not seldom found, though now aTid then they 
 li.ive been much exaggerated. The t.illest per- 
 sons of whom we have a trustworthy record did 
 not, according to Flaller, exceed nine feet 
 Schreber, who has collected the description of tht 
 princip.il modern giants, found few abo\e sever 
 feel and a half; although he mentions a Swedisl 
 peasant of eight feet Swedish measuie: and oni 
 of the guards of the 1) ke of Bruus.vick wai 
 eight feet six inches Di.'ch. One of the besi 
 autlienticateil ca.ses in n. )dein times is that oi 
 Parsiiiis, who was ny trade a black--mith, and jior- 
 t-r at Couit in the e.uly }).irt of the l^lli century 
 Hakewill {Apologij, iii. 4. •), Puller (\l'(ir//iies 
 StalKiriLshiie). an. I Plo:t (.\iU. Hist. Stafford 
 viii. 50) concur substantially in their accouiid 
 r specting him. He was seven feet t-.vo inchej 
 and, on the authority of Puller, ' he was jiro 
 poitionable in his pait.s, and liad strength eijua^
 
 GIBBETHON. 
 
 Is nis lifc'glit, valour to liis strengtii. temper to 
 nia vuloui' ; su tliat he <lis(laiii«(t tu <iu an iiijuiy 
 to any siji„'le jjeiy.iii. ll<: would iiutk<; iwlliing 
 t«Hakelvvuor (lie liille-t yfoiiifii of the gnaids 
 under liis aims «it diice, uiiU oriier tlieiii a^j lie 
 please<l.' \\ e have ut i-Kistence evidence of ex- 
 tr;iordina.ry iiei^ht in the Ciise ot" I) Jiiieii, wliu 
 was cxIiiOited tliuiiiglidiil Kiigland aUiiit (lie year 
 17S1. His skeleton, jue-.erved in the Musomii ol' 
 the Uoyal College of S((igeoii:> in London, inea- 
 »uics sevtn leel eieveii inches in heij^l.t. It' we 
 aMow two idciies tor tite sotter juits ol' the hody, 
 Lis statu(« w<Hild lie ei.;ht leet ojie incii. Utlier 
 instance:^ of still )^re^ter hei^lit aie on I'ecord 
 (see ait. ' Giant,' in the Eitct/clop<e(Ua Me.rojwli- 
 tana) ; hut s*»me aie evidently t'uibulods, some are 
 instdlii'ieiit'.y uutli«nti(;atnl, and others l>ear ul>- 
 vious signs ot° exaggeration, rvior, at'lei all, is it of 
 niiicii conseqiieiice to what lieight tlie huinaii 
 fraiiie may. in any individual ca^e, have ex- 
 tended. Theie ii.ive heen monsters of all kinds ; 
 and lieiglit, without iiealth, vigour, and coi- 
 resjH)nding strength, is only a loim ol' monstiosity ; 
 not to say that theiv are certain jiliysical condi- 
 tions of human existence which, it' they do not 
 forhid a height so gieat as some iiave tiiliied otj 
 go far to deprive any very unusual size of even 
 ordinary st length. 
 
 Tue p.issihility of a race of giants cannot well 
 be denied. Tlieie is a known tendency in the 
 human frame to ))er()eti<ate jieculiaiitieis which 
 have heeii once evolveil. Wiiy not extraordinary 
 * Orocerity' as well as any other'/ In /'act, the 
 piO[jagation of statuie, whether high or low, is a 
 phenomenon which we all see presented daily 
 bei'ore our own eyes. Tall jtaients give birth t<j 
 .all chiUUeit. The tallness is found to remain in 
 families ; and, doubtless, did not circumstances 
 intervene to reduce the statuie by inteimaiiiage 
 with short |<er.sons, the unusual height would he 
 jteritetuated in any given line. The inhabitants 
 of Potsdam, descended to a great extent from the 
 famous regiment of tall grenadiers which Fre- 
 derick (»l Hiussia took so much jiains to bring 
 together, are said to lie stdi remaikable for exceed- 
 ing the average height. Tiie family of Scaligers 
 ajjjjea's to have been unusually tall. 
 
 It mav also be to some extent admitted that, 
 in the eai'.y ages, men may liave surpassed the 
 modeiris in size and strength ; so that Homei's 
 oJot viiv 0poToi etViV may even then have had 
 JOine ground, which has certainly since his time 
 not grown less. For there are ttndencies in the 
 culture of a high civilization which, whatever they 
 do for the mind, can liaidly fail to reduce the 
 size and lessen the strength of tlie body. It is 
 a law in physiology tiiat the exercise of any pait 
 or organ adds at once to its size, its vigour, and 
 its ]K>wer. In eaily (leiiods the corpoieal fiaitie 
 was in constant play,- and in some states received 
 especial care; while with us the U)dy is dwaifed 
 by comparative inactivity, as well as by insalii- 
 briona air and food. The naluial consequence is 
 a general <liminittion of physical stiengtli, wiiich, 
 by going on for centuries, cannot well do otlierwise 
 than reduce tiic stature, and im|)air the ellective- 
 nes» of the race. — J. li. IJ. 
 
 GIBBRTHON (pn?? ; Sept. ra/3a«<ii/), a 
 city of the Philistines, wliich was includeil in the 
 ternt«ries of the tribe of Dan (Josh. xix. 41), and 
 
 GIBEON. - ^ 
 
 was as.«,gneJ to the Levites (Josli. xxi. lHy U 
 was stili in the hands of the Philistines in tli* 
 tiiiie<irXadat), king of Israel, »lio lH>sieg«d it, anil 
 was slain under its walls by Baasha, one of his 
 own olhcers (I Kings xx. 27; xvi. li). Mothing 
 is known of iis site. 
 
 (illiKAII CJ/aj ; Sept. rafiai). There were 
 several places of tliis name, whi<;li, as licf.iie le- 
 niarked [(iKu.i], is the feminine foiin of the woid 
 (ribeah, and signilk's a hill. VV'illMut doubt all 
 the places so named weie situated n|)<>n liill . 
 
 1. (iiuKAK ()»•■ ]JKN.(AMiN is liistoiically the 
 most impoitaiit of the places beaiing this name. It 
 is often mentioned in Sciipfuie. It was the sceito 
 of that abominable transaction which involved in 
 its conseipiences almost the entiie extirpation of 
 the tiil)e of Benjamin (JnUg. xix. 1 1, s<j.). It 
 was the biith-pl.ne of S.nil, and continued to 1)6 
 his residence after he l)ecaine king (I ,Sain. x. "26; 
 xi. 4 ; XV. 3J ; xxiii. li); xxvi. I j ; and heie wa« 
 t!ie s<:ene of Jonathan's romantic exploit against 
 the Piiilistines (1 Sam. xiv.). It was doubtless 
 on account of this its intimate connection with 
 Saul, that the Gil«>ouites hanged up here ids seven 
 dwcendants (2 Sam. xxi. Gj. Jerome sjieaks of 
 frilteali as, in his time, level witli the grouni'l 
 (/■-jo. 86, ud Ettstoch.)^ and since then it does not 
 appear to have liet'ti visited by tiavelleis till re- 
 cently. Dr. Robin -Oil, who made many valuable 
 observations in tliisneigiiliourhood, delected (iibeah 
 in the small and half-ruined village of Jel>a, which 
 lies upon a low, conical, or lathei round eminence, 
 on the broiid ridge wliich shelves down towards 
 the Jordan valley, and gj)reads out below the vil- 
 lage in a line sloping plain. The views of the 
 Dead Sea and the Jordan, and of tlie Kitstern 
 mountains, aiv here very extensive. Amon^ 
 the ruins some large lie.vn stones, indicating 
 antiquity, are occasionally seen. Tliis place i* 
 about live miles north by east from Jerusalem. 
 
 2. GiuEAH in the mountains of Jiidah (Josh. 
 XV. 57), which, urider the name of (iabaatha, 
 Kuseljiuj and Jerome ])lace twelve Roman miles 
 from Klentheiopolis, and state that the grave of 
 the prophet Haliakkiik was theie to be seen. Dr. 
 Robinson {^Reseankcs, ii. 327) identilies it with 
 the village of Jebah, which stands upon an iso- 
 lated hill, in the midst td' \Va<ly-el-Musurr, about 
 ten miles south-west of Jerusalem. 
 
 3. GiuKAU in Mount Kphraim, called Gibeah 
 of Pliinea-:, where the high-priest Kleazar, son of 
 Aaron, was binie<l by his son Pliineas (Josh, 
 xxiv. 33). The Onomasltcoii m.ikes it live 
 Roman miles Iroin (i()phiia, on the road to Nca- 
 polis (.Siiechem); whicli was itself lifteen Roman 
 miles north ol' Jerusalem. Dr. liobinson liiids it 
 in a narrow valley called Wady-el-.lib, the Geeh 
 of Maundrell, lying just midway on the road 
 between Jerusalem ami Siiechem. 
 
 GIBEON (py?fl ; Sept. PajSa^.'), a town cele- 
 brated in the 0|d Testament, but not mentioned 
 in the New. It was ' a great city, as one of tlio 
 royal cities; and to its jurisdiction originally be- 
 longed Beerotli, Cliephiiali, and Kirjath-je.iiitn 
 (Josh. ix. 17 ; x. 2). It is lirst mentioned in con- 
 nection with the '.leception practised by the in* 
 Labitants ujion Joshua, by which, although Ca- 
 naaniles (Unites), they induced the Jewish leader 
 not only to make a league with them, and ta 
 ■pare tbeir lives and cities, but also, in their do*
 
 TOO 
 
 GIBLITKS. 
 
 r>>iice, to irinke war iip.ni the five kin^^s by wliom 
 tliev well' l)fs.e;eil. It was in tin* j^rciii liattle 
 wliicli IdIIowimI, tliiif 'the sun staiid still n|j(in 
 Gilietm ' (.K).*!'. X. 12,1-14) The jilace aCterwaids 
 fell to tlie lot <if Benjamin, and hecaine a Levitical 
 city (Josh, xviii. 2) : xxi. 17), where the t,il),"niacle 
 was .set np tor niaiiv years under D.ivid and Siili>- 
 m;)ii 1 Clnon. xvi. 3!' ; xxi.2!t; 2 Qiron. i. 3), tiie 
 ink iiein^,' at tlie same tinieat Jernsalem (2 Chron. 
 i. 1) It was lifie, fis bein;,"- the ])lace of the altar, 
 that the yoirn^.^ Solomon otlered a llwusand l>nrnt- 
 olVeriiiirs, ami was rewanled by tlie vision which 
 left him the wisest of n)en (1 Kin^s iii. 4-15; 
 2 (3ij)on. i. 3-liJ). Tliis was the place wheie 
 Aimers challeni^e to Joal) bronijlit defeat upon 
 liiinsplf. ;{iiil death upon his brother .Ashael < 2 Sam. 
 ii. 12-32), and wliere Anuisi was afterwards 
 slain by .Icali(2 S.im. xx. P-12). None of these 
 luissa^es niaik the s.te of Gibeon ; but there are 
 indicatioirs of it in Jose|jl>iis (De Hell. Jiul. ii. 
 i'J. 1), who places it lifiy stadia i\(irth-Me.st from 
 Jertrsalcm ; and in Jerome {Ep. ^6, ad Eusti>ch.) : 
 which le.i\ e little doubt that (Td)eoii is to l)e iden- 
 tified with the place which still bears the name of 
 El-Jib; fi>r Jib, in Aral)ic, is merely a contraction 
 of the Helnew Cid)eoM. Tiie name Gabaon is in- 
 deed meiilioiied by writers of the time of the 
 Crufades, as existini^ at this spo', and amoni,' the 
 Arabs it tlien alreaily lK)re the name of El-.iib, 
 under which it is mentioned by Bohaedinn ( Vita 
 Saladin. p. 21 J). Afterwards it was over- 
 looked i>y most travellers till the last century, 
 when the attention ol Pococke was again ilnecied 
 to it. 
 
 El-Jib ia a mo<lerately sized village, seated on 
 the summit of a hii!, five miles north by vvest !ioiii 
 Jerusiilem. The liouses stand veiy irregularly and 
 unevenly, sometimes almost at).ive one another. 
 They seem lo be cliielly loonis in old massive luins, 
 which have fallen down in every diieclion. One 
 lar^e biiildinij still lemains. ))roljably a former 
 castle .>r tower of stien^lh. To.vards the east the 
 lid'^e of llie hill sinks a litlle, and here, a few rods 
 from the village, just below tlie toj) of theiidge 
 towards the norlli, is a line fountain of water. It 
 is in a cave, excavated in and under the high 
 rock, so as to form a Ivirge subteriaueaii reservoir. 
 Not f.ir below it, among olive-tiees, are the le- 
 main-; of an o,ien le^ervoir, ab ;ul onehnndied and 
 twenty feet in lengtli by one hnnilred in bie.idth. 
 It was doubtless designed to receive the su|jer!iu- 
 0U8 wateis of the cavern, and there can be little 
 question but that this was ' llie Pool of (iiiieon' 
 mentioned in 2 Sam. ii. 1 J ; and, in the whole, we 
 find the ' Great [or many] waters of Gibeon ' of 
 Jer. xli. 12. 
 
 GIBLITES (D*^23; Sept. Bl0\toi), the in- 
 nabitants of the citv and district of (iel)al in 
 Phc nici.i, ai° T N.'lat., 35" 12' E. long., on tiie 
 shore of the Meiliterranean, under Mount Le- 
 bunon. 'The land of the Giblites,' with 'all 
 Lebanon,' was assigned to the Israelites by the 
 original appointment (.losh. xiil. 5); but it does 
 »iot seem diat they ever possessed themselves of 
 it. The (lil)lites are denoted by the word ren- 
 dered ' slones(iuarer3 ' in 1 Kings v. 18; fiom 
 fvhicli it would seem that they were then subject 
 to, or in close connection with, Tyre. It is 
 doubtful whether this (iebal, or the one in Edom, 
 is tlttt mentione<l in Ps. Ixxxiii. 7. But in 
 
 GIDEON. 
 
 'K/.ek. xxvii. !', the Plui'nician (i"'.blite» are ilii- 
 linctly mentioned as such, and ])ieffrably em* 
 ])loyed iipon the ship))in'.; whi<-h formed the glury 
 and strength of Tyie. 
 
 (iebal was called Byblos by the Greeks, and 
 so the Septua.'inl has it here. It was an imnorla' 1 
 J)]. ice, and celebrated for the birth and worship of 
 Ailonis, the Svrian Thainmu/. Pliny and oti.ei 
 Komali authors call it (iabale {lli.ft. Aat. 
 v. 20). Tlie town still snlisists under the name 
 of JelMiil. It is seaie<l on a lisurg giound near 
 tlie sea, at the foot of Lebanon, which here a}>- 
 proaches cUwe ti) tlie coast. It is walle*! on tiie 
 thiee sides towarils the land, and oiien on the'west 
 towards the sea. liein;; jierhajis about half a mile 
 in circuit. Within tiie wall, which seems of the 
 age of the Crusades, the chief liuihling is an old 
 castle, whici) has received inodirn lepairs, and is 
 now used as the al»ode of the aj,ha or commiUKhint, 
 There are ihiee or four o]ien and lofty buildip«-s 
 belonging to the chief people of the )>lace, a 
 mosipie with a low niinaiet, and 'in old iViaronite 
 church of good masonry; liut the houses generally 
 aie of p or construction, and nearly half llie sjjdce 
 within the walls is occupied with the gardens of 
 the inliahitanti. The 'Nipulation is estiniated at 
 2001). (Miuindreirs./o«>-/)ev, p. 4.J ; Bnrckhardta 
 Syria, p. IcSO ; Buckingham's Arab Tribes, p. 
 455) 
 
 GIDEON (pyi?, destroyer; Sept. Vt^tdiu), 
 snrnamed Jr.KuuuAA). or Jbkuw!!!;sheth, fifth 
 Judge in Israel, atul the liist of them whose his- 
 tory is circunrstaritially nanated. He was flie 
 son of Joasli, of the 1 1 ilie of JManasseh, and resided 
 at Oj'hrah in Gilejil beycmd t!ie Jordan, 
 
 The Midianites, in conjunclion with the Ama 
 lekites and otli^r nomade trilies, invaded tiif 
 coiiiitry every year, at tlie season of ])roduce, ir> 
 great nnml>ers, with ilieir .'locks and heiils. They 
 I)lundered and traiuiilcd down the fields, the 
 vineyards, iuid the gardens; they seized the 
 cattle, and ]ilimdered man and Iroiise, rioting in 
 the country, after the manner which the Bedouin 
 Arabs prac.ti.se at tl>is day. After Israel Iwid been 
 humble<l by seven years of this teatmeid, the 
 Lord raised up a deliverer in the jierson of 
 (iideon. lie was threshing corn by sle.ilth, for 
 fear of its l>eing taken away l>y the Midianites, 
 when an angel of (iod a]!peaied before him. and 
 thus saluted him : — 'Tiie Loid is witli thee, thou 
 mightymaii of valour." Gideon expiessed some 
 douljt whether God was siill with a jieojile sui>- 
 ject to sucli idlliction, and was aiisweied by the 
 most iinexjiected commission — ' Go in this thy 
 might, ami thou sh.ilt save Israel fioin tlie hand 
 of the Midianites : have not 1 .sent thee ?' (iideon 
 srill urged, ' Wherewith shall 1 save Isiael t Be- 
 hoM my family is poor in Manasseh. and I am 
 the least in my father's house.' The 'Wheie- 
 witlr was ansueied by ' Suiely I will be with 
 thee." He then demurieii no more, but jnesse-i 
 his hospitality u))on the heavenly strang-'r, who. 
 however, ate not of what was set before him, but 
 drecling (Tideon to lay it out upon the rock as 
 upon an altar, it was consumed by a sujiematural 
 tire, and the angel disain eaied. Assured by this oi 
 his commission, Gideon procee(le<l av once to cas^ 
 down the Icc.il image and i;llar of Baal ; iiu't, 
 when the'jjpople would have avengeil tliig ins'^'r 
 to their false god, their anger was aver'cd t 110144;)
 
 GIDKON. 
 
 GIDKON. 
 
 -761 
 
 tiie adilress of lii- fUllu-r, wli,), liy dwcllini!; on t!ie 
 inability of li.i:il to avenge iiimstlf, irmie tliiin 
 insiiuiaicil u iloul.t of liis ci)iTi])efeiic.y to protect 
 Ills i'olloiveiw. This was ii r.ivourife argninent 
 ainoli^ llie Hehieivs a;;ainst iilnhitiy. It occiiis 
 oi'teii ill the |)n)(ili<-ts. and was soMoiii nij;e'l npon 
 idolalKiiis Isruelited without some etl'ect upon ttieir 
 coiiscieiicfs. 
 
 Giileon Sfxm foiiiul occasion to act iijioii h\H 
 high commission. 'I'he allied invaders were en- 
 cam)>ed in the j;ipat jihiin ol' Jezit'el or Ksdraehm, 
 when he lilew the IriMiipct, and thus (gathered 
 round him a daily iiicieusln^ iiost. tlie summons 
 to arms which it implied liavirii,' heeii transmitted 
 liirough the northern trilies liy special niessen^jers. 
 The iiupiietude connected with great enterprises is 
 more seiisil)lv (eit some days l)el'oie than at the 
 moment of action: and iience the two miracnloiis 
 8i>;ns wiiicii, on the two nights piecediiig the 
 marcli, were required and gi\en as tokens ol" vic- 
 tory. Tiie lirst r.ight a ileecc was laid out in tiie 
 middle of an oiien thieshiiig-floor, and in the 
 morning it was (|uite wet, while 'lie soil was dry 
 all around. The next night the wonsler w s le- 
 versed, the soil being wet and the fleece perfectly 
 dry (Judg. vii.)- 
 
 Encouraged by these divine tcstimonie<, (lidcon 
 commenced his ;i arcli, and a<lvanced to the brook 
 Harod, in the v Hey of Je/.reel. He was here at 
 the liead of ;J2,0fi0 men ; Imt, lest so large a host 
 should assume the glory of the coming deliver- 
 ance, which of ri^^lit belonged to God only, two 
 oi)erati,iiis, lem.ukable both in motive ami pio- 
 cedtiie, leiliiced this large host to a mere handful 
 of men. Fii.-t, liy divine direction, ])roclan)a- 
 tii;n was made that all the faint-hearted nii.cht 
 withdiaw ; and no fewer than 22.0U0 availed 
 tiiemselves of the indulgence. The remaining 
 10,000 were sti'l declared too numerous ; they 
 were theief.ue all taken down to tiie hiook, wlitn 
 only those who lapped the water from their hands, 
 like active men in haste, were leserved for the 
 cnteipiise, while all those who lay down leisurely 
 to diink were excluded. The former numlieied 
 no moie than 30i), and tliese were the ajipointed 
 vaiujiiisheis ol' tlie hu_'e host which covered the 
 great plain (Judg. vii. 1-S). 
 
 The o\ erheard relation of a dream, by which 
 Ciide.iii was incouraged (Judg. vii. 'J- 1 4), and tli;; 
 leinaikahle stratagem, with pitchers and torches, 
 by which he overcame (\ei\ 15-2;$), are well 
 kno'.vn. 
 
 The routed Midianites fled towards the Jordan, 
 but ueie ])ur;,ued with great sUiughter, the coun- 
 try being noiv r.used in puisuit of the flying 
 oppressor. Tlie Kphraimites rendered good ser- 
 vice by seizing the lower fords of the Jordan, ami 
 cutting oil' all who attempted escape in that di- 
 -ectioii, while (lideiui hiui.self puisiied beyond 
 the liver those who escaped by the uppo' folds. 
 Gideon cio.-se<l the Jordan a little below where it 
 leaves the lake of Ciennesareth, in pursuit of the 
 Midian'.tiih princes Zeba and Zalniunna. On 
 that side tiie river, however, hi.s victory was not 
 lielievcd or understood, and the peojile still tiem- 
 bled at the very name of the Midianites. Hence 
 he could obtain no succmu from the places which 
 he })a3»ed, and town alter town refuseil to snjiply 
 even victuals to his fatigued and hungry, iuil 
 ■till s'out-heaited Iriop. He denoiuicevl ven- 
 gouice upon t iin, Liut |)ost])oned its execulon 
 
 till lii.s retiiin ; and whet: iie did reiur> niil, the 
 two piinces as his |nisoner<i, he by ii < nieiuis tparetl 
 those towns which, like Snccoth and Penutl, Lad 
 added insult to injury (Jung. viii. 4-17). 
 
 It) those days captives of dixtinclion taixen in 
 war weie a'mosi invaiialdy slain. Zelia .^iiil 
 Zalmuhira had made up their m'nds to tin.-: t.i e ; 
 ami yet it vv;is (iiueon's intention lo have spared 
 thini, till he learned thai they hail pnl to ileatli 
 his own brothers under the aame circiunst.ii.ces; 
 u|Nin which, as the avenger of their bhxid. he 
 slew the captives with his own liun<l (Jndg. viii. 
 1S.21). 
 
 Among tlie fugitives taVieii by the Kphraimites 
 were two distinguished emiis of Midian, named 
 Orel) and Zeeb, whom they put to death. They 
 tiKik till ir heads over to (iiiieim, which amounted 
 to an acknowledgment of hi- leadership; but still 
 the alivays haughty and ji'.ilons Kphraimites 
 were greatly annoyed that they had nut in the 
 first iiista: ce been .sninmoned lo the llehl ; and 
 serious con.si'(piences miglil have I'dhiwed, but for 
 the tact of (iideon in speaking in a lowlv spiiit 
 ol' his own iloings in coni))arison with Iheiis (Judjj. 
 vii. 1 4 ; viii. 4). 
 
 Gidion having thus deliveied Israel from fiie 
 most alllictive tvranny to which they had been sub- 
 ject since they (piitted Egy|it, the giatelnl people., 
 and paiticnlarly the northein tribes, made him an 
 oiler of the crown for himself and his .sons, lint 
 the hero was too well aciiuainted with his true 
 ])os'tiiin, and with the princi]ili'S of the theocia- 
 tical gcven;nu'nt, to accept this miguanled olli r : 
 ' I will not I llie over y.'u," he said, ' neither shall 
 my son rule over you : Jehovah, he s'.iail rule 
 over you." He would only accejit the goldon 
 ear-rings which the v ictors had taken fiom thee;us 
 of their slaughteied f..e« [Kau-kinus) ; and a 
 cloth being spiead out to receive them, the ad 
 miiing Israelites threw in, not only the ear-rings, 
 but other ornaments of gold, including the chains 
 of the royal camels, and added ti.e puipleiolu^ 
 which the slain nion.uchs had worn, being the 
 first ind cation of jiuiple as a royal colour The 
 ear-rings alone weighed 17fli) shekels, etpial to 74 
 jioniuls 4 ounces, and woi'li, at the |)ie-eiit value 
 of gold, about 3oli0^. \\ ith this '(iideon made 
 an ephod, and put ii in his city, even in Opiiiah; 
 and all Israel went thither a wluaing after it; 
 which thing became a snaie unto Gitleon and to 
 his hoiLse.' An e])liod, at least that of the higli- 
 ])liest, was an outer gniinent like a sleeveless 
 tunic, to which was attached the oiacular brea.st- 
 jilate, composed of twelve precious stones .set in 
 gold, and graven with the names of the twelve 
 tribes. Another ])lainer description of ephod wiis 
 worn by the common priests. The object nf (ii- 
 deon in making an ejiliod with his ireasine is not 
 very clear. Some suppose that it was nieiely 
 designeil as a tiopiiy of Israel's deliv eiame ; if so, 
 it was a very strange one. It is nioie j/'.ol.able 
 that as Gideon had, on Ins being fust called to his 
 high mission, been instiucted to build an altar 
 and oiler sacrifice at this very place, he conceived 
 him.self anthoiized, if nut ie(piiied, ^i" have tl ere 
 a sacerdotal estdbIi.^hT^lent — f..r at least the fiibes 
 beyond the river — where sacrilices might be re- 
 gularly oli'eied. In this ca.se the woiship rendered 
 tlieie was doubtless in honour of .Miovah, but 
 was still, however well intended, highly sclii.smn 
 tical and inegular. Kven in his lifetime ii must
 
 191 
 
 GIHON. 
 
 haiebn-l (lie elTect of witliilrawin;^ the atfpnfion 
 oft If. |ieii|ilf t-ast (i("llie Joniati liiiin the Talier- 
 haCiC ;il Siiildli, and tluis s(i f.ir tcmleil fii liicili- 
 tate tlie step int. i actual iil(ilati_\', wliicli was taken 
 Si)()ii aflf'i- (riileoiis ileatli. The imdialiility i)t' 
 this ex|>laii.ilii)n is stieiigtiiciieil wiuii we lecoiU'ct 
 the scliisiiiatic.il saceiiuital fst.iltii.shiiients wiiich 
 \lerH r.iiine.l dy Mu-ah (in Mount K|iliraim, anil 
 lly l!ie Danilei at Laish (Judg. xvii. 5-13; xviii. 
 29-31). 
 
 The leinaiiiiler of Gideon's life was peaceaMe. 
 He had seventy suns iiy many wives,, and ilieil at 
 an advanced age, alter lie lia<l ' mleu Jsiael 
 (priiicijiali y the nortliem tiilies and those i.eyond 
 the livi i) r^'i- lorty yeais : h.c. lit!) to TiOlt. He 
 is meiitiohed in the discoinse of Samuel (1 Sam. 
 xii. II), and his name occurs in Heli. xi. <52, 
 ainoiij those of the heroes of the faith. 
 
 1. GIHOX (Jinj : Se|.(.n£.;i'),a fountain near 
 Jern-ialeni. The [ilace outside flie city ro wliicii 
 the yunn^r S ihiniJii was taken to lie anointed king, 
 was caMcd (iihoii, hilt its direction is lu.t indi- 
 cated (I Kiii-s i ;j;j, 3^). Siil)se(iiieiilly King 
 Hezekui.ii 'stoppel the n[)]ier watercourse [or 
 upi)eroiit-(Knv of the waters] i.f Gilion.and hroiijcht 
 it straigiil do.vii to the west suleof the city of l)a\ id 
 (2 Cliron. xxxii 30; xxxiii. 1 1). This was. jier- 
 Daps, on occasion of the aiijiroach of the Assyrian 
 army under Sennacherili, when, to prevent the 
 t>esie„'ers fr.mi tin ling water, groat nnmhers 
 of the people lalioiiied with nuich diligence in 
 itopping the water of the fountains without tlie 
 city, .iiid in paiticnlar of 'the hrook that ran 
 iiroiigh the midsl of the land ' (2 Ciiron. xxxii. 
 i,i). Tlieai.th irof theh ok of Siiach (xlviii. 17) 
 »Isi) states, that ' He/ekiah lirongiit water into the 
 midst III' the city ; he dug with iron into 'he rock, 
 and liuilt f.iinit.tiii-i lor the ivaters.' Tlie loiintain 
 »f Gihiin is also mentioned hy Joseplius. Fioni a 
 compaiisjii of these pas-^ages the editor of tiie 
 Pictorial liible (on 2 Cliron. xxxii.) ariived at 
 the coiicln^ion, since conlirmed liy Dr. Ilohinson 
 (^Researches, i 3l.i), th.it theie existed anciently 
 afonnrain of Gi ion. on the west side of die city, 
 which was ' stopjieil or covered over liy Hezekiali, 
 and its waters hionght hv snliterraneons channels 
 into the city. Utfire that time it would natu- 
 rally have lloived d<nvn through the valley of 
 Oihon, and proliahly formed the lirook which was 
 stopped at the same time. 'The fountain mav 
 have been sfO[)|ied, and it-i waters thus seemed 
 very easily hy dig.(iiig deej) and erect n^ over it 
 one or more vaulted suhteiranean cliamheis. 
 Something of tlie very same kind is still seen in 
 the fountains near Solomon's pools h^'yond Hetli- 
 leliem. »vlie/e tlie water lises in siihterraiiean cliam- 
 bers to whi<:h tliere is no access except down a 
 narrow sliaft like a well. In liiis way the waters 
 of Gihon woul.l lie withdrawn from the enemy 
 and pieserved in the city, in whicli they would 
 seem to have heen distrdinted among various re- 
 servoirs and fouiitains.' From all these circum- 
 stances t..eie set'ms little room to doulit that an 
 ope.i liiuMtain, called ' 'he fountain of(rilion.' did 
 an< lently exisr on the west ol'tlie city, the waters of 
 wiiich m,iy still continue to (low liy siiliterraiieau 
 channels down to the ancient temple, and ])erhaps 
 to Siloain. This liiiuitain was prolialily near the 
 present Upper Po.il, in the valley west of Jerusa- 
 lem. Tiiis Upper Pool is a large tank, which is 
 
 GILKAD. 
 
 tliy in summer, but in tie rainy season twcnmet 
 full, when its waters are con<liicle(l liy a small 
 rude a([iieduct or channel lii the \ icinity of the 
 Jalla (rate, and so to the pool of Hezekiah within 
 the citv. (Comii. Rohinsoii s Researches, i. o-33 
 5 12-51' I.) 
 
 2. GIHON ; the name of one of the rivers ol 
 Paradise. [Pahauisk. ] 
 
 GILBOA (yh^? ; Sept. TiK^ove and TfX^oi), 
 a mountain niemoralile for liiedel'eat of Sanl hy the 
 Philistines, wheie his three sons were slain, and 
 wlieie he himself died hy his own hand (I Sam. 
 xxviii. 4; xxxi. 1-8; 2 Sam. i. (5-21). Tlie'cir- 
 Ciimstances of the nairative would al.ine sidJice ti.\ 
 direct our attention to the nioiiniains which hound 
 the great )ilain ol'K^draelon i.n the south-east, and 
 are interjiosed lietween it and the Jorilan valley. 
 Heie (iicie are a number of ridges, with a geneial 
 directi,.n from noilh-west to .south-east, separated 
 liy valleys running in the same direction. The 
 largest of these valleys is the soniheinnio-t : it is a 
 liiiiad deep plain aliout two miles and a half wide, 
 and leading direct into the Jorii.in valley. This 
 is siip(K)sed to he tli.>tinctively (lor the plain of 
 Ksdraelon is sometimes so called) the Valley of 
 Je/ieel. The mountains which hound it on the 
 north appear to lie (hose of Li((Ie Hermon ; and 
 the higher niountiiins which lionnd it on the 
 south nniioiililedly form Mount (iilboa. There 
 is still, indeed, an inhaliiteii village, in whose 
 name of Jelboti that of Gilboa may be recog- 
 nised. 
 
 G I LEAD (l^^J ; Sept. roAaciS). 1. A group 
 of mountains connected witli Lebanon by means 
 of Mount Hermoii. It begins not fir from the 
 latter, and extends soutliwaid to the somces of 
 tlie briioks Jabbok and Arnoii,thu3 enclii-.ing tlie 
 whole eastein part of the land beyond the Jordan 
 (Gen. xxxi. "21 ; Cant. iv. 1). According to Mi- 
 cliaelis (Mox. Recht, i. 86), this mountain, which 
 gave its name to the countiy so calleil, must be 
 situated beyond the regi^jn sketched in our maps, 
 and soniewlieie about the Ku|ihiates. 
 
 .Some dilMculty has arisen as to its real situa- 
 tion from Judg. vii. 3, where it would a]iiiearthat 
 it lay on this side of the Jordan, in the [ilain of 
 Je/.ieel. There is, however, no need of altering 
 the reading of tlie text, as suggested by Le Cleic 
 and ,'\Iicliaeris,since it merely implies that all (hose 
 who should 7)ot feel inclined to |iiosctute the war 
 against the Midianites faither than the mountain 
 from which the latter had emerged, were at libeily 
 to return liotne. 
 
 2. (a) The name of a large district lieyond the 
 Jordan, continually mentioned in the Scriptures in 
 contiadistinction to, or apait from, liashan (l)eiit, 
 iii. L'J ; Josh. xii. 5 ; xiii. 11 ; xvii-. 1 ; 2 Kings 
 X. 33; 1 Cliron. v. 16; Mic. vii. 11); (hough, to 
 judge tram its geogiaphical position (as given 
 Num. xxxii. 26; Dent. iii. 12), it must have 
 comprised the entiie possession; of the two tribes of 
 (ifad and Reidien, and even the southern pait of 
 Manasseii (l)eut. iii. 13; Num. xxxii. -10; Josh, 
 xvii. 1-6). The cities Kam>t(li, Jabosh, and 
 Jazcr, are usually designated as lying in 
 Gileail. 
 
 This region was (lis(ingui.she;l for its rich pas- 
 tures (Num. xxxii. l)and .uom itic simples; from 
 wliicli latter dilTeient sorts of balsam were pie« 
 pared — facts conlirmed by modern traveller!
 
 GILGAL. 
 
 'St-etzen, Bnrcklianlt, Sec), with the addition fliat 
 tlie wliok- leirian is coven-il witli j,'i(.njn ol' liine- 
 ttuno mountains, inteisecteil l)y feitilc vallcvs. 
 
 (6) The name of t!ie wli.ile eastern ])ait of llie 
 Joriian (l)eut. .vxxiv. 1; coinp. 2 Kiiij,'* x. 33; 
 
 Jllllff. XX. 1 ). 
 
 Tlie name Gilr.ad continned to he used, in a 
 general and geo^'rai.lilcal sense, even after tlie 
 exile (I Mace. v. etc.). Josi-pluis tAntiq xiii. 
 13. 5) desi,.^nates it a.* a ))ari of Arabia, while its 
 special and t,.])ii^raphtCiil n;une was Pertea. 
 
 3. A city of this name is .nparently mentioned 
 Hos. vi. S ; so, at least, it is given in most of t!ic 
 ancient and modern versions, though the meaning 
 may only l>e that Gilead is (like) a city fnll of 
 iniquity, t. e. a union of iuiiinilous j)eo])le. — 
 
 K. M. 
 
 1. GILGAL {hhl ; Sejjt. Ta.Kya\a.\ the place 
 where the Israelites lorme.l their tirsi encampment 
 in Palestine, and which continued for some time 
 10 be their head-ipi aters while eu^'aged in the 
 conquest of the land (Josh. iv. 19. 20; ix. 6; x. 
 6, 7, &c.). It was here that they set up the 
 twelve stones which they took out of the bed 
 of the .loril.ui (iv. IS)), which anorher heail will 
 bring mider consider.ition [Stonk.s]. Samuel 
 us(h1 to visit (jilgal in his annual circuit as a 
 judge ; and here theie was a school of tlie jiro- 
 phets (1 Sam. vii 16; 2 Kni,rs iv. 3M). There 
 is no iioiice of the ])la' e after the (Captivity. In- 
 deed, it does noi seem that the name belonged at 
 Otist to a town, alihoiigh Ciil^al eventually liecame 
 an inhabited place. It appears to have lieen e.nly 
 abandoned, and Josf))lius does not seem to men- 
 tion it as fxistln^' in his time. This wiiter ])laces 
 it on the east border of Jericlio, ten stadia fiom 
 that city, and Hify I'rom tlie .loidan {Antiq. v. 1, 
 4, 11). From this it would seem to have I.een in 
 the vicinity of the pie.,ent village of the j)sendo- 
 Jericli 0, Riha, which is about the assigned dis- 
 tance from the liver. No tiace of the name or 
 •ite can now lie discovered. 
 
 2. GILtiAL, a place in the region of Dor, 
 whose king was siibiiiied by Joivhna (Josh. xii. 23). 
 The Gilgal of Meh. xii. 29, and 1 Mace. ix. 2, 
 is probably the same as this ; as well as the ancient 
 Galgala, which Kuseidus and .leronie ])lace six 
 Roman miles noith of .\ntip iti is. In this neigh- 
 bourhooil tlieie is stdl a '.illage called Jiljuleh, 
 which [)n)hably iei)'.esents the ancient sile. 
 
 (tIRDLK. [Ahnev; AiiMOLit; Dkkss.] 
 GIRGASHITKS ("J'n^ ; Scjit. T^py^aaloiX 
 one of the famil'es of Canaan, vho arc snjipoicd 
 to have been settled in that p.wt of the country 
 which lay to tlie east of the L.ike of (renne-areth. 
 This conclnsion is founded on the identify be- 
 tween the word Tepyiaaiot, uhich the .Sejitnagint 
 gives for Girgashites. and that by wl-.ich jiattliew 
 (viii. 2'^) indicates the land of the Gergeseiies. 
 But ;is this last reading rests on a conjecture of 
 Origen, on which lit'e reliance is now jilaceil 
 f<T viJAlu 1. the conclnsion drawn from it has no 
 weiglit, although the fact is possihle on other 
 grounds. Indeed, the older reading, 'Geiasenes,' 
 has snilicicnf resemblance to diicct the alfeiition 
 to the countiy l)ey(ind the Jordan. 
 
 The (Tirg.ishites are coujectured to have l>een a 
 par* i)f the large family of the Hivites, as they 
 are omitted in nine out of tin ])laces in whicli 
 the nations or families of Canaan are mentioned, 
 
 GL.\SS. 
 
 tin 
 
 while in the ten'h they are mentioned, anil th« 
 Hivites omilteiL Joseplins slates tli.it iiothin;; 
 but the name of the (>ir:4ii.shi;es reni.iiiied in hia 
 time (/In//./, i. (5. 2). In the Jewish ('ommen- 
 faries of U. Nachnian, and elsevvheie, the Gir- 
 gashites an- desciilied as having rcf^rrd into 
 .•\fiica, fearing the power of (i d ; and Proropins, 
 in his lli.itoii/ of the VdndnLt. ment'ons an 
 ancient inscription m M.imitania Tiii-itana, 
 stating that the iiihabitanls li.id lleil lliiti.er from 
 the face of Joshua the son of Nun. The f.ict of 
 such a migralion is not unlikely : liut we have 
 very serious doubts lesjiectiog the iii-ci ipt on, 
 nienlioned only by Procopius. which has atVoided 
 the groundwork of many wonderful conchisions 
 such, for instance, as thai the American Indians 
 were descende<l from ihi'se exju-lle.! (^anji-uutes. 
 The notion that the (iiigasliiles did migiate seems 
 to hive been founded on the ciiciiinsfance lh.it, 
 although they aie iticluded in the list (<l the 
 seven devoteil nations either to be drircii out or 
 destroyed by the l-^raelites (Gen. xv. 20, .'1 ; 
 Dent. vii. 1; Josh. iii. 1(1; xxiv. 11), yet they are 
 omitted in the list of those to be ulteily deslioveii 
 (Dent. XX. 17), and aie mentioned among those 
 with whom, contiary to the Divjie decree, the 
 Israelites lived and intermanied (Judg iii. 1-6). 
 
 GITTITKS ("ni; Sept. Tidaioi). inhabitanfs 
 or natives of Gath (Josh. xiii. 3). Obed-edom, 
 although a Lex lie, is calleil a Giltite (2 S.ini. 
 vi. 10), po.ssd)ly because he had been with Daviil 
 when at Gath, but miidi more ]irobably from Lis 
 being a native of (Tath-rinnnon, which was a city 
 of the Levites. There seems no reason for ex- 
 teniling this interpret, ition to Ittai (2 Sam. xv. 
 19), seeing that l)a\ id expre.ssly calls liim ' a 
 stranger' (foreigner), and, what is more, 'an 
 exile.' He was at the head of fiOO men. who 
 were also Gilfites, for they are called (ver. 2'i) 
 his • brethren.' They a])))ear to have formed a 
 foreign troo|) of experienced wairior.s, chiefly from 
 Gath, in the |iay and servite of David; which 
 tliey had |)erhaps entered in tlieliisl in>iaiire for 
 the sake of shaiing m the booty ol.tainalde in his 
 wais. We can conceive that the pie.sence of suc\i 
 a troo]) must have been useful to the king iii 
 giving to the Hebrew ;umy tliat organiz;ilion am 
 disci)iline which it did not ]K>s.sess befoie his lime. 
 As natues of Gath they were of couise Philis- 
 tines, aiid tliePiiilistii.es weie beyond c, mjiaiison 
 the beo!t so'dieis in Palestine; and although they 
 weie lialionally enemies of Israel, it is easy to 
 conceive vaiions ]iartial inlhicnces which might 
 have drawn a tioop of them into the .-eivice ot 
 the most lenowned general and successfui vvarriot 
 of their lime. 
 
 GlTTI'rH, a word which occurs in the title 
 of Ps. \iil., Ixxxi., Ixxxiv. [ l'.^Al..^ls]. 
 
 GL.\SS. according to V\'\u\-\I I ist. J^'at. xxxri. 
 
 20), was iliscovered liy what is lei n.ed accident. 
 Some inert luints kindled a (he on that j>;iit of the 
 coast of Plm'ni<;ia wliltli lies mar Pl.jlem.ii.s, be- 
 tween the f(K)t of Caimel and T\ le, at a spot wheie 
 the river Beliis c:ists the line sand which it br ngs 
 down; but, as they werewifhoul the usual tneaiia 
 of suspending their cooking ve.ssels, they em- 
 ])loyed for that pmjKise logs of niDe, their ve.^sel 
 being laden with that sulislance : the lire fusing 
 the iiilie and the sand produced ghws. The 
 Sidunians, in whose vicinity the diKuvery wat
 
 7«4 
 
 GLASS. 
 
 GLASS. 
 
 made, tonL it ti|), .and li.-iving in iwiku-ss iif lime 
 Caniid llie ;»t to a liijjli ile^iee of cxcclifuce, 
 g-.iiiieil t'licrclij Ihitli wfaltli and Ciiiif. Other 
 iiatiotis Ix'c-ame tlieir iiupils; the Hmnan.s e-pe- 
 cialiy attaiiieil to veiv \i'v^\\ skill in tlie ait of 
 fusing, lilowiiij;, anil colouring 1,'las-i. Eveuijlass 
 i:iiiii)i.s were invented liv the Sidonians — c.tiain 
 specn'n cxvofj'tacen ,at. This ac('ouht oC Fliiiy is 
 in iiilHtaiici' corr.ili jratcd l)y Stralio (x\ i. 1.5), and 
 by J(ise,)liin (/>e Hrll. JitrL ii. 0) Yet, notwith- 
 gtaiid ii-c 'li's expli -it statement, it was lon^' de- 
 nied that the ancients were acquainted wiili glass 
 pnijierly so called; nir did the ih'nial entirely 
 disappear even when Pompeii oli'ered eviilenccs 
 rf its want of foiirulatiou. Our kn;)\vled,-;e of 
 Egypt has. lio.vever, set the matter at rest — show- 
 ing at the same time lio.v caiefnl men should he 
 in setting up treie alistiact reasonin.;s in o|)posi- 
 ticn to the direct testimony of history. Wilkin- 
 8<m. in his Ancient Egiipliaiis (iii SS, sq.), lias 
 addiice.l the fullest evidence that gla-;s was 
 known to and made by that ingenious people at 
 a very eaily |H'rio<l of tlieir national existence. 
 Ujiward of 3.j<)0 years ago, in the reign of the 
 firs' Osiriasen, tiiey ap]ieir to have practiseil the 
 art of tjlowliy glass. Tiie process is lepresented 
 
 in "he jaiiHiiigs of IJeni Hassan, executed in the 
 reign (ii ihat iiioiiaicli. lu the same age images 
 <if tjlazed pottery weie common. Oriianieiits of 
 glass weie made liy ihem aliout l.'iOO yeais n.c. : 
 for a liead of lliat date lias lieen found, heiiig of 
 the s.mie sj ecilic gravity as tiiat o!' our cruwn 
 glass. Mary g'ass Ixittjes, &c. have heen met 
 witli in ihe tomln, some of \ery lemote antiqii'ty. 
 Gias.s va>es were used for iiohling wine a> eaily 
 as llie Hxcdiis. Such was the skill of the Kgyji- 
 tiaiis ill this niaiiiifactiire, tiiat tiiey snccessfully 
 coiiiiteite'ted the amethyst, aiul other precious 
 Stones. Winckelniann is of opinion that glass was 
 employed more frequenliy in ancient than iu 
 imxii'Mi times. l,t was sometimes used by the 
 Kgypiians even for (('(Hns. They also emploved 
 it, not only f..r diiiiking utensils ami ornaments 
 of l!ie jxMsoii, liut for .Mosiiic woik, the tiguies of 
 deitie-i. aii;l sacred emlilems, attaining to ex(jiii- 
 site wiakipanship, and a surprising hiiiliancy of 
 colour. Tlie art Iihi of cutting glass was known 
 to the^ii at the most lemote peiiods; for which 
 jMn I'ose. as we learn fiom Pliny ( lllst. Nat. xxxvii. 
 4j, the diamond was iise.l. That the ancients had 
 mirrors of glass is < lear from the aliove cited woids 
 of Pliny; liut the mirrois found in Egypt aie 
 
 made of mixed metal, chielly copj)er. So aJ- 
 muably did thi: .skill (jCliie Egyptians succeeil in 
 tise composition ol' metals, that thru miirois wei« 
 susceptible of a p,.li,li which has lieeii but jiar- 
 tialiy revived at the present day. The minor iva» 
 neaiiy round, having a hamlle uf wood, sione, or 
 metal. Tlie foim varied with tl e tasle of ihi* 
 owner The same Kind of meial niiiror wa.i 
 used by the Israelites, v.lio, doubtless, brought il 
 fiom Egypt. Ill Exod. xxxviii. R, it is expressly 
 said that Moses * made the laver of brass of t!ie 
 looking-glasses (brazen minors) of the women.' 
 
 It would be jnsiiliable to sujipose tli.it the He- 
 brews brought glass, and a kiiowle.ige how to 
 manufactuie it, with them out i,f Egypt, weie not 
 the evidence of liistory so explicit iliat it was ac- 
 tually discoveied and vvrouglit at their own duur.s. 
 Whelher it was used by liiein fur miirois is ano- 
 ther question. That glass, however, was known 
 to the Hehiews appears beyond a donljt. In .lot 
 xxvii. 17, JT'DIDT is believed to mean glass, 
 though it is renueied 'crystal' in 'he ICnglisli 
 veision ; a substance, in V\ iiiei's opinion (Uand- 
 toorttrbiah'), signilied liy {i'^23, wiiicli occurs 
 in tlie ensuing verse, wliile the foinier is the 
 Epecilic name for glass. In the Ne.v Testament 
 the word employed is va\os (compare Aiistopli. 
 Aubes, 76S). In Apoc. xxi. 16, were.ul 'The 
 city was jiuie gold, like unto clear <//«w ,•' ver. 
 "21, ' as it were trans|)aienl glass' ((;onipaie c. iv. 
 6). ' Molten glass ' alsoocctus in job xxxvii. 18; 
 but the oiiginil 'N1, and its coiresponding worj 
 in l<^x(;d. xxxviii. R, autlioiize the translation' 
 'minor' — that is of some metal, indeed V\ iuer, 
 rcleiiing to heckiuatt {Mfitiiit/c zur Gesch. det 
 Erjindang, iii 31'JJ, exiiie-sly denies that glass 
 niniDis were known till the thiiteentli century- 
 adding that tliey are still seldom seen in the East. 
 Minors of polisi^eU metal aie tiicse that are moslly 
 used, formed sometimes into such shajies as may 
 serve for omanients to Ihe person. In the East 
 minors had a cuiineciion with the observances of 
 vtligiiii; females helii them beliire ihe images o( 
 the guldesses, ti;eieby manilesti'ig their own hu- 
 mility as servants uf the divinities, and beti/keniliij 
 the jiievalence in jnivate lile of a similar custon. 
 (Calliiiiach. llij,iin. in I'alUtd. 21; Seiiec. Ep. 
 y J ; Cyiil, De Adijiat. in Spir. li. (ii). That in 
 the New Te.->tainent a niinoi isinteiiuid in James 
 i. 23, ' beho'ding his natural face in a glass,' 
 appears certain ; but the si^nilicalion of tlie other 
 jiassage in which the woid iaonTpov occms, is 
 by no means so clear. If by taompov a metal 
 minor is to be understood, llie language employed 
 is not without ililhculties. Tlie preposition 5j«^ 
 'through,' is in such a case improper; ' face to 
 face' ]uesents an equally impioper coiiliast, fur 
 iu a minor ' face answeis to lace ' (Prov. xx\ ii 
 ID). So the general iin|xjr* of the passage seems 
 to require a medium, anil an im|)erfectly transpa- 
 rent medium, tliiough which olijects aie beheld. 
 This is cuntiimed liy the words tj/ ojVi7;"arj, in 
 enigmas, that is, with the meaning hidden or 
 involved in outward coverings: in this stale ob- 
 jects aie seen mediately, not immetliately (see tlm 
 jiassages ipioteil by Welslein;; in the next ihe vtil 
 will be lemoved, and we shall see ihem as they 
 aie, as when two persons behold each oilier willi 
 no substance intervening. Hence tlie rendering 
 in the common version a]i])ears not iinsuit ible^ 
 and the statement of tlie Apostle Ciarespci^Ja witt
 
 GLEDK 
 
 (kci and experience : for it is obscurely, as llironp;!! 
 n. 'liiii meiliuin, tliat we see «)iiiitiiiil objects. 
 What tl e iivecise snltstance was wliicli tlie Aposlle 
 'houglit of wlieii lie used the wouls it may not l.e 
 •aay to dct« •mine. It coiiKl not well beoulinary 
 ^la$3, 't tliat was transparent It may liave 
 been the lapis speciilaris, or a kind of talc, of 
 whicli tiie ancients maiie their windows. Tliis 
 opinion is conlirnied l>y Schlensner, who says that 
 the Jews used a siniil.ir mode of expression to 
 describe a dim and im])erf;ct view of mental 
 olijects (Schottgen. llor. lleb. in loc.) See Mi- 
 criaelis, Hist. Vitri ap. Hch. in cl. Comment. 
 Soc. Goftting. iv. 57 ; also Dr. Fakoner on Mlie 
 knowledge of tiie Ancients resjiectin;;; Gla-^s," in 
 the Memoirs of the Lit. and I'hil. Soc. of Man- 
 e/iestcr, ii. Hn'. — J. 11. JJ. 
 
 GLKDK (De:it. xiv. 13) is an obsolete name 
 for the common kite, adopted in our version for 
 HKT 7'aah, or, as Gesenius thinks, nXT dan/i, 
 there l)ein^' a sliglit nnitation in the initial letter 
 of tiie word (comp. tiie j.urallel ])as-;:ige in 
 Lev. xi. 14). The Septnagirit renders it by yinfi, 
 and the Vulgate by mi/cii^. It has by soTiie been 
 taken for Percriopterns, noticed nnder Racham ; 
 and iiav ing tiieie shown tiie species referred to 
 Racham, in the nncertainty which here appeais 
 insurmountable, we can have recfnirse only to 
 the very nnsatisfactory inference that may be 
 drawn IVom tlie root wlience raa/i or daah may 
 be derived. Erymiilogists aaree to connect it 
 with velocity or rai)idity of Higiit ; and tliat 
 quality agrees jierfectly with the Greek and \'ul- 
 gate versiiins, for the kite has, in comparison with 
 Its bulk, very long wings, and a forked tail ex- 
 tending beyotid them. It is a species that rises 
 to a towering height, hangs apparently motionless 
 in the sky, and daits down with immense ve- 
 locity ; but the legs and claws bein^ w>'ak, it ig 
 
 GLORY. 
 
 703 
 
 3i%. [Milvus .\ter.] 
 
 cowardly, and feeds H|)on carrion, fish, insects, 
 nrce, anc' small birds. About Cairo kites are 
 {larticulat ly abnnilan*, mixing with the carrion 
 viiliiires i i (lieir wheeling llight, and coming in 
 numbers a> the daily distiiljution of fixxi awarded 
 them. lint the iinesfion wheliier ihe kite of Eu- 
 roj.e and that of Egyjit aie the .same species, is not 
 decided, thongh there is no want of scientiric names 
 for bolli sjiecies found in the valley of tlie Nile; one 
 of which is ceitainly distinct from the Enroj^ean, 
 ■nd the ii<her, if not so, is still a strongly maikeil 
 ««riet3'. We find it noticed in various stages of 
 
 plumage, as ,V//r?/? Iidmis. Militis Kt. lius, Sa- 
 vigny ; J-'<i/ro ..I'Jt/i/ptidcuii ami Falco /•' rs/inhtit, 
 Gtnel.; I'alvo vinvrco-fofiii/iuetis, Foiskiilil ; 
 I'nlco Arda. Suvigny; pconalily- also, i'alco 
 paiasifints. Lath. 'I'he dill of this speciis is 
 dark; lie.iil and throat wirilisli, witii biown 
 stieaks; boily above ilark giey l.niwn, jiale fer- 
 ruginous lielow ; tail but sligi.tly foiked ; leg« 
 yellow. It is fiuind in iiiernglyphic paintinga, 
 coloured with sniVicient accinacy not to be mis- 
 taken. The vitlier si.ecies, which we li^nie above 
 as .yilcii.s ater, is the li'ack kite, I'lilro mflamrp- 
 <(';-«,9, Daiiilin; EUnnis CcesiuH, Sa\ ignv ; I'alco 
 Souni)ifiiiis, Latli. ; Lc Blac. Le \aill, and 
 Kmtliieli of the .•\ial>s. It lias the lie.id, necK, luid 
 back daik rusty grey; scapiilais iMiideied with 
 riisfy ; wing-coverts and pr.maries black, the last- 
 mentioned tipt with while; uiil •i.sty grey aliove, 
 white benealh ; billd.nk; legs yellow. The man- 
 tiers of lioth s];ecies aie ninch the sariie : it is 
 likely that they are equally alinndarit at Cairo, 
 and spread into Palcjlnie. [Hawk. J — C. H. S. 
 
 GLORY', in the Englisli Version, re))re-ents the 
 words nU3 and U\a. The Ilebiew, fom n?^^ 
 'tobehea\y,' issnsceptilile of the vaiioiiscnia/or/icn/ 
 meanings which aie derived froui its mot, viz. 
 ' to be hard,' ' hoiiouied," ' rich," tc. In Gen. 
 Xxxi. 1, ' all this glory ;' Isa. x. W. ' your glory ;' 
 Ixvi. 12, ' the glory of the Gei^tiles,' it means 
 trealth, abundance. Ps. Ixxix. 0, * the glcry of 
 tliv name," i; e. honour, rcptttation. Isa. .\xxv. 2; 
 Ix. 13, com]). X IS, ' tlie glory of Lebanon," i. e. 
 ornament. Isa. \ iii. 7, ' tlie king of Asjvria and 
 all his glory,' is rendered by Lowth ' and all liis 
 force.' In some juissages it conveys the ideas ol 
 the ancients res])ecting liie liodily s^eat of certain 
 pa.ssions. .-Viiiong others, they thought the liver 
 to be the seat of anger and love. Thus Horace 
 (^Carm. i. 13. 4), de»cril)ing jealous anger or 
 resentment — Fervens dilhcili iiile tiimet J^cur, 
 — 'My burning liver swells with angry Idle' 
 (see notes ol'lhe Delplrn edition. Comji. Persius, 
 .Soy. V. 129; Juvenal, Sat. vi. (517). Tims Ps. 
 xvi. 9, ' My heart is glad and' niHS. literally, 
 ' my liver lejoiceth." Gen. xlix. (i, ' mine honour' 
 is remleied by .Sept. Ta ijiraTo uov. ' niy liver.' 
 Lam. ii. 11, is literally rendered by our tianslatoi-a 
 ' My liver is ponied u[>on ti e earth.' indicating 
 violent grief. ' To be heavy" is tiie primarg mean- 
 ing of the root; hence "112!) means ' the liver,* 
 the heaviest of all the visceia; j.iit .'is the luiigs, 
 the lightc.it of all, aie in our laiigiiUL;e called the 
 lights (Taylor's Ueb. Concord. ^. In some iii- 
 slances the literal lendering of the Hebrew idiom 
 in our version is attemied with obscniiiy. 1 .Sam. 
 ii. 8, 'throne of gKiry ' is *a glorious tliione.' 
 Ps. xxiv. 7, S, ' the king of glury ' is ' ihe gloi io. j 
 or majestic king.' Ps. xxix. .'J, ' the (i-nl J 
 glory" is • the glorious Gotl," anil is .so rendered in 
 the Prayer-book veis:on. In the New Testament, 
 Luke ii. 9, ' the glory of the Loid siione," is in 
 e.ctreme splendour (.see also Acts vii. 2V In 
 1 (^(.r. ii. 8, ' Lord of ulory ' is ' ghiiiuus or illii»- 
 trious Lord." Rom. viii. 8. • sp lit of (iod anil 
 ' spirit of Christ,' are ' a gonly and Chrisl'un 
 8]iirit, teni) er, or disjiosition.' I<eniarkahlv cve'tta 
 aie a well-known cause of the intrix' .^ciion ul' nc» 
 words or new senses of words. Th r ((/^jearnnri* 
 of what is teimeit mn* HlDD. ' tlie glory o( 
 Jehovah," Sv^t. 5i${a Kupiov, ' the .Shechinali uf tUt
 
 <S9 
 
 GNAT. 
 
 Raljbins, so oOt-n icfenwl to in flie Old Testa- 
 nietit, seem to liiive ori^'iriateil ceit.iiii ii^es of' *'ie 
 woiil, ill t!ie sense of liijkt, ami vixibie spleudo ,r, 
 and niiuieaiiis a|)|)!ic.iti«iiis of lliese seiisfs amoii^ 
 the Helleiiutu; iviiteis. It is liist (Ustinci( 1/ c.iWed 
 by tliij teiiit in Kxod. xvi. 7, 10. It is desciilied 
 as Weill J like ii4/t///«/_ytVc (Exo I. xxiv. 17) aulas 
 attemic'd with a cloud, Kxod. xl. iJl, iJ5. It is 
 prolMlile I lilt tlie tradition of tliese jilienomena 
 inlliieiiced the lepresentatioiis of heathen poets, 
 wiio so often de?ciitie t!ie appeaiances of tiie deities 
 as attended liy a cloud, with a hrij^htness in it 
 (.see Taubmann's Xotes on I'inf'd). It is believed 
 tiiat the chis-iical (ireek writers never use S(5|a in 
 the seiise of It ikt or splendour. The nearest in- 
 stanoL' yet adduced is from I'lutarcli (\icias, 
 torn. i. |i. 5dS, K), who speaks (tf nAaroJi/oj 
 fKKSjyaira SS^a, ' the ^;iory of Plato slpninj^ firth,' 
 It a.iwerj verv fieqiientlv, in the Sept., to ni35 
 (Kxoil. xxiv. 17, 40 ; y.-:xiv. 35 : Deut. v. 21. kc.) 
 down to the (lap iiity. The followin:^ instances 
 a.'.e oll'eied ofihe Hellenistic uses, allusions, or 
 applications of the word, originated by the events 
 »l)ove iiieiitioiied : — -Matt. vi. 21), 'Solomon in all 
 \\\& glory ; i. e. visible ma^nilicence. as opjiosed to 
 the do/ltiiif/, called ' array' of the lilie-;. I Cor. 
 XV. il, ' the ),dory, i. e. lustre, of the sun, moon, 
 and stars." Jesus is called, Heh. i. 3, awavyacr/xa 
 r?is S6^r}s. * the effulgence of his (the Father's) 
 glory," un evident allusion to E/.ek x. 4. Rom. 
 i. 23, • the s''"y of God ' is • the glorious./o/-?« of 
 God." 2 Thes. i. it, • the presence of the Lord 
 and the glortj of Ids power." 1 Tim. vi. 1(5, 
 •dwellinjf in li.^llt.' 1 Cor. xi. 7, 'man is the 
 imaije and glory of God," tr.etonym. tiiat which 
 exiicbits or rejiects this jjlory, i e. symbol, domni- 
 straliim. Uihei events would also conduce to such 
 j)eciiliar uses of the word as the shining of the face 
 of Moses (comp. Exod. xxviv. '^9; 2 Cor. iii. 
 7,8; iv. G); the splendour attendinjj the appear- 
 fince of angels, especially in later aL^es (Matt, 
 xxviii. 3, &c.); the transfiguration of Jcsits, in 
 which it is said that Peter, James, and John, saw 
 his glorif (Luke ix. 32; comp. John i. 14 ; 2 Pet. 
 i. 17, 19. See Mackni.rht on'Phil. iii. 21). And 
 since the appear.nxx's, kc. alluded to, are con- 
 nected with tlie Deity, the Saviour, any;els, kc, 
 the same word is also consistently adopted to 
 denote the participation in the glory and blessed- 
 ness of these heiuf^s which is reseived for the 
 faithfu'. Col. iii. 4, ' appear with him in glory. 
 1 Cor. iv. 17, 18; 2 Thess. ii. 14, ' the obtaininij 
 of the glory of our Loid Jesus Christ.' These 
 senses of tlie word originated in the eve^its re- 
 corded in the Sciiptiires, and are consequently 
 coiiKiied to the writers of Scrintuie, or to those 
 writers who ad.ijiteil their iileas and language. 
 For the ordinary senses and ajiplications of the 
 word, le'eience must be made to the Hiblical 
 Lexicons, as Robinson's, by lilooniHeld ; Paik- 
 hiirst .s by II. J. Rose, &c.— J. F. I). 
 
 (rN AT ((caVoiv^ ; Nulg. cufcx; Order, diptera, 
 Linu., ctdicidr, Latr ; occurs Matt, xxiii. 24). 
 1 hecounnon gnat scarcely yields to any insect in 
 regajd to the inteiesting facts which it presents to 
 the naturalist. Tlie following otitline will recall 
 the chief of them to the i-eader : — The boat- 
 shapecl raft of eggs, which the paient gn.it forms, 
 and leaves uimui the water, so admiraldy con- 
 strnctwl. tiiat, though i'ollow, it neither becomes 
 filled with 'vater, not ginks even under the tor- 
 
 GNAP. 
 
 rents of a tliunder-sliower ; llie aquatic larvn^ 
 breathing, head downwards, through it* tufted 
 siiiracle ; its /too^ with which it seizes the ani- 
 malcides on which it feeds ; the variations and 
 even reverses of structure it undergoes in the 
 pupa state, now swunming, head upwards, by 
 means of its lin'ike tail, and breathing through 
 sjiiracles placed behind the head; the amazing 
 tiansl'ormation it undergoes when ';.'*ing its 
 shoulders out of the water, and upon tne bursting 
 of the skin which had enveloped them, the perfect 
 insect emerges, its former covering now serving om 
 a lifedioat during those few ciitical moments 
 while it disengages and trims its wings for (light, 
 and commeni;es its existence a winged creature 
 in a new element, and instantly begins to suck the 
 juice.s of animals or vegetables, while ' its shrill 
 horn its feaiful "larum rings;' the complicated 
 mechaiiism of its tube, which serves the purf<oses 
 both of lancet and cupping-gla-ss, and of inserting 
 a lluid for liquefying the lilood, and making it 
 How more freely. Tiie various organs, compre- 
 hended in so small a structure, excitetl the wonder 
 of Pliny {Hist. Mat. xi. 2), and attracted the 
 notice of Socrates, as we Ivjarn from liis jioetical 
 adversary Aristophanes {Nubos, 1'j8): but the 
 further discoveiies of the microscope raise cur 
 wonder into a still higher principle. \Vhat has 
 been said, of the naturalist generally, is pecu- 
 liarly true of him when examining this subject 
 — duni studct, oral. '1 dare bildly affirm,' 
 says Swammerilain. ' that the incompiehensilde 
 greatness of Deity manifests itself in tjiese mys- 
 terious operations in a ])aiticu'ar manner, and 
 all'ords an opiKirtunity of examining, as it wre 
 with our senses, the Divine nature,' p. 2. 51. 
 The word kiLvw^ seems to b(? the generic term for 
 the gnat among the ancient Creek writers, under 
 which they included several species, as we use the 
 word ' fly,' and ' the lly ;' though they gi\ e distinct 
 names to some species, as the worti aeptpos, &c 
 Rosennmller (.bseives that the Ktox/coTrt? of the 
 Greeks seem to be the ephenierte of Liiina?u3 
 (apud Bochait, vol. iii. p. 414, 4to., Leijis. 1 71)3-6). 
 Aristotle gives the name to a species whose iarv» 
 are breil in the lees of wine, which is then called 
 \\\e culex vinarius (Hist. An. 5. 19). Pliny also 
 refers to various species of gnats : ' varia sunt culi- 
 cum genera'' (Hist. Nut. xi. 35). ' Alii e.\ licis, 
 ^camdicti' (ibid.). Alii ex aceto nascunlur' 
 (ibid.) ' Sunt etiam qui vocantur /nw/to/te*. Alii 
 centrince' (xvii. 27). We ourselves recognise se- 
 veral kinds under the common name, as gall gnats, 
 horse, wheat, winter (.see also Linn. i<yst. Nat. 
 Dijiteia, Culex). Our Saviour's allusi(<n to the 
 gnat is a kind of jiroverb, either in use in his time, 
 or invented by himself, ' Blind guides, who strain 
 out a gnat, and swallow down \b(dt, as we say] a 
 camel.' He adopts tlie antithesis of the i///.(f//es< 
 insect to the largest animal, and ajiplies ii to 
 those who are superslitioiisly anxious in i voiding 
 small faults, yet do not scriqile to commit the 
 greatest sins. The tyjwgraphical error, 'strain at 
 a gnat,' first found its way into King James's 
 translation, Itill. It is ' stiain out ' in the pre- 
 vious translations. The cust'im of filtering wine, 
 among the Jews, for this ]iurpo8e, was founded on 
 the jirohibition of * all Hying, creeping things' 
 being used for food, excepting ihe sallatorii (I/ev 
 xi. 23). The custom seems alluded to by tb* 
 Se|)t., which, in Amos vi. 6, reads Srjtdtrfiurtf
 
 GNOSTICISM. 
 
 9fi'of, 'fiUere'l wine' — a jia^siige iKivin:; a similar 
 ic(i{)e. Accoiiliiii^ to the Talimul, eating a iriiat 
 inc.nrretl scouif(iiij» or excDiiiiinmicatioii. It is 
 coiisiileied that the ineiin a lnpted in aiu-iotit 
 times to avcid tiie molestatiiMi it glials, oii^inaleil 
 Diir Plii^lish \rijnl cunopij, I'loin kwvuttuov, a hi'il 
 with hangings of gauze to keep olV gnats, or tlie 
 gaii/o-net itself. It occurs in the Aiiocryi'lia 
 (Juditli X. 21), and rlsewhere. In siicli a litter 
 was Clriniatia cairie* to the i)attle ol' Actiiiin 
 (Horace, Epod. ix. 11). Aeuiious s|iecid.itii)n 
 oas lately heen advarced res])ectiiig the use of 
 net-work, fmin<l in a passage in Heiodotiis, wiiicli 
 had heretorore l)aH!ed explanation. lie says (ii. 
 96) that ' tiie ]>e()ple living in the marshy parts 
 of Kgypt sleej) in lofty towers, to avoid the gnats, 
 but that tliey also reside near the marches, sidisti- 
 tiite a net widi whith the man catclics ^fiali in the 
 day, and makes tiie following use of it at iiiylit : — 
 Around and over the hed lie slee])S on lie casts the 
 net, cu'e])S under, an<l lays hiinsell' down. 'I'lie 
 giiat<, KMyaMTis, which, even if he was to wrap 
 himself in a linen cloak uhen in l>ed, would hite 
 through all, do not so much «.< even try t/ie net.' 
 Now the use of retreating ti) tuirers to avoid gnats 
 could he understood, liecause it is well kiiown 
 that gnats never lly beyond a certain heiyltt. 
 The modern Kgy]tfians also slee]) on the rtiof of 
 their houses for the same purpose. Wilkinson 
 (ii. 132) gives a (hawing of an ancient Kgyi)tian 
 house, with a lower ri-.iiig a!)ove the tcviace-riiof. 
 Such an addition is also common in modern 
 Louses (.Sliaw's Traveh, p. 211). But the efficacy • 
 of the nei-icork h.is lieeii rendered credible \>y a 
 statement o[' Mr. S[ ence to tiie Entomological 
 Society — that the /iOMseyZy will not enter a window 
 across which a net or even lines of thread are 
 drawn (Transact. Entomoloy. Soc. vol. i. ]). 8, 
 &c., 1834). If the ffnats have a similar objection, 
 then this may be legarded as an additional in- 
 stance of tlie 'iccuracy of Herodotus, when he 
 relates things he actually observed, having been 
 elucidated by modi-rn discoveries (\ orstius. De 
 Adayiis, X. T., )i. 771, ed. Fischer; Kirby and 
 S|ience,/ji;;'Of/ to Entomology ; Ba;liani Sjiiciley.; 
 Grief, Oraulum Christi contra percolantes culi- 
 ccm, &c., Lei)is. 1749). — I. F. D. 
 
 GNOSTICISM. In the whole history of the 
 bnman nund there is not a more instructive 
 chapter, at once strange and sad, interesting to 
 our curiosity and mortifying to our pride, than 
 the histoiy of Plafouism sinking into Gnosticism, 
 or, in«olher words, of Greek jihilosopiiy merging 
 in Oriental mysticism ; showing, on the one 
 hand, the decline and fall of philosophy, and. on 
 the other, the rise and progress of syncretism. 
 PerhajM, also, it is the most lemarkaiile instance 
 on lecor 1, that out of the religious, moril, and 
 political, in one woiil, the intellectual coiruption 
 which lirings on the fall of great and mighty 
 nations (si) it doubtless was with Babylon and 
 Thebes, and so we know it to have been with 
 Athens and Rome), God's piovidence educes purer 
 principles and higher hopes for the natioiH atid 
 jieopln that ri^e out of their iishcs, and who, if 
 tiiey will be taught wisdom and principle, righte- 
 oujiifss and peace, by the errors and sidVerings of 
 th()s« who have iireceded them, may rise to higher 
 desti'ues in the history of man's conduct and 
 God's prov'dence- 
 
 In the Bampf in lectures of Dr. Edward Burton, 
 
 GNOSTICISM. 
 
 7«7 
 
 late Regius Profes.sor of Divinity at Oxford 
 (inostici.^m is alliibuled pr iiii| ally to lh<; wiitings 
 of Plato, as stiiilieil at .\hxaii<li la. Though the 
 wisdom of Kjypt may have inlluenci'd ihed'ieeks 
 and Rinnans ihiongh the my>-tici.Mn of Pylhagoias, 
 tiiough ihi- Oriental doctrines of Babylon n)ay 
 have made their way aiiioug<l the .lews bolh ii( 
 .lerusalem and Alexa'iiliia l<y nieuns of their 
 Cabbala and Talnnid-i, and though some secta 
 of declaicd Gnostics may lia\ e gone slill more 
 directly to the metaphysical, or lallier mystical, 
 genealogies of the K.islein Magi, still il is llie 
 opinion of Dr. Bui ton that it was the Gieek 
 writings of Plato which gave the extraoiuinary 
 impulse of their gi'iiius, and. if we may use 'lie 
 won!, of their fasiiion, to the lost writings of the 
 Gnostics, as well as to those which lemain to im 
 of Philo aii<l Plotiniis ; in a wind, lli J I'lutonist, 
 Philonist, unit (ino.-tic, aie liil emanations at 
 dilVerenl distances fiom the (jtiosis of Plato, 
 though they have drawn .so deeply from some 
 fountains from which Plato drew more sparingly, 
 and willi far better taste, as to have mudilied the 
 clearer stieam, and liaikrned llie |-uier light 
 which they deiived primarily I'lom tiie writings 
 of I lato. 
 
 The character, learning, and station of Dr. 
 Burton, the years of study he is known to have 
 devoted to this subject, the judicious moderatiun 
 with which he has s] oken of liie fathers, tiie 
 geneial fairness and ability with which he has 
 examined iiis authoi itie.s, the nuiss of valualde 
 iid'ormation he has accumulated in bis n'Mea, and, 
 lastly, the ably leasoned theoiy which he baa 
 biought forwaid in his lecti ;*!S, entitle his ojanions 
 on this subject to great attention. It is our pur- 
 pose, tiierefore, in our )iie'icnt aiticle on Gnosti- 
 cism, as well as in the a'ticle iijion the Logos, 
 which may be considered \ cintinualiuii i.f the 
 subject, to give sucii a seiies of extracts from Dr. 
 Burton's lectuies, with reference* to some of the 
 most valuable ji.issages in l.is nol^s, as may br ng 
 his opinions, and the facts on -rJiich he gioiuids 
 them, most faiily b fore the reail :'..\ adding al the 
 close ol each aiticle such reuii'okd as may have 
 occurreil to uj. We take this ci.uisc, as it does 
 not seem ipiile honouiable towards a great scholar 
 and ilivine to ])resent Ida thoughts in our own 
 words (as Prol'e.ssor Mailer, in his clever and 
 agreeable woik Ilis/uire Critique du duosticisme, 
 ajijiears to us to have practised a Ittle too much 
 towards the learned and ]irolbuiid woik of his 
 great countryman Beansobie); nor, lastly, is it 
 wise in one who is seeking to eslablish tiuth to 
 diminish one jot or one little from a great autho- 
 rity. And, let us add, tliat a wiiier who has on 
 the whole been so fair to his I'ellow labouieis, to 
 Beausobre, JMosheim, and Bruckei, to Iieha:.i8 
 and Ittigius, as Professor Bui ton has been in his 
 criticisms and acknowledgments, de.-erves liimseW 
 to lie lia:l in remembrance, and not to be obscured 
 in tne woiks of thixse wlio have bouowed I'lom 
 him. 
 
 Dr. Burton states the object of his course to \>t 
 ' to consider the heiesies which inl'ested the church 
 in the lifetime ol' the apostles,' that is, as he after- 
 wards shows, ' tiuring the lirst centuiy of the 
 Christian era; for it seems certain that St. John 
 smvived the test of the aposlle.s, and the death ot 
 St. John, according to every account, very ne»rly 
 coincided witli tlie comu<eucemeitt crf lire •ecotMi
 
 Wi» 
 
 GNOSTICISM. 
 
 aentiiry.' Rpspectiii!,' t!ie prohaliility of our find- 
 StK trarei of liciejics lii llie Nf ,v Testament, Dr. 
 8nif<)ti leiiiaiks, * If (klse (l>.ctiiiie> were tlisse- 
 miimfed in tlio ciiurcli vvliile liie ajiosiles were 
 ttiive, it is ut least lii^lily ]ii-i)ljal)le tliat tliey 
 would alliide to llieiu in their writiiig-i.' lie 
 then proceeds to quoie texts which clearly j)rove 
 • the eKisfeiice of iieiesies in the days of tiie 
 iKostles theinseUes' (I C>)r. xi 11); (r.il. v. 20 ; 
 TitJs ill. 10; 1 .(o!in li. 18. 19: t;olosj. ii. S ; 
 ITini vi.ao.^ll ; liov. ii. (>, 1.) ; 2 Tiin. xvii. 18; 
 \ TitJi. i. lit, 20 ; -2 Tim. i. I); 3 Join, ver. 0). 
 After ttacin;; the term iieicsy tiii()Ui,di its siicces- 
 ■ive tneaniii.;* t) the |ire-eiit times, he adds, ' In 
 the course of diese leriaies I shall speak of the 
 heiesifs of the apost.ilic aj^e in the sense wiiirh 
 was attacheil to the term l»y theeaily faiiieis : and 
 all that 1 wi-li to he lemeinht-red at present is, 
 that the term is not t« be understood according to 
 modem iiieas" (t. e. as limited to lielcKtdoxies 
 aliont tlie Trinity), • hut that an heretic is a man 
 who eiiilira''es any opinion concerning relij^don, 
 that opinion not UAns in accoidance with the 
 faith of the Gospel.' Why heresies were allowed 
 to arise s,i early, and to spiead tiieir roots so deep 
 Elid wide, Piofessor iiurton presumes not to 
 answer; tint he (juotes 1 Cor. xi. 19 as pointing 
 out one of the principal i^o id elVdcts to he ijroduccil 
 Ijy sui-ii atiia! oftiie Ciuistian's hiith. Approach- 
 ing still neaier to his mam suhject, he adds, ' It 
 will ap])ear in the course ol' these lectmes, that 
 many persons who weie called lieielics in tlw; first 
 nnd second centuries had little or nothing in 
 common with Oliiisti inity. Tliey took such paits 
 oi'the (rosjiei as suited the r views or stiuck tlu ir 
 fanry ; hut liiese rays of li^ht they mixed up and 
 buried in such a chaos of ahsimlity, that the 
 a;)ostles theiu?elves would hardly have reco,'nised 
 their own doctrines. Such weie most of the 
 heresies iti the litetime of the aji istles ; and when 
 we come (o consider the .state of ])hi!osophical 
 opinion at that period, we shall cease to womler 
 that the fa'hers sjje.ik i.^( ski many heresies appear- 
 ing in the lifetime of the a]io?ties.' 
 
 Having thus glanced at the peculiar character 
 of the heiesies, or r.ilher of the heresy, of wiiicli he 
 is alfout to gi\e an accoimt. Dr. Buiton pmceeds 
 to altiihide its eaily pievalence, and the conse- 
 quent eiiors it intiothued into the religion of so 
 mauv Ciiiistiati conveils, to the len^'th of time 
 ftil'teen vears) which Dr. burton states to have 
 elapsed between the conveision df St. Paul and his 
 first journeying and preaching in Cilicia, Phrygia, 
 Mucedorda. Athens, and Coiinth ; during the lat- 
 ter pait of wliich jouiney, namely whilst he was 
 at Cktririth, he appeais to lia\e written the eailiest 
 of his Epistles — the (list Kpislle to the Thessal,)- 
 niitiis. • it appears, therefoie. that seventeen years 
 elajise:! between the linsl pronuilgation of the Gos- 
 pel an i the date of I he eai 1 lest writing whicli has 
 come down to us. Tiiose Kpistles from which 
 most^viiience will Ik' diawri concerning the eaily 
 beiesies, weie written several years later; .ind I 
 am sjieaking greatly within compass in savings 
 that the accounts which we have of heresies in the 
 Ihst century, aie taken from dociurients which 
 •veie wiittcn twenty years afier the lir t jiromulga- 
 *i')li (if the (iospel. 1 have .said that this f.ict is 
 Hot always iMirne in mind liy jiersous who an-con- 
 fidering tlie events of fl e (ir.t century ; ami yet 
 li>i» (NsrU'd i.s lixvjue^tionubly the uiost im)Mirtant 
 
 GNOSTICISM. 
 
 which ever has occuifed in the annals of man> 
 kind.' Jn a suhsetpient ))ass.ige he leniarln, 
 respecting fiie ))trio(l in (piestior', • If it had 
 not been for an incidental exintssion of St, 
 Paul in his Epistle to the Galatians we should 
 never have known that he ]).is-;ed three years in 
 Aiabia immediately after his conicrsioti, rior that 
 f inrtpc n more years elapsed helore the end -jf his 
 tiist jomney. Whether he paiseil the greater part 
 of this peiiod in his native city. Tarsus, and what 
 was tlie nature of his occupation, v.^e seek in vain 
 to learn. We could hardly c>.iiceive that the 
 chosen Api.htle ol" the Gentiles would be inclined 
 or peinutted to delay the great woik to which he 
 had lieen called, nor would it be easy, to imagine 
 that the other Apostles were idle in spreauing fliat 
 Gospel which they had been so soleiindy ordered 
 to preach amongst all nations. Tlie death of St. 
 James, and the imprisornneiit of St. Peter, by order 
 of Herod, prove that they weie not idle, and that 
 the Gospel made its way. But still it was not 
 till f.;uiteen years after our Lord s ascension tluit 
 St. Paul travelled for the li'rst lime, and pleached 
 the Gospel to the Gentiles. Nor is theie any evi- 
 dence that during that period the other Apostles 
 jiassed the contiiies of Jiiila?a.' 
 
 Piofessor Buiton proceeds as follows with his 
 very striking argumetit : 'Duiing the time when 
 v/e have supposed the .Apostles to hive conliiied 
 themselves to Ju<la;a, the Gospel was making lapid 
 progress in several [lartsof the w'>ild. Tnis is the 
 jK)int to which I now wish to direct y(jur atten- 
 tion, and paiticularly to tlie iact that this [jrogiess 
 was without co-o])eration and control of the Apos- 
 tles : which may ilstlfbe sidlicicnt to fnitiish a 
 reason for the ajipeaiance of so many heresies, and 
 for such strange corruptions of Cl.risli.inity in 
 those early times' He (hen maiks, by (piota- 
 tions from the New Testament, the times and 
 j)la(es when and wheie the Gospel niust have 
 lieen spiead l,j' those liist cotiveits whose accounts 
 ol' what they ha<l heard and seen prece<led by so 
 inanv ye. us the jonirievings anil preachings oftiie 
 Apostl'es (John xii. 20,' 21 ; Acts ii. D, 1 1 ; viii. I ; 
 xi. 19), and concludes with the lollowing sum- 
 maiy of his rrgument : ' The Acts of the Apostles 
 leave .St. Pa'il at Tarsus, in the third year after 
 his conversir i (Acts ix. 30): and ten years after- 
 wards we (in ■ him still at Tarsus, when Barnabas 
 went thitiier, vid brought him to Antioch. Du- 
 ring thi. peril d the (iospel was making its way in 
 many parts i .^ the tliiee quarters of the woild, 
 though as yet i one of the Apostles had travelled 
 beyond Juilsea fjid when we come to consider 
 the state of ])hil <-o\ hy at that time, and the fashion 
 wliich jirevailec. cf catching at any thing new, and 
 of uniting disco.\\'u e\»merits iiito fan<;iful sys- 
 tems, we shall not t-t siip-ised to find the doc- 
 trines of the Gospji d's^iiscd and alteied, and 
 that according to the la:ij,uaje of that age many 
 new heiesies were formeu.' 
 
 Professor Burton cliisej t'..'s s'' iking view cf the 
 first )irogiess of the (iospel tlu;»«gii llie reports of 
 those who were not its authoiized teachers, by 
 pointing out what must have been tlie etVect of such 
 a state of things in Rome, Coiinth, and Galatia* 
 and tlien shows that the argument applies n 
 fortiori to places which had not the teaciiing o' 
 the AjKfstles to coriect tiiis evil till a later 
 time. How much moie,' says he, ' tniut thi* 
 have been the case in places w'Jch tht Apo4tl»
 
 G:\OSTiCISM. 
 
 did nof visit so siKin, and wlieip, as in Home, the 
 Gosjwl in.ide its w;iy I'm- (ive-and-lweiity years, 
 witli uoliiiiig' but tlic 2i-al of iiidividiuiU to S|ii'eiid 
 it, and sniijcct to ;\]] the fancies wliicli those iiidi- 
 vidiials mis^iit a(lo|)t." 
 
 Tiie f^ieatest danger to wliicli Cliristiaiiity under 
 such circiiinstances \wis exposed arose (Vom tiiat 
 great Gnostic Heresy, wiiicli was hiiig- the rival, 
 and too often the corniptcr, of its piuer doctiines. 
 Siinon iMaiji'.s is cotisidered l)y Pn%lessor IJiirton 
 to have heeii t!ie lea(l(M' of that h\r;^e division of 
 tlie Gnostics win) attempted to unite Gnosticism 
 witli Chrislianiiy-j and the learned professor has 
 altenijited tiie soniewliat dillicidt t.isk of recon- 
 ciling witli tiie trntli. and witii one another, tlie 
 strange accounts of tliis Hercsiarcli told i)y llie 
 Fatliers. Wlien we reniendier the obscure claims 
 of one Kupliratos, snrnamed Persicus, to l)e the 
 Fatlier of Gnosticisni, wliicli liave been advocated 
 by Moslieim. it will ajipear most pro'^able in itself, 
 and most exculpatory of the Fathers, to consider 
 both these peisonai(es to have been res^arded in 
 nuicl) the same ligiit by some of the Fathers as 
 yliioliis and Darns are now considered in tiie history 
 of the Greek tribes; and that their learned ini,'e- 
 nuity, not unmixed with, sumeth'inof of the odium 
 Theoloriiatm. was let louse from all restraints, not 
 so niucti against the huiI Simon of the Scriplines, 
 as against Magus, who also might ha\e lieen 
 calletl Persicus. The other heresiarchs, Menan- 
 Jer and his disciples Hasilides and Saturninns, 
 and afterwards iVIarcion and V'alentinns, were in 
 their turn leaders of the great Gnostic liercsy, to 
 which also Cerinthus belonged (to combat wliose 
 oi)inions St. John is said to have written his 
 Gosjiel , as dlil the early sect of the Nicolaitans. 
 ' When the reader of ecclesiastical history,' con- 
 tinues Dr. Bui ton, 'comes to the second century, 
 he linds it divided into schools, as numerously 
 and zealously attended as any wliicli Greece or 
 Asia boast in their liajipiest days. He meets with 
 names totally unknown to him before, which ex- 
 cited as much sensation as those of Aristotle and 
 Plato. He hears of volumes having been written 
 in support of t;iis new philosophy, not one of which 
 has survived to our own day. His classical re- 
 collections are loused l)y finding an intimate con- 
 nection iietweeii the doctrine of the Gnostics and 
 of Plato: he hears of Jews who made even their 
 exclusive creed bend to tlie new system : and what 
 interests him most is, tliat in every page he reads 
 of the baneful elVect which Gnosticism had upon 
 Ciiristianity, by adojjting parts of the Gospel 
 scheme, but adopting them only to disguise and 
 deform them.' 
 
 The following extracts contain Professor Bur- 
 ton's view of the Gnostic doctrines, witli some 
 remarks on the sources from which they were 
 'lerived : — 
 
 ' III attemjiting to give an account of these 
 doctrines, 1 must lie-jin with oliserving, what we 
 siiall see more plainly when we trace the causes 
 of Gnosticism, tliat it was not by any means a 
 new and tbstinct jihilosophy, l)ut made up of se- 
 lections I'lom almost e\ery system. Thus we find 
 in it the Platonic doct line ol' ideas, and the notion 
 tluit every thing in this lower world has a celestial 
 and immaterial archetype. AVc find in if evident 
 Iraccsof that mystical ami cai)bal 1st ic jargon wliicli, 
 aft<rr their letum from captivity, delnrmed the re- 
 li^ino of tlic Jews; and many Gnostics adopted 
 
 GNOSTICISM. 
 
 761 
 
 the Oriental notion of two indepenihnt co-eternal 
 principles, the one the author of good, ami Ilia 
 other of e\il. Lastly, we find the (iiiostlc tiico- 
 logy full o( ideas and terms which must have 
 been taken from the (iosjiei ; aiid Jesus (Jin ist, 
 under some form or other, of y^'on, ennmalion, oi 
 incorporeal phantom, enters into all their systems, 
 and is the means of conimunlcaling to them that 
 knmvle.lge which raised them above all other 
 mortals, and entitled them to their peciilia* 
 name.' 
 
 ' The genius and very soul of Gnosticism was 
 mystery : its end and object was to purify its 
 followers from the corrn])iions of matter, and to 
 raise them to a higher scale of lieiti:^. suited only 
 to those who were to become perfect by knowlelge. 
 VVe have a key to many paits of llnir system, 
 when wc know that they held matter to be intiin- 
 sically evil, of which, conspcpiently, God could 
 tiot bn tiie author. Hence arose their fundamental 
 tenet, that the Oeator of the world, or Deminigu.s, 
 was not (he san>e with the supreme (iod. the 
 Author of good, and the Father of ('lirist. Their 
 system allowed some of them to call the Creator 
 God, but the title most usually given was Dcmi- 
 zar/us. Those who eniliraced the doctritie of two' 
 ]iriii(n))lcs supposed the world to have been ]iro- 
 duced by the evil principle; and in most systems, 
 the Creator of the world, and not the Father of 
 Christ, was looked u[)on as the God of the Jews, 
 and the author of the Mosaic law Some, again, 
 believed that angels were employed in creating 
 the world : but all were agreed in maintaining 
 that matter itself was not created ; that it \\m 
 eternal ; and that it remained inactive till tli» 
 worlil was formed out of it by the Creator.' 
 
 ' The sujireme God, according to (he (inostirs, 
 had ilwelt from all eteinity in a pleroma of inac- 
 cessible light; and beside the name of liist Father, 
 or first Principle, they called him also Bythos, as 
 if to denote the unfathomable nature of his per- 
 fections. This Being, by an o])cration purely 
 uieiital, or by acting ujion himself, ]irodnced two 
 x)ther beings of different sexes, from \» honi by a 
 series of descents, more or less numerous accord- 
 ing to different schemes, several jiairs of being.s 
 were formed, who were called ceoiis, from the 
 [)eriods of their existence before time was, or 
 emanations, horn the mode of their jiroductioii. 
 These successive aeons or emanations a]ipear to 
 iiave Ijeen inferior each to the pieceiiing; and 
 their existence was indispensable to the Gnostic 
 scheme, that they might account for the creation 
 of the world without making God the author of 
 evil. Tiiese seons liveil through countless ages 
 with their first Father. But the system of emana- 
 tions seems to have resembled that of concentiic 
 circles, and they gradually deteriorated as they 
 approached nearer and nearer to the extremity of 
 the ])leroma. Beyond this pleroma w;is ma ter, 
 inert and {xiweiless, though co-eternal with the 
 sniireme God, and. like him, without beginning. 
 At length one of the a-ons jiassed the limits of 
 the pleroma, and, meeting with matter, created 
 the W(irld after the Hiim and model of an ideul 
 world, which existed in the pleroma, or t!je mind 
 of the supreme God.' 
 
 ' Here it is that inconsistency is added to al>- 
 surdity in the Gnostic scheme. For, let the inter- 
 mediate wons lie as many as the wildest imagina- 
 tion could devise, still God was the remote, if not
 
 7r. 
 
 GNOSTICISM. 
 
 tLe prox'miale ruiise of creation. Adiled to whicli, 
 we are tvi sii|)j uge tliat tlie Deiniurf^us Ibrmeil the 
 world witl/oiit tlie knoM ledge of (iod, and that, 
 navirig foriii'jd it, lie lebclled again-st liim. Here 
 again we lind a strong resemblance to the Oriental 
 doctrine of two ])rincii)les, good arid evil, or light 
 and darkness. Tiie two principles were always 
 at enmity with eacli other, (iod must have lieen 
 conceived to be more jiowerful than matter, or an 
 einanalioii i'rom God coidd not have shajied or 
 moulded it into form : yet God was not able to 
 reduce matter to its primeval ciiaos, nor to destroy 
 the evil wliich the Demiurgus ha<l iiroduced. 
 What Goil could not jjrevent he was always en- 
 deavouring to cure : and here it is that the Gnos- 
 tics borrowed so largely from ;he Ciiristian scheme. 
 The nan;es, indeed, of several of their .eons were 
 evidently taken from terms wi;ich they found in 
 the Gospel. Thus we meet with Logos, Monogenes, 
 Zoe, Ecclesia, all of lliem successive emanations 
 from the supreme (Jod, and all dwelling in the 
 pleroma. At length we meet with Christ and the 
 Holy Ghost, as two of the last aeons which were 
 put forth. Chri.it was sent into the world to re- 
 nietly the evil whicli the creative aeon, or De- 
 miuigus, had caused. He was to emancij)ate 
 T)ien from the tyranny of matter, or the evil jirin- 
 ciple; and by revealing to them the true God, 
 who was hitherto iniknowii, to fit them, by a per- 
 fection and sublimity of knowledge, to enter the 
 divine pleroma. To give this knowledge was the 
 end and oliject of Christ's coming u])on earth : 
 and hence the inventors and belie\ers of the doc- 
 trine assumed to themselves the name of Gnostics.'' 
 It was in agreement with the Gnostic doctrine 
 of the utter malignity of matter, which Professor 
 Burton considers the very cornerstone of the 
 Gnostic system (both as to the ktioioledge of 
 divine things to whicii they pretended, and as to 
 the tnoi'aliti/, or, to speak more correctly, the 
 tnortijication, which they inculcated), that the 
 ditt'ereiit Gnostic sects ' either deriied that Christ 
 had a real body at all, and held that he was an 
 unsubstantial ]»liantom ; or granting that there 
 was a man called Jesus, the son of human parents, 
 they believed that one of the aeons, called Christ, 
 quitted the pleroma and descended upon Jesr.s at 
 his l)aptism.' 
 
 It was upon this belief of the utter malignity of 
 matter, on the one hand, and upon the elevating 
 nature of the divine knowledge to which they 
 j)retended, on tlie oth.er, that the morality of 
 Gnosticism, if it deserves to be so called, was 
 foimded. ' If we would know the eti'ect which 
 the doctrines of the Gnostics had upon their moral 
 conduct, we shall find that the same principle led 
 to two very opposite results. Though the Fathers 
 may have exaggerated tlie errors of their opponents, 
 it seems ui ienialile that many Gnostics led pro- 
 fligate lives, and maintained upon prmciple that 
 »i!ch conduct was not unlawful. Others, again, 
 are represented as practising great austerities, and 
 endeaiouring liy every means to mortify the body 
 and its sensual appetites. Both jurties were 
 actuated by the same common notion, that matter 
 18 inherently evil. The one tliouglit that the body, 
 which is compounded of matter, ought to be kept 
 in subjection, and hence they inculcated self- 
 flenial and tlu" practice of moral virtue' [if the 
 l»iarn»'d prof'esabr had said that they thought the 
 frody ought to be mortified, and for that j)urp)se 
 
 GNOSTICISM. 
 
 inculcated a system of asceticism, we think h« 
 would have lieen more correc't] ; ♦ while others, 
 who had jiersuaded themselves that ki/owledg« 
 was every thing, despised the distinctions of the 
 moral law, which was given, as they said, not l)y 
 the supreme God, but by an inferior a;on, or a 
 principle of evil, who had allied himself to 
 matter.' 
 
 Professor Burton gives a l)r>ef and clear sum- 
 mary of the Gnostic doctrines in the following 
 passage, which well deserves to be retained in (he 
 memory : — 'The system was stated to have Ijegun 
 with Simon Magus; by which I would uiKler- 
 stand that the system of uniting Christianity 
 with Gnosticism began with that heretic ; for the 
 seeds of Gnosticism, as we shall see presently, 
 had l)eeu sown long before. What Simon Magus 
 began was brought to ])erfection \>y Valentinus, 
 who came to Rome in the former ])art of the 
 second century ; and what we know of Gnosticism 
 is taken jirincipally from writers who ojjposed 
 Valenliniis. Contemjjorary with him there werp 
 many other Gnostic leaders, who lield dilferent 
 ojiinions ; but in the sketch which I have given, 
 I have endcavoureil to ex])lain those princij)le3 
 which, under certain modifications, were common 
 to all the Gnostics. That the supreme Goii, (.-r 
 the Good Prmci]ile, was nut the creator of the 
 world, but that it was created by an evil, or at 
 least an inferior lieing ; that God produced from 
 himself a succession of aeons or emanations, who 
 dwell with him in the Pleroma; that one of these 
 aeons was Christ, who came upon earth to reveal 
 the knowledge of the true God ; that he was not 
 incarnate, but either assumed an imsubstantial 
 body, or descended vipon Jesus at his baptism ; 
 that the God of the Old Testament was not thi; 
 father of Jesus Christ; that there was no resur- 
 rection or final jutjgment. Tiiis is an outline ot 
 the Gnostic doctrines as acknowledged by nearly 
 all of them.' 
 
 Of the erroneous and mischievous nature of th» 
 Gnostic doctrines, and of t e ' o]ipos»tion cf 
 science, falsely so called,' t:) the doctrines of 
 Christianity, we shall have to s|)eak presently. 
 For the present, we must confine ourselves to the 
 historical portion of this curious and important 
 subject, that is, to a statement of the facts of 
 GnoKticism as given in the lectures of tlie Regius 
 Professor. 
 
 Having given the above admirable outline 
 of the great leading doctrines of the Gnostic 
 herwy, or, rather, of the Gnostic school, he next 
 pTocueds lo trac-; up Gnosticism itself to the 
 thvre sourci-'s which we briefly indicated at the 
 bennning of this article, to wit, the Oriental doc- 
 trims of (he Magi of Baliylon, or the belief in 
 two principles, the causes of good and evil ; se- 
 condly, tk". Cabbala of the Jewish doctors, who 
 from 'he time of the ca[)tivity in Babylon had 
 IdeniStd much of the Oriental doctrines with the 
 Mosaic law, namely, in that traditional wisdom, 
 and secret doctrine, and mvstical interpretation 
 which they pretended to have received; and, 
 lastly, the philosophy of Plato (including that of 
 his followers, Greek and Alexandrian, .Jewish and 
 Oriental) — that popular jrhilosophy, in wliich 
 Plati), following Pythagoias and deserting So- 
 crates, set a.i example of blending philosophy with 
 theosophy, which ended in merging the Philo- 
 sophy of Greece in the Mysticism cf the £a«t
 
 GNOSTICISM. 
 
 We proceed to p;ive Dr. Burton's very clear and 
 «trikiii;5 history of" Gnosticism <i»\ in otli t words, 
 ol" eclecticism and syncivtism, that is, o' selectiiii^ 
 opinions and uniting tliem together}, '.n his own 
 words. 
 
 ' Some jiersons,' says he, ' liave deduced Gnos- 
 ticism Ci-oin the Kiistcin notion of a good and 
 evil pvinciph* ; some from the Jcwisli (Jahljida, 
 mild otiiers from tiie doctrines of (lie later Pla- 
 tonists. KacJi of these systems is ahle to support 
 itself hy alleging very strong rescmhlances ; aud 
 tliose persons have taken the most natural and 
 ^rohahly the truest course, who have concluded 
 that all these o])iriions contrihutetl to build u[) 
 the monstrous system which was known liy the 
 name of Gnosticism.' 
 
 ' We will hegin with considering that which 
 undoulitedly was the oldest of the three, the 
 Eastern doctrine of a good and evil principle. 
 There is no fact connecteil with remote antiquity, 
 which seems more certaiidy estahlished, than that 
 the Persian religion recognised two l)eings or 
 principles, which, in some way or other, exerciseil 
 an induence over the world and its iiilialiitants 
 To one they gave the name of Ormnzd," and in- 
 vested him with the attriliuies of light and l)ene- 
 ficence : the oilier they call'd \hreinan, and 
 identified him with the notions of darkness ami 
 malignity. It has often heen disputed, whetiier 
 these two principles were consideretl as self- 
 existing co-i'ternal gods, or whether they were 
 guhjec^ to a third and superior power. Plutarch 
 evidently considered that liotli of them had a 
 beginning, and that one of them at least woiild 
 come to an end ; for he says that Ormuzd took 
 its rise from light, and Ahrenian from darkness ; 
 •o that light and darkness must have existed be- 
 fore them : he adds, that the time woulii come 
 when Ahreman woiilil be ilestroyeil, and an age 
 of [lure nimiixed happiness would commence.' 
 'Upon the wliolo,' adils Professor Burton. ' I can- 
 not but C(;nsidcr that those persons have taken a 
 right view of this intiicate suiiject, who repre-ient 
 the Persians as having been always worshijipers 
 ©f one sujireme God. 
 
 ' It is true that the simplicity of their worship 
 was soon corrupted ; and the heavenly bodies, 
 jartictilarlj' the great source of light and hea(, 
 jecaine the object of adoration. It is undoubted 
 that the sun, under the name of Mithra, received 
 from them the highest honours; and it will solve 
 many difficulties, if we conceive, that as their 
 ideas liecaine more gross, and the externals of re- 
 ligion occiipied more of theirattentinn, they came 
 at length to identify the sun with the one sujirenie 
 God. There is evidence that a dillerenc.e of opi- 
 nion existed among the ?Iagi upon this subject. 
 Some of iiiem embraced what has been called the 
 dualitic system, or the notion that Iwtli yirincijiles 
 were uncieated and eternal; while others con- 
 tinued to maintain the ancient doctrine, either 
 dial one jiiinciple was eternal, and the other 
 created, or that both jiroi'eeded from one supreme, 
 ielf-existing source. This fundamental dilVerence 
 of opinion, together with the i(hdatry which was 
 daily gaining groun J, seems to have led to that 
 reformation of religion, which, it is agreed on all 
 hands, was ell'ected in Peisi.a by Zoroaster.' Dr. 
 Burton considers this reformation of ndigion to 
 faave taken ])lace in the reign of Darius Hystaspis. 
 
 Tbeie may,' he observes, ' have been an ideuti- 
 
 GNOSTICISM, 
 
 771 
 
 ficalion of Mithra, or the sun, with the first cause •. 
 but to bring back his ciiunlrymen to an ai-kjiow- 
 ledgment of a (list cause is wortiiy liie praixe* 
 which have bei'ii bestowed on the naiii"! of Zi>- 
 roaster ' 
 
 He further remarks, ' The Oiiental writers are 
 fond of asseiling that Zoroaster com crsei) witll 
 the <-aptive Jews, anil borrowed fmnilheni many 
 of his ideas. The fact is peihaps chronologically 
 possible; and Zoroaster itay well have con.sulled 
 with the Jews, if it ire true that the leform which 
 he introduced consisted in establishing tlie doc- 
 trine' I Dr. Burton had liefore stated this to be a 
 retu.n to the ancient doctrine of Peuia], * Ilia' 
 the two jirinciples were subservient to a tliiid, i.r 
 higher ])i inciple, by wliich they weie orig iia'y 
 created.' 
 
 Proliessor Burton proceeds to consider the second 
 sour<-e of Gnosticism, 'the mystical ])hilosophy of 
 the Jews, wliich has been known by the name 
 Cabbala;' and he tells us that 'the Jewish cab- 
 bala may be loosely delined to be a mystical 
 system, adecting the theory and practice i,l 
 religion, Ibunded upon oral tiadiiion.' Karil.cr 
 on, in the third lecture, he gives the folhnving 
 account of the origin of the cabbala, and of the 
 sjurit in which it was composed. ' Thai extia- 
 ordinary and infatuatoil people ' [he is speaking 
 of the Jewish tendency to go after strange gods] 
 ' were from the earliest times inclined to engrail 
 foreign superstitions upon their nati<inal woisliluj 
 and when their idolatries at length caused the 
 Almighty to destroy their city and send them 
 captives to Babylon, they came in contact »ith a 
 new system of superstition, dill'erent fiT)ni that of 
 Egypt or Canaan, which had befoie ensnaied 
 them. The Jews, who returned from Babylon at 
 the end of their captivity, would l* sure to bring 
 with them some of the jites and customs of the 
 peojile whom they had lei't ; but ihey also found 
 the evil already waiting lor them at their doors. 
 The mixed people who settled in Samaria, whei> 
 Shalnieneser had de;)0))ulated it, set up a variety 
 of idolatries, ami joined them to the wmship of the 
 God of the Jews (2 Kings xvii. 24-31) Most of 
 the idolaters were from the nations l>eyoiid the 
 Euplirates ; and this heterogeneous mixtuie of 
 creeds continued in the country when the Jews 
 returned from captivity. We know from Scrip 
 ture, that of those who were the first to return, 
 many formed marriages with the people of tiie 
 neighbourhood (Ezraix. 2); and the zeal with 
 which Ezra endeavoured to prevent this iiiter- 
 coiuse showeil that he considered the religion of 
 his country to be in danger. We learn also from 
 Josephus, that many Jews continued to live in 
 the countries beyond the Eu|ilnates; he speaks of 
 them as many myriads; and he shows in several 
 plac<'s that they kept u[i an intercourse with their 
 countrymen at Jerusalem; they attended the fes- 
 tivals; tliej paid the didrachnia to the tem]ile, 
 and sent their pedigrees to be legisteied at Jeru- 
 salem : all which shows that a constant comnui- 
 nication was kept up between the Jews and those 
 Eastern nations, where the religion of the J^Iagi 
 had lately been refoiined by Zoroaster. In one 
 sense the Jews had greatly jirofiied by iheir cap- 
 tivity in Babylon ; «nd we read no more of tlie 
 whole nation falling info idolatry. Tiie I'ersiaiss, 
 indeeil, wire not iiiolaters ; and it was fioni th^rn 
 that the greatest elVect was ])rodiiced upon t;i*
 
 m 
 
 GNOSTICISM. 
 
 opinions of the Jews. It seems certain tliaf tlieir 
 notiuns coiicerniri'^' angels received a considerable 
 .incture fnnn tho^e of tlie Persians : and the tliree 
 principal sects of Pliarisecs, Saddncec?, and 
 Esscnes, sliow limv far religious ditl'erences were 
 allowed among them, and yet the unity of the 
 faith was considered to he n;aintained. Tiie Cah- 
 fiala contains many doctrines concerning angels, 
 and other mystical ^wints, which can only iiave 
 come from an Eastern quarter : and the secondary, 
 or allegorical interpretation of Scripture, with 
 which the Cal)bala al)ounds, began soon after the 
 return from the captivity." 
 
 Dr. lisirtnn gi\es rather too slight a sketch of 
 the prlnciplc.5 of tlie Cabbala, and remarks on its 
 resemldaiice to those of the Gnosti<» : ' Tiiey," tlie 
 Cabbalists. ' did not hold tlie eternity of matter 
 with tlie Greeks ; nor, with the Persians, had they 
 recourse to two o])pos!te principles : they cut the 
 knot wtiich they could not solve; and they taught 
 that God being a spirit, who pervaded all s])ace, 
 the universe also was not material, but s))iritual, 
 and proceeded liy emanation from God. Tlie first 
 emanatluii was called in their language Htcjirst 
 man, or the first liegotten of God : and he was 
 made the medium of producing nine other ema- 
 nations, or sephirofh, froiri which tlie imiverse was 
 formed. All this is highly myst'cal ; and it is 
 melancholy to see how the liuman mind can fall 
 when it attempts the highest flighf.s. Imjjerfectly 
 as I have de.scril)ed the system of the Cabfialists^ 
 it will he seen that it bears no small resemblance 
 to that of the Gnostics, who inter|)osed several 
 BBons or emanations between the supreme God 
 and the creation of the world." Respecting the 
 secondary and mystical interpretation of the 
 Scriptures introduced by the Cabliallsts, and 
 carried so much fiirther by the Gnostics, he 
 says: ' With the Gnostics, to interjjrel Scripture 
 literally was the exception ; and they only did it 
 when it suited their purpose : their rule was to 
 sxtort a hidden meaning from every passage, and 
 to ma'ke every word, and almost every letter, 
 contain a mystical allusion. There undoubtedly 
 was aCalibala, or secret doctrine, among the Jews, 
 before we hearanyth ng of the Gnostic philosophy : 
 th<' latter, therefore, could not have contributed to 
 produce the former.' 
 
 It will be obvious from the above statements 
 that the Gnostics were as much indebted to the 
 Cabl)ala, as the Cabbala had been to the Oriental 
 doctrines. ' The notion of emanation-:, as has 
 been observed by Profes.sor Matter, is ihe essential 
 feature of the Cabbala ; and since there is no 
 V arrant for this in the Bible, nor did it a))])ear in 
 the pievailing schemes oi' heathen philosophy, he 
 very natiirallv di-duces it from the East, where 
 many of the Magi taught that every thing ema- 
 nated from God, the fountain of light.' 
 
 Profesf Burton connects the second source of 
 Gnosticism with the third, and, as he considers it, 
 the greatest, or, at h-ast, the most immediate cause 
 ol' Gnosticism, namely Platmiism, in the t'ollow- 
 ing jiasiagc : ' It is natural for us to ask, how the 
 Cj4)bala came to leceive a system of philosojjliy 
 Ko f"ar removed from the simplicity of the Mosaic; 
 and how the OTiinions of the Jews, hitherto so ex- 
 chisi\eands() little known, could produce any 
 elfect ujx)ii a svstem which, at the time of which 
 we are gpe.iking. was spread over great ] art of Ihe 
 world. A solution of these questions may pro- 
 
 GNOSTICISM. 
 
 bably be found by a consid ration of the P atonie 
 doctrines.' The.se (ioctrints he considers to have 
 been ' (he jirincijial source of Gimsticisio," and tc 
 have had an effect 'upon Ihe Cabbalistic philoso- 
 phy of the Jews.' 
 
 In the (xreei; ])hilo8oj)hy,as well as in the Greek 
 Mythology or Cosmogony, the origin of evil wai 
 the same stumlillng-block that it appears to hav» 
 been to every system, imaginative or rational ; and 
 the Greeks had their own jjeculiar way of getting 
 (iver the dilliculty. ' The Grecian phlloso))liy, 
 says Professor Burton, ' did not adopt the system 
 of emanation. Tliay all held that matter was 
 eternal; and such undouliledly was the Oj)inioTi 
 of Plato. This was the expetlient by wliich all 
 the iihilosophers thought to rescue God from being 
 the author of evil : forgetting, as it a])|>ears, that 
 at the same time they limited liis omnipoiencej 
 and made him, though not the author of evil, yet 
 himself subject to its influence : for a being who 
 is all good, and yet restricted in his power, is un- 
 doubtedly subject to evil. — Here tlieii was th« 
 basis, the false, the unjihllosophical basLs, on which 
 all the Grecian sages built their systems. Mattel 
 was co-eternal with God ; and the world was 
 formed either by matter acting upon itself, o» 
 being acted upon by God. Tlie school of Epicu- 
 rus made matter act upon itself, and the Deity 
 was reduced to a name. The Stoics and Peripa- 
 tetics believed God to have acted upon matter, 
 but it was from necessity, and not from choice.' 
 
 ' Plato had already adopted a system mor« 
 worthy of the Deity, and conceived that God acted 
 upon matter of his own free will, and by calling 
 order out of disorder formed the world. Plato 
 certainly did not believe the world to be eternal, 
 though such a notion is ascribed to Aristotle. 
 Plato held the eternity of matter ; but he believed 
 the arrangement and harmony of the universe to 
 lie the work of the Deity. Here begins the pecu- 
 liar intricacy of the Platonic system. Every 
 thing, except the Deity, which exists in heaven oi 
 in eartli, whether the object of sense or purely in- 
 tellectual, was believed to liave had a tieginning. 
 Tiiere was a time when it did not exist ; but there 
 never was a time, when the Idea, i. e. the foini oi 
 archetvpe, did not exist in the mind of the Deity. 
 Hence we find so many writers speak of three 
 princijiles being held by Plato, the Deity, tne idea, 
 and matter. It Isdlllicult to explain the Platonic 
 doctrine of ?£/efls, without running into my.sticism 
 or obscurity ; l)ut jierhaps, if we lay asid'- for a 
 time the tloctrines of the ancients, and take ouj 
 own notions of the Deity, we may lie able to fi)ini 
 some conception of Plato's meaning.' 
 
 ' We believe that there was a time when the 
 woild which we iniial)it, and eveiy thing which 
 moves upon it, ilid not exist ; but we cannot saj 
 that there ever was a time when the woiks of crea- 
 tion were not present to the mind of the Deity. 
 There may therefore be the image of a ihing 
 though as yet it has received no material form ; or 
 to use the illustration of the Platonlsts, the seal 
 may exist without the impression. — Plato supposed 
 these images to have a real existence, and gave to 
 them the name of form, example, aichetyjic, oi 
 idea; and tlie use which he made of them consti. 
 tutes the peculiar character of the Platonic philo 
 so])hy. He saw that these ideas not only preceded 
 the creation of the worlil, but must lave tjeen 
 present to the Deity from all eternity , and h«
 
 GNOSTICISM. 
 
 could assign ttietn no other place tlian the mind of 
 tlie Deity.' 
 
 'The Gnostics, as we iiave sei-n, agreed with 
 Platj in making matter cc-eleiiial with CJod. 
 Tiiey also hclievcd that the mattiial world wiis 
 formed after an eternal and intellectual iiUa. 
 This peculiar and mystical notion is the very soul 
 of Pliitonism : and we leain (Vom Iienajus liiat it 
 was iield l)y all fiie Gnostics, lioth jiarlies also 
 >i!ie\e<l in an intermediate order of beings lie- 
 tween Oie si'.|)reme Gotl and the inhahifaMts of the 
 earth: these beings were supposed \>y both to have 
 proceeded iVoni the mind or reason of God : and 
 it may furnish a clew to nuich of tiic Gnostic 
 philosophy, if we supjiose llie ;cons of tiie Gnos- 
 tics to be merely a personidcatiuii of the ideas of 
 Plato ; or we may s.iy generally, that the Cinostics 
 formed their system of a.'ons liy coml)ining the 
 intellectua! beings of the Platonic philosophy 
 with the angels of t!ie Jewish Scriptures.' 
 
 'There is, indeed, one material difl'erence be- 
 tween tlie system of Plato and that of the Gnos- 
 tics. According to the former, God oidered tlie 
 intellectual beings which he iiad produced, to 
 create the world ; and lie dekgated this work to 
 them, that he might not ije himself the author of 
 evil. But according to tlie Gnostics, the Demiur- 
 gus, one of the ijil'erior a;ons, created the world 
 without the knowledge of God. This is jierhajis 
 as rational an hyjothesisas that of Plato himself ; 
 and the one may have very naturally grown into 
 the other, during the frequent agitation of tl;e 
 question concerning tlie origin of evil. It may be 
 observed, also, tliat the constant hostility wiiicli 
 existed between the supreme God and the creative 
 aeon, or demiurgus, does not find any jwrallel in 
 the Platonic philosophy. This was jirobaldy bor- 
 rowed iiom the Easlern doctrine of a good and 
 evil princijile ; and what the Scriptures say of 
 Satan, the giea; adversary of man, may also have 
 contributed to form the same doctrine.' 
 
 Sucii is Prolessor Burton's view of the doctrines 
 of Gnosticism, and of thethiee great sources from 
 which it originated, together with some of its 
 elliects ujHHi Christianity, in div erting many of the 
 first converts from a better faith into a vain phi- 
 losophy, 'profane and vain Iiubblinys, and the 
 opjiositiotis of science falsely so called.' 
 
 It will remain for us, in the article Logos, to 
 lay before our readers Professor Burton "s estimate 
 of one of the most remai kable etVects of Gnosticism 
 upon Christianity ; but as it relates to the Logos 
 of St. John's Gospel, and as it ouglit, we think, 
 to have lieen p'eceded by a more detiiiite, not to 
 say a more searching inquiry into the errors of 
 Plato's philosophy (which aie indeed very types ol 
 the principal faults of Gnosticism^ than Dr. Bur- 
 ton has given to them, we jiropose theie to show 
 what were tlie lalse principles in Plato's philo- 
 sophy which weie propagated so widely by the 
 Gnostic heresy, andl'iom which Christianity of- 
 fered to all who would be taught better things a 
 means of escajie. 
 
 We trust it lias already become evident to our 
 readers that, in piesenting them with a lirief and 
 tiear analysis of the doctrines and origin of Gnos- 
 Scism in the very words of the late Regius Pro- 
 fessor of Divinity, we have been influenced by no 
 desire to save ourselves trouble of thought or com- 
 
 Bisiticu. The character, learning, and station of 
 r. Bi-toit, and the maJ / years of his innocent 
 
 GOAT. 
 
 T3I3 
 
 anil useful life which he devoted to the Vinoctie 
 h(;iesy and tiie AiKistolic age, miiit gi\e auinority 
 to his o])inion8 when fairly staled. — J. P. P. 
 
 (rOAT. (Jhaldee, izza ; Pha'nician, azu ; 
 Ayiiyt\c, Jidda nuii /icdzj'a:. Of the s^ncial Ilebieiv , 
 denominations of this animal there is no diiulit, 
 for the sinifile manners of llie ancient Semitic 
 nations muliiplied the names of the few ob^ecta 
 (hey had constantly before their eyes; and iheirch)- 
 mcstic animals, in paiticular, recei\ed aliundani . 
 general and distinctive ap|:clIati<Mis, ac(ording to 
 sex, age, race, and conditions of existence or pin- 
 jiose. Thus we have for goat, fy cz (lien, xxvii. 
 9) ; ei'^Tl diasiph ( 1 Kings xx. 27) ; niny altud, 
 'a lie-goat," or lather Dmny altiidiiii, ' he-goata' 
 (Gen. xxxi. 10, 12) ; "l^DV Izophir, ' a he-g(.at ' 
 (Dan. viii. 5, 21); "l^yC 4('"', 'a hairy one' 
 (Lev. iv. 24); 7y jaal, a kind of wild goat 
 (I Sam. xxiv. 2j; IpN nkko, either the same or ^ 
 another sj>ecies of w ild goat (Kxod. xxiii. 19) ; and 
 ^"M c/edi, "a kid' ((jen. xxxviii. 17, &c.). ' 
 
 3£9. [Syrian Goat.] 
 
 The races either known to orkejit !iy the Hebrew 
 jieojjle ueie pidbalily— 1. The don-eslic Syrian 
 long-eared bieed, with lioms ralhei small and 
 variously bent; the ears longer than the head, and 
 pendulous; hair long, often black : — 2. Tlie An- 
 gora, or rather Anatloli bieed of Asia Minor, with 
 long hair, more or less tine ;— 3. The Kgypt iaii breed, 
 with small spiral hoins. loi:g brown hair, very long 
 eais; — 4 A bleed lioniUpl ei Eu'V])!, without iiorni, 
 having the nasal bones singularly elevated, (he 
 nose contracted, with the lower jaw proliuding the 
 incisors, and the female vvitli udder \eiy low antl 
 purse-shaped. Tliis lace, the most degiaded by 
 climate and treatment of all the doniistic va- 
 rieties, is clad in long coarse hair, commonly 
 of a lufoiis brown' colour, and so early distinct. 
 that the earlier monuments of Egypt represent i< 
 with obvious precision. It is jrobable that some 
 of the names which now appear synonymous were 
 anciently applied to distinguish breeds from dif- 
 ferent regions. Thus Tzapiiir, lacing of C'haldee 
 origin, may have denoted a goal of a noiti.em 
 mountainous legion ; (;r may have been the taniC 
 as Tschaler, ' the leader of a (lock :' while Azazel-, 
 on the eontraiy, applied in ihe Aiitli. Veis. to (he 
 scape-goat, might seem to be derived fiom the 
 wandering Syriair or Phoenician bleed of the 
 coast, were it not shown in the next ailicle to 
 have a dilTerei.t reference. 
 
 The natural history of the domestic goat requires 
 no illustration in this place, and its tcunondc us«» 
 demand only a few words. Kotw illistanding tne 
 olfensive lasciviousness which causes it to be sig- 
 nilicantly separated from sheep, the goal wat> eua-
 
 774 
 
 GOAT. 
 
 GOAT, SCAPE. 
 
 I^oyed hy the people of Isniel in many respec's 
 Hi tlieir re])iesr^!itative. It was a juiie animal fur 
 gaciilice (Exoil. xii. 5), aiul a kid might, be siil)- 
 •tiintpfi as equivalent to a lamh : it fovmcd a 
 jirincipal part of the Hebrew Hocks; and bi)th the 
 milk and the young kids weie daily articles of 
 food. Aniony: the poorer and more sober s!ie])lierd 
 families, the slaughter of a kid was a token of lios- 
 pilaiity to stringers, or of uinisual festivity; and 
 the prohibition, thrice re]ieated in the Mosaic law, 
 * not to seethe a kid in its mother's milk ' (Exod. 
 xxiii. 19; xxxiv. 2fi ; and Devit. xiv. 21), may 
 have originated jiaitly in a desire to recommend 
 abstemiousiies-, which the legislators and mo- 
 ralists of the Kast have since invariably enforced 
 with success, and partly with a view to discoun- 
 tenance a ])ractice which was coonecled with 
 idolatrous festivals, and the rites they involved. 
 It IS from goatskins that the leathern bottles to 
 contain wine and other liquids are made in the 
 Levant. For this j)uvpose, after the head and feet 
 are cut away, the case or hide is drawn olV the 
 carca.ss over the neck, without opening the belly; 
 and the extremilies being secured, it is dried with 
 tne flair in or outside, according to the use it is 
 intended for. The old worn-out skins are liable 
 to burst: hence the obvious ])r()priety of putting 
 new wine into new bottles (Matt. ix. 17). Har- 
 mer appears to have rightly referred the allusion 
 in Amos iii. 12 to the long-eared race of goats : 
 ' As the shepherd taketh out of the mouth of the 
 lion two legs or a piece of ear, so shall the 
 children of Israel be taken out that dwell in 
 Samaria and Damascus.' 
 
 x^ 
 
 330. [Wild Goat of Sinai] 
 
 Beside the domestic goats. Western Asia is 
 
 jx-a-^essed of one or more wild s]iecies — all large 
 and vigorous mountain animals, resembling the 
 il>ex or bouquefin of the Alps. Of these, Southern 
 Syria, Ar;i/l)ia, Sinai, and the borders of the Red Sea, 
 cotitain at least one species, known to the Aral)s by 
 the name of Beden or Beddan, and Taytal — the 
 Copra Jacla of Ham. STiiith, and dajn'a Sinuitica 
 of Khrenberg. We take this animal to be that 
 noticed under the name of 7V< Jaal or Jol, 
 in the plural .Foliin (1 Sam. xxiv. 2; Job xxxix. 
 ) ; Ps. civ. IS ; Prov. v. 19). The male is con- 
 siderably taller an(i more robust than lire larger 
 he-goats, the horns forming regular curves back- 
 wards, and with from 15 to 24 transverse elevated 
 cross ridges, being sometime near three feet long, 
 tad exceedingly po'.iderous: there is a beard under 
 the chin, and the fur is dark brown; but the limbs 
 
 are white, with regular bla^k marks do vn the frotit 
 of the legs, wuh rings of the same colour above 
 the knees and on the jiastejiis. The females are 
 smaller than the males, more slenderly made, 
 Inighier rufous, and with the white and black 
 markings on the li^gs not so distinctly visil)le. 
 This species live in troops of 15 or 20. anil plunge 
 down ])reci])ices with the same fearless imiietnosity 
 which di-tingiiishes the ibex. ' Tljeir horns are sold 
 by the Arabs for knife handles, &c. ; but the ani- 
 mals themselves are fast dmiinishing in number. 
 In Dent. xiv. 5, "IpN Akko is translated ' wild 
 goat." Schultens( 0//y/MCA' Hebraicee) vAnt'yciures 
 that the name arose ' ob fugacitatem,' from it« 
 shyness, and consequent readiness to (iy ; and Dr. 
 Harris points out what he takes to be a confirma- 
 tion of this conjecline in Shaw's travels; who, from 
 the translations of the Sej)t. and Vulgate, makes 
 it a goat-deer, or T)agelaj)hus, such as the Lerwee 
 or Fishtail, by mistake leCerred to Capra Mam- 
 ir/ca oI'LinnjBus; whereas that naturalist (Si/slcm. 
 Nat. )3th ed. by Gmelin) jjlaces Leruee among 
 the synonyms of Ant. Cervicapra, which does not 
 suit Shaw's notice, and is not known in Western 
 Asia. The Fishtail is, however, a ruminant of 
 tlie .\frican desert, ])ossibly one of the larger Anti- 
 lopidae, with long mane, but nit as yet scientifi- 
 cally described. Akko, therefore, if it be not a 
 second name of the Zamor. which we refer to the 
 Kebsch, or wild sheep (Chamois), as the species 
 must be sought among ruminants that wereacces-' 
 sible for food to the Hebrews, we should lie in- 
 clined to view as the name of one of the Gazelles, 
 pri)bab]y the Ahii {A7it. Subgiitturosa), unless the 
 Abyssinian Jbex (^Capru Walie) had foniierly 
 extended into Arabia, and it coxdd be siiown 
 that it is a distinct species. SKe may here also 
 remark upon the researclies of lliijjpell and of 
 Hemprich and Ehrerd)erg, that they naturally 
 sought in vain for the Aliyssiniaii Ibex as it is 
 figuied in Griflifhs' Cuvier, because, liy some mis-- 
 take of flie letter engraver, he has affixed that name 
 to the representation of Ovis Tragelaphus or 
 Kebsch.— C.H.S. 
 
 GOAT, SCAPE. Under this head we caimot 
 do better than piesent tl-.e reader with the sub- 
 stance of a very ingenious article in Hengsten- 
 berg's Die Biicher Mosis viul Aegypten, one of 
 the most interesting books on Egy])tian antiqui- 
 ties, as applied to the illustration of Scrij)ture, 
 which has yet ajjpeareil, and of which an excel- 
 lent translation has been proiiuced in America, 
 by R. D. C. Robbins, under the title of Egypt 
 and the Books of Moses, 1843. 
 
 It a])pears to Dr. Hengstenberg, that an Egyp- 
 tian reference must necessarily Ije acknowledged 
 in the ceremony of the Great Atonement day : 
 and in order to establish this reference, he. 
 first endeavours to substantiate his view af the 
 meaning of the word ^^^1"^ Aznzel : which is, 
 that it designates Satan. But this notion can 
 only l)e placed in a right point of view by taking 
 a general survey of the whole rite, in order to 
 jiomt out definitely the position which Azazei 
 holds in it. 
 
 The accoimt of this remarkable ceremony is 
 contained in Lev. xvi. 
 
 First, in verses 1-10, the general outlines are 
 given ; and then follows, in verses 11, sq., tlie ex- 
 planation of separate points. It is of no stnali
 
 GOAT, SCAPE. 
 
 imiCTtance for (he interpretation lliat tliis ariange- 
 meiit, uliicli lia.3 been lecognisud l>\ few inlei|)re- 
 ters, sli^W iie cloaily luuloistooil. Aaron first 
 oflfers a bullock as a sin-oll'ering f<)r liimself and 
 his house. He then lakes a firepan Cull of (roals 
 from the altar, with fragrant incense, and goes 
 within the vail. There he puts tiie incense on the 
 fire before the Lor<l, anil ' the cloud of tlie in- 
 cense ' (the emiiodied ])rayer) coveis tlie niercy- 
 seat which is upon the ark of tlio covenant, that 
 he die not. Aaron then takes the blood of the 
 bullock and sprinkles it seven times before the 
 mercy-seat. After he has thus completed tlie ex- 
 piition for liimsell', lie proceeds to the expiation 
 for the i)eople. He takes two he-goats for a sin- 
 offering for tlie cliililren of Israel (xvi. 5). These 
 he places before the Lord at tlie door of flie ta- 
 bernacle (xvi. 7). He casts lots upon them ; one 
 lot ' for the Lord" and one lot • for .Azazel' (xvi. H). 
 The goat uptm wliich the lot for tlie Lord fell 
 (xvi. 9) he olVeis for a sin-oll'ering, brings the 
 blood witliin the vail, and does with it as with 
 the blood of tlie bullock. In this way is flie 
 sanctuary purified from the defilements of the 
 children of Israel, tlieir transgressions, and all 
 their sins, so that the Lord, tlie holy one and 
 pure, can continue to dwell there with tliem. 
 After the expiation is complet.-d, the second goat, 
 on which fell the lot for Azazel, is brought for- 
 ward (xvi. 10). He is first jilaced before the 
 
 Lord to absolve him (IvJ? "^337). Then Aaron 
 lays his hands upon his head, and confesses over 
 nim the (forgiven) inicpiities, transgressions, and 
 sins oi' tlie children of Israel, puts them upon his 
 bead, and gives him to a man to take away, in 
 order that he may bear the sins of the jieople into 
 e. solitary land (xvi. 22), into the desert, for 
 Azazel (xvi. 10). Then Aaron oilers a burnt- 
 otferiiig for himself, and one for the people. 
 
 Now, in resjiect to language, there can be no 
 objection to interpreting Azazel as meaning Satan. 
 That the Hebrew pTJ?, Azal, coiTesponds to the 
 Arabic jji^, was long ago asserted by Bochart 
 and others, and is now generally admitted ; and 
 
 ?TNTi?) Azazel, belongs to the form whicii repeats 
 the second and third radicals. In reference to 
 this form, Kwald remarks (Gramm. § 333), that 
 it expresses general intension, and that the idea 
 of continual, regular lejjetition, without interrup- 
 tion, is also specially exjnessed by the re|ietition 
 of nearly the whole vvt)rd. Tlie Arabic word 
 Azala signifies in (hat language ' semovit, di- 
 movit, ren.ovit, descivit ;' in the passive it signi- 
 fies ' remotus, depositus fuit;' and the participle, 
 azul, means ' a caeteris se sejungens.' In like 
 manner azal, niazul, denote ' semotus, reinotus, 
 abdicatus.' From this two explanations of Azazel, 
 as relating to Satan, may be educed ; either 
 ' the apostate' (from God), or, ' the one entirely 
 separate.' It is in favour of tlie latter that the 
 signification 'descivit' is only a derived one, 
 and that it is approjjriate to the abode in the 
 desert. The goat is sent to Azazel in the desert, 
 in the divided land (' terra abscissa"). How 
 then could he be designated by a more appro- 
 priate name tliaii ' the separate one' ^ 
 
 And this explanation, as far as the facts of the 
 case are concerned, is, in Hengstenberg's opinion, 
 •^uallj unexposed to any well grounded olijec- 
 
 liO.\T, SC.\PE. 
 
 T7S 
 
 tioii. The doctrinal signification of the symbolical 
 acliiin, ;is far as it lias lefeience lo Azazel, is tiiii, 
 that Satan, ihe enemy of the peo|ile of God, can- 
 not harm those forgiven by God, but that ihey, 
 witii sins forgiven of (rod, can go l>efore him with 
 a light In-ait, deride him. ami triMtiiph o\er liim. 
 The jHisitive reasons which favour this explana- 
 tion aie the following ; — 
 
 1. The manner in which the phrase PTNTy?, 
 ' for Azazel,' is contrasted witii ninv, ' for Je- 
 hovah,' necessarily lequiies that Azazel should 
 denote a personal exi.-.teni'e, and, if so, only Satan 
 can be intended. 2. If liy Azazel, .Satan is not 
 meant, there is no grouiul for tiie lots that were 
 cast. \\'e can then see no reason why the deci.sioii 
 was referred to God; why the liigh-prieat did nut 
 simply assign one goat for a sin-olliring, and the 
 other for sending away into the deseit. The cir- 
 cumstance that lots are cast implies that Jehovah 
 is made the antagonist of a personal exi>tence, 
 with lespect to which it is designed to exalt the 
 unlimited power of Jehovah, and to exclude all 
 etpialily of this being with Jelio\ali. 3. Azazel, 
 as a word of comparatively unfretpient formation, 
 and only used here, is best fittetl for the designa- 
 tion of Satan. In every other explanation the 
 question remains, ' Why, then (as it has every a.]y- 
 pearance of being), is the word formed for this 
 occasion, and why is it never found except here 1' 
 
 By tills explanation the third cha]itir of Ze- 
 chariah coined into a relation with onr [lassage, 
 entirely like that in which chap. iv. of the same 
 prophecy stands to Exod. xxv. 31. Here, as 
 there, the Lord, Satan, and the iiigh-priest appear. 
 Saran wishes liy his accusations to deslroy the 
 favourable relations between the Lord and his 
 people. The high-priest presents himself bef..ie 
 the Lord, not with a claim of purity, accoiding 
 to law, but laden with his own sins and the .>inj 
 of his people. Here Satan thinks to find liie 
 safest occasion for his attacks ; luit lie is mistaken. 
 Forgiveness baffles his designs, and he is comj.elled 
 to retire in confusion. It is evident that the doc- 
 trinal jiart of both passages is substantially the 
 same, and that the one in Zechariah may lie con- 
 sidered the oldest cominentiiry extant upon t,.« 
 words of Moses. In substance we have the samt 
 doctrine also in Rev. xii. 10, II : * ti.e accuser 
 of our brethren is cast down, who accuses then 
 before our God day and night, and they oveicame 
 him by the blood of the Lamb.' 
 
 The relation in which, according to this ex- 
 planation, .Sataii is here placed to the deseit, finds 
 analogy in other passages of the Bible, where the 
 deserted and waste places appear as jieculiaily 
 the abode of the Evil Spirit. See Matt. xii. 43, 
 where the unclean spirit cast out of the man is 
 repiesented as going through ' dry places' : also 
 Luke viii. 27 ; and Rev. xviii. 2, according to 
 whicli the fallen Baliylon is to be the dwelling of 
 all unclean sjiirits. 
 
 To the reasons already given, the Egy|itian le- 
 ference, which the rife bears according lo this ex- 
 j)lanatioii, may be added — ' a releience so remark- 
 able, that no room is left for the thought that it 
 has arisen through false explanation.' 
 
 Dr. Ilengstenberg then proceeds to meet tUe 
 objections wlilcli have been brought to bear against 
 the view adopted by him^' adopted," for thi« 
 explanation is by no means a new one, thiuj^li h*
 
 •j-u 
 
 GOAT, SCAPE. 
 
 lias lirt>ii2'!it it I'orwarii in f;ieiiter t'ljrce tlian be- 
 fore, and vvilli r^vv illu-tr.i.tiii)i3. 
 
 Tlie inost important iif rl)e objections, and (lie 
 one whicli lias cxerlcl the ^italt-st iiilliiencp, is 
 this, (hat it g-ive-i a sense wliicli stands in diiect 
 opposition til the spirit i>t' tjje leli-jion of Jthovah. 
 It is aske;!, ' Could an offerin.^ ))ro|>erly be made 
 to the E\ il Sjiiiit in the deicrl. wli ch tlie common 
 precepts o( le'i^ion in tije Mosaic kivv, as well as 
 tlie sifjniticaiice ot' the ceieoiony, entinrly ojijjose ;' 
 To this Hen^sleiibeii^ an'?\vers — ' \', eie it really 
 liecessny to connect with the explanation (jf 
 Aza/el as meaning; Satan, llie assum])ti()n that 
 sacrifice was offeied to liini, we slioulil I'eel oh- 
 li^ed to abaiuhin it, notwithstandin^j all the rea- 
 sons in its favour. But ii()thin_( is easier th.in '.o 
 «hnv that tills manner of niiderstainlin^ the ei- 
 ])lai;ation is entiiely arbitrary. The IbUowinu; 
 reasons prove that an oll'ering made to Axiijl 
 cannot be sn])ii'>sed :' — 
 
 1. Both the goats are, in verse H, taken together 
 as t'ormini,' nnite.lly one single olVeiing, which 
 wholly excludes the thought that one of theni was 
 brought as an olTering to Jehovah, and the other 
 to Azazil. And luither, an otlering wliich is 
 made to a Ixid being can never be a sin-otfering. 
 Tlie idea of" a sin-ofVering imi)lle3 IwHness, hatred 
 of sin in the l)eing to whom the otlering is made. 
 
 2. Both the goats were first placed at the door 
 of the tabernacle of the congregatiuii before the 
 Jjord. To him, therefore, they both belong ; and 
 when afterwards one of tliem is sent to Azazel, 
 this is done in accordance with the wish of Je- 
 liovah, and also without destroying the original 
 relation, since the one sent to Azazel does not 
 cease to belong to the Lord. 
 
 3. The casting of lots also shows that both these 
 goats were considered as belonging to the Lord. 
 The lot is never used in the Old Testament 
 excejjt as a means of obtaining the decision of 
 Jehovah. So then, here also, Jeliovah decides 
 which of the goats is to be offered as a sin-ofl'ering, 
 and which to be offered to Azazel. 
 
 4. Tlie goat assigned to Azazel, l)efore he is 
 sent away, is absolved (xvi. 21). The act by 
 which the second goat is, as it were, identiHed 
 with the first, in order to transfer to the living 
 the nature wliich tiie dead possessed, shows to 
 what tlie ])hrase ' for a siii-otfering," in verse 5, 
 has reference. Tl«e two goats (as Spencer had 
 befiire oliserveil) became, as it weie, one goat, 
 and their duality rests only, on the physical 
 impossibility of making one goat re|)iesent the 
 (lifl'erent points to l)e exhibited. Had it been 
 possible, in the circumstances, to restore life to the 
 goat that was sacrificed, this would have been 
 done. The two goats, in this connection, stand in 
 a relation entirely similar to that of the two birds 
 in the purification cf (he leprous jjerson in Lev. i. 
 4, of which the one let go was dipjieil in the 
 J>1(K)d of the one slain. As soon as the second 
 goat is con.sidered an offering to Azazel, the con- 
 nection between it and the first ceases, and it can- 
 not lie conceived why it was absolved before it 
 went away. 
 
 5. According to verse 21, the already forgiven 
 sins of Israel are laid upon the head of the goat. 
 These he bears to Azazel in the flesert. But 
 miere tliere is alieady forgiveness of sin, there is 
 no more olVering. 
 
 The other )bjections which have on differenl 
 
 GOAT, SCAPE. 
 
 principles been made to this view are if lew 
 weight. 
 
 One of them, which alleges (he apjiarenT 
 equality given under this explanation to th« 
 claims of Jehovah and of Satan, is aJisAered by 
 showing that it is rather calculated to act against 
 the tendency of an ancient people fo eu'ertain 
 tliat belief. The h>t is under the direction of 
 Jehovah, and is a means of ascertainiiHi; his will ; 
 and not a mediation l,etween the two iiy i»ii Inde- 
 j)endent third agency, which decides to which the 
 one and to which the other sl;all till. 
 
 Another olijection, founded on the belief that 
 Satan nowhere ajipeais in the Pentateuch, will 
 not in this country lie deemed fo requiie much 
 answer. It is eiiferturned chiefly by (iiose wlin 
 believe that the presence of Satan in Scripture is 
 o.ving to the influence of a foieign (Biiliy Ionian 
 and Persian) theology upon Hebrew opinions; 
 and it is answered by a refi'rence to the book of 
 Job, in which Satan apjiears distinctly, while 
 even the olijectors admit that this lioik waa 
 written long before the assigneil influence existed. 
 And if it were indeed necessary to lefer (he know- 
 ledge of Satasi to a foreign influence, it might be 
 perceived that quite us much is accomplished by 
 referring to the Egyptian Ty])hon as to the Persian 
 Ahreman. Hengsfenberg also points} to the in- 
 timations of the doctrine'cf Satan, which a])i)ear 
 in Gen. iii., and remarks -' From a (heohiuical 
 point of view, as well as from the nature of the 
 case, it will be found almost im])ossil>le that a 
 dogma which in the later ]>eri(Kl of the revelation 
 holds so important a place, should not at least be 
 referred to in the statement of the first principles 
 of that revelation. 
 
 After exhiljiting the positive reasons for this 
 explanation, and disposing of the olijections to it, 
 Hengsteiiberg subjects to examination those 
 among the various explanations that have been 
 given, which are now current; and makes out thai 
 they are either philologically untenable with re- 
 ference to the Word Azazel, ilo not agiee with tin 
 context, or are unsatisfactory in the result te 
 which they conduct us. 
 
 If it has been thus estalilished that Satan is to 
 be understood by tlie term Az;izel, then, argues 
 Hengstenberg, an allusion to Egyjjt in the wholo 
 rite cannot be mistaken. In that country every 
 bad influence or jiower of nature, and generally 
 the bad itself, in a jihysical or ethical respect, 
 was ]iersonified under the name of Typhon. The 
 cJuctrine of a Typhon among the Egyptians is 
 as oltl as it is fiimly established. Re[)iesenta- 
 tions of him are found on numerous monuments 
 as old as the time of the Pharaohs. Heiodotui 
 speaks of Typhon (li. 14J. 56, and iii. 5). Bui 
 Plutarch gives the most accurate and jiarticuiai 
 account, with, indeed, many incorrect additions. 
 
 The barren regions around Egypt generally be- 
 longed to Typhon. The desert was especially 
 assigned to him as his residence, whence he made 
 his wasting inroads into the consecrated land. 
 ' He is,' says Cieuzer, ' the lover of the degenerate 
 Neplithys, the hostile Libyan desert, and of the 
 sea-shore. There is the kingdom of Typhon. On 
 the contrary, Egyjit the blesse<l, the Nile-valley 
 glittering with fiesh crops, is the land of Isis. 
 Herodotus ascribes a similar dwelling to Tyj/tion. 
 
 By a strange but very natural alteiation, thf 
 Egyptians sought sometimes to propitiate the g*-!
 
 GOAT, SCAPE. 
 
 wliom tlicy lialed, l)ut feareil, by ofTeriiigs, and 
 indee<l l>y those Hliicli roiisistetl ol'stuned animals. 
 Somplimcs, a•,^1in, wlien they supposed tluit tlie 
 power of tlie gods was prevalent and snslained 
 them aijainst liim, they allowed tlieniselves in 
 every sj)ecies of mockery and abuse. • The ob- 
 »cured and broken jiower of Typhon,' says Plu- 
 tarch, ' even now, in tlie convulsions of death, 
 they seek sometimes to propitiate l)y olVerings, 
 und endeavour to persuade him to favour tiiem ; 
 but at other trmes, on certain festival occasions, 
 they scoll' at an 1 insult him. Tlien they cast 
 mud at those wlio are of a red complexion, and 
 tliroiv down an ass from a jirecipice, as the 
 f'op'ites do, liecause they su)])ose that Typhon 
 wa-s of the coloifr of the fox and the iiss." 
 
 Tlie most inipi.rtant jiassage on the worship of 
 ry])lion is I'ound in De Is. et Osir. ]>. 380 : ' But 
 ft lien a irieat and troublesome heat [irevails, which 
 in e.\cei3 either brings along with it destructive 
 sickness or other strange or extraordinary mis- 
 fortunes, the jiriests take some of the sacred ani- 
 mals, in jjiofound silence, tc a dark place. There 
 tliey thieaten them first and terrify them ; and 
 when the calamity continues, they offer these 
 animals in sacrilice there.' 
 
 Now, the s;;p];osition of a reference to these Ty- 
 phonia sacra Hilsius considers as a profanation. 
 But it is seen at once that tlie reference contended 
 for by him is materiHlly difl'erent from that adopted 
 by our author. The latter is a controversial one. 
 In opposition to the Egyptian view, which im- 
 plied the necessity of yielding respect even to bad 
 beings generally, if men would insme themselves 
 against them, it was intended by tliis rite to bring 
 Israel to the deejiest consciousness that all trouble 
 :s the punishment of a just and holy God, whom 
 tliey, through their sins, have ofl'eniled ; that tiiey 
 irmst reconcile themselves only with him; that 
 when that is done, and the forgiveness of sins is 
 obtained, tl|^ bad being can harm no farther. 
 
 How very natural and how entirely in accord- 
 ance with circumstances iivich a reference was, is 
 evident from tlie facts contained in other ))a-sages 
 of the Pentateuch, which .show how severe a con- 
 test the religious principles of the Israelites hud 
 to undergo with the religious notions imbibed in 
 Egypt. Tiiis is esjiecially exhibited in the regu- 
 lations in Leviticus xvii., following directly upon 
 •.he law conceining the atonement-day, which prove 
 that the Egyptian idol-worship yet continued to 
 be practised among the Israelites. The same thing 
 is also eviilent tVom the occurrences connected with 
 the worshi)) of the golden calf. 
 
 The assum])tion of a reference so specially con- 
 troversial might indeed be supposed unnecessary, 
 lince in a religion, uhicli teaches generally the 
 •xistence of a powerl'ul bad being, the error here 
 Jombated, the belief that this being ]iosse.sses other 
 than derived j)ower, will naturally arise in those 
 wlioliave not found the liglit solution of the riddle 
 of human life in the deeper knowledge of human 
 •ijifidness. 
 
 But yet the whole ri<e has ton direct a reference 
 to a jirescribcd ]iiactice of jirojiitiatiiig the bad 
 being, and implies that formal ofVerings were made 
 to him — a tiling which could never be the natural 
 product of Israelitish soil, and could scarcely 
 S])ring up there, since such an embodying of error 
 contradicts fundamental j)rinciples among the 
 Israelites respecting die being of Jehovah, which, 
 
 GOD. 
 
 717 
 
 indeed, allows the existence of 'o other jxiwei 
 with itself. 
 
 And, finally, there exists here a ]irculiar fraic, 
 which ill Ilengsteiilierg's opinion makes it rerlaru 
 that there is an Egyptian lel'ereiice, namely, tlie 
 circumstance that the goat was sent to Aza/.ei into 
 the desert. The sp.ecial residence ol Typhon was 
 in the desert, according to the Egyptian doctiine, 
 which is most intimately connected with the na- 
 tural condition of the country. There, accoid- 
 ingly, is Azazel placed in our passage, not in tlie. 
 belief that this was literally true, but meiely 
 symbolically. 
 
 Such is the view taken by Professor Hengstcn- 
 berg, and wiiich we have endiavouied with all 
 ])ossible conciseness to place befoie the leader. 
 Those wlio desire to contemplate the subject in 
 dill'eient jioints of view will do well lii coiiMilt the 
 valuable dissertation in Piol'essor )iu>\i'i Notes on 
 Z.ei;('itcM6- xvi.,and pieviously piiblLihed liy him in 
 the American Biblical Rtpositorij for July, 1812. 
 Prolessor Bush takes notice of the o|iinion that 
 Azazel was Satan : he shows that the Septuagint 
 makes Azazel a person, and tliat the early Chiis- 
 tian chuicli, and most (jf the Jewish writeis, re- 
 garded him as Satan. The professor is, however, 
 not of this opinion ; but he had not the ad\ antage 
 of having seen it as rejiroduced in the new and 
 strong lights thrown upon it by Heiigstenberg 
 whose vast erudition and soundness of tlieological 
 ojiinion give great weight to any conclusion 
 which his judgment ajjjHoves. The subject is one 
 of the most curious and interesting in Biblical 
 literature; but it is also one on which it seems 
 scarcely possible to realize an implicit convii;- 
 tion : and the jjresent writer, in reporting the 
 views of another, must admit that he, for himsellj 
 has not been able to do so. 
 
 GOD. The two principal Hebrew names 
 of the Supreme Being (St. Jerc^me and the 
 Rabljins enumerate fen, but they belong tather 
 to his attributes) used in the Scriptures are 
 nin^ Jehovah, and D^'^7N Elohim. Dr. HU- 
 vernick, in his erudite wcnk, Ilistorisch-critiscfte 
 Eiiileituvg ins alte Testament, Berlin, 1839, 
 ])roposes the reading T\)\}1 Jahvch instead of 
 njn* Jehovah, meaning ' the Existing One," 
 
 while he derives DS"1?N Elohim. fi-om an an- 
 cient Hebrew root, now lost, T\7i^ coiuit, and 
 thinks that the jilural is used merely to indi- 
 cafe the abundance and sii])er-iichiiess contained 
 in tlie Divine Being. With him, theiefoie, Je- 
 hovah is not of the same origin as the heathen 
 Jove, but of a strictly peculiar and Hebrew 
 origin. Both names, he admirably proves, are 
 used by Moses discriminately, in strict con 
 formity with the theological idea he wished to 
 express in the immediate context; and, puisiiing 
 the Ptntatpuch nearly line by line, it is astonish- 
 ing to see that Moses never uses any of the names 
 at mere landom or arbitrarily, but is thioiighoitt 
 consistent in the a])plication of the respective 
 terms. Elohim is the abstract expression for 
 absolute Deity apart from the sj)ecial notions of 
 unity, holiness, substance, &c. If is more a phi 
 losophical than devotional terni, and corresponds 
 with our term Deity, in the same w;'.y as state oi 
 government is abstractedly exjiressive of a king 
 or monarch. Jehovah, however, lie considers to 
 be the levealed Elohim, the Manifest, Only, Per-
 
 T78 
 
 GOD. 
 
 sonal, and Holy Eloliim : Eloliim is the Creator, 
 
 Jehovah tlie Redt^emer, &c. 
 
 To Elohim, in the later writers, we usually find 
 affixed the adjective D^^H chayim ' the living ' 
 CJer. X. 10; Dan. vi. 20, 2(3; Acts xiv. 15; 
 2 Cor. vi. 16), probably in contradistinction to 
 idols, which might be confounded in some cases 
 with tlie true God, the linguistical difl'erence in 
 tlie Hebrew existing only in tlie plural, the former 
 
 being called D*?'''?K Elilirn instead of Elohim 
 (Lev. xix. 14 ; xxvi. 1 ; Hab. ii. 18). 
 
 The attributes ascribed to God by Moses are 
 systematically enumerated in Exod. xxxiv. 6-7, 
 though we find in isolated passages in the Pen- 
 tateuch and elsewhere, additional properties spe- 
 cified, which bear more directly upon the dog- 
 mas and principles of religion, such as e. g. that 
 he is nor trie auilior of sin (Gen. i. 31), although 
 since the fall, man is born prone to sin (Gen. 
 vi. 5; viii. 21, &c ). But as it was the avowed 
 design of Moses to teach the Jews the Unity of 
 God in opposition to (he Polytheism of the other 
 nations with whom they were to come in contact, 
 he dwelt paiticularly and most prominently on 
 that point, which lie hardly ever omitted when 
 he had an opportunity of bringing forward the 
 attributes of God (Deut. vi. 4 ; x. 17 ; iv. 39 ; 
 ix. 16, &c. ; Num. xvi. x^ii ; xxxiii. 19, &c. ; 
 Exod. XV. 11 ; xxxiv. 6, 7, &c.). 
 
 In the Prophets and other sacred writers of the 
 Old Testament, these attributes are still more fully 
 developed and explained by the declarations that 
 God is the first and the last (Is. xliv. 6), that 
 He clianges not (Hab. iii 6), that the earth and 
 heaven shall perish, but He shall endure (Ps. 
 cii. 26) — a distinct allusion to the last doomsday 
 — and that He is Omnipresent (Prov. xv. 3 ; Job 
 xxxiv. 22, &c.). 
 
 In the New Testament also we find the attri- 
 butes of God systematically classified (Rev. v. 
 12 and vii. 12), while the peculiar tenets of 
 Christianity embrace, if not a farther, still a more 
 developed idea, as presented by the Apostles and 
 the primitive teachers of the church (comp. Se- 
 niisch's Justin Martyr, vol. ii. p. 151, sq., trans- 
 lated bp' J. E. Ryland, 1843). 
 
 The expression ' to see God ' (Job xix. 26 ; 
 xlii. 5; Isa. xxxviii. 11) somethnes signifies 
 merely to experien(;e his help ; but in the Old 
 'lestament Scriptures it more usually denotes the 
 approacli of death (Gen. xxxii. 30 ; Judg. vi. 23 ; 
 xiii. 22; Isa. vi. 5). 
 
 The term D'n?N {3, ' son of God,' applies to 
 Kings (Ps. ii. 7 ; Ixxxii. (5, 27). The usual 
 notion of the ancients, that the royal dignity 
 was derived from God, may here ije traced to its 
 8.)urce : hence tlie Homeric Zio-^ivris ^dcnXevs. 
 Tliis notion, entertained by the Oriental nations 
 witii regard to kings, made t.'ie latter style them- 
 selves Gods (Ps. Ixxxii. 6). 
 
 D'H/N "'31, ' sons of God,' in the plural, im- 
 plies inferior gods, angels (Gen. vi. 2; Job i. 6); 
 as also faithful adherents, worshippers of God 
 ^Deut. xiv. 1 ; Ps. Ixxiii. 15; Prov. xiv. 26). 
 
 DTlpK K'^fc^, ' man of God,' is sometimes ap- 
 lilied to an angel (Jndg. xiii. 6, 8); as also to a 
 jrojihet (1 Sam. ii. 27; ix. 6; 1 Kings xiii. 1). 
 
 When, in the middle ages, scholastic tlieology 
 Viegan to speculate on the divine attributes, as the 
 'msis of systematic and dogmatic Christianity, 
 
 GOD. 
 
 the Jews, it appears, diil not wisl to remain be- 
 hind on that head, and collecting 9. few passage! 
 from the Old Testament, and more esjiecially 
 from Isa. xi 2, and Cliron. xxix. 11, where the 
 divine attributes are more aiojjly developed and 
 enumerated, they strung them together in a sort 
 of cabbalistic tree, but in reality reiiresentijuf a 
 human figure. 
 
 In.scrutable. 
 
 "ini 
 
 Crown. 
 
 ^3I^'^» 
 
 Idea. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Intelligence. 
 
 
 n»3n 
 
 Wisdom. 
 
 Left 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 
 « 
 
 Force. 
 
 
 Magnificence. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 mssn 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 *iin 
 
 Glory . 
 
 Vlctc/i . 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 PD> 
 Rigm 
 
 These attributes they caH O'lT'PD Sej AifOlh 
 (numbered ones), and divide them into tb:et up» 
 per (crown, wisdom, and intelligence) ani ».v;ven 
 lower. The first constitute the being of Goil, 
 and the latter merely his virtues. Only the 
 first tliree are called intellects, but not attributes 
 (^Cabbala Dcmtdaia). 
 
 Instead of giving the term Sephiroth an He 
 brew derivation, from "IQD sophar, ' to count, 
 ' number,' we would rather incline to assign it a 
 Greek etymology, from ff<pa7pa, globe, circle, tliii 
 Sephiroth-system representing among the cabba 
 lists the planetary system of ten spheres. The 
 plural termination in HI it has in common with 
 many similar words adopted by tl e Rabbins Irom 
 the Greek ; such as hlDViri; from (St«^f>
 
 GUG. 
 
 D'^DQ'nDIBK from iiriTpoiros, |''D1tt''3 from vofj.6s, 
 fcc— E M. 
 
 GOEL. [Blooii-kevenge.] 
 
 GOG 012) occurs Exek xxxviii. 3, 14, and 
 zxxix. 11, iis a jjropcr name ; tliat of a prince of 
 Magog (3130), a poojjle tUat were to come from 
 the North to invade the land of Israel, and be 
 there defeated. In a difl'crenf sense, but corre- 
 •ponding with the assertions of other Oriental 
 autliors, in whose traditions this people occupy an 
 important ])lace, Gog occurs in Itev. xx. 8, as 
 the name of a country. 
 
 Interpreters have given very difl'erent explana- 
 tions of the terms Gog and Mago^' ; but they 
 liave generally understood them as syml)olical 
 ex])re88ions for tiie iieathen nations of Asia, or 
 more ])articularly for the .Scythians, a vague 
 krowledge of whom seen»s to have reached the 
 Jews in Palestine about tiiat period. Tlius Jo- 
 lephus (Aiitiq. i. 6. 3) lias dropped the Hebrew 
 word Magog, and rendered it by ^KvOai : and 
 to does Jerome, while Suidas rendeis it by 
 nepcai — a dilference tiiat matters but little in 
 the main question, since '2Kvdai, in the ancient 
 authors, is but a collective name ibr the northern 
 but partially-known tribes (Cellar, No/it. ii. 
 753, sq.) ; and, indeed, as such a collective 
 name, Magog seems also to indicate in tlie He- 
 brew the tribes about the Caucasian mountains 
 (comp. Jerome on Ezek. ibid.). Bochart (I'/ial. 
 iii. 13) supports the opinion of Joseplius, though 
 by but very jirecarious etymologies. Accord- 
 ing to Reinegge (Dcscrip. of the Caucasus, ii. 
 79") some of the Caucasian people call their 
 mountains Gog, and tlie highest northern points 
 Magog. The Arabians are of opinion that the 
 descendant?, of Gog and Magog inhabit tiie 
 northern parts of Asia, beyond tiie Tartars and 
 
 Sclavonians, and they put ^^>-Vct — »,».b 
 
 always in conjunction, thereby indicating the 
 extreme points of north and north-east of Asia 
 (Bayer, in Comment. Acad. Petrop. i. ; D Her- 
 bclot, Bihl. Orient. )). 528). Nor are there waiiting 
 interpreters w!io understand by tlie Gog of Reve- 
 lations the anti-Ciirist, and by tiie (Jog of Ezekiel 
 the Gotlis, who invaded tlie Roman empire in tiie 
 5th century of tlie Christian era. — E. INl. 
 
 GOLAN (|?i3 : Sept. VaiXwv) or Gaui.on, a 
 Levitical town of Bashan, in the triiie of Manasseh 
 (Dent. iv. 43 ; Josh. xx. S ; xxi. 27 ; 1 Cliion. vi. 
 71). from whicli tlie small province of Gaulonitis 
 {TavXdiv'nis) took its name. The word is recog- 
 nised ill the present Jolan or Djolan, mentioned 
 by Burckhardt {Syria, p. 286), as giving name to 
 a district lying east of the lake of Tiberias, and 
 composed of the ancient Gaulonitis, with part of 
 Bashan and Argob. It is indeed clear, that the 
 Uaujonitis of the later Jewisli history must have 
 included part of the more ancient Bashan, if 
 Golan gave name to the jnovinre, seeing that 
 Golan was certainly in Bashan. Some difficulty 
 has been suggested as arising from the fact, that 
 tlie Judas whom Jose))hus (Antig. xviii. 1. 1) calls 
 a Gaulonite, is called by St. Luke (Acts v. 37) a 
 Galilajaii. This is the more remarkable, as Jose- 
 phus elsewhere (ex. gr. De Bell. Jud. ii. 20. 4) 
 carelully distinguishes Galilee and Gaulonitis. 
 Yet he himself elsewhere calls this very Judas 
 I GaJilaean (^Antiq. xviii, 1.6; xx. 5. 2 ; Dc Bell. 
 
 G(>LG()THA. 
 
 771 
 
 Jud. ii. 9. 1). It is, from thi.s, ]i obalile thai 
 Judas had a doulilc cognomen, periiaps liecause 
 lie imd been boni in (iauhmitis, liut iiad been 
 bri)uglit up or dwell in G'alilee; as .\polloniu.s 
 alfhougli an Kgyjitiau. yet WiLs. from his place 
 of residence, called Rhodius (see Kuinoel, in Act. 
 V. 37). 
 
 GOLD. The Hebrew word nnt (zahah) is 
 merely the niineialogical name 1 1' lliis metal, 
 wiiilt! ihe various kinds, in a purified stale, are 
 called TD, DHD, 'I'lin. .tc 
 
 (iold was liiiimn ami \alued in very early 
 times. Abraham waj> ricli in golil (Gen. xiii. 2; 
 xxiv, 35); and female ornaments were made o/ 
 gold (Gen. xxiv. 22). 
 
 To judge fiom 1 Chron. x.\ii. 14; xxix. 4, 
 the Jews must have been, in their jiahny days, 
 in possession of enoimous (jiiantilies of tlii.s nictal, 
 considering the many tons of gold that weie sjent 
 in the Imilding of the temple alone, though the 
 exjjression, pk/itiotis as stones (2 Ciiron. i. 15), 
 may be considered as hyperbolical. It is, however, 
 conlirnied by the history of ihe oilier .\siali(; na- 
 tions, and more esjiecially id' the Persians, that the 
 period lel'erred to really aliounded in gold, wliicli 
 was imported in vast masses fiom .-Vliica and 
 the Indies (Heereu, Ideen, i. 1. 37, sq.). Tlie 
 queen of Sheba brought with her (I'roni Arabia 
 Felix), among other presents, 120 taltnta of gold 
 (2 Chron. ix. 9). The technical name of geld- 
 smiths (D''Q"1^ zorphim) occurs for tiie lirsl time 
 in Judg. xvii. 4 ; and that o\' t\ie crucHjle (PpVD 
 mazreph) in Prov. xvii. 3. Both n;;mes aie 
 derived from the verb t]"lV zoraph, to purify 
 (metal).— E. M. * 
 
 GOLGOTH.\ (ill Greek letters roA7oea ; in 
 Aramaean ND^llyi). The original word signi- 
 fies 'a skull,.' as d( es its Latin lejiresentative, Cal- 
 varia, Cahary. Dill'eient opinions have prevailed 
 as to why the place was so teinied. Old fables 
 assign as the reason, that Adam was inteiied at 
 Golgotha, in order tliat wheie he lay who had 
 elTected the ruin of mankind, there also might 
 the Saviour of the world sidTer, die, and be Ijuiiid 
 (Reland, Paleest. p. F.60J. Many have iield that 
 Golgotha was the jilace of jiulilic execution, the 
 Tyburn of Jerusalem ; and that hence it w;is 
 termed the ')ilace of a skull.' Another opinion 
 is that the jjlace took its name I'rom its siiaj e, 
 being a hillock of a foini like a liuman skull. 
 The last is the opinion to'whicli the wi iter of these 
 remarks inclines. Tliat the place was of some 
 such shajie seems to be generally agreed, and lhe 
 tradilional term moxmt, applied to Calvary, ap- 
 pears to conlirm this idea. And such a shaje, it 
 nius-t be allowed, is in entire agreement with the 
 name. — that is, ' skull.' To these considerations 
 there arc added certain difficult ies which aiise 
 from the second exjilanation. So far as we know 
 there is no historical evidence to show that there 
 was a ]/lace of jniblic execution where (iolgotha 
 is commonly fixed, nor that anysuch place, in or 
 near Jerusalem, bore the name Golgotha. Nor is 
 the term Golgotha desciijitive of such a p'ace ; 
 to make it so, to any extent, the name should hav e 
 been 'skulls,' or ' the jilace of skulls.' Kqiially 
 unajit is the manner in whicli the writeis i.f tiie 
 Gospels speak of the ])lace : Matthew calls if ' a 
 ]ilace called Golgotha; that is to say, a place oi 
 a skull;' Mark, ' the place Golgotha; which is,
 
 780 
 
 GOLGOTHA. 
 
 being interjiieted, tlie place of a skull ;' Luke, 
 •tlie place uhich is called Calvary;' Jolui, 'a 
 place called of a skull, wliicli is called in the 
 Hebrew Gulgotlia.' Now, no one of these dascrip- 
 tions is what wonl<l have been natural had Gol- 
 gotha been a ])lace or the place of pulilic execu- 
 tion. All English writer would say, ' they took 
 t'le ciimiiial to Tyburn and executeil him.' In 
 the same manner would the biographers of Jesus 
 haves]K)ken — 'they took him to Golgotha;' in such 
 a case there was no need of explaiiaiions ; what 
 and where Gol.;otha was every ]iersun would iiave 
 known. In truth, the context seems to show that 
 the Roman guard hurried Jesus away and put 
 him to tleath at the first coiivenient spot; and 
 that the rather because there was no small fear of 
 a popular insurrection, especially as he was at- 
 tended Ijy a crowil of people. But where was 
 the place? Not far, we may suppose from what 
 biis been said, Inim the jmlginenl hall, which was 
 doubtless near the spot (Fort Antonia), where the 
 Roman forces in Jerusalem were concentrated. 
 From our plati of Jerusalem it will be seen 
 tliat Fort Antonia lay on the north-west angle 
 of tlie temple. Was it likely, then, that in 
 the highly excited state of the pulilic mind the 
 soldiers should take Jesus southward ; that is, 
 through the whole breadth of the city 1 Some- 
 where in the north, it is clear, they would exe- 
 cute him, as thus they would most easily efl'ect 
 their object. But if they chose the north, then the 
 road to Jojipa or Damascus would be most conve- 
 nient ; and no spot in the vicinity would proba- 
 bly be so suitaiile as the slight rounded elevation 
 whicTi bore the name of Calvary. That some 
 hillock would be ^ireferred, it is easy to see, as 
 thus the e.xposure of the criminal and the alleged 
 cause of his crucilixion would be most elVectually 
 secured. But the particulars detailed by the 
 gacred historians show that our Lord was not cru- 
 cified on the spot, or very near the spot, where he 
 was condemned, but was conducted some distance 
 through the city. If so, this, as appears from 
 our plan, must have been towards the west. Two 
 points seem thus determined : the crucilixion was 
 at the north-west of the city. 
 
 The account, as given in the Evangelists, 
 touching the place of the crucifixion and burial 
 of our I^rd, is as follows: — Having been deli- 
 vered liy Pilate to be crucitied, Jesus was led 
 away, follov.^ed by a great compaiiy of people and 
 women, who bewailed his fate. On the way the 
 soldiers met one Sinuin, a Cyrenian, coming out 
 of the countnj, vvho is coni])ulled to bear Jesus' 
 cross. When they weie come to the place which 
 is called Calvary, there they crucified him. This 
 place was nigh to the city : and, sitting down, 
 they watched him there. They that passed liy 
 reviled him, wagging tlieir heads and scofUng. 
 Likewise also the chief priests mocked him, with 
 the scril)es aiid elders ; and the people stood be- 
 holding. The soldiers too mocked him. There 
 stood by Ine cross of Jesus his mother, and his 
 niothci's sister, and Mary Magdalene. And all 
 his acquaintance and the women that followed 
 him from Galilee stood af ir oft', beholding these 
 tilings. In the place where he was crucified there 
 was a garden, and in the garden a tiew sepulchre, 
 hewn out in tlie rocK ; tkera laid they Jesus, and 
 rolled a great stone to tht> door of the sepulchre. 
 The writer of the eiiistle ti> the Hebrews adds, that 
 
 GOLGOTHA. 
 
 Jesus snfTered without the gate, sulijoining, * '9? 
 us, therefore, go fortli to him without the can p 
 (or the city) bearing his reproach' (He'i. xiii. 12, 
 13; Matt, xxvii. ; Mark xv ; Luke xxiii. ; Jolia 
 xix.). 
 
 We thus learn, as a positive fact, that the crji- 
 cilixion and burial took ])lace out of the city, and 
 yet nigh to the city; and the statement of the 
 writer to the Hebrews is confirmed by the inci- 
 dental remaik (Mark xv. 21), that the soldiers 
 seized Simon, as he was ' coming out of the 
 country.' It now a]ipears. then, that Calvary lay 
 at the north-west, and at the outside, of' the city. 
 Tlie reader, on perusing the abstract just given oj 
 the evangelical narrators, combined witii previous 
 remarks, will find reason to think that Calvaiy 
 was onlvjust on the outer side of the second wull. 
 It is also clear that the place was one around 
 which many persons could assemble, near which 
 wayfarers were passing, and the sutlerers in which 
 could be seen or addressed by persons who were 
 both near and remote : all which concurs in show- 
 ing that the spot was one of some elevation, and 
 equally jiroves that 'this thing was not done in a 
 corner,' but at a place and mider circumstances 
 likely to make Calvary well known and well re- 
 membered alike by the foes and the friends of our 
 Lord. Other events which took place immedi- 
 ately after, in conner.lion with the resurrection, 
 would aid (if aid were needed) in fixing the re- 
 collection of the spot deep and inefiaceably in the 
 minds of the jirimitive disciples. 
 
 Was it likely that this recollection would 
 perish? Surely of all .spots Calvary would be- 
 come the most sacred, the most endearing, in the 
 primitive church. The spot where Jesus was 
 crucified, died, was buried, and rose again, must 
 have been bound to the heart of every disciple 
 in the strongest and most grateful bonds. We 
 do not need history to tell us this ; or, lather, there 
 is a history^the history of man, of what human 
 nature is, and feels, and loves — which declares 
 the fact to every intelligent mind. Nor did the 
 Jew, with his warm gushing afl'ect'ons, feel on 
 such a point less vividly than his fellow men. 
 ' The tombs of the prophets,' ' the sejiulchre of 
 David,' were, we read (jMatt. xxiii. 29 ; Acis ii. 
 29), reverentially regarded, and religiously pre- 
 serveil from age to age. That of 'Davids Lord' 
 would assuretlly not be neglected. It was a sea- 
 son of public religious festivity when our Lord 
 sutl'ered. Jerusalem was then crowded with 
 visiters from foreign parts. Such too was the 
 fact at the time of the effusion of the Holy Spirit. 
 These pilgrims, however, soon returned home, and 
 wherever they went many carried with them the 
 news of the crucifixion of Jesus, and told of the 
 place where he had been executed. When these 
 had reached their homes they became, under Pro- 
 vidential influences and the preaching of Apostles, 
 in each case, a nucleus of an infant church, 
 which would naturally preserve embedded in its 
 heart the knowledge of Calvary. Perhaps no one 
 spot on earth had ever so many to remember it 
 and kuciw its p'ecise locality, as the place where 
 Jesus died and rose again, p'irst in Jerusalem^ 
 and soon in all parts of the earth, were tliere 
 hearts that held the recollection among tlieir most 
 valued treasures. 
 
 We do not think these remarks need confirma- 
 tion ; but the passage iu the Hebrews shows Uiai
 
 GOLGOTHA 
 
 8h«y are substantially correct. We there le;irn 
 tKat far on in tlic lirst century Calvary was well 
 known in the chuicli ; lliaf tlie Iradilion wa< |>re- 
 •erveil, and preserved in so livin^' a form as to 
 he ma<le llie snlycrt of a li^malive illustration of 
 Ciiristian doctrine. The memory of disliiiifiiislied 
 plares is auioiii; the least ))erishahle of eaithly 
 tliiiig-s. Tliormojjyhc and Runnymede are yet, 
 and will ever he, known. Willi how much more 
 reason Calvary ! At the Hrsl tliere were not only 
 in Jerusalem and Palestine, hut in all p.rls of 
 tiie eartli, l)03,>ms whicli had found for it a shrine. 
 Fathers would convey their knowledi^e and tiieir 
 impressions to sons; one geiieratioti and one 
 cliurch to another. Tlie [)assage in the Ilelircws 
 would tend to keep alive tlie recollection. And 
 tliiis from a'^e to H'^e there would he a regular 
 fiansmissioii of tlie. essential facts of the ca<e, till 
 at len^^th the tradition became fixed in history, 
 and a splendid edifice was raised in j)er]ietnal 
 commeinoration of the great events which rendered 
 Golgotlia the most remarkable spot on tiie wide 
 earth. Before, however, we .speak more of this 
 edifice and tliis record, we must add that iiea- 
 thenlsm lent an aid to the Chris'ian tradition. It 
 was the fate of Jerusalem, after its cajiture by the 
 Romans, to become a heathen city ; ev^n its name 
 was chanijed info Coloiiia TEVin Capitol ina. In 
 the e.\ces5 of their triumpliant joy, the coiiijuerors 
 made Jupiter its patron God, and erected statues 
 of Jupiter and Venus on the jilace where Jesus 
 nad been crucilied (Sozomen, xi. 1). This was 
 done not so much to insult as to conciliate. 
 New-corners in religion have always availed 
 themselves of establisheil feelings, and tlierefore 
 erected their sacred edifices on ])hices already 
 consecrated in the minds of the jieojile. So was 
 it wlien Ciiristianity was planted in (ireat Britain. 
 Many of our old churches stand on s])ots wliere 
 istood before idolatrous tem))les. Sucli was the 
 pilicy of rlie Romans. The mere fact of a temple 
 to Venus standing on Calvary sutTices to siiow 
 that Cahary was the place where Jesus sulTered. 
 The temple thus takes up the tradition and Irans- 
 ni'.ts it in stone and marlile to coming ages. 
 Tiiis continuation of tlie tradition is the more ini- 
 poitant because it begins to 0]ierate ftt a time 
 when the Christians were driven from Jerusalem. 
 Bi't the absence of the Christians from the iioly 
 city Wcis not of hng duration, and even early in 
 the third century we find pilgrimages from distant 
 places to the Holy Land had already begun, for 
 the ex])ress purjx)se of viewing the spots which the 
 presence and suflierings of the Saviour had ren- 
 dered sacred lUid memorable (Hist. Ilierosol. p. 
 ."iOl ; Ihiseb. IJist. Ercles. vi. 11). A century 
 Liter, P]useliius (a.d. 315) informs us that Chris- 
 ti uis visited Jerusalem from all regions of the 
 e.irth for the same oliject. So early and so de- 
 cided a current towards the holy city presupjjoses 
 a. strong, widespread, and long ])re-eminent 
 feeling — an esfalilished tradition in tiie church 
 touching the most remarkable spots ; a tradition 
 of that nituie which r adily links itstlf with the 
 actual ie;ord in Hebrews. 
 
 Early in the fourth century Eusebius and Je- 
 rome write down the tradition and fix the locality 
 of Calvary in thnir writings. Knsil.'ius was born 
 at (Jbcsarea. in Palestine, ah .ill .\.n. 270. In IH5 
 *jp b^".ame a bi.shop in his native country, and 
 li' in 310. He was a most learned man, anil 
 
 GOLGOTHA. 
 
 761 
 
 wrote a history of the Cliristiun clu.rch. About 
 !}'60 he composcil his 0)io>nny-livt»i, which was 
 expressly devoted to tl e business i/f tletei mining 
 and recording the sites of lioly and other places 
 in I'alestinP. This woik of Ku>ieliiiis, wrilien in 
 (Vreek, .liMome afterwards translati-d into Latin 
 and thus added his authority to that of Kiisibius 
 Jerome took up his lesiden<-e in the Holy Land 
 in the latter jiiirt of the foiiith century, and re- 
 mained tlieie till his death (for an e->timale of 
 the value ol' these geogiaiiliical authorities see Re- 
 land, I'dlrest. ]). 4(i7. sq.). I'ilgiim.s now .streamed 
 to Jerusalem from all pait.s of the woi Id. and that 
 site was fixeii for (lolgotlia which has reinaine4 
 to the present hour. 
 
 This was done not merely by the testimony of 
 these two learned father^!, but liy the acts of the 
 Emjieror Constantine and his mother Helena. 
 This empress, when very fir ad\ ai ced in life, 
 visited Jerusalem for the exjiiess pui|H)se of erect- 
 ing a church on the spot wheie ihe Lord Jesus 
 had been ciiicilied. Tlie pre(!eding details sliowr 
 that the ])res«rvation of the memory of the locality 
 was aiiyhing but impissible. Helen. i would 
 naturally be solicitous to discover the true s])ot : 
 wiience ensues the likelihiuid that she was not 
 mistaken. She had previously heard that tiie 
 holy places had been heaped uj) and concealed 
 liy the heathen, and resolved to attempt to biing 
 them to light, e/'y tp&s ayaytiv (Theoj h in C/iion. 
 p. IS ; qiioteil in Reland, I'dlvst. uniler ' Gol- 
 gotha ') 'On her airival at Jerusalem she in- 
 quired diligently of the inhabitants. Yet the 
 search was unceilain anddilhcult, in consequence 
 of the obstructioirs by which the heatiien had 
 sought to render the spot unknown. These U;ing 
 all removed, tiie sacred sejiuliliie w. is discovered, 
 anil by its siile three crosses, with the tablet bearing 
 the inscription written by Pilate "(Robinson, Ihbl. 
 lics.n 1 1; Thei.doiet. i. 17). This account of hei 
 proceedings taken from one who labours to bring 
 infodiscreditllie whole of Helena's proceed ing»,and 
 who is far too iiniiscriminate and swee]iing in h>.« 
 hostility to \\w jyr tin i live tiaditlons cif the church, 
 shows sulV.ciently that Helena was cautious in 
 her proceedings, that theie did exist a tradition 
 on the subject, that by that traditirm the empress 
 was guided, and that she found leason to fix the 
 site of Calvary on the sjiot wheie the iieathen had 
 erected their temple ami set ii])tlieir jnofane lites. 
 That no small jjoition of the mar\ ellous, not tc 
 say legendary and inciedible, is ii ixed up in the 
 accounts whicHi the ecclesiastical liistoriiuis have 
 given, we by no means deny ; but we see no rea- 
 son whatever, and we think such a coui-se verj 
 unphilosophical, to throw doubt unsjiajingly ovet 
 the whole, a< (by no means in the best tiuste) doei 
 Dr. Robinson. Howevei, on the site thus asccr 
 t.tined, was erected, whether by Constantino oi 
 Helena, certainly by Roman inlluenie and trea 
 sine, a splendid and extensive Christian temple 
 Socrates {Ecclcs. Ilist. i. 17) says, ' the em- 
 peror's mi.ther ererteil dver the jilace where th» 
 sepulchre was a most magnificent ciiurch, and 
 c.illed it new Jerusalem, buildinir it opposite tc 
 (lint old (leseiled Jeiusaletn.' This church wa» 
 completed and dedicated a.u. ;)j.5. If wtu" l ^real 
 occa^'on fill- the Ciiiistian world. In older to givt 
 it ini]iortance ami add to its splendour, a council 
 of liishops was convened, bv oidir of the emperut, 
 from all the provinces of the cnijiire, '♦■hich ••■
 
 782 
 
 GOLfiOTHA. 
 
 sembled first at Tyre, and then at Jerusalem. 
 AmoniT ,'tictn was Kiisebiiis, \*ho took part in the 
 solemni ries, and held several jmblic discourses in 
 the holy city (Euseb. Vit. Const.; Robinson, ii. 
 13). The reader's attention is :lirected to the 
 words aliove cited from Socrates, by which It 
 appears tliat tlie church was built not in tlie old 
 city, but opposite to it (ayriTrpoffco/roy). In this 
 description Socrates is borne out l)y Eusebius 
 {Vit. Const, iii. 33). A reference to the plan 
 will show that such an account of its site cor- 
 responds with the locality on which tlie cruci- 
 fixion and interment took place. The churcli of 
 the hdly sepulchre was burnt by the Persians in 
 A.D. (ill. It was shortly after rebuilt by JMo- 
 destus with resources supplied by John Eleemor, 
 patriarch of Alexandria. The Basilica or Mar- 
 tyrion erected under Constantine remained as 
 before. Tiie Moliammedans next became mas- 
 ters of Jerusalem. At length Harun er Rashid 
 made over to Charlema:^ne the jurisdiction of 
 the holy sepulchre. Palestine again became the 
 scene of battles and liloodshed. Muez, of the 
 race of the Fatimites, transferred tiie seat of his 
 empire to Cairo wiien Jerusalem fell into tlie 
 hands of new masters, and the holy sepulchre is 
 said to have been again set on tire. It was fully 
 destroyed at the command of the third of the 
 Fatimite kalifs in Egypt, the building being razed 
 to ti;e foundations. In the reign of his successor 
 it was rebuilt, being comjileted a.d. 1048; but 
 instead of the former magnificent Basilica over the 
 place of Golgotha, a small chapel only now graced 
 the spot. Tiie cinsades soon liegati. The crusaders 
 regarded the e.liHces connected with the sepulchre 
 as too contracted, and erected a stately temple, 
 the walls and general form of which are admitted 
 to remain to the present day (Robinson, ii. 61). 
 So recently, however, as a.d. 1*08 the church of 
 the holy sepulchre was jiartly consumed by fire; 
 but being rebuilt liy the Ureeks, it now oilers no 
 traces of its recent desolation. 
 
 We iiave thus traced down to the present day 
 the history, traditional and recorded, of the 
 buildings erected on Golgotha, and connected 
 these edifices with the original events by which 
 thev are rendered memorable. To affirm that the 
 evidence is irresistible may be going tiio far. Not 
 less blameworthy is the carp ng and incul[iatory 
 tone pursued by Robinson in his review of the 
 sid)ject. Few aiiti(piarian questions rest on an 
 equally solid basis, and few points of history 
 would remain settled were they sulject to the same 
 sceptical, not to say unfair, scrutiny which Robin- 
 son has here applied. 
 
 The sole eviiience of any weight in the opposite 
 balance is that urged by Robinson, tli it the place 
 of the crucifixion and these])ulchre are now found 
 in the mi<ist of the modern city. But to rvnder 
 this argument decisive it should be proved that 
 the city (tccupies now the same ground that it 
 occupied in the days of Christ. It is, at least, as 
 .likely that the city should have untlergone 
 changes as that the site of the crucifixion should 
 have been mistaken. Ti.e identity of such a sjuit 
 is more likely to be preserved than the si/.e and 
 relative projiirtions of a city which has undergone 
 mere violent changes than probably any other 
 place on earth. Tlie present walls of Jeiusalem 
 were erected so late as a.d. 1513 ; and Rol)inson 
 •uinseT remarks, en passant, that a part of Zion is 
 
 GOLGOTHA 
 
 now left out (p. 67). If, then, the city has been 
 contracted on the south, anil if, also, it was aftei 
 the deatli of Christ expanded on the north, what 
 should we expect but to find Golgotha in the 
 midst of the modern city ? 
 
 Jerusalem in the days of Christ had two walls, 
 those termed in our plan of Jerusalem ' first" and 
 ' second.' It is with the second wall that we 
 are here chiefly concerned. It began at a tower, 
 named Gtnnalh, of tlie first wall, curved out- 
 warii to the north, and ended at the castle o/ 
 Antoiiia. The third wall ran as (m the plan, 
 embracing a wide suburb on the north and north- 
 west. This comprehended a sort of new city, and 
 was built in consequence of the large population 
 which by degiees fixed their abode in li.e space 
 which falls between the second and third walls. 
 This wall was begun under Claudius, at least 
 forty-one years after Christ (Joseph. De Bell. Jud. 
 V. 4. 2; comp. Tacit. Hist. v. 12). This third 
 wall, tlien, did not exist in the time of our Lord ; 
 and Robinson allows that if the present site oi 
 the se])ulchre fell without the second v/all, all 
 the conditions of the general question would Ite 
 satisfied. Our plan of the city shows that it 
 may liave fallen without the second wall. The 
 city liulgel! out on the north, as it contracted on 
 the south, thus bringing Golgotha into its central 
 parts. Robinson, however, asserts that the second 
 wall must either have excluded the jiool of Ileze- 
 kiah, wliich was in the city, or included the site 
 of the seiiulchre, which was out of the city. In 
 our plan the second wall does neither, but leaves 
 both where the Scriptures place them." But the 
 distance from the western point of the temple to 
 the present site of the sepulchre Robinson con- 
 siders insufficient, it being only aljout a quarter 
 of a mile. We know not that there is anything in 
 Sciiptural account which gives support to this 
 notion. A distance of a quarter of a mile appears 
 quite enough for the recorded e\eiits, to sav no- 
 thing of the essential weakness of such a position; 
 for how can Roliinson know that iiis measures 
 extended along the same ground as our Lord was 
 hurried over'? Hut reason has already been given 
 why t!ie Jews should have taken no very jjro- 
 tracted i:ourse 
 
 Two or three additional facts in confirmation 
 of the identity of the present place may, finally, 
 be adduced. Buckinghaui (Palest p. 283) .says, 
 ' tlie present rock called Calvary, and enclosed 
 within the church of the holy sepulchre, bears 
 marks in every part that is nakeil of its having 
 been a round nodule of rock standing above the 
 common level of the surface.' Sclmlz {De Gol- 
 gotha siiu, p. 9) states that he traced the remains 
 of a wall, which ran as tlie second wall on '.he 
 plan rims, exckuling G.:lgotha and taking in the 
 pool of Ilezekiah (Riiumer, p. 352). It may also 
 be remaiked that since the. publicafi.di of Robin- 
 sons woik Riiumer has put forth a \)\e\:e {lieitrarje 
 zur Bib. Ocoff. 1843) in which he revi.ses his 
 I'uUi-tina so far as Robinson "s ascertained resulta 
 render necessary ; but he remains of the same 
 opinion in regard to the po.ssibility of the jiresent 
 church of the sepulchre lieing out of the city. 
 At most, a very few hundred yards (jo'y can the 
 original Golgotha have lain from the present site, 
 and the evidence in favour of its identity, if not 
 decisive, is far stronfjer than any that has beer 
 adduc 'd against it. At the be.=t, then, verj' gmaU
 
 GOMK. 
 
 GOME. 
 
 7(U 
 
 la the reaA.'in for distiirliing the convictions and 
 digtressing the liearts nf tlie sincere helievers w!io 
 visit the lioly sejiiilchre in order to give vent to 
 thdir tearful prnitiliide and cherish their pious 
 faith.— J. R. B. 
 
 GOLIATH. [Gi.^NT.] 
 
 GOME (Xg3), translated 'rnsh' and 'bul- 
 rush,' is mentioned in four ])hices of Scripture, 
 from whicii tiieie is no donht tiiat it was a pUuit 
 growing in moist situations in Egypt, and em- 
 ployed in tiie construction of vessels of dill'erent 
 kinds, intended to float upon tiie wafer, sucii as 
 tiie aik in wiiicii Moses was hid, and vessels for 
 transit (Joh viii. 11; Isa. xxxv. 7; Exod. ii. 3; 
 Isa. xviii. 2). Tlie name c/onie, according to 
 Celsius {Ilieroh'A. vol. ii. p. 138), is deuved from 
 NOJ gimme, ' ahsorbere, Ijibere, quia in aqua 
 nascitur, et aqnam semper imbibit.' Though 
 other plants are ailduced by translatois and com- 
 mentators as tlie gome of Scri])ture, yet it is 
 evident that only the papyrus can be meant, and 
 that it is well S'lifed to all the ]iassages. Being 
 in some respects so obvious, it could not escape the 
 notice of all translators. Hence, in the Arabic 
 Version, and in tiie Annals of Eutychlus, the 
 
 word ^>iji biirdee is given as the synonym of 
 gome in Exod. ii. 3. The Sept. in Job (viii. 11) 
 gives irdirvpos, in Isaiah (xviii. 2) ^t^Kii/as, 
 and the Vulgate, in this last passage, papi/rum. 
 In Arabic authors on Materia Medica, we find 
 the ;;(7/>y;vw mentioned under the three heads of 
 Fnfeer, Jiurdee, and Chartas. Fafcer is said 
 to be the Egy|)tian name of a kind of burclee 
 (bur-reed) of whicli jjajjer (charta) is made; and 
 of burdee, tl/j word fafururs (evidently a cor- 
 ruption of papyrtis) is given as the Greek 
 • /nr-;vm. 
 
 The papyrus is now well known: it belongs 
 to the trilie of sedges or cyperaceee, and is not a 
 ■«»h (%r l.'ulrusli, as in the Authorized Version. It 
 lav .le seen grow-ng to the height of six or eight 
 
 feet, even in tuf's, in the liothoiises of this couMrv, 
 and is described by the ancients as growing in 
 the shallow parts of the Nile. The root ig flesiiy, 
 thick, and spreading; the stems triangular, eight 
 or ten feet in height, of which two or so are nsiially 
 under water, thick below b it tap.ering towarils 
 the aju'x, and destitute of le.ives; tliose of the 
 base broad, straiglit, and sword-sh.iped, Imt much 
 shorter than the stem. This bust is terminated by 
 an involncel of about eight leaves, swor(l-sha|)ed 
 and acute, much shorter than the ni.iiiy-rayed 
 mnbel which they support. Tlie ser^ondiuy 
 umbels are composed only of three or four short 
 rays, with an involncel of three awl-shaiied 
 leaflets. The flowers are in a short spike at the 
 extremity of each ray. Cassiodorus, as quoted 
 by Carpenter, graphicall)- de.'criljed it as it ap- 
 jiears on the banks of the Nile, ' There rises to 
 the view this forest without branches, this thicket 
 without leaves, this harvest of tlie waters, this 
 ornament of the marshes.' 
 
 The papyrus was well known to the ancients as 
 a plant of the waters of Egypt. ' Papyrum nasci- 
 tur in iialustribus vEgyjiti, aut quiescent! bus Nili 
 acpiis, ubi evagattc stagnant' (Pliny, xiii. 11}. 
 Theophrastiis, at a much earlier jjeriod, described 
 it as growing, not in the deep |jarts, Lut where 
 the water was of the depth of two cubits, or e\ en 
 less. It was found in almost every part of Egypt 
 inundated by the Nile, in the Delta, especially in 
 the Sebeiinytic nome, and in the neighl)ouili(H)d 
 of Memphis, &c. By some it was thought pecu- 
 liar to Egypt; hence the Nile is called by Ovid 
 ' amnis jiajiyrifer.' So a modern author. Prosper 
 Alpinus {l)e Plant. ALgypti, c. 36} : — * Papyrus, 
 quam herd M.g'j\^\X\ nominant,e3t planta fluminis 
 Nili.' By others it was thou/^ht to be a native 
 also of India, of the Euphrates near B ibylon, of 
 Syria, and of Sicily. The fynu% cy perns, indeed, 
 to which it is usiaally referred, abuunds in a great 
 variety of large aquatic species, whicli it is ditH- 
 cult for the generality of ot)servers to distinguish 
 from one another; but there is no reason why it 
 should not grow in the waters of hot countries, a.s, 
 for instance, near Babylon or in India. In fict, 
 modern iiotanisls having divided tiie genus cy- 
 perus into several genera, one of them is called 
 papyrus, and the original species 7'. nilotica. Of 
 this genus papyrus there are several species in 
 the waters of India (Wight, Con'ributiuns to tht 
 Botany of India, Cyperea;, [>. 8S1. 
 
 A brief' description of the uses C'';.'is planj, a< 
 given in the works of the ancien'^s, is flius sumrnej 
 up by Parkinson in his Herbal, p. 1207: ' The 
 plant, say the ancients, is sweete, and used by 
 the Egyptians, before that bread of corne wag 
 known unto them, for their food, and in their 
 time was chawed, and tiie sweelnesse sucked 
 forth, tiie rest lielng spit out; liie roote .serveth 
 them not only for I'ewell to biirne, but to make 
 many soifs of ves'^els to use, fir It yieldeil much 
 matter for the jiurjiose. Papyrus ipse (say tley), 
 that is tlie slalke, is iirofifalile to many uses, as 
 to make ships, ami of the iiarke to weave. ;md 
 make sailes, mats, carpets, some kinds "of gar- 
 ments, and ropes also.' The constiuction of />rt« 
 pyriis boats is mentioned by The ipliraslus : so 
 Pliny (Hist. \at. vi. 21), ' Pa|iyraceis navibub 
 arniamentlsqne Nili;' and again (vii. 5<.), 
 ' Naves primiim repertiLS in /Egypto in Nilo ex 
 l»apyro.' P'-itarch, as quoted liy Rosenniiiller
 
 iHi 
 
 GOMKR 
 
 GOPIIl'R WOOD. 
 
 iKvyi, ' Isis circumnavigated tlie marslies in n 
 papyrus wlieiiv for tlie purjwse of coUecdnij llie 
 pieces o\ Osiiis's hody. From Ilelioilorus's ac- 
 count it apjjears that tlie Etliiojiiaiis made use of 
 similar I loats ; for lie relates that the Etliloj)ians 
 passed in reed wherries o\ er the Asfahoras ; and 
 he adds that (hese reed wherries were swift sailing, 
 being made of a lijjht material, and not cajjable 
 of carrjdng more than two or three men.' Bruce 
 rtlates that a similar kind of boat was made in 
 Abyssinia even in his time, havin;^ a keel of 
 acacia wood, to which the papynts jilant.s, first 
 sewe 1 tOL;etlier. are fastened, beinL( gatheied up 
 before and l)eliind, and the ends of the plants thus 
 tied to<^et.lier. Kejjresentatioas of some Egyptian 
 l)OLits are given in the Pictorial Bible (ii. p. 135); 
 where the editor r'^marks that when a boat is 
 described as being of reeds or rushes or papyrus 
 (as in Egy]>t), a covering of skin or bitumen is to 
 be understood. That Vne papyrus was employed 
 for making pajier is also well known, and Wil- 
 kinson mentions that from ancient paper being 
 found at Thebes and elsewhere, it is evident that 
 this application of it was much anterior to the 
 time of Alexander the Great. — J. F. R. 
 
 GOMER Op^)- 1- The eldest son of Japhet, 
 8on of Noah, whose descendants Bochart (Phal. 
 iii. 8) supposes to have settled in Phrygia (Gen. 
 X. 3 ; comp. 1 Chron. i. 5). Most of the inter- 
 preters take him to be the ancestor of the Celtae, 
 ind more especially of the Cimmcrii, Kififiepioi, 
 wno were already known in the time of Homer 
 {Odi/ss. xi. 14). To judge from the ancient his- 
 torians (Herodotus, Strabo, Plutarch, &c.), they 
 had in early times settled to the north of the 
 Black Sea, and gave their name to the Crimea, 
 flie ancient Chcrsonesus Taurica. But the greater 
 part of them were driven from their territories by 
 the Scytlnans, when they took refuge in Asia 
 Minor, B c. 7. 
 
 In the Scriptures, however, the people named 
 Gomer im,dy rather an obscure and but vaguely 
 known nation of the barbarous north (Rosen- 
 niiiller, Alierth. i. 1. 2'')5, sq.) 
 
 Josephus (^Antiq. i. 6. 1) says' expressly, that 
 the ancestor of the Galatians, a Celtic colony, 
 was called Gomer (Michael. Suppl. p. 335, sq.). 
 T!ie Jerusalem Targum gives Gen. x. 3 with 
 ••pnDK Afr.canus ; Arab. r\'\n Turca. 
 
 2. Tlie name of the daughter of Diblaim, wife 
 of the prophet Hosea (Hosea i. 3). — E. M. 
 
 GOMORRHA, one of ' the cities of the plain,' 
 destroyed along with Sodom. An account of that 
 catastrophe is given under Sodom. 
 
 GOPHER WOOD ("Ifj fj?, etz-gopher) is 
 mentioned only once in Scripture, as tlie material 
 of which Noah was directed to build the ark 
 (Gen. vi. 14), ' Mal;e thee an ark of gopher wood ; 
 rooms shalt thou make in the aik, and shalt jiitch 
 it within and witliout with pitch' (^k/'.cmar, pro- 
 bably 'bitumen'). In endeavouring to ascertain 
 the particular kind of wood which is mentioned 
 in the above [lassage, we can get assistance only 
 from the name, the country where the wood was 
 supposed to have been procured, or the traditional 
 o[)inions respecting it. Tliat nothing very satis- 
 factory has been ascertained is evident from the 
 various interpretations that have been given of 
 this word, so that some have preferred, as in our 
 Authorised Version, to retain tJie original Hebrew. 
 
 Tlie Septiiagint renders it ' squared timbers,' toad 
 Jerome, in the Vulgate, renders it 'planed wood' 
 and ' pitched wood.' Some have ado[)fcd th» 
 oj)inion that a kiild of jiine-tree is intended ; and 
 others that several species may lie included, 
 as they all yield resin, tar, atid pitch. Tiia 
 Persian translator has also adojjted the jiine 
 but Celsius objects th.'it it was never common 
 in Assyria and Baliyhmia. The Chaldee ver- 
 sion and others give the cedar, because it viaa 
 always jilentifnl in Asia, and was I'.istinguished 
 by the incorruptible nature of its wood. But 
 cedar is a very general term, and corie';tly ap 
 plied, as we have seen [Eres], only to dilleient 
 kinds of junijier. These, thougli yielding ex- 
 cellent wood, remarkable for its fragrance, never 
 grow to a laige size in any warm country. Eu- 
 tycliius, pitriarcT of Alexandria, relates in his 
 Annals ([i. 34), as quoted by Celsius (Ilierobot. 
 i. p. 331\ that the ark was made of a wood 
 
 called saff or saj mX^] •, . - *'^ (•f^- The 
 
 sag or saJ has been thought i)y some to be 
 ebony, but apparently without any foundation. 
 Still less is there any likelihood of its being a 
 shrub like juniperus sabina, as indicated in a 
 note by Rosenmiiller, Eng. transl. p. 261. It is 
 curious, as already alluded to in the Essay on 
 the Antiquity of Hindoo Medicine, as mentioned 
 by Forskal, that the woods imjwrted from India 
 into Arabia are saj, abnoos (ebony) and sissoo 
 (^Dalbergia sissoo). Some Persian writers or 
 Materia Medica consider saj to be the sril (shorea 
 robusla), another valued and much used Indiar 
 timber tree, br.t common only along the foot of 
 the Himalayan mountains. The teak is the 
 best known and the most highly valued timber 
 tree on the Malaljar coast, and it has long been 
 imported into ."Vraliia, and also into Egypt. One 
 of the names by which it is known in India is 
 sagoon. Tne saj is described in some Persian 
 works, chiefly translations from the Arabic, a> 
 having large leaves like elephants' ears. This 
 applies well to the leaves of the teak tree; and 
 there is little doubt, therefore, that the so;" of Aral 
 authors is the teak free, \^'ith resiwct to its be;no 
 the gopher wood, the present writer has already 
 remarked in the above woik : ' The gopher wooc 
 of Scripture is so dill'erently translated by dilfereni 
 commentators, that it is dillicult to form even a 
 conjecture on the subject ; besides being used at 
 so early a period, and mentioned only once. Ii 
 need not have been alluded to, except that th» 
 Arabic version translates it saj, which is the leak 
 and not likely to have been the wood employed. 
 The Chaldee Samaritan translator, for gopher. 
 gives, as a synonym, sisam, of which Celsiu.« 
 says {Hierobot. i. p. 332), ' Voceni obscuram. 
 sive referas ad ^v\a ar]ffdfnua, qua; ex Jndiii 
 adferri sciibit Arrianos (/'cripl. Mar. Erythr 
 ]). 162), et Ebeiio similia jierhibeiit alii (Salinas 
 in Solin. p. 727).' The sisatn is probalily t!i< 
 above sissoo, mentioned by Forskal as im]H)rted 
 in his time into Aralpia, anil which is a highly- 
 valued, dark-cohiured wood, of which one kind 
 is called blackwood {Dalbcrgia latifolia). Tiit 
 greatest nutriber of writers have been of opinion 
 that by the goplier wood we are to understand tlx 
 cypre.ss ; and this opinion is supported by sack 
 authorities as Fuller in his Sacred Mis:eUanie», 
 Bocliart ( Gtiogr. Sacra) ; as wel 1 ai by Cel«ifj«
 
 GOSHEN. 
 
 Bierribct. I* \.a& [teen sratrd tliat ihe letters «f 
 •inl /;A, A aii'l t). tliiicr only in the soil or lianl 
 mp.iuier ii. mIjIcI; tlicv uie ]iitiiioiii:c»'cl, and tlieic- 
 fdve lliat (jo/ihri- ami /yti/xtr dillcr Vfiv little in 
 soiii:(l, aii<l tliat n'lriii in the (•ie<'k Kuirdf)i<r<roi 
 is a nieie aildi'ioii to tlie ni t. It is aij^iiod 
 rmliier that the wood of the cyiiress, iK'ins; almost 
 mcoiTiiptihU', was likfly to he jiuTeinxl; that it 
 was fiwjiieiitly einjiloyed in later a^t-s in the 
 fonstritctidii of temples, hiid^'es, and even ships; 
 and that it was very aliinnlaiit in the coimirics 
 where, accor<liti;,' to these authors, the ark is sii])- 
 jwsed to have heen hiiilt, that ii>, in Assyria, 
 where other wocmIs are source. B«if wherever the 
 ark was imilt, there woidd l»e no delicien; y of 
 timlier i(" tiiere was a certain de^iee of moisture 
 with warmlli of climate; ami we know not what 
 cliati'^ ol' cliinate may have taken place at the 
 Delu^t?. The ]iineliil<e, inclu Img the cypress, 
 appeals as likely as any other to have heen em- 
 ployed. usniiHy );rowin;^ as they do in extensive 
 forest"", iiid yieldin;,' stiaight and easily woiked 
 tiir.lier, calcuhiled. riotii its resinous nature, 
 e.'liecttiHlly to rt-sist nu»i>ture, especially if coveietl 
 with pitdi and tar, witicli ini^ht easily have lieen 
 Jirepared from the refuse hraiiches and tiinlier, and 
 tise<! IS well as the natural Uitumen. lint the 
 whole of these siigi^e-tions amonnt only to con- 
 jectures, and theix' seems no possihility uf i'.niviiig 
 at a satisfactory conclusion. — J. 1''. It. 
 
 GOSHKN (\\:h ; Sept. Feo-fV, reff^n), a pro- 
 vince or <ll*trict ol' Ki^ypt in wliicli JiKoli and his 
 faiuily sett1e<l through the instiumeiitality of his 
 lion Joseph, and in which tliey and their ilescejid- 
 ants reiriained I'cir a peiiud of -I'M) years ((Veil. xlv. 
 10; xlvi.2«:xlvM.-27: l.*- : K>:(;d."viii. i-i; l.\. 20). 
 The iiihie tloesnot present any definite infmnialion 
 a.<i to the precise locality of (Toslien, and of couise 
 later authorities |K)ssess only an inleiior value. 
 There are, however, incidental exp;e>si()ns, allu- 
 sions, and imjilicatioiis in the Sciiptnies, which 
 afford aid in deteitnining the spot. That (ioslien 
 lay on the eastern .si<le of the Nile may he jiisti- 
 liably infened liom the lact ti'at Jacoii is not 
 re[)oite<l to have crossed that liver; nor dees it 
 Ajifiear that the Israelites did so in their Higlit out 
 <tf Egypt. With this inlerence all the langcia^e 
 employed (see the passiiges as given aljovej, to 
 say the least, agrees, if it d<ies not afford aii in- 
 «lirect evidence in its favour. Hy c(,mparing 
 Kxotl. xiii. 17 and 1 ('hion. vii. '21, it apjiears 
 that Ciosheii ljordeiv'<l on Aial)ia (see (ien. 
 xlv. Ill, Sept. Feo-f'/* 'Apa^las) as well as Pa- 
 lestine, and the jiassage of the Israelites out of 
 Egypt fIkiws that liie land was not tar lennived 
 from tli€ Re<l Sea. It appeals pixihalile that we 
 may Hx the locality <if (joshen in Lower Kgy])t, 
 • in tli« ea.st side of the Pehisi.ic tnaiicli of the 
 Nile, ill the district around UeioojKilis. The 
 Septnagint lenders tie words nVTN |C'2 'land 
 «r Goshen" (den. xlvi. '28 j. Ka.6' 'H^xliaiy ■k6Kiv, 
 tii yr,v 'Ptm«J"<r/), thus iileiitiiying (iosheii with 
 Rjjmeses, or the district of I'itl.oin or HeriK»]i<ilis. 
 (*«ee map, No .3, in Ivnigiit's lllnminate«t Athis.) 
 This wiKiid make (ios'.ien coiretipond with one 
 of the alvisii>i;s of what was anciently tennwl 
 the I'ra-frciura Araliica, 'M-Ainltia, the eastern 
 distiict, lyinir, i';;al i«, on thee stern or .Arahian 
 »i<le of tlie Nile. This <livision was that of 
 BeJio)>uIis or On. Ma^iiiyeh, or Ain-Slnmo. 
 
 GOSHEN. 
 
 TM 
 
 An attempt lias heen made to define il aec'ir.»t«ly, 
 so as to iilentify (Toshen (Jliiseiiiii. Altcrt/iutK.f 
 iii. "ilfij with liie Noinos .-Viahiie ( l'l..l. iv. /) >, or 
 th<- country of Ksih-.cliar Kij.di ('In- eastern 
 hinil), which stieiches soiilh liom l^>lu^il!nl a» 
 far as UellK-is (noith-east from ('aiio), and Ic 
 tlie norlh-e;uit iioidt-rs of tlie deseit Kl JJ>cheliir. 
 'i'races are found heie, it is fii<iught, of llie lesi- 
 dence of the Isriielites, in large heaps of iiiins, a 
 few hours' joiiinev to the noitheast of C'aiio, 
 which Ihe Aial«s call 7V//c/.y;,f«/ (Jcus* hills), 
 or Turhi'h ci J/iu</(.h-ws' graves^' Niel.uhr, i. Illll '.. 
 Accoriling to Unis Aytne (iJexcnj). dc (' lu/ijfttr, 
 viii. Ill) (iosheii was the valley .'>aliu!-yar, 
 whi<-li hegins in tlie vicinity of lielOeis, and ein- 
 hiaces the di^tiict of Il('ro(i|)olis. KohiriMili (/'a- 
 k-sti/ie. i. 37 J makes light of the ev iilence suf»- 
 posed to he supplied liy 'the mounds ol tlieJews, 
 just inent-onei/ He siys, ' If llieie is any iiis- 
 torical I'uuiulaliiin fur-tiiis name, which is doubt- 
 ful, tiiesc mounds can only he lefeiied hack to 
 the )K I idd of the Ptolemies, in the c<iituiii-s im- 
 mediately heloie the (Jiirislian era, when great 
 luimliers of Jews ie>oiled to Egypt and erected a 
 ttniple at I.roiitopolis." This opinion, iiouevrr. 
 appeals to us somewhat aihitiaiy. And wh.ii 
 ever the aclii'il oiigin of these mounds, Ihe uiili- 
 uaiy account of them may he the tiansmission 
 or echo of a \eiy ancient tra<lition. ]iob:ns<in, 
 however, does not deny that (io-lien is to \»f 
 found about wheie ihe best authojities i rdinarily 
 jilace it, as will appear fnini the following quo- 
 tation ; we legiet that t!ie wish heie s|)oken of was 
 not fuliilled : 'It had been our wish to take li 
 nu.re ciiciiitons mnle from Suez to Caiio, de- 
 scending the casleiu branch or canal of the Nile 
 iieyond Kelheis, as far as to the province of 
 Shni-kiyeh, and thence along the valley of the 
 ancient canal to the htad of the gulf of .Suez. 
 Our object in taking Ihis route would liave been 
 ti) make in<piiries and obseivatii.ns prisonally in 
 relalit.n to the land ofCio-henand iheEx.dus 
 of ti.e Isiaelites' (i. 54). The f.llowing pas-age, 
 however, will serve to |iio\e that even the deseit 
 is not iinsuited lo iiastoral | iiiposes: — ' Thede-eil 
 uhicli we weie now crossing is not sandy, but its 
 sin lace, for the mi.st jiait, is a liaid giavel, oOen 
 stiewed with pebbles. Nunieious wadys, or shal- 
 low water-courses, intusect its surface. In all 
 these wadys there aie usually to be I'ouiul scat- 
 leied liifis of heibs or shrubs, '>u which the cameU 
 lirowse as they ]!ass along, and which seive like- 
 wise as tlifir pasturage when turned loose at 
 night. During the lainy season anil afterwards, 
 the inhabitaiits of lielbeisand the Shnr-kiyeh, a.i 
 pn bably did tiie Isiaelites of oUi, still drive their 
 mingle<l (locks of sheep anil goats for jiastuiage to 
 this (jiiaiier of the deseit.' 
 
 Latiorde {Arabia J'e/riea, ji. 58) fixes Gosh^i 
 in the country around lielbeis, on the eastern sii.e 
 of the Nile. S| leaking of his journey I'miiu C'aiui 
 by Ijell*is to Suez, he siiys, ' Tiiis |ilain is the 
 jirovince (if (ioslien, wheie the chihlren of Egvpt 
 settled and multiplied: it was heie that the Heel- 
 ing occii)re<l ln'tween Jacoli, the |iatriar( li, and 
 J(ise).h,tl.e minister and maslei of E^jypt.' Lab^iide 
 passed liie banks of the canal which forineily 
 united the Nile with the Ri »l Sea. and which, he 
 Ni\s. HoiiaivHite was the fiist in mixU-rn tiiiie.s hi 
 obsirve. M. (^uaircnn le lias <-ndeavoiiied lode- 
 line th»- locality, and by compaiing s^^rial po*- 
 
 » m
 
 786 
 
 GOSHExN, 
 
 •ages Cdl'ecfed from tJifiVrent writers, lie infera 
 tlia* tlio vViuly Tuinilaf (Waily Toinlate in La- 
 borde) in wliii:li tiie canal of Cairo teiniinales is 
 tlie land ti° Go;jlieii : sncli at least s»eeins to have 
 been tlie opinion of Saadias and AUu Said, the 
 autliors of I lie eailie.st Araliic Versions of the Old 
 Testament — tlie one I'or tlie use of tiie Jews, and 
 the otiier for that of tlie Samaritans (Mcin. Geogr. 
 str I'Egypte). J. 1). Miciiaelis was of opinion 
 {SpicU. p. .'571) that Goslieii extended from Pales- 
 tine aloi)^ tlie Mediterranean as far as tlie Tariific 
 inoutli o( (he Nik', and thei'ce inland u|) toHelio- 
 polis, enihracini^ a sweep of country so as to take 
 in a |iart of Arabia, bordering on Egypt. The 
 \'ariuiis opinions that have been iield on the sub- 
 ject may be foiiiul classilied and considered by 
 Bellerinaiiii in liis Handb. d. Bibl. Lit. iv. IDI- 
 220 ( ee also Jaldonsky, Dissert, viii. de Terra 
 Oosen ). 
 
 This district was suitabl»for a nomadic people, 
 who woiiM have been misplaced in the narrow 
 limits of the valley of the Nile. Children of the 
 desert, or at least used as they were to wander 
 freely from one fertile plain to anotlier with 
 their Hocks and herds, the sans of Jacoli required 
 a sjxit wlieie the advantages of an advanced civi- 
 lization tould be united with unrestricted freedom, 
 and abundance be secured without the forfeiture 
 of early and cherished lialiits. The several o]ii- 
 iiioiis which we have given substantially agree in 
 referring Gosjien to the country intervening be- 
 tween the desert of Arabia and Palestine on the 
 one side, and the Pelusiac arm of the Nile on the 
 other, with the Mediterranean at the liase. The dis- 
 trict assigned to Jacob and his family was chosen 
 for its superiority ((Jen. xlvii. 6), ' In the best of 
 the land make thy father and brethren to dwell, 
 in the land of Goslien let them dwell ;' and the 
 gubsequent increase of the Israelites themselves, 
 as well as the miiitiplicatioti of their cattle, 
 shows that tiie territory was one of extiaordinary 
 fertility. Time and circumstances have doubt- 
 less had tlieir ellect on the fertility of a country 
 in which the desert is ever leady to make en- 
 •;roach:neiits so soon as the repelling hand of man 
 is relaxed or withdrawn. But Laborde (p. 53) 
 represents the vicinity of Heliojiolis as still co- 
 vered with palm-trees, and as iiaving an en- 
 closure, comprehending a considerable space of 
 grourjd, which is coveied every year by tiie in- 
 undation of the Nile W) the heigiit of Hve feet. 
 We are not, however, to expect evidences of 
 luxuriant fertility. The country was chosen for 
 its pre-eminent fitness for sltepherds. If a nomadic 
 tribe had wide space and good pasture-grounds, 
 they would have' the best (lor themselves) of the 
 land," and these advantages tlie district in which 
 we have ])laced Goshen abundantly supiilied in 
 ancient times, when the waters of the Nile were 
 more liberally disj)ensed than at jiresent to the 
 eastern side of the country. Nothing is needed 
 but water to make the desert fertile. ' The water 
 of the Nile soaks through the earth for some 
 distance under the sandy tract (the neighbour- 
 hood of Heliopolis), and is everywhere found on 
 digging wells eighteen or twenty feet deep. 
 Such wells are very frequent in ])arls which the 
 inundation iloes not reach. The water is raised 
 fiom them by wiieels turned by oxen and apjilied. 
 to the irrigation of the fields. Whenever this 
 takes place the desert is turned int: a fruitful 
 
 GOSPEI^ 
 
 fiehl. In j)as5ing to Heliopolls we saw several 
 such lields in the ditVerent staires of being re- 
 claimed from the deceit ; some just laid out, 
 others aljeady fertile. In returning by another way 
 more eastward, we passed a siiccesiitui of IteaMli- 
 fill jvlantatiiins wholly dependent on tins mode of 
 irrigation' (Robinson".s I'uli'ntiiie, vol. i. ]>,'M). — 
 
 J. R. B. 
 
 GOSPEL. Tlie Greek word tvayytKutv, glcd 
 tidingi, is translated in the luiglisli Version by 
 the word Gospel, viz., God's spell, or the IJ'ord q/ 
 God. The central point of Christian pri-aching 
 was the joyful intelligence that llie Saviour had 
 come into the world (Matt. iv. 23; liom. x'. 15); 
 and the liist Christian jireachers, who charac- 
 terized their account of the person and nils.sion 
 of Christ by the term si'/oyyfAioj', were themselves 
 called tuayy(\iarai (Epli- ii. 11 ; Acts xxi. 8). 
 The former name was also jirelixeii to the written 
 accounts of Christ; and as this intelligence was 
 noted down liy various writers in various forms, 
 the ])article Korii (e. g. fuayytKiov Kara Mar- 
 Oalov) was inserted. We possess four such ac- 
 counts ; tiie Hrst by Matthew, announcing the 
 Reileemer as the jiroiriised King of tiie Kingdom 
 of God ; tiie second by Mark, declaring him ' a 
 Prophet mighty in deed and word' (Luke xxiv. 
 19); the tliiid by Luke, of whom it might lie 
 said that he represented Clirist in the special cha- 
 racter of the Saviour of sliiiieis (Luke vii. 36, 
 sq ; XV. 18-!), sq.) ; the fourth by John, who re- 
 jiresents Christ as the Son of God, in whom 
 deity and humanity liecame o>»e. The ancienl 
 church gave to Matthew the symbol of the lion, 
 to Mark that of man, to Luke that of the ox, and 
 to John that of the eagle : these were the foui 
 faces of the cherubim. The clouci in wliieli the 
 Lord revealed himself was borne by the cheru- 
 bim, and the four Evangelists were also the l>earers 
 of that glory of God which aj'peared in the form 
 of man. 
 
 Concerning the order which they occupy in the 
 Scrijitures, the oldest Latin and Gothic Versions, 
 as also the Codex Cantabiigiensis, )ilace Mat- 
 thew and Jolin first, and after them Mark and 
 Luke, while the other MSS. and old versions 
 follow the order given to tliem in our liibles. As 
 dogmatical rea.«ons render a ditVerent order more 
 natural, there is much in favour of the opinion 
 that their usual |)Osition arose from regard to the 
 chronol.igical dates of the resjiective coiiifxisition 
 of the four gosjiels : this is the opinion of Oiigeii, 
 Irenseus, and Kusebius. All ancient testimonies 
 agree that Matthew was the earliest, iind John 
 the latest Evangelist. The lelafion t>f the Gospel 
 of John to the otiier three Gospels, and the relation 
 of the Gosjiels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke to 
 each other, is very remaikable With llie ex- 
 cejition of the history of the Bajitist, and tliat oi 
 Christ's passiiin and resurrection, we Hiid in John 
 not only narratives of quite diirerent events, 
 Ijiit also dltferent statements even in the above 
 sections, the strongest of which is that relating to 
 the crucifixion of Christ, which — according io 
 the first three Gospels — took place on the first 
 day of the Passover, while, to judge from John xiii 
 1, 29; xviii. 28; xix. 11, 31, ii would apjiear 
 that it had taken place on the eve of the day on 
 which the ]ias,sover was to be eaten, but which wai 
 either not eaten at all by our Lord, or was antici- 
 pated by him by a day. On the othex bacd, (iw
 
 (iOSPlilL. 
 
 flrsi three Evani^lMts not only tolevalily liartno- 
 ni«e ill tlie suliotaiice nitd oiiii-r of the events tlit-y 
 reWe, Imt cmiesjxind evt-ii si-ntence liy seiiti'iice 
 in their se|viiaie ii;iri;itives (cinnj). ex. (jr. Mark i. 
 21-28 with Luke iv. :5I-37; Mutt. wii. 31-31; 
 Mark vi. 34; v. 17; Luke viii. 32-37, etc.). 
 Tlie thouglit that (irst suic^^ests itself on con- 
 sideiiiii^ tliis siu'|irisiiitr harmony is, that tliey all 
 liaii mutually liiawn tlieir infonnafion fioin one 
 aiiother. Tlitis (irc'-ius, ex. <jr , is of opinion that 
 Matthew was the oldest source, and that Maik 
 drew his infoiinarioii Itoth from Matthew and 
 Luke; a^'ain, accordiiifj to Biibchini;, Luke was 
 iJie oldest, and Matthew made use of Luke and 
 Mark ; wliile most critics in Germany have 
 ado|ite<l the view of Giieshach, that .Matthew was 
 tlie ohiestj and was made use of l»y Luke, and 
 i'lat Mark deiived his iufonnatiou Ijoth from 
 Maftliew iind Luke. Followiiijj the suggestion 
 of Rore, Some ti{ flie most modern critics, sucli 
 as VVeisse, Wilke (in his work entith-d Ur-ccan- 
 ^ellst, 1S38), and JJauer, are, on tlie other liaiid, 
 of (ipinion that Mark was tlie original evan- 
 gelist, and that Matthew and Luke derived 
 their information fiom him. The dill'erence of 
 these opitiions leads to the suspicion that none 
 of them are right, more especially when we 
 consider that, nolwitiistainling the partial har- 
 mony of tlie three evan^'elists in the choice of 
 then sentences, there is still a surprising dill'eience 
 in them as regards tlie words of those sentences; 
 a fact which com|jelled the critics who sujipose 
 that the evangelists made use of each other's 
 writings, to account everywhere for such devia- 
 tions, and frequently to have recourse to the most 
 trivial and pedantic arguments. To us tliese dif- 
 feiences in word and phiase would appear incon- 
 ceivahle were we disposed to assume that the 
 evangelists had copied one. another. 
 
 V\ like has tried, wi'h gieat show of learning 
 and much confidence, to defend his opinion, tiiat 
 Maik's (rospel was the primitive text; but Wilke 
 also is obliged to have recourse to the most 
 aititicial hypotheses; one of which is, that even 
 Mark has sulisequently Ijeen extended hy glossarial 
 additions, l;ecause he could account in no other 
 way for the omission of Matthew and Luke to 
 copy the seven sections jieculiar to Maik. An- 
 other difliculfy, viz. that the text of Matthew often 
 ..armonizes more with the text of Luke than with 
 that of Mark, he is oiiliged to meet hy assuming 
 that Matthew reformed tlie text of Mark in confor- 
 mity with that of Luke, etc. These diliiculties 
 led to the supposition, already brought forward by 
 Le Clerc, Sender, and Lessing, that there existed 
 originally a I'rutevanffelium, ov primiti\e Gospel, 
 comjKised by the AjMJstles in the Aramaean lan- 
 guage, which was afterwards variously lecast in 
 the Greek tongue by authors wi;o made use of 
 each other. This hyi)othesis was particulaily 
 developed by Eichhorn and Marsh, liTit is now 
 again generally relinquished on account of the 
 serious objections against i*.— I. By this hypo- 
 thesis it is assumed that the paits in which 
 all the thiee barmon!i;e existetl in the original 
 evangelium, wliile the pltis consists of additions 
 ky the 8e|iaiate wi iters. Now, how are we to 
 account, in a natural way, for their frequent 
 harmony in these aihlition-. alsoV This oijjei.-tion 
 can only i)e answered' in a very artilicial mdiiner. 
 2. The chronological Order would thus remain 
 
 GOSPKL 
 
 1M 
 
 tlie same. 3. Luke in his ]<roa>n:!uni do<» not 
 
 mention an original evangflium, but, on the con- 
 trary, sjK'uks of vaiious lejnr's from eye-wit- 
 nesses. 4. It is not likely that the kiiou le-.lge o( 
 such original evaiig<'liiini should not have t.eeii 
 preserved for some time; but none of the anci<iit 
 writers know anything alKiui it. 
 
 Herder suggested another hyfMithesis, which 
 lias been very ably defende.l by Gie.seler, in his 
 work I'lhcrdic Eiitsclittii'j tdidfrniitsloi Sclikk- 
 sale dcr Evatigelien, ISIS; namely, that our 
 written gos])els aie founded upon u cycliis of 
 oral traditions; that the oi iginal witnesses of the 
 life of our Lord at lirst conlined the iiarraiion of 
 their testimony to Jeiiisalem arid Juda-a, whoie 
 the facts which ha<l oecuiied in Galilee weie little 
 known ; atid that by frequently repeating the^e 
 accounts, not only a certain spheie of facts, but 
 also of ])hrases, and jiaitially also of woids, be- 
 came the lixetl standard for these nariaiions, 
 without, however, encroaching altogether on flie 
 free choice of the narrator. But this assumption, 
 likewise, is liable to objections: — 1. If the 
 Ajiostles liad leally fixed fm- the jirimilive oral 
 gospel a ceitain set of facts, how tloes it liapiH'ii, 
 then, that the evangelists disagree so much in 
 their chronological airaii>;ement f (comp. Luke 
 iv. IG, sq. with Matt. xiil. 53, sqq.) 2. If the 
 cycle of traditions was fixed by the Apustles, 
 why, then, does John so entiiely deviaie liom itV 
 3. According to Pajiias, Maik collected what 
 Peter lueached as circumstances requiied. Papias 
 states that on this account Peter could not have 
 written a complete avvra^is. Does it not follow 
 from this that Peter had no fixetl standaid, or 
 j)attein, or cycle for his preaching'.' 4. According 
 to Luke i. 1, 2, several earlier writers had pui 
 fogother {aj/ario'fffa-dcn) into a narration the facts 
 told to them by eye-witnesees. Does tliis not 
 indicate that it was the writers who lirst brought 
 into connection the accounts of the eye-witnesses V 
 Tliese argntnents are, however, not quite in- 
 contioveitible. As to John, he is, ihioughout, 
 original; and, haviiig wri'leti at an advanceil 
 age and far from Palestine, he may certainly 
 have pursued a couise of his own. Papias's as 
 sertion does not reiiiier impossible the fact that 
 Peter communicated a ceitain fixed cycle of 
 facts. The same leason which induced Papias 
 to consider the Gospel of Maik an incomplete 
 gyntaxis, because it does not contain everything, 
 may also have iniluce<i him to consider as sucii 
 the conimuiiicalions of Peter. Th« phiase uvaraa- 
 fftadat IfftjTjaiv in Luke does not pje«isely indicat.- 
 that the relations of the eye-witnesses had no ci.ii- 
 nection. Of nioie im|K)itarice certainlj is the 
 argument deriveil from the chionological |)osition 
 of ceitain facts in Matthew and Luke. Ilovvevei, 
 as regards Luke, theie cannot lie the l(a.-t doubt 
 that his Gospel, as well as the Acts, was com- 
 posed and ai ranged fiom alieady existing crigiiia! 
 documerits ; a fact coiiliim(;il among other leasons ■ 
 also by tlie good Ciieek in tlie nreface of his t 
 Gos|iel, and in the hist chapters of ttie ^c^*, wheic 
 he himself api ears in his narration as the tia- 
 veiling companion of Paul. This good Greek 
 style forms a striking contract with the Hellenic 
 Gieek u.sed in the historical )iait of his Gosjiel, 
 and in ihe first and greater poitiiii of (he Acii. 
 If, theiefo.- fe found doiiwnents on »onie sei*' 
 rate ])arts ot the lilie of our Lu<d, which liad itmi
 
 /«8 
 
 GOSPEL. 
 
 committefl to wiitin,!» from the oral commiini- 
 «alitiMs of tlie Apostles ami Evaiij^elists, tlie.ie 
 documents ini^lit ceitiiiiily liave l)een anan^'eil 
 in a (jhionologically ditleieiit manner. 1 IT 
 we possess in llie (iro3])el of tlie most ancient 
 Evaui,^elist and Apo-itle the pattern of oial tra- 
 dition, iiow can it lie that Luke C()m])iles liis 
 Gospel from private ilocnments, an. 1 thus chanijes 
 the order of the airan^'enient '.' atiil how can it he 
 that Mark in tiiis respect jiaitiaily follows Luke? 
 Tliis dilferent arran^rement of the events is observ- 
 able not only in one or two isolated instances, but 
 the onler of all the events in Matt. iv. 23; xiv., 
 differs from that of iVI.irk and Luke. 2. It cannot 
 be denied that thoHfrh Matthew frequently adds 
 to his nai ration some expressions which indicate 
 the time of the events, there is also frecpiently 
 wantini; all such indications, as well in Matthew 
 as in Luke. It has Ion;; been assumed that 
 Mattliew. in hi.s narrative of the sayings of Christ, 
 has grouj)ed to.;ether kindred sayings; for in- 
 stance, various parables (ch. xiii.) ; denunciations 
 against the Pliarisees (ch. xxiii.). Since, thei-e- 
 fore, Matt ew fre(pietitly does nut connect tlie va- 
 rious events chioni)logically, but rather according 
 totiieir similarity, it is likely tliat he iiad no in- 
 tention to furnish the succession of the times, and 
 there is no reason to sup[):>se that the apostles had 
 any definite pattern for a compendium of gospel 
 history. We tlieiefore suppost> it to lie necessary 
 to limit the hypothesis of an oral (irotevangelium 
 to the fact that ceitain groups of speeches anil 
 events in the history of our Lord weie, from the 
 very beginning of Cliristianity, frequently nar- 
 rated and also written down. Hence i( will be 
 understood why the sentences in various evange- 
 lists are frequently arranged in a similar maimer, 
 and why the evangelists frequently dilfer in their 
 phraseology, in i\if: })lns or ?)iiiius of liieir com- 
 munications, and in their arrangement. The 
 learned Schott concludes his Isagage with a 
 confession which deprives criticism of all hojie 
 even for the futuie : ' etsi lubenter largiamnr 
 ejusmodi conjecttnam cujns ojie, quiecunque dis- 
 cepfari possint de his illisve recti. aibus evange- 
 liorum canonicorum jjarallelis [irorsus deliniantur, 
 hand facie unqnam prodduram esse.' ' Although 
 we would gladly allow such a conjecture, by the 
 aid of which any iloubt concerning tiie.se or those 
 more correct parallels of the canonical gospels 
 may be fully determined, yet it catinot easily be 
 ever advanced.' 
 
 As the three Evangelists mutually supply and 
 exiilain each other, they weie early joined to each 
 other, by Tatiaii, about a d. 17f), and by Am- 
 monius, about a w. 230,* and the discrepancies 
 among them early led to attempts to reconcile 
 them.f An ingenious essay of this kind was 
 written by Augustine in his book De Consensu 
 EvangcUstnivm. Starting from the principle 
 of a verbal inspiratiim in the Gosjiels, every 
 dilVerence in e.\pieiS'ous and facts was considered 
 as a proof that the speeches and facts ha<l re|x.'at- 
 edly occurred. This opinion is advanced, for 
 instance, in Andreas Ossiander's Uartnonia Evan- 
 gelistarum. The subject is. however, moie fieely 
 riandled by Calv!:i, Chemnitz, Kaiser, Geihard, 
 md others, in their resjiective v.'orks, De llar- 
 
 * Such pu ting together is calleil tynoptis. 
 f llarmoniei. 
 
 GOSPELS. SPURIOUS. 
 
 tttonia Evangelistarfim. Gerhanl s nook, in thre» 
 folio viilumes, is cne ol' tiie most compiehensive 
 eNcgetical work* on the tour t-iiw^ols. Strauss 
 ii.ia drawn his |)rinci]»al argunifiii against the 
 uulii >toiic.a1 cii'\rartei of (he Gospels from thes« 
 dlsi:iepaiicie.s ; liut he is in the (irst instance wrong 
 in 8Up]),.3 Tig that t'e Kvangeliot had Mie intention 
 of lelatin; the paitic.u'ais of e\en!s scrujiulous^y 
 in a chionologkal onler; nor i^ e less wrong m 
 seeing in every deviation a conli.iuiction, and ir 
 the attem[)ts at reconciliatiim, jirodnctions of mer« 
 dogmatic prejudice, while he is himself guilty of 
 prejudice, by the very aversion he shows against 
 every attempt at snch reconciliation ! 
 
 When we consider that one and the samt 
 writer, namely, Luke, relates the conve*'sion o( 
 Paul (Acts ix. 22, 20). with dilferent incidental 
 circumstances, aller three various documents, 
 though it would have been very easy for him to have 
 annulled the discrepancies, we cannot help being 
 convinced that the Evangelists attached but 
 little weight to minute preciseness in the inci- 
 dents, since, inilee<l, the historical truth of a 
 narration consists less in them, in the relation ol 
 minute details, than in the correct conception of 
 the charaiter and spirit of the event. An ex]X)- 
 sition and refutation of the most recent attacks 
 against the truth of the Evangelical history on 
 account of this discrepancy, may be seen in 
 Tholuck's Glunhwurdigkeit del- EvangeUschen 
 GeschicJite; and in his lievieio of Strauss's LifcoJ 
 Christ m Literarischer Anzciger, i83S; also in 
 Eitrard's Wissenschaftliche Kritik dcr Evange- 
 Uschen Geschichte, 2 vols. 1843. This last work 
 is a compendium of all critical investigations into 
 the history contained in the Gospels. — A. T. 
 
 GOSPELS. SPURIOUS (ApocuYfiiA). The 
 canon of the New Testament, as we have already 
 seen, having been finally settled bel'ore the clo'^e 
 of the fourth century, thereje<:ted wiifings which 
 bore llie names of the Apostles and Evangelists 
 soon sunk into oblivion, and few, if any, have 
 desceniled to our times in their original shajie. 
 From tiie decree of Gelasins and a few othei 
 sources we have the names and a few detached 
 notices of a good many of these productions. We 
 shall first sp; ak of those which are still extant. 
 
 TiiK HisToiiY OK Joseph the Caupenteii, 
 which has been preserved in the East in an Arabic 
 translation, was first made known in Europe in the 
 commencementof the sixteenth century by Isidore 
 <le Isolanis in his Summa de donis Sti. .Joscphi 
 He oliserves that the 'Catholics of the East* com- 
 memorate St. Joseph on the I9th March, and read 
 the legend of the saint, omitting certain jiartj 
 which are not a])proved in the Roman church. 
 This work wiis first published by Wallin, at Leip- 
 sic, in 1722, from an Arabic MS. of the thirteeiifb 
 century, in the Bihlioti'.rque du lioi, accom- 
 ])aiiied with a Latin translation. It was divided 
 by Wullin into cha])tei-s and verses. It is alsc 
 found in Cojilic, Sahidic. and Mempliic. It is 
 highly esteemed by the Co])ts. The I'oimer part, 
 to chap, ix , a))i>eai-s to have been derived from an 
 ancient Gosj)el of the Infiiicy. The Latin wal 
 republislied by Eahricius. 
 
 Ti-iK GosPF.i. OK THE Inkancy was first ptiK- 
 lished by Henry .Sike, at Utrecht, in 1697, Irons 
 an Arabic MS. Sike's Latin version was rep'ib- 
 liithed by Fabrieiiu, who divide:! 't into chapidRL
 
 GOSPELS, SPURIOUS. 
 
 Tlie Aialic was <!i\iiled into cutifspoiiding cliap- 
 ters l)y Tliilo, in ls'32. 
 
 TIk*:*" are sfvonii MSS. of tliis rosjk'I extant, 
 tlie oldest (if wliicli known is tliat in llie Meilicean 
 Library, written in I'i'J'J. 'I'lie narratives wliicli 
 it contains were ruirent in the gecuiiU century, 
 and tlie acxoiint conlairi-jd in this gospel res]K'ct- 
 ing Christ's learnini^ the alnlial>et is mentiuned 
 by Ireiiaeis {Adv. I/icres. i. 20) as a fal)ri<-ation 
 of the Marcosians. The Cios|)el of ihe Infancy is 
 f(iii:id in tlie catalogue of (jelasiiis, and it is es- 
 pecially reniaikalile from the fact ihat it was 
 most probably tiiij gospel which was knowti to 
 Mohammed, wiio seems to have i»een nnaccpiaiiited 
 witii any of the canonical Scriptures, and who 
 ba4 inserted some of its narrations in the Koran. 
 The Sephey Toldoth »/esi<, a well-known ]iuUlica- 
 tion of the Jews, contains similar fables with 
 Ihose in this gospel (WagenseiFs Sola). Tins 
 work was received as genuine by m.iny of the 
 Eastern Christians, especially the Nesmrians and 
 Monophysites. It was I'omiil to have iRvn nniver- 
 sally lead by the Syrians of St. Thomas, in Tra- 
 vaiiciiie, iind was condemned at the Synod of 
 Jiiamj)er, in 1599, l)y Archbishop Menezes, who 
 describes it as 'the book called the Gospel of the 
 Iiifancij, alreatly condemned liy tie ancients for 
 Its many blasphemous heresies and fabulous his 
 tories.' A\ herever the name Jesus occurs in this 
 
 gospel, he is universally entitled <-— >iJI, while 
 
 Clirist is called tX ". This was a distinction 
 
 introduced by the Nestorians. The Blessed 
 Viij^iri is also entitled the L.idy Mary. The 
 Persians and Copts also received il '•« gosjiel (De 
 la lirosse's Ltxic. Pers. voc. Tinctoria urs). The 
 ori„Hnal laiiguaj;e was pruiiably Syiiac. It is 
 cometimes called the Gospel o' Peter, or of 
 Thomas. 
 
 The Gospi;r- ok Thomas niK Iskaei.itk 
 (Gri.'ek), a woik which has llowed fiom the same 
 source with the farmer, was first published by 
 Cotelerius {Notes an the Constitutions of the 
 jijjostles. 1. vi. c. 17, torn. i. p. 3J8), from an 
 im]ierlect MS. of the fifteenth century. If was 
 republished and divided into chapters liy Kabri- 
 cius. The most peifect edili.in was that of Min- 
 garelli, in the Niiova RaccoUa d' Optisculi scieii- 
 tijic.e e Jilosojice, ^'enet. 1761, from a Bologna 
 MS. of the lifteenth centmy. Mingaielli (who 
 believed it to have been a for;^cry of the Mani- 
 clieei) accompanied his text witli a Latin trans- 
 lation. Tliilo has given a complete edition from 
 a oillation of Mingarelli s woik with two MSS. 
 preserved at Hoim and Dresden. This gospel 
 relates the fable of Chri>t"s learning the Greek 
 alphabet, in which it agrees wiili the accouni in 
 Ireiueus. In other Gosjiels of the Int'ancy (as 
 in that published by Sike) he is represented as 
 learning the Ilebrcto letters. It lia-s been ques- 
 tioned whether this is the fame wojk which is 
 called the fiospel of Thomas, by Origen, Am- 
 brose, Bede, and othei-s. This gospel ]irobably 
 had its (jrigiii among the Gnostics, and found its 
 »a> from them, through the iManichees, into the 
 ciiuich; but having lieeii noie generally received 
 «i:i(ing the heretics it was seldom copied by the 
 U)<nlis. which accounts for the |)aucity of MSS. 
 Niiejihorns sa ■« that the Gospel of Thomas cmi- 
 ■jaiued 1^00 irlxoi [Sticuomethv], This 
 
 GOSPELS, SPURIOUS. 
 
 ;s9 
 
 pseud-epigrj[)hal work is jirobably the fonndii'iou 
 of all the liistories of Chiists iiil.inry, but it i» 
 Bup|K)sed to have lieen recast and ii.ter|K>lated. 
 
 TliK PitorKVANOKi.ioN OK Jauks liiu* de- 
 scended to us in the original (ircek, and »as first 
 ))ublished by liibliaiider, at Basel, in I.y')2, in a 
 Latin version iiy William Pustoll, who asseiteil 
 that it was |)ul>licly lead in the Greek cduicheik, 
 and maintained that it was a geiinine woikol the 
 Ajiostle James, and inleniled to be placed at the 
 head of St. Maiks (iospel. Tluse comiiicnda- 
 tions provoked the wrath of the leained Henry 
 Ste| hen, who iii>nuiaied that it was fabricated 
 by Postcll himself, whom he calls ' a deli.'st.ible 
 monster' ( Introduction au Traitede la Confotinili 
 des MerveiUes Anciciines avec Ics Modernea, 
 lofifi). It was reprinted in the Orthodo-iixiropita 
 of J. Ileidld, Basil, 1555; and again in the 
 Orthodoxor/rapha, vol. i. (loG'J), of Jacob 
 Grynaus, who enteitained a very favonialile 
 opinion of it. Subsecpient discoveiies have proved 
 that, notwithstanding the al>surdity of Psistell's 
 high pieteiisions in favour of the authenticity of 
 this gospel, Stephen's accusations against iiim 
 were all ill-l'iiuniled. There had, even at lli«» 
 time when Stephrn wiote, U'en alrea<ly a Greek 
 translation piililished liy Neainler, of which 
 Stejihen was not aware; it appealed among the 
 Apociypha aiuiexed by O|:orin to his edition of 
 Lutliei's Catechism, Basel, 15()4. It was repub- 
 lislieil by Fabiicins (who divided it into chajitersV 
 and sulise(puiuly by Biicii and Thilo. Tliilo 
 collated for ii s edition si.\ Paris MSS., the oldest 
 of which is of the tenth century. From riie cir- 
 cumstance of these M-""^ containing a Gieek 
 calendar or martyrology, and from other internal 
 exidcnces, there seems lillieih/ubt that this gosjiel 
 was fi.ntierly read in the (i^eek church (Moiit- 
 faucon, I'cla-o/jr. 6'»ar. p. oOl). There aie also 
 extant veisioiis of the (rospel of the infancy in 
 the Arabic and other languages of the Eastern 
 churches, among wliicli ihcy a])pear to iiavc jws- 
 sessed a high degiee of authority. 
 
 Alltiough this work is styled by Postell the 
 Vrotcvangeliiim, there is no MS. authority fiirthis 
 title, nor fur tlie fact of its being ascribed to St. 
 James the Apostle. It only ap;iears that the 
 aiilhoi's name is Jaines. The nariations of this 
 Gospel were known to Teitullian {Adv. Gnost. 
 c. viii.). Origen {Com. in Matt. \). 223), Gie- 
 gory Nyssen (Orat. in diem Aat. Christ. : Opp. 
 vol. iii. p. i(16), Ejiiphanins {n<er. 70. J 5), 
 the author of the hnperfcct Work on Matt. : 
 Chrysost. Opp. toni. vi. j). 2i), and many others 
 among the ancients. 
 
 Thk GospEi. OK THK Nativity of Mauv 
 (Latin). Although tli<r Latins never evinced the 
 same tlegiee of credulity which was shown by the 
 Greeks and Oiientals in regaid to these falmloin 
 jiroductions, and although they were generally 
 rejected by the fathers, they were again leiived 
 about the sixth century. Notwithstanding their 
 contemiituous rejection by Augustine and Jeiome, 
 and tlieir condemnation by Pojies Innocent and 
 (ielasius, they still found readers in abundance. 
 Cielasius expressly condemns the lituik concerning 
 tlic Nativity of St. Mary and the Midwife. 
 
 The Go.sjiel of the Nativity of Mary, which 
 m(>st proliably, in its pre.sent form, dates its origin 
 from the sixth century, has been even recom- 
 mended by ihe jneteiided authority uf St. Jeromv,
 
 190 
 
 GOSPELS, SPURIOTIS. 
 
 There is a letter extaii*. said to be written hy the 
 BinhojM ChioinutiiH ami Heliodonii to Jerome, 
 reqiicstiii.,' liim to translate mit of Helirew into 
 Latin the liistory of the liirt/i of Mar;/, and of 
 the Birth and bifancij of Christ, in order to 
 Oi)])i)3e the Iabiih)ii3 ami heretical ao^omits of the 
 same, contained in the apx-ryjihal l)o()!<s. To 
 ihis Jerome accedes, ol)9erv'nr:j;'at tlie same time 
 chat tlie real anthor of the hook was not, as tliey 
 siip])OHed, the Vlvan^elist Matthew, Imt Selencus 
 the IManichee. Jerome ohserves that tlieie is 
 some tnitli in the account-:, of which he furnishes 
 a translation from the iirij,'inal Helaew. These 
 pretended letters of .Ferome are now universally 
 acknowledf^ed to he fahrications ; hut the a)>o- 
 cryplial j^ospel itself, which is the same in sub- 
 stance with the Protevamje'ion of James, is 
 still extant in Jerome's pretetided Latin version. 
 This i^'Spel was republished by Mr. Jones from 
 Jerome's works. It is from these Gosi)els of the 
 Infancy tliat we have learned the names of tlie 
 parents of the Blessed Virgin, Joachim (although 
 Bede reads Eli) and .A.niia. Tlie narratives con- 
 lain^d in these gos])els were incorporated in the 
 Golden Legend, a work of the thirteenth century, 
 w'.iich was translated into all the languages of 
 Europe, and frequently prinleil. There are extant 
 some inetrical accounts of the same in German, 
 whicii v;ere p(>])nlar in the era of romance. These 
 legends weie. however, severely censured by some 
 eminent divines of the Latin clunch. of whom it 
 will besulYicient to name Alcuin, in his Homilies, 
 in the ninth, and Fulbert and Petrus Damianus 
 'bishop ai' Ostia) in the eleventh century. ' Soine,' 
 says the latter, ' boast of being wiser than they 
 should be, wlien, with sn])erllu()U3 curiosity, they 
 inquiie into tiie names of the ])arent3 of the 
 Blessed Virgin, for the Evangelist would surely 
 not have failed to have named them if it were 
 profitahle to mankind ' {Sermon on the Nativity). 
 Eadiiier, the monk, in his book on the Excellence 
 of the Virgin, writes in a siinilar strain (cap. ii. 
 Anselm. 6pp. p. 435, Paris, 17'2I). Lutiier also 
 invei,His against the readers of these books (Ilomil. 
 ed. Walch. torn. xi. ; and Table-Talk, ch. vii. 
 rom. xxii. ]). 306). 
 
 There were several editions of Jerome's pre- 
 tended translation publisl-e I in the lifleenth cen- 
 tury, one of them by Caxton. It is jirinted by 
 Thilo fioiri a Paris MS of the fouiteeiith cen- 
 tiny, atid divided t)y him into twenty-four chait- 
 lers, after a MS. of the lifleenth century in the 
 same library. One of the chief objects of the 
 writer of these gospels seems to be to assert the 
 Davidical origin of the Virgin, in op])os;lion to 
 the Manichees. 
 
 Mr. Jones conceives that the first author of 
 these ancient legen Is was a Hellenistic Jew. wiio 
 lived in the seconii century, but -that they were 
 added to and interpolated by Selencus at tlie end 
 (if the third, who liecame tiieir reputed author; 
 and that still further additi(vis were made by the 
 Nestorians, or some late Christians in India. 
 Lardner (C7-cdibilify , vol. viii ) so f,u- dilVers from 
 Mr. Jones as to believe tlie author not to have 
 been a Je.v. That these legeii<lary accounts have 
 not altogether lost their aiifh.iiity apjiears fr.im 
 tJ.e lAfe of St. .Joseph, in the last number of the 
 Catholic Magazine {Dccentiipr, 1813). 
 
 TheGvispel of the Nativity of Muy was re- 
 aeive'i by many of the ancient l:eretics, and is 
 
 GOSPELS, SPURIOUS. 
 
 mentioned hy Epiphanins, St. Augustine, and 
 Gelasiiis. The Gnostics and Manichees en-lea- 
 voured to found on its authority some of theii 
 peculiar opinions fsuch as that Cluist wis not 
 the Son of (iod bel'oie his baptism, and iha! h* 
 was not of the tribe if Judah, l>ut of that of Levi) ; 
 as did also the CoHyridians, who maintained that 
 too much honour could not lie ])iid to tlie lilesseJ 
 Virgin, and that she was lurself born of a virgin, 
 and oiiglit to lie woishijijied with saciilices. 
 
 Although the Gosi'Ei, oK Makcion or ralhei 
 that of St. Luke as corrupted liy that heretic in 
 the second centurv, is no longer extant, Professor 
 Hahn has endeavoured to restore it from the ex- 
 ti.acts found in ancient writers, es])ecial]y Ter- 
 tuliian and Epiphanins. This work lias been 
 published liy Thilo. 
 
 Thilo has also jiublished a collation of a cor- 
 rn])ted (ireek (iosPKi. ok St. John, found in the 
 archives of the Kniglits Templars in Paris. This 
 work was first noticed (in 182^) by the Danish 
 Bishop Miienter. as well as by Abbe Gregoire, 
 ex-bishop of Blois. It is a vellum MS. in 
 large 4to., said iiv persons skilled in jialiEogiaphy 
 to have been executed in the thirteenth or four 
 teeiith century, and to have been copied from a 
 Mount Athos MS. of the twelfth. The writing 
 is in gold letters. It is divided into nineteen 
 sections, which are called gospels, and is on thi.* 
 account supposed t,i have been designed J'or 
 liturgical use. These sections, corres|)ondiiig in 
 most instances with our chapters (of which, how 
 ever, the twentieth and tAeoty-liist are omitted y_ 
 are subdivided into verses, the same as those now 
 in use, and said to have been tiist invented bj 
 Robeit Stephen [Vkusks]. The omissions and in 
 ter|)olatioiis (which latter are in barbarous CireeK) 
 represent the heie^iesand niysteiies of the Knight* 
 Templars. Notwithstanding all this, Thilo cotv 
 sideis it to be modem, and fabricated since th* 
 commencement of the eighteentli century. 
 
 One of the most curious of the a]iocrypha] 
 gospels is the Gospel ok Nicodemus. or Act* 
 OK Pii.ATK. It is a kind of tlieological romance 
 )iaitly founded on the canonical gosjiels. Tht 
 first jiart, to the end of ch. xv., is little more than 
 a paraphrastic account of the trial and death 
 of Christ, embellislied with fabulous additions. 
 From that to the end (ch. xxviii.) is a detailed 
 account of Chiist's descent into hell to liberate 
 the spirits in prison, the histoiy of whicli is said 
 to liave been obtained from Lenthius and Clia- 
 rinns, sons of Simeon, who weie two of tliosf 
 ' saints who sle])t.' but were raised friim the dead, 
 and came into tlie holy city after the rcsnnection 
 This jiart of the history is so far valuable, that 
 it throws some light upon the ani-ient idea* 
 current among Chiistians on this suhject. It is 
 therefore considered by Hirch {Anctarium, Pioleg. 
 p. vi.) to lie as valuable in this lespec* as lli« 
 writings of the Fathers. 
 
 The snliscriptiiin to this book states that it viza 
 found by the emjieror Tlieodosins among the 
 jiublic records in Jerusalem, in the hall of 
 Pontius Pilate (a.u. 380) U'e rea<l in chaj,-. 
 xxvii. that Pilate himself wrote all the trans- 
 actions fiom the relation of Nicodemus. who had 
 taken thein down in Hebrew ; and we are in- 
 formed by Epiphanins that the Qiiartadeciman* 
 ajijiealed to the Acts of 1' Hate in favour of tliei; 
 opinions as to the jiroper time of keeping Ka*te7
 
 liOSPKLS, SPURIOUS. 
 
 It was writfeii iit tliese Acts that our Saviour 
 •ufTered im tli« eifjlilli Kal. of A|>ril, a circum- 
 stance wliicli is stateil in the siil»scii|iti«ia t<i the 
 present A ts. It is iinccit.iin, liowffver, wl.oii 
 this work was (list called by tlie name of Nico- 
 demus. 
 
 The two ancient aiwld^rists, Justin Martyr ami 
 Tertiillian, Imth a|t|»e.il in cnii(irmalii>ji iil' o *r 
 Saviour's miracles and cnicilixioii (« the Ac/8 
 of ViUUe (Justin Martyr, i\\ti)'u,ijy^ (tj^ 76, h»; 
 Tei-tullian, ApoL c. '21, or Kn:,'li.sh ttaiisl. by 
 Chevalliev, l»J3). From this citcunsslancc it 
 has (*e«n gern-rany held that such docutneiits 
 must have existed, althdugli this fact has lieen 
 called in questicm hy Taiiaijuil Falier and Le 
 Clerc (Ji)n<»s, On the Canott, vol. ii. p, 282, 
 pt. iii. cit. 20). Tltese a])peals, however, in ail 
 probahility liist funiislied the idea of tlie preseut 
 pious fi-aud. Air. Junes supposes that this luay 
 have heen done in (Miler to silence those pai,'aus 
 who denieci tiie evistenee of sucli Acts. Tlie 
 citations of those Fathers ai« all fuuiid in tlie 
 pifseiit work. 
 
 We iiav« already seen that a Imok entitled )}i« 
 Acts of Pilate enisled among' the Quaitadrci- 
 mans, a sect which ori^'inate*! at the close of the 
 third century. We are inFormeii hy Euseliius 
 that iIk; heathens firmed certain Acts ot Pilate 
 full of all sorts of lilaspliemy agains* Christ, 
 which tliey jKocured (a.d. 3(1;<) to he dis|iersed 
 through tiie empire; and that it was enjoined on 
 •choolmasters to pit ti»em iuto the hands ol' chil- 
 dren, who wete to learn them by heart insteatl o( 
 their lessens. But tii« character of tlie Gosjiel of 
 Nicodeinus, which cont.iiris no blasphemy of the 
 kind, fbi-i»i(is us to identify it with those Acts. 
 This gos]iel jjroljably had its origin in a later 
 ag«. From tlie circumstance of its containing 
 the names of Lenthius and C'^i" inus, Mr. Jones 
 conceives it to liave been m? "vork of the cele- 
 brated fai)ticator of gosjiels, Lucius Ctiariniis, 
 who flourislied in the l*egiiin!;.g of the fourth 
 century. It is ceitainly not later than the tilth 
 or sixtli. * l)uriu.j tlie persecution under Maxi- 
 niin,' says Gieseler {Eccles. Hist. vol. i. § 24, 
 note), * the lieathens first brought forward certain 
 calumnious Acts of Pilate (Euseb. ix. 5), to 
 which the Christians opposed others (Epipiian. 
 Heer, 79, ^ \), which were al'teiwarils in various 
 ways aniernJed. Une of these improved ver- 
 sions was called afterwards tlie Gospel of Nico- 
 demiis.^ 
 
 Bcausobre susjiected that the latter part of tlie 
 *Kiok (the descent into hell) was taken from tlie 
 Gospel of Peter, a work of Lucius Charinus 
 now lost.' Thilo ' Coclex Apocrypltus) thinks tliat 
 it is the work of a Jewish Ctir stiaii, l)ut it is 
 uncertain wlieflier it was originally written in 
 Hebrew, Gieek, or Latin. Tlie only Greek 
 writer who cites it is .the author of (he Synax- 
 iwiojt, and the first of the Latins wlio uses it is 
 tlie celebrated Gregory of Tours {Uist, Fianc. i. 
 20, 23). 
 
 The Gosjiel of Nicodeinus (in Latin) was one 
 of tiie earlie.st tx)oks jiriiiled, :uui tlieie are subse- 
 quent editions in UflO, l.')Ui, 1522, and 15jS, 
 and in 15()9 in the Orthfxloxoffvaptia ofGrynaius. 
 It was aftei wards |iiibi"ishe<l by Faljricius {Cod. 
 Apoc.y, who divided it into cli.ipters. Fabricius 
 gives us no iiiAivmatioo lesjiecting the age or 
 ehancterof his MS., which is extremely defxtive 
 
 GOSPELS, SPURIOUS. 
 
 711 
 
 and in.iccurate. Mr. Jcmes republl.sl wl tnij, 
 with an English wi-sion, 
 
 TheGif-ck Gos]»el of Nioodemus was first ]inl»- 
 lislied fixiin an iiicoJTect Pa«is MS. by IJiidj 
 {^AtictariHiny, and subseijuenlly, fnxu a ctdlation 
 of several valviable nianus<-ripfs, \\h'. nK>st aiicitnit 
 of whidi are of Jho thirtivnth < entury, by Thilo, 
 with the Latin text of the very ancient MS. at 
 Einsidl, d<:sciil«;<l by Geiliert in his Her A!e- 
 Htiutnicnin. It lias been shown by Smidt (liihl. 
 fiir Critik nnd F.rt(j<se) tliat the piesent MSS. 
 exhibit in their cilatioJis from the canonical books 
 a text of the sixth cttitury, and consecjueutly llial 
 this gosjx;! is extremely useful in a critical jviirit 
 of view. 
 
 The esteem in which this woik was lield in 
 tlie midille ages may lie seen from the number 
 of eaily versions which were in |)opular use, 
 o( which iniuuneiable MSS. have ( esceuded to 
 our limes. Tlie earliest of tliese is (lie Anglo- 
 Saxoti traiislaiion, |»inte(J at OxUhiI in 169^, 
 from * Camliridge MS. (Thwaites's [Irptate^t- 
 ckws). This is a translalion from the Latin, as 
 none of the Greek MSS. contain Pilate's letter 
 to Claudius. There are also MSS. of the .same 
 in the Bodleian and Caiilerliury libraries. That 
 in the Bodleian is divided inlo thiity-fovu- chajc 
 ters. Tlieie are several MSS. of the Eiiglisn 
 version in the Bodleian, one in Sion College, 
 and oAe in English verse in Pejiys's collection. 
 It was also translated by Wicklille; and there 
 were versions jirinted in London, in l/i'i? and 
 1509, by Julian Notary and Wynkyii de Worde, 
 which ran through several ediiioiis (Panzi's 
 Atuials). The latest published btf ne Mr Jones's 
 wo'k was by Joseph Wilson in 17o7. He says 
 nothing of tlie age of his MS., but the following 
 sj)ecimen from the prologue may not [irove un- 
 inteiesting : — 
 
 *It befel in the eighteenth year of the seigniory 
 of Tiljerius Caesar, Emperor of Rome, and in the 
 seigniory of Herod, who was King of (ialilee, the 
 Slh Kalend of .A.])ril, which is the ^Jih day of 
 Mijrcli, the fourth year of the s ni of \'elom, who 
 was Counsellor of Rome, and O/i/nipias had hetn 
 afore two htwdred ijcars and ttco ; at this time 
 Josepii and Annas were lords ab<»ve all justices of 
 {leace, mayors and Jews. Nicodemus. who was 
 a woidiy prince, did write this blessed liistory in 
 Hebrew, and Theodosius the emiieror did trans- 
 late it out of Hebrew into }..a(in, and Bishop 
 Turpin ilid translate it out of Liiliii into French, 
 and hereafter did ensue the bles.seti history called 
 the Gosjiel of Nicodemus." The re.-ard. indeed, 
 in which this book was held in England will l« 
 understood from the fact that, in 1524, Eiasmus 
 acquaints lis that he saw the Ciospel of Nico- 
 demus affixed to one of the columns of the cathe- 
 dral of Canteibmy. 
 
 Translations were also common in French, 
 Italian, German, and Swedish. In the French 
 MSS. and evlitions it is imited with the old 
 romance of Percefurest, Ktng of Grcitt Britain. 
 The'e was also a Welsh tianslatioii (Lhiiyd'a 
 Arclnpolo'/ia, p. 2')<5), anil the woik was known 
 to the Eastern Christians, and has been even 
 sn])posed to bv cited in the CJoptic liturgy ; but 
 this has been shown by Luiiolf to l<c a mistake, a* 
 the lesson is from the history of Nicodemus, iic 
 John iii. 
 
 Of the gospels no longer extant, we kiK'sr
 
 ;w2 
 
 GOSPKLS, SPURIOl S. 
 
 liftle more tlia i that tlicy once existed. We 
 rtail in Irenn'us, Epiplianiiis, Origeii, Kusebiiis, 
 ixid otlicr eixlesiiislic.il writer*, of tlic G.isp(;l3 of 
 iSve 1)1- of Peiffction, of Hiiniubas (ancient and 
 modfni), of B iitli iloinew, of B isllldei. of Ilesy- 
 cliiiij, of Jiulas Jscaiiot, of the Valeiitiniaiis, of 
 Apolioj, of C'erintiiu*, of tiie Twelve Apistles, and 
 t^vera] ofiiers. S.-me of tiiese were deiiveJ lr,)in 
 j)>e Cii»;>tics and oti)er lieielics; others, a-; t\\ii 
 fiosptd of M.itiliius, aie siipjjcwed liy Mill, Grat>e, 
 md inoit icained men to have Ikeeii f;;(-iiiilr)e <i;-os- 
 jels ni>>v Itxf. Th,)se of vvhicl) we liave the fullest 
 details aie the dospel of the Kt/yptians and that 
 >f tlie NA'itA)«Br»Bs. Thij latter is iiust jirobaWly 
 Uie same iv itli tliaf of tJie Hebrews, wlifch was 
 ■jsed by file Kliiciiiites. It was sii|>|)oseil by St. 
 Jevi>me to Jiave been a tfemiine Cios|)eI of St, 
 Maftlie.v. w!i I, l>e says, wrote it in the Hebrew 
 'a:;giia,^e and letters. Ilecopi'Ml it himself from 
 'he ovi^iiial in the libraiv of Cjesirea, trans- 
 lated i! iiito (ireek and Latin, and lias given 
 many extracts from It. Gratw conceived this 
 {o.spel to have be i> compo'^el by Je.vish C(/t»\'erts 
 »oon afler our Lird's ascension, bef ire t le com- 
 p«)sitiou of the cannriical G is]k>1 i>f S'f. Rl.iftliew. 
 Baroiiins, Grotiiis, Father Simon, aiid Du Pin, 
 look up>)ii it as the G.isjiel of St. Matfliew — inter- 
 polated, bowevei', by the Nazirenes Baroniusand 
 Grab)e think that it was cited -'-y Ignatius, or the 
 lutiior of the Epislles ascribed to him. Others 
 'ook ii[)on it as a translation altered frarn the 
 Greek of St. Mafthe.v. Mr. Jones thinks that 
 this Gosj)el was reffrre.l to by St. Panl in his 
 Kpistle to the Galatiaris. It is refeire(} to by 
 Keijesippi^s (F.nseb. Eicl. Hist. iv. 22), Cle- 
 mei.s Alexandrini.s (Strn?n. il. ]"■• '^'-'O). Origen 
 (^Comm. on John; Iloin. viii. in ]\latt.), a7rii 
 Eusebins (Hist. Eccl. \i'.. 25, "J?, SSV Ejfrpha- 
 nins {Hofr. ({ 21), dO) actjiU'-li v.s that if was 
 Sekl in great re[)ute by nie ancient Jddaizirfg 
 Christians, and that if beoT^i ^;.u.; : ' It came to 
 jass in the diys o( He;oil king of Judaea tluit 
 lolin came ha|>ti2'ng with the ba[)tism of vef)eRt- 
 ince in the river Jonlar,," kc. If coifseqiiently 
 wanted tlte jjenealogy and the two lirst chapters. 
 
 Tlip Go.srKi. OF THE EfJVPTiAMs is cited by 
 Clemens Alexaiidrinus (Sttvm. rii, pp. 44>, 
 152, 4 )3, 463), Origin (Rom. m Lnc. p. I), Am- 
 brose, Jerame {Prcrf. to his Comnt. on Mat/.}, 
 and '<^[)iphanins (IIierrs.\\h. 6 2). Grabe, Mill, 
 Du Pin, and Fatlier Sinron, who fhoijght highly 
 of this Gosp*?!, looketl upon it as oj)e ot' the works 
 referred fa l)y St. Lnke in the conimcn cement of 
 his G.)sj)el. Mill ascribes its origin to the Es- 
 senes, and siipjioses this and the former Gospel to 
 lave bfen comp >sed in or a little bef ire ad. 58. 
 It is cited by the Pseudo-Clement (.S<?f07)rf /'-TJisi/e 
 to the ('i)rinthiuns, or Cl.evallier's Translat on, 
 I853), who is generally suppjged to have written 
 aot before the third centi:ry. (S«e Car. Chr. 
 Schmidt's Corpus omniitm vet. Apucr. extra 
 Biblia ; Kleuker, [)c Apoc. N. T. ; IlencUe, De 
 Pilati actis prohah. ; VV. L. Brunn, De indole, 
 tetate et lesie li.br. Apocr. tulgo inscripti Evan- 
 jel. Nicodemi, Berlin, 1794; Birch's ^?«(r/(rr.?<m, 
 Ease. 1, Hafn. IS04. Hone's Apocryphnl N. 'J'., 
 London 1820, which in its external form was 
 desigTio"! tt> be an imita'ion of the English New 
 TesfamPirf, is of no ci itical u.se Tiie Ortho- 
 ioxograp)ia of Grynaeus, 7 vols, in 2, ft>I. Basil, 
 
 GREECE. 
 
 l-'ittQ, of whicn (here was formerly a copy m (a« 
 British .Mns('\ini, whicli exists fliere no longer, 
 but th( ri' is a fine copy in .\lr. Darling's valuable 
 Clerical Libraiy.)— >V. VV, 
 GOURD. [KiK.now.] 
 
 GOZAN (|T13; Sept. TwCiv), a river of 
 Media, to the conntiy watoiel by which Tiglalli 
 pilfser lirst, and afterwards S lalmaiieser, fraiys- 
 ])K)ited the ca|rfive Israelites () Chron. v. iiJ ; 
 2 Kings xvii. 0). It is mmfci'ssaiy to trouble 
 the reader with antiijiiated coiiji'Ctnies <i>uceining 
 this river, as, sin<-e the apjiearance i>f Major 
 Rennell's GexxfrKiphtf nf U<nod,tas, Loiid. I^-'OO 
 (which contains a secfion, xv , "■ (^iMkceujiug the 
 (Hspogil of the Ten Trit>es t>f the .le.vs,' pp. 389- 
 407), there has been scarct-ly a «lis*entijig voice 
 to hig concliis'on — that tiie Gozan is no of he? 
 than the |)resent O^an, or, with the prefix. Kiziil- 
 Oza!i (Go}>len Riv^r). wliich is the principal 
 river of that ]x»rt of Persia tl.^t answers to the 
 ancent Media. Ever\ tiling ijiciiticis 1 i>r travel 
 which has sin-e transpired luvs tended to cii3iS)rn> 
 this most happy conjecture. Wlien Majiit Uennell 
 wrote it was s<.arcelv known si weD-as it is now, 
 to what extent the Oriental .leas themselves cittv 
 nect the tntrnories of the first captivity with the 
 country through which the Kizzil-Ozan flows. 
 This river rises eijdit or nine iiiiles south west of 
 Sennah, in Kiirdt.«fan. It ifins along the north- 
 west frontier of Irak, and passes under the Kafu- 
 )an Kub, or Mountain of Tigris, where it is met 
 liy the Karaitku. These two vivers comli ned 
 force a [sassage thiro»gh rise great range of Caii- 
 casan, and, dujing their course, foim a junction 
 witii the .Shaiood. The collective waters, imder 
 the ilesigiiation oV .Sifeed Ri>.id or White River, 
 so named fiwm tlic fL«iiM iwxasioned by the rapidity 
 of its cnrieiil, llo.v in a meamipvuig course through 
 Ghilan to the Caspian Sea (Sir Jwhn MacdunaM 
 Kinrrjlr's Cv^njiuph. Memoii ly' i'u l's?'fian En,- 
 piye, pp 121, 122; Ms.riei's Secotid Journey:, 
 p. 2(>S \ Ker Porter's Tritvcls, i. 2)7). The present 
 writer, in crossing the liver in September, unde> 
 the Kal'ulan Knh, l>y a biidge of thiee arches, 
 found it tliPie a low but rapid stream, flowing 
 Ijetween well woofled banks, and in a deep tliannei 
 which alVorded r»aiiii'e>t traces of its bieadth antt 
 impefuosity when swollen by the iieriodical rains 
 ami by the diaijwge of tire moiiutaia*. 
 
 GRAPE. [Vink] 
 
 GRASS. [DiwHA and CH.izui.} 
 
 GRAS.^HOPPER C^^O- 1'''e crrature tte- 
 jjDted by this Hebrew word so evidently belongs 
 to the class of ^ fiijiny creeping filings ' (Lev. xi" 
 21, 22), that tlie giciMkojjjJcr, according to tli» 
 common acce,itat;on of the word, cafi scaicely be 
 tlie [iroper tran-^lation. Other reasons remler it 
 most ))robable that a species of luctist is intejideil. 
 It is, therefore, leferred to the general English 
 word [Locust], under which the vaiious sjieciea 
 will l>e considered whicli are not aheady treated 
 of uniler the Hebrew n^mei [Charuoi.; Chasil]. 
 
 J. ¥. D 
 
 GRAVE. [BuisiAi-] 
 
 GREECE. Tiie relations of the Heivrpws witb 
 the (iieeks vv^re always of a distant 1 ind. 1 n'l. 
 the Mav;eilonian cnpijuest of the P'.ist ; I. n.-c .ji 
 the Old Festameiit the mention of tlie (iicf-ki is 
 naturally rare. It apj>eais by C-uueii'a Concent
 
 lillKECK 
 
 GRKECK. 
 
 793 
 
 Ktl-j-5 iliat ' Tiilia,! and Javan,' in conin'Cfion, are 
 uameU four timoiJ, Dun ami Javan i)nce(Kzfk. 
 jcxvii. l!>), anil Jav.cn, Iranslati'il liy us (iieece 
 and Gu-eks, live limes, >)f wliicli fliroe are in llie 
 book of IKmicl. Ol' these ])a3sa^es, that wliicli 
 counles Dan and Java!! is ^^'cneially relened to a 
 dillereui tiilie [se"" Javan]; in the re-t Javan is 
 uiidei'stiiod of (ii'wce or its people. TliC (iieek 
 nation had a bioad division into two races, 
 Dorians and loinans : of whoni tlie fonner seem 
 to have hini^ lain hid in continental ])aits, or on 
 the wesleni side of the country, and had a teni- 
 peramont and institutions more a)ipri)acliiny; to 
 tiie Italic. The Iniiians, on the contrary, letained 
 many .\siatic usa:j;es and tendencies, witnessin;^ 
 tliaf they had never been so thoroo'^lily ciitotVas 
 the Doiiaiis from Oriental connection. \\ hen 
 afterwards the Ionic colonies in Asia Minor rose 
 to eminence, the I<inian lace, in sjiile of the com- 
 petition of the half Doric y^volians, continned to 
 attract most attention in Asia; and it is not 
 wonderfnl that the Ionian name (for Javan is the 
 same word as laair} shoiilil have maiiitalneil its 
 extensive application in Oriental iis.i^'e. Just 
 BO in the ' Persx> ' of tne trau-ic jnet yl'^schylns, 
 the Persians aie made to style all the Greeks 
 Idoyfs, i. e. Javan. 
 
 The few dealin^^s of the Greeks M-ith the 
 Hebrews seem to have been rather unfriendly, 
 to jnd^'e l)y the notice in Zecli. i.\. 13. In Jne] 
 iii. 6, the Tyrians are rejiroached for selling the 
 children of Judah and Jerusalem to tie Grecians; 
 but at wiiat time, and in what circumstances, 
 must depend on the date assii^ned to the hook of 
 Joel [see Joki.]. VVitii the (jieeks of Cy])rus or 
 Cliittini, the Ilebreivs were naturally better ac- 
 qiiaint: d ; and this name, it would seem, mij^ht 
 easily have cxfen led itself in tiieir tontriie to 
 denote the wlmle Greek nation. Such at least is 
 the most pl.iusible explanation of its use in 
 1 Mace. i. 1, and viii. 1. 
 
 The Greeks were eminent for their apjireciatioa 
 of beauty in all its varieties : indeed their leligious 
 creed owed its shajie mainly to this ]iecidiarity of 
 then- mind ; for tlieir lo^'ical acnteness was not 
 exercised I'U such subjects until qiiile a later 
 period. The |)iierile or indecent fables of the 
 old mytholo;.,'y may seem to a modern reader to 
 have been ti.e very soul of their religion; Ijut to 
 the (rreek himself these were a meie accident, or 
 a veNule for some embodiment of beauty. Ks 
 thought lillle whether a le^enil concerniiii,' Ar- 
 temis or Apollo was tine, but much whether iho 
 dance and music <.elebratiii^; the divinitv w'?re 
 •olemn. Iieaufdul, and toucliin;i;. The worship 
 of Apollo, the f^oil of youth and beauty, has been 
 rc^aide'.l aS <;har.icle] i/.in;4 the Hellenic in contrast 
 with the older I'e!as„'ian times ; nor is the fact 
 willioul si..^nilic.inr-e, that the ancient lem])le and 
 vacie of Jujiiter at Dodona (ell afterwards into 
 (he shade iii comp.iiison will) that of Apollo at 
 Deliiui. In eed the Di i ian Spaitans and the 
 Ionian Athenians alike le^^arded Apollo as their 
 tutelaiy god, who was 'AirSWaiv irarpoios at 
 Athens, and ^AirdWtov Kapvuns at Amychp. 
 Whatever the other vai leties oi' Greek religious 
 C«reniiinies, no violent or frenz-eii exhiljilions arose 
 out of he national mind ; but all such orgies (as 
 Ihey were called) were impoiteil fiom the East, 
 and l»ad much dilliciiltv in establi-hing thenise'. vj-s 
 AaOre«k aoil. Quite ata lute priud the luaim^ers 
 
 of orgies were evidently regarded as ni re inKvlen 
 of not a very reputal'le kinil (see Deimwlh l)t _ 
 Corona, J 7'J, )>. 313); nor do the (iieek .Slales, uf 
 such, ap|M>ar to lia\e iittlioiiiMil Tliem. Un tiie 
 contrary, the solenm leligioiis pnii esxions, tiia 
 sacred games and dances, fonnid a serious item 
 in the ]iub1ic ex|ienditme; ami to be |M>iinanen)ly 
 exiled from such s| ectacles would have been a 
 moral ileath tothe (iieeks. \\ lieiever lln-y iM.-tlled 
 they introduced their native in^liiiiliun.s, iuid 
 leared lemjiles, gvnmasi.i, biillis. loilu'or.s, se- 
 pulchres, of eh;ua' teii.>tic simjile e!egai:re. The 
 morality and the lellgion of such a ])e.iple natu- 
 rally wire alike superlicial ; nor did tlie two stand 
 in any close union. liloody and ciue) lites 
 coidd lind no pl.ice in tiieir cre(>d, because faitii 
 was n(.t earnest enough to endure nMii;h self- 
 abaiidoimient. Religion was with them a senti- 
 ment and a taste rather tlia)i a ilecp-sealeil con- 
 viction. On tlie loss of l>eloved relali\es tirey felt 
 a tender and natinal sorrow, Imt unclouiled witli 
 a sh.ide of anxiety concerning a future life. 
 Through the whole of their later history, during 
 Clnistian times, it is eviilent th.il they had little 
 power of remorse, and little natural tirmnrsg of 
 conscientious piinciple: and, in fact, at an eailier 
 and ciilical time, when the intellect ol'the nation 
 was ripening, an atrocious civil war, that lasted 
 for twenty-seven years, inllicied a iiolil'cal anu 
 social demoialization, !'rom the elVecls of which 
 they could never recover. Besides this, their very 
 ndniiialion of beauty, coupied with the degraded 
 state of the female uifeilect, proved a fiighlful 
 source of corruption, such as no philoso)>hy could 
 have a<loquately checked. From such a nation 
 then, whatever its intellectual jiiitensi.ms, no 
 he.ilthful iiilloence over its neighbouis coidd How, 
 imtii other and higlier insi.iration was iiduaed 
 into its seiifnnent. 
 
 Among the Giefks the arts of war antl ))eace 
 were carried to greater perfection than among 
 any earlier ^leople. l;i navigation they were little 
 behind the Tyrians and C.uthaginians ; in juili- 
 tioal foiesight they equalled them ; in military 
 scienc'.", both liy sea and land, they were decideilly 
 their supeiiors ; while in the ])ower of reronciling 
 subjeci-foieigiiers to the conquerors and to tlo-ir 
 institutions, they jierliaps suijjiissed all na:i(ins of 
 the world. Their copious, cultivated, and llexilile 
 tongue carried with it no sm.dl mental ' ..icalioil 
 to all who Itarned it thoronglily ; and so sagacioin 
 weie the arrangements of the great Alexander 
 throughout his lapidly acquiied Asiatic em|)ire, 
 that in the twenty years of dreadlVil war between 
 his generals which fidlo'.ved his death, no rising 
 of the natives against Greek intiiienee appeals to 
 have been thought of. Without any ch.inge of 
 population adequ.ite uniler other circum>tances 
 to cll'ect it, the (iieek tongue ai d Greek feeling 
 sj>rea(l far and sank deep through the Mace- 
 donian dominions. Halfof.Vsia Minor became 
 a new Greece; and the cities of Syria, North 
 Palestine, and Kgypt, were deeply imbued with 
 the same iniluence. Yet the piuity of the Hellenic 
 stream was various in various pltices; and some 
 account of the mixture it underwent will be giveo 
 in the Article Hiii.i.iiMhTs. 
 
 \Vheii a lieginiiing had lieen n.ade of preach- 
 ing C'hiistianily to the (iiiitiles, Greece imiue* 
 dialely Itecume a principal ipliere I'ur mi>noU4rv
 
 tn 
 
 IIABAKKUK. 
 
 exertion. Tie vernacular fondue of ihe Hclle- 
 nistic Clirisliaiis wiis iinileistmul over so lart^'C 
 an extent of couiitiy, as uluiost of itself to point 
 out in wluit direction tlipy slioiild exert tiieriti- 
 selves. Tlie Grecian cities, wlietlier in Europe 
 or Asia, wen- the peculiar Held lor tiie Apostle 
 Paul; I'.ir wlio^c Kibiiurs a supei intending Provi- 
 dence iiad \ou'r before been providing, in the 
 large ninnher of devout Greeks who attended the 
 Jewish syna^'o 41.es. Greece Proper was divided 
 Ijy the Roinini into two provinces, of which tlie 
 nortliein was called M.icedonia. and the southern 
 Achaia(as in 2 Cor. ix. 2, &c.); and we learn 
 incidentally frorr. Acts xviii. that the pro-consul 
 of the latter resided at Coriiitii. To determine 
 the exact divisi.m bet^ween the provinces is ditK- 
 cult; nor is the quest ion of any importance to a 
 Biblical stiiiieiit. Achaii>., iiowever, had piobably 
 very nearly tlie same frontier as the kingdom of 
 modern Greece, which is limUed by a line reach- 
 ing from the gulf of Volo to that of Arta, in 
 ^•eat i)art along the chain of Mount Othrys. Of 
 tlie cities celei.;-ited in Greek history, none are 
 prominent in the ?*rly Christian times except 
 Corinth. Laconi.i, and its chief town Sparta, had 
 ceased to be of any im|Kjria.r>ce : Atliens was 
 never eminent as a Christian ciiurci.. In Mace- 
 donia were the two great cities of Pliilipp: and^ 
 ThessaUmica (formerly called Therme) ; yet of 
 these tlie former was ratlier recent, being founded 
 by Philip the Great; the latter was not distin- 
 guished above the otiier Grecian cities on the 
 same coast. Nicopolis, on the gr.lf ofAmliiacia 
 (or Arta), had lieen built liy Augustus, in me- 
 mory of his victory ct A''tium, and was, perhaps, 
 t!ie limit of Achaia 01. the weiNv.n coast (Tacitus, 
 Anna!, ii. 53). It had risen into some import- 
 ance in .St. i\:vl's days, ar.:l, ?.3 jnany suppose, 
 h is lit il.is Nicopoiis f':ac l:e a^iuiies in his 
 epi-ifle to Titus. (.StC turi;<er i.uiW Achaia and 
 NiCdP.u.is.)— K. W. N. 
 
 GRKYHOUNl). [Zauzik; Doo.] 
 
 GRINDING. [Mii.i..] 
 
 GUEST. [Hospitality.] 
 
 H. 
 
 HABAKKUK (p-1i55n), one of tlie most dis- 
 tinn-uis! "d Jewish ]irophets, who llourislied about 
 610 u c, ilie name descending in the form of 
 "lliyt^, froni p2n, atiiplccti, and denoting, as 
 observed by Jeiome, as well a ' favourite' as a 
 ' struggle!-.' Aliarbanel thinks that in the latter 
 sense it has allusion to the patriotic zeal of the 
 prophet, fervently contending liir the weltareof his 
 coiintrv: liiit other piopbet^ did the same; and 
 in the first and less distiint signification, the 
 name would be one like TlieopiiiUis, 'a friend 
 of God,' which his parents may have given him 
 for a good omen. The Greeks, not only the 
 Septuagint translators but the fathers of the 
 Coiircli, jirobalily to make it more sonorous, 
 corrupt it into 'ApajSaifot^K-, ' ApaPaKovpta, or as 
 Jeiome wiites, 'A^aKovpu, and < illy one Greek 
 copv, found in the libiary of Alcala in Spain, 
 has 'A./^/Jakoufc, which seems to be a recent cor- 
 rection niaile to suit the Hebrew text. Of this 
 proplief's birth-place, paienta-e, and life we have 
 only a]iocrv]ihal and coiiHicting accmints. The 
 Pieuilo-Kiiiphanius (De Vitis Prophet. Opp. torn. 
 
 H.A.B.\.KKUK.. 
 
 ii. 18, )). 217) states that he was of t^ie tribe at 
 Simeon, and born in a jilace called 877^^0x17^ 
 («/. Bi5(,''exap) ; tliat he lied tii Ostiaiine when 
 Nebucliaibie/./.ar attacked Jeiusalem, but after- 
 wards leturned liome, and died two years beforf 
 the return of his countrymen. But rabbinical 
 writers assert that he was of the tribe of Levi, and 
 name diil'eient birth-places (Ilue'ius, iJem. 
 Evaiifj. Pro|i. iv. p. 508). !•> the aimcryphal 
 appendix to Daniel, in the story of Bel and the 
 Dragon, we aie tolil that an angel seized Habak- 
 knk liy the hair, when he was in J udtea carrying 
 food to his reapers in the Held, and transported 
 him throiigli the air to the lions' den in Babylon, 
 where Daniel then lay; and that, after having 
 provided the latter with victuals, he was tlie same 
 day c.inied back to his own country in like inin- 
 ner. Ivisebiiis notices that in his time the tuinb 
 of Habakknk was shown in the town of Ceila, in 
 Palestine; and this is repeated also by Nice- 
 phoriis (Hist. Eccles. xii. JS), and Sozomen (vii. 
 29): still there are other writers who name dif- 
 ferent )ilat:es where, according to common opinion, 
 lie had been buiied (Caipzov, liitrod. ad Ubfo$ 
 canonicus V. T., p. 402). , 
 
 A full and trustworthy account of the life of 
 Habakknk would explain his imagery, and many 
 of the events to which he alludes; but since we 
 have no information on which we can ilepend, 
 notiiin^f rein.iins liut to determine from the book 
 itsi^ir its histoiical basis and its age. Now, we 
 tind that in chap. i. the prophet sets forth a vision, 
 in which he discerned the injustice, violence, and 
 oppression committed in his country by the rapa- 
 cious and terrible Chaldaeans, whose opiiiessiorij 
 he announces as a diviiie retribution for sins com- 
 mitted ; consecpiently he wu'.t" in the Cluildaeaii 
 period, shortly before the invasion of Nebuchad- 
 nezzar which rendered Jehoiakim tributary to 
 tl'.e king of Baliylon (2 Kings xxiv. 1). When 
 he wiote the first chapter of his jirophecies, the 
 Cliai(li£aMs could not yet have invaded Palestine, 
 olheiwise he would not have introduced Jehovah 
 saying (i. 5), ' I will icork a work in your days, 
 which ye will not believe, thovigti it be told you;' 
 (ver 6) 'for I raise up the Ciaklaeans, that bitter 
 and hasty nation, which shall march through the 
 breadtli of the land to possess the dwelling-places 
 that are not theirs.' From ver. 12 it is also evi- 
 dent that the ruin of the Jews had not then been 
 ellected ; it says, ' the Lord ordained them for 
 judgment, established them for correctii n.' Agree- 
 ably to the general style of the jnopl ets, who to 
 lamentations and announcements of divine pu- 
 nishment add consolations and cheering h()])e3 
 for lire future, Habakknk then proceeds in the 
 second chapter to foretell ihe future humiliation 
 of the conquerors, who jilundered so many na- 
 tions. He also there jmimulgatcs a vision of 
 events shortly to be expected; (ver. 3) 'the 
 vision is yet for an apixjinted time, luit at Ihe end 
 it shall speak, and not lie; iliough it tarry, wait 
 for it, because it will surely cotne ; it will not 
 tarry.' Tliis is succeeded in the third chajiter 
 by an ode, in which the ]ii-opliet celebrates the 
 deliverances wrought by the Almighty for h;« 
 peo^ile in times j'ast, and jirays for a similar in- 
 teiference now to mitigate the coming distressei 
 of the nation; which he goes on to describe, reprft- 
 senting the land as already waste and desolate, 
 and yet giving encouragement to ho})e for a retiua
 
 HABAKKUK. 
 
 of IxHer times. Somp in'erpretrrs are of opinion 
 
 that ch. ii. was uiilten in tlip rei^'ii oljclidiiicliiii, 
 the son of Jehoiakini (2 Kin;;* xxiv. fi), alter 
 Jerusalem hail Ucen licsiei^eil ami coiiqiicred liy 
 Nel)ucl)a(li)e/./,ar, the kin;,' made a piisDiu'r, ami, 
 with many tlioiisamls ol' his snhjecfs, cariied 
 away to Bahylon ; none lemal^iin;^ in Jerusalem, 
 gave the pooiest class of ihe peoiile (2 Kinijs xxiv. 
 IJ). lidt ol" all this luilhiiig is saiil in tlie t)i)ok 
 of llai)akkiik, nor even so much as liinted at; 
 anil wiiat is stated of the violence and injustice 
 of tiie Cha!da;ar)s does not imply that the Jews 
 hati already experienceil if. The ])ro])liet dis- 
 tinctly mentions that he sets forth what he liad 
 discerned in a vision, and he. therefore, sjieaks of 
 events to he expected and coming. It is also a 
 8iipi)osition equally Riatuitons, according; to which 
 some interpreters refer ch. iii. to the ]ieiiod of the 
 last siege ol' Jerusalem, when Zeiiekiah was taken, 
 his sons slain, his eyes j'ut out, the walls of the 
 city liroken down, and the temjile hurnt (2 Kings 
 XXV. 1-lt)). There is not the slightest allusion 
 to any of these inciilents in the thiid chapter of 
 Haliakkuk; and from the IGtIi verse it a|i])eais, 
 that the destroyer is only coming, and that tlie 
 prophet expresses fears, not of the enlhe destruc- 
 tion of the city, much less of the downfall of the 
 state, hut oidy of the desolation of tiie coun'ry. 
 It thus a]ipears lieyond dis])u(e. that Hahfikkuk 
 prophesied in the lieginning of the reign of Je- 
 hoiakim, ahout the year stated ahuve. (larp/.ov 
 {Introductio ad lib?-, canon. /•'. 7'., pp.79, 110) 
 and Jahn (^Introd. in Ubros sacros V. 7'., ii. 
 § 120) lefei- our ])ro|)lK't to the reign of Manasseii, 
 thus placing him tiiirty odd years earlier, but 
 at that time tiie Clialda'ans had not as yet given 
 just ground for appieliension, and it would have 
 been injudicious in Hahakkuk prematu'ely to till 
 the minds of tiie peo))le witli fear of them. Some 
 additional suppmt to our statement of the age of 
 ;his hook is derived IVom tiie tradition, reported 
 ■n tlie arjocryphal appendix to Daniel and hy the 
 Pseudo-Eiiiphanius, that Hahakkuk lived to see 
 the lialiylonian exile; lor if lie projihesied under 
 Manasseh he could not have reached the exile at 
 an age under 90 years ; l)ut if he held forth early 
 in the reign of Jehoiakim he would have lieen only 
 50 odd years old at the time "f tlie destiuction of 
 Jeru-^aleiu and oftheexile. Hewas, liien. a con- 
 temporary of Jeremiah, hut mucli younger, as 
 llie latter made his first aj)[)ear,inre in ]>uhlic as 
 early as ii.c. 620, in the iliiiteenih year of Joslah. 
 Kanitz (hitrodiwfio in Hub. Vatic. \)\u 21, 59), 
 Stiikel {Prolog, ad interpr. tertii cap. Ilah. ])p. 22, 
 27). and J)e' Wette (l.ehrbiich der llistoiisch- 
 kri.isckcn JCinlcii. Berlin, lS4i), p. 33S) justly 
 place the age of IIal<akkiik befoie the invasion of 
 Judsea hy the Cli.ilda'.ms. 
 
 The style of this propliet has heen always much 
 "idmiied. Lowth {De I'oesi Hebneor. ]>. 2S7) 
 Bays; 'Poeticugest Ilahaccuci sty his; sed maxime 
 ill oila, qtur inter ahsoluiis-imas in eo genere 
 niento numeiaii jiutest.' Eicliliorn, De \\'ette, 
 nnd Rosenmtiller aie loud in their praise of 
 Ilihakkuk's style; tiie Hist giving a detailed 
 and jin'iiuated analysis of the construction of his 
 prophe.-las ^Ein/eihing in das A. T. iii. ]) 33'.}). 
 He equals the rnosl eminent prophets of the OUl 
 Teslamenl — Joel, Amos, Nahum, Isaiah ; andliie 
 ode in ch. iii. may he placeil in comjietition with 
 Ps. xviii. and Ixviii. for originality and suIh 
 
 HABOR. 
 
 7M 
 
 limity. His figures are all great, liapjiily elntsen, 
 and |iro]ieiiv drawn out. His denunciatioiis ar« 
 teiiihle, iiis ileris'on liilter. lil.s cmisolatioii rlieer 
 ing. Insl.inces <M-ciir of In rrowi d ideas (rh. iii. 
 Ii), coiiij). Ps. xviii. 31; cli. ii. (>, comp. Ism. 
 xiv. 7 ; ch. ii. 11, comp. Isa. xi. 9); hut lia 
 makes them his own ii, drawing them out in liii 
 jieculiar maiinpr AVith all the holilness anil 
 fervour of his imagination, his language is pure 
 and his verse melodious. Kichhoiii, indeed, gives 
 a considerahle immher of woids which he consi- 
 ders to he ]ieculiar to this jirop'iei, and sii))pos«3 
 liim to have formed new words, or altered exi.sfing 
 ones, to sound moie energetic or feehle. as the sei^- 
 timents to he exjiressed might leipiire: lint Ins 
 list needs sifting, as De Wette observes (IJinlei- 
 tinif/, ],. 339) ; and ^"l^p'r, ch. ii. Ki, is the only 
 unexceptionable iiislance. The ancient catalogues 
 of canonical liooks of the Old Testament do not, 
 indeed, mention Hahakkuk byname; but they 
 m.u-t have comiteil liiin in fiie twelve minor )ir(V 
 ))hets, whose numbers would otherwise not he full 
 III the New Testament some ex]iiessio»is of his ari 
 iiilroduceii, but his name is in.t added (Horn. i. 17 ; 
 Gal. iii. 11 ; Ileb. x. 3S, comp. Hab. ii. 4; Acta 
 xiii. ID, 41, comp. Hal), i. 5). 
 
 Tiie best auxiliaries, ancient and modern, to tha 
 inteijiretation of the book of Haiiakkiik are the 
 following ; — 
 
 1. Introductory works : T. C. Friederich, 
 lUiioriscli-kritisclnr Vcrsiuh iber Ilab ZeitalttT 
 tivd Sc/ni/ffn, in Eichlioin"s .'l///?. Bihliofh. del 
 Bibl. Lit X. 379-1(10; A. C. Hanitz. IntroJuctic 
 in llab. Vaticinia. Llpsiae, I'^O"^; Hiinlein, Si/;«6. 
 Crit. ad Interp. Vatirin. Ilab., Erlaiigjp, 1795. 
 
 2. General commentaries: Aliaihanel, Itabbi- 
 nictis Comment, in llab., Latine ncUlitiis a Di- 
 do ico Sprcc/iero, Helmst. 1790; 1). Cliytrsei 
 I.ectiones iti Priph. Hab., in his Ojtp. t. ii.; 
 Kofod, Commen/arins crit. atipie exeget., Giittintf. 
 et Li]is. 1792; I. A. Tin)>'-i'lii Atiimadv. phil. 
 etcrit. Upsal. 1795; 4. — ilo:>enmuller, Sc/iolia in 
 V. T. vol. vi. 
 
 3. Translations witli notes, explanatory and 
 critical : S. Y. G. Wahl (Hanover, 1790), G. 
 C. H.,rst (Gotha, I79S), and K. IM. Tusti 
 (Leijizig, 1721). 
 
 4. Commentaries on single cha]iters : — The first 
 and second chapters are interjireted by (i. A. Ru- 
 jierti in the Commtntatl. Tlieot. ed. Veltlmsei*, 
 Kuinuel et Riiperti, iii. 40"), sq. Tlie tliirtl 
 clui|iter is explained by G. Peis<;hke (Fiankfort, 
 1777), G. A. Schroeder (Groning, 17S1), Oh. F. 
 .Schnuiier (Tiil). 1780; al.so in his Disaertat. phil, 
 crit. p. 342), and by Muemei (Upsala;, 17!Jl). — 
 
 J. V. H. 
 II.^-B.\RKANIM,orBAiJKANiM. [TnouNs.] 
 UABAZZKLETH. [Chuia^zklkth.] 
 H.\BERGEON. [Akm.-, ; Aumouu.J 
 
 HABOR ("ihri ; Sept. 'A^cip), or rather Cha- 
 
 «(>!{, a city or country of Media, to whicli poitions 
 of the ten tiibes were trans])oited, liist by Tijlalh* 
 jiileser, and afferwaids by Shalmanesei (2 Kin^ 
 xvii. C; xviii. 11). It is thought liy some to 
 be the .same monnlainous region lietween Media 
 and .Assyria, which Ptolemy (Gfog. vi. I) calls 
 Chaboias (Xa0wpas). This notion has the name, 
 and noth'iig but the natne, in its favour. Ha*>oc 
 was l)v the liver (iiizan : and iis we have acceptoj 
 Major Kelmell's conclusion, hal Gozan wu -Ju
 
 V58 HAD.VD. 
 
 ^escnl Kizzil-Ozun [Gozvn], we ;iie liound to 
 .oil 'W liiiri ill (ixiii^ tlie |i(<sition of Halior ii.t llie 
 ♦x)wn ()(' Aidiai-, vvliicli is sitiuiteil on a liiancli ol' 
 lliat river, ur\il lias the i<'|iiit.iti()ri u( lieiii^' very 
 ancient. At tliis [lace Mr. Moi rer (imiikI urns 
 ciiaudsi'tl <»r laij^e sun-dried Itiicks compacted 
 with straw, like sciiil- of those Cditid at liaUyioii. 
 As this kind ofconjtriictioii is an iiilalliMe si^n of 
 rena.ite anti([iiity. it so farall'oids <i must iinpoitaiit 
 «n»irolioialioti of Alajur llomieirs coiijecluie. 
 
 HADAD (Tin ; Sept. *A5i5) is equivalent 
 til Ad.id, tiie name of the chief tleity of the 
 Svriaiis [.\oai)], and borne, with or without ad- 
 <iitioiis, as a ])ro;ier name, or iiioie (iroliahly as a 
 title, like ' Hhaiauli ' in Hjjypt, hy several of the 
 kiii„'S of S.iuthi'in Syria. 
 
 1. IIa.d.\u, kin.,' of Eiloin, wlio defeated the 
 Midi.inites ir: tiie intervening leiritory of Miia^j 
 (Gen. xxxvi. 35 ; I Ciiron. i. 46) This is the 
 only one of the ancient kin^s of Edum whose 
 exploits ate recorded liy Moses. Another kin,:^ 
 of Kdoni of the same name is mentioned in 
 I Chron. i. 51. 
 
 2. IIao\d, king of Syria, who reigned in Da- 
 mascus at the time that ]>avid attacked and 
 defeated Il.idad-ezer, king' of Zobah, whom he 
 r.iarciied to assist, ami shared in his defeat. This 
 fact is recoided in 2 S.im. viii. 5, luit the name 
 of the kin^ is not ^;iven. It is sujiiilud, however, 
 \)V Joseiihus (Antifj. vii. 5. 2), who leiwits, after 
 Nicolas of Damascus, t'.iat lie carried succours to 
 Kadade/er as far us the Euiiliiates, wlieie Da\ id 
 defeated tliem both. 
 
 3. I! vu.^D, a young ])rince of the royal race 
 of Kdom, who, wlien his country was conqueied 
 by David, contrived, iu the lieat ol' the massacre 
 comiisitled liy Jo. di, to es ape with some of his 
 father's servants, or rather was carried olV by 
 them info the land of Midian. Thence Hadad 
 went into the deseit of Paran, and eventually jiro- 
 ceed-eil to Egypt. He was (liere most faiourably 
 r.'ceiied by the king, who assigned him an estate 
 and establishment suileil to his rank, and even 
 gave him in marriage llie sister of Ins own consoit, 
 by who'M be bad a son, who was itrought up in the 
 palace will tlie sons of Piiaraoh. Hadad reina'iied 
 ill Kgvpt till after the death of Da\ id and Joali, 
 wlien h« letuineii to his own cuuntiy in the hope 
 of re<:ove!ing his father's throne (1 Kings xi. 
 14-22). TheScriptuie (hies not record the lesidt 
 of tiiis attempt fcuther than by mentioning bim 
 as one of tiie troiiU'eis of Solomon's reigi;., whi<;b 
 iiii[ilii s some measure of success. .-Ifter relating 
 these (acts the text goes on to mention anothtr 
 enemy ui' Solomon, named Rczin, and then adds 
 (ver. 25), that this was 'besides the mischief that 
 Hada I did; and lie abhoned Israel and reigned 
 over Svria." On this juiint the present wiiter may 
 quote what he li.is eise^vheie stated — ' Our version 
 seems to make this apply to Ke/in; Imt theSeptua- 
 gint leleis it 1<t Hadad, reading DHJC Edoni, in- 
 giead ol D'lN Araiii or >yriH, and I he sense would 
 cfitainly Ite im[iioied liy this reading, inasmucli 
 as it supjilies an app irent omission ; for without it 
 we onlv know tliat Hadad left Egypt f.ir Eibun, 
 and not ho.v he succeedeil there, or bow he was 
 able to trouble S.iloinon. The history cf Hadad 
 U ceitainlv very oliscme. .Adopting the Septua- 
 ^t reading, some conclude that Pharaoh used 
 kis interest with S >lomi>*i ijuUow Ilad.wl to reign 
 
 II ADAS 
 
 a-s a tributary prince, and that he ultii.natr?j 
 
 as.seite<i his inile|)en<ieiice. Josephus, however, 
 seems to have read tiie Hebrew as our version doea, 
 " S\ I ia" not •' Kdom." He .says that Ilaihid, On ni« 
 airival in Kdom. found the teiritory too strongly 
 garrisoned hy Solomon s troo|)S to all'ord any hope 
 of success. He therefore proceeded with a paity 
 of adiieients to Syiia, uhere he was well received 
 by Rezin, then at the head of a band of robliers 
 and with his assistance sei/.ctl upon part of Syria 
 and reigned tlieie. If thi^ bo conect, it n.jst liavf 
 lieen a dillerent jiart of Syria from tlia', in which 
 Keziii himself leigned, for it is ceitain, from verse 
 '21, tliat he (lie/.in)did leign in Damascus. Caiv 
 rieies supposes that Hadad leigned in Syria aftej 
 the ileaih of Rezin; and it might reconcile appa- 
 rent discrepancies, to suppose that two kingdoms 
 were established (there were more previously), 
 botli of which, after the death of Rezin, weie con- 
 solidated under Hadad. Tiiaf Hadad was leally 
 king of Syria seeins to be rather corroborated by 
 the fact, tliat every subsequent king of .Syria is, in 
 the Scripture, called Ben-Hadad, '' son of Hadad," 
 and in Josephus simply Hadatl; which seems to 
 denote that the founder of the dynasty was called 
 by this name. We may observe that, whether wf 
 here read Aram or Edom, it must be understooii 
 as applying to Haihid, not to Rezin' (^Pictorial 
 liihle, on 2 Kings xi. 14). 
 
 HADADEZER ( "I.Ti?1"in, Hadad - helped ; 
 Sept. 'A5paa(^ap), or IlAjJADKEziur, king of Zo- 
 bah, a ]ioweifiil monaicli in the time oj' David. 
 and the only one who seems to have been in a 
 condition seiiously to dispute with him the pre- 
 doniinaiicy in south-western Asiti. He was de- 
 I'eaied by the Israel. tes in the first campaign 
 (ij.c. iOo'2) in the neiglibouiiiood of the Eu- 
 pbiates, with a gieat loss of men, war-chariots, 
 and horses, and was despoiled of many of bis 
 towns ('2 Sam. viii. 3; 1 Chron. xviii. 3). This 
 check not tjiily impaiied, but destioyed his jiower. 
 A diveision highly serviceable to him was made 
 by a king of Damascene-Syria (whom the Sciij)- 
 tiire does not name, but who is the same with 
 Hadad, 3), who, coming to bis succour, com- 
 pelled David to turn his arms against liim, and 
 abstain from reaping all the fiuits of his victory 
 (2 Sam X. 6, sq.; 1 Chron. xix. fi, sq.). The 
 breatiiiug-time thus alVoided Hadadezer was 
 turned by him to such good account that he was 
 able to accept tlie subsidies oT Hanun, king of the 
 Ammonites, and to take a leading pait in the 
 conl'ederacy formed Ijy that monarch against 
 Duvid. The lirst army inoiigbt into the field 
 was beaten and put to (light bv Abishai and 
 Joab; but Ha<ladezer, not yet discouiaged, went 
 into the countiies east of tl.-e Euphrates, and got 
 together the foicesof all his allies and tributaries, 
 which be placed under the command of Shop- 
 liacli, his general. To confront so formidable an 
 adversary, David took the tield in jiersoii, an<J 
 in one great victory so com]iletely broke the 
 jwwer of Hadadezer, that all the small tributary 
 princes seized the opportanity of throwing oft' hi* 
 yoke, of abandoning the Ammonites to their fate, 
 and of submitting quietly to David, whuw powoi 
 was thus extende<l to tiie Euplirates. 
 
 HADAR. [Etz-hadau.] 
 
 H.ADAS (Din>, always translaled «myitl«, 
 occurs iu seveial passages uf tite Old Te».tainent^
 
 , HADAS. 
 
 u ii Isaiah Xii. IJ); Iv. 13; N»'li, viii. 15; 
 Z*cli. i. S. 10. II. The Ilehipw word liadas is 
 
 identical with the Arahic [jmi^ hndas, which 
 
 in ti'e dialect ( f Arabia Felix si^nilie-i tiie myitle- 
 hve ' Rich. ivd ton's J'ers. a»d Arabic Diet.). 
 The myrtle is, mmoover, kmtwn ♦in-oii<^ii()iiL 
 K;isterii cuiiiitiies, and isdesciii)ed in Aialiic woiks 
 
 under the name ijm\ As. Tiie present wiiter 
 
 fdund the lierries of the myrtle sold in tiie hazaars 
 c( India under this name (fl/ti.tt. Jlimnl. Hot. p. 
 217). Esther is snpposed hy Simonis {Bibl. Cabi- 
 net, xi. 262) to he a C()m|KMind of As and (itr, and 
 so to mean a fresh myrtle; and hence it would 
 a])pear to he very closely allieil in sif^nilication 
 to A/rjrfrMsn!/i, tlieor'fjfinal nameof Ksther. Almost 
 all translators unite in considering;; tiie myrlle as 
 intended in tlie above passaj^es; the Sept. has 
 iivp(rivi]v, and tlie Vulgate myrtns. 
 
 The myitle has from the e.nliest periods been 
 hii;lilv esteemed in all tlie countries of the south of 
 Kuro|)e, and is frequently ■ menfioneil by the 
 poets : thus Vir;,'il (Kcl. ii. 54) — 
 
 Et vos, O lauri, carpam. et te, prnxima myrte : 
 
 Sic positae quoniain siiaves miscetis odores. 
 
 By tiie Greeks ard Romans it was dedicated 
 to Veiuis, and employed in makiii;.^ wreaths to 
 crown lover-, i)ut amonj? tlie Jews it was the em- 
 blem of justice. The note of tiie Ciialdce Targnin 
 ,in the name Esther, accordinj; to Dr. Harris, is, 
 ' fhey call her Iladassah because she wn^Jnst, and 
 tho84> that are just are compared to rmjrtles.' 
 
 HADES. 
 
 117 
 
 The rrptife which the myrtle enjoye<l in ancient 
 nnies it still retains, notwitlistandirif; the great ac- 
 cession of cmamental siiiul)j and (lowers which 
 nas been made to the gardens and greenhou.ses of 
 Europe. Tills i» justly due to the rich colouiing 
 of its dark green and shining leaves, contrasted 
 wlih the white star! ike cluster* of its llowers, alVord- 
 ing in hot countries a |.leasant sltade under its 
 
 hranrhcs, ijul dii7iising an agr"cahle odour Imro 
 it.s (lowers or bruised leaves. It is, however, uii>«t 
 a^neeuble in apjiearance wiien in ihe state of a 
 shrub, lor when it grows into a«ice, ;i.s it d,,es in 
 liot countrie-, the traveller h.oks under insteaii of 
 over i»'s leaves, and a multitude of small bramhes 
 are seen depiived of their leaves by the croudin^^j 
 of the upper one-. This shrub is comm. n in tiie 
 soutliein pro\ ini es of S)),iin and Fiance. ;ui well ai 
 in Italy and (iieece; and al.so on the noilhern 
 coast of Afiica. and in Syria. Tin- ])o(lical cele- 
 biity of this plant had, no doubt, some in(liienc« 
 ujion its emji'oyment in medicine, and nnnnrouj 
 propeitie-i are ascribed to it by Dioscondes (i. 
 127). It is aromatic and astiing( lit, and hence, 
 like many (ither such jilants, foiins a stimulant 
 tonic, and is useful in a variety of complaint! 
 connected with debility. Its beiries weie for 
 merly employed in Italy, and still are so in Tus- 
 cany, as a substitute for spices, now iin]ioiletl so 
 plentifully Com the far Eajit. A wine was al.so pre- 
 pared from them, which was called myrtidanum, 
 and their e-.sintial oil is ]io<ses-ed ol'cxcilai.t pro- 
 )>eities. In many parts of Gieece i.iid Italy tlie 
 leaves are employed in tanning leather. The 
 myrtle, ))osses»ing so many leniaikable qualitie.s, 
 was not likely to have escaped the notice of the 
 sacred writers, as it is a well-knoun inhabitant (.< 
 Juilsea. Ila-sehpiisl and Durckhaidt lioth notice it 
 as occurring on tiie hills around Jeruaalem. it 
 is also found in the valley of Lei anon. Capt 
 Light, who visited the couiitiy olthe Druses ip 
 ISil, says, he 'again proceeiled up the monntaiii 
 by the side of a range of hills abounding witk 
 myrtles in full bloom, tliat gjiread their fiagiauci 
 round,' and, further on, ' we crossed througl 
 thickets of myrtle.' Irby and Miiiigles (p. 222" 
 ilesciibe the rivers from Tiijioli towards (ialilei 
 as generally pretty, their banks coveicd witl 
 tiie nii/rtlc, olive, wild vine, X:c. Savary. a» 
 quoted by Dr. Hjirris, describing a scene at ihi 
 end of the f rest of Plataiiea. says, ' Myrtle-, in- 
 termixed with laurel-ioses, ^'vo-v in the \alhys t( 
 the heiijht of ten (Vet. Tlieir snow-white lloweis 
 b^ailered with a jiuiplc edging, ajipcar to peciilia; 
 ailvantage under the verdant foliage. EacI 
 myrtle is loaded with them, and tliey emit jier 
 fumes more ex(piisite than those of the roe itself 
 They enchant every one, and the soul is lillef" 
 with the softest sensations." — J. F. U. 
 
 IIADASSAH. [EsTiiKu.] 
 
 HADES, a Greek word (SStjs) by which \\\t 
 Septuagint translates (he Hebrew 7lXty s/icoi 
 denoting the abode or woild of the .had, ip 
 which sense it occurs frequently in llie New Tcs 
 tamerit, where it is usunlly rendereil ' hell ' in tli< 
 English version. The word hades means literall) 
 that which is in darkness. In Ihe classical wiiler> 
 it is used (o denote Onus, or (he infernal legions 
 Accoiding to the notions of the Jews, sh/ol oi 
 hades was a vast receptacle where the souls of lh» 
 •lead cxisteil in a sejiaiate statt ufril the lesurrec- 
 (ion of their bodies. The region of the blessed 
 during this interval, or the inferor )iarad se. they 
 supposed to be in the njiper pait of ihis ie(epta(de; 
 while beneath was the abyss w (jehetum (Tailariis), 
 in which the souls of tiie wicked we e sidaecte<l tc 
 puiiithnif-nt. 
 
 The question whelher this is or is no( (Kr 
 doctrine uf the Scriptures is one uf niucii '\m
 
 79« 
 
 H/»DES. 
 
 )|K>rf:itice, and lias, fiist and last, excited no small 
 t:cnu(itit (if discussion. It is a doctrine received 
 !>y a larg-e portidn of tlie noniiual Christian 
 riiurcii ; and it ftirnis tiie I'dimdation of flie Ro- 
 T^aii Calltoljc diictiine (if Purgatory, for which 
 • lietx; wdiiKl lie ti<t f^iound hut for this interiireta- 
 •:on of the word hades. 
 
 Tlie (jnestion liierefore rests entirely uyion the 
 inteijiretatioti of tiiis woid. At tlie tirat view the 
 classical sigiiilication would seem t(» support the 
 sense ahuve indiv-.aled. On fmtlier consuieiation, 
 Jiowever, we are referred liack to the Hehiew 
 sheol : for the Greek term did not come to the 
 Helirevvs from any classical source, or with any 
 classical meanings, hut tlirough the Septuagint 
 as a translation of their own word; and wijctlier 
 coirectly translating it or not is a matter of critical 
 opinion. The word hades is therefore in nowise 
 Lindiri'; upon us in any classical meaning wliich 
 may he assigned to if. 'I'he real (juesiion (here- 
 fore is, what is the meaning whii;h sAeol hears in 
 the Ol'l Testament, and hades in tiie New? A. 
 careful examination of the passages in which 
 tiiese words occur will prohaldy lead to the con- 
 clusion, that they allord no real sancrion to the 
 notion of an intermediate place of the kind indi- 
 cated, hut are used l)y llie inspired writers to 
 denote t/ie grave — (lie resting place of the hodies 
 Iwfh of t!ie righteous and the wicked ; and that 
 they are also use<i to signify hell, the ahode of 
 miserahle 8]iirits. But it would lie difliciilt to 
 produce any instance in whicii they can he shown 
 to signil'y the ahode of the s])iiits of just men made 
 |>erfect, either helbre or after the resurrection. 
 
 In tl»e great majority of instances sheol is in 
 the Old Testament used to signify the grave, 
 and ill nius^ of these cases is so translated in 
 (he Aiitliorized Version, It can have no other 
 meaning in such texts as Gen. xxxvii. 35 ; xlii. 
 38; I Sam. ii. G; I Kings li. 6; Joh xiv. 13; 
 xvii. 13, l(i ; and in numerous other passages in 
 tiie writings of David, Solomon, and the pro- 
 phets. But as the grave is regarded hy most 
 jiersoiis, and was more e3]iecially so hy the an- 
 cient.s, witii awe and dread, as heing tiie region 
 of gloom and darkness, so tlie word denoting 
 ;.t Soon came t(t he applied to that more dark 
 and gloomy world which was to he the ahiding 
 place of the miserahle. Where our translators 
 supposed the word to have tiiis sense, they ren- 
 dered it hy ' iiell.' S^ime of the passages in 
 wiiich tilts has heen done may ije douhtful ; 
 Jjut there are others of whicli a question can 
 scarcely he enter'ained. Such are those (as Joh 
 xi. 8; Ps. cxxxix. 8; Amos ix. 3) in which tlie 
 word denotes the opposite of lieaven, which can- 
 not he the grave, nor the general state or region 
 of the dead; hut hell. Still more (iecisive are 
 eucii passages as I's. ix. 17; Prov. xxiii. 9; 
 in which sheol cannot mean any place, in this 
 world or the next, to wliicli the righteous as well 
 as the wicked are sent, but the penal ahode of 
 the wicked as distinguished from and opposed 
 lo the rigiiteous. Tlie only case in which such 
 'W-ssiiges could hy any possibility he supposed 
 lo mean the grave, would be if the grave -that 
 IS, exfinclioM — were the final doom of the un- 
 righteous. 
 
 Ill the New Testament the .word ^Stjs is used 
 in much the same sense as 7lXti' in the Old, 
 except t'la in a less projiortii i of cases can it be 
 
 HADES. 
 
 construed lo sigii'fy 'the grave.' There are slil., 
 however, instances in which if is HS«"d in lliii 
 sense, as in Acts ii 31; I Cor. xv. .')0 ; hut in 
 general the hades of the Nevif Testament ap]iearj 
 to he no other than the world of future jjunish- 
 menfs (e.g. Matt. xi. 23; xvi. IS: Luke x\i. i'i). 
 
 The i)riiici]ial arguments for the inteiniediaie 
 hades, as deduced from Scri|iture. are founded 
 on those ]iassages in which things ' under the 
 earth ' are described as rendering homage to God 
 and the Saviour (Pliilii). ii. 10; Rev. v. 13,- &c.) 
 If such passages, however, heconijiared willi others 
 (as with Rom xiv. 10, 1 1, &c.), it will ajipear that 
 they must refer to the day of judgment, in \ihich 
 every creature will render some sort of homrtge to 
 the Saviour ; hut then the bodies of the saints will 
 have heen already raised, and the intermediate 
 region, if there he any, will have been deserted. 
 
 One of the seemingly strongest arguments for the 
 opinion undei consideration is founded on 1 Pet. 
 iii. 19, in which Christ is said to have gone and 
 ' preached to the spirits in prison.' These spirits in 
 prison are sujiposed to lie the holy dead — ))8rhaps 
 the virtuous lieaf hen — imprisoned in the interme- 
 diate place, into which the soul of tiie Saviour went 
 at death, that he might preach to them the Gospel. 
 This passage must be allowed to jiieseiit great 
 dilliculties. The most intelligible meani.ig sug- 
 gested liy the context is, however, that C-hrist by 
 his spirit preached to those who in the time (*f 
 Noah, while the aik was preparing, were dis- 
 obedient, and whose spirits aie note in prison, 
 aliidiiig the general judgment. The piisoii is 
 doubtless hades, but what hudcs is must be de- 
 termined iiy other passages of Scripture; and, 
 whetlier it is the grave or liell, it is still a prison 
 for Ibose who yet await the judgment-day. This 
 interpretation is in unison with other jiassages of 
 Scnptiiie, whereas the other is conjecturally de- 
 duced from this single text. 
 
 Another argument is deduced from Rev. xx. 
 14, which describis 'death and /i«</es ' as 'cast 
 into the lake of tire' at the close of t! e geneial 
 judgment— meaning, accoidiiig to the advocates 
 of the doctrine in quest inn, that hades siiould then 
 cease as an intermediate jilace. But this is 
 also true if understood of the grave, or of the ge- 
 neral intermediate condition of the dead," or even 
 of hell, as once more and for ever reclaiming 
 wiiat it had femiioiarily yielded up for judgment 
 — just as we every day .see criminals In ought 
 from prison to judgment, and after judgment re- 
 turned to the prison fmm which they came. 
 
 It is further urged, in ]iroof of Hades being an 
 intermediate place other than the grave, that the 
 Scriiitures represent tlie happiness of the righteous 
 as incomplete till afttr tiie resurrection. This 
 must be admitted ; but it does not llicnce follow 
 that; their souls are previously imprisoned in 
 the earth, or in any other place or region cone- 
 s[)onding to the Tai tarns of the heathen. Although 
 at the moment of death the disembodied spirits 
 of the ledeemed ascend to heaven, and continue 
 there till the resurrection, it is very jjossible that 
 their happiness shall be incomplete until they have 
 received their glorilied bodies from the tomb, and 
 entered upon the full rewards of eternity. 
 
 A view su])ported by so little force of Scripture, 
 seems unequal to resist the contrary evidence "rhich 
 may be produceil from tiie same source, and whicb 
 it remains briefly to indicate. The ell'oct of thif
 
 HADES. 
 
 \g to fh.iw fluit the souls of (lie redeemed are 
 (U'w'.riled as [)i owed iii>i;, after dealli, ill iHice to 
 lieavcii — the pUwe oC final Iiap|iiiie8<, and tlmse of 
 the nniedecnied lo the pUi. e of linal wietclicdiiess. 
 In Hel). vi. 12, tlie ri),'lite>)iis dead are desi-iihfd 
 OS being in actual iiiliei it.uici" of tlie iir.miiscs 
 made to the I'atlieis. Our Saviour represents llie 
 deceased saints ;is alrea<ly, l)efoie the resnirf, tion 
 (for so tlie coutfxt reijuiies). ' like unto the anj^els," 
 and 'equal to the aii;,'els ' (Malt. xxii. 30; Luke 
 XX. 36); which is n()f very cotnpatilile with ilicir 
 imprisonment even in the liappi r legion of the 
 supposed Hades. Our Lord's declaration to the 
 dyinx thief — "This day shall thou he with me in 
 Paradise' (Luke xxiii. 43), has hi en urijed on 
 both sides ol' tin" arifuinent ; hut the word is here 
 not Hades, l)nt I'aradise, and no instance can he 
 ))roduced in which the paradise l)ey<ind the f^rave 
 means anylhinjj el,-.e than that ' ihiid heaveti,' that 
 •[jaradise" into which the Apostle vv;is caught up, 
 ami wiiere he lie.ird ' unutteral)le thiii;.fs (2 Cor. 
 xii. 2, 4). In the midst of that paradise grows 
 the mystic 'tree of life ' (Rev. ii. 7), which the 
 tame writer represents as growing near the throne 
 of (xod and the Land) (xxii. 2). In Kph. iii. l.i, 
 '.lie Apiislle de->cril)es the whole church of God as 
 being at presen; in heaven or on eurtli. liut, 
 according to the view under consideration, tlie 
 ijreat body of the church would be i. either in 
 heaven nor on earih, hut in Hades — the intei- 
 mediale place. In Heli. xii. 21-24, we aie told 
 that in the city of the living God ilweli nut 
 Oidy God hinisi'lf, the judge of all, and Jesus, 
 the mediator of tiie new covenant, and the in- 
 numerable company of angels, but also ' the 
 «;iirits of just men made ]ieifect' — all dwelling 
 together in the same lioly and happy place. To 
 the same elfect, hut, if possible, still moie conclu- 
 sive, are the various ])assages in whicii the souls 
 of the saints are describetl as being, when absent 
 from the body, ))resent with Clirist in heaven 
 (comp. 2 Cor. V. 1-S; Philip, i. 23; 1 Thess. v. 
 10). To this it is scarcely necessary to add the 
 various passages in the Apocalyptic vision, in 
 which St. John beheld, as inhabitants of the high- 
 est heaven, around the throne of God, myiiads of 
 redeemeil souls, even U'fore the resurrection (Rev. 
 V. 9 ; vi.9; vii. 9; xiv. 1,3). Now the 'heaven " 
 of these passages cantiot be liie ])lace to which the 
 term Hades is ever applied, lor that word is never 
 iwsociated witli any circum»tances or images of 
 enjoyment or hajipiuess [Heaven]. 
 
 As these argnments seem calculated to disjirove 
 the existence of the more favoured region of the 
 alleged inleinieiiiate place, a similar couise of 
 evidence militates with equal force against the 
 existence of the more penal region of the same 
 place. It is admitted by the staimciiest advocates 
 for the doctiiiie of an intermediate place, that he 
 souls of the wicke<i, when they leave the bo<ly, go 
 immediately into punishment. Now tiie Scrip- 
 luic knows no ])laceof punishment after death but 
 that which was prepared for the devil and his 
 angels. This place xWs noio inhabit; and this is 
 the place to which, after judgment, the <ouls of the 
 r.ond.emneil will be consigned (com[). 2 Pet. ii. 4 ; 
 Ma't. XXV. 41). This verse of Peter is the only 
 one in Scripture in whicli any reference to the word 
 Tai tarns occurs: here then, if anywhere, we should 
 find ■ t intermediate ))lace corresjjonding to the 
 Tartu.-.* of the heat hen, frcm whom the word is bor- 
 
 IIA6AR. 
 
 IM 
 
 rowe<l. But fM)m the other text we cai l»e quite 
 certain that the 'laitains ol' Peter i» no ouier than 
 the hell which is to I.e llic tiuai,ii» it i*, in tieirree, 
 the present d.ioni of the «ic:kcd. That this htll \» 
 Hailes is readily ailniitted. for the corrse of lije ar- 
 gument l:a- b( en to show that H.ides i.i hell, when- 
 ever it is not the grave. * Whether tlie liijhleoin 
 and the wicked, after thejnilgmenl, will ^o literally 
 to the same placis in whicli they were bef re situa- 
 ted, it is not material to incpiire. liut, boih |>efi>ie 
 and after the jud^'iiient, tlie righteous will be in 
 the same place with tin ir gloiilied Saviour alnl 
 ills holy angel,; and tliis will be heaven: and 
 before and after tiie judgment the wicked will be 
 in the .same place with the devil and his ant:els ; 
 and this will be hell' i Dr. Knoch PiihI. On the 
 Litcrtvedidta Place, in American liHilial Uepu- 
 sitonj. fo.- .April, IS Jl, VI 111, in we ha\ e hererhielly 
 followed : comp. Kiiap])'s Clirintiun 'I'lieolcgy, 
 6 101; Meyer, l)e Aolioiie 0?-ci np, Ilchraiit, 
 Lub. 1793; Bahrens, Fteiiiiuthhie Untcrss. itber 
 d. (hkus d. Hehraer, Halle, \1<Q). 
 
 The nation repelled in this article was enter- 
 tained by Justin Martyr, Irena?iis, Teitnllian, and 
 many other of theeaily Chiistian fathers. This, 
 however, proves nothing in its f.nour, as the same 
 notion was common among the Jews tliemselves, 
 in and l.efure the time of Christ. It may even* 
 have be«n enteitained by the Seventy wl en they 
 translated the Helirew s//et»/ by the (ireek hades. 
 Thetjuestion conni-cted with Hades has inilireclly 
 brought under view two of the three notions re- 
 specting the state of the soul after death. Tlie 
 third notion is that of those who hold that the soul 
 is in a perfectly quiescent condition tiiitil the 
 resurrection. This requires notice under another 
 head [.Soui, : see also Heavrn ; Hei,i.]. 
 
 HAG.\ll ("Ipi^, a stranger; Sept. ''hyap), a 
 native of ICgypt, and servant of .Abraiiam ,• but 
 how or when she became an inmate of his family 
 we aienot informeil. The name Ilagar, which is 
 ))ure Hebrew, signifying i/rfl»i!_(/e)-, having been ))ro- 
 balily given her alter her ariival, and beii'g the one 
 by which .■■he continneil fo be desig'iated m the 
 patriarch's household, seems to inqily that her c<-.n- 
 nection with it did not take place till l(>ng after 
 this family had emigiated to Canaan ; and tlie 
 jiresumptlon is that she Wius one of the female slavei* 
 jiresenfed to .Abraham by Pharaoh during his visit 
 to Egyjit ' Gen. xii. 16 i. But some derive the name 
 from "Ijy, to fee ; and suppose it to have been 
 applied to her from a remaikalJe incident in her 
 lil'e, to be afterwards mentioned ; just as the Ma- 
 homedans call the (liglit of Mahomet by the col- 
 lateral term ' Hegira.' Whatever were her origin 
 and previous histoiy, her ser\ ile condition in the 
 family of Abraham must have prevented her fmm 
 being ever known beyond the limits of her hunilile 
 splieie, had nut her name, by a s]H)ntaneous act of 
 her mistiess, become iudiss.dubly llnkeil with the 
 patriarch's history. The long continued sterility 
 of .Sarah suggested to her the idea (not uncommon 
 in the East) of becoming a mother luv ]iroxv 
 through her handm.iid, whom, with that \ iew, she 
 gave to Abraham .tsa secondary wife [.Aukaiiam ; 
 Adoption ; Conci.'uink]. 
 
 The honour of such an alliance a>id elevatiiiD 
 was too gieat and niiexjiected for the wenk and ill- 
 regulated mind of Ilagar : and no sooner did nht 
 find her».kf in a delicate situatioi , which ina>i«
 
 BOO 
 
 II AGAR. 
 
 her, in the prospect of l>ocominjj a moflier, an ob- 
 ject t>r incrcasinj^ interest and im]H)itance tc 
 AWraliani, tlian she oiienly itulnl^eil in tiiuni])li 
 over li«"r less fUvoureil mistress, anil sluweil l)y her 
 altered lieliavionr a (^lowinij lialiit of disrespect 
 and nisolencp. The feerrn:^s of Sarali were se- 
 verely wdiitulcd, anil s'.ie liroke out to her hushund 
 in loud coin|i1aints of tlie servants jietnlaiice. 
 'Mywron^ he upon tliee,' she cried — lani;u,ige 
 wliicii is irei'.erally considered an im])assioned 
 burst of teiriper. in which she niijiistly char;^ed 
 Abraham with cansin:; or encoura^'in^, l)y his 
 n-.aiked attention to tlie concuhine, the ill usa'^e 
 she met with ; hut it appeals suscepfihle of otiicr 
 constrtictii;!!s mm-li m.ire r.uonralile to Sarahs 
 
 character. The words ']'' ]! "DDH si^'nify either 
 
 'My wroti:^ be s)ip(T (c,' as Cucceius and others 
 render it, (, e. lietii n|!on thee, poiiiliii;; to liisduty 
 as lier pmtector, and soliciting his interference, 
 or else ' My wrong is propter te — on your ac- 
 count. 'I have exposed my-ielf to these indii^ni- 
 lies solely out of my intense anxiety to pratify 
 you with a son and heir.' Whichever of these 
 interjMetations we prefer, tlie exclamation of Sarah 
 expresses bitter iiiilii;nation at ihe misconduct of 
 her slave ; and Ahraliam, wliose meek and prudent 
 behaviour is strikingly contraste.l with the vio- 
 lence of iiis wife, leaves lier with unfetlered ])ower, 
 as mistress of his householil, to take what steps 
 she pleases to obt.iiii the reijuired redress. In all 
 Oriental states where concubinage is lei^'alized, 
 the principal wife iuis aniliority over the rest; the 
 Becondaiy one, if a slave, letains her former con- 
 dition uriclianj;ed, an<l society thus jiresenfs the 
 strange anomaly of a woman beitij; at once tlie 
 menial of her master and the partni'r of iiis bed. 
 In like manner Ilagar, ihjngh taken into llie re- 
 lation of concuhine to .Ahraham, continued still, 
 bein;^ a dotal maidservant, under the id)solute 
 
 Gwer of her mistress, who, after her husl)arid liad 
 't her Intake her own way in vindication of her 
 dignitv as the piincipal wife, was neitljer re- 
 luctant nor sparing in itiakitif^ the minion reap 
 tiie fruits of her in-olence. Saiah, imheil, not 
 content with the simple exertion of her auUioiity, 
 seems to have resorted even to corjxiral chastise- 
 ment, the word iljyn conveying such a meaning, 
 and hence An^nistine has diawn an elaborate 
 argutnent for in(bct iig civil ])enalties on lieretics 
 {Epist. xlviii.). But whether slie actually iii- 
 nicteil Idows, or merely tiirew cut menaces to that 
 eft'ect, cannot be determined, as the two render- 
 ings, 'Sarali afflicted' and 'would atllict' her, 
 have i-ecened equal sujiport from res];ectable lex- 
 icographers and versions. Sensible, at length, of 
 Uie liopelessne.'ss <tf getting the letter of her mis- 
 iTes.'?, Ha;rar deternimed on Hight; and having 
 seemingly t'ormed the purpose of returning to her 
 relations in Kgypt, she took the direction of that 
 country; wiiic'i led iier to what was ai'tei wards 
 called Shin-, llnou,di a long tract of sandy unin- 
 iiabited conntiy, lying on the west of Arabia Pe- 
 traea. to t! e extent ol l-iO miles lietween Palestine 
 anil Egypt. In tliat lonely region she wivs sitting 
 by a fount -.in to replenish her skin-bottle or re- 
 cruit herweariid lindis, when Ihe angel of the 
 Lord, wb<ise language or this occasion bespeaks 
 him to have been more than a created beini;. ap- 
 peared, and in the kuidbest n aimer remonstrated 
 •itb Inr on the axuse she k/u pursuing, and 
 
 n.\G.\R. 
 
 encinnaged her to return by the promise that tht 
 would ere long have a son, whom Proviileuce 
 dest'ned to liecome a gre.it mai. and whose wi ^- 
 and irregular features of chaiacter would be ind*- 
 libly im[)rcssed on the mighty nation that should 
 S])ring IVom him. Obedient to the heavenly visitor, 
 and having distinguished the place by the name 
 of Beer-lahai-roi. 'the well of the visible God,' 
 Iiagar retraced her steps to the lent of Abraham, 
 where iti due time she i'.ad a son ; and having pro- 
 bably narrated tiiis remaikable intervie\/ tc Alra* 
 ham, that patriarcli, as diiected l;y the ang«l, 
 called the name of the ciiild Ishmael, '(rod hs.i;* 
 heard.' 
 
 Fourteen years had elajised after the birth t 
 Ishmael wlien an event occurred in tlie family cf 
 Abraham, by the appearance of the long-jiromisiii 
 heir, whicli entirely changed the pros] et ts of tl il 
 young man, though nothing materially alTecti ig 
 him took place till tlie weaning of Isaac, wlii';h, 
 as is generally thought, was at the end of tiia 
 third year. Ishmael was then a lad of seven* ten 
 years of age; and being fully ca]iable of un ier- 
 standing his altered relations to the inheritance, 
 as well as having felt perhaps a sensible diminu- 
 tion of Sarah's affection towarils him, it is not 
 wonderful that a disappointed youth should in- 
 considerately give vent to his feelings on a festive 
 occasion, when the newly-we.ined child, clad ac- 
 cording to custom with the sacied symbolic robe, 
 which was the liadge of the biithright, was for- 
 mally installed heir of the fiibe (see Biblinih. 
 liibl. vol. i. ; Vicasi, Annot. 32; Bush on Gen. 
 xxvii. '.5). Our feelings oi' justice naturally 
 lead us to takejiait with Ishmael, as haully dealt 
 v.'ith in being s.i unexpectedly snjieiseded af'tei 
 having been so long the acknowledged heir. Bui 
 the iMocedure of Abraham in awarding the c'aini 
 to tiie inheritance to Isaac in pieference to hie 
 elder son was guided by the special commanu ol 
 God; ami it may lie remaikei!, moreover, that il 
 was in harmony with the immenioiial practice ot 
 Ihe East, where the son of asla-'e or secondary wife 
 is alw lys supplanted by that oi' a f:ee woman, 
 even if born long after. The harmony of the 
 weaning I'east was disturbed by Ishmael being 
 discovered mocking. Tlie Hehrew wind pPl^tD 
 though properly signifying 'to laui^h,' is fre 
 qnently used to ex))iess strong derision, as in Gen 
 xix. I i ; Neh. ii. ID ; iv. 1 ; E/.ek. xxiii. 32 ; ao 
 companied, as is proliable on some of the occasioni 
 referred to in these passages, with violent gestines 
 and in accordance with this idea the CIrildee and 
 Septuagint versions render if by ' I play,' whict 
 is used by the latter in 2 Sam. ii. 14-17, as syno- 
 nymous with boxing, whence it might very jnstlj 
 be characteiixed as persecution (Gal. iv. 29) 
 This conihict gave mortal oll'ence to Sarah, win 
 from that moment would lie saiislied with nothing 
 short of his irrevocalile ex])nlsion from the family 
 and as his mother also was included in the sam* 
 condemnation, there is ground to believe that sht 
 had been rejieating her former insolence, as well ai 
 instigating her son to his impro)irletie3 of behii- 
 viour. S.) harsh a measure v, as extremely jiain- 
 fiil to the alVectionate heart of .\l raham ; but hif 
 scruples were removed by the timely apparance o) 
 his divine counsellor, who said, ' Let it not bt! 
 grievous in thy sight, l)ecause of the lad, <»nd be- 
 cause of thv hond woman : in all that Sara^; liatb 
 Siiid unto tiire, hearken unto her voice :" ' for,' •adi
 
 IIAGGAI 
 
 ihe Targnm of Jjiiaflian, 'she w a ,ir.>piietcss.' 
 Acc()i(lin{,'ly, wliiit slip s.iid Is ciillid ihe Sci']itiire 
 'Gal. iv. 30), ami flie inculciit allonls a \ cry re- 
 markable iiistaiicf of an ovcirulin.; Piovlilenc e In 
 making lliis lainly iVud in the tent of a ])ast()ral 
 chief 4000 years a;^o the occasii.n of separating 
 two tnii,'hty peoples, wlio, acconlin;^ to tlie pro- 
 phecy, have ever since occiijjieil an ini])<)itarit 
 ch.'i))ter ill the history of man. Ilajjar and Ish- 
 maei ile]'artt'd e.uly on the day fixed f.ir their 
 removal, Abraham fninishing them with the ne- 
 cessary supply of travelling provisions. The 
 Septuaijint, which our translators liave I'ollovvr.'l, 
 most alisurdly represents Ishmael as a child, 
 
 f)lareil along witli the lrave!!ing-bags on the 
 leavily-loaih'd shouUlers of Hagar. But a little 
 change in the punctuation, the observance of the 
 parenthetical clause, and the construction of the 
 word "child' witli the verb ' took,' remove the 
 whole dilliculty, anil the passage will then stand 
 thus: 'And Abrah.mi rose up eaily in the morn- 
 ing, and to;)k bie.id, and a bottle of water (and 
 gave it unto Ilagar, ])utting it on her shoulder), 
 and the child, ami sent her away.' 
 
 In spite of their instructioiH for threading the 
 desert, the two exiles missed their way. Over- 
 come by fatigue and tiiirst, increasing at every 
 step under the unmitigated rays of a vertical sun, 
 the strength of the young Ibhmael, as was natural, 
 first gave way, and his mother laid him down in 
 complete exhaustion under one of the stunted 
 shrulis of this arid region, in the hope of his ob- 
 taining some miuneutary relief from smelling the 
 damp in the sh;ide. The burning fever, however, 
 continued unabated, and the poor woman, forget- 
 ting her own sorrow, destitute and alone in the 
 midst of a wililerness, an<i absorbed in the late of 
 Ikt son, withdrew to a little distance, unable to 
 witness his lingering sufl'erings: aad there 'she 
 lifred nj) her voice and wept.' In this distress- 
 ing situation the angel of the Lord appealed for 
 the purpose of coml'oitiiig her, and diie<:ted her. 
 t,) a fiiuntairi5 which, concealed by the brush- 
 wood, had esca]ied her notice, and from which 
 she drew a refreshing draught, that had the 
 efleot of reviving tlie almost lifeless Ishmael. 
 Tills well, accotdiug to the tradition of the .\iabs, 
 who )iay great honour to the memory of Hagar, is 
 Zenuem, near Mecca. 
 
 Of the sul)sequeiit history of Ishmael we have 
 no account, further than that he established 
 himself in the wilderness of Paian, in tl.e neigh- 
 bom liiMd of Sinai, was marrie<l by his mother to 
 a rountryw(jman of her own, and maintauied 
 both himself and family by the produce of Ins 
 bc.w — R. J. 
 
 IIAGARENES. [Auapia.] 
 
 IIAGGAI CiU ; Sey.t. and Josejili. 'A77070J; 
 Jer me and V'ulg. Aggacus or Aggeus, otherwise 
 Hagga?us). one of the twelve minor prophets, anil 
 the liisf of the thiee who, alter the return of the 
 Jews from the Babylonian exile, proi)hesied in 
 Palestine. Of the place and year of bis biitli, 
 his 'lescent, and the leading incidents of his life, 
 nothing is known w icli Ciin be relied on. Some 
 assert that he was b- rn in Babylon, and came to 
 Jsr'isalcni when Cyrus, in the year b.c. 5.J(>. al- 
 lowed the Jews to return to their country ("2 C'hron. 
 \xxiv. 23; K/.ra i. 1), — the new colony consisting 
 chiefly of people L>elonging to the tril/es of Judah, 
 
 HAGGAI. 
 
 M 
 
 Benjamin, and Levi, with a fi)W from otlirr tribe* 
 The more fabulous traditions of Ji-ui^h wr'tf i^ 
 who j);iss him for an Assessor of the Si/ti-tijii/a 
 Ma(jttci, and enlarge on his literary avoeali. ns, have 
 been collecti'd by Carpzov (httrixhirtio in V. T. 
 iii. p, i'lG). 'fliis much appears from his pro'ilie- 
 ries, that he flourished dtiiiiig the reign of the 
 Persian monarch D.u ius IIysta.spis, who ascrndetl 
 the throne n.c. •'i'il. These projilieiies are com- 
 jirised in a book of two chapters, and coinist of 
 (ifscoursesso brief and summary as to have led some 
 Geiman theologians to suspect thai they have not 
 come down to us in their original complete form, 
 but are only an epitome (Eichhum, Enilcilunf 
 in aas A. f. iii. ^ 598; Jahu, hitroductio in 
 libros sacros Vet. Ftrd., edit. 2, V'icnnap, IPH, 
 § ISO). Their object generally is to urge the 
 leliuilding of the T'niple, wlieh had indeed been 
 commenced as early as n.c. 53-5 (Kzra iii. 10). but 
 was afterwards discontinued, the Samaritans hav- 
 ing obtained an edict from the Persian king, 
 which forbide further ]irocedure, and i-)flueutial 
 .lews jneteiiding that the time for rebuilding the 
 Temple had not arrived, since the seventy year* 
 pred'cted by Jeremiah ai:plied to the Temple also, 
 irom the time of the destruction of which it was 
 tiien only the sixty-eighth year. .A.s on the deadi 
 of Pseudo-Smerdis, and the consetpieut termina- 
 tion of his interdict, the Se\w% slill continued to 
 wait for the end of the seventy years, anil were 
 only entraged in buildingsplendid houses for them- 
 selves, Haggai began to piojihesy in the second 
 year of Darius, B.C. f)'20. 
 
 His first discourse (ch. i.), delivered on the first 
 day of the sixth month of the year mentioned, fore- 
 fells that a brighter era would begin as .soon aa 
 Jehovah's house was rebuilt; and a notice i.s sub- 
 joined, staling that the ad<lress of the prophet had 
 been elVeclive, the peojile having resolved on re- 
 suming the restoration of the Temple. The second 
 discourse (ch. ii. 1-9), delivered on the lv,enty-lirst 
 day of the seventh month, piedicts that the glory 
 of the new Temple would be greater ih.m that of 
 Solomon's, and shows that no fear need be enter- 
 tained of the Second Temple not equalling the lir^t 
 in splendour, since, in a remaikable jiiditicil 
 re\olution, the gifts of the Gentile-s would !»» 
 la-ought thither. The thiid discourse (ch. ii. 10-19), 
 deliveied on the twenly-ronrth day of the ninth 
 month, lel'ers to a period when build ng materiiil.s 
 had been collected, and the woikmen had iiegun Ic 
 put them fo:;ether ; for which a commencement of 
 the Divine blessing is promised. The I'ourth and 
 last discourse (ch. ii. 20-23), delivered also on the 
 twenty-fourth day of the ninth month, is exclu- 
 sively addressed to Zerubbabel, the jiolitical chief 
 of the new Jewish colony, who, it appears, bad 
 asked for an exj.lanation i*garding the great jwili- 
 tical revolutions which Haggai had predicted in 
 his second discourse: it comfoits the governor by 
 assuring him they would not take jil.ice \ eiy soon, 
 and not in his lifetime. The style of the discouisej 
 of Haggai is suitable to their conti-nts : it is pa- 
 thetic when he exhorts; it is vehement when he re- 
 proves; it is somewhat elevated when he treas ol 
 future events; and it is not altogetlier destitute of a 
 podical colouiing, lliou.;h a jirophct of a higher 
 order would have depicted the splendour of the Se- 
 cond Temj le in brighter hues. T'.ie language la- 
 biiiirs iiniier a piverty of terms, as may be observed 
 in the constant lepeti ion of the same expression* • 
 
 3 k
 
 ttna 
 
 HAGIOGRAPHA. 
 
 HAGIOGRArHA. 
 
 iff. r\'\T]'' IDX r\2 (i. 2, 5, 7). mn^ DW llnce 
 limes ill one vei<e (ii. -I), witli pTH three times in 
 the same verse, ail. 1 rTlT tliree tunes also in one verse 
 (i. 14). Kiciilijin (/if/z/e/iiMi)/, 6 599j atfril)utes 
 Jiese repetilionj to an attempt at o nament, ren- 
 Jering the writer disp.i-ied to recur fietjiiently to a 
 favourite ex|ire3siiin. Tiie jiropiietical iliscourses of 
 Ha--.ii, nS^23 'in nXn:. are reftrred to in (he 
 Old an. I Ne.v Testam-nt fKzra v. 1; vi. 11; 
 Heh. xii. 2r> ; com)) IIii^^iJ. ii 7, S, 21). In most 
 o( the ancleiit catalogues of the canonical hooks of 
 ihe Olii Testament, liaggai is not, indeed, men- 
 tioned hy name; Init an they specify the twelve 
 min')j proohets, he must ha-e lieen included 
 among them, as otlieiwise thtir numher would 
 not he full. Josephus, mentioninjj Ilaf^gai and 
 Zechariah (AtUiq. xi. 4. § -i, p. 557), calls them 5vo 
 irpo(/)7}Toi. (See generally Rosenmiiller, Scholia m 
 Vet. Test. \ii. 4. ii. 74; Jahn, Einle'Uang in die 
 gi'tttlicheii Biicher des Alien Bimdes, ii. 2. p. 658 ; 
 Bettholdt, Einlcitiuig, iv. p. 1G9,)--J. v. H. 
 
 HAGIOGRAPHA. Sacred Writinrjs. The 
 word a.yi6ypa<pa is Hrst found in Epiphunius 
 (Panarin/n, p. 5S), who used it, as well as 
 ypacpeidy to denote the third division of the Scrip- 
 tures, called hy the Jews D''3inD, or the Writings, 
 consistin;^ q\' fire books [Micoii. loth], viz. the 
 tliree poems (nON), Joh, Pioverh?, and the 
 Psalms, and tlie two hooks of Chronicleo. 
 
 These divisions are found in the Talmud 
 {Bavu, Bathra, fol. 1. ed. Amsterd.), where the 
 bacred hooks are classiiied under the Lam, 
 the Prophets, and the Writings (Cetuhim). 
 The last are thus enumerated (/. c.) : — Ruth, 
 the book (sepher) of Psalms, Joh, Picverhs, 
 Ecclesiastes (Koheleth). the Song of Songs, La- 
 mentations, Daniel, and the hooks (megilloth) 
 of Esther, Ezra, and Chronicles. The Jewish 
 writers, however, do not uniformly follow this 
 arrangemeut, as they sometimes place the Psalms, 
 or the hook of Joh, as the first of the Hagio- 
 grapha. Jerome gives the arrangement followed 
 Dy the Jews in his time. He oliserves that they 
 divided the Scrijitures into five books of Moses, 
 oiglit jnophetical hooks (viz. 1. Joshua; 2. Judges 
 rtiid Ruth; 3. Samuel; 4. Kings; 5. Isaiah; 
 6. Jeremiah; 7. Ezekiel ; 8. The twelve pro- 
 phets), and nine Uagiographa, viz. 1. Job; 
 2. David, fi\e parts; 3. S.jl-omon, three parts; 
 •1. Koheletti; 5. Canticles ; 6. Daniel : 7. Chro- 
 nicles ; 8. Esdias. two books [viz. Ezra and Nehe- 
 miah] ; 9. Esther. ' Some, however," Le adds, 
 ' ])la(;e Ruth and Lamentations among the Ha- 
 giofi;rapha rather than among the prophetical 
 Ixioks.' We find a dill'erent arrangement in 
 Josejjhus, who reckons thiiteen pro])hetical books, 
 and four containing; hymns and moral precepts : 
 fiom which it would appear that afier the time of 
 Josephus the Jews comprised many books am( ng 
 the proi)hets wliich had previously belonged to the 
 Hagiogiapha. It lias, however, been c msideied 
 as more probable thai Josephus had no autiiority 
 from manuscripts for his classification. 
 
 The earliest notice which we find of these divi- 
 ei(>ns is that contained in the prologue to the book 
 of Ecclesiasticiis, written B.C. 130, the author of 
 wh'cli refers to the Law, the Prophets, and x\\n other 
 hiioks : by which last were most ))robal.ly meant 
 tlie Hagioj,na})ha. Philo also speaks of the Laws, 
 »>.e Prophets, the Hymns, and the other bo„ks, 
 uut without classifying them. In the New Testa- 
 
 ment we find three corresponding dividioiis mm 
 tioiie], viz. the Law, the Pio])heis, and the Psalnii; 
 which last book has been suj)pe.sed to have given 
 its name to the third division, from the cixcum 
 stance of its then being the first in the catalogue 
 (Luke xxiv. 44). Hiivernick, however {Ilandbuch, 
 p. 78), supposes that Luke calls the Hagiograplia 
 by the name of Psalms, rather on account of the 
 jioetical cliaracter of several of its jiarfs. The 
 ' book of the Prophets" is referreii to in the New 
 Testament as a distinct volume (Acts vii. 42, 
 where the passage indicated is Amos v. 25, 26). 
 It is well known that the second class was 
 divided by tlie Jews into the early Prophets, viz. 
 Joshua, Judf,'es, Samuel, and Kings; and the 
 later Piophets, viz. Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel 
 (called the major prophets), and the book of tha 
 twelve (minor) prophels. 
 
 When this division of books was first introduced 
 it is now impossible to asceitain. Probaiily it 
 commenced alter (he return from the exile, with the 
 first formation of tlie canon. Still more difficult 
 is it to ascertain the principle on which the clas- 
 sification was formed. The rabbinical writers 
 maintiiin that the authors of the Cetuhim en 
 joyeil only the lowest degree of inspiration, as 
 they received no immediate communication from 
 the Deity, like that made to Moses, to whom God 
 spake face to face; and that they did not receive 
 their knowledge thiough the medium of visions and 
 dreams, as was the case with the prophets or the 
 writers of the second class; but still that they felt 
 the Divine Spirit resting on them and inspiring 
 them with suggestions. This is the view main- 
 tained by Abarbanel ( PraJ. in Proph. priwes, (u). 
 20. 1), Kimchi (^Prcpf. in Psalm.), Maimonides 
 (Mo7-e Aevochim, ii. 45, p. 317), and Elias Leviva 
 (Ttsbi); which last writer defines the word HiriD 
 to mean a woi'k written by divine inspiration. 
 The jdacing of Ruth among the Haguigiapha, 
 and especially the separation of Lamentations 
 from Jeremiah, seems, however, to be inecoii- 
 cilalile with this hypothesis; noV is it easy to 
 assign a satisfactory reason why the historical 
 books of Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings 
 should be placed among (he Prophets, and the 
 b.Mk of Chronicles among the Hagiugrajiha. The 
 reasons generally assigned I'or this, as well as tui 
 placing in (he lliird class the books of Psalms, 
 Daniel, and Job, are so fanciful and imsatisfac 
 tory as to have led Christian writers to form other 
 and more definite classilications. It will suffice 
 (o mention the leason assigned Ity Ralibi Kimchi 
 for excluding Daniel from (he hi ok (;f Pro))hets, 
 viz. that he has not equalled the other prophets in 
 his visions and dreams. Others assign the late 
 date of the book of Daniel as the re.ison for the 
 insertion of it, as well as of .some historical 
 books, in (he Hagiographa, inasmuch as (he col- 
 lection of the Propliets was closed at the date o/ 
 the composition of this bonk (De Wette, § 'i',b). 
 Bertholdt, who is of this opinion (Einleiturg, 
 vol. i. p. 70, sqq.), thinks that (be word Cetubim 
 means ' books ne.vly introduced into the canon ' 
 (p. 81). Hengstenlieij!; (Aiithentie dcr Daniil, 
 Kc., p. 25, sqq ) fillows the ancient opinion of 
 the rabbins, and maintains that the Uiok of 
 Daniel was placed in tiie Hagioj,'rajjlia in conse- 
 quence of the lower degree of inspiration a(tacliei' 
 (o it ; but herein he is ojipoised fiy Ilaverniok 
 \Haudbuch_ j). 62). De U'ette (§ 13) suppone*
 
 IIAGIO&RAPHA. 
 
 HAIR. 
 
 002 
 
 that tL* two fii-st divisions (tlie Law and tlie Pro- 
 phefs") weic closecl a little aCter the time cjf Nelie- 
 miaii (cuiiip. 2 Mace. ii. 13, H), and that fxr- 
 ha|)j at tiie end of the Persian jieiiod (lie Jews 
 comtnenceil the fmniation tif tlie llayioc/rapha^ 
 wliicli Uin<^ leinained ' cliangeai)le atid o])eii.' 
 TliC c-oUectioii of tiiC Psalms was not yet com- 
 pleted when the two /list jKiits were tbinied. 
 
 It lias l)een concluded lumi Matt, xxiii. 35 
 •nd Luke xi. 51, conip. with Luke xxiv. 41, tiiat 
 W the Psalms were the Hrst, so were Clirunicles the 
 last hook in the Ha_Lcio;4;ra|»ha (Carpzov, I/Urod. iv. 
 p. 25.) If, when Jesus sjioke of the righteous lilood 
 tiled lioni the hlood of Ahel (Gun iv. Sj to that of 
 Zechariah, he referred, as most commentators suj)- 
 {wse, to Zecharlali the son of Jehoiada {'1 Chron. 
 xxiv. 20, 21), there appears a peculiar ap()Osite- 
 ness in the a|i])eal to tne (irst and the last books in 
 the canon. The hook of CiironicUs still holds the 
 last place in the Ilebiew IJibles, which are. all ar- 
 ranged accor<ling to the thieefold division. The 
 late date of Chr(<nicles maj' in some measure ao 
 count i'or its sejiaration from the book of Kini^s; and 
 this giouiid liolils gootl vvhfther we ti\ the era of the 
 CiuoiiicUr, with Zunz, at atwut u.c 260, or, with 
 the eminent Roman Catholic, Professor Movers, 
 the able delender of the antiquity and autheriticity 
 of the l.jok, we conceive him to have been a 
 younger contemporary of Nehei.iiah, and to have 
 written ab<iiit u.c. 400 (Kritische Untersuchung 
 iiber de Biblische Cluvnik. Bonn, 1^34). The 
 circumstance of the existence of a \'evi acknow- 
 ledged later additions, such as I Chron. iii. 19-24, 
 does not militate against this hypothesis. De 
 VVette conceives that the genealogy in tliis pas- 
 sage comes dowrr only to the third generation 
 after Xeheiaiah. 
 
 The word Hagiographa is once used by Jerome 
 in a peculiai' sense. Speaking of Tobit, he asserts 
 that the Jews, cutting olVtliis ijook from the cata- 
 logue of the divine Sciijjtures, jjlace it among 
 tiiose hooks which they call Ilagiographn. And 
 again, of Judith he says, ' by the Jews it is read 
 among the Hagiograplia, whose authority is not 
 sullicient to conliim debated [joints ;' but, as in 
 the latter instance, tiie greater number of maiiu- 
 6cri[its read Apocrypha, which is doubtless tlie 
 true readiitg, it is highly ])robable tiiat the woid 
 Hagiographa, us»-d in refeience to tlie book of 
 Tobit, lias arisen from the mistake of a tianscriber. 
 The two woids were in the middle ages lie(juenily 
 used as synonymous [Deutkro -canonical]. 
 Hagi;tgrapha has been also used by Chriatian 
 writers as synonymous with Holy Scripture. 
 
 The .Alexandrian translators have not been 
 guided l»y the thieefold division in their arrange- 
 jnent of the l«)oks of Scriptme. We have already 
 p)KUTEiio-c.\NONiCAi.j givcn the order of tlie 
 Codex Alexandiiuus. In tlie Vatican Co<lex 
 Tobit and Judith are {daced between Neliemiah 
 and Kstlier. Wisdom and Kcclesiasticus follow 
 Canticles. Baruch and Lamentations follow 
 Jeremiah, and the Old Testament concliules with 
 the fiMir books u( Maccabees. Luther .'who intro- 
 tluce<l iwto tlus Bible a jjec.nliar' anangemeut, 
 wliich in the Old Testament has Ijcen followe<l in 
 tlie English Authorized Version) was the first who 
 ieparate<l the canonical from the other books. 
 Not only do the Alexandrian translators, the 
 Fait er>, and Luther dill'er friim the Jews in the 
 •rder ul' su ;cet>siuit oi' tlie sacred books, but among 
 
 the Jewii themselves theTalmiidistsand Majori'cs 
 and the Geiman and Sp.uiish manuscripts Ibliuw 
 each a dillerent airangenieiil. — W. W. 
 
 HAI. [At. I 
 
 il.\IR js fiftjiiently inentiuned in Scripture,, 
 and in scaicely anything has the caprice of faniiiuii 
 been moie strikingly d>>played than ni ihevanou* 
 forms which flic taste of dilVeieot countries and 
 ages has jiresciilied for disp(i>ing of this natural 
 covering of the head. The Gieeks let their hair 
 grow to a gieat length, and their natural foiiduesj 
 for this altril)utc o\' beauty has Iteen perjtettiateil 
 not only by the fre(pieiit!y recurring epithet cl 
 Homer. Ka^riKOfjidxDUTis, as desciiptivc of the 
 'A.)(awi. but bv the ciicumstance o^ the p.it-is 
 and artists of that ancient peoiile repie.senting 
 even the goils themselves with long hair, 'i he 
 early Egyptians, again, who were proveiliial f.T 
 their haliits of cleanliness, removed the hair as u:i 
 incuminance, and the almi;st unavoidable deci- 
 sion of sordid and olVenaive negligence. 'I hey 
 •haved even the heads of young childten, leaving 
 only ceitain locks, ae an emblem of youiii, on tlie 
 front, the buck, and the sides. In the case of 
 royal children those on the sides weie covered and 
 enclosed in a bag, which hung down cons|Mcuously 
 as a liadge of princely rank. All chisses amongst 
 that people, not excepting the slaves imp ried 
 from foreign countries, were reciuired to submit to 
 the tonsure (Gen. xli. llj ; and yet, wh.it was 
 remarkable in the inhabitants of a hot climate, 
 while they removed their natural hair, they weie 
 accustomed to wear wigs, which were so con- 
 structed that ' they far surpassed,' says Wilkinson, 
 'the comfort and coolness of the modem turb.in, 
 the reticulated texture of the ground-work on whicii 
 the hair was fastened allowing the heat of the head 
 to escape, while the hair ediectually protected it 
 from the sun (^Anc. Egyptians, iii. 354). Diller- 
 ent from the custom liolli of the Greeks and the 
 Egyptians, that of the Hebrews was to wear their 
 liair generally short, and to check its growth by 
 tlie application of scissors oiily. The priests 4it 
 their inauguration shaved off all their hair, and 
 when on actual duty at the tcmjile, were in the 
 habit, it is said, of cutting it e\ery fortnight. 
 Tlie only exceptions to this ])revailing fashion are 
 found in the case of the Nazariles, whose hair, from 
 religious duty, was not to be cropped during the 
 term of their vow; of young persons who, during 
 their minority, allowed their hair to hang down 
 in luxuriant ringlets on their shoulders ; of such 
 etieminate persons as .Absalom (2 Sam. xiv. 26); 
 and of Solomon's horse-guards, whose vanity 
 afl'ected a puerile extravagance, and wiio strewed 
 their heads every day with particles of gold-(in>l 
 (Jo.sephus, j-lw^t^. viii. 7). Alth.ugh the Ilebrevvs 
 wore their hair siiort. they were great adiniieis o( 
 strong and thickset locks ; and so high a value did 
 they set on the possession of a good head of haii, 
 that they deprecated nothing so much as baldness ; 
 fo which, indeed, so great ignominy w.is attaciieil 
 that, svliether a man was destitute of hair or not, 
 bald-head became a general term expressive ol 
 deep and maligriTlnt contempt (2 Kings ii. 23> 
 [Bai.dnes.s]. To prevent or remedy this detect 
 they seem, at an early jieriod, to have ai'ail(-<l 
 themselves of the assist^uice of art. not oi.ly for 
 beautifying the hair, 1 ut increasing its thickness; 
 while the heads of the priests were anointed 
 with an unguent of a {leculiar kind, the vi-
 
 M4 
 
 HAIK. 
 
 KTP<lients of whicli, wilh llieir various propor- 
 tions, were presciihed l)y divine authority, and 
 Hie composition ol' wliicli llie peojile weie ])rolii- 
 liited, under seveie penalties, from attempting to 
 imitate (Kxod. xxx. 32). This custom spn ad 
 lill anointing the hair of the head became a 
 generiJ mark of gentility and an essential part of 
 the daily toilet ; the usual cosmetics emjiloyed 
 consisting of the best oil of olives mingled with 
 spices, a decoctioi. of ])arsley-seed in wine, and 
 more rarelv of spikenard (Ps. xxiii. 5; xlv. 7; 
 Eccles. ix. I; Mark xiv. 3). Tlie prevailing 
 colour of hair among the Hebrews was dark ; 
 'loci.s bushy and black as a raven,' being men- 
 lioneil in the description of the bridegroom as the 
 perfection of lieauty in mature m mhoud (Sid. 
 Song, V. 11). Hence the apjjearance of an old 
 man with a snow-white head in a company of 
 younger Jews, all whose hea<ls, like those of other 
 Eistcrn people, were jet black — a most consi)icu- 
 ousoiiject — is beantirully compared to an almoTid- 
 trce, which in the early pait of the year is in full 
 blossom, while all the others are dark and Icatless 
 (Eccles. xii. 5). A story is told of Herod, that in 
 order to conceal his advanced age, he used se- 
 cretly to dye his gray locks with a daik ]i\i;- 
 tnent {Joseph. Antiq. w'u H); and although the 
 anecdote was probably an unfoinided calumny 
 on that prince, yet that it was customary with 
 many of his Roman contemporaries to employ 
 artiticial means for changing or disguising the 
 silver hue of age, is siifliciently apparent from 
 the works of Martial and other satirical poets. 
 Vrom Rome the fashion spread info Greece and 
 other provinces, and it ap|iears that the members 
 of the church of Corinth were, to a certain extent, 
 captivated by the })ievailing taste, some Christians 
 being evidently in the eye of the Apostle, who 
 bad attracted attention by the cherished and wo- 
 manly decoration of their hair (1 Cor. xi. 14-lG). 
 To them the letter of Paul was intended to ad- 
 minister a timely reproof for allowing themselves 
 to fall in with a style of manners wliich, liy con- 
 founding the distinctions of the sexes, threat* iied 
 a baiiefid influence on good morals : and that not 
 only the Christian converts in that city, but the 
 primitive church generally, were led by this ad- 
 monition to adopt simpler habits, is evident from 
 the remaikable fact that a criminal, who came 
 to trial under the assumed characti r of a Chiis- 
 riaii, was proved to the satisfaction of the jvidge to 
 be an impostor, by the luxuriant and frizzled a]> 
 pcarance of his hair (Tertullian, ApoL; Fleury, 
 Lcs Maurs des ('hrktiens). 
 
 With re.^ard to women, the possession of long and 
 luxuriant hair is allowed iiy Paul to be an essen- 
 tial attiibule of the sex — a graceful and modest 
 coveiing jirovided by nature; and yet the same 
 Apostle elsewhere (1 Tim. ii. 9) concurs with 
 Peter (1 Pet. iii. 9) in launching severe invective-i 
 agauist the ladies of his day for tlie pride and 
 passionate fondness they displayed in the elaborate 
 decorations of their heaJdriss. As the hair w;is pre- 
 eminently the ' instrument of their pride' (Ezek. 
 xvi. 39, maigin), all the resources of ingenuity 
 and art weie exliausted to set it off to advantage 
 and load it with the most dazzling trnery ; and 
 many when they died car.sed their longest locks 
 to be cut ofi', and ]ilaced separately in an urn. to 
 be deposited in tlieir fond, as the most precious 
 <jid vilued reli<;s. In the daily use of cosmetics 
 
 HALAH. 
 
 they bestowed the most asiuni«hinj{ pains in sr- 
 ranging their long hair; sniiietiiiies twisting h 
 round on the crown of the bead, where, and at fh« 
 temples, by tlie aid of gum, whicli tliey knew as 
 well as the modern bellis, they wrought if into a 
 variety of elegant and lai,_ifnl devices — (igurei 
 of coronets, harps, wreaths,, diadems, emblems oJ 
 public temples and conquered cities, being formed 
 by the mimic skill of the ancient friseur ; or else, 
 ])laiting it info an incrKiildc numlier of tresses, 
 which hung down the back, antl which, when ne- 
 cessary, were lengthened by ribbons so iis to reach 
 to the ground, and were kept at full strpfch by 
 the weight of various wreaths of pearls and gold 
 fastened at inter\als down to the extremity. Eiom 
 some Syiian coins in his ])ossess:on Haitmann 
 (D?e Ilcbrticrhicim Viitz'Khe) has given this de- 
 scription of the style of the Hebiew coilVure; and 
 many ancient busts and jiortraiis which have been 
 discovered exhibit so close a resemblance to those 
 of Eastern ladies in the present day, as to sh(W 
 that the same elaborate and gorgeous disposition 
 of their hair has been the pride of Oriental females 
 in ev ery a;^'e. 
 
 From the great value attached to a profuse head 
 o^ hair aro.se a variety of superstitious and emble- 
 matic observances, such as shaving parts of the 
 head, or cropj)ing it in a paiticnlar forns , parerrts 
 dedicating the hair of infants ('lertuliian, De 
 Aninia') to the gods; young women theiis at their 
 marriage; warriors affer^i successl'nl campaign ; 
 sailors after deliverance from a storm ; hanging 
 it u]) on consecrated trees, or depositing it in 
 temjiles ; burying it in the tomb of friends, as 
 Achilles did at the funeral of Patioclus ; besides 
 shavirrg, cutting off, or plucking it out, as some 
 pec'ple did ; or allowing it to gicrw in .sordid neg- 
 ligence, as was the practice with others, accord- 
 ing as the calamity that befell them was co'.r.mon 
 or extraordinary, and their grief was mild or 
 violent. 
 
 Various meta]ihorical allusions are made to 
 hair l)y the saoed wi iters, especially the jirophets. 
 'Cutting off the hair" is a figure used to denote the 
 entire de^rmction of a jieonJe by the ri;.,diteous 
 retributions of Providen(e (La. vii. 20). 'Gray 
 hails heie and there on Ephraim ' jiurfcnded the 
 decline and fall of the kingdom of Israel (Hos. 
 vii. 9). 'Hair like women's" foims jiait of thed(»- 
 scrijifion of the Apocaly[)fic locusts, and histori- 
 cally ]iuints to the prevailing head-diess of the 
 Saracens, as well as the vo]uj)tnous elleminacy 
 of the Anticlnijfian clergy (Rev, ix, 8). And, 
 finally, 'hair like line wckjI' was ap,rom;neiit featrrre 
 in the ajijiearance of the deiKed Redeemer, em- 
 blematic of the majesty and wisdom that belong 
 to him (Rev. i. 14). 
 
 HALAH (n^H; Sept. 'A\o«'), oi J-ather 
 Cn.\i,Arn, a city or district of Meilia, ujion tlie 
 river (iozan, to which, among other p'aces. the 
 captives of Israel weie transplanfeil by the Assy- 
 rian kings. Many, after Buchart (Geoff. Sacra, 
 iii, 14. p. 220 J, have conceived this Halah or 
 Chalach to be the Calachf)ie which Ptolemy 
 ]ilaces in the north of Assyiia. But if the river 
 Gozan be the Kizzil-Ozan, Halah nii sf needs be 
 sought elsewheie, anil near that river. Accoril- 
 ingly Major Rennell indicates as lying along its 
 lianks a disfrict of son'e extent, und of gieat beauty 
 and fertility, nameti Chalcltal tiaviMg witbi^a it a
 
 HALLELUJAH. 
 
 mnarkably sirong position of tiie same name, 
 Bi(^uate<l on one of tlie liills iiiljoiiiiiif; to ilie 
 Biounfiiins wii di se[)aiate it from the [iroviiice 
 of GhWiin {(jcrig. of Ilerod ]). ',W6). 
 
 HALLELUJAH (Hn'pbn;, oi- Ai.i.Ki.uiA 
 (^W\i]Kouia), a word wliicli stands at llic i)egiii- 
 iiiiifj of many of tlie Psalms. From its fivijuent 
 occiirieiice in tiiis position it givw into a foimola 
 of praise, and was cliaiited ;is siicli on solemn days 
 of rejoicing. This is intimated hy the Auiciy- 
 plial bookofToliit (xiii. 1S_), when speak ini< of 
 tlie rehoildlng of Jenisalfin, ' And all her (Je- 
 riisalt-m's) sliects shall n'mg Alleluia' (comj). 
 Rev. xix. 1, 3, i, 6). This expression of joy and 
 praise was tiaiisl'erred f;jin the syna^o^^ue to the 
 clmi(tli, and is still occasionally heard in devo- 
 tional psalmody. It is so often found in the 
 beaiitiffd hymns of Jolin and Charles Wesley, 
 that the frequent use of it has almost become a 
 characteristic of the religious hotly named after 
 tiie former. 
 
 HAM (Ori). I. The youngest son of Noah 
 (Gen. V. 32 ; comp. ix. 24). Having provoked 
 the wrath of his father by an act of indecency 
 towards him, the latter cursed him and his de- 
 scen<lants to be slaves to his brothers and their ile- 
 sceniiants (ix. 25). To judge, however, from the 
 narrative, Noah directed iiis curse only against 
 Canaan (the (burth son of Ham) and his race, thus 
 excluding froui it the descendants of Ham's three 
 other sons, Cush, Jliiraiiii, and Phut (Gen. x. ti). 
 How that curse was accomplished i.s taught by 
 the history of the Jews, liy wiiom the Canaanites 
 were suhseunently exterminated. The general 
 opiiiion is, that all the Svruthern nations derive 
 their origin from Ham (to wliicli tlie Hebrew root 
 on, hat, not unlike theGieek AiSiWes, lends some 
 force). Cush is supjwscd to have been the ]iro- 
 genitor of the natioiis of East and Sooth Asia, 
 more especially of Soath Araliia, and also of Ethi- 
 opia ; j)yi;rai/>c, of the African nations, including 
 the Philistines and some other tribes which Greek 
 fable and tradition connect with Egypt ; Phut, 
 likewise of some Afiican nations; and Caiuum, 
 of the inhabitants of Palestine and Phcenicia. 
 On the Arabian traditions concerning Ham, vid, 
 D'Herbelot (Bibl. Orient, art. 'Ham"). 
 
 2. A p.iefical name for the land of Egypt 
 (Ps. ixxviii.5l; cv. 23, 27; cvi. 21). In the 
 Egyptian language XHMI, cr KHME, signifies 
 black. Plutarch also (De Isll. et Osir. 33) calls 
 Egypt Chemia : r)]v Aiyvirr iv iv rois fxaKiara 
 fiiKixyytioi/ ouaaf, Sunrep rh / (\av roii 6(pdaXfiov, 
 
 X-Tj/xlaV KaXoiKTLV. 
 
 In Gen. xiv. 5 occurs a country or place 
 called Hum, belonging to the Ztizim, but its 
 geographical situation is unknown. — E. M. 
 
 H A MAN ( j^^n a name of the planet Mercury ; 
 Sept. 'Afii.v), a lavourite of the king of Peisia, 
 whose history is involved in that of Esther and 
 Monlecai. He is called aii Agagite ; and as 
 Agag was a kind of title of the kings o( (he 
 Amalekites [.Auag], it is supposed that Hainan 
 was descended trom the royal family of that 
 nation. He or his parents probalily Ibund their 
 way to Persia as captives or hostages; and_ that 
 the foreign origin of Haman was no bar to his 
 advancement at court, is a circumstance quite in 
 vxd m with the in(;st ancient and still subsisting 
 
 HAMAN. 
 
 80fl 
 
 usages of the East. Josepii, Daniel, and Mordecai 
 aflbrd other examples of tlie same kind. 
 
 It is luineces.sary to repeat the particuhns of a 
 story so well know;i as that of Haman. Tlie cir- 
 cumstantial details of the height which ho 
 attained and of his sudden downfall, alVord, like 
 all the rest of the book oC Esther, a most laiioful 
 picture of tlie cu.stoms of an Oriental court ami 
 government, and furnish invahiai)le maleiials f<« 
 a comparison between the regal usages of ancient 
 and modern times. The result of such a oini- 
 parison will excite surprise by the closeness of the 
 resemblance; for there is not a single fact in ihf 
 history of Haman which might not occur at the 
 present day, even in its merely lormal character- 
 istics, and which, indeed, is not of frequent o<cur- 
 reiice in dillerent combinations. The boundles* 
 creiiit which Hamaii enjoyed with Ahasuerus ; 
 the homage wiiich all the coiut in consequeric« 
 |iaid to him; the royal signet-ring, the inipressiou 
 from which gave such authority to all written 
 orders, and placed the doom of nations in thehantls 
 of its possessor; the price of blood which Haman 
 ollered to the king ; the inquietude of that inordi- 
 nate power which could endure no rival, ami which 
 tlie shadow of opposition oU'ended and alarmed; 
 and the form of poetical justice given to the final 
 retril.'utioii in*the hanging of Haman uj^jn a gal- 
 lows which he had preiKired for another; — all 
 these are traits which would at the present day 
 be received in .\sia as the unexaggerated record 
 of current events. 
 
 Even the decree for the extermination of the 
 Jews which was gianted at the re(iuest of Haman, 
 however startling it may ap|ieai to those whose 
 notions are grounded upon European institutions, 
 woukl a]ipear in no wise strange iinileran Oiiental 
 government. Even in Europe the fanaticism and 
 tyranny of ancient governnients oflen jiroduced 
 similar proscriptions (sometimes with reference to 
 the very same jieople), which, under the mild- 
 ness and tranquillity of modern institutions, 
 we are as little aljle to comjireheml. Jiut in the 
 E;ist we have still no difficulty in discoveiing (he 
 (races of (he same excesses of desjiotism, (he same 
 blind submission in the people, tlie same resp-ct 
 for the seal of the sovereign, and the same p.ia- 
 sive resignation to the sword which he uplilts 
 or to the liowstring which he sends. Even in 
 our own day . we have seen im[jerial lirmauns 
 consign to utter destruction in the mass the 
 Greeks, the Diuses, and the Maronites; and such 
 things must and will occur wherever the extermi- 
 nation of a ]ieople is unhappily so easy a matiei 
 that it costs a despot no fuither (roulde than the 
 drawing of a ring from his (in/er. Other times 
 and other names make all the dilleience — the man- 
 ners are the same, it may be well (o oli.<erve il at 
 Haman never mentions Mordecai himself to l|«. 
 king; and that in speaking of the Jews he iloes 
 not name them directly, but describes them as 
 'a certain jieople ' dispersed through the king- 
 dom, and living sc]iaiate <inder laws of dieir 
 own (Eslh, iii. S). That this people, or any 
 (idler subject to his sce))tre, shoidd require to 
 be thus descriptively indi»iited, seems to .show 
 how little (he king knew of the actual state of 
 his dominions, or of jjeisons beyond the im- 
 mediate circle of the court. The de.itli ol 
 Haman appeals to have taken ]dace about the 
 year u.c. 510.
 
 806 HAMATH. 
 
 IIAMATH (n)pn ; Sept. 'E^a'0), one of the 
 •mallei kin j;iloiTis uf Syiiii, lia\ ins^ Zobali on the 
 fast and Rehulioii the south. This last kinj^dom, 
 lyiiiic within the (greater Mount Hermon, is ex- 
 pressly said to have Ix-fii taken jwssession of by 
 the Israelites, and, like D.m or Ivai-<h, whicli is 
 represented to have been in ihe valley of Betli- 
 reliob : Jud;^;. xviii. 2S;, is used to denote the 
 northern biondary of the Holy Land. Tlius it 
 if. is said .'Noni xiii. 21) that the spies ' went np 
 and searched the land, ('ro:n the wihlerness of Ziii 
 unto Rehob, as men come to H.imatli," which lay 
 to the south of Rrliob, beyond Hermon. The 
 a()))roach to it from the south is i)y an o))ening 
 or m.iuutain-pass, called 'the entrance of Ha- 
 matli,' and ' tlie entering in of Hamath,' which, 
 being the p.is^.itje (rom the nortiiern extremity of 
 the land of Israel into Syria, is sometimes used 
 to desciibe the boundary of the former in this 
 direction, as 'from tlie enterinu; in of Hamath to 
 the river of E;4:ypt ' (1 Kings viii. 6.j). This 
 ' entering in ol Hamatli ' answers to the route 
 taken by Bnrckhardt (Si/ria. \t. 249) from El- 
 Bekaa, or the suutlieni [jart of the valley between 
 the two chains of LJiianus and Anti Lilianus, to 
 Banias. As tliere does not appear, from bis de- 
 Bcription, to be any elevated ground in this route, 
 there would seem lo be a depression t)F llie chain 
 which bears the jiame of Jebel es-Slieikh. 
 
 The kingdom of Himath, or, at least, the soutli- 
 ern or central jiarts of it, ap]iear to have nearly 
 corresponded with what was afterwards denomi- 
 nated Cirle-Syria; but northwaids, it stretched 
 as far as the city Hamath on tlie Oiontes, which 
 seems to have been tlie caj)ital of the whole 
 country. Tliis city was called E])iphania by the 
 Greeks, under which name it was known to 
 Josephus {Antiq. i. 6. 2; comp. Michaelis, Spicil. 
 ii. 52) and Jerome {(iiieest in Gen. x. 15; 
 VoTnment.in Ezek. x\\n. 15, 16); but it has novr 
 resumed its more ancient deuominalion, which 
 indeeil was proliably never lost among the native 
 jiopulation. Toi was king of Hamath at the time 
 when David conquered the Syiians of Zohah ; and 
 it ajifMjars that he liad reason to rejoice in the 
 l)iuiiiliatii)n of a dangerous neighbour, as he sent 
 tii» own son .Juram to congratulate the victor (2 
 Sam. viii. 9, 10). In tlie time of Hezekiah the 
 town along with its territory was conijuered by 
 the Assyrians (2 Kings xvii. 24 ; xviii. 31 ; xix. 
 13, I-ia. X. 9: xi. 11); and afterwarils by the 
 ChaldiBans (.Fer. xxxix. 2, 5). Abulfetia, the 
 Arabian geographer, who was prince of Hamath 
 in ibe fourteenth century, correctly states (7o6. 
 Syria, p. I OS) that this city is mentioned in the 
 bo.iks of the Israelites. He adds, 'It is reckoned 
 one of the most ple.isant towns of Syria. The 
 Or.mfes (li)ws round the greater part of llie city 
 on the east and north. It boasts a lofty and well- 
 built citadel. Within the town are many dams 
 uiid water-machints, by means of which the water 
 is led olV by canals to irrigate the gardens and 
 8up])ly ])rivate houses. It is remarked of this 
 city and of Schiazaj- that they alionnd more in 
 water-machines tlian any other cities in Syria.' 
 This descri[)tion still, in a great degree, applies. 
 Hamath is a ])icturesque town, (}f consiilerable 
 circumference, and with wide and cunvenient 
 streets. In Bnrckliardts lime tlie attached dis- 
 trict contained 12ll inhabited villages, and 70 or 
 80 that lay waste. The western part of this district 
 
 ' HAND. 
 
 forms Ihe granary of Northern Syria, though tht 
 harvest never yields more than a tenf.ld retuni^ 
 chiefly on account of the immense numliers o} 
 mice, which sometimes completely destroy tht 
 crnps (Pococke, Traiels, ii. 209; Buickliardt. 
 Travels in Syria, j). 249 ; Richter, Wallfahrten, 
 p. 231 : comp. RosenmijUer's Bib. Geography, 
 ii. 213-216). 
 
 HANAMEKL, a kinsman of Jeremiah, to 
 whom, bel'ore the siege of Jerusalem, he sold a 
 fiehl which he posse.-^sed in Anatho'h, a town of 
 the Levites (Jer. xxxii. 6-12). If this tield be- 
 longed to Ilanameel as a Lev ite, the sale of it 
 would imply that an ancient law had fallen into 
 disuse (Lev. xxv. 31); but it is jio.ssilile that 
 it may have been the pro])erty of Hanamcel in 
 right of his mother. The tran.'^actiiin was con- 
 ducted with all the foims of legal transfer, and 
 was intended to evince ihe certainty of restora- 
 tion from the ap]'.roaching exile, by showing 
 that {Tossessions which could be established by 
 documents would yet lie of future value to the 
 possessor (b.c. 5S7). 
 
 1. HANANI (*33n, graciom; Sept. 'Aye*'/), 
 a pr(i])hef under the reign of Asa king of Judali, 
 by wliom he was scizetl anil imprisoned for an- 
 nouncing that he had lost, from want of due trust 
 in God, an advantage which he might have 
 gained over the king of Syria ("2 Ciiron. xvi. 7). 
 The jirecise occasion of this declaration is not 
 known. This Hanaiii is sujijxised to lie the same 
 who was father of anotlier jirophet, named Jehu 
 (1 Kings xvi. 7) ; bni circumstances of lime and 
 place seem adverse to tlii.s conclusion. 
 
 2. HANANI, a brother of Nehemiah, who went 
 from Jeru.siilem lo Shushan, being sent most pro- 
 bably by Ezra, and brouglit that information 
 lespecting llie miserable condition of the retnrneil 
 Jews which led to the miss'ion of Nehemiah. 
 Hanani came back to Judaea, piobaliiy along with 
 his brother, and, together witli one Hananiah, w;i8 
 a|)j)ointeil to lake charge of the gates of Jeru- 
 salem, and see that they were opened in the 
 morning and closed in the evening at the ap- 
 pointed time. The ciicumstances of tlie time 
 anil ))lace rendered this an importan! and res]ion- 
 silile duty, not unattended with some danger (Neh. 
 vii. 2, 3). B.u. 455. 
 
 1. HANANIAH (y^]'W.< Jehovah's goodness, 
 Sept. 'hvavia), a false prophet of Gibeoii, who, by 
 ojiposing his projihecies to those of Jeremiah, 
 brought u)ion himself the terrible sentence, 'Thou 
 shall die this year, because thou hast tauglif re- 
 bellion against Ihe Lord.' He died accordingly 
 (Jer. xxviii. 1, s(] ), B.C. 5S6. 
 
 2. HANANIAH. [Shaduach.] 
 
 3. HANANIAH, the jierson who was asso 
 ciated with Neheiniah's brother Hanani in th« 
 charge oi the gates of Jerusalem. The high 
 eulogy is bestowed u]>on him, that 'he was a 
 faithful man, and feared God above many ' (Neh. 
 vii. 2) [Hanani 2]. 
 
 HAND, the organ of feeling, rightly denomi- 
 nated by Galen the instrument of instruments, 
 since by its position at the enil of the fore-arm, its 
 structure and its connection with the mind, the 
 hand admirably executes ihe behests of the human 
 will, and acqiiiies and impai Is lo man iri.com- 
 parable skill and power. By the peculiarities o'
 
 HAND. 
 
 HAND. 
 
 ^07 
 
 h« conformafion — tlie inclinatloti of llie lliumli to 
 the piiliri. the coin])aiative length of the tliumi) 
 mill of the (iiigors, ' the hollow of the iiaiid.' and 
 <lie fleshy |)rotiil)eiances hy wiiicli tliat hollow is 
 mainly formed — this ineinhei' is wonderfully 
 adapted to the j)iii()oses for wiiicii it was designed, 
 and serves to illustrate the wisdom and providence 
 of the great Creator (7'/te Hand, its Mechanism, 
 and vital. Knduicmen/s, as evincing Design, by 
 Sir Cliarles Bell). In no one qiia'ity is the hand 
 more distinguished us an in-.tniment than in tlie 
 flexibility of the jjarts, and the ease with which 
 the whole is moved- a power which is owing to 
 the comijle.vity of its structure, consisting, as it 
 does, of no fewer than twenty-seven separate 
 bones, which are l)oiind together and put in 
 motion by nineteen muscles. 
 
 The hand itself serves to distinguish man from 
 other terrestrial beings. No other animal has 
 ^any member comparable witii the human hand. 
 Tlie trunk of the elephant unites the attiiliutes of 
 skill and power to a surprising extent, iiut yields 
 the palm to the hand. The fore- foot of the ouran- 
 imtang thougii possessed of extraordinary proper- 
 ties, is greatly inferior to the hand. In tlie chim- 
 panzee the thuinl» is so short as not to extend 
 further than tlie root of the fingers. 
 
 Of the two hands the right lias a preference 
 derived from natural endowment. Its universal 
 use, as the chief instrument in acting, serves to 
 show that its sujieiiority is something more than 
 an accident. But the preference which it holds 
 U only a pait of the general advantage which the 
 right side has over the left, not only in muscular 
 strenglii, but also in its vital or constitutional 
 properties (Bell). 
 
 Considering the nniltijjlex efficacy of the hu- 
 man hand, the control whicii it has given man, 
 the conquest over the external woild which it has 
 enabled him to aciiieve, and the j)leasing and 
 useful revolutions and improvements whicli it 
 tias brought about, we aie not surprised to read 
 the glowing eulo^^y in which Cicero ( De Nat. 
 Dear. ii. 60) has indulged on the subject, nor to 
 find how important is the part which the hanil 
 ])erforms in the records of divine revelation. From 
 the properties already described, the student of 
 Scripture is jjrejjared to see the hand employed in 
 lioly writ as a symiiol of skill, strength, and efli- 
 cacy. Asa part of that general anthropomorphism, 
 without whose aid men in the early ages could 
 probably have formed no conce[)tlon of God, and 
 which, after all, is less gross among the ancient 
 Hebrews than among other contemporary nations, 
 the Deity is frequently sjioken of in the records of 
 revelation as if possessed of hands; though it may 
 be questioned if such plirasiology was, even in 
 primitive times, anything more than figurative, 
 a setting forth of the unknown by the known, a 
 sort of pictorial writing in divine things. It is, 
 However, jiretty safe to afliim, that many vulgar 
 errors in religion owe their origin and supjKJit to 
 the inaptitude of men to look through the sign to 
 the thing signified, tc pass from the shadow up- 
 wards to the substance, to divest eternal truth of 
 its temptirary vestments. Were tliis more gene- 
 rally ell'ected, God would not be regarded as 
 seated in some part of space on a throne of gold, 
 with iiis son ]ilaceil literally at his 'right hand;' 
 but thssciiplura' representations w^iuld lie seen to 
 indicafe the ceaseJess providence and constant 
 
 su|iervision of the Ciealor, in which flit ikh) iu>d 
 glorilied Jesus has an intimute interest and a sii- 
 jjienie share. 
 
 The ordinary usages of Scripture in regard to 
 'hand," 'right hand,' &c., must be familiar to tiM 
 stuilent, and the jiassageson whicli the representa- 
 tions above made aie founde<l, are too easv of 
 access, by means of a Concordance, to need being 
 enumerated here : if may therefore lie more usel'til 
 to confine Vhe rest of our remarks to one or two 
 s|iecilic and more inijiditant points 
 
 The ])hiase ' silting at the light hand of God,' 
 as applied to the .Saviour of the world, is derive*! 
 from the fact that with earthly piinces a jumilioii 
 on the right hand of the throne was accounte<l 
 the chief place of honour, dignity, ami (louer: 
 — 'upon thy riglit-hand did stand the queen' 
 (Ps. xlv. 9; compaie 1 Kings ii. Ii); Fs. Ixxx. 
 17). The immediate passage out of which s|)iang 
 t'ne phraseologj' em|iloyed by Jesus may be Jotind 
 in Ps. ex. 1 : 'Jeliovali said unto my LokI, sit 
 thou at my right hand until I make thine ene- 
 mies thy footstool.' .-^ccoidingly the Saviou; 
 declares before Caiaphas (Matt. xxvi. (i I ; Maik 
 xiv. 62), 'Ye shall see the .Son of man sitting on 
 the right hand of ])ower, and coming in tlie clouds 
 of heaven ;' where the meaning obviously is that 
 the Jews of that day should have manifest priKjIa 
 that Jesus held the most eminent pi ice in the 
 divine favour, and tliat his [resent humiliation 
 wouhl be succeeded by glory, majesty, an»l power 
 (Luke xxiv. 26 ; 1 Tim. iii. 16). So when it is 
 said (Mark xvi. 19; Rom. viii. 34 ; Col. iii. J ; 
 I Pet. iii. 22; Heb. i. 3 ; viii. I) that Jesus "sits 
 at the right hand of God,' 'at the right hand o( 
 the Majesty on lii.,h,' we are obviously to under- 
 stand the assertion to be that, as his Father, so he 
 worketh always (John v. 17) (iir tlie advanceuieni 
 of the kingdom of heaven, and the salvation of the 
 worlil. 
 
 As the hand is the great instrument of action, 
 so is it eminently lilted for affording aid to the 
 mind, by the signs and indications wiiich it 
 makes. Thus to lay the hand on any one was a 
 means of pointing him out, and consecjuenfly an 
 emblem of setting any one a] art for a jiarticular 
 office or dignity. Intpositioa of hands accord- 
 ingly formed, at an eaily jxiriod, a ))art o\' the 
 ceremonial oi)seived on the a])j:ointmeiit and con 
 secration of persons to high and holy under- 
 takings. In Num. xxvii. 19 Jeliovah is lejire- 
 sented as thus speaking to Moses, ' 'lake thee 
 Joshua, the son of Nun, a man in whom is the 
 spirit, and lay thine haini ujion him. and set him 
 before Eleazar the priest, and before all l-he con- 
 gregation, and give him a charge in their siglit,' 
 &.C. : where it is obvious that the layin,' on of 
 hands did neither originate nor cimimunicate 
 divine gilts ; lor Joshua had ' the sjiiiit ' befure he 
 received imjMsition of hands; but w.is merely an 
 instrumental sign for marking him out indivitJu- 
 ally, and setting himapart, insight of the coiiu'ie- 
 gation, to his anbious work. Similar ajipeais to 
 be the import of the obs^-rvance in the primitive 
 church of Christ (Acts viii. 15-17; 1 Tim. iv. 
 14 ; 2 Tim. i. 6). A corruption of this doctrine 
 was. that the laying on of hands gave of itself 
 divine jiowers, and on this account Simon, the 
 magician (Acts viii. Ifi), oll'eied money, saying 
 '(live me also this power, tli.it on whonisoever I 
 lay hands he may receive 'the Holy G'los*,' ii»>
 
 eo8 
 
 H.VXI)I<;ilVFT. 
 
 HANDICRAFT. 
 
 leiuliri^ ]ir.)!),il)ly to carry on a f^aiiifiil trade by 
 com:iiiinii;atin,f tlii? g'iCt to otljer;. 
 
 In G.)l. ii. 13, 1 I. 'the 1 uv of <f;:nman.lincnts 
 contained in oi-'lirianre-i ' (Mphps. ii. 15). is dcsiL,'- 
 riateii ' the luiiidniritiivj of ordinances fliat was 
 asj;ain^f u>,' whi''li Jisin liKrfted wnt, and took 
 away, nailiiitr it tv) his cross ; piiraseolou^'v wliioh 
 in'.licates the aholitio-i. on iliP piitof rlie S.irionr, 
 of flie Mo-i lie la.v f VV illins, CarcB Phclolog. in 
 N. T. i!i. ir>). -.1 Fl. ]}. 
 
 HAXDICR^Fr. In the e.irly" periods to 
 which tiie Scriptiiiai liistory refers we do not meet 
 willi tho-ie aifilicial fHelij);s and unreasoiiahle 
 prejn dices a^'.iiiist hand lab.mr which pievail ami 
 are so i>anyt'iiliy ind lent'.il in m )dern society. 
 Tlie entire circle of achieveni Mit vvnicli min iiad 
 ort'ectcd in tiie ii.it nral vv.u'ld, w.is, in ancient 
 tiiries. too immediately atid too ohv'ionsly con- 
 nected wi*h tiie lahiim' of the hands, which is, in 
 truth, the great primiry sonrce of wealth, for any 
 feeling; le^'ardiiii^ if to ])revail but otie of hiijh 
 c-»(.imation. Wlien liand-labourers were seen on 
 every side, arid found in every f^rade of lite, and 
 when tlie products of tlieir skill and industry 
 were the chief, if not flie s;)Ie, advarita^'es wiiicli 
 civilization ijave, handicraftsmen, as they were 
 anionjj the threat benefactors, so were they amonij 
 the clijef favourites of human kind. Accord- 
 ingly, even the creation of the world is spoken of 
 a.i llie work of Goil's iiands, and the tirmament is 
 saiil to show his handy-work (Ps viii. 3 ; xix. 1 ; 
 Gen. ii. 2; Job xxxiv. 19). The primitive his- 
 tory, too, wliicli the Bible presents is the history 
 of hand-labourers. Adam dressed the i^arden in 
 vvhich God had placed him (Gen. ii. 15), Abel 
 was a kee[)er of shee)), Cain a tiller of tlie ground 
 (Gen. iv. 3), Tubal-cain a smith (Gen. iv. 2i). 
 Tiiese references prove how soon men gave them- 
 si^vestothe laboufs of the hand, and these and 
 yirnilar passages serve to show what were the 
 earliest employments, did not the nature of the 
 Ciise sullice to assure us tliat the most necessary 
 arts would lie livst cultivated. The general nature 
 o\' this article does not recjuire any extensive or 
 •li'tailed inquiry into the hand-labours which flie 
 Isjuelites practised l)efore their descent into 
 Egvpt ; but the liigh and varied culture which 
 lliey f,)nnd tisere, declares tliat any hist.ny of liand- 
 labom- must be very defective the sources of 
 wiiich are found exclusively in tiie Bible. Tlie 
 s'-ieplieril-life which tlie jiatriarchs previously led in 
 their own pasture grounds, was not favouiable to 
 the cultivation of the jjiactical aits of life, much 
 less of those arts by wliicii it is embellisJied. 
 Kgypt, in conse'iuence, must have jiresented to 
 .losepli and liis father not only a land of wonders, 
 but a source of rich and attractive knowledge. 
 And tliough tlie herdsman-sort of life which the 
 Hebrews continued to lead would not be con- 
 ducive to tiieir advancement in either science or 
 art ; yet it cannot be doubted that they derived 
 in no slight dt'gree those advantages wliich have 
 always been reaped by a less cultured peo])le, 
 when brought into ])roximity or contact with a 
 high state of civilization. 
 
 Another source of knowledge to the Hebrews 
 of handicrafts were the maiitinie and com- 
 mercial Plid'nicians. Commeice and navigation 
 ir/ijilv great skill in art and science ; and the 
 pursuits to whicli tliey lead l.irgely increase the 
 ikill whence tlt-y emanate. It is not, therefore. 
 
 surprising that the origin of so many arta has IxeK 
 referred to liie north-eastern shore of the iVIediler 
 ranein Sea; nor is tiiere any liilViculty in under 
 standing how arts and letters should be [Kopa- 
 gated from the coast to tlie interior, coiiferri!;^ 
 high advantages on the inhabitants of Syria in 
 general, as well before as after the .seitletnent 
 of the Hebrew tribes in the land of promise. 
 At liisl the division oi labour was only very 
 ))artiai. The master of the family himself exercised 
 such arts as were found of absolute necessity. 
 Among these may be reckoned not only tiiose 
 which j).isturage and tillage leqiriied, but most of 
 those which were of tliat rough and severe nature 
 wliich demand strength as well as skill- such, 
 for inst.mce, as the ])re|iaration of wiKxl-wovk I'lr 
 the dwelling, the slaying of animals ftir food, 
 which every householder understood, together 
 with the art of extracting the blood fioni the 
 entire carcass. Tlie liglite*' laUnns of tiie hiuid 
 fell to the share of the housewife; such as 
 baking bread — for it was only in large to, iis th.it 
 l>aking was carried on as a trade (2 Sam. xiii. 
 S), — such, also, as cooking in general, supplying 
 the house with water, no very easy otiice, as the 
 fountains often lay at a consideralile distance 
 from the dwelling: moreover, weaving, making 
 of clothes for males as well as i'emales, woiking 
 in wool, tlax, hemp, cotton, tapestry, richly co- 
 loured hangings, and that not only for domestic 
 use, but for ' merchandise,' weie carried on within 
 the precincts of the hou-e by the mistress and 
 her maidens (Exod. xxxv. 25; 1 Sam. ii. 19; 
 2 Kings xxiii. 7 ; Prov. xxxi.). 
 
 The skill of the Hebrews during their wander- 
 ings in the desert does not a]){)ear to have lieen 
 inconsiderable ; but the jnirsuits of war and the 
 entire absorption of the energies of the nation in 
 the one great work of gaining the land wtiich 
 had been given to them, may have led to theii 
 falling olV in the arts of ))eace ; and from a 
 passage in I Sam (xiii. 20) it would appear that 
 not long after they had taken possession of the 
 country they were in a low condition as to the 
 instruments of handicraft. A comparatively 
 settled state of society, however, soon led to the 
 revival of skill by the encouragement of industry. 
 A more minute division of labour ensued. Trades, 
 strictly .so called, arose, carried on by ])ersoiis 
 exclusively tlevoted to one pursuit. Thus in 
 Jiidg. xvii. 4 and Jer x. 14, ' the founder' is 
 mentioned, a trade which implies a j)iactical 
 kiiowledge of metallurgy ; the smelting and woik- 
 ing of metals were well known to the Hebrews 
 (Jol) xxxvii. IS); brass was in use betbre iron; 
 arms and instruments of hushandry were made 
 of iron. \n Exodus (xxxv. 30-35) a jiassage 
 occurs which may serve to sjiecify many arts that 
 were jiraclised among tlie Israelites, though it 
 seems also to intimate that at the time to wliich 
 it refers artificers of the description rcferied to 
 were not numerous — ' See, the Loul hath called 
 by name liezaleel, and hath iilled him with th» 
 sjiirit of God, in knowledge and all manner 
 of workmanship, anil to devise curious works, 
 to wirk in gold, and in silver, and in brass 
 and in the cutting of stones, to set them, and in 
 carving of wood, to make any manner of cunnina 
 work ; and he hath put in his heart tiiat he may 
 teach; both, he and Aholiab : them hath he filled 
 with wisdom of heart to work all manner of work
 
 HANDKERCHIEF. 
 
 of the oic/rov^r ; and of llie cuiiniii.^ workman, 
 and of the cnibraiderer in l)lui! and in |)in|)lc, 
 in 8C.iil<?t and in (ine linen, anil of the weaver.' 
 Fmni the fnsuin;; cli.ipler (ver. ;iJ) it aiipcars (liat 
 gilding was kno.vn liufv)rt' tlie sctl lenient in 
 (Janaan. Tlie aik (Exod. xxxvii. 2) was over- 
 laid with pure i,'old within and wiiliout. The 
 cliernliim were wrouf^ht (' heaten,' Exod. 
 xxxvii. 7) in t,n)ld. The candlestick was of 
 beaten gold (verses 17, 22). Wire-ilrawin;^ 
 was probahly understood (Kxoil. xxxviii. 4; 
 xxxix. 3). (.'-Dverin^' with brass (Exod. xxxviii. 
 2) and with silver (Prov xxv i. 23) was practised. 
 Architecture and the kindred arts do not appear 
 to have made much progress till the days of Solo- 
 man, who employel an incredible luunber of 
 jvrsons to ])rocijre timber (1 Kin^s v. 1:5, sij.) ; 
 but the men of skill for biiildiiii,' his temple he 
 obtaineil from Hiram, kin.^ of Tyre (1 Kin^s v. 
 sq. ; 1 Chron. xiv. 1; 2 Clnon. ii. 7). Without 
 pursuing the subject info all its details (see Scliolz, 
 Ilandb. dor Bib Archiiol. p. 390, sq ; l)e \^■ette, 
 Lchrb. der Archiiul. y. 115, stp ; \Viner, Re<d- 
 xchri. art. ' Handwerke'), we remaik that the inter- 
 course whicii the Baliylonisli ca|)tivify gave tlie 
 Jews seems to have greatly improved their know- 
 ledge and skill in both the practical and the Hue 
 arts, and to liave led them' to hold them in very 
 high estimation. The arts were even carried on 
 by persons of learning, who took a title of honour 
 from their trade (RosenmiiUer, Morgenl. vi. 42). 
 It was held a sign of a bad education if a father 
 did not teach his son some handicralt — quicunque 
 dlium suum non ilocet aliqiiid o])ilicium est ac 
 si doceret eum latrocinium— ' whoever does not 
 teach liis son a trade, teaches him robbing' (Liglit- 
 foot, p. 61(i; Mish. Tr. rirke Aboth, il. 2; Wa- 
 gensed's Sota, p. 507; Otlion. Lex. Rabb. 491). 
 In the .\pocrypha and New Testament there 
 are mentioned tanners (.\cts ix. 43), tenl-makers 
 (Acts xviii. 3) ; in Jusephus (De Bell. Jud. v. 4 I) 
 cheese-makers; domestics (icovpils, Antiq. xvi. 
 1 1. 5); in the ralniiul, with others we find tailors, 
 shoe-makers, blood-letters, glaziers, goldsmiths, 
 plasterers. Ceiiain handicraftsmen could never 
 ri.se to the rank of high-priest (Mish. Tr. Kid- 
 dus/i, 82. 1), such as weavers, bailters, fullers, 
 perfumers, cupj)ers, tanners; which pursuits, espe- 
 cially the last, weie held in disesteem (Mishna, 
 Tr. Aler/illa/i, iii. 2; Oilion. Lex. Rabb. l.)5 ; 
 VVetsteln, i\'. 7". ii olo). In large cities particular 
 localities were set a])art lor p iiticular trad 's, as is 
 the case in the East to the present ilay. Thus \n 
 Jeremiah (xxxvii. 21) v.e read of * the bakers' 
 street.' So in the Talmud (MIs/ina, v. 169, 22')) 
 mention is ni.ide of a llesh-markel ; in Joseuhus 
 (De Bell. .hid. v. 4. 1 ) of a cheese-miuket ; and in 
 the New Testament (.lohn v. 2) we read of a sheep- 
 market. See Iken, .-intiq. llebr. iii.-ix. p. 57S, sq ; 
 Bellermann, Ilandb i. 22, sq.— J. R. li. 
 
 HANDKERCHIHF, NAPKIN ((ruuSoLptov, 
 Vulg. sudariii.»i), occins in Luke xix. '20 ; John 
 xi. 44 ; XX. 7; Acts xix 12. The GrcH'k word 
 is adopted from the Latin (like /cf/x'croy, fj-^/x- 
 $oii>a, and many others), and probably, at liist, 
 had the same meaning with it, and which, being 
 derived from sudo, to perspire, corresponds to our 
 Wor I ']>otk(.'t) handkcrc/iie/. The (ireek rheto- 
 rician Pollux (\.u. 180) remarks that the word 
 ffovBdi or had supplanted not only the ancient 
 Qi«ek wor»l for haiidkeicliiefj 7jp.iTvBioh or ijfu- 
 
 HANDKERCHIEF. 
 
 8M 
 
 rifiPtoy, whicli he considers an Egyptian worn, 
 lint even the moie recent term Ka^t^fiu-Tioif : 
 'Ch 8e i)^iTvjj.0i3V can n\v koI rovro Aiyvimop, 
 eilj 5' hv Kara Tt) (V rij /J-fCij (fayi'i-Si-r. ;fai|/i5()(«)Tio^ 
 KaXov/xevuy, h vvv (TouSaptov ofOfid^tTai ( Ono- 
 tnast. vii. 16). The iidiuence of the R<iniana 
 caused the introdii<!tion of this word even aniiin^ 
 the Orientals. The ralibins have KITlD. In 
 tlie Syiiac version NITD iins'.ver> to the Hebrew 
 nnSOD. (I veil (margin, s/icet or (tprou); and in 
 CiiaMee "niD or STTiD is u>ed for a veil or 
 nxy linen cloth (Huxloif, [.ex- C/iul.y. 1412). It 
 is indeed but natural to expieet that a foieign 
 word, introduced into any language, should lie 
 a))plied by tho.se who borrow it in a looser sense 
 than they do from whom it is obtained. Ili-nce, 
 although the Latin word sjidmiiun is generally 
 restricted to the forementioned meaning, yet in 
 the Greek and Syriac languages it signilies, 
 c/iiejli/, na[)kin, wrapper, &c. These observations 
 ]iie|)are us for the did'erent uses of the word in 
 Scripture. In the lirst instance (Luke xix. 20) it 
 means a wrajijier, in whicli the ' wicked sei\aul" 
 had laid up tlic jiound entrusted to him by Ins 
 ma-iter. For leferences to the custonr of laying 
 np money, &c. in couSapta, lioth in classical and 
 rabbinical writers, see VVetstein's ^Y. T. on Luke 
 xix. 20. In the second instance (John xi. 44) 
 it appears as a kerchief, or cloth attached to the 
 head of a corpse. It was ]ierliaps brought round 
 the forehead and under the chin. In many 
 Egyptian mummies it does not cover the face. 
 In ancient times among the Greeks it did. Ni- 
 colaus (De (Ircpcor. Luctu, c. iii. J 6, Thiel. 
 I<iy7). Maimonide.s, in his comparatively recent 
 times, desciibes the vhvle face as being covered, 
 and gi\es a leason for the custom (Tract i.fel, 
 c. 4). The next instance is that of the aovZapiov 
 which had been 'about the head' of our Lord, 
 but which, after his resurrection, was found lolled 
 up, as if deliberately, and ])ut in a place sepa- 
 rately from the linen clothes X'"l'^^ ivrnvKiyixiyov 
 (Is fva rdnov. The last instance of (he Bi- 
 blical use of the word occurs in the account of 
 'lhes|)ecial miracles' wrought by tlie hanils of 
 Paul (Acts xix. 11); 'so that aouSapia (hand- 
 kerchiefs, napkins, wrappers, shawls, &c.) were 
 brought from his body to the sick ; and the dis- 
 eases departed Irom them, and the evil spirits 
 went out of them.' The E|ihesiaiis had not un- 
 naturally inferred that the a)jostle's niiiaculuus 
 jMiwer could be commnnicatid by such a mode 
 of contact ; and ceitaiidy cures thus received Iry 
 jiarties at a distance, among a people lamed for 
 their addictedness to 'curious arts,' i. c. magical 
 skill, &c., would serve to convince them of the 
 truth of the gospel, by a n-ode well suited to 
 interest their nunds. The Apostle is not recorded 
 to have exjiiessed any opinion res|:ecting llie 
 reality of this inteiniediate means of those mi- 
 racles. He had doubtless sufficiently exiilained 
 that these and all the other niiiacles 'wrought by 
 his hands,' i.e. by his means, weie really wrought 
 by God (ver. I I) in attest. iliou of the mission of 
 Jesus. If he himself t+ld not enteitain exactly 
 the same ideas upon the subject as they did, he 
 may be consideied as conceding to, or rather n,ot 
 disturldng nniiecessai ily, ]ioi)ular notions, ren- 
 dered harmless by his ]ircvious explanation, and 
 allbrdiiig a veiy convenient medium for achieving 
 much Uigher purpuseii. if the comieciiou be-
 
 810 
 
 HANNAH 
 
 twet'n the seiondarij cause and the effect was 
 real, it reinimU us of our Saviour's expression, 
 * I perceive that virtue is goue out of me ' (Mark 
 V. 30) ; wliicli is, however, regarded hy many- 
 critics as a popular mode of saying that he knew 
 that a miracle liad been wrought hy his power 
 and efHcacy — a mode of speaking in uniso7i at 
 least with the belief of the woman that she should 
 he healed if she could but touch the hem of his 
 garment unperceived by him, and perhaps even 
 conceded to, in accordance with the miracles 
 wrought through the medium of contact related 
 in the Old Testament (1 Kings xvii. 21; 2 Kings 
 iv. 29, &c.), and in order, by a sujierior display, 
 in regard both to speed and extensiveness, to 
 demonstrate his supremacy by a mode through 
 which the Jews were best prepared to perceive it 
 (Luke vi. 19 ; Schwarz, ad Olear. de Siylo N. T. 
 p. 129; Soler. de Pileo, p. 17; Pierson, ad Mar. 
 
 B348 ; Lydii Flor. Spars, ad Pass. J. C. p. 5 ; 
 rusius, Qucestt. Ileb. c. 2; Rosenmiiller and 
 Kuinoel on the passages). — J. F. D. 
 HANGING. [Punishments.] 
 
 HANNAH, properly Ciiannah (HSn, gra- 
 cioiisness ; Sept. "Awo), wife of a Levite named 
 Elkanah, and mother of Samuel. Slie was very 
 dear to her husliand, but l)eing childless was much 
 aggrieved by the insults of Elkanah "s other wife 
 Peninnah, v/ho was blessed with chihlren. The 
 family lived at Ramathaim-iophim, and, as the 
 law required, there was a yearly journey to offer 
 sacrifices at the sole altar of Jeliovah, which was 
 then at Shiloh. Women were not bound to attend ; 
 but pious females free from the cares of a family 
 often did so, especially when the husband was 
 a Levite. Every time that Hannah went there 
 childless she declined to take part in the festivities 
 which followed the sacrifices, being then, as it 
 seems, peculiarly exjiosed to the taunts of her 
 rival. At length, on one of these visits to Shiloh, 
 while she prayed before returning home, she 
 vowed to devote to the Almighty the son which 
 slie so earnestly desired (Num. xxx. 1, sq.). It 
 seems to have been the custom to pronounce all 
 vows at the holy place in a loud voice, under the 
 immediate notice of tiie priest (Dent, xxiii. 23; 
 Ps. xxvi. 14); but Hannah prayed in a low 
 tone, so that her li]is only were seen to move. 
 This attracted the attention of the high-priest, Eli, 
 who suspected that she had taken too much wine 
 at the recent tVast. From this suspicion Hannah 
 easily vindicated herself, and relumed home with 
 a lightened heart. Before the end of that year 
 Hannah became the rejoicing mother of a son, to 
 whom the name of Samuel was given, and who 
 was from his l)iitli jjlaced under tlie obligations 
 of that condition of Nazariteship to which his 
 mother had vowed him. B.C. 1171. 
 
 Hannah went no more to Shiloh till her child 
 was old enough to dispense with her maternal 
 services, when she took him up with her to leave 
 him there, as, it appears, was the custom when one 
 already a Levite was placed under the additiona' 
 obligations of Nazaviteship. When he was pre- 
 sented in due form to the high-priest, the motln>. 
 took occasion to remind him of the former trans- 
 action •. ' For this child,' .she said, '1 prayed, and 
 the Lord liatli given me my petition which I 
 asked of him' (1 Sam. i. 27). Hannah's glad- 
 aess afterwards found vent in an exulting chant, 
 
 HARAN". . 
 
 which furnishes a remarkable specimen of tlie 
 early lyric ])oetry of the Helirews, and of which 
 many ot the ideas and images wcie in after times 
 re]ieated by the Virgin Mary on a somewhat 
 similar occasion (Luke i. 46, sq.). 
 
 After this Hannah failed not to visit Sliiloh 
 every year, bringing a new dress for lur son, who 
 remained under the eye and near the jiersoli o' 
 the high-priest [Samuel]. That great personagt 
 took kind notice of Hannah on these occasions, 
 and bestowed his blessing upon lier and. her 
 husband. The Lord repaid her abundantly for 
 that which she had, to use her own expression, 
 ' lent to him ;" for she had three sons and two 
 daughters after Samuel. 
 
 HANUN (l-1Jn, bestotcer; Sept. 'AvviLv), son 
 and successor of Naliash, king of the Ammonites. 
 David, who had in his tiouliles been befiiende;] 
 by Nahash, sent, with the kindest intentions, an 
 emijassy to condole with him on the death of his 
 father, and to congratulate him on his own ac- 
 cession. The rash young king, however, was led 
 to misapprehend the motives of this embassy, and 
 to treat with gross and inexpiable indignity the 
 honourable personages whom David had charged 
 with this mission. Their beards were Aa//"sl)aven, 
 and their robes cut short by the middle, and they 
 were dismissed in this shameful trim ; which can 
 be appreciated only by those who consider how 
 reverently the beartl has always been legaitled by 
 the Orientals [Beaud] (b.c. 1038). When the 
 news of this alfront was brought to David, he sent 
 word to the ambassadors to remain at .leiicho till 
 the growth of their beards enabled them to appeal 
 with decency in the metropolis. He vowed veri 
 geance upon Hanun for the insult; and the vehe 
 mence with which tlie matter was taken up forms 
 an instance, interesting from its antiquity, of the 
 resjiect expected to be paid to the person and cha- 
 racter of ambassadors. Hanun himself looked foi 
 nothing less than war as the consequence of his 
 conduct; and he subsidized Hadarezer-and othei 
 Syrian princes to assist him with their armies 
 The power of the Syrians was broken in two 
 campaigns, and the Ammonites were left to theit 
 fate, which was severe even beyond the usual se- 
 verities of war in that remote age [Ammonites; 
 D.wid] (2 Sam. x. ; 1 Chron. xix.). 
 
 HARA (i<"in), a Chaldee form for "Tin, tnoim- 
 tain (Gesenius): Vulg. Ara. One of the places 
 to which the tril>es beyond the Jordan were carried 
 away by Tiglath-pilescr. T!ie v/ord occurs only 
 in a single passage (1 Chi on. v. 26) ; in the Sep- 
 tuagint and Syiiac version it is altogether omitted. 
 Tlie Chaldee Paraphrast renders it by N^^np "'1113, 
 mountains of darkness. Bochart and Gesenius 
 conjecture that it is a name for the nurtherr. jiart 
 of Media, which in Arabic is called Algebal, ' the 
 mountainous regicm,' to which the Hebiew term 
 corresponds. Media, Bochart oliserves, is called 
 Aria livthe Greeks, and the inhaliitants are deno- 
 minated Arii ("Apioi) (Herod, vii. 62; Bochart. 
 Geog. Sacra, iii. 14. p. H'4 ; Gesenius, The 
 sauriis, s.v. ; Michaelis, Sitpplementa ad Lejc, 
 Heb., vol. i p. 570).— J. E. R. 
 
 IIARADAH, a camp or station of the Israel- 
 ites (Num. xxxiii. 24) [Wanuehing]. 
 
 HARAM. [House.] 
 
 1. HARAN, eldest son of Terah, brotho d
 
 BARAN. 
 
 Abrabam anil Nalior, and fatlier of Lot, Milcah 
 and Iscali. He died hcfoie his iailicr Teiali ; 
 wliicli, fi(;n) tlie manner in wliicli it is mentioned, 
 appe.irs to have been a much rarer case in those 
 da\s than at present (Gen. xi. 27, sq.). 
 
 HARAN, or rather Ciiawan (pn ; Sept. 
 Xap^dv), called by the Greeks Charran, and by 
 the Romans Charr;B. It was situated in the 
 north-western part of Mesopotamia, on a river of 
 the same name running into the Kiiphrafes. It 
 is supposed to have been so called IVom Haran, 
 the fatlier of Lot and brother of Abraham ; hut 
 there ajipearsno gromid for lliis conclusion except 
 the identity of names. Abraham, after he had 
 been called from Ur of the Clialdees, tarried heie 
 /ill his father Terah died, when he proceeded to 
 the land of Canaan (Gen. xi. 31, .'JS; Acts vii. 
 4). The elder branch of the family still re- 
 mained at Haran ; which led to the interesting 
 journeys thiiher described in the patriarchal his- 
 tory — first, thai of Abraiiam's servant to obtain a 
 wife for Isaac (Gen. xxiv.),and next, that of Jacob 
 when he fled to evade the wrath of Esau (Gen. 
 sxviii. 10). The plain bordering on this town 
 is celebrated in history as the scene of a battle 
 '1 Y7hich the Roman army was defeated by the 
 ?artliians, and the Triumvir Crassus killed. 
 Abrilfeda (Tab. Sijrice, p. 164) sjieaks of Haran 
 >« formerly a great city, which lay in an arid 
 /•nd barren tract of country in the province of 
 \iar Modha). Tiie Sabians had a chapel there 
 which was dedicated to Aliraham. 
 
 Haran still retains its ancient name in the 
 foi.n of Harran, and is only peopled by a few 
 fiitnilies of wandering Arabs, wh<i are led thither 
 »y a plentiful snpjjly of water from several small 
 treams. It is situated in a fl;if and sandy plain 
 r, 36^ 4U' N. lat., 39° 2' 45" E. long. 
 HARE (nip.lN arnebeth ; Arab, arneb) 
 jcurs in Lev. xi. 6, and Deut. xiv. 7, and, in 
 y th instances, it is prohibited fiom being used as 
 t>od, because it chews the cud, although it has not 
 lie hoof divided. But the hare belongs to an order 
 . r mammals totally distinct from the runiinan- 
 A, which are all, without exception, bisulca, the 
 amel's hool' alone ollering a partial modilic.ition. 
 ibey have all four stomachs; incisor teeth, with 
 I gain some slight modilicatiun in the camel, sulely 
 ' 1 the lower jaw ; molars made for grinding, and 
 ne lower jau lione articulated, so as to admit of 
 /le circular action required for that jiurpose, when 
 he food, already swallowed, is forced up to be 
 lioroughly triturated. All these characters and 
 •'icfilties are wanting in the hare, which belongs 
 o tiie order rodentia; for, in common with j)or- 
 .upines, squirrels, beavers, and rats, it has in- 
 .•isor teeth above and below, set like chisels, and 
 alculated for gnawing, cutting, and nibliiing. 
 The word ' nibble " itself shows an aflmity to tiie 
 iemitic jiarticle neb in the names above cited.) 
 The stomach of rodents is single, and the motion 
 if the mouth, excejitiiig when they masticate some 
 Aiall portion of food reserved intlie hollow of the 
 cheek, is more that of the lips, wlien in a state 
 of repooe the animals are engaged in working the 
 ■jici.sor teeth upon each other. This practice is a 
 .•■.ficessary comiifion of existence, for the friction 
 Keeps them Ht for the purjjose of niltiiling, and 
 
 Iirevents their growing ijeyond a projier length, 
 [t is a provision of nature in the whole order of 
 
 HARETH. 
 
 811 
 
 rodffots; and, if by any ac<ident the four cuttiui) 
 
 teeth be lendeied inefhciciit liy iiol <:losiiig upon 
 each other at the exact line of ront.ict, they grow 
 ra])itily beyond .serviiealili.' u.se, exceed the ojx'M- 
 iiis; of the mouth, and impede feeding (ill the 
 animal ])erishes from want. As iiares do not sub- 
 sist on ban! substances, like most of the geneia of 
 file order, but on tender shoots and grasses, ihey 
 have more cause, and therefore a m^re constant 
 craving, toabra<le their teeth ; and this they do in 
 a manner which, combined with the slight tritu- 
 ration of the occ.Lsiuiial contents of lire cheek.t 
 even modem writers, nut zoologists, have mislukeii 
 for real rumination. In the German versions, tlu< 
 exjiression wicderkauvn. ' to chew again,' is much 
 more correct than tin.' English ])hiase, 'to chew 
 >he cud," because this last inijiliesa faculty which 
 -e-chewiiig does not, and which the hare duec nol 
 
 3088688. 
 
 \4-i, 
 
 S3S. [Syrian Hu«.] 
 
 Physiological investigation having fully deter- 
 mined these questions, it follows that both with 
 regard to tlie Shaphan and tlie Hare we shouM un- 
 derstand theoiiginal in the alwve passages, rendered 
 'chewing the cuil," as mertily implying a .second 
 mastication, more or less coni])lete, and not neces- 
 sarily that faculty of true ruminants, wiiich de- 
 rives its name from a power to draw up aliment, 
 alter deglutition, when worked into a ball, from 
 the first stomach into the mouth, and theie to sub- 
 mit it to a second grinding ))ro<ess. 'llie act of 
 ' chewing the cud and 're-ciiewing" lieing con 
 sidered identical by the Hebrews, the sacred law 
 giver, not being occupied with the doctrines ot 
 science, no doulrt used ihe ex))ie.s3ion in tlie sense 
 in which it was then understood. It may b« 
 added, that a similar ojiinion, and conseiiuent re 
 jection of liie hare as food, pervaded many nat icii* 
 of antiquity, who derived their oiigin, or their 
 doctrines, liom . a Semitic soiiice; and that 
 among others it existed among tlie Biitish Celta?, 
 jjiobalily even befoie they had any intercourse 
 with Phoenician niei chants. 
 
 There are two distinct sy:ecies of hare in Syria, 
 one, I.ej)us Syriaciis, or Syiiiin hare, neaily e(pial 
 in size to the ci/iimion European, having the lur 
 ochry buli', and Lejjtis Sinaiticus, or haie ol the 
 desert, sm.i Her and brownish. They reside in the 
 localities indicated by their trivial names, and 
 are distinguished from the common hare, by a 
 greater length of e.iis, and a Itlack tail with white 
 fringe. There is found in Egypt, and higher up 
 the ^'ile, a third sjjecies, rejnesented in the outline 
 })ainiings on ancient monuments, but not coloured 
 with that delicacy of tint required for ^ii^tinguisll- 
 ing it from tlie olheis, exci-pling that it appears to 
 be maikeil with the black s]«ckles which charac- 
 terize the existing species — C. li. S. 
 
 HARETH, a forest in Judah, to which David 
 fled from Saul (1 Sam. xxii. 6) [1'uhkki'].
 
 812 
 
 HARLOT. 
 
 HARLOT, VVnoitE, Strange Woman. &c. 
 
 (n2"lT ; Sept. iropvv, Vuljj. meretrix i H^lf?, 
 n»"l23 niT, &c. Tlie first of these En-lisli 
 
 ^ • ; T > TT ' ^ ^ 
 
 u'orcls, to wliicli vaiious etymologies liave been 
 a.ssigiied, siL,'nifies a piostitute for lust or gain. 
 The mercenary motive is more evident in the 
 second, from the German hureii, Dutch huerer), 
 ' to hire.' It is equally apparent in the Greek 
 K6pi'rj, from TTtpvaw, "to sell;' and in the Latin 
 meretrix, I'-om 7nereor, ' to earn.' Thus Ovid 
 (^Amoj: i. ,0, 21):— 
 
 ' Slut meretrix certo cuivis mercahilis aere, 
 Et miseras jusso corpore quaerit opes.' 
 The first Hehre^v word (HJIT) occm-s frequently, 
 and is often remlereil in our version by the first 
 of these English worils, as in Gen. xxxiv. 31, &c., 
 and sometimes, without apparent reason for the 
 change, Ity tlie second, as in Prov. xx'iii. 27, and 
 elsewhere. Tlie lirst En;,'lish word is also applied 
 to different Hebrew words, vvliereby important dis- 
 tinctions are I0.4. Tlius iii Gen. xxxviii. 15, the 
 word is nJIT. ' harlot,' which, however, becomes 
 clianged to Ht^'lp, 'harlot," in vers. 21, 22, vvhicli 
 means, literally, a consecrated woman, a female 
 (})erhaps priestess) devoted to prostitution in 
 honour of some heathen idol. The distinction 
 shows that Judah supposed Tamar to be a heathen : 
 the facts, tiierefore, do not prove that prostitution 
 ■was then practised between Hebrews. The fol- 
 lowing elucidation is ofTered of the most im- 
 portant instances in which the several words 
 occiu' : — 
 
 First, n^lT- From the foregoing account of 
 Judah it would appear tliat the 'veil' was at 
 that time j)eculiar to harlots. Judah thought 
 Tamar to be such, ' because she had covered her 
 face.' Mr. Buckingham reinaiks, in reference 
 to this ()as5age, tliat ' the Turcoman women go 
 unveiled to tiiis day' {Travels in Mesopotamia, 
 i. 77). It is contended by Jahn and others 
 that in ancient times all females wore the veil 
 (Bibl. Archaol. p. 127). Pos^^iljly some pecu- 
 liarity in tiie size of the veil, or the mode of 
 wearing it, may have been (JlilT JT'ti', Prov. 
 vii. 10) the distinctive dress of the harlot at that 
 ])eriod (see New Translation, by the Rev. A. De 
 Sola, &c. pp. 11<), 218-9). The priests and the 
 high-jiriest weie foi bidden to take a wife that was 
 (had been. Malt. xxi. 31) a harlot. Josephus 
 extends tlie law to all the Hebrews, and seeins 
 to ground it on the prohibition against oblations 
 arising from ]irostitution, Deut. xxiii. 18 (Antiq. 
 iv. 8. 23). The celebrated case of Raiialj has 
 been much delated. She is, indeed, called by 
 the word usually signifying harlot (Josh. ii. 1 ; 
 vi. 17 ; Sept. Tropvrj ; Vulg. meretrix ; and in 
 Heb. xi. 31 ; James ii. 25) ; but it has been 
 attemjited to show that the word may mean an 
 innkeeper [Rahab]. Tiienext instance introduces 
 the epitliet of ' strange woman." It is the case of 
 Jephthali's mother (Jutlg. xi. 2), who is also called 
 a harlot {irSpvi); meretrix); but the epithet nCi'N 
 mnN, 'strange woman," merely denotes foreign 
 eztractiim. Josephus says |fVos7rept ttiv p.-f]Tipa, 
 ' a stranger by the mother's side.' The masterly 
 description in Prov. vii. 6, &c. may possibly be 
 that of an abandoned married ■wimvMx (ver. 19, 
 20). or of the solicita'Juns of a courtezan, ' fair 
 gpeech,' imder such a pretension. Ttie mixture 
 «f religious observances (ver. 14 " vems illustrated 
 
 HARLOT. 
 
 by the fact that ' the gods are actually worsliipiw<l 
 in many oriental brothels, and fragments of the 
 ofl'erings distributed among tlie frequenters' (Df 
 A. Clarke's Comment, in loc). The representa- 
 tion given by Solomon is no doubt /o?(wrfc(/ u|H)u 
 facts, and therefore shows that in his time pros- 
 titutes jilied their trade In the 'streets' (Prov. vii. 
 12; ix. U,&c. ; Jer. iii. 2; Ezek. xvi. 24, 25, 31). 
 Since the Hebrews regarded Jehovah as tlie lius- 
 band of his people, by virtue of the covenant he 
 had made with them (Jer. iii. 1); therefore, to 
 commit fornication is a very common metanhor 
 in the Scrijitures to denote defections on liieir 
 part from that covenant, and especially by the 
 practice of idolatry [Founication]. Hence 
 the degeneracy of Jerusalem is illustrated by the 
 symbol of a harlot (Isa. i. 21). and even that of 
 heathen cities, as of Nineveh (Nah. iii. 4). Under 
 this figure the prophet Ezekiel delivers the tre- 
 mendous invectives contained in ch. xvi., xxiii. 
 In the prophecy of Hosea the illustration is 
 carried to a startling extent. The jinipliet seems 
 commanded by the Lord to take ' a wife of 
 whoredoms and children of whoredoms ' (ch. i. 2}, 
 and to ' love an adulteress' (ch. iii. 1). It has, 
 indeed, been much disputed whether these trans- 
 actions were real, or passed in vision only ; 
 but the idea itself, and the diversified apjili- 
 cations of it throughout the prophecy, rendei 
 it one of the most eilective portions of Scripture 
 [Hosea]. 
 
 Secondly, HC'Tp (occurs Gen. xxxviii. 15, 21 
 22; Deut. xxiii. 17; Hos. iv. 14). It has been 
 already observed that the jnoper meaning of the 
 word is consecrated prostititte. The very early 
 allusion to such persons, in the fir.'it of these jias- 
 sages, agrees with the accounts of them in ancient 
 heathen writers. Herotlotus refers to the 'abomi- 
 nable custom of the Babylonians, who conqielled 
 every native female to attend the temple of 
 Venus once in her life, and to prostitute her- 
 self in honour of the goddess' (i. 199; Baruch, 
 vi. 43). Strabo calls prostitutes, who, it is well 
 known, weie at Athens dedicated to Venus, 
 UpSSovAoi yvvaiKis, ' consecrated servants,' ' vo- 
 taries ' (Geog. viii. p. 378; Grotius, Annutat. on 
 Baruch ; Beloe's Herodotus, Notes, vol. i. p. 272, 
 Loud. 1606). The transaction related in Num- 
 bers XV. 1-15 (comp. Ps. cvi. 2'*) seems con- 
 nected with idolatry. The prohibition in Deut. 
 xxiii. 17, ' there shall be no ilK^lp, " whoie," of 
 the daughters of Israel,' is intended to exclude 
 such devotees from the worship of Jehovah (see 
 other allusions, Job xxxvi. 14 ; 1 Kings xiv. 24 ; 
 XV. 12). 
 
 Thirdly, nHDJ, ' the strange woman' (1 Kingi 
 xi. 1; Prov. v. 20; vi. 24; vii. 5; xxiii. 27; 
 Sept. aWorpla ; Vulg. aliena, extranea). It 
 seems probable that some of the Hebrews in later 
 times inter|)reted the prohibition against forni- 
 cation (Deut. xxii. 41) as limited to females of 
 their own nation, and that the ' strange women' 
 in question were Canaanites and- other Gentiles 
 (Josh, xxiii. 13). In tlie case of Solomon they 
 are specified as Moabites, .\mmonites, Edomites, 
 Zi<lonians, and Hittites. The jiassages refeired 
 to discover the character of these females. To 
 the same class belongs mT, ' the strange woman' 
 (Prov. V. 3, 20 ; xxii. 14 ; xxiii. 33 ; yuvT] ificvrt, 
 aWorpia ; meretrix, aliena, extranea) : it it 
 sometimes found mt HJ^X (Prov. ii. 16 ; jii. b)
 
 HARMONIES. 
 
 Tn the same class of females belongs ni7*D3 
 nB^, ' llie foolisli woman,' i. c. hy a coumion 
 association of \deiis in the Sliemilisli dialects, 
 liufiil (Ps. xiv. 1). Tlie desciiiitioii in Piov. ix. 
 II, &c. illustiates the character of tlie female so 
 ilesigiiatcil. To wliich may he added J?"! nL''N, 
 'the evil woman' (Prov. v. 24). 
 
 In tiie New Testament iT6puri occurs in Maft. 
 xxi. 31, .Vi ; Luke xv. 30; 1 Cor. vi. 15, Ki; 
 Heh. \i. 31; James ii. 25. In none of fl)e3e 
 passages does it 7icccssan'ii/ imply ])rostitution for 
 gain. The likeliest is Luke xv. 30. It is used 
 symbolically for a city in Rev. xvii. 1, 5, i."), 16; 
 xix. 2, wiiere the term anil all tlx- attendant 
 imajfeiy aie derived from the Old Testament. 
 It may lie oh-eived in regard to Tyre, wliich 
 (Isa. xxiii. 15, 17) is represented as ' committing 
 fomicalion with all t!ie kinj^doms ot the world 
 upon the face of the ejirtli,' that these words, as 
 indeed seems likely from thoic which follow, 
 may relate to the various arts whicli she had 
 employed lo induce ?nerc/iants to trade with her' 
 (Patiick, in loc). So the Sept. understood it, 
 tarai i^TiSpiov irdcrais reus PaatXiiats rris oIkou- 
 u€vt)s iirl TTpSfrwirov rfjs yrjs. Schleusner obs-eives 
 that the same words in Rev. xviii. 3 wwy also 
 relate to commercial dealings. (Winer's Rcal- 
 toiirterb. s. v. Huue; Rahah ; Fesselii Adver- 
 ser. Sacr. ii. 27. 1, 2; VVilteb. 1650. Frisch, 
 De THuliere peregrina ap. Hebr. Lips. 1744). 
 
 —J. F. D. 
 
 HARMONIES. The object of Harmonies is 
 to arrange the Scriptures in ciironological order, 
 80 that the mutual agreement of the several paits 
 may be rendered apparent, and the true succes- 
 sion of events clearly understood. With this 
 view various scholars have compiled harmonies of 
 the Old Testament, of the New, and of particular 
 portions of both. Harmonies of the Old Testa- 
 ment exhibit the books disjwsed in chronological 
 order, as is done by Lightfoot in his ' Clironicleof 
 the Times, and the order of the Texts of the Old 
 Testament ;' and by Townsend in his ' Old Testa- 
 ment airanged in Historical and Chronological 
 order.' Harmonies of the New Testament present 
 the gospels and ejjisties di.^tiibuted in like (irder, 
 tJie latter being intersjier.sed among the Acts of the 
 Apostles. In this way Townsend has proceeded 
 in his valualile work entitled, ' The New Testa- 
 ment arranged in Chronological and Historical 
 order' Books, however, of this kind are so \'evi 
 in number, that the teim harmoraj is almost ap- 
 propriated by usage to the gospels. It is this 
 part of the New Testament which has chiefly 
 occupied the attention of those inqiiirers whose 
 object is to arrange the Scriptures in their true 
 order. The memoirs of our Lord writ'en by 
 the four Evangelists, have chietly occu])ied the 
 tliouglits of those who wish to siiow fliat they all 
 agree, and nnitually autiienticate one another. 
 Accordingly, such compositions aie exceedingly 
 numerous. Tiie four gospels nairate tlie principal 
 events coimecfed with our Lord's alxide on earth, 
 from his birth to his ascension. There must 
 therefore be a general resemblance between them, 
 ftiongh that of John contains little in common 
 with (he others, beiuig apparently supplementary 
 to them. Vet tiiere are consideralile vff» ersities, 
 both ill the order in wliich facts are narrated, and 
 Ui the facts ihemseUes. Hence tiie difliculty of 
 weavin;^ the accounts of the four into a continiiom 
 
 HARMONIES. 
 
 AI3 
 
 nnil chronological history. Those portionn of the 
 (iospels that tel.ite to the remirrcclion of the 
 Saviour have always ])res('nled thi- greatest ob- 
 stacles li« the comjiilers of harmonies, and it miut 
 be catitlidly admitled that the ac<-oiuits of this 
 reuiaikable event aie not easily recoiK ilcd. Vet 
 the lalxiuis of West and Townson, especially the 
 hiltd-, have served to lemove llie appaieiit contra- 
 dictions. In adilition to liiem may be nien- 
 tiiiiied (Jranlield and Hales, who have cmhavoiired 
 to improve u[ion the aMem|ifs of their prede- 
 cessors. 
 
 In connection with harmonies the term diates- 
 saron freipieiitly o<;curs. It denotes a continueil 
 narrative selected out of tlie four Gosj.'cls, in 
 which all re|,efitioiis of ihe same or similar words 
 are avoideil. It is ilms Ihe resiift of a harmony, 
 since the latter, jiropeily sneaking, exhibits tlie 
 entire texts of the four Evangelist , aiiaiiged in 
 corresponding columns. In ])opiilar l.iiiguage 
 the two are often used synonymously. 
 
 The following (piest'ons relative lo harmoniet 
 demand atleiition : — 
 
 1. Have all or any of the Evangelists observe*! 
 chronological arrangement in their nairatives * 
 
 2. What was the duration of our Lord's mi- 
 nistry? 
 
 1. It was the ojiiiiion of Osiander mid his fol" 
 lowers, that all the Evangelists lecord the fads ol 
 the Saviour's history in their tiue older. When 
 tlieiefore the same transactions aie jilacfil in a 
 different order by the writers, ihey were supposed 
 to have hajipeiied more than once. It was asctimcd 
 that Ihey took place as often ;is ihey were dilVer- 
 enlly arranged. This princi]ile is too improbable 
 to requiie lel'utatiun. Instead of endeavouring 
 to solve ditlicultie-s, it boht'y meets them with a 
 clumsy expedient. Improbable however as the 
 hypothesis is, it has been adopted by M.ickniglit 
 It is our dcciiled conviction that all the Evange- 
 lists iiave not adheretl to chronological arrange- 
 ment. 
 
 The question then aiises, have all neglected 
 the order of time? Newcome and many others 
 es))oiise this view. ' Chrono'ogical order, says 
 this writer, ' is not jiiecisely obseivetl by any of 
 the Evangelists ; St. John anil Si. Maik observe 
 it most ; and St. M.itthew neglects it most.' 
 Bishop Marsh supposes that Matthew ])robably 
 adhered to the order of time, because he was for 
 the most part an. eye-witne-ss of the facts. The 
 others, he thinks, neglected the siccession of 
 events. The reason assigned by the learned pre- 
 late in favour (if Matliiew's order, is of no weight, 
 as long as the inspiration of JMark, Luke, and 
 John, is maintained. If tl.ey were infalliblj 
 directed in their (uimpositiiins, tlicv were in a 
 condition equally favourable (o chronological 
 narration, 
 
 A close insjiection of Matthew's Gosjiel will 
 show that he did not iiitciiil to maik the true suc- 
 cession of events. He gives us no dc Unite ex- 
 pressions If assist in arranging his nialei ials in their 
 proper orde^. V'erv frequently he pas.ses from ono 
 occuireiice to anoti.ei without any note of time; 
 sometimei he employs a T(5t«, sometimes iv Tatl 
 ■llfifpais *<c€'Va.5, (V (KiKvrf Tu' Kaip'!", or eV fKfiyjl 
 TTJ (iipa Kaiely is he so minute as to ust! fitff 
 r)fxfpai ff ( .vvii. I ). In short, time and place seem 
 to have been sidioidinated to the grand object 
 whicli he had in view, viz.. the livelv exliibitiov
 
 814 
 
 HARMONIES. 
 
 HARMONIES. 
 
 of Jesus in liis jierson, works, and discourseg. In 
 inireiiinu^ tiiis design, lie has often bron<^ht together 
 ■imilar facts and adilresses. Although, therefore, 
 Kaiser founds upon the ])hrase9 we have adduced 
 a conclusion the very reverse of ours, yet we 
 bel'eve that Matthew did not projwse to follow 
 chron(>l()gical order. Tlie contrary is obviously 
 implied. 
 
 Mark again is still more indefinite than 
 Matthew. Even the general expressions found 
 in the first Gospel are wanting in his. The facts 
 themselves, not their true succession, were the 
 ol)ject of his attention. Chronological order is 
 not oi)served in his Gos])el, except in so far as that 
 Gospel agrees witii Lukes. Yet Cartwright, in 
 his Harm, my published about 1630, makes the 
 arrangement of Mark his rule for method. 
 
 With regard to Luke, it is probable that he in- 
 tended to arrange every thing in its true place, 
 because at the,l)eginning of his work, he employs 
 the term KaSeffis-. Tliis word is often referred 
 to succession of events^ wit-hout involving time ; 
 but it seems v-.learly to imply chronological suc- 
 cession (comp. Acts xi. 4). Although, therefore, 
 Grotius and many others oppose the latter view, 
 we cainot but coincide with Beza when he 
 says: "In harmonia Evangelistarum scribenda, 
 recfiorem ordiiiem servari putem si in iis quae 
 habent communia, reliqui ad Lucam potius ac- 
 commodentur, cpiam Lucas ad cseteros' (comp. 
 also Olshausen. Die Echtheit der vier Canon 
 E'xing., &c.. Band i. ss. 82, 3, dritte Aufl.). 
 We may therefore conclude that this Evangelist 
 usually follows the chronological order, espe- 
 cially when such p ssages as iii. 1 and iii. 23 are 
 ciinsidered, where exact notices of time occur. 
 But as the Gospel ad\ances, those expressions 
 which relate to time are as indeterminate as 
 Matthew's and Mark's. Frequently does he pass 
 from one transactiuu to another without any note 
 of time; and again, he has pL^To. ravra, 4v /xiS 
 rctji/ Tj^jLipSiv. In coiisecpience of (his vagueness, 
 it is very difficult, if )iut impossible, to make out 
 a complete h.ninony of the Gos])els according to 
 the order of Luke, because we have no precise 
 tiata to guide us in inserting the particulars re- 
 lated by Matthew and Mark in their proper 
 places, in the third Gospel. All that can lie de- 
 termined with any dej;ree of probability is, that 
 Luke's order seems to have been adopted as the 
 true, chronological one. Whether the writer has 
 deviated from it in any case, may admit of 
 doubt. We are inclined to believe, that in all 
 minute particulars chronological arrangement is 
 not observed. The general hpdij of facts and 
 events seems to par;al<e of this character, not 
 ecerij special circumstanrs noticed by the Evan- 
 gelist. But we are reminded that the assig7i- 
 mcnt of d ites IS d\stmct from chronological ar- 
 rangement. A writer may narrate all his facts 
 in the order in which they occurred, without 
 specifying the particular time at which they hap- 
 pened : or, on tlie other hand, he may mark the 
 dates without anatiging his narrativjf. in chrono- 
 logical order. But attention to one of these will 
 naturally give rise to a certain o])inion with 
 legard to the other. Tlie more indeterminate the 
 notidcatiiius of time, tl e lej.s probable is it that 
 time was an e'ement kept bel'ore the mind of tlie 
 writer. If ther; l)e a i'ew dates a-^signed with 
 e£ac(7ies8, it i» i presumptioii tliat the true ar- 
 
 rangement is observed in otiier partg where bo 
 dates occur. In the succession of events Luke 
 and Mark generally agree. 
 
 With regard to Johns Gospel, it has little in 
 common with the rest except the two last cha])fers. 
 It is obvious, however, that his arrangement is 
 chronological. He carefully marks, in general, 
 whether one, two, or three days happened be- 
 tween certain events. His Gospel is therefore 
 of great use in comjiiling a synopsis. 
 
 On tlie whole, we should make the Gospel of 
 Luke the document to which the others should be 
 subordinated in point of arrangement, not neg- 
 lecting at the same time that of Joliri in con- 
 junctioii with it, wherever it is possible to connect 
 them. 
 
 Still it appears that there are not sufficient data 
 in the four Evangelists to enable the inquirer to coo 
 pose a haimoiiv in exact chronological order, no 
 as to preclude objections to its arrangement. Snice 
 times and places have been left so inileterminafe, 
 it is hopeless to conceive of a diatessaron chrono- 
 logically accurate in all particulars. The problem 
 may continue to employ the ingenuity of in- 
 quirers, without allbrding an adequate compensa- 
 tion for the learning and labour bestowed ujwn it. 
 2. What was the duration of our Lord's mi- 
 nistry ? 
 
 This is a question upon which the opinions of 
 the learned have been much divided, and which 
 cannot be settled with conclusive certainty. In 
 order to resolve it, it is necessary to mark the dif- 
 ferent Passovers which Christ attended. Looking" 
 to the Gospels by Matthew, Maik, and Luke, we 
 should infer that lie was ]ireseiit at no more than 
 two; the first at the time of his baptism, the 
 second immediately before his crucifixion. But 
 in John's Gospel three Passovers at least are 
 named during the period of our Lord's ministry 
 (ii. 13; vi. 4 ; xi. 55). It is true that some 
 writers have endeavoured to adapt the Gospel of 
 John to the other three, by reducing the Passovers 
 mentioned in the former to tivo'. So Priestley, 
 Vossius, and Mann. In order to accomplish this, 
 it was conjectured that ttocxo^ i'^ cli vi. 4, is an 
 interpolation, and then that iopri} denotes some 
 other Jewish festival. Bishop Peaj-ce went so far 
 as to (H)njecture that the entire verse l.as been in- 
 terpolated. For these lash speculations there is 
 no authority. The received reading must here be 
 followed (Liicke's C'oninientar iiber Johan?ies, 
 dritte Aufl, zweiter Theil, s. 104). In atldilion 
 to these ])assages, it has been thought by many 
 that another Passt)\er is referred to in v. 1, 
 where, although ■jrda'X''' '^^es not occur, r] iopr-r} is 
 supposed to denote the same feast. But this is a 
 subject of dispute. Iienaeus is the oldest authority 
 for explaining it of the Passover. Cyril and 
 Chrysostom, however, referred it to the Keast of 
 Pentecost; an o])ini(in ajiproved of by Eiasmus. 
 Calvin, and Beza. But Lufiier, CJhemnitz, Ca- 
 lovius, Scaliger, Grotius, anil Lightl'ont, returned 
 to the ancient view of Irenaeus. Kepjiler seems 
 to have lieen the first who conjectured that it 
 meant the Feast of Purim immediately jirecedii g 
 the Second Passover. He was followed by Petau, 
 Lamy, D'Onlrein, &c. Co>-ceius, followed by 
 Kai»ser. referred it to tlie Feast of Tabcrnuclef , 
 while Keppler and Petau intimated that it m^tj 
 possihlg ha\e lieen the Feast ofDedicaliun. Bengei 
 defended the opinion of Chrysostom ; wliile Hug
 
 HARMONIES. 
 
 with miicli plausiliility endeavours to sl)Ow that 
 italliules tu the le.ist of Purim immediately hefore 
 the Passover. Tiie latter view is adopted l)y Tiio- 
 iuck, Olsljaiiseii, and Claviseii ; tlioiii,fli Gieswell 
 maintains that tiie Passover is meant. 
 
 It would occupy tiio much sjjace to adduce the 
 various considerations tiiat have been urj^al for 
 and a-jainst tiie two leadinir opinions, viz. the 
 Passover and the Feaitt of Vwiin. The arf^imients 
 advanced on either .side are not conclusive. There 
 is still room (or tlouht. The true meatiing of 
 (opT-r\ (for I.achmann has ri}^titly expunged tlie 
 article from liefoie it) is still indeterminate (see 
 es])ecially Liicke vber Johannes, dritte .Autl., 
 ZHeiter Theil, ss. 1-15, and Hug's Introduction 
 translated tiy Fosdick, ^ 61, p. 117, sqq.). To 
 us It appears most prohahle that the most ancient 
 hypothesis is correct ; althongl the circumstances 
 urged against it are neither few nor fetlile. 
 
 Sir Isaac Newton and Macknight snpjiose that 
 five Passovers intervened between our Lord's bap- 
 tism and crucifixion. This assumption rests on 
 no foundation. Periiaps the term kopri) in John 
 vii. 2 may have given rise to it ; although eoprij 
 is explained in that passage by CK-qvo-Kriyia. 
 
 It has been well remarked by Bi.shop Marsh, 
 that the Gospel of John jiresen Is almost insuper- 
 aljle obotacles to the opinion of tiiose who confine 
 Christ's ministry to one year. If John mentions 
 but three Passovers, its duration must have ex- 
 ceeded two years; 'wut if he mentions fottr, it 
 must have been lunger than three years. During 
 the lirst tiiree centuries it was commonly believed 
 that Christ's ministry lasted but one year, or one 
 year and a few months. Such was the opinion of 
 Clemens Alexandrinus and Origen. Eusebius 
 thought that it continued for above thiee years; 
 which hypothesis became general. The ancient 
 hyiKjthesis, which confined the time to one year, 
 was revived by Mann and Priestley ; but New- 
 come, witli more judgment, defended the common 
 view, and refuteti Priestley's arguments. In inter- 
 weaving the Gospels of Matthew, Maik, and Luke, 
 with that of John, the intervals between the Pass- 
 overs are filled ujj by various transactions. Were 
 the number of these feasts determinate and precise, 
 there would be a general agreement in tiie tilling 
 u]) of the timis between them; but in consequence 
 of tiie uncertainty attaching to the suljject, har- 
 monies are found materially to dilVer in their 
 modes of arrangement. One thing is evident, 
 that the modems in tiieir endeavours after a 
 chronological disposition of the Gospel.s, adopt a 
 far more rational course than the ancients. The 
 latter strangely sup[)Osed that the first six chapters 
 of Jolin's Gospel relate to a ])eriod of Ciirist's 
 ministry prior to that with whicli the other tliree 
 evangelists begin their accounts of tlie miracles. 
 Thus Jolin alone was supposed to nan ate the 
 events belonging to the earlier part of his tninistry, 
 while Matthew, Mark, and Luke related the 
 transactions of tiie last year. 
 
 Tiie most ancient Harmony of the Gospels of 
 rtiiich we have any account was composed by 
 Tatiaii of Syria in tlie second century ; but it is 
 now lo»* 'see H. A Daniel s Tatianus der Apo- 
 Ir/ifer., Halle, 1S37, Svo.j. In the third century, 
 Ainni'.inius"^ was the author of a Harmony sup 
 
 * Tlii? Ainmoniiis is not to be confounded with 
 Vuanoiiiiis Saccas the philosopher, although 
 
 HARMONIES. 
 
 816 
 
 j)osed to be still extati., Eusebius of Ca?sarea also 
 composed a Harmony of the G()s|>tIs almut a.d 
 31.^. In it he divided the Gosjjel liiniory into ten 
 canons or tables, according aa dilVerent fads ara 
 related by one or more of the evangelists. These 
 ancient Harmonies, however, diller in chaiacter 
 from such as belong to modern time.'*. They are 
 summaries of the life of Clirist, or indexes to 
 the four Gospels, rather than a chriinohigic.il ar- 
 rangement of ditVerent facts, accompanied by a 
 reconciliation of apparent contrailictions. In mo- 
 dern times, Andreas Osiander published liis llar- 
 mony of the Goipels in 1537. He aiiopted the 
 princi])le that tlie evangelists constantly wrote in 
 chronological order. Cornelius Jansenius' Co»j- 
 cordia Evanr/clicawAs \n\hy\i\\ei\ in 1.519. Martin 
 Chemnitz's Harmony was first jiulilished in 1593, 
 and afterwards, with the contirniations of Leyser 
 and Gerhard, in 1628. Chemnitz stands at the 
 head of that class of harmonists who maintain 
 that in one or more of the four Gospels chronolo- 
 gical order has been neglecteil ; while Osiander 
 is at the head of those harmonists who maintain 
 that all the Gospels are arranged in chronologiau) 
 order. Other harmonies were published by Light- 
 foot (1651), Cradock (160S), Lamv (IGSH;, Le 
 Clerc (1G99), Toinard (1707), Whiston ri7n2), 
 Rus (1727 S-30), Bengel (1736), Haiiber (1737), 
 Doddridge (1739 and 40), Pilkington (1717), 
 Macknight (1750), Beilling (I7()7;, Griesiiach 
 (1776, 97, 1809, 22), Newcome (1778), Priestley 
 (1777 in Greek, and 1780 in Engli.sh), Michaelig 
 (17S8, in his Introduction), White (1799), De 
 Wette and Liicke ( 1 « 1 8), Mattliaei ( 1 826 \ K.iiser 
 (1828), Roediger (1829), Clausen ( 1829), Gres- 
 v,-ell (1830). Cnpentei- (183S), Reiehel (1810), 
 and Overbeck (1843). 
 
 The latest woik of importance which has ap- 
 peared in Germany on this subject is that of 
 Ziegler. 
 
 In connection with Greswell's Ilarmonia Evan- 
 gelica, the same authors Dissertations iqxm the 
 Principles and Arrangemcint of a Harmony of the 
 Gospels, of which a second edition has lieen pub- 
 lished, deserve notice. These disserf.itii ns are ex- 
 ceedingly clai) irate, and demand a patient jieru.sal. 
 The learned writer has greatly di^tln.;uislied him- 
 self as the most laboricuis of modem harmonists. 
 His work is the most cojiious that lias appeared, it 
 least since the days of Cliemnitz's folios. Some t.f 
 his fundamental principles, however, are (piestioh- 
 alile. On the whole, weie we couiinetl to one 
 Harmony of the Gospels, wc sliould prefer ihst of 
 Newcome to any other. But to adopt any one 
 implicitly, is more than the enlightened inquirer 
 can consent to do. Wc sliould llirrd'ore rei'om- 
 menil a minute examination of the works ]iub- 
 lished l)y Newcome, Greswell, Michaelis, De 
 Wette and Liicke, and Clausen. 
 
 The above list contains the best Harmonica 
 and Diatessaron? of the Gosjiels. Some aie written 
 in Greek, or Greek and Latin, others in Latin, 
 
 Eusebius and Jerome in ancient, as also Bayle 
 and Basnage in modern times, iiave fallen into 
 this mistake. Ti.e same lilunder is rommilfe*! Iiy 
 the writer of the aiticle ' .\mmonius Sacias ' in 
 Smith's Dictionary of Gieek and Roman Bio- 
 graphy and Mythology. See Ne.inders Alu/em. 
 Oeschichle, i. 3. S. 1183, Miirdocks Mnslieina, 
 vol. i. n. 171. note IS (^nl edit. New YorkV
 
 9T« 
 
 HAROD. 
 
 oftiers in Gprman and G, '<■'(, otlirrs in English. 
 The entire number of Harmonies is very f,'ieat. 
 Those \vl|() wish to see 'luits tolerably complete 
 may consult V'aiiricii Bi '•.-.ndicca Grtvca, vol. 
 iv., eil, FLirU's ; Walchii Bibliotheca Tkcohtjica, 
 torn. iv. ; Micuaelis's Introd , by Marsh, vol. iii., 
 with the traiislaior's very valuable notes. — rS. D. 
 
 H.\ROD (nnn ; Sept. 'Apa5), a brook not 
 far from .fezrecl and Mount GilLoa. The name 
 means ' pal|)itatioii,' and it lias been suggested 
 that it originated in consequence of the alarm 
 and terror of most of the men who were here 
 tested bv Gideon f.hidg. vii. l-'5); but this su])- 
 posirion seems very far-fetclied, and tlic name 
 more prol)ali!y aro'^e from some peculiarity in 
 the outflow of the stream. 
 
 HAROSHETH ok tuf. Gentii.f.s (,7)1^")^ 
 Dl'lall ; Sejit. ^ApicTuiO tuv iBi/uv), a city sup- 
 {xised to have been situated near Hazor, in the 
 northern ])arts of Canaan, called afterwards Upper 
 Galilee, or Galilee of the Gentiles [G.\i,ii.ee]. 
 Haroshetli is said to have been the residence of 
 Sisera, the general of the armies of Jabin, kin^' 
 of Canaan, who reissued in Huzor. To this place 
 Jabin himself was pursued and defeated by De- 
 biirali and Barak (Judg. iv. 2, 13, IC). 
 
 HARP. [Music] 
 
 HART [A.JAI, ; Antelope]. Fallow-deer 
 having been oniilted as a separate article, and 
 there being some confusion in the history of the 
 Asiatic and ,»VfVican Ccrvida-, increased perhaps 
 hy the remaiks of Ehrenberg 'Symb. Physic. 
 dec. i.) un<ler the head of Aiit. Leucoryx, it may 
 be proper to take notice of his attempt to de- 
 monstrate, with the aid of Bochart and Rosen- 
 miiller, who wrote when the zoology of Syria was 
 almost unknown, that AvtAolops and Jachmtcr 
 denoted fallow-derr, and particularly such as were 
 of a white cc.lour i But Cinier, in his Ossemens 
 Fossiles, has shown thai Dama among the an- 
 cients was oftenei- intejided to refer to the antelope 
 than to the fallow-deer, of ivhicli he had sought 
 the native region in vain for many years. The 
 species appeared to be largest in Spain ; and it was 
 only after the .second edition of his work was in flie 
 press that he first received a wild young specimen, 
 sliot in the woods south of Tunis, Northern Africa, 
 therefire, may be ilie original residence of this ani- 
 mal ; although it is found wild also in Sweden, 
 where palmated horns are more evidently useful 
 to clear the snow from autumnal verdure ; and re- 
 cent fossil remains attest that it was a native of 
 the whole of Vr-estern Europe. There is, however, 
 no evidence that it was ever found, or that it now 
 exists, in Asia, or that an occasional Albino of 
 any species should have obtained the particular 
 names above cited. Neither Cuvier, nor it ap- 
 pears Ehrenberg, was acquainted with the exist- 
 ence of the Cercics Barbartis of northern Africa ; 
 which, though allied to the Corsican stag, warits 
 tlie l)isantler, has the horns somewhat flattened, 
 and is slightly s])eckled : it therefore appears to 
 be intermediate with f'allovf deer. 
 
 This sjiecies, we are assured, has been seen east 
 of the Nile, in tiie de-ert of .\rabia, and is there 
 tejHited to !)e fi.nd of eating (i>h (small lizards)— 
 a propensity which impels other species to attack 
 cvcu dangerous se!})unts; and there is on the 
 «oith oi P '"»*lne the Gewasen oi' Armenia, a 
 
 h.\uran 
 
 speciPiS of stag of the luisa grouj, which coma 
 westward into Anatolia, and is net unlikely th» 
 real Z«/«or (IDT) of Scriptus", sitice the name 
 Satimor is still in use for the Biisn of India and 
 Caubul ; and in that case Akko {)pii) would na. 
 fnrally designate the Tragclophtts [Go.vtJ. Since 
 the discovery of gunpowder gieat modificationg 
 have taken ])lace in the lesidence c" t''c sporting 
 and more ferocious animals. We know, js yet, 
 little of those ran.;ing in Southern Arabia, and 
 across the Shat-ul-Aiab into Persia, ami theiefore 
 have no just light to deny that there are ariy sp«. 
 cies of Oryx wdiich may occasionally still vis't, 
 or which foimerly diii frequent, tlie borders of th« 
 Euphrates. — C. H. S. 
 
 H.\VIL.\H (n^iq; Sept. EmAi). 1. A 
 district in Arabia Felix, deriving its name from 
 the second sou of Cnsli 'Gen. x. 7), or, according 
 to others, from the second son of Joktan (Gen. x. 
 29; comp. xxv. 18). There can be no doubt, 
 however, of tlie existence of a double Havilah ; one 
 foi:;i(led liy thf descendant of Ham, and the other 
 by that of :^hcm. Niebnhr {Beschr. von Arab., 
 p)i. 270, 2S0) actually found in Yemen two dis- 
 tricts called Chaidan or llaulan (probably the 
 
 present /ov*i-), one between Saana and Mecca, 
 
 and the other a few leagues soulh-easf from "^aana; 
 which latter Biiscliing {Erdbesclir. v. i. 601) con- 
 siders to be the Havilah founded by the son of 
 Cush, as mentioned Gen. x. 7 (Michaelis, Spicil. 
 i. 189, sq. ; ii. 203). From Gen. xxv. 18, it 
 would appear that the land of Havilah formed the 
 eastern boundary of the Israelites, and so likewise 
 from 1 Sam. xv. 7, where it seems, moreover, to 
 have been a possession belonging to the Ama- 
 lekites. Others, however, take this Havilah al.so 
 for a district in Arabia, and understand liy Shur, 
 the city Pelusmm or Sin (Ezek. xxx. 15) in 
 Egypt (see Michaelis on this passage). 
 
 2. nv'^in ; Sept Ei;iA.aT, a land rich in gold, 
 lidellium. and shoham, mentioned in Gen. ii. 11, 
 in the geographical description of Paradise. 
 Some identify this with the ]neceding; but others 
 take it to l)e C/twala on the Citsnian Sea, from 
 whence that sea itself is said to l.ave derive*! the 
 Russian name of Chtvalinskoy more (Sea o\ 
 Chwala); and others sujipose it a general name 
 for India (7'. Ilicros. \>'\ZT\), in which case the 
 river Pison, mentioned as suiroumling it, would 
 be identified with the Ganges. — E. M. 
 
 HAVOTH-JAIR (the Hebrew and Arabic 
 rilin). Ilavoth signifies ' cabins * or 'huts,' such 
 as belong to the Arabians, and a collection ol 
 which is regarded as forming a hamlet or village. 
 The district of Havoth-jair (,/air's hamlets), 
 mentioned in Niim. xxxii. 41, and Dent. iii. 14, 
 was beyond the .Ionian in (he land of (iilead, and 
 belonged to the hall-tiibe of Manasseh. 
 
 HAURAN {]'])r\ ; Sept. hhpavWis), a tract o» 
 region of Syria, south of Damascus, which ia 
 twice mentioned under this name in Scripture 
 (Ezek. xlvii. IG. IR). It w;is probably of small 
 extent originally ; but received extensive ad- 
 difii.iis fri m the Romans under tiie name 
 of Anrani'is. At present it reaches from aViout 
 twenty miles south of Damascus to a little betow 
 Bozra, including the rocky district of El-I/edj*, 
 the ancient Tracbonitis, and the mo'Hi*ajno»»"'
 
 HAWK. 
 
 leyion (if Jelwl-Ha^man. Within its limits are 
 also iiicliuleil, besiiii-s riiichoiiilis, Itiir;e;i or Ittur, 
 now caUeil .le<liiiir, ami piiit of J^itaiiipa or 
 Biishaii. It is •.■t|iresented by Biirokliardt as a 
 Volcajilc region, coiiiposed of porous tiil'iL, puiiiice, 
 and lias.ilt, with tlie reni.iiiis of a crater on the 
 Tel Siioba, wliich is on its eastern border. It 
 nrodnces. bowever, croiis of corn, and has many 
 patches of luxuriant herbage, which aie freciueiited 
 m sumniM- liy the Aral' tribes for pasturage. It 
 lUo abonnili' with interesting remains of cities, 
 •cattered over its snrl'ace, among which are found 
 Greek inscriptions. 
 
 HAWK (1*3 ?ietz; Sept. Upa^; Vulg a^cipiter, 
 an unclean bird; Lev. xi. Ifi; Dent. xiv. 15; Job 
 xxxix. 26j. The Eiiglisli name is an altered form 
 of the old word fawk or falk, and in natural his- 
 tory represents several genera of raptoiial l)lrds ; 
 as does the Arabic naz^ and, no doubt, also the 
 Hebrew tietz. Western Asia .and Lower Egypt, 
 and consequently the intermediate territory of 
 Syria and Palestine, are the haliitation or tran- 
 sitory residence ol'a considerable numlier of spe- 
 cies of tlie order Ryptores, which, even irscluding 
 the shortest-winged, have great powers of (light, 
 are remarkably enterprising, live to a great age, 
 are migratory, or followers upon birds of passage, 
 or remain in a region so almndantly stocked with 
 pigeon aod turtle-dove as Palestine, and atfording 
 such a variety of ground to iuint their paiticular 
 prey — abounding as it does in mountain and forest, 
 plain, desert, marsh, river and sea-coast. We siiall 
 here enumerate, so far as oiU' information will per- 
 mit, the FalconidT of this region, exclusive of those 
 mentioned in other ariicles [.\zani.i.u; Kaui.b ; 
 61.KOF. ; KiTi:]. 
 
 HAWK. 
 
 ?n 
 
 3S4. [Peregrine Falcon.] 
 
 Falcons, or the ' noMe ' birds of prey used for 
 hawking, have lor many ages lieen objects of 
 gicat iiiteiesf, and still continue to be bought at 
 higii prices. Tney are consequently imported from 
 distant countries, as central .-Vsi.t, Iceland, Bar- 
 bar j-, &c. Theii love of liberty often renders them 
 irreclaimable when (tnce on the wing; and tlieir 
 |Kiwersiind boldness, in(le|)endent of circumstances, 
 and tiie extent (tf range wiiich the long-winged spe- 
 cies in ])arfii;ular can take, aie exempliHed by 
 their presence in every quarter of the gIol)e. The 
 Falco coinniunin, or Peiegrine falcon, is so gene- 
 tally (litl'used as to occur even in New Holland 
 «nd S<»«th Ameri<.a. .\s a tyjie of tne genus, we 
 may add that it has tlie two foreinosf quill-feathers 
 of aln.cst Clonal len^jtii, and th.il wru'U the wings 
 
 are closed tliey nearly reach tiie end of the taiL 
 On each side of the ci(M)ked |H)iiit of tiie bill lher« 
 is an angle or prominent lootii, and tVoin tlie 
 nostrils backwards a blark streak passi's iieiieath 
 the rye and forms a patch on each side of tii» 
 throat, giving tiie liird and its congeners a wiii*- 
 keietl and menacing aspect. 
 
 Next we may place Falco Aroeria of Sir J. Gr. 
 Wilkiiis'in, the sacred hawk of Kgypt. This, il it 
 be not in realilv liie same a<, or a mere variety ot, 
 the Peregrine, shoulii have retaineil the ancient 
 epithet of Ilierax, and the hawkers' name of Sacif, 
 derived from the .\rabic .Sayr, wliich evidently 
 ai)plies to it. This bird Inis the same moustaciiio 
 marks, and from them tlie old name (iernoniu, 
 whicii in base Latinity indicates whiskers, may 
 ha\e been derived. Inimmeialile representation* 
 of it occur in Kgy]itian monuments, since, in tlia 
 character of Horltal, or bird of victory, it over- 
 shadows kings and heroes, like tlie Garuda, Si- 
 »ie(/-ff, and the Hiimtna bird of Eastern .-Ysia ; but 
 it is also an emblem of Re, the Sun, and numerous 
 other divinities ; for an a;count of which we refer 
 to Sir J. G. Wilkinson's Manners and Cunto/ns of 
 the A/icie/it Egyptians, 2iid Series. 
 
 The Holiby, Fiilco suhlmtco, is no doubt a second 
 or third species ol' sacred hawk, h.aving similar 
 gernonia. Both tliis l/ird and the tractable Mer- 
 lin, Falco epsa/on, are used in the falconry of the 
 inferior Moslem landowners of Asiatic Turkey. 
 
 Besides tliese the Kestril, Falco tinnuiuuliis, 
 occurs in .Syria, and Falco tin/iunctiloides. or 
 lesser Kestril, in Egyjit ; and it is probaljle that 
 both species \'isit these two territories accordin;jf 
 to the seasons. 
 
 To tlie 'noble' birds we may add the Gerfalcon, 
 Falco ffi/rfalco, which is one-third larger tli.ui tlie 
 Peregrine: it is importeil from Taitai y and sold ac 
 Constantinople, AlepjKi, and Damascus. The gre.it 
 birds Hy at antelo[)e.s, bustanis, cranes, &c. ; and 
 of the genus Astttr, with shorter wings than true 
 falcons, the Goshawk, /•a/co palumbarius, and tim 
 Falcon Gentil, Falco f/entilix,a.ve ei'iifr imported, 
 or taken in their nests, and used to (ly at lower and 
 aquatic game. It is among the above that the 
 seven species of hunting hawks eninn rated by ])r. 
 Russe'rl must be sought; though from the circum- 
 stance that the Arabic names of the birds alone were 
 known to him, it is ditlicult to assign their scien- 
 tiKc denominations: but the following identilica- 
 tioii is tolerably evident — I. Al-lUtz or Baiaban 
 is the Geifalcon; 2 Al-Scphy, the Peregrine; 
 3. Al-Shahccn, the Doctor himself asserts to ha 
 theFabonGentil; 4. Al-Zygranuz,{\\viii)shAVik. 
 One of the remaining species is, no doubt, the Mer- 
 lin; and tiie last, Al-Basliak, is the cresteii buz- 
 zard, Fako Ba^.-lia, which is most abundant in 
 ,\tiica, and the principal enemy of the S(iaiih;:.:i 
 (Hyrax). The smaller and less jmwerful hawks ot 
 the genus Nisus are mostly in use on acci>unt of 
 the siHUt they all'ord, being less fatiguing, as they 
 aie employed to (ly at pigeons, |)artridges, quail*, 
 Pferocles, Katia, and other s]iecies of Ganga. 
 Tiieie are various other rapti riil birds, not l.eie 
 enumi rated, found in Syria, Arabia, an<l Kgyj t. 
 We have at this moment before tis colouie<l 
 repiesentations of three such, copieil from tlie 
 jiaiiited sculptures of ancient Egypt; and in 
 conforinitv with tlie common laws of animate 1 
 nature, the Nile cannot be wilh.-ut a variety of 
 specieji ieeiiing on the pioduce oi' Is waters aiid 
 
 '<i u
 
 818 
 
 HAZAEt. 
 
 itsvwiuis; but thn a,l)Ove enumeration will be 
 fouiia, we trust, sullicieut i'vr our [ireseiU pur- 
 pose.— C Tl. S. 
 
 HAY. [CuATziii.] 
 
 IIAZAEL ("pSTn rision of God; Sept-'A^ai^A), 
 an officer cf B< nliadail, Vinu; of Syria, whose 
 eventual accession to tiie tlnone of tlial kingdom 
 Wiis maile known to Elijah (1 Kinijs xix. 15); 
 and wlio, when Elislia was at Damascus, was 
 sent by liis master, wlio was then ill, to consult 
 the )iro})het res|)ecting his recovery. He was 
 followed by forty camels bearing presents from 
 tlie king. When Hazael appeared before the 
 prophet, he said, ' Thy son Benhailad, king of 
 ■Syria, hatli sent me to thee, saying, Shall 1 
 recover of this disease T Tiie ansiver was, that 
 he 7ni(jht certainly recover. ' Howbeit,' added 
 the prophet, ' the Lord hath showed me that he 
 shall surely die.' He then looked stedlastly at 
 Hazael till he i)ecame confused ; on wiiich the 
 man of God then wept ; and when Hazael re- 
 spectfully inffuired the cause of this outburst, 
 Elisha replied by describing the vivid picture 
 then present to his mind of all the evils which 
 the man now before him would inflict n])on 
 Israel. Hazael exclaimed, ' But what ! Is thy 
 servant a dog that he should do this great thing T 
 The prophet explained that it was as king of Syria 
 ne should <i() it. Hazael then returned, and deli- 
 vered to his master that jorlion of the prophetic 
 respimse wliich was intended for him. But the 
 very next day this man, cool and calculating in 
 his cruel ambition, took a thick cloth, and, 
 iiaving dijiped it in water, spread it over the face 
 of the king, who, in his feelileness, and i)robal)ly in 
 his sleep, was smothered by its weight, and died 
 what seemed to his people a natural death (2 Kings 
 viii 8, &c.) B.C. 8S5. VVe are not to imagine 
 thai such a project as this was conceived and 
 executed in a day, or that it was suggestal by 
 the words of Elisha. His discomposure at the 
 earnest gaze of the ])rophet, and other circum- 
 stances, show that Hazael at that momei:t re- 
 garded Elisha as one to whom his secret jjur- 
 poses were knovn. In that case, his cry, ' Is thy 
 servant a d;)s,' &c., was not, as some suppose, 
 a cry of jov at the first view of a throne, but of 
 horror at the idea of the public atrocities which 
 the prophet descril)ed. Tliis was likely to shock 
 him more than it would <lo after he liad com- 
 mitted his (irst crime, and ol>faiued ])OS3ession of a 
 throne acquired at such a cost. 
 
 The further information re.specting H izael 
 wliich the Scrij>tures afford is limited to brief 
 notices of his wars with Ahaziah and .loash, kings 
 of Judah, and with .Fehoram, Jehu, anil Jehoahaz, 
 kings of I.srael (^ Kings viii. 28; ix. It; x. 32; 
 xii. 17; xiii. 3; 2 Chron. xxii. ^)). It is difficult 
 to distin.,aiish the several campaigns and victories 
 involved in these allusions, and spread over a 
 reign of forty years; but it is certain that Hazael 
 always had the advantage over the Hebrew 
 princes. He devas'eii their frontiers, rent from 
 them all toeir territories l)eyond the Jordan, tra- 
 versed the breadth of Palestine, and carried his 
 arms into the states of the'Pliillstines ; he laid 
 ■iegfl to Jerusalem, and only retire<l on receiving 
 the tieasures of the temple and the palace. The 
 dutail? of these concpiests redeemed to the very 
 letter Ihe apjia ling predictions of Elisha. This 
 
 HEAD. 
 
 alilc and successful, but nnjirincipled ii8ur];)er lefV 
 the liinine at his death to iiis son lienliadiid. 
 
 HAZARMAVETII, the third .son of J,.klaD 
 (Gen. x. 2li), wliose n;uiie is judged to have l>eeii 
 preserved in liie Aral))an province of Iladraniaui 
 [.■\iiauia]. 
 
 HAZEL. [Lltz.] 
 
 HAZEROTH, Ihe third statioir of the Israelite* 
 after leaving Sinai, and eitlier four or tive lava' 
 march fromtliat mountain (Num. xi. 3.5 ; xxxiii. 
 17; con)|). X. 33) [ Wandkkino], 
 
 HAZEZON-TAIVIAR. [En-oedi.] 
 
 HAZOR (liVH; S,pt. 'Atrwp), a city near th« 
 waters of lake Meiom (Huleli), the seat of Jabin, 
 a powerful Canaanitish king, as apijears from 
 the summon sent by liim to ail tiie neiglibonring 
 kings to assist him against the Israelites. He 
 and his coid'ederates were, however, defeated anci 
 slain by Josluia, and the city burnt to the ground 
 (Josh. xi. ], 10-13; Joseph. Antiq. v. .5. 1). 
 But by the time of Deborah and Bavak fiie 
 Canaauites had recoveied jiart of the territory 
 then lost, had rebuilt Haziir, and were ruled by a 
 king with the ancient royal name of Jabiii, under 
 whose ]rower the I.sraeli'es w<'re, in punishment 
 for their sins, reduced. Eroni tiiis yoke they weie 
 ilelivered by Deliorah and Barak, after whicli 
 Hazor remained in quiet possession of tlie Israelites, 
 and belonged to the trilie of Naphtali (Josh. xix. 
 36; Judg. iv. 2). Hazor was one of the towns 
 rebuilt or inuch improved by S.ilomon (1 Kings 
 ix. 15), and was one of the fortitied jtlaces o< 
 Galilee whicli the Assyrians under Tiglalh-plleser 
 first toik on invading Palestine from tlie north 
 (2 Kings XV. 29). There is no modern notice of 
 this town. Raumer, indeed, queries whether it 
 may not have lieen the ancient town of Naason, 
 which King Bahbvin IV. passed on i.'is uay from 
 Tiberias to SapI.et (Will. Tyr. p. 101 J); and his 
 reast>n for tlj s conjecture is that the V'idg-ate gives 
 Naason for the Asor ('Acrwp) of Tuljil i. I (Raunaer, 
 rcdiistina. p. 12G). 
 
 HEAD. L*'N"); Greek, Kt(pdKi]\ Latin, caput; 
 Gothic, hanhitli . Anglo-Saxon, hcafod ; fT'eiman, 
 kopf. The r(M>f is kep ox ro/t, den(»ling tliat which 
 liolils : ihui the head etymologically signifies the 
 container, the name describing the function. But 
 as the head is the tnjuiiost i>art of the liiunan 
 Ixxly, it can)e ileri\ati\ely to signify that which 
 is highest, chief (chef in Fiench. fiom the same 
 kep or cap), tlie highest in jiosition locally being 
 regarded as highest in office, rank, or dignity : 
 whence, as the he.id is the cenlieof tl>e n^rvons 
 system, holds the brain, and stands above all the 
 other jiarts, Plato regaided it as the seat of the 
 deathless sotd ; and it has generally been con- 
 sidered as the abode of the intellect or intelligence 
 by which man is enlightened and his walk m life 
 directed ; wdiile the heart, or the paits placed near 
 it, liave been accounted the place whoe the afl'ec- 
 tions lie (Gen. iii. 15; Ps. iii. 3; Eccles.-ii. 14). 
 The head and tlie heart are .somntimes taken for 
 the entire jierson (Is. i. 5). Even fl»p head alone, 
 as bein" the chief member, iVe(pienfly stands for 
 the man (Prov. x. 6). Tlie head also denotes 
 sovereiii-nty C 1 Cor. xi. 3). Covering the head, and 
 cuttin'T off the ha'^'r, were signs of mourning and 
 tokens of distress, which were enhanced by throw- 
 ing ashes on the head, together with sackclot* 
 (Amos viii. 10; Jot i. 20; Lev. xxi. 5; Deat,
 
 HEAD. 
 
 HEART. 
 
 sie 
 
 XIV. I; 2 Sam. xiii. 10; I'st.'ier iv. 1); while 
 anointing; tlie liead was iinic.tiseil on I'estive oc- 
 casions, arul considcie'l an ciiilileui of folic.ity 
 (Ecc.les. ix. 8 ; Ps. \xiii. ; LiiUe vii. 46 j. It was 
 usual to swear hy tlie head (.Malt. v. oC). 
 
 3.'!5. 1. Ethiopian ; S. Mon^jolian ; 3. Caucasian ; 
 4. Malay; 5. .American. 
 
 The general chaiacler of the liumaii head is 
 iuch as to estal)lisii the identity of ihe human 
 race, and to distinguisii man liom every other 
 animal. At the same time dillerent families of 
 mankind are marked liy peculiai ities of constnic- 
 tJon in the head, which, thout^ii in indiviihial 
 cases, and wlien extremes aie compared tof^ether, 
 they nm one into tiie other to the entire loss of 
 distinctive lines, yet are in the f^eneral broadly 
 contrasted one with fiie other. These peculiarities 
 in the structure of the skidl give rise to and are 
 connected willi other peculiarities of feature and 
 general contoiu- of face. In the union of cranial 
 jieculiarities witli tiiose of the face certain clear 
 marks are presented, hy wiiicli piiysiologists have 
 lieen able to raii;^e the in<lividuals of our race 
 into a few great classes, and in so doing to ad'ord 
 an unintentional corrolxiration of the information 
 which the Scri[)turi's alVord regarding the origin 
 and dispersion of mankind. Canriiwr, one of the 
 most learned and clear-minded physicians of the 
 eiglitcenlli century, has the credit of being the Srst 
 who drew attention to the classilication of the 
 human feattues, and endeavoured, by means of 
 what he termed the facial angle, to furnish a 
 method for digtinguishing difleient nations and 
 races of (nen, which, Ijeing himself an eminent 
 limner, lie designed lor aj)plication chielly in the 
 art of drawing, and which, thou:.,'h far from pro- 
 ducing strictly delinite and scientific results, yet 
 aflurds views that are not without interest, and 
 approximations that at least prepai-e<l the way 
 »or something liel'er (see u collection of Camper's 
 jjieccs entitled (Eutres qui out pour Olyet rUis- 
 
 toire I\^alwclle, la I'hyfiologie. ct C AnnUtmie 
 coniparee. Paris, I'^O.'}). It is, however, to tlie 
 celcbrafetl J. F. Hiumeid>acli, whose merits in th« 
 entire sphere of natuial history aie so traii-scend- 
 ent, that we aie inainlv indebted for the accurate 
 and satisfactory classitications in leganl to ciania! 
 structure which now prevail. Cam[>er had ob- 
 served that the breadth of the hcinl dill'crs in 
 dillerent nations ; that the heads of Asiatics (the 
 Kalriiiics) have the greatest breadth; that tlios* 
 of Europeans have a miildle ilegree of bieadlh; 
 and that the skulls of the African negroes are tlie 
 narrowest of all. Tliis ciicnmstancx.' was by 
 lilumenbacli made the foundation of his anange- 
 nient and ilescriplion of skulls. By com|<aring 
 dillerent forms of the hiniian cranium together, 
 that eminent physiologist was led to leaigiiise 
 three great types to which all others could be 
 referred — the Caucas'an, Mongolian and Ethi- 
 opic. These three dilVer more widely from each 
 other than any other that can be foun<l ; but to 
 these three lilumenbacli, in his cl.issilication ot 
 skulls, and -of the races of men to which they 
 lielong, added two others, in many resjiects inter- 
 mediate liefween the three forms already men- 
 tioned. In this way five classes aie established, 
 corresponding with five great families. 1. The 
 Caucasian family, comprising the nations of Eu- 
 rope, some of the Western Asiatics, &c., have the 
 head of the most symmetrical shajio, almost round, 
 the forehead of moderate exterit, the cheek bones 
 rather nai'ow, without any projection, but a di- 
 rection downwards from the molar process of the 
 frontal bone; the alveolar edge well rounded; 
 the front teeth of each jaw jilaced perpendicu- 
 larly; the face of oval shape, straight, Itatuies 
 moderately jironiinent; forehead arched; nose 
 narrow, slightly arched ; mouth small; chin full 
 and round. 2. The second is the AIouLjolian 
 variety. 3. Ethiopian. 4. Malay and South Sea 
 Islanders. 5. American. The (lescriptioii of their 
 ])eculiaiifies may be found in Prichanl's lie- 
 searches into the Physical History of Man, 2nd 
 edit. V(d. i. p. 167, sq. Thercatler may also consult 
 Lawrences Lectures on the Xaiural History 
 of Man ; J. Midler's llandbuck dcr Pliysiolotjie. 
 But the most lecetit, if not the best, work on the 
 subject before us is Prichard's Naturol History 
 of Ma7i, 1S43; a work which comjirises and 
 reviews, in the spirit of a soiuid )ihiloso| hy, all 
 that has hithei-to been written and disiineied on 
 the origin, physical s(riit''ure, and propagaiion 
 over the earth of the race of man. In this in- 
 valuable work full details may l)e foiiiid of the 
 methods of studying the human heail of which we 
 ha\e s] oken, and of some oth-'s, not less inteiest- 
 ing in themselves, nor less \ tlualile in their le- 
 sulu ("see jiarticulaily ]). IHi, sq.). — J. R. H. 
 
 HEART. All the jihra-ses, more or less meta- 
 phoiical, in which this word occuis, are rendered 
 intelligible, without detailed examples, when we 
 are told tiiat the heart was, among the Hebrews, ^ 
 regarded poetically not only as the ««"at of the]ias- ^ 
 sions and emotions, as of lov e, pleasure, and grief, 
 but also of the intellectual faculties — the mind, 
 the understanding. In the original Scriptures, as 
 well as in the English and other translations, the 
 word ' he.ut,' therefore, constantly occiira where 
 ' min<L ' is to be uiulerstood, and would be used 
 by a modern English writer. We say moderi^ 
 because the ancient usage uf the Enj^lish viuMi
 
 dao 
 
 HEAVEN. 
 
 ' heart' was more conformable tlian the present to 
 that of t'e Hebrews. 
 HK,\TH. [OiioR.] 
 
 HEAVEN, the state and place of blessechiess 
 in the life to come. 
 
 Of the nature of this blessedness it is not ])os- 
 Bible that we should form any adequate concep- 
 tion, ai;d, consequently, that any precise informa- 
 Stion respecting it should he f^ivcn to us. Man, in- 
 deed, usually conceives (lie joys of heaven to Ije tlie 
 Bame as, or, at least, to reseml)le tlie ])leasures of 
 this world ; and each one iiopes to obtain with cer- 
 tainty and to enjoy in full measure, beyond the 
 grave, that whicli he holds most dear upon earth 
 —those favourite employments or ])articuhir de- 
 liglits which he ardently h)ng-s for heie, but which 
 he can seldom or never enjoy in tins world, or in 
 the enjoyment of which lie is never fully satis- 
 fied. But one who reflects sol)erly on tlie subject, 
 will readily see that the happiness of iieaven must 
 be a very difierent tiling from earthly hap]iiness. 
 In tliis world the highest j)leasures of which our 
 nature is capable satiate by their continuance, and 
 80on lose the power of giving positive enjoyment. 
 This alone is sufficient to show that the bliss of 
 the future world must be of an entiiely diflerent 
 kind from what is called earthly joy and hajjpi- 
 ness, if we are to be there trtilij liap|)y, and happy 
 for ever. But since we can have no distinct 
 conception of those joys which never have lieen 
 and never will be experienced by us here in their 
 full extent, we have of course no words in human 
 language to exjjress them, and cannot therefore 
 expect any clear description of them even in the 
 Holy Scri|)tures. Hence the Bible describes this 
 liappiness sometimes in general terms, designating 
 its greatness (as in Rom. viii. 18-22; 2 Cor. 
 iv. 17, 18j; and sometimes by various ii^'urative 
 images and modes of speech, liorrowed from 
 everything which we know to be attractive and 
 desirable. 
 
 The greater part of these images were already 
 common among the Jewish contemporaries of 
 Christ; but Christ and his a[)()stles employed 
 them in a purer sense than the great multitude of 
 the Jews. The Orientals are rich in such Hguies. 
 They were employed by Mohammed, who carried 
 them, as his manner was, to an extravagant 
 excess, but who at the same time said exjuessly 
 th.at they were mere figures, although many of his 
 followers atterwards understood them literally, as 
 has been often done in a similar way by many 
 Christians. 
 
 The following are the principal terms, both 
 literal and figurative, which are a])plied in Scrip- 
 ture to the condition of future haj)|)iness. 
 
 Among the literal apjiellations we find faiVj, 
 ^011) alcLvios, which, according to Hebrew usage, 
 signify ' a happy life,' or ' eternal well-being,' 
 and are the words rendered ' life,' ' eternal life,' 
 and ' life everlasting," in the Auth. Version (e fj. 
 Matt. vii. 14 ; xix.' 16, 29; xxv. 46) : Uia,l6^a 
 rov @euv, ' gloiy,' ' the glory of God ' (Rom. ii. 
 ^, 1(); v. 2); and flp-fivT), 'jieace' (Rom. ii. 10). 
 \lso aid'Viov 0dpos SS^ris, ' an eternal weight of 
 gloiy [2 Cor. iv. 17}; and (rwrjipia, <TaiT7]pia 
 •idovios. ' salvation,' ' eternal salvation ' (Heb. 
 ?. 9). &c. 
 
 Among \\\ii fiiriirative representations, we may 
 olace the word ' heaven' itself. The ahode of de- 
 |«.rted sjiirits, to u» who live ujion the earth, and 
 
 heave:s'. 
 
 while we remain nere. i.s invisible an'l inaccesgiblei 
 beyond the bounds of the visiijie w;M'ld, and 
 eniirely separated from it. There they live in 
 the highest well-being, and in a nearei connection 
 with (iod and ('hrist than here below. This 
 jilace and state cannot be dedgnated by any more 
 fit and biief expression than that which is found 
 in almost e\ery language, namely. ' heaven,' — a 
 word in its jninriary and material signification 
 denoting the rtgion of the skies, or the visible 
 heavens. This word, in Hebiev W12i\y sham- 
 mayiw, inGreek ovpav6s, is therefore frequently 
 employed by the sacred writers. It is there tliat 
 the highest sanctuary or temple of God is 
 situated, i. e. it is there that the omnipresent God 
 most gloriously reveals himself. This, too, is the 
 abode of God's highest spiritual creation. Thither 
 Christ was transported : he calls it the house of 
 his Father, and says that he has therein prepared 
 an abode for his followers (John xiv. 2). 
 
 This place, this ' heaven,' was never conceived 
 of in ancient times, as it has been by some 
 modern writers, as a particular planet or world, 
 but as the wide expanse of heaven, high above 
 the atmosphere, or starry heavens; hence it is 
 sometimes called the third heaven, as being 
 neither the atmosphere nor the starry heavens. 
 
 Another figurative name is ' Paradise,' taken 
 from the abode of our first parents in their state of 
 innocence, and transferred to the abode of the 
 blessed (Luke xxiii. 43; 2 Cor. xii. 4; Rev. ii. 
 7 ; xxii. 2). 
 
 Again, this place is called ' the heavenly 
 Jerusalem" (Gal. iv. 26 ; Hel). xii. 22; Rev. iii. 
 12), because the earthly Jerusalem was the capital 
 city of the Jews, the royal residence, and the 
 seat of divine worship; the 'kingdom of heaven' 
 (Matt. xxv. 1; Jas. ii. 5); the ' heavenly king- 
 dom' (2 Tim. iv. 18); the 'eternal kingdom' 
 (2 Pet. i. II). It is also called an 'eternal 
 inheritance' (I Pet. i. 4; Htb. ix. 15), meaning 
 the ])ossession and full enjoyment of happiness, 
 typified by the residence of the ancient Hebrews 
 in Palestine. The blessed are said 'to sit down 
 at tat>le with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacoli,' that 
 is, tof .e a sharer with the saints of old in the joys 
 of salvation ; ' to be in Ahiaham's bosom" (Luke 
 xvi. 22; Matt. viii. 11), that is, to sit near or 
 next to Abraham [Bosom] ; ' to reign with Ciuist' 
 (2 Tim. ii. 11), i. e. to be distinguished, honour* d. 
 and happy as he is — to enjoy regal felicities; to 
 enjoy ' a Sabbath," or ' rest' (Heb. iv. 10, 1 1), in- 
 dicating the happiness of pious Christians, io/A in 
 this life and in the life to come. 
 
 All that we can with certainty know or infei 
 from Scripture or reason respecting the blessedness 
 of the life to come, may be arranged under the 
 following particulars: — 1. We shall hereafter 
 be entirely freed from the sufferings and ad- 
 versities of this life. 2. Our future blessednesf 
 will involve a continuance of the real happnes* 
 of this life. 
 
 I. The entire exemption from suffering and al 
 that causes sufl'ering here, is <!xpressed in lh« 
 Scripture by words which denote rest, repose, re. 
 freshment, after ])erformiiig labour and enduring 
 allli('tiou. But all the terms which are employeil 
 to ex]iiess tl«3 condition, define (in the original"* 
 the promi-ed ' rest,' as rest after labour, and 
 exenipti(.n from toil and grief; and not the ab- 
 sence of employment, not inactivity or indoleoc*
 
 HEAVKN. 
 
 (JTliess. i. 7 ; Heb. iv. 9, 11 ; llev. xiv. 13 ; camp. 
 »ii. 17). 
 
 This deliverance from the evils of our present 
 life includes — 
 
 1. Deliverance from this earthly body, the 
 •eat of the lower piinciples of our naltne and of 
 our sinful currnption, and the source of so many 
 evils and sulVeiings i^'l Cor. vi. 1, 2; I Cor. 
 xviii. 15). 
 
 2. Entire separation from the society of wicked 
 and evil-disj<osed persons, wiio, in various ways, 
 injure the riL,'hteous mati and embitter his life 
 on earlh (2 Tim. iv. 18). It is hence accounted 
 a part of the felicity even of Christ himself in 
 heaven to be * separate from siimers ' (Heb. vii. 
 26). 
 
 3. Upon this earth everything is inconstant, 
 and subject to perpetual change; and nothing is 
 capable of completely satisfying our expectations 
 and desires. But ui the world to come it will 
 be (lilfeient. Tiie bliss of tiie saints will continue 
 without interruption or change, without fear of 
 termination, and without satiety (Luke xx. 36 ; 
 2 Cor. iv. 16, 18; 1 Pet. i. 4; v. 10; 1 John 
 iii. 2, sq.). 
 
 II. Besides being exempt from all earthly 
 trials, and having a continuance of that hajjpiness 
 whicii we had begun to enji)y even here, we have 
 good reason to expect hereafter other rewards and 
 joys, which stand in no natiual or necessary con- 
 nection with the present life. For our enlire 
 felicity would be extremely ilefective and scanty, 
 were it to be conlined merely to that which we 
 carry with us from the [uesent world, to that 
 peace and joy of soul which result from reflecting 
 on what we may have done which is good and 
 pleasing in the sight of God ; since even the best 
 jTian will al.ways discover great imperfections in 
 all that he has done. Our felicity would also be 
 incomplete were we compelled to stop short witii 
 that meagre and elementary knowledge which we 
 take with us from this world, — that knowledge so 
 broken up into fragments, and yieliling so little 
 fruit, and which, [Kjor as it is, many good men, 
 from lack of <i])portunity, and without any fiiult 
 on their part, never here acquire. Besides the 
 natural rettaids (jf goodness, tliere must, therefore, 
 be others, which are positive. an<l depen<lent on 
 the will of tlie Su]jrenie Legislator. 
 
 On this point almost all pliilos i])hers are, for 
 the above reasons, agreed — even those who will 
 admit of no positive punishments in the world to 
 come. But for want of accmate knowledge of 
 the state of tilings in the future world, we can 
 say nothing definite and certain as to the nature 
 of the positive rewards. In the doctrine of the 
 New Testament, however, ]^ositive rewards are 
 considered most obviously as belonging to our 
 future felicity, and as constituting a principal 
 part of it. For it always represents the joys of 
 ne<iven as resulting strictly from the favour of 
 God, and as being undeserved by those on whom 
 they are bestowed. Hence there must be some- 
 thing more added to the natinal good consequences 
 of our actions, something which cannot be con- 
 ••dereil as the necessary and natural conse\;;'ience8 
 fif the good actions we may have here j>er- 
 f'l.med. But, on this sidiject, we know nothing 
 more in general than this, that God will so a|> 
 («int and or.ler our vircurnstances, and make 
 uioii arrangements, tha the ^'i'incipal faculties 
 
 HEAVEN. 
 
 631 
 
 of our souls — reason and affection, will be iieigiii- 
 ened and developed, so that we shall continually 
 obtain more pure anil distinct knowledge of tha 
 truth, and make continual advances in holinew. 
 
 The f'oUowing remarks may be of some uie 
 in illustrating this subject : — 
 
 (1). In this life God has very wisely (Hotted 
 various capacities, ])ower8, and lf\lents, in ditlerenj 
 ways and degrees, to different men, according to 
 the various emls for which he designs them, and 
 the business on which he employs them. Now 
 there is not the least re.ison to sujipose that God 
 will abolish tliis \ariety in the future world; it 
 will rather continue there in all its extent. We 
 must supjiose, then, that there will be, even in the 
 heavenly world, a diversity of tastes, of labours, 
 and of enqiliiyments, and that to one ))erson this, 
 to another that field, in the boundless kingdom of 
 truth anil of useful occu[)ation, will be assigned 
 for his cultivation, according to his peculiar 
 powers, qualifications, and tastes, A presenti- 
 ment of this truth iscontalneil in the iilea, which 
 was widely diffused throughout the ancient world, 
 viz., that the mines will continue to prosecute, in 
 the future life, the employments to which they had 
 Iteen here accustt)med. At least such arrange- 
 ments will doubtless be made by God in the 
 future life, that each individual will there deve- 
 lope more and more the germs implanted within 
 him by the hand of the Cieator; and will be able, 
 more fully than he ever could do here, to satisfy 
 the wants of his intellectual nature, and thus to 
 niaUe continual progress in the knowledge of 
 everything woithy of being known, of which he 
 could only learn the simplest elements in this 
 vvoild ; and he will be able to do this in sucti a 
 way that the increase of knowledge will not fje 
 detrimental to piety, as it often ])i()ves on earth, 
 but rather promotive of it. To the sincere and 
 ardent searcher after truth it is a rejoicing and 
 consoling thought that he will be able hereafter 
 to jiejf'ect that knowledge which here has so many 
 deticiencie-! (1 Cor xiii. 9). 
 
 But there is danger of going too far on thii 
 point, and of falling into strange misconcejitions, 
 V'aiious as the tastes and wants of men in the 
 future world will douljtless be, they will still 
 be in many respects difVerrnt from what they are 
 here; liecause the whole sphere of action, and the 
 objects t)y which we shall there be surrounded, 
 will be different. We shall there have a changed 
 and more ]ieifect body, and by this single circum- 
 stance shall be I'recd at once from many of the 
 wants and inclinations which have their seat ia 
 the earthly body. And this will also contribute 
 nmcli to rectify, enlarge, and jierfect our know- 
 ledge. Many things which seem to us very im- 
 ])ortant ami essential during tliis our stale of in- 
 fancy upon earth, will hereafter doubtless ap])ear 
 in a difl'erent light : we shall look upon them as 
 trifles and children's jilay, and employ ourselves 
 in more important occujjalions, the utility and 
 interest of which we may have never before 
 imagined. 
 
 Some theologians have supjwsed that the sainl* 
 in heaven may be taught by immediate diviiie 
 revelations (lumen gloria;); especially those wtio 
 may enter the abodes of the blessed without know- 
 ledge, or with only a small measure of it ; e. g, 
 children and others who have died in ignorance, 
 for which they themselves were not to blame.
 
 623 
 
 HEAVEN. 
 
 On tliis subject, nothing i* definitely taught in 
 the Scriptures ; hut both Scripture and reason 
 ■warr.iiit iis in believing that provision will he 
 made for all such ])ersons in the world to come. 
 A ])rinc:j)al part of our I'utine happiness will con- 
 sist, acconliiig to the (^^iiristian doctrine, in the 
 enlarging and correcting of our knowledge re- 
 specliiig God, his natuie, attributes, and works, 
 and in tiie saliitaiy a))plication of this knowledge 
 to our own moral benefit, to the iiu^rease of our 
 faith, love, and obedience. There has been some 
 controversy among theologians with regard to the 
 vision of God (visio Dei intuitiva, sensitiva, 
 beatijica,comprehensiva). Tlie question is,whefher 
 the saints will hereafter behold (jO(1 with the eyes 
 of (he mind, i. e. merely know him with the 
 undei standing. 
 
 But in the Scriptures God is always repre- 
 sented as a being invisible by the bodily eye 
 (oti^aror), as, indeed, every spirit is. The tests 
 of Scripture \^hich speak of seeing God have been 
 misundeistood : they signify, sometimes, thtunore 
 diitinct kiKAcJedije of God, as we sj)eak of know- 
 ing by seeing, of seeing with the eye? of the mind 
 (John i. IS; 1 John iii. 2; iv. 12; comp. v. 20 j 
 1 Tim. vi ]()) ; and Paid uses ^Kfxeiv anil ytvci- 
 «r/(«»' as synonymous (1 Cor. xiii. 12, 13; comp. 
 V. 10). Again, tliey ex])ress the idea of f elicit y, 
 the enjoyment of Gotl's favour, the being thought 
 worthy of his IViendship, ^c. Still more fre- 
 quently are biith of these meanings comprehended 
 under the ])hrase (o see God. The image is taken 
 from Oriental princes, to see whose face, and to 
 he in whose j)resence, was esteemed a great 
 favour (Matt. v. 8.; Heb vii. )4). 'Without 
 lioliness, owSelj ui^ierai rhv Kvpiov.' The ojiposite 
 of this is to lie removed from God and from his 
 face. 
 
 But Christ is always represented as one who 
 will be personaih/ visible to us, and whose per- 
 sonal, fainiliar intercoiuse anil gui<larice we shall 
 enjoy. Herein Christ himself places a chief part 
 of the joy of the saints (.lohn xiv. xvii., &c.) ; 
 and the €i])i)stle3 often describe the blessedness 
 of the pious liy the phrase being loith Christ. 
 To his guidance has God entrusted the human 
 race, in heaven and on eaith. And Paul says 
 (2 Cor. iv. 6j, we see ' the brightness of the divine 
 glory in the face of Christ,' he is ' the visil)le re- 
 presentative of the invisible God' (Col. i. 15). 
 Accortling to the representation contained in the 
 Holy Scriptures, tiie saints will dwell together in 
 the future world, and form, as it were, a kingilom 
 or state of Goil (Luke xvi. ; xx. .38; Rom. viii. 
 10; Rev. vii. i); Heb. xii. 22). They will there 
 narrake of a common felicity. Their enjoyment 
 will doubtless be very much heightened by friend- 
 ship, and by their conKilIng intercourse witli each 
 oti.er We must, however, separate all earthly 
 imperfections from our conceptions of this hea- 
 venly society. But that we shall there recognise 
 our former fl lends, and shall be again assotiiated 
 with them, was unif.irnily believed by all an- 
 ti(piifv. --Vnil whtn we call to mind the alTec- 
 tioiiate maiinei in wliich Christ soothed his dis- 
 ciples by the assurance that tliey should hereafter 
 see him again, sh> iilil be with him, and enjoy 
 personal inteicourse ami IViendship with him, in 
 that place to which I.e was going (John xiv. o; 
 '>om)). 1 Pet. I. 8), we may gather just sriounds 
 lor thi.« belief Paul indeed says ex|nessly that 
 
 HEBREW LANGUAGE. 
 
 we shall he with Christ, in company with ctu 
 fiiends who died before us {a.iijx avv avrots, 
 1 Thess. iv. 17) ; and this presuppo.ses that vie 
 shall recognise them, and have intercourse with 
 them, as with Christ himself. 
 
 1. HEBER ("i;iy, o«e of the other side; Sept. 
 "E0€p and ''E;3£p), son of Salah, who became ihe 
 father of Pel eg at the age ;if 31 years, and died 
 at the age of 4(J4 (Gen. x. 21 ; xi. 14; 1 (iliron. 
 i. 25). His name occurs in the genealogy o( 
 Christ (Luke iii. 35). There is nothing to Cvin- 
 stitute Heber a historical j)ersonape; but tlieie is 
 a tlegree of interest connected with him from the 
 notion, which the Jews themselves entertain, that 
 the name of Hebie.vs, applied to them, was de- 
 rived from this allegeil ancestor of Abraham. 
 No hist(aical ground apjiears why this name 
 should be derived from him rather than from 
 any other ])ersonage that occurs in the catalogue 
 of Shem's tlesct-ndants ; but there are so much 
 stronger objections to every other hypothesi.s, that 
 this perhaps is still I lie most probable of an/ 
 which have yet been started. 
 
 2. HEBER {"i^n ; Se])t. Xaj3e^, a descendant 
 of Hobah, son ol' Jetliro, anil brother of the wife 
 of Moses. His wile was the Jael who slew Sisera, 
 and he is called Heber the Kenite (Judg. iv. 11, 
 17 ; v. 24), which seems to tiave been a name for 
 the whole family (Judg. i. 16). Heber appears to 
 have lived separate from the rest of the Kenites, 
 leading a ])atriarchal life, amid bis tents and 
 Hocks. He must have been a jierson of some 
 consequence, from its being stated that there wa» 
 jjeace between I he house of Heber and the powerful 
 king Jabin. At the time the histoiy brings him 
 under our notice his camp was in the ])laiii of 
 Zaanaim, near Kede h in Na])htali [Jaei, ; 
 Kenitks]. 
 
 HEBREW LANGUAGE. The Hebrew lan- 
 guage is that which was the national idiom of 
 those descendants of "Eber which received the 
 distinctive name of the People of Israel, an<l, as 
 such, was that in which all the boi>ks of the Old 
 Testament (with the exception of the few Cliahle" 
 passages occurring in those after the Babyloniari 
 ca])tivity) were originally composed It belongs 
 to the Semitic, or, as it is more ap)iroi)iiately 
 called, the Syro-Arabian family of languages; 
 and it occu))ies a central jxiint amid-t all the 
 branches of this family, as well with reference to 
 the geogra])hical jjositinn of the country in which 
 it prevailed, as with reference to tiie degree of 
 development to which it attained. In point of 
 antiquity, however, it is the oldest form of human 
 speech known to us, and, from the early civili- 
 zation, as well as from the religious adva'itages 
 of the Helirevvs, has ]ireserved to us the oldest and 
 purest form of tlie Syro-.\rabian language.* 
 
 If we except the terms ' li]) of Canaan' 
 (jyJD nSB*) in Isa. xi .. IS — wliere the diction 
 is of an elevated charactvr, and is so far no evi- 
 dence that this designation was the one commonly 
 emjdoyed — the only name liy which the Hebrew 
 language is mentioned in the Old Testament is 
 ' Jewish' ('n*Tin', used adverbially. Jndnice, mi 
 Jewish, 2 Kings xvii . 26, 28 ; Isa. xxxvi. 11, 13; 
 
 * It mav suflice here to lefer ginerally to 
 Ewalds ll'cbrew Grammar, §^S I-IS, 135-160, 
 where the whole subject of this ai tide is "reated of
 
 HEBREW LANGUAGE. 
 
 HEBREW LANGUAGE. 
 
 8U 
 
 2 Cliron. xxxii t^*), wiicre tlie feminine may 
 be explaineil as aii alistiact i>f the last formation, 
 ftccoidiiig to b.wald's Hebr. (Iraiiu, ^^ 3 J4, 457, 
 
 or as refeiTing to tlie usual gfnder of llCy? under- 
 stood. In a strict sense, luiwevcr, ' Jewish ' de- 
 notes the idiom of the kini^dom of .(mlah, which 
 became the jHvilomiriaut one after t!(e deportation 
 of the ten trilies. It is in the Gieok wrifinf,'S of 
 the later Ji'ws tiiat ' Hehi-ew' is first applied to 
 tlie laiiijna^, as in the f^paia-Ti of the ]trolo;4iie 
 to Ecclesiasticus. and in the ■y\cixr(raTcLi''E jipaitav 
 of Josephus. (Tiie efipdis SiaKeKTos of the New 
 Testament is n-sed in contradistinction to the 
 idiom of the Hellenist Jews, and does not mean 
 the ancient Hebrew languay;c^ hut the then ver- 
 nacular Aramaic dialect of Palestine.) Oni 
 title to use the designation Hebrew language is, 
 therefore, founded on the fact that tlie nation 
 whicii spoke tiiis idiom was projjerly distinguished 
 t>y the ethiut^iMphical name of Hebrews. 
 
 Tlie appellatii)n Hebrews may. indeed, origin- 
 ally liave emiiraced more tvihes than the Israel- 
 ites, as it appears IVoni Genesis (x. '21, 25) that 
 the descendants of loijtan liad some claim to it. 
 Nevertiieiess, it was soon appropriated to the 
 Israelites as their distinctive name as a nation in 
 the eixrUer penods of ti\eir history, and (after 
 giving ]ilace, in the intervening ceiitinies, to that 
 »f Israel, and, sulisequently to the deportation of 
 the ten trihes, to that of Jews) was at length re- 
 vived not long before the Cinistian era — when, 
 however, it also served to distinguish the Jews of 
 Palestine from tlie Hellenist Jews — and passed 
 over, t((gether with that of Jews, to the classical 
 writers. As for the origin of the name, there are 
 two theories (liesidcs that which makes it a patro- 
 nymic from "Eber), cne of wliich, by deriving 
 'ibri from the verb ^^y, to paxs over, assumes the 
 name to have been assigned to Al)raliam by the 
 Canaanites, in consequence of his having cmssed 
 the Euphrates, so tiiat the word means transitor ; 
 while the other assumes that, as Mesopotamia is 
 called the co<nitry bci/ond l/ie riccr (^'\l^^l^ ^2J?, 
 Jos. xxiv. 2), 'ibri is derived from the ])rej)osition 
 ")2J? in that combination, so that the word should 
 mean tratisjliivialis, one of tiie jieople who dwell 
 on the other side of the river. If the fact tliat the 
 Sept. translators have rendered ' the Helirew,' in 
 Geri. xiv. 13, by o jrepciTjjr, and Aquila by 6 ne- 
 oaiTTj-s (from lepou'ij, ' the country over the water;" 
 cf. JoAJph. De Bell. Jud. ii. 20. 4) may not prove 
 that both these opinions existed at the date of tJiose 
 versions, yet they establish the existence of one ot 
 them. However distinct these views may be, 
 they have frequently Iwen confounded ; but 
 many early Christian writers, such as Origen 
 and Jerome, favoured the former theory, viz. that 
 ''ibr't is derived from tlie verb. The latter 
 appears to have been virtually held by l)io- 
 dorus Tarseusis, whose words are : irfpaTTjv KaKel 
 tVi' 'Affpau wo'a^fl irtpav oiKOvyra tov 'Inpddvov 
 (see the note of Flam. Nobilius ad loc. in Walton's 
 lii'il. Polyglot, torn, vi.); and expressly by Chry- 
 
 * Tlie ])assage in Nell. xiii. 21 is not included 
 aere, because, as will be seen Ih'Iow, it is a dis- 
 puted ))oinl at what time the Hebrew language 
 ceased to lie a living tongue; ;uid it depenils on 
 the decision pf that question whether the 'Jewish' 
 •f Neiiemiah means Hebrew or Aramaic. 
 
 sosfom, who, in his .?.5th hoinily on Genesis, »ay» ! 
 ^jreiS?; yelp irtpav rov ^.ttippdrou r^v »caTolirTpT«f 
 tlxf' SiaTovro Kal irtparris ^\4yero. Tliis view if 
 the one whicii has found most favour in recent 
 times. S. Muriniis, who rejects both these views, 
 encounters tin- loiiuer witli very ])ertiiient argu- 
 ments ; esjieci.illy wiien he insists that, even 
 if there were evidence that tlie name Hebrew 
 was imjH)sed on .'Vbraham by the Canaanites, it 
 could not, in the (irst signilication, hive bei-n a 
 distinctive name, at a ]ieriod when so many trilie* 
 must have recently passed westsvaitls ovei liie Eu- 
 phrates (l}e Ling. I'rimtrva, p. Ot). Heeel uUo 
 lias stated some of the be.st objections to i-ach 
 theory, in his (lesr/iivhte d^r lleb. Sprarfie, ^ 4 ; 
 and Ewald in his latest work, (iesrliichtc des 
 VoUccs Israel, i. ."{{I, has lirieHy, though emj)ha- 
 tically, declared both to be untenalile. 
 
 The liest evidences which we possess ;is to the 
 form of the Hebrew language, jirior to its lirst 
 historical jieriod, tend to show that Abraham, on 
 his entrance into Canaan, found the language then 
 prevailing among almost all the dillereiit tril)e* 
 iiihabiting that country to l)e i\i at least dia- 
 lectual affinity with his own. This is gathered 
 from the folhiwing facts: that neaily all the 
 names of places and persons relating to those 
 trilies admit of Hebrew etymologies; that, ami<lst 
 all the accounts of the intercourse of the Hebrews 
 with the nations of Canaan, we (ind no hint of 
 a divoisity of idiom; and that even the com- 
 paratively recent remains of the Pluenician and 
 Punic languages bear a manifest aflinify to tlie 
 Hebrew. But whether the Hebrew language, as 
 seen in the earliest books of ttie Ohl Testament, 
 is tlie very dialect which Abraham brought with 
 him into Canaan ; or whether if is the common 
 tongue of the Canaanite nations, which Abra- 
 ham only adopted from them, and wliich was 
 afterwards develojied to greater I'ulness under the 
 peculiar moral and jwlitical influences to which 
 his posterity were exposed, are questions which, 
 in the absence of conclusive arguments, are gene- 
 rally discussed with some dogmatical preposses- 
 sions. Almost all th(«e wlio supjKirt the first view 
 contend also that Hebrew was the primitive lan- 
 guage of mankind. S. Morinus, in the work 
 above cited, and Loscher, in his De Causis Ling. 
 Hcbr., are among the best champions of this 0])i- 
 nioii ; but Havernick has recently advocated it 
 with such modifications as make it nuire accept- 
 able (Einleit. in das Alte Test., I. i. p. 1 IS, g(j.). 
 The principal argument on which they depend is 
 that, as the most important proper-names in the 
 first part of Genesis (as Cain, Seth, and others) 
 are evidently founded on Hebrew etymologies, 
 the essential connection of these names with their 
 etymological origins involves the historical credi- 
 bility of the records themselves, and leaves no 
 room for any otlier conclusion th.in that the He- 
 brew language is coaeval with the earliest history 
 of man. Tiie advocates of the other opinion 
 attach some weight to the cogency witii which 
 they infer, from the phenomena of the Hebrew 
 language itself, that its roots were at one ])eriod 
 biliteral, and were afterwanls develo])ed to the 
 compass of three consonants. They also rest on 
 the evidence which Gen. xxxi. 47 alVords that the 
 near relatives of Abraham, residing too in the 
 country from whicii he had reiicntly emignitetl, 
 spoke Aramaic ; and they think this warranto
 
 834 
 
 HEBREW LANGUAGE. 
 
 the conclusion tliat Ara-.iiaic must liave been tlie 
 vernacular dialect of Al)ral)aiu himself. Lastly, 
 Geseiiiiis lays same stress on tiie ciiciiinslance 
 Hiat the lan^'iia!<e not only denotes west by D^, 
 sen, but tiiat it iloes not jwssess any otlier vvoid to 
 express that sense. 
 
 Tlie liistovy of the Helirew lan;jiiaje, aa far as 
 we can trace its coiuse by the changes in tbe dic- 
 tion of tbe documents in wbich it ig preserved, 
 may l)e here conveniently divided info that of tbe 
 period jnecediiii,', and fbat of the period siicceed- 
 \\v^, the Exile. If it l>e a matter of surprise that 
 the tbousand ye.irs wbicb infcivened between 
 M(«e5 and tbe Captivity should not have pro- 
 duced siillicient ciiange in the language to war- 
 rant its history during that time being distri- 
 buted into sul)ordina«e divisions, tlie following 
 C!)usidei itions may excuse tliis arrangement. It 
 is one of the signal characteristics of tbe Hebrew 
 language, as seen in all the books prior to the 
 Exile, tliat notwithstanding the existence of some 
 isolated, but important, archaisms, sucii as in the 
 tbrm of the pronoun, &c. (ibe best collection of 
 wbich may be seen in Havernicii, I. c. p. 183, sq.) 
 it preserves an un]7aralleied geneial uniformity of 
 structuie. The extent to wbicb this uniformity 
 prevails may be estimated, either by the fact that 
 it has furnished many modern scholars, who rea- 
 Svii from tlie analogies discovered in the changes 
 in otlier languages in a given peiiod, with an ar- 
 gument to sliow that the Pentateuch could not 
 have l)een written at so remote a (bite as is gene- 
 rally believed (Gesenius, Gesch. der Htbr. Spra- 
 che, § 8) ; or, Ity tbe cou<z\\\iwn, u fortiori, wliich 
 Havemick. whose express object it is to vindicate 
 its received antiquity, candidly concedes tliat 
 ' the books of Chionicles, Kira and Nebemiah are 
 the earliest in whicli the language ditVeis sensibly 
 from that in tbe historical portions of the Penta- 
 teuch ' {Einleit i. p. 1W> We are here solely 
 concerned with the fact that this uniformity of 
 type exists. The general causes to which it is 
 to l>e ascril)ed are to be sought in the genius of 
 the language itself, as less suscejitible of change ; 
 in the stationary civilization of tlie IIel>rew3 
 during tbe period', and in fbeir comjjarative isola- 
 tion, as regarded nations of foreign language (see 
 Ewald's Hebr. Grain. § 7). The particular cau.ses 
 defiend on tbe age and autbur assigned to each 
 book falling witliin this i)eriod, and involveques- 
 tions utterly alien to the scope of tliis article. 
 
 In tbe canonical books belonging to the first 
 j)eriod, the Hebrew language apj)ears in a state of 
 mature development. Although it still preserves 
 tbe charms of freshness and simplicity, yet it has 
 attained great regularity of formation, and such a 
 j/recision of syntactical arrangement as ensures 
 both energy and distinctness. Some common 
 notions of its laxity and indefiniteness have no 
 other foundation than the very inadequate scholar- 
 ship of the persons who form them. A clearer 
 insiglit into the organism of language absolutely, 
 ioined to such a study of the cognate Syro- Arabian 
 idioms as would reveal tbe secret, but no less cer- 
 tain, laws of its syntactical coherence, would show 
 them to what degree the simplicity of Hebrew is 
 compatible with grammatical jwecision. 
 
 One of the most remarkable features in the 
 'anguage of this jjeriod is the dit5erence which 
 distinguishes the diction of poetry from that of 
 prose This difference consists in tbe use of un- 
 
 HEBREW LANGUAGE. 
 
 usual words and llexions (many of wbicl. aie con 
 gidered to be Aramaisms or .-^rcbaisiiis, althougL 
 in lliis case thest- terms are nearly identical), ajid ir 
 a b.inuoiiic arrangement of thoughts, as seen both 
 in the jjavallelism of members in a single verse, 
 and in the strophic order of longer portions ; tin 
 delicate art o( wliich Ewald has traced with ])re« 
 eininei)t success in Ids I'octische Biicher des Alt. 
 Bimdcs, vol. i. 
 
 Tbe Babylonias> cajitrvity is assigned as the 
 commencement of that decline and corruption 
 wbich mark the secoml jwviotl in the history of the 
 Hel)rew language; but the Assyrian deportation 
 of tbe ten tril)e3, in the year h.c. 7"20, was proba- 
 bly the lirst means of bringing the Aramaic idiom 
 into injurious jiroximity to if. The Exile, how- 
 ever, forms the epacli at wbich tbe language shows 
 evident signs of that encroacbmei?t of the Aramaic 
 on its integrity, which afterwards ended in its 
 complete extinction. Thedictio)i of the difi'erenl 
 books of this j)eriod discovers various grades of this 
 Aramaic influence; and in some cases a])proaches 
 so nearly to tbe type of tbe first period, that it has 
 been ascril)ed to mere imitation. 
 
 An interesting question has been, raised as to 
 the precise time at wbich the Hebrew ceased to be 
 the liring vernacular language of the Jews. Some 
 learnwl men, arnong whom are Kimclii, Buxtorf. 
 and Walton, maintain that tbe Jews entirely lost 
 the living use of Hebrew during the Captivity. 
 Others, as PfeitVer and Lbscher, argue that it ie 
 quite unreasonable, considering tlie duration and 
 other circumstances of tbe Exile, tosupjxwe that 
 the Jews did not retain the partial use of their 
 native tongue for some time after their return to 
 P<i3e,tine. and lose if by slow degrees at last. The 
 ])oiiits on which tlie question chiefly turns, are the 
 sense in which the words CjniQJS aiul nniH', in 
 Nell. viii. S • xiii. 21, are to l>e taken ; and Heng- 
 ste!jl)erg, in bis AiUhentie des Daniel, p. 29it, sq., 
 and Gesenius, in his Gesch. d. Ilebr. Sprache, § 13, 
 are the best modern advocates of either view. But, 
 on whichever side the tiutb may l>e here, it is cer- 
 tain that the language continued to be understood 
 and used in writing by tbe e>iucated, for some 
 time after the Exile, as is evident from the dateo/ 
 tbe latest Biblical Iwoks: and it is found in the 
 inscriptions on the coins of tbe Maccalxies. No 
 decisive evidence, however, shows at what exact 
 time it became a virtually dead language; al- 
 though there is every reason to conclude that, 
 more than a century l>e''ure tbe Christian era, it 
 gave place altogether in writing, as before in 
 speech, to that coriupt Aramaic dialect, which 
 !K)me have called the Syro-Chaldaic, and that it 
 was thenceforth solely studied, as the language of 
 the sacre<l books, l>y the learned. 
 
 The ])ala;ograpbical history of the Hebrew lan- 
 guage requires a brief notice, at least as far as 
 regards the results of modern inqniiies. The 
 earliest monuments of Helirew writing which we 
 jx)ssess arc tbe genuine coins of the Maccabees, 
 which date from tbe year B.C. 113. The charac- 
 ter in which their inscriptions are expressed bears 
 a very near resBml)l.ince to the Samaritan alpha- 
 bet, and both are evidently derived from the Plioi- 
 nician alphabet. The Talmud also ani Oiij;en 
 and Jerome, iioth attest the fact that an ancienl 
 Hei)rew character bad fallen into dijirse ; and, bj, 
 stating that the Samaritans employed it, and ty 
 giving some descriptions of its form,tiiey ui^tiuctly
 
 HEliREVV LANGUAGE. 
 
 prove tlial tlic unciciit cli.iiai-ler sjKiki-ii of was 
 essentially the same as tliat on llie IlaxiiiDiia'an 
 ck>ins. It is, llieret'ore. coDsideicu to Ijc cslalilislieil 
 beyond a iloiilit tliat, before ll.c exile, the Hel)rews 
 used tliis anciMit cliaiuctcr (ilie Talnind even 
 calls it the ' IIel)iew '). At what ))eri( 1, liowever, 
 the square Ilelu'ew diameter of our juinfeil hooks 
 was (list ado[ite(l, is a niatlcr of some dispute. 
 The Tcihiiud, and Oiigen and Jerome a>< iil)e the 
 change to Ezra; ami those who, like Gesenius, 
 admit this tradition to he true in a limited sense, 
 reconcile it with llie late use of the ancient letters 
 m the coins, by ajipealinL,' to tlie ]).irallel use of 
 the Kufic character on tlie Mahommedan coins, for 
 leveral centuries after ihe Nisclii was eniployed 
 for writing; or, hy supposing that the Maccaliees 
 iia<l a mercantile inteiest in imitating the coinage 
 of the PhoEuicians. Tiie other opinion is that, as 
 the square Hebrew character has not, to all ap- 
 pearance, lieen developed directly out ol'tiie ancierjt 
 »tiir Phoenician type, luitout of an alphahet bear- 
 ing near atlinity to that found in the Palmyrene 
 inscrij)tions, a combination of this pabeogra|)liica] 
 fact with the intercourse which took place between 
 the Jews and the Syrians under the Seleucidae, 
 renders it probable that the square character was 
 first adopted at some inconsideralde but undelin- 
 ible time before tiie Christian era. Either of these 
 theories is compatible with the sup]X)sition that the 
 square cliaracter underwent many successive mo- 
 dilications in the next centmies, before it attained 
 its full calligra])liical perfection. The passage in 
 Matt. V. 18 is considered to prove that the copies 
 of the law were already written in Ihe square cha- 
 racter, as t\ie jodoi the ancient alphabet is as large 
 aletteias thealep/i; and IheTalmudand Jerome 
 gpeak as if the Hebrew MSS. of the Old Testa- 
 ment weie, in their time, already provided with 
 rhe (inal letters, the Taggin, the point on the i)roken 
 horizontal stroke of PI, and other calli graphical 
 minutiae.* 
 
 The origin of th«r vowel-points is to be ascribed 
 to the eiVort which the Jewish learned men made 
 to preserve the pronunciation of their sacred lan- 
 guage, at a time when its extinction as a living 
 tongue endangered tiie loss of the traditional 
 memory of its sound. Every kind of evidence 
 renders it jjiobalile that these signs for the pronun- 
 ciatiiin were Hist introduced about tlie seventh 
 century of the Christian era, that is, after the 
 completion of the Talmud, and that tlie minute 
 and complex system which we possess was gra- 
 dually developed, fiom a lew indispensable signs, 
 lo its present elaborateness. The existence of the 
 
 * Some have allempted to find, in the discre- 
 pancies between the Septuagint and the Hebrew 
 text, ihe liasis for discovering in what character 
 the MSS. from which they translated must 
 have lieen written, by trying to reduce these dis- 
 crejiancies to mistakes of one letter for another. 
 Eichhurn favours the notion that the Septuagint 
 was made fiom MSS. in the Samaritan character; 
 while Gesenius decides that the letters which are 
 interchanged are only alike in the square charac- 
 ter. The decision of (his question would in some 
 degree all'ect the view entertained of Ihe anti- 
 quity of the square character. The latest author on 
 this subject, however. Erankel, asserts that the 
 evidence does not ]ir-'poiideiate on either side 
 {Voratudien zu dtr He^ytuaylnta, 1811, ji. 213j. 
 
 HEBREWS. 
 
 %%s 
 
 jiresent complete system can, however, Ve traced 
 back to the ele enlli century. The sKilful in- 
 vestlgalioii of }Iu|ife1d (in the Stiidirii tiiid Kri' 
 tiken for 18;{0) has proved that the vo,vel-|x)int8 
 were unknown to Jerome and the Talmud : but, 
 as far as regards the lormer, we aie able To 
 make a liigh estimate of the degree lo wliicti 
 the traditionary ])roiMinclatii>n, ])rior lo the use of 
 the ii.ints, accorded with our Miisoietic signs : 
 for Jerome describes a jiromincialion which agrees 
 wonderfully well witii our vocalisatii:!.. We are 
 thus called on to avail ourselves thankfully of the 
 Masoretic jiunctuation, on the double ground that 
 it repiesents tlie Jewish traditional jironnnciafion, 
 and that the Hebrew language, unless vbeu 
 read according to its laws, does not enter into 
 its fuTl dialectual harmony with its Syro-A.ubiaii 
 sisters. 
 
 Although it may be supernuous to enf(>ice the 
 general advantages, not to say iinlispensable neces- 
 sity, of a sound scholailike study of the Hebrew 
 language to the theological student, yet it may 
 be allowable to enumerate some of those jwrti- 
 cular reasons, incident to the jiresent time, which 
 urgently demand an increased attention lo this 
 study. J'irst, we have an ancient honcurable 
 name to regain. Selden, Castell, Lightfoot, 
 Pocock, Walt.)ii, Spencer, and Hyde, were once 
 contem|)orary ornaments of our country. We daily 
 see their names mentioned with deference in the 
 writings of German scholars; but we are forcibly 
 struck with the fact that, since that period, we 
 lia\'e hardly, with the excejition of Lowth and 
 Kennicott, produced a single .Syro-Arabian scholar 
 whose labours have signally advancetl Uiblicn.] 
 philology. Secondly, the bold inquiries of the 
 German theologians will force themselves on our 
 notice. It is impossilile for us much longer to be 
 ignorant of their existence ; for that which no Eng- 
 lish bookseller ventures to undertake linds a more 
 enterprising publisher in America, and soon visits 
 our shores in an English dress. These investiga- 
 tions are conducted in a spirit of philological and 
 historical criticism which has nevei yet been 
 brought to bear, with such force, on the most im- 
 portant Biblical questions. The wounds which 
 they deal to the ancient traditions cannot be liealed 
 by reference to commentators whose generation 
 knew nothing of our doubts and dilliculfies. The 
 cure must be sympathetic ; it must bcelfected by 
 thesame weapon thatcaused the wound. If thenion- 
 strous dis]iro|)ortion which books*ielating to ecclesi- 
 astical antiquity bear, in almost every theological 
 bookseller's catalogue, over those relating to Bildi- 
 cal jihilology, be an evidence of the degree to which 
 these studies have fallen into neglect, and if Ihe 
 few books in which an acquaintance with Hebrew 
 is necessary, which do appear, are a fair jiroof of 
 our preseiv -il)ility lo meet the Germans with their 
 own weapons — then there is indeed an urgent 
 necessity that theological students should jirejiare 
 for the increased demands of the future. — J. N. 
 
 HEBREW OF THE HEBREWS {'E^paToi 
 e'l 'E^paicov), emphatically a Hebrew, one who 
 was so by both jiarents, and that by a long series 
 of ancestor, without admixture of Gentile or even 
 proselyte blood. Of this the Jews were as jiioud 
 as were those Christians in S|)ain w ho called them- 
 selves Old Christians, of having no mixture o( 
 Moorish blood. 
 
 HEBREWS. The question as to the origin ct
 
 826 HEBREWS, EPISTl E TO THE. 
 
 the Helirew name is incidentally considered in 
 the aiticle HKiiitKW LANHUAciE. 
 
 HEBREWS, EPISTLE TO THE, In the 
 
 received text tliis compositiun appears as part of 
 the Canonical Scriptures i)f tiie New Testament, 
 and also as tlie production of the apostle Paul. 
 For neiliier oC tlifse assumptions is tlie evidence 
 allowed on nil iiands to be conclusive; and 
 hence the j,'rt\iieit diversitj' of op'iiion ]irevails 
 amon<^ ciitics as to the claims of this epistle, 
 some cuntendiiii; tor its caooiiical aiiliiority and 
 Pauline origin, some <letiyin^' hotli of tliese, and 
 some admiifinir i!ie former, whilst they repudiate 
 tiie latter. As the question of its caiionicity he- 
 comes of impuitance as a separate question only 
 where its Pauline authorship is denied, and as 
 on the latttr of tliese points we mean to advocate 
 the side of liie allirniative, it will not he necessary 
 to occupy space wilii any discussion of the former 
 l)y it.self. We snail proceed accordlii'jjly to fiie 
 consideration of tiie question of the autiiorship of 
 this coiriposiliou. 
 
 On no sui)je<;t, perhaps, in the department of 
 the hij^iier ciiticism of liie New Te^tanlent, liave 
 opinions l)een more divided and more keenly 
 discussed, ilian on tliis. Of those who have re- 
 jected the claims of the ai'ostle Paul to the 
 autiiorship of this epistle, some have advocated 
 those <if IJarnabas. others those of Luke, others 
 tjiose (;f Clement of Rome, others those of Silas, 
 others those of .\j)ollos, others those of some un- 
 known Christian ot Alexai.diia, and olheis those of 
 some 'apo-itolic man,' whose name is no less un- 
 known. Of these hypotheses some are so jiurely 
 conjectural and ckstitule of any basis eitlier his- 
 '*rlcal or internal, that the hare mention of them 
 as the vaijaries of learned men is almost all the 
 notice they deserve. Thar wiiich ascrilies tliis pro- 
 duction to Apollos was fir;?! suggested by Lullier. 
 and it has been in more recent times ad(i|)ted 
 by Heumaiin, lieriholdt, De VVette, Bleek. and, 
 apparently, also Tlioluck. Uiisupporteil as this 
 th. (try is l)y a shadow of direct evidence either 
 e.\ternal or internal, it would deserve only to be 
 passed over in silence, were it not for the great 
 names which have espoused it, and the ingenious 
 reiisons they have urged in its support. As, how- 
 ever, it rests entirely on the liypothesis that the 
 author of tills epistle must have lieen an Alexan- 
 drian, we shall defer any remarks upon it till we 
 come to examine' that hypothesis. The claims 
 of Silas have been urged by Bohme in the intro- 
 duction to his C4»mmentary on this ppislle (Lips. 
 I8;iij. and by Mynster in the Studien ttnd 
 Kritiken^ bd. ii. s. 344 ; liut they have adduced 
 nothing in support of thise claims which might 
 not with equal plausibility have been urged on 
 behalf of any other of the companions of Paul. 
 The same might almost be said regarding the 
 supposition that Clement Is the author of this 
 work ; for though his name is mentioned by 
 Origen in relation to this subject, it is only as 
 that of the su[)posed amanuensis of Paul, whom 
 Origen's slatement sets forth as the reputed 
 author of the epistle, as we shall have occasion 
 more lully to see afterwards; and though J'^iome 
 and Piiilastriiis attest that some in the Roman 
 Churcli ascrllied the authorship of this ejiistle to 
 Clement, the very terms in which they give the 
 •tateiiient show that it is one to which they thought 
 to credit was to be attached ; nor does a com- 
 
 HE3REWS, EPISTLE TO THE. 
 
 pnrison of the style and contents of this epi»tl«> 
 with those of Clement's extant productions tend 
 to any other conclusion than that the author of 
 the one could not have been the r.ntlior of th* 
 other. The claims of Luke ajiparenily rise a 
 degree higher from the circumstance that, besides 
 being named by Origen, .lerome. and Pliilastrius, 
 as dividing with Clement the honoins which, tliest 
 writers testify, were in certain i^uarteis assigned 
 to the latter, there is a character of similarity in 
 respect of language ami style between this epistle 
 and the acknowledged productions of the evan- 
 gelist. Hut on this circumstance no stress can 
 legitimately be laid. For, ls% where tliere is no 
 other e\ idence, or atleist none of any weight, in 
 favour of identity of authorship, meie general 
 similarity of style cannot lie allowed to possess 
 much force. 2!iiily. Assuming the epistle to be 
 the production of Paul, it is easy to aco unt fjr 
 the resemblance of its style to that of Luke, from 
 the fact that Luke was for so many years tlie 
 companion and disciple of Paul; for it is well 
 known that when persons for a long time associate 
 closely with each other, and especially when one 
 of the jiaities is an individu.ii of poweil'ul in- 
 tellect whose forms of thought and modes of 
 s])eecli imperceptibly impress themselves on thoso 
 with whom he associates, they fall insensibl* 
 into a similarity of tone and style both of s]»eak. 
 iiig and writing. To this, indeed, Chrysostom 
 whose authority in all such matters must be al 
 lowed to stand very high, exjiressly ascribes tin 
 similarity of Luke's sty le to that of Paul, whei^ 
 contrasting the language of the former with thai 
 of Mark, he says, (KUffTos 5e dfxoiais rhv SiSdff 
 KaKov iixtjxricraro' 6 fiXv [6 AovKas\ rhu TlavKot 
 virip Tohs TfOTaixous peovra' u 5e [o Mapxos] rht 
 TlcTpoi' (ipaxvKoyias eTrtfxi\ovix(vov (^lloni iv. in 
 Matt., cpioted by Forster, Apostulical AiUhoi-ity 
 of the Kpistle to the i/eire.'M, p. 64S). 3rdly, 
 It is not in the epistle to the Hebrews alone that a 
 resemblance to the style of Luke may be detected : 
 the same feattire jicrvades all Paul's epistles, es- 
 pecially those of a later date, ixs iias been fre- 
 quently ob.served liy critics. This argument, 
 then, if used against the Pauline origin of the 
 epistle to I he Helirews would jjrove too much, as 
 it would go to invalidate the claiirs of almost all 
 the acknowledgeii writings of the apostle. In fine, 
 whilst there are such resemblances of style, &c., 
 as have been referred to between this epistle and 
 the writings of Luke, there are differences o( il 
 nature so weighty as completely to ovei balance 
 these resemblances, and authorize the coiisluslon 
 that the author of the latter could not als. be the 
 author of the former Both Siuart (^Comment. 
 vol. i. p. .'i33, Lond. 1B28) and Elchhom (Einlcit. 
 bd. ili. s. 465) justly lay stress on the greater pre- 
 dominance of Jewish feelinys in the Epistle to the 
 Ilebrevvs than in any of Luke's writings, anil still 
 more on the marked familiarity with the jiecu- 
 liarlties of the Jewish schools displayed by the 
 writer of the epistle, but of which no traces 
 are ap))arent in any of the writings of the 
 evangelist. Both writings display the combina- 
 tion of the Palestinian and the Hellenistic cha- 
 racter on the jiart of their author: but in the 
 E]iistle to the Hebrews the former so decidedly 
 jnedominatcs over the latter, whilst the reverse is 
 the case wivh the wiitings of Luke, that it seema 
 to the last ' legree improbable that the same [lenOB
 
 • HEBREWS, EPISTLE TO THE. 
 
 tonlil have written Imlli. P appears, thprpforp, 
 that for tlie llieoiy wliicli ascribes iliis ejiistle to 
 Luke, there is no eviilence «;t" any kiiM wliich 
 will bear examination, l)iit, on the contrary, not 
 a little n-^ain-t it. That which claims the aiitlior- 
 ■hip of tiiis epistle for Barnahas has in its support 
 Jie testimony of TeituUian (^Dc Ptidicitia, c. 20), 
 with wiiom, as we learn from Jerome (A';»m^. 129, 
 ad Dardanuin), scve'al {pleri<iUe) amoni,' the 
 Latins couciirrtd.* For this opinion Teitnllian, 
 in the passage refeircii to, assi^Mis no reasons, and 
 Jerome apjHars to liave treated it iis a mere con- 
 jectnre resting npun Tcrtnllians authority alone ; 
 for, in his catalogue of ecclesiastical writers (c. 5) 
 he refers to this opinion as one ' juxfa Tertnllia- 
 num,' whilst he says that the oi)inion that Luke 
 was tiie aiitiior was one ' jnxta qnosdam." Hug 
 18 of 0)iinion (I»trod. p. 59C, Fosdick"s transl), 
 tliat in tiiis passage we have not Tertullian's own 
 view so mncii as a concession on his part to tiinse 
 whom lie was opposing, and who, because of tiie 
 very passage lie is about to quote from the Kpistle 
 to the Hebrews (vi. 4-8), were inclined to reject 
 the claims of that epistle to lie esteemeil tiie pro- 
 duction of Paul. This conjecture is of use, as it 
 tends to show that Tertullian might have another 
 reason for ascribing this epistle to Barnabas than 
 his total ignorance that it had ever Iwen iii:pufed 
 to Paul, as has been confi<lently inferred by 
 several writers from the fact that it was ob- 
 viously to the interest of his argument to ujjhold 
 the Pauline origin of this epistle had he been 
 aware of it. In recent times tlie ablest defendei 
 of tliis hyp ithesis is Ullmann. who iias devoteil to 
 it an article in the first volume of his journal, the 
 SiJidieii wid Kritiken, but liie evidence he aiiduces 
 \i\ favour of it is very feeble. After enlarging on 
 the testimony of Tertullian, he proceeds to the 
 internal evidence iii favour of Barnabas ; l>ut of 
 the s'cT reasons he assigns fof ascribing the ej)isfle 
 to him, none jiossesses any force. Tlie_/i>'s<, viz. the 
 traces in the epistle of an Alexandrian education 
 on the part of the author, snp])osing it granted, 
 would nut apply j'ai tic'ularly to Bariial as. who 
 was a native of Cyjirus, and who, though Uilmann 
 says, ' he hail per/iaps been in Alexandria,' fur 
 aufht we know had never seen that seat of alle- 
 gorical learning. The second, viz. that Banialias 
 being a Levite was the more likely, on that ac- 
 count, to imderstand the Jewish ritual, as we see 
 the author of this epistle did, is of no weight, for 
 there is nothing stated in the epistle on that liead 
 wliich any intelligent Jew miglit )iot have 
 known, whttlier a Levite or not. The third, viz. 
 that what the author of this ej)istle savs concern 
 ing the law, divine revelatiun, faith, &.C., is very 
 
 * Ullniaiin {S/vd. utid Krit. i. .3!>I) has la- 
 boured to show tiiiit the ' phrique' in this jjassage 
 must he understood of persons belonging to the 
 Eastern cliinch, the ' Giaeci sermonis- sciiptores,' 
 of whom Jerome sjH'aks in tiie same sentence. 
 Hail he re.id flie ]rassage atlenively, howevtr, he 
 would lia\e ])er<eived that wli it Jtmnie .-avs is, 
 that though in his day ' |)leiique eam vel Bar- 
 naliae vel Clementis arbitrautiir,' it was viewed 
 as PauTs 'non solum ab eccle.^i is Orient is. sed ab 
 omnih'ts retio [i. e. anfiquioribusj ecclesiasticis 
 Gr:eci 9'r 11 iM> s-ci lj)ioi ibu ..' It f;//ihe Greek 
 writers judged it 'o lie Paul .s. how could ntant/ 
 •f them inscribe it to Barnabas? 
 
 HEBREWS, EPISTLE TO THE. SJ7 
 
 Pauline, and such as we might e\|)rct fiotn a 
 comjianion of Paul, such as Barnalias was ; tho 
 fourth, viz. that li.e tenor of 'he epistle is worihy 
 such a man as Bainal)a3 : tnc fifth, viz. that the 
 writer ol' this episile sj)eaks of the .Saviour very 
 fre(]ne7itly by the a]ipellatiori f) 'Irjffori. which 
 Dr. Ullmann thinks indiciites that the writer unist 
 have known our Lord during his |;eTsonal ministry, 
 which was probdhhj the case with Harnatxas ; and 
 the sixth, viz. that the names of iKMsons men 
 tioned in this epistle are names » liirh Barnal)as 
 mir/ht have relVireil to liad he written it — an» 
 reasons such as it would be idle to refute, ami .vucb 
 as fill us with siir]>rise that a man of Ullmann's 
 learning and vigour should ha,ve gravely adduced 
 them. With regaid to they{/V/i also, blsbau.seu 
 has justly observed (Opvsc. 'fhiolof/icn, p. 115) 
 tiiat if it were ceitain tliat Barnalias had enjoyed 
 the advantage of our I^ords ))eisiinaJ niiiislry, it 
 would clearly jirove that he was not the author of 
 this epistle, for the latter distinctly classes him- 
 self with those by whom this advantage had not 
 been enjuyed (ch. ii. 3). Stuarl and .soine olheis 
 have laid great stress on tlie contrast atl*>r<led by 
 this epistle to the extant e)ii-tle wliich )iassea 
 under the name of Baiiiaiias, in respect of style, 
 tone, and geneial character, as supplying iitdnbit- 
 able evidence that the fi.rmer is the jirodnctioii 
 of a dilleient and a far sv.jieiior mind. Of this 
 there can he no (juesth n, and, were we quite cer- 
 tain that tlie ejiistle ascribetl to Barnabas wa» 
 really his ]iri)ducfio)i, the argument would be 
 Ciinclnsive. But though some very ilisfinguished 
 names may be cited in support of its authen- 
 ticity, the greater weight, Iwth of authoiiiy and 
 evidence, is against it [Baiin.vb.as, Kpi.sti.b ok]. 
 The total absence of any reason in favour of im- 
 ]iuting the authorshi]) of the Ejiistle to the He- 
 brews to Bainabas atl'oids suJlicient ground for 
 rejecting llis hypothesis without our attempt- 
 ing to a(kluce dubious and unceitain reasi.ns 
 against it. 
 
 It only remains that we should consider the 
 alleged traces of an Al xaiidiian origin in thia 
 ejiistle. Tiiesehave been much insisted ujion by 
 Kichhorn, Schulz, Bleek, ami others; iiut they 
 aie not such, we think, as will cany conviction 
 to any impartial inquirer. The standaid of com- 
 parison by which the snjijKised AKxandriai: 
 tone of this ejiistle is evincetl, is sujijJied by the 
 writing's of Pliilo, between which and this epistle 
 if is atVirnied that there is so close a lesemfihmce 
 that it can be accounted lor (mly on the siijiposi- 
 tion that the .intlior of the latter was, like Pi.ilo, 
 an Alexandrian Jew. Now liefore this reasoning 
 can be so much ;is luiked at, it behoves tliose who 
 use it to jiiiiiit out clearly how much of Philo'a 
 peculiar style and sentinient was owing to ids 
 Jewish, and how iniicli to his .-Mexaiiihian, educa- 
 tii.n or hakiits of thought ; iieca.i.se, unless this 
 can be done, it will be im)H<ssible to show that 
 any alleged jieculiarity ueressurily l.esjieaks an 
 .\lexundrian origin, anil could not jio.ssilily have 
 ajijieared in the w ritings of a j'ure Jew of Pales- 
 tine. No attenijit, however, of this .sort has been 
 made; on the conlraiy, it has been assumed that 
 whatever is Philonian is theiefoie Alexandrian, 
 and hence, all resemblances lielween the writings 
 <if Pliilo and the l-'pislle to the Kelirews have 
 been urged as ceitaiii jiroofs that the latter must 
 have becJi written by a cotivetted Jew fif Alex-
 
 828 IIEBREAVS, KPISTLK TO THK. 
 
 ■.ndria. Sucli an assiimptimi, liowevei', we wcrulil 
 by net means cniice.le ; ami we ft-fl conlinned in 
 this liv an excimiiia'i.iti ciC tlie eviileiicc a;l.liiced 
 in sii|i|)iirt of the alle^'el A'e.\ancliian cliacacter 
 of itiis epistle. As Stuart lias, we tliiiil<, clearly 
 tlinwn (i. 321), anil as even T.iiiluck, tlioiiirli 
 obviously ineliuing tlie otlier way, 'las caudidly 
 adinitieci (ConimeHC. on the Ilebretcs, i. ji. 68, 
 § 7), tl.ere is unfiling in this evidence to sliovv 
 tli.U tliis epistle might not liave tieen wiitten liy 
 a Jew who had never left the liouuds (tf Palestine 
 It is worthy of notice that several of the points (in 
 whi<;h Eichh((rii chielly insists as favoiuin;^ his 
 view, such as the [irevalence of typical exposi- 
 tions of the Mo-aic ritual in this epistle, anti the 
 greater elegance of its language and style ( Ei/deit. 
 iii. 413 11'.), are given up by Bleek, and that of 
 the two chiefly insisted ujwn by tlie latter, viz. 
 tli€ close affinity between this epistle ar.d the 
 writings of Philo, and the alleged mistake in re- 
 gard to the furniture of the tabernacle which 
 Bleek charges upon the author of this epistle in 
 ch. ix. 3, 4, and which he thinks no Jew of 
 Palestine could have committed, lioth are relin- 
 quished by Th(duck as untenable (comp. the 
 valuable remarks of Hug, IiUrod. p. 584, note, 
 Fosdick's transl.). With regard to the hitter, it 
 n«ay be remarked that, even supposing it proved 
 that the writer of tins epistle had erred in assert- 
 ing that the jiot containing the manna and 
 Aarons rod were placed in the ark of the testi- 
 mony, and that, supposing dufMariipiov to denote 
 the aftar of incense, and not tiie censer, he had 
 (alien into the mistake of placing this within 
 instead of without the vail, nothing could be 
 thence deduced in favour of the Alexanthian 
 origin of the author. For, with regard to the 
 fornier of these it was a matter on which the Jews 
 of Palestine had no better means of infnrtnalion 
 thantliose of any other place, since, in the Temple 
 as then standing, none of the furniture of .lie 
 Holy of Holies had lieen preserved ; a. d with 
 legard t<i the latter, as it could lut be iKe result 
 oi igimrance either in a Jew of Palestine or in a 
 Jew of Alexandria, but must have been a piece 
 of mere iiiadcer/eiice on the pait of elflier, it 
 seems rather too much to conclude (hat it was 
 such as the latter alone was capable of commit- 
 ting. That, however, there is no blunder in the 
 case, has. we think, been very satisfactorily shown 
 by Deyling (Obs. i^'ac. torn. ii. No. 47) and 
 others (comp. Stuart and Thohick in loc). 
 
 On the alleged Alexan<lriaii tone of this ej/istle 
 rests, as already rem;irked, the entire claims of 
 Apollos 1(1 the authorship. In setting aside the 
 former, tlierelure, we of necessity repudiate also 
 the latter. But it may be ]iermitted lis to re- 
 mark that, even supposing the former established, 
 (he latter would by no means follow, any tnor« 
 than because a work produced in (iernianv in the 
 present day was deeply tinctured with Hegel- 
 ianism, it would follow from that alone, that it 
 must be the production of Strauss rather than of 
 Weisse, or any other disciple of Hegel's school. 
 The adofition of this theory by Dr. ThoUick, after 
 his exjtosine of the unsoundness of Bleek's leason- 
 ingg, has filled us with surprise. 'Still." says 
 tie (i. 69), ' could it lie rendered probable that 
 any distinguished person having iiiterc(nirse with 
 Paul, were an Alexandrian, and of Alexandrian 
 QuJli re, "ve mi^-ht, viith the greatest a2)i)earance of 
 
 HKBRKvVS, KPISTLE TO THE. 
 
 truth, regard him as the anthi.r of the epistle 
 Now such an one is found ni the person ol 
 Apollos.' What is this but to say, ' Tlie argu- 
 ments for the .\lexaiidrian origin of this epistle. 
 I must confess, ]irove nothiiig ; but sliow me an 
 end to be gained by it and I will admit them to 
 be most conclusive! ' Such a statemnnt utlordg, 
 we think, very clear evidence that the disposition 
 to ascribe this ejiistle to Apollos is to be traced 
 not to any constraining force of evidence, but ex- 
 clusively to what Olshausen in his strictures on 
 Bhek (OpiMC. p. 92) justly denounces as the 
 main source of tliat able writer s errors on ihtg 
 question — ' Quod non ab omiii partium studio 
 alienum animum servare ipsi contigit.' 
 
 We have occupied so much space in the exami- 
 nation of these hypotheses, partly because we wish 
 to make it a[iparent how slender and shadowy are 
 the grounds on which the o])ponents of the Pauline 
 origin of this epistle are content to acquiesce in the 
 claims of the parties who hare been put forward as 
 the Apostles competitors ; and partly because, be- 
 fore proceeding to consider the evidence directly 
 for and against the claims of the Apostle, we are 
 desirous to make it apparent that, unless these 
 claims can be substantiated, we must give up as 
 hopeless all attempts to ascertain the author of this 
 epistle. Our sole choice lies here between Paul 
 and some unknown writer of tlie apostolic age. 
 This gives the (juestion a character of no small 
 importance, for it renders it virtually a question 
 as to the canonical authority of this epistle. In 
 the formation of the New Testament Canon \ve 
 have no reason to believe that any supernalura'i 
 aid was vouchsifed; i»ut each chinch received 
 or rejected books according as they were satisfied 
 or not with the evidence historical and internal 
 of their having proceeded from some apostolic 
 source [Canon]. The oidy ground, tlierefoie, 
 upon which we can receive any book as canonical, 
 is its lieing shown that it was received in the pri- 
 mitive cliuiches as sanctioned liy apostolic au- 
 thority, confirmed by a comparison of its contents 
 with the general doctrines of the Bible, and of itg 
 style and statements with those of the known 
 writings of the party to whom it is ascribed. 
 Wheie this cannot be done the mere antiuuily of 
 the book pro>es nothing to the point; the fact 
 that, however ancient, the book <;annot be shown 
 to hive been received by those who alone were 
 qualified to judge accurately of such matters, as 
 either the production of an apostle or of some 
 /moicn individual who wrote under the sanction 
 and guidance of an apostle, is enough to set aside 
 all its claims to be reverenced asa part of the divine 
 word. Now if all attem))ts to ascriiie tlie E|iistle 
 to the Hebrews to the jien of any of the known 
 companions of Paul must be regarded as futile, 
 it follows that unless it can be shown to lia\ e been 
 received by the early churches as the production 
 of the Apostle himself, and that upon grounds 
 not incom{)atible with actual evidence to the con- 
 trary, it must be struck out from its place in the 
 sacred Canon, and, masterly as it is, be rankeo 
 with the productions of uninspired human wis- 
 dom. 
 
 Referring our readeis for particulars to the able 
 and copious discussion of this question furnished 
 by the works of Stuart (^ConuneiiUuy, vol. i.), 
 Forster {Tlie Apostol. Author'^y of the Ep. to tht 
 Hebrews, &c.), and Hug, we shall attempt to
 
 HEBRf.WS, EPISTLE TO THE. 
 
 present a conilensed outline of flip cviilrnce, Ixitli 
 for and agiiinst tlie Paiilire antln)rslii|i of this 
 epistle. FollowiiiLj the fxample of Hufj and 
 Foister, we shall commence with the iiiteriml 
 evidence, taking nj) liisf that in favour i)l' the 
 Pauline origin of the epistle. 
 
 1. A jierson familiar with the doctriiies on 
 wliicli Paul is foiiil of insisting in his atknovv- 
 ledged f|)i-tl("S, will readily j)eict'ive that there i.s 
 •uch a correspondence in this respect between 
 these and the Epistle to the Hebrews, m sii]>plies 
 good ground for ])resuming that the latter pro- 
 ceeded also from his pen. That Christianity ;us a 
 system is superior to Judaism in respect of clear- 
 ness, simplicity and moral efficiency ; that the 
 former is the suhsfance and reality of what the 
 latter hail presented only the typical adundira- 
 tion ; and that the latter was to he al)olished to 
 make way for the former, are points which, ii 
 more fully handled in the Epistle to the Hebrews, 
 are familiar to all readers of the E])istles of Paul 
 (cornp. 2 Cor. iii. 6-18; Gal. iii. 22; iv. 1-!), 
 21-;51; Cnl. ii. 16, 17, &c.). The same view is 
 given in this ei)istle as in those of Paul, of the 
 divine glory of the Mediator, not simply as 
 dtivQpunroSi but s])ecifically as the (Ikwv tov dfov, 
 the reflection or manifestation of Deitv to man 
 [cornp. Col. i. 15-20 ; Phil. ii. 6 ; H.eb. \. 3,&c.) ; 
 His condescension is described as having consisted 
 in an impoveiishing. and lessernng, and lowering 
 of Himself for man's behalf (2 Cor. viii. 9; Phil. 
 ii. 7,8; Heb. ii. 9); and His exaltation is set 
 forth as a coiulifion of royal dignity, which shall 
 be consummated by all His enemies being ])«t 
 under His footstool ( 1 Cor. xv. 23-27 ; Heb. ii. 8 ; 
 X. 13; xii. 2). He is representetl as discharging 
 the office of a fiecrirrji. a word which is never 
 used except by Paul ami the writer of this ejiislle 
 (Gal. iii. 19, 20; Heb. viii. 6); His death 
 is represented as a sacrifice for the sins of man ; 
 and the ]ieculiar idea is announced in connection 
 with this, that He was preliguied by the sacrilices 
 of the Mosaic dispensation (Rom. iii. 22-26; 
 1 Cor. V. 7; Eph. i. 7; v. 2; Heb. vii.-x.). 
 Peculiar to Paul and the author of this epistle is 
 the phrase 6 6ehs r^/S etprivi^s (Rom. xv. 33, Ac. ; 
 Heb. xiii. 20); and both seem to have conceived 
 of the x'tp'^'M"''"" under the aspect of Siatpsffets 
 and /jLtptaijiol Trvevfj.aros (1 Cor. xii. 4 ; Heb. 
 ii. 4). It is worthy d' remark also that the mo- 
 mentous question of a man's ])ersonal acceptance 
 with God is answeied in this e])istle in the same 
 peculiar way as in the acknowledged Ej)istles of 
 Paul. All is u fide to depend upon the indi- 
 vidual's exercising what both Paul and the author 
 ?f this epistle call ttiVtis, and which they both 
 represent as a realizing appiehension of the facts, 
 »nd truths, and promises of revelation.''* By both 
 
 * Blei'k and Tholuck have both endeavoured 
 /> show that the Triaris of the Epistle to the 
 Hebrews is not the same as the tticttis of Paul's 
 lcknowletl;;ed writings, but with .singular want 
 )f success in our view. Tholuck's chief argu- 
 ne;)t, and which he luges as of more weight than 
 iiiy Hleek has advanced, is, that the writer has 
 lot here contra^'ed y6iJios and iriVris, the (pya 
 ^ifU>v, and llie ip-ya -niaTfus, as Paul would have 
 done. P..1 how can this be said when the 
 (fieat lesson of the episile is, that cilirai/s, even 
 Utidef tit^ law ilnelf, irio'Tit was 'he ntedium o( 
 
 HEBREWS, KPISTLK TO THE. •?2« 
 
 also th«» power of lliis irimn is frequently lel'crred 
 to and illustiattd by the example of tliose who 
 had distinguished themselves in the aimaU of the 
 Jewish race (comi). Rom. iii. I; v. 2: H<b. iii.6; 
 Gal. iii. 5-11; Heb. X. 3S; xi. 10]. (Jn all 
 these j/oints the sentiments of this cj)i>l^e are so 
 obviously l^uiline, that not only did Origen re- 
 mark that it contained to yorifiara ricii^Aoi;, but 
 even the most de<;ided ojiponenfs of its Pauline 
 authorshi)) in recent limes have laid it down as 
 undeniable that it must have been written by 
 some companion and discijile of Paul. 2. .Some 
 of the Hgures and allusions einployetl in this 
 epistle are strictly Pauline. Thus tlie word of 
 God is com])ared to a sward (E])h. vi. 17.; Heb. 
 iv. 12) ; inexjx-riencetl Christians are children 
 who need milk, and must be instructed in the 
 elements, whilst those lA' 7nn hirer atlainn.ents are 
 fiill-ffroicn men wlio require strmig meat (\ Cor. 
 "iii. i, 2; xiv. 20 ; Gal. iv. 9; Col. iii. 14; Heb. 
 V. 12, 13; vi. 1); redemption through Christ is 
 an introd^tction and an eiUrunre vit/t covjidence 
 unto God (Rom. v. 2; Kjih. ii. 18; iii. 12; 
 Heb. X. 19j; afflictions aie a conttst or strife 
 kyicv (Phil i. 30; Col. ii. 1; Heb. x. 32); the 
 (Christian life is a race (1 Cor. ix. 24 ; Pliil. iii. 
 14; Heb. xii. 1); the Jewish ritual is a \vrpfla 
 (Rom. ix. 4; Heb. ix. 1. 6); a person u:>der 
 the constraint of some unwoithy feeling or prin- 
 ciple is ivoxos SovXeias (Gal. v. 1 ; Heb. ii. !.'>) 
 &c. The iiict that these and other such like 
 figurative ])hrases occur only in this ejiistle and 
 in the acknowledged Epi.slles of Paul, affords 
 strong evidence that the former is his production, 
 for in notiiing does a writer more reailily Itetray 
 himself than by the use of peculiar and favourite 
 figures. 3. Certain marked chaiacleiislics of 
 Paul's style are found in this epistle. This de- 
 jiartment id' the internal evidence has, more, per- 
 lia]is, than any other, been canvas.sed by lecent 
 critics, and in some cases opposite concliisioris 
 have been drawn from the same jilienoniena. 
 Thus the occmrence of aira^ Xtyofxiva in this 
 epistle tias been adduceil by the (TCiman scholars 
 aijainstthe Pauline origin of it, whilst Stuart and 
 Forster have both rested on this part as strongly 
 in favour of that conclusion ; and as it ap])ear9 
 to us with justice, for if it be made out from 
 Paul's acknowledged writings that the use of 
 unusual words is a characteristic of his style 
 (and this has been placed by these writers beyond 
 all ipicstion), it is obvious that the occurrence of 
 the same characteristic in this epistle, so far from 
 being an argument against, is, as far as it goes, 
 an aigumenty'or our ascribing it to Paul. On 
 arguments, however, b.ised on such minirte phe- 
 nomena, we are not disjiosed to rest much weight 
 on either side. Every person must be aware that 
 an author's use of words is greatly mo'litied by 
 the circumstances under which he writes or the 
 design he has in writing; and I ie literature of 
 every country [jvesents '.is with numerous cases of 
 authors, whose works, written at ilill'cient pTiods, 
 and with dirt'erent designs, jiresenl far greater 
 diversities of expressidu than any widen nave 
 lieen jiointed out between liie Epistle to the He- 
 biews and the ucknowledgeil Ejiistles of Paul. 
 Hence cautious critics have declined to rest 
 
 acceptance and tlte channel of iiivin< blewiing 
 t.1) tuen'j
 
 130 HEIJREVVS, EPISTLE TO THE. 
 
 much ill nti."s(i(ins of literary p:ireiitiii»e upon 
 wluit lioiitlcy valWs (Dissert, on P/ialari^, p. 19, 
 Luiul. Uii'O) ' co'iSiiies tliiit are tuade (Voin stile 
 arul laii;;uau;e alone," and wSiiilr, lie adds, ' are 
 conimarily nice and uncertain, and dt-pend ujion 
 slender uiitices.' Apart, however, fixim such 
 iTiirutte niceties, (iiere ire certain marked pecu- 
 liarities of style wliicl; attach to jiarlicular writers, 
 and (low so directly from the ciiaracter of theii 
 genius or education, that tiiey can liardly express 
 tlieiriselves in discourse with<int iiitrodiicinj;(hem. 
 Now such )icculiarities the writings of Paul pre- 
 sent, and the occurrence of tliem lias always been 
 felt to allord no small evidence of the authenticity 
 of any production claiming to he his iu which they 
 are fouinl. Paley, in eiiumeratini,' tiiese (Huree 
 Paulina;), has laid stress chielly on tiie follovvini( : 
 A dis|)Ositiou to the frequent use of a word, which 
 cleaves as it were to the memory of tiie writer, so 
 as to l^^conie a sort uf cant word in his writings ; 
 a p'.o[)ensity ' to go oil' at a word,' and enter upon 
 a parciitlietic series of lemarks suggested by that 
 word; atiil a fondness for the paronomasia, or play 
 upon words. In tiie Epistle to the Helirews these 
 peculiarities of Paul's style are ricidy exemplified; 
 Hti evidence in favour of its Pauline origin which 
 can never l)e enfeebled by adducing words, phrases, 
 or features of style peculiar to this epistle, unless 
 it can be first shown that it was impossible for 
 Paul to have used such. 4. There is a striking 
 analogy between Paul's use of the Old Testament 
 and that made by the writer of this epistle. Both 
 make frequent apjieals to the Old Testament ; 
 boti) are in the habit of accumulating passages 
 from different ))arts of the Old Testament, and 
 making them bear on the point under discussion 
 (comp. Rom. iii. 10-18; i.K. 7-;53, &c. ; Keb. i. 
 5 14; iii ; x 5-17); both are fond of linking 
 quotations togetiier by means of the expression 
 Kok TToXiy (comp. Rom. xv. 9-l'2; I Cor. iii. 19, 
 20: Heh. i. 5; ii. 1'2, LI, iv. 4; x. 30); both 
 make use of tiie same p.issai,'es, and that occa- 
 sionally in a seose not naturally suggested by the 
 context wlience they are quoted (1 Cor. xv. 27; 
 Kph. i. 22; Ileb. ii. 8; Rom. i. 17; Gal. iii. 11 ; 
 Heb. X. 3S) ; an<l Iwtli, in one instance, quote the 
 same itassage in the same way, but in a form in 
 which it does not agree with the Sept., and with 
 an addition of the words Kijei Kvpios, not found 
 in the Hebrew ; thereliy indicating that the pas- 
 sage is given in both instances as it was present 
 t«» tlie mernorv of one and the same writer (com]). 
 Rom. xii. 19'; Heb. x. 30). On the other iiand, 
 great stress has lieen laid by the o|jponents of the 
 Pauline origin of this epistle on the fact, tlial 
 whilst Paul in his acknowledged writings quotes 
 from the Heinew original in preference to the 
 Sept. wliere the latter dilfers from the former, 
 the author of this epistle quotes exclusively fiom 
 tiie Sept., even when it departs very widely from 
 the Hebrew. To this it may be replied : 1st, 
 That both Paul and the auVior of this e|)istle 
 quote getierally from the Sept. ; 2ndly, That 
 where tlie Sept. dilfers from the Hebrew, Paul 
 does not alwai/s follow the Hebrew in ))refereiice 
 to tlie Sept. (comp. Rom. ii. 24 ; x. 11-18: xi. 
 27 ; XV. 12; i dw. i. 19, &c.) ; and, 3rdly, That 
 tlie writer r,f tiiis epistle does not always follow 
 the Sept. wliere it dillers from the Hebrew, but 
 oc »sionally deserts the former for the latter {e. gr. 
 %. 30 ; siii. 5). These is no ground, therefore, 
 
 HEBREWS, EPISTLE TO THE. 
 
 for this olijectioii to the Pauline origin of tiii« 
 epistle. In fine : The Epistle to the Helirewg 
 contains some j)er.<<)rial allusions on the part oj 
 the writer whicli strongly favour the supposition 
 that he was Paul. Tliese are tlie mention of his 
 intention to pay those to whom lie was writing a 
 visit speedily, in company with Timothy, wiiom 
 he alTectionately styles 'our brother,* and whom 
 he describes as liaving been set at liberty, and 
 ex])ected soon to join tne writer (Heb. xiii. 23); 
 the allusion to his being in a state of imprison- 
 ment at the time of writing, as well as of hia 
 having partaken of their sympathy while formerly 
 in a state of bondage among them (Heb. xiii. 19; 
 X. 34) ; and the transmission to them of a saluta- 
 tion from the believers in Italy (Heb. xiii. 21)r, 
 all of which agree well with the supposition 
 that Paul wrote this ejiistle while a prisoner at 
 Rome. 
 
 Such is an outline of the internal evidence 
 furnished by this epistle of its Pauline origin. 
 Let us now glance at the main objections which 
 from various sources have been urged against it. 
 
 1. It is unaccountable that Paul, had he writ- 
 ten this epistle, should have withheld his name. 
 But is it less unaccountable that Clement, or 
 Apollos, or Luke, had any of them been the 
 author, should have withheUl his name? Might 
 not Paul write anonymously as well as any other 
 man? Why he should have done so in this case 
 we admit our inability to say .satisfactorily ; the 
 only apjiarent reason, as far as we have been able 
 to see, being the more rhetorical character of the 
 ])roduction, which might induce the author to 
 waive the usual form of epistolary address. But 
 our inability to assign the reason why this work 
 should have been issued anonymously cannot 
 surely be held to be an argument against it» 
 authenticity, else it would be imjiossihle to esta- 
 blish the authenticity of any anonymous produc- 
 tion unless we could satisfactorily show what 
 were the author's reasons for wiihludding his 
 name — a thing which in h've cases out of six it 
 is impossible to do. 2. ' This ejiistle is more 
 calmly and logically written than it was jiossible 
 for the energetic Paul to have written ; all the 
 analogies between Judaism and Christianity are 
 calmly investigate I and calmly adduceil ; the 
 materials are arranged in the strictest order, and 
 carefully wrought out according to this disjiosi- 
 tion, and conclusion follows conclusion with the 
 greatest regularity ; the language also is rotund 
 and choice, and the rejiiesentation unusually 
 clear. All this is unlike Paul' (Eiclihorn, tlinlett. 
 iii. 459). It will jierhaps surjirise our readers tc 
 find the author of the Epistle to the Romans pro- 
 nounced so utterly incapable of calm, connected, 
 and logical reasoning, that it is inconceivable he 
 should have written the Epistle to the Heiirews. 
 If there be oue thing for which Paul's writings 
 are more remarkable than another, it is thei' 
 dialectic accuracy ; and as for calmness, whilst 
 we admit that as a whole there is less of iirdour 
 and vehemence in this epistle than in the majority 
 of Paul's acknowh'dgeti epistles, we think tliis is 
 to be ascribed to the fact that a large jjortion of 
 it is occupied with remarks of an explanatory 
 and illustrative kind — remarks which are usually 
 made in a calmer tone than where the design oJ 
 the writer is to expose error, or to exhort to duty ; 
 and, on the other band, we would assert that ia
 
 HEBREWS, EFISTLK TO THE. 
 
 Xmyne parts of tlie epislle wlieie liis subject call-i 
 file wtiter lo the titleiaiice of rcpriKiC, wiiiiilii;,', nr 
 exliovlalioii, the l.iii.mi.ige is t-qiiiiily indent willi 
 that tiseil ill any aiialnj^otis p.iss.ii^fs in the wiit- 
 iii;^s of Paul. This liiirigs us to the closiiijj part 
 of Kiclihorn's ohjee.tiou, which lehites to the use 
 in tliis epistle of a more rotund, eleijauf, and per- 
 spicuous style than we find usually in the epistles 
 of Paul. Now it must hie admilteil here that this 
 composition does partake much more of tlie cha- 
 racter of a Howiug, ctmtinuous discourse, than is 
 found ill the apostle's ackii nvledgrd productions. 
 Tlie cpiestiori, however, is not, Whether Paul 
 roiglit r.ot for some sufficient reason ])iefer at- 
 t;;mptin^ such a discourse in liiis jiarticular case? 
 A (luestion \vhi<;h it would surely he absurd to 
 discuss; hut, Whether, sKjiposhtff \nm to make 
 the attempt, if is conceivalde that he should suc- 
 ceed in it to the e.\teiit realized hy the writer of 
 this epistle? Eichhorn concludes in the iief,Mtive; 
 liut on w'.iat grounds? Apparently on the grounds 
 that f'.ie aposile"s acknowledgeil writings |)resent 
 no specimens of such success ; so that his argu- 
 ment is this : Supposing Paul to have attempted 
 to write iheforically, it is impossible he should 
 tiave succeeded so well, because we lind that, 
 where he makes no such attempt, his style is far 
 from being rhetorical ! Of sucii reasoning we ar 
 content to say, ' Valeat quantum valere )iotest. 
 We may also hint that, in our opinion, there is no 
 passage in the Epistle to the Hebrews, iinjiosiiig 
 as it is, which might not have (lowed from the 
 same pen which composed the 6lli chapter of 
 RonuiJis, and the liSlli of 1st Corinthians. — 3. 
 ' Whilst we occasionally meet Pauline termini, 
 we (ind precisely in the leadinrj ideas of the 
 epistle a terminology dill'eront fnun that of Paul " 
 (Tholiick, i. 39, Eng. transl.). Tlie instances spe- 
 cified by Dr. Tlioluck are tlie use of Upivs, noifj.riy, 
 and airdaToXos, as designations of Christ ; oi' 6/j.o- 
 Koyla, which he says is confined to this e|jistle ; 
 of iyyi^eiv t<2 Beai ; and of reAttouv, with its de- 
 rivatives in the sense in which it is used Heb. 
 vii. 19. Now, with regard to this objection, it 
 may be obseived, 1st. Tiiat supjiosing all the in- 
 itaiices adduced by Tholuck to be unimpeachable, 
 and su]iposing no reason could be assigned why 
 Paul should use such in writing to Hebrews, 
 when he did not use them in writing to others, 
 still the objection cannot have much weight with 
 any [lerson accustomed to weigh e\ idence, because 
 not only is the number of Pauline termini found 
 in this epistle far greater than the number of ter- 
 miiii which, according to Tholuck, are ' f.ireign 
 to th,» jipostle to the Gentiles ;' but it is always 
 less liliely tliat the peculiar phrases of a writer 
 ehouid be borrowed by another, than that a writer 
 noted f'jr the use of peculiar words and jihrases 
 should, in a composition of a character somewhat 
 diflerent t.din his other productions, use terms not 
 found elsewhere in liig wiitings. But, 2iidly, let 
 us examine the inttaiices adduced by Tholuck, 
 and see whe'her thev bear ont his le.isoning. 
 ' Paul iiowheie calls Christ priest.' True ; but 
 though Paul, ill writing to churches composed 
 move or less of Gentile converts, whose previous 
 ideas of jiiifsts and priestly riles were anything 
 but favourable to their receiving under sacerdotal 
 terms right notions of Christ and his work, never 
 calls Christ a priest, is that any reason for our 
 MQcludiiig that in writing to Jews, who had 
 
 HEBREWS, EPISTLK TO THE. fi»\ 
 
 amongst them u priest hood of di\ iiie organi/alidii, 
 and wiitiijg lor the express purpo'»e of nIiowJik 
 that that piieslhooil wu.s typical ol Cliiisl, it is 
 inconceivalile that the apnslle ^il(lulll have applirU 
 the teim^j/i'eiMo Cliii>t .' To ii8 the dillicully 
 would rather seem to lie to cimceive iiow. in 
 handling such a fo)iic, he could avoid calling: 
 Christ a ]iriest. — ' Paul nowhere calls Christ a 
 shepltcrd and an ajwst/c, as the wriier of thi.i 
 epislle does.' But the whule weif^ht of this 
 objection to the Pauline oi igin of ihis ejiistle 
 must rest on the assiimplion that Paul never \if€$ 
 figurative ajipellatioiis of Christ in his writings ; 
 for if he do, why not here as well as elsewheie? 
 Now it could only be the giossesf iiii.ic(pi.iiiite<l- 
 ness with the aposlle'.s writings which could lead 
 any to alli.-in this. The very o]i]>osile temleiicy 
 is characteristic of them. Tims we lind (^l.ilst 
 termed reAos v6nov (Rom. x. 4), Smkovov wtpt- 
 TOfxris (xv. 18), T^ Troffxa riHuv (1 Coi. v. 1 j, T) 
 iTfTpa (x. 4), anapxh (xv. 23^ tcl aySp] {2 (,"or, ii. 
 2), aKpoywvtaiov (K]ili. ii. 20), ^ic. W ith these 
 nistances before iis. why should it be deemed so 
 utterly i"ciedihle that Paul could have calleii 
 Christ oirdcTToAor and iruiixriv, that the occurrence 
 of such teims in t..e epislle before us is to be held 
 as a reason fur adjudging it not to have been writ- 
 ten by him i Witii regard to the use of ifxzXoyia 
 ill the sense of religions prof ession, the leader 
 may compare the passages in which it occurs in 
 this epistle with Rom x. 9 ; 2 Cor. ix. 13 ; 1 Tim. 
 vi. 12, and judge for himself liow far sucli a u.-ia-e 
 is foreign to the apostle. The jihra.se iyyi^nv tw 
 6i<2 occurs once in this ejiistle (vii. 19), and once 
 in the Epis'le of James; Paul also once ii.ses the 
 veib actively (Phil. li. 30); and, on the other hand, 
 the author of this epistle once uses it inlransi- 
 tively (x. 25). As there is thus a jieifect analogy 
 in the usage of the veib lietweeii the two, why it 
 should lie su])()osed impiobable that Paul should 
 use it in reference to God, or why a jilirase used 
 by James should be deemed too Alexanilriaii to 
 be used by Paul, we feel oniselves utterly at a 
 lo.ss to conceive. With regard to he use ol 
 TfXxnaov, Dr. Tholuck himself confemls [Ajypen- 
 dix, ii. 297) that it everywhere in this epi.'-tle 
 retains the idea of completing ; but he cannot 
 understand how Paul could have contemplated 
 tne work of redemjitioii under this term in this 
 epistle, since in no other of his epistles is /t so 
 used. This dilliculty of the learned jirofes-or 
 may, we think, be very easily removed, by re- 
 marking that it does not ajijiear to have l>een 
 Paul's design elsewhere, so fully at least as here, 
 to represent the superiority of Christianity over 
 Judaism, as that arises from the former being siifli- 
 cient, whilst the latter was not siitlicieiit,tofo»;/»/e/« 
 men in a religious point of view, i. e. to supjily 
 to them all Ihey need, and advance them to all 
 of wliicli they are capable. That this is the theme 
 of the writer the jias-sages in which the word in 
 question occurs show ; and we see no leasoii why 
 such an idea might not have occurred to Paul aa 
 well as to any other man. 
 
 Such are the objections on which the more rt- 
 cent impugners of the Pauline anthorshlp of this 
 epistle seem inclineti to lay most stiess. A niul 
 titude of otheis have been urged by Berlholdt 
 Scliulz, Seyfl'aith, ^c, which have lieeii carefulU 
 noticed and rejjlied to by Stuart, but which it ij 
 unnecessary to adduce liere us their futility seem
 
 «32 HEBREWS, EPISTLE TO THE. 
 
 reiy generally admiltetl even by those who take 
 the anti-Paiiliiio side. 
 
 It ajjiieais, tlicivfure, that from tlie epistle itself 
 nothing can lie ijathereil materially iinfavourable 
 to the opinion tiiat Paul was its audior, whilst 
 there is muclt in it strongly terulinjf to support 
 that opinion. It yet remains that we should look 
 at the external evidence liearing on this (jnestion. 
 Hei« we shall (irid the same ci.nclusion still more 
 decisively supported. 
 
 Passing Uy, as somewhat uncertain, the alleged 
 testimony of Peter, who is suppojeil (2 Pet. iii. 
 15 16) to reler fo the Hpistle to the Hebrews as 
 ttie cimiposition ./(Paul, and passing by, also, the 
 testimonies of the apostolic I'atiiers, which, though 
 very decisive as to the anticjiiity an I canonical 
 authority of this ejiistle (see Forsfer s inquinj, 
 § 13), yet say nothing to guide us to the author, 
 we Come to the testimony of the Eastern church 
 npon this subject. Here we meet the inijiortant 
 fact, that of the (ireek fatheis n;)t one ascribes this 
 epistle to any but Paul. Pantcpmus (ap. Eu eb. 
 Hist. Eccles. vi. 14), in the second century, 
 ascribes it to the apostle ; and so does Clement of 
 Alexandria (ibid., Stroniat. vi. 645, et saepe). 
 Origen(ap. Kuseb. Hist. Eccles. vi.l5), in affirming 
 that the Pauline authorship of this epistle was in 
 his day matter of ancient tradition, assents to the 
 truth ot this opinion, and in noticing what he 
 thinks the un-Pauline features of the style, men- 
 tions that a report was extant to tli« etlect that, 
 whilst the ideas were Pauls, the words were those 
 of dement of Rome or of Luke ; though, so far 
 from regarding this as ceitain, he says that 'G.)d 
 knows who was the writer (e. e , as the context 
 shows, the amanuensis) of this epistle.' Enset)ius, 
 whilst he places this epistle among the ayrtAeyS- 
 fieya. knowing tliat in the church at Rome its 
 claims had been questioned, nevertheless often 
 quot<!s it as Paul's (see the pa-sages in Lardner's 
 Credibility; Work.^, iv. 2J9, ed. 1788), and in- 
 cludes it as received by the church generally 
 among theP.uiline e]iisties (//<si. Eccles. iii. 25). 
 A number of other teitimonies from the Eastern 
 church may be found in Lardner (vol. vi. p. 3'Jl), 
 fully justilying the assertion above made. Jerome 
 also assures us (/yj. ad Dardanuni] tliat it was 
 received as Paul's by all the Greek writers. Nor 
 does it appear that in any part of the Eastern 
 church the Pauline origin of this epistle was ever 
 doubted or susjiected (comp. Olshausen, Opusc. 
 Theolog. p. 95). 
 
 In the Western church this epistle did not 
 meet with the same early and universal reception. 
 Notwithstanding the regard shown for it by Cle- 
 ment, the church at Rome seems to have placed 
 it under a ban (comp. Euseb. Hist. Eccles. iii. 3 ; 
 vi. 20, see Heinichen's note) ; and hence Tertul- 
 lian ascribed it to Barnabas, and others to Luke 
 and Clement, whilst no Latin writer is found 
 cluring the first three centuries who ascribed it to 
 Paul. In tlte middle of the fourth century, 
 Hilary of Poictiers quotes it as Paul's; and from 
 that time the opinion seems to have gained ground 
 (ill the commencement of the fifth century, when 
 it s()eedily became as general in tlie Western as it 
 had been in the Eastern churches (Lardner, vol. vi. 
 [>. 39;{). Now, of what value is this state of opinion 
 m the eaily cliurches of the West in the question 
 of evidence now before us ? To judge o( this, we 
 lBti«t hear in mind tliat the sole amount o!' evi- 
 
 HEBREWS, EPISTLE TO THE. 
 
 deuce arising from the testimony of the Latii 
 churches is jicyrt^jfc ,■ all we can conclude from 
 it, at the most, is that they had no cullicient evi» 
 dence in favour of this epistle being Paul s: they 
 do not seem to have had a shadow of historical 
 evidence against its being his. The claims of 
 Barnabas, Clement, and Luke, rest upon mere 
 individual conjecture, and have no histoiical .su])- 
 port. Supposing, then, that the rojrclion of this 
 epistle by the Latins cannot be accounted fjr l)y 
 circumstances ])eculiar to tliem, still this fact 
 cannot diminish the weight of evidence accruing 
 from the unanimity of the Greeks and Asiatics. 
 Had the Latins been as nnaiiinious in favour of 
 Apollos or Clement as the Eastern churches were 
 in favour of Paul, the case would liiive been "dif- 
 ferent. The value of Paul's claiins would in 
 that case have been equal to the dilVerence be- 
 tween the value of the Eastern tratlition and the 
 value of the Western. This would have fur- 
 nished a somewhat puzzling problem ; though 
 even in that case the superiority of (lie Eastern 
 witnesses to the Western would have materially 
 advocated the claims of the apostle. As the case 
 stands, a^^ the positive eviilence extant is in favour 
 of the Pauline authorship of this ejiistle ; and the 
 only thing against it is that in the Latin churches 
 there appears to have been no commonly received 
 tradition on the .-nbject. Under such circum- 
 stances, the claims of the ajiostle are entitled to 
 be regarded as fully substantiated by the external 
 evidence. 
 
 The result of the previous inquiry may be 
 thus stated. 1. There is no substantial evidence 
 external or internal in favour of any claimant 
 to the authorship of this epistle excejit Paul. 
 2. There is nothing incompatible with the sujipo- 
 sition that Paul was the autlior of it. 3. The 
 [ireponderance of the internal, and all the direct 
 external, evidence, go to show that it was written 
 by Paul. 
 
 Assuming the Pauline authorshi]) of the ejiistle, 
 it is not dillicult to determine rcken and tvhert 
 it was written. The allusions in cli. xiii. 19, 21, 
 p. lint to tlie closing period of the apostle's two 
 years imprisonment at Rome as the season during 
 ' the serene hours' of which, as Hug describes 
 X\\pm (^Iiitrod. p. 603), he composed thisnoble;t 
 production of his [len. In this opinion almost all 
 who receive the epistle us Paul's concur; and 
 even by tliose who do not so receive it, nearly the 
 same time is fixed upon, in consequence of the 
 evidence furnished by the epistle itself of its hav 
 ing been written a good while after those to whom 
 it is addressed had become Christians, but yet 
 before the destruction of the Temple. 
 
 That the jiarties to whom this epistle was ad- 
 dressed were converted Jews, the ejiistle itself 
 plainly siiows Ancient tradition points out the 
 church at .Jerusalem, or the Christians in Pales- 
 tine generally, as the recipients. Stuart contends 
 for the church at Caesarea, not without some show 
 of reason. 
 
 An early opinion that the epistle was first 
 written in Hebrew or Aramaic, and then trans- 
 lated into Greek, has found in Micliaelis a strenu- 
 ous defender (^Introd. iv. p. 221). The argu- 
 ments he adiluces, however, aie more specious 
 than sound ; an<l it has liecn aiiund.intly shown 
 by Laidner, Hug. Eichhorii, an<l others, that thil 
 opiiiiiiii is untenable. Why Paul should bftTf
 
 HEBRON. 
 
 written in Greel< to porsons residing: in Jiulxa is 
 best answered bv tlie it'.isoiis wliicli lltig {iiitrod. 
 p. 326, s<n.) anil Dio<lafi {De Chrisdi Orcrce lo- 
 quente cxercilntid. Sic, t-diteil liy I). T. ])i)l)liiii, 
 LL.B., Liiiiil. lSi;<) have adduced, to sliow that 
 Greek was at that time well known to the mass of 
 the Jews (comp. Tholuck, i. 7S). 
 
 Some have doubted whetlior this composition 
 be justly termed an e])istle, and have proposed to 
 regard it rather as a treatise. Tlie saltitatioiK, 
 liowever, at the close, seem rallier to t'avoiir the 
 common opinion ; thonjli it is of little moment 
 which view we espouse. 
 
 TUe desi(/n of this epistle is to dissuade those to 
 whom it is written from rela])sing into Judaism, 
 and to exhort them to hold fast tlie truths of 
 Christianity which they had i-eceived. For this 
 purpose the apostle shows the suj)eriuritv of the 
 latter over the former, in (hat it was intro.luced 
 by one far greater than ani^els, or than Moses, from 
 whom the Jews received their economy (i.-iii.), 
 and in that it alfords a more secure and complete 
 salvation to tlie sinner than the former (iv.-x.). 
 In demonstrating the latter position the apostle 
 shows that in jioint of dij^nitv, perjietuity, suffi- 
 ciency, and suitableness, the Jewish priesthood 
 and sacrifices were far inferior to those of Christ, 
 who waa the substance and reality, whilst these 
 were but the type and shadow. He shows, also, 
 that by the ajipeavance of the anti-type tlie type 
 is necessarily abolished; and adduces fiie im- 
 ])ortant truth, that now, through Christ, the ])rivi- 
 lege of personal access to God is fiee to all. On 
 all this he founds an exhortation to a life of faith 
 and obedience, and shows that it has ever been 
 only by a spiritual recognition and worship of 
 God that good men have p ntici])afed in his 
 favour (xi.). The epistle concludes, as is usual 
 with Paul, with a series of ])ractical exiiortations 
 aiid ]iious wishes (xii -xiii.). 
 
 Of Commentaries on this epistle (he following 
 may be -enumerated as ranking among the liest. 
 Owen"s Exposition of the Epistle to the Ifehreics, 
 With preliminary e.rercitalions, 4 vols, folio, 
 L:ind. 166S-^4 ; Maclean's Paraphrase and 
 Commentary on the Epistle to the Hobreirs, 
 2 vols. 8vii., Lotid. 1S19; Stuait's Conunentnry 
 on the Epistle to the Hebrews, 2 vols. Rvo., 
 Lond. 1P2S; i vol. ibid 1S31; Carpzov, Sacrce 
 Kxercitt. in Pauli J'p. ad llch. Rvo.. Heltnst. 
 1750 ; Storr, PaiiJi Brief, an d. Ifib. crliintert, 
 8vo., Tiili. 180'J; Krnesti, l.cctioncs Avadd. in 
 Ep. ad Heb. ^vo., Lips. 1795: Bohme, Ep. ad 
 Ileb. lat. vert, et comment, perjict. instiuxit. Svo., 
 Lips. 1825; Kuinoel, Comment, in Ep. ad ffeb. 
 8vo.. Liiis. 1831 ; Bleek, Der. Br. an d. H(b. 
 erliiuferlu.sic.2hd.,Bvx\. 1838-40. Tiioluck, 
 Kommentar znm Br. an d. Ueb 8vo., Hamb. 
 1810 (2te. A>dl.), translated into English by 
 James Hamilton, M..\ , and J. E. Rvlaud, Esq.^ 
 2 vols. s. 8vo.. K.liu. 1812.— W. L. A. 
 
 HEBRON (I'nnn ; S^pt. Xe^piif), a town in 
 the Suulli of Palestine and in the tribe of Judah, 
 18 miles south from Jerusalem, in 31" 32' 30" N. 
 lat., 35° 8' 20" K. long., at the h ight of 2fi64 
 Paris feet above the level of the sea (.Schul>erl). 
 It is one of tlje most ancient cities i xisting, having, 
 as the sacred writer infvrms us, been built ' seven 
 fears before Zoan in Egy{)t,' and being men- 
 tioued even prior to Damascus (Num. tAU. V2 ; 
 
 HEBRON. 
 
 8M 
 
 Gen. xiii. 18; comp. xv. 2). Its most antr.ent 
 name was Kirjath arbi, that is, ' the city of .\il'd,' 
 from .-Vriia, the father of An ik and of the .Vnakiin 
 who dwelt in and arm nid ^Hebron (Cien. xxiii. 2; 
 Josh. xiv. 15; XV. 3; xxi*. II; Judg. i. Id). It 
 ap|iears to have been also ciilled ALimre, piobably 
 (Voni the name of Abraham's Amoiilish ally 
 ((ien. xxiii. 19; xxxv. 27; comp, xiv. 1.3, 28). 
 The ancient city lay in a valley: anil the two 
 remaining pools, one of which at le.ist existed in 
 (he time of David, serve, with other circum- 
 stances, to identify the modem with the ancient 
 site (Gen. xxxvii. 14; 2 S.im. iv. 12). Much 
 of the life-time of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob 
 was six-nt in tiiis neighbourhood, where (hey 
 were all entoudieil ; and it was from hence tlia( 
 the patriarchal family de])ar(ed for Egy])l by the 
 way of Beersheba ((ien. xxxvii. 14; xlvi. 1). 
 After (he return of the Israelites, the city was 
 taken by Joshua and given over to Caleb, who 
 expelled the Anakim from its territories (Josh, x 
 30, 37 ; xiv. 6-15 ; xv. 13-14 : Judg. i. 20). It 
 was afterwards made one of the cities of refuge, 
 .and assigned to the priests and Levites (Josh. xx. 
 7; xxi. 11, 13). David, on becoming king ot 
 Judaii, made Hebron his royal residence. Here 
 lie reigned seven year* and a half; here most of 
 liis sorjs were l)orn ; and here he was anoin(ed kinj? 
 over all Israel (1 Sam. ii. 1-1, 11 ; 1 Kings ii 
 11; 2 Sam. v. I. 3). On this extension of his 
 kingdom Hebron ceased to be sufficiently central, 
 and Jerusalem then became the nietro]io1is. Il 
 is possible that this step excited a degree of discou 
 (eiit in Hebron which afterwards encouraged ,\b 
 salom to raise in that city the standard of rebellion 
 against his father (2 Kings xv. '.\ ID). Hebion was 
 one of the places i'ortllied by R(-iioboam (2Cliron 
 xi. 10) ; and alter the exile the Jews who returned 
 to Palestine occupied Hebron and the siuround- 
 ing villages (Neh. xi. 15). 
 
 Hebron is not named by the jn.iijhets, nor in 
 the New Testament ; but we learn from (he first 
 book of Maccabees, atid from Jose]ihu>i, that it 
 came into the power of the Edomitcs, who iiad 
 taken jjossession of the south of Jiidali, anit was 
 recovered from them by Judas MaccabiEus 
 (1 Mace V. 65; J ose\)h. A ntiq. xii. P. fi). Dm-- 
 ing the great war, Hebron was seizeil bv the rebel 
 Simon Giorides, Init was re-captured and liurni 
 by Cerealis, an officer of X'esjiasian (Joseih. De 
 Bell. Jud. iv. 9; vii. 9). Josephus describis the 
 t(milis of the patriarchs as existing in iiis ilay; 
 and both Eusel)ius and Jerome, and all subse- 
 quent writers who mention Hebron down to the 
 time of the Crusades, speak of the pi.ice chielly 
 as containing these sejiulchres. In (lie course 
 of time (he reniarkaide stiucture enclosing the 
 tombs of Abrah.un ami tlie (ptlier patriarchs wal 
 called (he ' Castle of Aliraham ; and l;y a;- 
 easy transition this name came to be applied 
 to the city itself; till in (he (imc of the Crusadcj 
 the names of Hibron and Cattle of Alirahani were 
 rjsed inteichangeably. Heme, as Abiahani if 
 also distinguislied among the Moslems by ihe 
 apiiellation of cl Khiilil, •(he I'riend (o( (iod •, 
 tjiis la((er epithet became, among them, the na-ne 
 of (he city ; and they now know Ilebroti only ;ls 
 e! Khiilil (Robinson's liesearcf.cs. ii. 456). 
 
 Soon a/ler tiit Ciusaders had taken Jerusalem, 
 Hebron also appears to (i;ive |)a^sed into their 
 hand.s, ami, in 1 lOi), was bestowed iw a fie/ 
 
 3 H
 
 M 
 
 HEBRON. 
 
 U|rf>n Gerliaril if Avenues ; but two years after 
 it is (lescrilwd as heiiiij in niiiis (Wilkeii, Gesch. 
 der Krus. ii. -ll; Saewulf, Peregrm. p. "259), 
 In llt)7 Hebron was laiseil to the rank of a 
 l)i.sboi(ric, and tli«> title of Itisliop of Ilelfron long 
 remained in the Roinisli cliiircli ; for it occnis so 
 late as a.d. 1365. Bur it was merely nominal ; for 
 after the capture of Jerusalem l)y Saladin in I 187, 
 Ilebnin als i reverted to the Moslems, and has ever 
 since rem, lined in their ])i)ssessioi]. In the modern 
 liistorv of Hel)ron the most remarkable circnm- 
 slance is the part which the inhabitants of tlie 
 town and district took in the rebellion of 1831, 
 and the heavy retribution which it bronj^^ht down 
 upon them. They held out to the last, and 
 gave battle to Ibrahim Pasha near S.domon's 
 Pools. They were ilefeateil ; but retired and en- 
 trenched themselves in Hebron, wliicli Ibrahim 
 carried by storm, and gave over to sack and pil- 
 lage. The town has not yet recovered from the 
 blow it tlien sustained. 
 
 In the fourteenth century pilgrims passed from 
 Sinai to Jerusalem direct through tlie desert by 
 Beershel)a and Hebron. In the following cen- 
 tury thi^ route seems to have been abandoned foi 
 that by Gaza; yet the pilgrims sometimes took 
 Hebron in their way, or visited it from Gaza. 
 Tlie travellers of that period describe as existing 
 here an immense charitable establishment, or hos- 
 pital, wliere 1200 loaves of bread, besides oil and 
 other condiments, were daily distriliuted to all 
 comers, without distinction of age or religion, at 
 the annual expense of 20,000 ilucats. 
 
 Hebron continued to be occasionally visited 
 l)y European travellers down to the latter part of 
 the seventeenth century; but from iiiat time till 
 the present century it appears to have been 
 little frequented by them. The jjrincijial tra- 
 velle'< fho have been more recently there are 
 S-oeizen, Ali Bey, Irlty and Mangles, Poujoulat, 
 Moiuo, Stephens, Paxton, Lord Lindsay, Rus- 
 segger, Schubert, Dr. Robinson, and Dr. Olin. 
 
 Tlie town of Helnon lies low down on the 
 sloping sides of a narrow valley (of Mamre), 
 chiefly on the eastern side, but in the soutiiern 
 part stretches across also to the western side. 
 The houses are all of stone, liigli and well built, 
 with windows and Hat roofs, and on these roofs 
 are small domes, sometimes two or three to each 
 nonse. This mode of building seemed to Dr. 
 Robiinon [)eculiar to Judaea, as he had not ob- 
 served it furtiier north tlian Nabulus. It is, 
 however, common in the countries farther east, 
 where wood is scarce. The streets are narrow, 
 seldom more than two or three yards in widtli ; 
 tlie pavement, where one exists, is rough and 
 difficult. The bazaars ate to a coiisideral)le 
 extent covered, either fiy some kind of awning, 
 or by arclies springing from the tops of the houses 
 and spanning the street. The goods in them 
 are thus secured from the eflects of the sun and 
 rain, but the streets are rendered gloomy as well 
 as damp. The shops aie well fuinislied, better 
 i idied than tliose of towns of the same class in 
 Egypt, and the commodities are of a very similar 
 description. The only display of local manu- 
 factiues is t'le produce of the glass-works, for 
 which the place has long lieen celebrated in these 
 liarts. The ai tides manufactured consist almost 
 excUisiveiy of glass lamps, many of wliicii are 
 •XfKjiteil 10 Egypt, and rings of coloured ghiss 
 
 HEBRON. 
 
 •warn by fen)alcs on the arms. Gates are p1ac«d 
 not only at the entrance of the city, but in dif- 
 ferent ))arts of the interior, and are closed at 
 night for tiie better preservation of order, as well as 
 to prevent communication between the difl'ereut 
 quarters. This is a rude contrivance much re- 
 sorted to iu Eastern towns from tiie want of an 
 eflicient ambulatory niglit-watch. 
 
 There are nine mosques in Hebron, none of 
 which jjossess any architectural or other interest, 
 with the exce[)tii)n of the massive structure which 
 is built over tlie toml)s of the ])atriarclis. This 
 is esteemed by the Moslems one of their holiest 
 ])laces, and Ciiristians are rigorously excluded 
 from it. The only Europeans who have found 
 their way to the interior aie Ali Bey and Gio- 
 vanni Finati. the Italian servant of Mr. Bankes. 
 The l)est account of it, from whatever source de- 
 rived, is tliat furnished by the Rev. V. Monro, who 
 states that ' the mosque, which covers the cave 
 of Machpelal), and cmitains the ))atriarchal toiribs, 
 is a square building with little external deco- 
 ration, at tlie south end of the town. Behind it 
 is a small cupola, with eiglit or ten windows, 
 beneatli which is the tomb of Esau, excluded 
 from the privilege of lying among the patriarchs. 
 Ascending from the street, at the corner of the 
 mosque, you pass through an arched way by a 
 flight of steps to a wide platform, at the end of 
 which is another short ascent ; to the left is the 
 court, out of which, to the left again, you enter 
 the mosque. The dimensions within are about 
 forty paces by twenty-five. Immediately on the 
 right of the door is the tomb of Sarah, and 
 beyond it that of Abraham, having a passage 
 between them into the court. Corresponding 
 with these, on the opposite side of the mosque, are 
 those of Isaac and Rebekah, and behind them 
 is a recess for prayer, and a pulpit. These tombs 
 resemble small huts, witl« a window on each 
 side and folding-doors in front, the lower parts of 
 which are of wood, and the upj^er of iron or 
 bronze bars plated. Within each of these is an 
 imitation ol the salcophagus which lies in the 
 cave below the mosque, which no one is allowed 
 to enter. Those seen above resemble coiiins with 
 pyramidal tops, and are covered with green silk, 
 lettered with verses from the Koran. The doors 
 of these tombs are left constantly o))e:i ; but no 
 one enters those of tlie women — at least, men do 
 not. In the mosque is a baldakin, supported by 
 four columns, over an octagonal figure of black 
 and wliite marble inlaid, around a small hole iu 
 tlie pavement, through wiiich a chain passes from 
 the top of the canopy to a lamp continually 
 burning to give light in the cave of Machpelah, 
 where the actual sarcoi)hagi rest.. At the upper 
 enil of the court is the chief place of jnayer; and 
 on the opjxjsife side of tlie mosrpie are two larger 
 tomlis, where are deposited the bodies of Jacob 
 and Leah' (Summer's Ramhlc, i. 245). The 
 cave itself he does not describe, nor does it 
 a])pear that even Moslems are admitted to it ; 
 for Ali Bey (a Spaniard travelling as a Moslem) 
 does not even mention the cave below while 
 describing the siirines of the mosque. John San- 
 derson (.\.u. 1601) ex])ressly says that none might 
 enter,.but tiiat uersons might view it, as far as the 
 lamp allowed, tiirough the hole at tiie fo]), Moslemi 
 being I'lirnislied witli more liglit tor tlie purpose 
 tliarf Jews. At an eailier period, however, when lii#
 
 HKBRON. 
 
 Holy Land was in the })o\ver of tlie Clivistiaiis, 
 acc«6s was not deiii<^i ; aiiil Benjamin orTiulela 
 says tUat tlie satcopliagi aUive groiitul wfi« si«»wii 
 to I lie generality of pilgrims as what lliey il«?- 
 *ired t« see ; Imt if a, rich Jew olleivd an a<l(li- 
 tioiial f«e, ' all iwii dotir is iUHjneii, wliicli dates 
 from tiie time of our foref.ilhers who n-st in (leace, 
 aiKi with a liuiniiiLC tajnn' iii Iris hands the visitor 
 descends into a (iist cave, which is empty, tia- 
 verses a second in tlie same state, and at last 
 readies a tliinl, wliicU cotitains six sepulchres, 
 those of Aliraliam, Isaac, ami Jacob, and of 
 Sarah, Rebekah, and Leah, one opposite the 
 otiier. All these sei)ulchies l/tar inscriptions, 
 the letters lieing engraved; thus upon that of 
 Abraham : " This is the sepulchre of our father 
 Abraham, njwn whom be peace ;'" even so upon 
 that of Isaac and all the other seiiulchres. A 
 lamp burns in the cave arnl ajjon ttie sepulchres 
 continually, both night and day ; and you there 
 see tul>s tilled with the bones of Israelites; for it 
 is a custom of the house of Israel to bring hither 
 the bones and relics of their foret'athers, and 
 leave them there, unto this day ' (^Itaierary, i. 77 ; 
 ed. Asher, Berlin, 1840). The identity of this 
 place with the cave of Machpelah is one of the 
 few local traditions in Palestine which even Dr. 
 Robinson surtere to pass without dispute, and may 
 thei-efore be taken for granted. 
 
 Tlie court in whicl* tlie mosque stands is sur- 
 rounded hy an extCJisi^ie and lofly wall, formed 
 ut" large stones, and strengthened by squaie but- 
 tresses. This wa.ll is the gi'eatest antiquity in 
 Hebron, and even Dr. RoOinson sujiposes that 
 it may iie substantially tlie same which is men- 
 tioned by Josephus (Autiq. i. 14; Dc Bell. Jud. 
 iv. 9. 7), and (ly EusHiius and Jerome (^Ononutst. 
 8. v. Arboc/i) as the sepulciire of Abraham. The 
 enclosed structure is usually ascrilied to the em- 
 ^^•ess Helena; but Dr. Robinson thinks it more 
 likely to have lieen erected by the Crusaders, and 
 'iiat till their time no building existed within the 
 g-reat wall. Il^ however, we rightly understand 
 *.he RaUii Benjamin, he saj's there was a syna- 
 gogue here under the Moslems (before the Cru- 
 sades) ; but he certainly uscrilies to the Gentiles 
 (Cliristiaiis) the six sejiulchres which appear 
 above giiRind. If this were so, tliey have since 
 <)een renewed by tlie Moslems, as those which 
 now exist aie, as desc«if»e<l, quite similar to the 
 Moslem shrines of Jewish saints which the pre- 
 sent writer lias seen in countries where Cliristians 
 never had jwwer, A c<imnaon Moslem tomb in 
 the neiglilwurhood of Hebron (a.sses as the tomb 
 of Abncr. He was certainly inlenetl in this city 
 (2 Sam. ii«. 32) ; and the head of I^hlxiahelli, after 
 iiis assassination, was dejiosited in the same se- 
 pulchre i2.Sam, iv. 1-2); l>mt there is slight evi- 
 dence in favour of tlie tradition which professes 
 to [xtint out this locality to the modern tiavellej'. 
 Besides this venerable wall, theie is nothing at 
 Hebron lieaiing the stamp of antiquity, save two 
 Teservoiis tor rain water outsitle the town. Ojie 
 of these is JMst without the sonthefii gate in the 
 bottom iyf tiie valley. It is a large l»a.sin, Ij^ foot 
 square, and 21 feet 8 inches deep. It is' built 
 with Itewn limestone of very solid workmansldp, 
 *nrl obviously af ancieMt <late. Tlie depth of 
 water of couise v*ries at dilfeient times of tl^ 
 year : in May, it is U feet. The descent is by 
 flijjlU*^ steps «'. tlie foui corners, by which the 
 
 HEDUOSMON. 
 
 8M 
 
 water is lirouglit up in vessels and skins, and 
 poured out into troughs for the tlock.s or caiiied 
 away for domestic uses. Just at tlie n<iMh cud of 
 the main jwirt of the town is ajiother aixl siiialier 
 jNHd, also occujiying the In-d of the vullcy, and 
 measuring fi feet by 5.1, with a depth of Ib^ feet, 
 containing (in May) 7 li^'t of water. i'li<-.ce cisterns, 
 which aie C(Jinected witli no |pi'ieniiial spiin-s, 
 and which are (illed only by the rains, seeiii ("al 
 leiist in summer) to be the main tlejiendeiKe of 
 the ildiabitaiits for water, although that of the 
 larger jiool is neither clear nor clean. As these 
 po<)ls are doubtless of high antiquity, one of llieiri 
 is in all likelihood the ' [khiI of Hebron' nv. r 
 which David hanged uji tlieassaisiiigof Ishlioshelh 
 (2 Sam. iv. 12). 
 
 The present population of Hebron has not Utu 
 clearly ascertained. Monro heard it«ilk>d Kt.OOO, 
 but thought iialf that number more piolAal.le. 
 Dr. Robinson, however, was inclineii to receive the 
 larger number; but Dr. Olin was assured bv the 
 resident Jewish chief rabbi that it did not ex<;eed 
 400U or 50OO ; and m the Jews at Hebron aie 
 mostly Europeans, their inlbrnialion is of nioie 
 value than that of Asiatics, who have a singid.i. 
 vacancy of ideiis in numerical coiiqiutaiions. 
 Mr. Stent also states the pojiiilation at 3()(/0, (/ii 
 the authority of Bishop Alexander's chaplain at 
 Jerusalem {K</i/i)t and Holy Lund., ii. 1 Ki;. 
 Most of the inhabitants are Moslems, of (ieice 
 and intolerant character. There are no resitient 
 Christi;uis. TheJewsamount to about one bundled 
 families, mostly natives of dillersnt dxurfiies of 
 EuRijw, wiio liave emigrated to this place f,/r the 
 purpose of having their bones laid near the se- 
 pulchres of their illustrious ancestors. Tiiey ha\e 
 two synagogues and several schools. .-Vs usual, 
 they have a quaiter of the city to themseKes, 
 where the streets are narrow and tilthy, and the 
 houjes mean. In a (aw instances, however, they 
 are in toleiable repair and wiiitewashed — a cir- 
 cumstance which Dr. Olin judged jieculiar to 
 Hebron, as he had not obseived it elsewhere. 
 
 The environs of Hebron are vei-y fertile. Vine- 
 yards and plantations of fruit-trees, chieHy olive- 
 trees, c;iver the valleys and aialile grounds; while 
 the tops and sides of the hills, although stony, aie 
 covered with rich p.istures, wliicli support a'great 
 number of cattle, sheep, and g<tils, constituting an 
 important branch of the industry and wealth of 
 Hebron. The hill country of Jiidah, of which it 
 is the capital, is indeed highly pioduclive, and 
 under a paternal government would 1* capable of 
 sustaining a large population. That it did so 
 once, is uianilkst from the gieat nuinU'r and ex- 
 tent of ruined teiTa<'es and dilapidate*! towns. It 
 is at present abandone«l, an<l cultivation ceases at 
 the distance oi' two miles north of the town. The 
 hills then lieconie covered with prickly and olliir 
 stunted trees, which furnisli Bethlehem and ofhtT 
 villages with woo<l. See the vaiious traveller* 
 above nanieti as having visited IIebr(>n, iwid ia 
 ])articuliu. Dr. Roljin-on, Dr. Olin, Rev. V. iMonio, 
 and SchulK-it, 
 
 HEDUO.SMON (Gr. i^tio<T^uor, i. c. Iwvhii^ 
 a sueet sukjU;, tr.uislated mint., is menlione<l \u 
 Matt, xxiii. 23: 'Woe unto yon, S<:iibes aiiit 
 Pharisees, hyjHJcrites! for ye jjay tithe of mint 
 and anise (proiieriy dill) and cnmmiii, and have 
 omitted the weightier matters of the law ;" and, 
 again, in Luke xi. 12 : • But woe unto vou, Flu*-
 
 836 
 
 HF.DUOSMON. 
 
 risws ! for ye tit)ie mint and nie, anil all manner 
 »f liei !)<f, anil ]ia=9 over jii<ly;inent ami llie love of 
 GimI : these ought ye fi) liave done, and 7iot to 
 ^.eave the other undone.' All llie ])!ants mentioned 
 in till' al)(>\e |)as^ai;es l>eliinLi; to the smaller ones 
 cultivated in ganlens in Kniope, ai;d wliicli 
 usually rouie under the denomination of sueet 
 herlw. Lady Calcott inquires whether mint was 
 one of the bitter herl>s wliich the Israelites ale with 
 the I'aschal Lamh ; and infers the prohability of 
 its hein'^ 90 from our own ] vactice of eating lamb 
 with mint S3U U3. Dr. Hnrris argues that mint, 
 anise, and cummin wore not tithed, and that the 
 Pliarisees onlv ])aid tithes of these plants from an 
 overstrai(»e<l interpretation of the law. But, in the 
 article Anf.thon (Dii.s.), it may Ije seen that 
 dill was tithed, and it is one of flie herbs men- 
 tioned along with mint. The meaning, llieref'ore, 
 seems to lie, that the Pharisees, while, in con- 
 formity with the law, they paid these minute 
 tithes, negleoled the most important moral duties, 
 — triitli, justice, and mercy ; for it is added, ' these 
 ouglit ye to have dune, and not to leave the otlur 
 unvloue.' 
 
 336. [Mentha 9ylve»tr?9.] 
 
 The plant ribuvrf.ws w ySvoafJ-oy, so called ' ab 
 wloris Iionitate vel jucunditate,' was also railed 
 tiis^da and fxivOos I'v the Greeks, and mentha, or 
 meiifa, by the Rom;ins. The Arabs give minthee 
 
 ■1 as the Greek synonyme of their %_^^ nana; and 
 
 in India, Persian works give^wf/ee^aas the Hindee 
 name of the latter. I'odecna is the common name 
 of a species of mint cultivated in the gardens 
 0! Noith-Western India. These names are in- 
 teresting as occuriing in works on Materia Me- 
 dica; I'ecanse both were cinployeil by early trans- 
 lators as the equivalent of riZvoapiov in the 
 above passages of .Matlliew and Luke; and all 
 European IvaT.-sIators. according to Celsius, con- 
 cur in considering mint as intended. The s]«e- 
 ries most comiuon in Syria is 77teiitha syJvtstria, 
 fcund by Russell al Aleppo, and montioneil by 
 hiui a* one of the iieibs cultivated in the gardens 
 
 IIELBON. 
 
 there. It also occurs in (iieece, Tanms, Ck* 
 casus, the Altai Range, and as far as Casl-.mere^ 
 whence we have obtained specimens. M.(irvenii», 
 of which M. sntira (Linn.) is one of the varieties, 
 is also a widely dilTused species, being fonnd in 
 Greece, in parts of Caucasui, in the Altai Range, 
 and in (Jajlimere. iMiirt ia highly esteemed is 
 Kastern countries, and apparently was so also by 
 the Jews. Celsius says, 'Patpt o1us fnisse m Judjea 
 quondam notum, ct Jnda;is irb viituteset prsestan- 
 tiam sing-iilarem acceptissimnm.' It was -much 
 esteemed by the ancients, as Pliny (Hist. Nat. 
 xix. 47) testities: ' Mentre nomen suavitas odoria 
 apud Grsecos mntavit, cum alioqui mintiia voca- 
 rehir : wnde vetoes nostri nomen <leclinavenirrt. 
 Grato menta niensas odore yiercurrit in rnsticis 
 da))ib\is ;■ and again (xx. 53), ' Menta; ipsius odoi 
 nnimum excitat et sapor aviditatem in cibis, ideo 
 eiidiammatum mixtura; familiaris.' Dioscoridei 
 also (iii. 41) mentions it as useful to the stomach, 
 and pecTiliarly gratelul as a condiment. Mint wai 
 employed by the ancients in the pre{mration ch 
 many dishes. ' Hinc in Apicii libro coqnlnario 
 singulis fere paginis mentlise tarn viridis, quarei 
 aridse, mentio' (Gels. Hierohnt. i. p. 046). 'Sic 
 apud Kbrgpos in cibis recejitam fuissementham ma- 
 nifestetradunfTalmiidici Tract. Sheni. VeJobel, 
 vii. 2 ; et Tract. Oketztn, i. 2 ; Skeb. vii. 1. Und» 
 et olerum decimafioni subjecta fuit ' (lb. p. 547). 
 It is diflicult to determine the eicact specie? 
 or variety of mint employed by tlie ancients 
 Theie are numerous sjTCcies very nearly allied 
 to one another. Tliey nsnally grow in moist 
 situations, and are heibaceous, perennial, of 
 powerful odour, esjjecially when twuised, and 
 liave small reddisb-coloured flowers, arranged in 
 spikes or wliorls. Tlie taste of these ]ilants is 
 bitter, warm, and jiungent, but leaving a sensation 
 of coolness on the tongue: in their pro jierties they 
 are so similar to eacli other, that either in medi- 
 cine, or as a condiment, one species may safely be 
 substituted for another. But the sjwcies M. syl- 
 vestris an<l M. arrensis, whicli have been n>en- 
 ♦ioned above, proliably yielded the varieties culti- 
 vated in Palestine, — j. F. R 
 
 HEIFER. RED. [Sacrifice.] 
 HEIR. [BiuTHHicjHT ; Inijekitawch.J 
 
 HELRON O'u'pn ; Sept. XeK^^v), or Chsi. 
 BON, a name which occurs only in Ezek. xxvii. 
 18, where 'the wine of HeUion' is named among 
 the commodities brought to tlie great market of 
 Tyre. The Syriac, SymmachuS; the Chaldee, and 
 Vnlgate, all regard llie woid as an ajuiellativ* 
 descriptive of the (jualitv of the wine as ' pingu« 
 vinum ' or 'vinum diilce cnctum.' But it n 
 better to accejit the indication of the Sejiluagint, 
 wliicli, by giving the jirojier name XeAyScuy, nvust 
 be supposed to have had in view tnat old city ol 
 Syria which appears under the fornj of Cbalyboi 
 [Xo.Xv^div) in Ptolemy (Geoff, v. 15) and SttaU 
 (xv. p. 50>). The la'ter author mentions ihir 
 (Jhalybon as a place famous for wine; and il. 
 describing the luxtiry of the kings of Persia, lit 
 says they would hiive wheat bri.nght from Assoi 
 in j^olia, Chalylionian wine out of Syria, anc 
 water from the Km1*us (the river Ulai of Dan 
 viii. 2), which was tlie lightest of any Aihena?u> 
 repeats tlie fact of the kings of Persia drinking 
 only the Chalybonian wine (Sijn>pos. i. 22). 
 
 Now 't is generally agreed that the ancleB'
 
 HELBON. 
 
 Chaljrbon is epresenled by (lie niodeni Aleppo. 
 At the present time, wlieu the pi-oliil'itioiH of the 
 Moslem religion oi-casioii much neglect in ivs|>ect 
 to wines, we can merely judge hy (.onipaiison of 
 the qualities of the ancient wines in these p;jts. 
 Thevenot, however, informs us that a stronj; wine 
 is made from the giajres of Al'*p[K» (Travels, part 
 i. }■). 25); and Russell (\at. Mist, of Aleppo, i. 
 80) states that altliough the white wines ai-e thin 
 Kul poor, aiid difficult to keeji, the led wine^ 
 
 HKLL. 
 
 R37 
 
 whiih is deejHcolininHl, is strong and lieady, and 
 more apt to pioduce (liowsiness than lo raise iIm 
 spirits. iJtit ojie tliiid [uut of the while wine 
 mixed with twoof liio re<l pmduces a Hipior (ule- 
 rahly i»iilatalile, and nuK-li ligliter than ihe^red 
 wine hy itself. This wine is preierml iiy the 
 EuKHjeans, who use it wiwn tiie wines of Fiovenoe 
 (their usiml l)eveiage) hap[K'n to lie scaiee. 
 
 Aleppo, styled hv the natives Haleh, i« situ, 
 ated in N. laU 36® il' 25", E. I«;g. ^r »', aad 
 
 337. [Aleppo,— Helboii.] 
 
 is 9i .idnty-six miles from the sea by way of Scan- 
 (i€iv,.^%»n a straight line, and ninety miles by way 
 of Ajitioch. It is owe of the few ancient cities of 
 these ])ait8 which have retained their ancient im- 
 portauce ; and tliis it owes to its happy jKJsitioii 
 ii])()n the line of the commercial intercourse of Asia 
 Minor arjd Syria with Egypt, and of Europe and 
 AVestemri\ost Asia with the countries Iwyond the 
 Euphrates. It seerns to have risen to commercial 
 importance on the decline of Palmyra, to which 
 ft succeeded. It is itideed remarkable that tl»e 
 earliest mention of the place, in Ezekiel, occurs in 
 a. commerc'ial conned ion, and in the same con- 
 nection it would probably l>e mentioned at the 
 present day. As the town is only once nametl, 
 and then only with r^fei'ence to its wine, and as no 
 Biblical interest is attached to it, we must refer to 
 general or geogra])hical dictionaries for an account 
 of its history and present conditiofj. It may suf 
 fice to iiidicate that it has long ranked as the 
 capital of Syria, and as the third, if not the Sfcond 
 city of the Ottoman empire. It has sulTered dread- 
 fully from earthquakes at dilVei-erit times, and has 
 never recovered the terrible xis'talion of this kind 
 which it sustained in IS22: the po])ulation, 
 wliicli was formerly reckoned above 200,000, 
 is not supposed to reach lialf that number at 
 pKseuU 
 
 HELIOPOLIS. [On.] 
 
 HELL. Mucli that lielongs to this sufiject 
 has already b«en considered under (lie U-ad 
 H.tDEs. It is there shown that hell is ie()ie- 
 sented by tlie word 71681^ (Skcol) in the OW 
 and by oStjs {Hades) in tlie New T«'stame»iC 
 But as liotii these words mean also ti«e glare oc 
 the condition of the dead, hell, as the place <-*'<inaI 
 jxmishmejit for sinners, is more distinctively indi- 
 cated by the term Gilienna (y^eypa), wlii<Mi it 
 the word (i-anslated 'hell' in Jlatt. v 2% 2S, S«y; 
 X. 28; xviii. 9; xxiii. l'>, Xi : Miuk ix. 4j, Vi, 
 47; Luke xii. 5 ; Jan<es iii. (i. I* is also dis- 
 tinctively indicated by sucii ptirases a-j ' tlie 
 place of torment' (Luke xvi. 2Kj; 'eveiJxsting 
 lire" (Matt, xxv. 41); 'the hell of fue, wlitre iIk 
 worm dieth not, and the lire is not mi«jc!ie'r 
 (Mark ix. 44). The die.ulful nature of tiie 
 abode of the wicked is implied in various ligu- 
 ralive exjnession.s, such as 'outer darkues.s, 'I 
 am tormented in this llaivie," * furnace of (ire,' 
 ' unquenchable fire," ' where the wonn diclii no*.,' 
 'the blackness of darkness;," 'torment in lire and 
 brimstone," * the ascending smoke of tiielr tor- 
 ment,' 'tlie lake of lire that buriiiKli with iirim- 
 slorie ' (Matt. viii. 12; xiii. -12; xxii. 13, 
 XXV. 3C ; Luke xvi. 21; comp ^latt. xxv. 41 ;
 
 938 
 
 HELL. 
 
 Mark ix. 43 48 ; Jude 13; comp. Rer. xiv. 10, 
 11; xix.il); xx. 14; xxi. 8). The fi^niie by 
 which liell is represent eti iis Imniiug with lire and 
 Liimstoiie is i^robably derived from tl)e Ihte of 
 Sotlom ai)d (Jomonali, iis well as »hat which 
 tlescribes the sm ike as asrt-nding from if (comp. 
 Rev. xiv. 10, 11, with Gen. xix. 21, 28). To 
 this coinciileiice of description Peter also most 
 pro(>ably alludes in 2 Pet. ii. fi. 
 
 The names wiiich fn many of the other instances 
 are ■'ivcn to the jxinislunents of lieU, :tie doubtless 
 in ])art figurative, and iDany of the terms wiiicb 
 were commonly applied to the subject by tiie Jews 
 are retained in the New Testament. The images, 
 it will be seen, are generally taken from death, 
 capital pntiishments, tortures, prisons, ike. And 
 it is the obvious design of the sacred writer^ in 
 using sue!) iigures, to awaken the idea of some- 
 tiiing terrilde and fearful. They mean to teach 
 tliat the punishments beyond the gi'ave will 
 excite the same feelings of distress as are jiro- 
 duced on earth by tlieol)jects employed to rej)vesent 
 tliem. We are so little acquainted with the slate 
 in which we sliall lie hereafter, and with tlie nature 
 of our future body, that no strictly literal repre- 
 sentation of such punishments could be made 
 intelligible to us. Many of tl)e Jews, indeed, 
 and many of tlie Clnistian fathers, took tiie terms 
 employed in Scri])ture in an entirely literal sense, 
 and siip])osed tliere would lie actual lire, &c. in 
 hell. But from the words of Clirist and his 
 aj'ostles nothing more can witli certainty be in- 
 Jlerred tlian that they meant to denote great and 
 unending miseries. 
 
 The punishments of sin may be distinguished 
 into two classes — 1. Natural punishments, or 
 sucli as necessarily follow a life of servitude to 
 sin : 2. Positive punishment.s, or such as God 
 shall see (it, by his sovereign will, to inHict. 
 
 1. Among tlie natural punishments we may 
 -ank tlie privation of eternal happiness (Matt. 
 vii. 21. 2J; xxii. 13; xxv. 41 ; comp. 2 Thess. 
 i. 9) : the jiainful sensations which are the na- 
 tural consequence of committing sin, and of an 
 impenitent heart ; the jjropensities to sin, the evil 
 ]iassions and desires which in this world till the 
 Irinnaii lieart, and whicli are doubtless carried 
 into the world to come. The company of fellow- 
 sinners and of evil s])irits, as inevital)ly resulting 
 from the other conditions, may be accounted 
 among the natural punishments, anil must prove 
 not tlie least grievous of them. 
 
 2. The positive jyuiiisiiments have been al- 
 ready indicated. It is to these chielly that the 
 Scripture directs our attention. 'There are but 
 few men in sncii a state that the merely natural 
 p.nii^hments of sin will appear to tliem terrible 
 r.iDii'di to ileter lliem from the comiiiission of it. 
 Experience also shows tliat to threaten positive 
 punishment has far more elVect, as well ujwn 
 the cultivated as the uncultivated, in deterring 
 them from crime, than to announce, and lead men 
 to expect, the merely natural consequences of sin, 
 l>e they ever so terrilile. Hence we may see why 
 It is that the New Testament says so little of 
 natural punishments (although the^e beyond ques- 
 tion await the wicked), and makes mention of 
 ihem in ]iariicnlar far less frequently tlian of 
 j)08itive punishments; and why, in those passages 
 whi<-li treat of the jwnisliments of hell, such ideas 
 and images are constantly employed as suggest 
 
 HELLENIST. 
 
 and confirm tlie idea of jjosifjve punlshinenta' 
 (Knapp's Christian Thvoli^yi/, ^ 15»>J. 
 
 As the sills which shut out from lieaven vary 
 so j,"»atly in quality and degree, we should ex- 
 ;t;ct from the justice of God a corresjxjixJiiig 
 variety both in the natural and the positive 
 punishments. This is accordingly the uniform 
 doctrine of Christ and his ajx)stles. The more 
 knowledge of the divine law a man jwssesses, 
 the more bis opjiortniiities and inducements to 
 avoid sin, the stronger tlie incentives to faith and 
 lioliness set liefore him, the greafer will be his 
 punishment if he fails lo make a failhfid use of 
 these advantages 'The servant who knows hij 
 lord's will and does it not, deserves to lie i>eatsn 
 with manv strij>es :' ' To whom much is given, 
 of him much will be required' (Matt. x. 1.'); 
 xi. 22, 21; xxiii. 15; Luke xii. 4??j. Henc« 
 Sf. Paul says that the lieathen who acted against 
 the law of nature would indeed be punisiiai ; liut 
 that the Jews would lie punished more than they, 
 because they had moie knowledge (Rom. ii. 'J-29). 
 In this conviction, that Goil will, even in hell, 
 justly ])ro])ortion ])unishment to sin, we iniis! rest 
 satisfied. We cannot now know more ; the piecise 
 degrees as well as the ])recise nature of such 
 punishments are things belonging to another state 
 of being, which in the present we are unalde to 
 vmderstand (Kna])i)"s Christian Theolor/i/, trans- 
 lated by Leonard Woods, Juii., DD., §§ 156- 
 loS; Storr and Flatt's Biblical Theology, vi\{\\ 
 Schmucker's Additions. § iii. 58). 
 
 HELLENIST {"EWTtv Lari]s). Tliis word is 
 derived from the Greek verb eAATjyi^w, which in 
 Aristotle means ' tt> talk (good) Greek ' ( Rhetoric, 
 iii. 5. 1 ; 12. 1) ; but, according to the analogy ol 
 other verbs in — i^w, it might mean ' to favour the 
 Greeks,' or ' to imitate Greek manners.' In the 
 New Testament it seems to be apjiropviated as the 
 name of those persons who, being of Jewish ex- 
 traction, nevertheless talked Greek as their roo'.her- 
 tongue; which was the case generally vnith the 
 Jews in Egypt, Syria, Asia Minor, and Greece; 
 and in fact, through the influence ' f the Greek 
 cities in uurthein Palestine (Decapoiis), it would 
 appear that tlie Galilwtris from their childhood 
 learned nearly as mucii Greek as Hebrew. The 
 aj)i)elIation Hellenist is opjiosed to that of Hebrew 
 in Acts vi. 1 : in Acts ix. 29 the reading is not 
 so certain, yet probably it should tliere also be 
 ' Hellenists,' meaning unconverted Jews. Modern 
 critics have accordingly agreed to denominate 
 the Jewish dialect of Greek ' Hellenistic ;' and, 
 whatever name be used, the thing itself ought to 
 be distinctly conceived of. 
 
 The Greeks who conquered the Persian empire 
 spoke many dilVerent dialects; and the leading 
 nation, the Macetlonians. were too delicient in 
 literary pretensions to give an exclusive currency 
 to their own idiom. A necessary result of thig 
 was, that even in the written style the curient 
 Greek becasie more or less a compound of several 
 dialects ; and much more must this have hap- 
 pened to the sjjeech which foreigners learned to 
 talk as Greek. They could not discriminate 
 Ionic and Macedonian words and plirases from 
 those of Aitica; and while they fusetl the lan- 
 guage into a new mould, they would also fail to 
 learn the niceties of Greek grammar, and the j)e- 
 culiarities of its genius. Add to tliis, that each se- 
 parate people was of course liable to introduce iti
 
 HELLENIST. 
 
 »wn idioms into flie Greek — a source ofcoriiipfioii 
 less influential jieiiiaps iu the cast; of lluisc lan- 
 guages (sucn as Pliryj^iaii ami IVrsiaii) wliioii 
 belonged to the lnJo-Eiu(>jx;aii stock, hul wiiich 
 in the case of the Jews iiiusi have been [)eculiaily 
 powerful, both because of liie eminent contrast 
 between the -jenius of tlieir tcingne and that of the 
 Greek, and because their national literatine liad 
 taken so deep a liold. In conseijuiMic*', so similar 
 in style are most parts of the New Testiiment and 
 of tlie A])Ocryplia to the Old Testament, that even 
 tiie best scliolar would fail cff liiidin;,' out from 
 the English translation, close as it is, in which of 
 tlie two languages the original was written. 
 
 The last remark, liowever, h;is its exceptions; 
 for in the Hellenistic Greek tlie Jewish element 
 is not always equally predominant. As might 
 naturally be expected, it is geneially found to 
 be most a[)undant in the translations from He- 
 brew, such as tiie Alexantbine Version of (he Old 
 Testament and tlie first book of Maccabees. Tlie 
 Apocalypse, of all original comjxisitions in Greek, 
 thougli t'uU of natural eloquence, is the most 
 thoroughly Hebraic, and most violates the laws 
 of Greek grarsimar. Next to it, the three first 
 Gospels and the first half of the Acts may be fitly 
 reckoned, ami periiaps after these the Gospel and 
 Epistles of John. Still more vigorous and natural 
 Greek is found in the Catholic Epistles and in 
 those of Paul ; belter slill is the latter half of tiie 
 Acts, and the preface to the tiiird Gospel, which 
 is nearly or quite on a jiar with the Epistle to the 
 Hebrews. The book called The Wisilom of So- 
 lomon, and the second book of JIaccabees, are 
 likewise written in a Greek decidedly sujierior to 
 the common Hellenistic style. But from all other 
 Jewish writers Josephus and PI ilo are sejiarated 
 by a long interval. Their studies led them to a 
 close perusal of classical autlu rs, whose idiom 
 they liave anxiously imitated, and with much 
 success. 
 
 Plveiy such arrangement as has been just given 
 musf be liable to objections. VVe cannot, for in- 
 stance, draw so sharp a line between the first and 
 second half of the Acts of the Ajiostles as may 
 seem to be im[)lied. No writer of tlie New Tes- 
 tament has so great inequality of style as Luke ; 
 of which a more striking illustration is not needed 
 than the sudden change from the prefacp of his 
 Gospel to the actual narrative. It seems impos- 
 sible to assign this to any other cause than his 
 having worked up into his own accumit the very 
 words and sentences of those from whom he gained 
 his information, (hough he has done tl. is in such 
 a way tliat here and there a better Gree'i phraseo- 
 logy seems to come out. In the latter part of the 
 Acts, where he is describing what he himself saw, 
 the style is almost free from Jewish idiom, and, 
 though not j>erfectly .the language of European 
 Greece, is yet deeply imbued with its spirit. 
 Again, it is not easy to decide in what place we 
 should rank the Gospel and Epistles of John. In 
 them we complain of me:igieness of vocabulary and 
 general monotony. In Matthew, Mark, and Luke 
 the genius of the Hebrew language obtrudes itself, 
 on the whole, more than in John, and yet the 
 style of John is rather to be calleii less Hebraic 
 liian move Greek. This may be plausibly ascribed 
 to his long absence from Palestine and from He- 
 brew influence.s, and to the absorption of his mind 
 ij contemplations jjeculiariy his own. Once more, 
 
 HELLENIST. 
 
 S3S 
 
 the Epistles of Peter, James, and .1 ii\e contain a 
 profuNiun ol" Ionic or ]ioetical w(>rds, lieyond what 
 can have entered into the spoken tongue, and 
 scarcely to lie paralleled in the con1em|i<»raneoii» 
 prose (ireek. It might almost .•.eem th.it the 
 writers (;is often hapiiens to forei^neis learning 
 our language, or indeed to half-educated iK-ruons) 
 had never learned to feel the dill'erence Ix'twcen 
 the poetical and the common diction. In (his 
 resjwct these Epistles may Ite judged hardly as 
 good Greek as those of Paul : still they have, in 
 connnon with his, a certain freedom, llnency, and 
 vigour; and their dilferences may l)e ascrilied In 
 peculiarities rather of mind than, strictly s|H.'ak- 
 ing, of dialect. 
 
 It belongs to a grammar to detail all that dis- 
 tinguishes the Greek of the New Testament (see 
 Winer's excellent Granunatik des ncu-lestammt- 
 lichcn Spracli-idioms). But in fact, iiy knowing 
 Hef)rew and Greek, it might almost have iieen 
 predicted wliat sort of errors and defects would 
 exist in the degenerate tongue. Whatever sjie- 
 cially characterizes (he Greek would be ill-learned 
 or lost, such as the use of numerous particles, (he 
 sequence of moods and tenses, the middfarious 
 use of the participles, the delicate jiroprieties ot 
 jirepositions and their cases. It was to fie ex- 
 pected that a part of the vocabulary would iievei 
 be learned at ali,:i;;d another large jiart be slightly 
 misajiplied; that Hebrew secondary and meta- 
 phorical senses would be obtrudeil on Greek 
 words ; that various new vocal)le> or compounds 
 would arise, not always generated according (o a 
 sound analogy ; that in the structr.re of sentences 
 the tame uniform concatenated Hebraic idiom 
 would, to a great extent, supei.sede the periodic 
 and varying form of the Greek sentence, flexil/le 
 for rhetorical energy or logical perspicuity ; and 
 (as an indication of the fact) (hat the conjunction 
 and would predominate over all others. This is 
 exactly wiiat has occurred. A still furiher slep 
 is a neglect of the common laws of concord, 
 which, however, is generally restricte<l within 
 narrow limits. Oidy in the Ap'ocalyiise (h) we 
 meet with very gross instances ol it ; such ;is, OTri 
 'l-qaov XpiaTov, 5 /idprvs h i^KSris (i. Oj; t\v 
 yvuaiKa r/ Kiyovffa (ii. 20) ; tw ayawriaayri y/xas, 
 Kcd ^Troiri<rey v/^as, fi'r non'^aai'Ti (i 5. ')). Tlie 
 repel ilion also of the pronoun, as in (he last in- 
 s(aiice, so natural to the Hebrew, is slavish in (he 
 Greek. Once only (and that not widiout dis- 
 pute) is an instance found of the singular iiliom 
 which technical grammar has denominated in 
 Hebrew Vau co>iv6rsive ; viz. koX irtKiad-r] for 
 Tf\«T9ri(TeTai (x. 7). In the Greek of the Hew Tes- 
 tainent generally the optatiie mood is obsei\ed 
 to be very rare; which appears as the first stage ol 
 the ])rocess by which it lias vanished in moueni 
 Greek. So too, instead of the participle, the 
 inlinilive is sulistituted in Hebrew tir>hion ; which 
 often gives an ungraceful stiffness to passaires 
 otherwise well written. .\s a single instance, in 
 James iii. '6, ISou, rSiv 'inmcu tovs x'^^-''"^'' *'S 
 TO, (TrSfxaTa fidWoixei' irphs rh nddfaOai abrovs 
 7]fuv .... down to ^aWofiev the (iieek is gi-od, 
 and suited to tlie elevated tt;nc of tie writer, but 
 the words which follow sjwiil it to a cl.i.«sical ear. 
 
 The Epistle to the Hebrews differs from all (lie 
 other compositions of the New Te>t.uiient, in being 
 the writing of one who bus evidently s]ient mucfc 
 pains on the cultivation of his style. With a *"e»
 
 840 
 
 riKLLK.VIST. 
 
 HELre. 
 
 exce;>tu)-is, it is scire ly mire fluniM^hly IJiom- 
 afic tliau (!iL> 27iii c'lujrtr of the Acts; but it is 
 full of inli;; iti,)iis tint tin; writ-r ii.il not only 
 move I ill circles w'loie .;-).).l Greclj w.istilke;!, 
 Imt li.i'l sliilio.l vVfll-.vriHeu m ) leU, anil aiinc-l 
 to iinit.ifi-' til Ml. Ill piiiit of iii^re stvle it miy 
 l)t; fiiily (:.)iii I irfl wit i tin VVis;lo;n of S,>lomjn 
 ^altii,>ii^'-'i tin; siibjact o[' tli; l.il^ter b(X)k often 
 thro.vs t\vi se:»t^iicts i it>> a in ire Hebrew fjrm) ; 
 and in fa-.t b.>t!i a;)i>!ar 1 1 exliibit sulficient marks 
 of t!ie Alexari,lr:<iii culture. 
 
 It liii> I) 'en flioii,'''it nn:)e^e;5.iry here to enter 
 into detail caiicerniii.^ tli' oM c mtrover-iiei l>e- 
 iween tl>e Purists, wli i trio I t > |,>r.)ve tliat all tbe 
 Greek of the Nev T.-stan; it w is classical, and 
 the Hebraists, w!i > overdid tli? o;):);)site ar^riuijeiit 
 (Winer's Gram. § 1, ellt. of l<ir»); for on this 
 •iibjjct there are iio loa^^er l.vj oj)i:u.)n$ amongst 
 the learned. 
 
 The fa';t tint s:> lavjje a (xntio'.! of the Jewish 
 mtion was Helleirisfiu, was destined to work g-reat 
 results on tbe Christian cause. Indeed, in some 
 sense, Christianity itself miy Ik? said t>) have had 
 Its human birtli amon.^ Hellenists, since Jesus 
 himself and the majority of bis disciples were 
 reared in Galilee, and were probably nearly as 
 familiar with the Greek as with the Hebrew 
 tongue. Ne\ertheless, during the e.irly times 
 which followed the day of Pentecost, no striking 
 result a[);)ears from this, except that it must have 
 facilitated communication with the Jews of the 
 disjiersion. Tiie important part which_ the Hel- 
 lenists were to sustain, was Hrst indicated by the 
 preaching of Stephen ; who discerned the lower 
 place wliich must be assigned to the national 
 law of Moses in the kingdom of iVIessiah. Ste- 
 p'len, indeed, was abruptly cut oil' by the odium 
 v/liich liis principles caused ; but the same were 
 soon after adopted, and yet more elliciently in- 
 culcated, by his jiersecutor Saul, to whom the 
 liigli office was allotted ol" establishing the pe- 
 culiar system of doctrine which thenceforward 
 distingaished the Gentile from the Je.vish church. 
 The K,)istle of James (whether written, as Neander 
 thinks, before the development of the Pauline 
 views or not) exiiibits to us undoubtedly tb? state 
 of Christian doctrine in the mother-church of 
 Jerusalem. We see in it the liigher spirit of 
 Ciirist struggling to put down the law into its 
 right {jlace, but having by no means as yet 
 brought out into their full clearness the disthi- 
 guishing doctrines of the gospel. All of these 
 were pre.iched and established by Paul in his 
 own churches, founded among Gentile proselytes 
 to Hellenistic Juuaism, and from them in no 
 loTig time were imbilx'd by all (ientile Christen- 
 dom. But, sinful taiieoiisly, the struggle began 
 within the chnrch itself lietween the Hebraic and 
 the Hellenistic spirit. The (so-called) first coun- 
 cil at Jerusiilem fActs xv.") decidal, for the time 
 at least, that the Mosaic law was not -to (wen- 
 forced u[/in the Gentiles, but it did not lessen 
 the imp>Ttaiice of it to Jewisli Christians ; and it 
 would apjiear that the Helirew sj)irit became 
 afterwards even stronger still within the Jerusalem 
 church, if we may interpret literally the words 
 of Jamos (.lets xxi. 20j : — ' Thou .seest, brother, 
 liow many thousands of Jews there are which 
 twlieve, and thvtj are all zealous of the law.'' At 
 any rate it a]ipears ceitain that the resistance to 
 tbe Pauline doctrine continued intense in tke 
 
 great borly of the Hebrew Christians ; for tlipy 
 show themselves in ecclesiastical history only 
 under the names of Naairenes and Ebionites, and 
 are alway- regarded as (more or less) heretical liy 
 the (ieiitile churches, since they held only the 
 bare rudimental creed on which the original 
 Pentecostal church was founded ; and fiertina- 
 ciously rejected the distinguishing tenets of Paul, 
 which were conth'med by Peter, ami imrlfa]» ex« 
 tended by John. This IJrst and greatest of con- 
 tiMversies ended in the extin:-ti(>i> of tlie Helirew 
 churches, which had refu.s<?d to grow with tlie 
 growtli of the Christiari spirit in its highest iin<l 
 most favoured le-aders. But long lief ire that eyeiit 
 tlie Hellenistic Jews ha(J been swallowed up in 
 the mass of Gentile Ijelieveis j aixl to fillow tha 
 further ilevelopment of the (jrecian ininil \7itl1in 
 t\K IjOiom of Christianity, belongs, not to this 
 article, but to a history of Gentile Clwistendom. 
 
 F. W. N. 
 HELMET. [Arms; Aumouu.] 
 HELPS (ai/TiAyjtpeis ; Vulg. opetnlaiionc$ ; I 
 Cor. xii. 2^). The Greek word, signifying aids 
 or assistances, has also this meaning, among 
 others, in the class cal writers (e. (/■ Diod. Sic. i. 
 87). In the Sept. it answers to iT^ti? (Ps. xxii, 
 in to ]^V^ (Ps. cviii. 12), ami to yTiT (Ps. 
 Ixxxiii. S). It is found in the same sense, Ecclus. 
 xi. 12 ; 2 .Mace. xi. 26 ; and in .Toseplms (L»e Bell. 
 Jud. iv. 5 1). In the New Testament it occurs 
 once, viz. in the enumeration of the se\eral orders 
 or classes of persons possessing miracn',>us gifts 
 among the primitive Christians (lU supra), where 
 it seems to l)e used l>y metonymy, the abstract for 
 the concrete, and to mean helpers ; like the words 
 5ui/£i/.teiy, 'miracles,' i.e. workers oi miracles; 
 i{>^fiepin}(reis, ' governments,' that is, (jovernors, 
 &c., i;. the same enumeration. Tbe Americans, 
 it is well known, by a similar idiom, call their 
 servants ' helps.' Great dilficulty attends the 
 attempt to ascertain tlie nature of the office so 
 designated among the first Ciiristians. Tlie()j)hy- 
 lact explains am'i\i)'^iis by cumxic^dai tmv uffde^ 
 v(t>v, helpimj or sapporting the infirm. And so 
 Gennadius, in CEcumenius. But this seems like 
 an inference from the etymology (see Gr. of Acta 
 XX. 35). It has been assumed by some eminent 
 modern writers that the several 'orders' mentioned 
 in ver. 2S, correspond respectively to the several 
 ' gifts ' of tiie Spirit enumerated in \er. 8, 9. In 
 wder, however, to make the two enumerationfl 
 tally, it is necessary to make 'divers kinds of 
 tongues ' and ' interpretation of tongues,' in the 
 owe, answer to ' diversities of tongttes ' in the 
 other, which, in the present state of the received 
 text, iloes not seem to be a complete correspond- 
 ence. The result of the collation is that avrt- 
 A-fji^eis answers to ' prophecy ;' whence it lias been 
 inferretl that these ]iersons were such as were 
 qualified with the gift of 'lower prophecy,' to 
 help the Christians in the public ilevotions ;Bar- 
 rington's Miscellanea Sacra, i. IGG ; Mack night 
 on I Cor. xii. 10-2S). Anotlier result is, that 
 ' governments ' answers ' to discerning of spirits.' 
 To l«iih these Dr. Hales very reasonably objt eta, 
 as unlikely, and pronounces this tabular view te 
 be ' f)er])lexed and embarrassing" (New Analysis, 
 &c., Lund. 1830, iii. 289;. Bishop Horsley haj 
 adopted tliiu classilication of the gilts and olfice- 
 liearers, and points out as 'helps,' e. e. person* 
 gifted with 'prophecies or predictions/ suCb pei
 
 HELPS. 
 
 wns as Mark, Tvcliicus, One»iimis. Vitiinga, 
 from a co^nparisDii of vor. 2S, 29, 3(1, inCcis that 
 tlie avrtK-h^ets denote tliose wlio luul tlie gilt of 
 interpretinif foreif/n langimr/es {lie Siina<j. Vet. 
 ii. 5lt'), FiaiKHie. I(i9(>); whit-!), tlioi!;^li coituliily 
 possible, as an arbitranj use of a very si;^ni(icant 
 wor I. staniis in iieeil of conlirination l>y actual 
 instances. Dr. Li^'liifiKJt also. ac<:or<liiisj to hia 
 l>ii>;^ra|)lier, ailopteil tlie same plan and arrived at 
 the same conclusion (Strype's IJfe of Uijhtjhot, 
 prefixed to his Works, p. 4, Loud. i(5St). Hut 
 Li^htfoot himself explains the wortl ' persons who 
 accompanieil tlie apostles, baptized those .vho were 
 converted hy tiiem, and were setit to places to 
 wiiicb they, bein.? employed in other things, could 
 not cotne, as Mark, Timothy, Titus.' He ob- 
 serves that the Talmudists sometimes call the 
 
 Levites □'•^Hd'? n^DD, ' the helpers of the 
 
 priests' (vol. ii. p. 7^1). Similar catal.igues of 
 miraculous gifts and ollicers occur Rom. xii.6-S, 
 and Eph. iv. 11, 12; but they neither correspond 
 in number nor in tlie order of enumeration. In 
 the former, ' prophecy ' stands Krst, aii<l in tlie 
 latter, second ; and in the former many of the 
 terms are of wide import, as ' ministering,' while 
 minute distinctions are made between others, as 
 between 'teaching' and 'exhortation,' 'giving' 
 and 'showing mercy.' Other writers pursue dif- 
 ferent methods, and arrive at dilVerent conclu- 
 sions. For instance, Hammond, arguing from 
 the etymology of the word, and from passages in 
 the early writers, which desci ii)e the ollice of re- 
 lieving the poor as peculiarly connected with that 
 of the apostles and bisliops by the ileacons, infers 
 that avTiA. ' denotes a special part of the office of 
 those men which are set down at the beginning 
 of the verse.' He also exjilains Kv^^pv-rjcms as 
 another part of their office (Hammond, Comment, 
 in luc). Sehleusner understands ' deacons who 
 had tlie care of the sick.' Rosenmiiller, 'Diaconi 
 qui paiiperibus, peregrinis, aegrotis, mortuis, ))ro- 
 curandis praeerant.' Bisliop Peaice thinks that 
 both these words may have been originally put in 
 the margin to explain Swd/xas, ' miracles or 
 powers,' and urges that a,vTi\. is nowhere men- 
 tioned as a gift of the Spirit, and that it is not re- 
 capitulated in ver. 29, 30. Certainly the oinission 
 of these two words would nearly ])roduce exacti- 
 tude in the recapitulation. Bowyer adopts tiie 
 game conjecture; liut it is without support from 
 MSS. or versions. He also observes that to the end 
 of ver. 28 some co])ies of the Vulgate add ' inter- 
 pretationes sermonum,' ep/xrjvfias y\oo<T<r<ii/ ; as 
 also the later Syriac, Hilary, and Amlirose. This 
 addi'ion would make the ?-ecapitulation perfect 
 Chrysostom and all the Greek interpreters consider 
 the avTi\. and Kv^^pv. as importing the same 
 thing, viz. functionaries so called with reference 
 to the two dilVerent ])arts of their office : the avriX. 
 gnjierintending the care of the jioor, sick, an<l 
 strangers ; the Kv^fpv. the burial of the dead, and 
 the executorship of their elVects, including the 
 care of their widows and orphans, rather ma- 
 nagers than governors ( Hlonitield's Recensio 
 Si/nopt.). After all it must be confessed, with 
 Doddridge, tiiat • we car. only guess at the mean- 
 ing of the words in cpiestion, having no princijiles 
 on which to jiroceed in tixing it absolutely' 
 (Fami/g Expositor, on 1 Cor. xii. 2"^). f.-Vlberli, 
 Glossar. p. 123 ; Saicer Thesaur. m voc. ; Sal- 
 
 HERAKLFS. 
 
 Ml 
 
 masius, De Frrnore TrapezUico, p 409; WolW 
 Cura- J'/tilolog. liasil. 1741.)— J. F. J). 
 
 1. HE.MAN (,19^^; Sept. Al/xoviu), a peram 
 of the tribe of Judih, named with others cele- 
 brated for their wisdom, to which tiiat of Solomon 
 is compared (1 Kings iv. 31 ; I Chion. ii. fi). 
 The considerations st.ited under FiriiAN will 
 distinguish this Hem.in frimi tlie following, with 
 whom he is sometimes confounded. 
 
 2. HE.U.\X, a Kohathite of the tribe of Levi, 
 ami one of the leaders of the temple-music as 
 organized by David (1 Chron. vi. 33; xvi. 11, 
 42). This, doul)tless, is the Heman to win m liie 
 8Stii Psalm is ascribed. 
 
 HlvMLOCK. [RosH.] 
 
 IIEli.\KLKS {'HpttK\Tis) is mentioned in 2 
 Mace. iv. 19, as the Tyrian god to whom the 
 Jewish high-jjriest J;i3 m sent a religious embassy 
 (dewpoi), with the olTering of 3(1() drachmae ol 
 silver. That this Tyrian Hercules (Herod, ii. 
 44) is the same as the Tyrian Haal, is evident 
 from a bilingual PlKEiiician inscription found at 
 Malta (ilescribed by Gesenius, Monum. Ling. 
 Plvrn. i. 95). in which the Phceni(^ian words, ' To 
 our Lord, toMelkarth, the Haal of Tyre,' are repre- 
 sented by the Greek 'HpaKK(l'A.px>TY(T(i. More- 
 over, Heraklesand .\st arte are meiitioned together 
 by Josephas (.4«<«(^. viii. 5. 3), just in the same 
 manner as Haal and .\shtoreth are in the Old Tes- 
 tament. The further identity of this Tyrian Haal 
 with the Haal whom the idiilatioiis Israelites wor- 
 shipped, is evinceil by the following arguments, 
 as stated chieHy by Movers (Die PJumizter, i. 178). 
 The worship of Baal, which prevailed in the time 
 of the Judges, was ))ut down by Samuel (1 Sam. 
 vii. 4), and the elVects of that supjiression ajjjje.ir 
 to have lasteil through the next few centuries, as 
 Baal is not enumerated among the idols of Sido- 
 mon (1 Kings xi. 5-8; 2 Kings xxiii. 13), nor 
 among those worshijiped in Judah i'l Kings xxiii. 
 12), or in Samaria, where we only rea<l of the 
 golden calves of Jeroboau) (1 Kings xii. 28 ; xv 
 26). That worship of Baiil which ))revailed in 
 the reign of Ahab, cannot, therefore, be regarded 
 as a mere continual ion or revival of the ol<l 
 Canaanite idolatry (although there is no reason 
 to doubt the essential identity of both Baals), but 
 was introduced directly from Phoenicia by .-Vhab's 
 marriage with the Siilonian princess Jezebel (1 
 Kings xvi. 31). In like manner, the establish- 
 ment of this idolatry in Judah is a-scrilied to the 
 marriage of the king with a dartghter of Jezebel. 
 (C."Tip. Josephus, j-l«<<5. viii. 13. I ; ix. 6.6.) 
 
 '1 he power of nature, which was worshijijwd 
 under the form of the Tyrian Hercules, ^lel- 
 karth, Baal, Ailonis, Moloch, and whatever ids 
 other names are, was that which originates, sus- 
 tains, and destroys life. These functions of the 
 Deity, accortling to the Phuinicians, were repre- 
 sei>ted, although not exclusively, by the sun, the 
 inlluence of which both animates vegetation by 
 its genial warmth, and scorches it up by its fer- 
 vour. 
 
 Almost all that we know of the worship of the 
 Tyrian Hercules is jireserved by the classical 
 writers, and relates chieily to the Phipnician colo- 
 nies, and not to the mother-state. The e.igle, the 
 lion, and the ihuniiyfish. were sacred to him, and 
 are often found on Pha-nician coins. Pliny ex- 
 pressly te:>tities tliat human sacrifices were oU'erm
 
 MS 
 
 HERMAS. 
 
 lip every year to tlie Cartliaginian Hercules 
 '^llist. Nat. xxxvi. v. 12) ; which coincides with 
 what is stated of Baal iti ,Ter. xix. 5, and with the 
 acknowledged worsliip of Moloch. 
 
 Movers endeavours to show that Herakles and 
 Hercules are not merely Greek and Latin syno- 
 tiymes for this god, but that tliey are actually 
 derived from his true Phoenician name. This 
 original name he supposes to have consisted of the 
 syllables IN (as found in '•"IX, lion, and in other 
 words), meaning strong, and 73, from 73'', to 
 conquer; so that the compound means Ar conquers. 
 This harmonizes with what he conceives to be the 
 idea represented by Hercules as tlie destroyer of 
 Typhonic monsters (I. c. p. 130). Melkartb, tlie 
 MeAi'/cap^os of Sanchoniathon, occurs on coins 
 
 only in the form mp?D- We must in this case 
 assume that a kajjh has been absorbed, and re- 
 solve the word into Nfllp "J]?©, king of the city, 
 woKiovxos. Tlie bilingual inscription renders 
 it by 'ApxTY^''"'!^ i ii'"! 't is ^ title of the god as 
 tlie patron of the city — J. N. 
 
 HERMAS, 'Epnas, one of the Christians at 
 Rome, to whom Paul addressed special saluta- 
 tions in his Epistle (Rom. xvi. 14). Of his history 
 and station in life nothing is known. By several 
 writers, ancient and modern, he has been reputed 
 to be the author of a work entitled 77*6 Shep/ierd 
 of Hennas, which from its high antiquity and the 
 supposed connection of the writer with St. Paul, 
 has been usually classed with the epistles of the 
 80-called Apostolic Fathers. It was originally 
 written in Greek, but we possess it only in a Latin 
 rersion (as old as the time of TertuUian), a few 
 fragments excepted, which are found as quota- 
 tions in other ancient autliors. It has been divided 
 by modern editors ((or in the manuscript copies 
 there is no such division) into three books ; the 
 first consisting of four visions, the second of twelve 
 commands, and the third of ten similitudes. It 
 is called the ' Shepherd' (6 notfi-fjv. Pastor), be- 
 cause tiie Angel of Repentance {Nuntius Foeni- 
 tentue), at whose dictation Hermas professes that 
 he wrote the second and third books, apjjeared in 
 the garb of a shepherd — ' habitu pastorali, pallio 
 albo amictus, peram in humeris, et virgam in 
 manu gestans.' It is doubtful whether the author 
 really l)elieved that he saw the visions he describes, 
 or merely adopted the fiction to render his work 
 more attractive. It is frequently quoted by 
 Clemens Alexandrinus, either by the author's 
 name (Stro?7i. h. 29. § ISl ; 0pp. ed. Klotz, ii. 
 119; ii. I. ^3; 0pp. ii. 124), or Ijy the phrase 
 ' the Siiephenl says" (Strom, i. 17. § 85 : 0pp. ii. 
 60 ; ii. 12. ^ 55 ; 0pp. ii. 15S ; ii. 9. ^ 4-3 ; 0pp. 
 ii. 150; ii 12. § 55; 0pp. ii. 158; iv. 9. §76; 
 0pp. ii. 318; vi. 6. § 46; 0pp. iii. 125), though 
 he does not expressly identity tlie author as the 
 Hermas in Rom. xvi. Eusebius is more definite. 
 In liis Eccles. Hist. (iii. 3) he says, ' The a])Ostle, in 
 the salutations at the end of his Epistle to the 
 Romans, makes mention among others of Hermas, 
 who, it is said, wrote the book called the Shep- 
 heid; it is to be not«d that this book is called in 
 question (di/Ti^ 6'a«ktoi), so that it cannot be 
 ranked among the booUs received as canonical 
 {iv ouoXoyovn^uois). By others it is judged to 
 be a. most necessary book for elementary instruc- 
 tion. And we know that it is publicly read in 
 churches, and that some very ancient writers 
 
 HERMAS. 
 
 make use of it.' Elsewhere he says, •' anvn* th« 
 spurious (ei> tois yddois) are to be placed the 
 Acts of Paul, the Book called the Shepherd, and 
 the Revelation of Peter' (Hist. Eccles. iii. 25). 
 And in giving an account of the opinions of Irenaeug 
 {Hist. Eccles. v. 8.), he remarks, ' the liook {rijr 
 ypacpiiv) of tlie Shepherd he not only knevv, l)ut 
 received with approbation, saying, Well spake 
 the book (^ ypa<p7)) which .say.s, '' first of all 
 believe tliat there is one God." ' This ])assage 
 has been adduced, but, jierhaps, im])ropeily, to 
 prove that Irenaeus regarded ' The Shepherd' as 
 canonical : the word ypatjyf], by some lieie trans- 
 lated Scripture, may mi an simply the book or 
 writing (Lardner's Credibility, ch. xvii. ; H'orks, 
 ii. 171). Origen often quotes ' The Shepherd,^ 
 speaks of it as useful, and, in his opinion, in- 
 spired : lit j)uto,divinitus inspirata (Ep. ad J{o}n. 
 Comment, lib. x. ; Opera, vii. 437, ed. Lom- 
 matzsch). Elsewhere he describes it as • a book 
 circulated in the church, but not universally ac- 
 knowledged to be divine" {Comment, in Evang. 
 Matt. Horn. xiv. ; 0pp. iii. 316). Jerome also states 
 that ' it was publicly read in some of the churches 
 of Greece, though among the Latins it was almost 
 unknown' {De Illust. Vir. cap. x). The testimo- 
 nies of other writers are given by Cotelerius and 
 Fabricius. If it be admitted that ' The Shephe7-d^ 
 was written by the Hermas of St. Paul, its date 
 must be fixed towards the end of the first century. 
 Some eminent critics, however, ascribe it to 
 Hermas, a brother of Pius, who was Bishop of 
 Rome about A.D. 141. Mosheim argues at some 
 length, and witli no little vehemence, in favour of 
 this opinion ; but the only authorities he adduces 
 on its belialf are some lines in a poem against the 
 Maicionites, falsely attributed to Tertidiian, the 
 fragment of an anonymous work on the canon, 
 published by Muratori in his Antiquitates Ital. 
 Med. yEvi, and a passage in the Liber Po7itiJicalis, 
 respecting Easter, there said to lie from a book 
 called the Shepherd, written by Hermas, the brother 
 of Pius, but not found in the work tliat has come 
 down to us under that title {Commentaries on 
 the Affairs of the Christians, vol. i. ]ip. 180-188,. 
 VidaFs transl). The same opinion is advocated 
 by Dr. Hefele, in tlie Tiibingen Thcol. Quart. 
 Schrifft., 1839. Dr. Neander", while he allows 
 that it may be doul)ted whetlier ' The Shepherd'' 
 was written by the Hermas of St. Paul, seems to 
 consider the other supposition still more question- 
 able, since we cannot determine what credit is 
 due to the audiwities adiluced in its favour, and 
 it is diflicult to reconcile with the later origina 
 tion (if the work, the high esteem in wliich it was 
 held in the age of Irenaeus and Clement of Alex- 
 andria {Allgemeine Geschichte, &c. Abth. i. 
 Band 2, p. 1139, 2nd edit.) Impartial judges 
 will proliably agree with Mosheim, that ' I'he 
 Shephe7'd' contains such a mixture of folly and 
 superstition with piety, of egregious nonsense with 
 momentous truth, as to render it a matter of 
 astonishment that men of learning should ever 
 have thought of giving it a place among the in- 
 spired writings. 
 
 The Shepherd of Hermas was first published at 
 Paris in 1513, and is included in the editions of 
 the apostolic I'atiiers by Coteleiius, (iallaiid, and 
 Hefele. Faliriciu5*also publislied it in his Codex 
 Apocryphns. Hambuvgi, 1719. Archbislioj 
 Wake's translation is well known. — J. E. R.
 
 HERMES. 
 
 HERMES ('Ep/nTJs), the Mercmius of the Ro- 
 mans, WHS the messenger of (lie gods, ami was 
 equally characteriiect l)y adioitness of action and 
 readiness of speech. He wa.s also the customary 
 attendant of Jujiiter when he a|)i)eaied on earth 
 (Ovid, Fast. v. 495). These circumstances ex- 
 ])lain why the inliahitants of Lystra (.Vets xiv. 
 12), as soon as ever they were disjxisetl to helieve 
 that the gods had visited them in the likeness of 
 men, discovered Hermes in Paul, as the chief 
 speaker, and as tlie attendant of Jupiter. It 
 eeems untiecessary to be curious whether the re- 
 presentations of Mercury in ancient statues accord 
 ■witli the sup{^)sed personal appearance of Paul, 
 and especially in the matter of the beard of the 
 latter; for all known representations of the god 
 difler in much more important particulars from 
 the prohable costume of Paul (c. (j. in the absence 
 of any garment at all, or in the use of the short 
 chlamys merely ; in the caduceus, the petasus, 
 &c.). It is more reasonaljle to suppose that those 
 who exjjected to see the gods mixing in the atl'airs 
 of this lower world, inhuman form, would not 
 look for much more than the outward semblance 
 of ordinary men. Comp. the ' dissimulantque 
 deos" of Ov'id {I.e. 504.)— J. N. 
 
 HERMOGENES ('Ep;uo7eVrjs) and PHY- 
 GELLUS, disciples of Asia Minor, and probably 
 companions in labour of St. Paul. They aban- 
 doned him during his second imprisonment at 
 Rome, doubtless from alarm at the perils of the 
 connection (2 Tim. i. 15). 
 
 HERMON {\yO'\r\ ; Sept. 'Aep/xciv), a moun- 
 tain which formed tlie northernmost boundary of 
 the country beyorjd the Jordan which the Hebrews 
 conquered from the Amorites (Deut. iii. 8), and 
 wliich, therefore, must have belonged to Anti- 
 Li banus, as is, indeed, implied or expressed in 
 most of the other passages in which it is named. 
 In Deut. iii. 9 it is said Jo have been called by 
 the Sidonians Sirion (p''^t^'), and by the Amorites, 
 Shenir(T'3t^*), both of whicii words signify ' a coat 
 of liiail.' In the next chapter (iv. 49) it is called 
 Mount Sion (JIN'Cj, meaning ' an elevation,' 
 ' a high mountajn' — whicli it was well entitled to 
 be designated Ky way of excellence, being (if cor- 
 rectly identilied with Jebel Es-sheikh) by far the 
 nighest of all the mountains in or near Palestine. 
 In the later booKs of the Old Testament, hoivever 
 (as in 1 Chron. v. 23 ; Sol. Song iv. S), Shenir is 
 d.stingiiished from Hermon properly so calleil. 
 Since modern travellers have made us acquainted 
 with the country beyond the Jordan, no doubt has 
 l>een entertained that the Mount Hermon of those 
 texts is no other than tlie present Jebel Es-slieikh, 
 or the Sheikh's mountain, or, which is equivalent. 
 Old Man's Mountain, a name it is said to liave 
 obtained from its fancied resemblance (being 
 topped with snow, which sometimes lies in length- 
 ened streaks upon its sloping ridges) to the hoary 
 head and beard of a venerable sheikh (Elliot, i. 
 317). This Ji'bel Es-sheikh is a south-eastern, 
 and in tliat direction culminating, branch of .A-iiti- 
 Libanus. It is probably the highest of all the 
 Lebanon mountains, and is thought to rival Mont 
 Blanc, though, as Elliot observes, the high ground 
 on which it stands detracts considerably from its 
 a])parent altitude, and makes it a less imposing 
 otiject than that king of European mountains as 
 riewed from the Italian valley of Aosla. Its top 
 
 HERODIAN FAMILY. 
 
 841 
 
 is covered with snow throughout the sumn.er, and 
 must tlierefore rise above tlie jioinl of perpetual 
 congelation, which in this quarter is al)out 1 1,000 
 feet. It might, |)erlia)>s, be safe to add aiKither 
 1000 feet for the height above that iH)int, making 
 in all 12,000 feet ; but we niu>t wait the result of 
 more accurate observations than iiave ytt lieeii 
 made. Some statements make it so low as 10,000 
 feet. Dr. Clarke, who saw it in the month ol 
 July, says ' the summit is so lofty that tiie snow 
 entirely covered the ujiper jiaif of it, not lying ii 
 patches, but investing all the liiglier part with 
 that perfect white and smooth velvet-like ap])ear- 
 ance wliich snow only exhil)ifs when it is verv 
 deep.' Dr. Roi>inson only ditVers from the pre- 
 ceding by the statement that the snow is per- 
 ))etnal only in the ravines, so that llie top jiresents 
 the ajipearance of radiant stripes, around and 
 biiow the sunuiiit (Bib. lie-carclies, iii. .'ill). 
 The mention of Hermon along witli Tal>or in 
 Ps. Ixxxix. 12, led to its being souf^hl, near the 
 latter mountain, where, accordingly, travellers 
 and maps give us a ' Little Hermon.' But that 
 jiassage, as well as Ps. cxxxiii. 3, applies better 
 to the great mountain alreaily described; and 
 in the Ibimur it seems ))erfect]y natural for the 
 Psalmist to call upon these mountains, resjiect- 
 ively the most conspicuous in the western and 
 eastern divisions of the Hebrew territory, to rejoice 
 in the name of the Lord. Besides, we are to con- 
 sider that Jebel Es-sheikh is seen from Mount 
 Tabor, and that both together are visible ficin the 
 plaiu of Ebcbaelou. There is no reiison tosiip|u)se 
 that the so-called Little Hermon is at all men- 
 tioned in Scripture. Its actual name is Jebel 
 ed-Didiy ; it is a shapeless, liarren, and unin- 
 teresting mass of hills, in the north of the valley of 
 Jezreel and opposite Mount Gilboa. 
 
 HKRODIAN FAMILY. Jo eplms introduces 
 us to the knowledge of the Heroilian family in 
 the Iburteenth l)ook of his Antiquities. He tliere 
 tells us (c. i. § 3) that ami.ng the chief friends 
 of Hyrcanus, tlie high priest, was an Idumaean, 
 named .-Vntipater, distinguished for his riches, 
 and no less for his turbulent and seditious temjier. 
 He also quotes an author who represented hi)n as 
 descended from one of the best of the Jewisli 
 families which returned from Babylon aftt r tlie 
 captivity, but adds that' this statement was 
 founded on no lietler grounds than a desire to 
 flatter the ))ride and support the jiretensioiis of 
 Herod the Great. The times were favouialile to 
 men of Antijjater's character; and, while he ob- 
 tained sovereign authority over liis native province 
 of Idumsea, lie contrived to subject Hyrcar.'js 
 completely to his will, and to induce him to foim 
 an alliance with Arelas, from which he trusted to 
 secure the best means for his own aggrandize- 
 ment. Having so far acconqjlished his designs 
 as to make himself the fivouiite ally of Rome, 
 he obtained for his son Phasadus the governor- 
 ship of Jerusalem, and for Herod, then only 
 tifteen years old, the chief command in Galilee. 
 
 Herod soon distinguished himself by his talents 
 and bravery. The country was at that time in- 
 fested with numerous bands of robliers. These 
 he assailed and vanqiuslieil, and his sncces* 
 w;is proclaimed, not only throughout (ialilee, 
 but in Juda;a and tlie neighbouring countries. 
 This increasing popularity of a member of tiie 
 family of .-Vntipater alarmed the ruling iiei) at
 
 S44 
 
 HERODIAN FAMILY. 
 
 HERODIAN FAMILY. 
 
 Jerusalem, and they willingly hearkened to the 
 conijtlaintx made against Herod by some of the 
 relatives of tliose whom lie had slain. He was 
 accordinijfly summoned to take his trial belbre the 
 Sanhedrim : nor ditl lie disobey the summons ; 
 but on the day of trial he appeared at the tri- 
 Uimal gorgeously clad in pur|)le, and surrounded 
 by a numerous band of armed attendants. His 
 acquittal was speedily pronounced. One only of 
 the judges ventured to speak of his guilt, and the 
 veneralile old man prophesied that, sooner or later, 
 this same Herod would punish both them and 
 Hyrcauus for their pnsill.mimity. 
 
 In the events which followed the death of 
 Cicsar, Herod found fresh opportunities of ac- 
 conii)lisliing his ambitious designs. By collect- 
 ing a consideral)le tribute for Cassius in Galilee, 
 he obtained the friendship of that general, and 
 was appointed to the command of the army in 
 Syria. No less successful with Marc Antony, 
 he overcame the powerful enemies who represented 
 the dangerous nature of his ambitious views, and 
 was exalted, with his brother Phasaelus, to the 
 dignity of tetrarch of Juilaea. They liad not, 
 however, long enjoyed their office when the ap- 
 proach of Antigonus against Jerusalem compelled 
 them to meditate immediate flight. Phasaelus 
 and Hyrcanus fell into the hands of the enemy ; 
 but Hercul, making good his escape, hastened to 
 Rome, where he pleaded his cause and his former 
 merits with so much skill, that he was solemnly 
 proclaimed king of the Jews, and endowed with 
 tlie proj)er ensigns and rights of royalty. Au- 
 gustus, three years afterwards, conHrmed this act 
 of the senate ; and Herod himself scrupled not 
 to |)erpetrate the most horrible crimes to give 
 further staliility to his throne. The murder of 
 his wife Mariamne, a daughter of Hyrcanus, and 
 of his two sons Alexander and Aristobulus. place 
 him in the foremost rank of those tyrants whose 
 names blai^ken the ]>age of history. Of the mas- 
 sacre at Bethlehem the Jewish historian says no- 
 thing ; but it has been well observed that such 
 an event, in a reign marked by so many horrible 
 deeds, and occilrring as it ilid in a small, obscure 
 town, was not likely to obtain a place in the na- 
 tional annals. As a vain attempt to set aside the 
 purposes of God, it affords a startling instance of 
 the awful follies to which the acutest and most 
 politic of rulers may be tempted by the love of 
 em{)ire. " Had Herod not proved, by the acts here 
 alluded to, the little confidence which he felt in 
 himself, or in the actual claims which his courage 
 and ability gave him to dominion, he might have 
 merited the title of Great, conferred on him by 
 his admirers. His reign, jjrolonged through thirty- 
 seven years, ^vas in many respects prosperous ; 
 and the splendour of his designs restored to Jeru- 
 salem, as a city, much of its earlier magnificence. 
 
 According to the custom of tlie times, Herod 
 made his sons the heirs to his kingdom bj' a 
 formal testament, leaving its ratification to the 
 will of the emperor. Augustus assenting to its 
 main provisions, Archelaus became tetrarch of 
 Judaea, Samaria, and Iilumaea; Philip, of Tra- 
 chonitis and Ituraea; and 
 
 Hekod Antipas, of Galilee and Peraea. This 
 Herod was first married to a daughter of King 
 Aretas of Arabia; but forming an unholy attach- 
 ment for Herodias, the wife of his brother Philip, 
 ue »oon became involved in a course of guilt 
 
 which ended in his utter rmn. .-Vretas, to avengn 
 his daughter, sent a considerable army against 
 Herod, whose generals in vain attemjjted to op- 
 pose its progress. The forces which they led were 
 totally destroyed, and instant ruin seemed to 
 threaten both Herod and his dominions. An 
 api^eal to the Rximans afforded the oidy hojK? of 
 safety. Aretas was haughtily ordered by the em- 
 peror to desist from the prosecution of the war , 
 and Herod accordingly escaped the expected 
 overthrow. But he was not allowed to enjoy his 
 prosperity long His ne]ihew Agrippa having 
 obtained the title of King, Herodias urged him 
 to make a journey to Italy and demand the 
 same honour. He weakly assented to his wifVs 
 ambitious representations ; but the project proved 
 fiital to them both. Agrippa anticipateil their 
 designs; and when they appeared before Caligula 
 they were met by accusations of hostility to Rome, 
 the truth of which they in vain attempted to dis- 
 prove. Sentence of deposition was accordmgly 
 passed upon Herod, and both he and his wife 
 \were sent into banishment, auil died at Lyons in 
 Gaul. 
 
 Herod Agripp.\, alluded to above, was the 
 son of Aristobulus, so cruelly put to death by his 
 father Herod the Great. The earlier part of his 
 life was spent at Rome, where the magnificence 
 and luxury in which he indulged reduced him 
 to ])overty. After a variety of adventures and 
 suti'erings he was thrown into bonds by Tiberius; 
 but on the succession of Caliguia was not only 
 rdstored to liberty, but invested with royal dig- 
 nity, and made tetrarch of Abilene, and of the 
 districts formerly pertaining to the tetrarchy of 
 Philip. His influence at the Homan court in- 
 creasing, he subsequently obtained Galilee and 
 Peraea, anil at length Judaea and Samaria, his 
 dominion being thus extended over the whole 
 country of Palestine. 
 
 To secure tlie good-will of his subjects, he 
 yielded to their worst passions and caprices. 
 Memorable instances are afforded of this in the 
 apostolic history, where we are told that * He 
 stretched forth his hands to vex certain of the 
 cliurch, and he killed James, the toother of John, 
 with the sword ; and because he 'saw it pleased 
 the Jews, he proceeded further to take liefer also' 
 (Acts xii. 1-3). His awful death, descril)ed in the 
 same chapter, and by Jose[)hus almost in the same 
 words (Antiq. xix. 8), occurred in the fifty-fourth 
 year of his age. 
 
 Heuod Agrippa, the son of the above-named, 
 was in his seventeenth year when his father died. 
 The emperor Claudius, at whose court the young 
 Agrippa was then residing, purposed conferring 
 upon him the dominions enjoyed by his father. 
 From this he was deterred, says Josephus, by the 
 advice of his ministers, who represented the 
 danger of trusting an important province of the 
 emjjire to so youthful a ruler. Herod was, there- 
 fore, for the time, obliged >o content himself witl 
 the small principality of Chalcis, but was no. 
 long after created sovereign of the tetrarchies 
 formerly belonging to Pliillp and Lysanias ; a 
 dominion increased at a subsequent period by the 
 grant of a considerable portion of Peraea. The 
 habits which he had formed at Rome, and his 
 strong atlachment to the people to whose rulers 
 he was indebted for his prosperity, brought iiini 
 into frec^uent disputes with his own nation, H»
 
 HERODIANS. 
 
 HERON. 
 
 «U3 
 
 4ied, at tlie 9?e of seventy, in the raily jxiitof tlie 
 iei"n ofTiaj III. — II. S. 
 
 HERODIANS, a <'lass of Jews lli.it existed in 
 tlie lime of Jesus Christ, wlietlier ot" a ])()litica) or 
 religions description it is not ea<y. tor want of 
 materials, to determine. The ])assages of the 
 New Testament whlrli refer to them are tlie fol- 
 lowing. ;\Iaik iii. 6: .\ii. 13; Matt. xxii. 16; 
 Lnke XX. 20. The y/artienlars are these:— the 
 •ecclesiastical anthorities of Jnt'Epa having failed 
 to entrap Jesns hy demanding the authority by 
 which he did his wonderful works, especially as 
 Been in his e\])urgation of tlie lemjile ; and heing 
 incensed in con.sequence of the jiaralile s]i()ken 
 against them, iiamely, 'A certain man planted a 
 vineyard,' &c., held a council against him, and 
 associating with themselves the Herodians, sent 
 in einliassy to 'our Lord with the express hut 
 covert design of ensnaring him in his sjieech, 
 that thus they might comjiass his destruction. 
 The question they put to him was one of the most 
 diflicult — ' Is it lawful to jiay tritiute to Cssar?' 
 The way in which Jesus extricated himself from 
 the ditliculty and discomlited his enemies is well 
 known. 
 
 Do these circumstances afford any light as to 
 what waa the precise character of tlie Herodians? 
 Whatever decision on this point may he arrived 
 at, the general imjiort of the transaction is very 
 clear, and of a character highly honourable to 
 Jesus. Tliat his enemies were actuated hy bad 
 faith, and came with false pretences, migiit also 
 be safely inferred. Luke, however, makes an ex- 
 press statement to this eJI'ect, saying (xx. lS-20), 
 ' they sought to lay hands on him ; and they 
 feared the jieople; and they watched him, and 
 sent forth s])ies which should feign iheynselves 
 just 7nen, that tiiey might take hold of his words, 
 that so they might dclii-er him unto the power 
 and authority of the govertior.' The aim, then, 
 was to embroil our Lord with tlie Romans. For 
 this purpose the question put iiad been cunningly 
 cliosen. These a])])ear to have been the several 
 feelings w nose toils were around Jesus — the hatred 
 of the priests, the favour of tlie jieojde towards 
 himself, and their aversion to the dominion of the 
 Romans, their half faith in him as the Messiah, 
 which would jirotialily be conveited into the vex- 
 ation and rage of disajijxiintment, should he 
 a])])rove the payment of tritiute to Rome; another 
 element of dilliculty liad in tiie actual case been 
 deliberately provided — flie presence of the He- 
 rodians. Altogether tiie scene was m'^st perplex- 
 ing, the trial most jjerilous. But what additional 
 ditlKculty did the Herodians bring? Herod An- 
 tipas was now Tetrarch of Galilee and Persea, 
 wliich was the only inheritance he received from 
 his father Herod tlie Great. As Tetrarch of 
 Galilee he was sjieciallv the ruler of Jesus, whose 
 home was in that province. The Herodiiins tlien 
 may iiave lieeii siilijects of Herod, Galibeans, 
 whose e\idence 'he priests were wisiiful to pro- 
 cure, iiecause theirs would be the evidence of 
 feliow-cour.tiymen, and of sjiecial force with 
 Antipas as being that of his ov/n immediate sub- 
 jei'ts ( Luke xxili. 7). 
 
 IlrriMrs relations with Rome were in an unsafe 
 condition. He was a weak prince, given to ease 
 and hixnry, and iiis wile's ftmljition conspired 
 Mrith his own desires to ina'te him strive to olitain 
 <ifoiii tlie Kniperot Ca'i^/ da the title of king. 
 
 For tliis jnirposi* lie took a journey to Roit e, iuui 
 was banished to Lyons in (iaul. 
 
 The Herodians may have been favourers of hit 
 pretensions: if so. they wonhi be piirliul lieirers. 
 and eager wilncs'cs against Jesus Iwfoie die Ro- 
 man tribunal If would be a great service to 
 die Roniaus to be the means of enabling them to 
 get ri<l of one who aspired to lie king of llie Jews. 
 If would eipially gialifv their own lord, slmuld 
 tlie Herodians give, ell'ectual aid ifi ]iiittiiig a 
 ]ieriod to the mysterious yet tonnidable claims ot 
 a rival claimant of tiic crown. 
 
 We do not .«ee that the two characters lierf 
 .isrribe<l to the Herodians are incompatible; and 
 if they were a (ialilaean jiolitica! parly who wert 
 eager to jnocure from Rome the honour of royalty 
 for Herod CMaik vi. 14, the name of king \> 
 merely as of courtesy), fhev were chosen as asso- 
 ciate, by the Sanhedrim witii especial jiropriefy. 
 
 Tlie deputation were to ' feign thrmselves jiisf 
 men.' that is. men wiiose svmpal hies were errti ely 
 Jewish, anil, as such, anfi-lieathen : they were ti; 
 intimate their dislike of jiaying fiii'Ufe, as being 
 an acknowledgment of a foreign yoke; and liy 
 flatlering Jesus, as one who loved truth, feared no 
 man, and would say what lie fliought, thev meant 
 to inveigle hiin into a oondcniiiaruiii ol' the prac 
 fice. Ill order io cairy these liase and hypoci itical 
 designs info ell'ect, the Herodians were a)ipro- 
 priately associated with the Pharisees; for as the 
 latter were the recognised consei vatorsof .Judaism, 
 so the former were fiiends of the aggrandisemeii* 
 of a native as against a foreign prince. 
 
 Other hvpotlieses niav be found in Pauiiis on 
 the jiassage in jMatt. ; in Woli', I'tirrr J'/iiL i. 31 1, 
 sq.; see also J. Stench. iJiss. de llercd. Lund. 
 I70G ; J. Floder, Diss, de Herod. Uiisal. 1761.— 
 
 J. R. B 
 
 HERODIAS. [HeitoDiAN Family.] 
 
 HERON (npDX nvnphnh. Lev. xi. 19; Dent 
 xiv. 1^). The original is a disputed name of ar 
 unclean bird, which has also been translated kite 
 woodcock, pairof, and cr-ine. For the fiist of flies* 
 
 33S. [.\rdea Hprri(lia.s.] 
 
 see Gi.F.Di;; the second is rare and only a mo 
 menlary visitor in Palestine; the third, s;irely 
 reipried no ])roiiibition where it was no' a residen' 
 species, and jirobubly not inipoifed fill the reigi 
 of Solomon ; and. as to the crane, we hav« 
 alieady shown it to have been likewise exotic 
 making only a momentary apjiearance, and tha' 
 raiely, in Syria, wli le if is commonly represented 
 by file .Afri<'an species Griis viryo (crane). If tli» 
 Hebrew name be derived I'roni Sj3X aiinp/i, ' tc 
 lireathe short,' or ' to snilV through ihe iio.«triU wiOi
 
 64e 
 
 HESHBON. 
 
 an irritafeil expression,' the most obvious applica- 
 tion would lie to the goose, a bird not, })erhaj)s, 
 tfherwise noticed in tlie Hebrew Scriptures, though 
 it was constantly eaten in Egypt, was not held 
 unclean by tlie Jews, and, at some seasons, must 
 have freciucnteil the lakes of Palestine. The he- 
 ron, liiough not so constantly hissing, can utter a 
 similar sound of" displeasure with much more 
 meaning, and the common 8])ecies Ardca cinerea 
 is found in Egypt, and is .also abundant in the 
 Haurati of Palestine, where it frequents the mar- 
 gins of lakes and pools, and the reedy water- 
 courses in the deep ravines, striking and devour- 
 ing an immense quantity of fisii. Tlie Greek 
 woTToin. (Hom. Odyss. i. 320), though in sound re- 
 sembling a/iap/ia/i, \s not, therefore, as Bochart 
 pretends, necessarily a mountain hawk ; for then 
 the root couhl not be taken from anaph, unless it 
 applied to one of the smaller sjjecies, such as the 
 Kestril or sparrow-hawk. — C. U. S. 
 
 HESHBON (I'n^'n; Sept. 'Eat^dv; Euseb. 
 'E(rcre/3aj»'), a town in tlie southern district of the 
 Helirew territory beyond the Jordan, parallel with, 
 and twenty-one miles east of, the point where 
 the Jordan enters the Dead Sea, and nearly 
 midway lie! ween the rivers Jabbok and Arnon. 
 It originally belonged to the Moabites ; but 
 when the Israelites arrived from Egypt, it was 
 found to be in tlie possession of the Amorites, 
 whose king, Sihon, is styled both king of the 
 Amorites and king of Heshbon, and is exjjressly 
 said to have 'reigned in Heshbon ' (Josh. iii. 10; 
 comp. Num. xxi. 26; Deut. ii. Jl). It was 
 taken by Moses (Num. xxi. 23-2fi), and even- 
 tually became a Levitical city (Josh. xxi. 39; 
 I Chron. vi. 81) in the tribe of Reuben (Num. 
 xxxii. 37; Josh. xiii. 17); but lieiiig on the con- 
 fines of Gad, is sometimes assigned to the latter 
 tribe (Josh. xxi. 39; 1 Chron. vi. 81). After 
 the ten tribes were sent into exile, Heshbon was 
 taken possession of liy the Moabites, and hence is 
 mentioned by the prophets in their declarations 
 against Moab(lsa. xv. 4; Jer. xlviii. 2, 34, 45). 
 Under King Alexander Jannseus we find it again 
 reckoned as a Jewish city (Joseph. Antiq. xiii. 
 15. 4). In the time of Eusebius and Jerome it was 
 still a place of some cunseipience under the name of 
 Esbu3("E(r/3oui'); l)Ut at the present day it is known 
 by it.s ancient name of Heshbon, in the slightly 
 modified firm of Hesban. The ruins of a consi- 
 derable town still exist, covering the sides of an 
 insulated hill, but not a single edifice is left 
 entire. The view from the summit is very exten- 
 sive, emliracing the ruins of a vast number of 
 cities, the names of some of which liear a strong 
 resemlilance to those mentioned in Scripture. 
 There are reservoirs connected with this and the 
 other received towns of this region. These have 
 been supposed to be the pools of Heshbon mentioned 
 by Solomon (Cant. vii. 4) : lint, say Irby and 
 Mangles, 'The ruins are uninteresting, and the 
 only jio.il we saw was too insignificant to be one 
 of those meiitiiined in Scripture.' In two of the 
 cisterns among the ruins they found alioiit three 
 dozen of human skulls and bones, which they 
 justly regard as an illustration of Gen. xxxvii. 20 
 (Y'/'iTcZ-s, p. 472; see also Burckhardt, Greorge 
 RobiuMin, Lord Lindsay, &c.). 
 
 HEZEKIAH (.nji?tn ; Sept. 'ECe/ci'aj), son of 
 
 HEZEKIAIL 
 
 Ahaz, and thirteenth kingof Jndah, who reigned 
 from B.C. 725 to u c. 69(5. 
 
 From the commencement of his reign the effort! 
 of Hezekiah were directed to the reparation of fbe 
 efl'ects of the giievous errors of his predecessors; 
 and during his time the true religio.i and ttte 
 theocratical policy flourished as the; had not 
 done since the days of Divid. The Temple was 
 cleared and purified ; the utensils and forms of 
 service were restored to their ancient order; all 
 the changes introduced by Ahaz were abolislied ; 
 all the monuments of idolatry were destroyed, 
 and their remains cast into the biook Kedron. 
 Among the latter was the brazen serpent of 
 Moses, which had been deposited first in the 
 Tabernacle, and then in the Temple, as a me- 
 morial of the event in which it originated : and 
 it is highly to the credit of H<%ekiali, and shows 
 more clearly than any other single circumstance 
 the spirit of his operations, that even this interest- 
 ing relic was not spared when it seemed in danger 
 of being turned to idolatrous uses. Having suc- 
 ceeded by his acts and words in rekindling the 
 teal of the priests and of the people, the king 
 ajipointed a high festival, when, attended by iiis 
 couit and people, he proceeded in high state to the 
 Temple, to jiiesent sacrifices of expiation for the 
 past irregularities, and to commence the re-or- 
 ganised services. A vast number of sacrifices 
 evinced to the people the zeal of their sujieriors, 
 and Judah, long sunk in idolatry, was at length 
 reconciled to God (2 Kings xviii. 1-8; 2 Chum, 
 xxix.). 
 
 The revival of the great annual festivals was 
 included in this reformation. The Passover, 
 which was the most important of them all, had 
 not for a long time been celel)rated according to 
 the rites of the law ; and the day on which it 
 regularly fell, in tiie first year of Hezekiah, being 
 already past, the king, nevertheless, justly con- 
 ceiving the late observance a less evil than t!ie 
 entire omission of the feast, directed that it should 
 be kept on the 14th day of the second month, 
 being one month after its proper time. Couriers 
 were sent from town to town, inviting the people 
 to attend the solemnity; and even the ten tribes 
 which formed the neighbouring kingdom weie 
 invited to share with tlieir brethren of Judah in 
 a duty equally incumbent on all the children of 
 Abraham. Of these some received the message 
 gladly, and others with disdain; but a consider- 
 able number of persuns belonging to the northern- 
 most tribes (wliicii had more seldom than the others 
 been firouglit into hostile contact with Judah) 
 came to Jerusalem, and by their presence iin- 
 paited a new interest to the solemnity. A profound 
 and salutary impiession appears to have been 
 made on this occasion ; and so strong was the 
 fervour and so great the number of the assembled 
 people, that the festival was piolonged to twica 
 its usual duration ; and during this time the 
 multitude was fed abundantly from the countless 
 offerings jiresented by the king and his nobles. 
 Never since the time of Solomon, when the whole 
 of the twelve trilies were wont to assemble at the 
 Holy City, ha<l the Passover been observed with 
 such magnificence (2 Cliroii. xxx.). 
 
 The good ertect of this jiiocedure was seen 
 when tlie jieople carried back to their homes the 
 zeal for the LordHliich had thus lieeu kiiid!e<l, 
 and proceeded to destroy and ca«l forth all tiw
 
 HRZEKIAH. 
 
 abominations hy wliich their several towns had 
 been (Ifliled ; thus jieirorminj^ again, on a smallfv 
 icale, the doings of the king in Jerusalem. Kven 
 tlie ' liigh phices,' which tl.e ])ious kings of former 
 davs had spared, were on tliis occasion aholislied 
 and overthrown ; and even tiie men of Israel, who 
 iiad attended ilie feast, were carried away by tlie 
 same lioly enthusiasm, and, on relurninjj to their 
 liomes, broke all tlieir idols in pieces (.2 Chron. 
 xxxi. 1). 
 
 Tiie attention of this pious and able king was 
 extended to wiiatever concerneii the interests of 
 religion in liis (hmiinions. lie caused a new 
 collection of Solomon's proverbs to be made, 
 tieing the same wliich occupy chaps, xxv. to xxix. 
 of the book wliich liears that name. The sectional 
 divisions of the priests and Levites were re-esta- 
 blished ; the per])ctnal sacrifices were recom- 
 menced, and maintained from tiie royal treasure; 
 the stores of the lem]ile were once more filled liy 
 the offerings of tlie people, and .he times of Solo- 
 mon and .lehoshaphat seemed to have returned 
 (2 Chron. xxxi.). These improvements indicate 
 tiie peculiar nature of the operations requiretl to 
 establish the character of a good prince under 
 the Hebrew theocracy. It was not necessary 
 that he should create new and ")eneficial insti- 
 tutions; even from the most refirming king it 
 was only required that he should re-establish 
 the old institutions which had fallen into neglect, 
 and to abolish all recent innovations adverse to 
 their principles. Of all people the Hebrews lived 
 most on the memories of the past; and the re- 
 trospective character of all their refornititions ne- 
 cessarily arose out of the divine authority by 
 which their institutions had been established, and 
 their perfect adaptation to their condition as a 
 peculiar people. 
 
 This great work having been accomplished 
 and consolidated (2 Kings xvii. 7, &c.), Heze- 
 kiali applied himself to repair the calamities, as 
 he had repaired the crimes, of his fathers govern- 
 ment. He took arms, and recovered the cities 
 of Judah wliich the Ptiilistines had seized. En- 
 couraged by this success, lie ventured to withhold 
 the tribute wliich his father liad paid to the Assy- 
 rian king ; and this act, which the result sliows 
 to have been imprudent, drew upon the country 
 the f,^reatest calamities of his reign. Only a few 
 years befoie, namely, in the fourth of his reign, 
 the Assyrians had put an end to the kingdom of 
 Israel and sent the ten tribes into exile; but 
 had abstained from molesting Hezekiah, as iie 
 was already their tributary. Seeing his coun- 
 try invaded on all sides by the Assyrian forces 
 under Sennacherib, and Lachish, a strong place 
 which covered .lerusalem, on the point of falling 
 into tiieir hands, Hezekiah, not daring to meet 
 them in the field, occupied himself in all neces- 
 sary preparations for a protracted defence of Jeru- 
 ialem.in hope of assistance from Egyiit, with which 
 country he had contracted an alliance (Isa. xxx. 
 1-7). Such alliances were not favoured liy the 
 Divine sovereign of Israel and liis jirophets, and 
 no good ever came of them. But this alliance 
 did not render the good king unmindful of his 
 true souice of strength; for in quieting the alarms 
 of the jjeople he directed their attention to the 
 ooi.sideratioii that they in fact had more of power 
 (Uid strength in the divine protection than the 
 Assyrian king (xt^sessed in all his host: 'There 
 
 HEZEKIAH. 
 
 847 
 
 IS more with us than with him : wifli liim it an 
 arm of flesh, but with us is the Lord onr fiml t« 
 help us and light our battles." Nevertheless, 
 Hezekiah was himself distrustful of tlie course 
 he had taken, anil at length, to avert the calami- 
 ties of war, sent to the Assyrian king oilers of 
 submission. Sennacherib, who was anxious to 
 proceed against Egypt, consented to withdraw 
 his forces on the jiayment of three hundred talents 
 of silver and thirty talents of gold; which the 
 liing was not able to rai.se without exhausting 
 both his own treasury and that of the temple, 
 and stripping olT the gold with which the doors 
 and jiilhirs of the Lord's house were overlaid 
 (2 Kings xviii. 7-16). 
 
 But after he had received the silver and gold, 
 the Assyrian king broke faith with Hezekiah. and 
 continued to jirosecute his warlike operations. 
 While he employed himself in taking the fortresses 
 of Judsea, which it was important to secure lie- 
 fore he marched against Egy]it, he sent three of 
 his generals, Rabshukeh, Tartan, and Rabsaris, 
 with part of his forces, to threaten .Jerusalem with 
 a siege unless it were surrendered, and the inha- 
 bitants submitted to be sent into Assyria; and 
 this summons was delivered in language highly 
 ir^sulting not only to the king and jieople, but to 
 the God they worshipped. When tlie terms of 
 the summons were made known to Hezekiah, he 
 gathered courage from the conviction that God 
 would not fail to vindicate the honour of his in- 
 sulted name. In this conviction he was confirmed 
 by the ]irophet Isaiah, wlio, in the Lonl'g name, 
 promised the utter discomfiture and overthrow of 
 the blasjihemous Assyrian : ' Lo, I will send a 
 blast u]Kin him, and he shall hear a rumour, an«l 
 shall return to his own land, and I will cause him 
 to die by the swoid in his own land" (2 Kings 
 xix. 7). The rumour which Sennacherib heaid 
 was of the advance of I'irhakah the Ethiopian to 
 the aid of tiie Egyptians, with a force which the 
 Assyrians did not deem it prudent to meet : but, 
 before withdrawing to his own countrv, Senna- 
 cherib sent a threatening letter to Hezekiah, 
 designed to check the gladness wliicli his retire- 
 ment was likely to produce. But that very night 
 the predicted blast — ] no I ably the hot pestilential 
 south wind — smote 180,000 men in the camp of 
 the Assyrians, and released the men of Judah 
 from all their fears (2 Kings xviii. 17-.'^, xix. 
 i-31 ; 2 Chron. xxxii. 1-23 ; Isa. xxxvi. 37). 
 
 It was in the same year, and while Jerusalem 
 was still threateneil by the Assyri.iiis. that Heze- 
 kiah fell sick of the jilague ; anil the asjiect w liich 
 the plague-boil assumed assured him that he must 
 die. In this he was contirmeil by Isaiali, wlio 
 warned him that liis end iipproached. The love 
 of life, tht! condition of the country — the Assyrians 
 being jiresent in it, aiul the throne of David with- 
 out an heir — caused him to grieve at this doom, 
 ami to pray earnestly that he might be sjiared. 
 And his prayer was heanl in liea\ en. The jiro- 
 ))het returned with the assurance that in tliree 
 days he shoiihl rec-over, and that fifteen aildilionai 
 vears of life should be given to him. This com- 
 munication was altogether so extraordinary, that 
 the king required some token by which his belief 
 might be justified; and accordingly the ' sign' 
 which he retjuired was granted to him. The 
 shadow of the sun went back upon the dial o. 
 Aliaz, the ten degrees it had gone down [Dial.]
 
 BC8 
 
 HEZEKIAH. 
 
 TVii« was a marvel greater tlian tliat of flie cure 
 wliicli the king distrusted ; for tliere is no known 
 pyiiicii)le (if astronomy or natural pliilosojjliy by 
 which such a result could he produced. A cata- 
 plasm of figs was tlien ajiplied to tlie jilagne- 
 boil, under the direction of the projihet, and on 
 the third day, as (bietold, the king recovered 
 [2 Kings xx.'l-U ; 2 Chron. xxxii. 21-26; Isa. 
 xxxviii.). [Plague]. 
 
 The destruction of the Assyrians drew tlie atten- 
 tion of foreign courts for a time towards Judaea, 
 and caused the facts connected wifii Hezekiith's 
 recovery, and the retrogression of the shadow on 
 the dial, to he widely known. Among others 
 Merodach Baladan, king of Babylon, sent am- 
 bassadors with ])resents to make inquiries into 
 those matters, and to congratulate the king on 
 his recovery. Since tlie time of Solomon the 
 appearance of such cmliassies from distant parts 
 had been rare at Jerusalem ; and the king, in the 
 pride of iiis heart, made a somewhat ostentatious 
 display to Baladan's ambassadors of all his 
 treasures, which lie had proliably recovered from 
 the Assyrians, and much increased with their 
 sjioil. Josejihus (Antiq. x. 2. 2) says that one of 
 tiie objects of the emiiassy was to form an alliance 
 with Hezekiali against the Assyrian empire; and 
 if so, his readhiess to enter into an alliance ad- 
 verse to the tlieocratical ])olicy, and his desire to 
 magnify his own importance in the eyes of the 
 king of Babylon, jirobably furnished the ground 
 of the divine disap])rol)ation witii which his con- 
 duct in this matter was regarded. He vras repri- 
 manded by tlie projihet Isaiah, who revealed to 
 him tlie mysteries oi' the future, so far as to ap- 
 prise him that all these treasures should hereafter 
 be in tlie possession of the Babylonians, and his 
 family and jieople exiles in the land from which 
 these ambassadors came. This intimation was 
 
 HIERAPOLIS. 
 
 received by the king with his usual submisuca 
 to the will of God ; and he was content to kno^f 
 that these evils were not to lie intlicted in hii 
 own days. He has sometimes been blamed foi 
 this seeming indilference to the fate of his suo- 
 cessor-i ; init it is to be borne in mind that at 
 this time he had no chiUiien. This was in 
 the fourteenth year of bis reign, and Manas- 
 seh, his successor, was not born till three years 
 afterwards (2 Kings xx. 12 19; 2 Chron. xxxii. 
 31 ; Isa. xxxix.) The rest of Hezekiah's life 
 aijpf-ars to have been peaceaiile and prosperous. 
 No man before or since ever lived under iht 
 certain knowledge of the precise length of the 
 span of life before him. When the (il'teen years 
 had ex))ired, Hezekiah was gatliered to his fathers, 
 after a reign of twenty-nine years. He died 
 sincerely lamented liy all his people, and the 
 public respect for iiis character and memory was 
 testified by iiis corpse being jilaced in the highest 
 niche of the royal sepulclire (2 Kings xx. 20, 21 
 2 Chron. xxxii. 32, 33). 
 
 HIEL (^"•n, God liveth; Sept. 'Axi^A), a 
 native of Beth-el, who rebuilt Jericho, above 500 
 years after its destruction by the Israelites, and 
 who, in so doing, incurred the effects of the im 
 precation pronounced by Joshua (1 Kings xvi 
 34). 
 
 Accursed tne man in the sight of Jehovah, 
 Who shall arise and build this city, even Jericho j 
 With the loss of his first-born shall he found it. 
 And with the loss of liis youngest shall he fix ill 
 gates (Josh. vi. 2fi). — J. E. R. 
 
 HIERAPOLIS {'Upd-noKis), a city of Pliry 
 gia, not far from Colossee and I^odicea, where 
 tliere was a Christian church under the charge of 
 Epaphros, as early as the time of St. Paul, whfl 
 commends him for his fidelity and zeal (Co'.o* 
 
 839 i^IIiP apo is 1
 
 HIGH PLACES AND GROVES. 
 
 HIGH PLACKS AND GROVES. 819 
 
 IT. 12, 13.) Tne \Aiir.p is visilile from tne theatre 
 at Laodicea fnmi ivliioii it U (ive miles distant 
 iiortliward. 
 
 Smith, ill his j-oirney to the Seven Churches 
 (1671), wtu the first to descrilte the ancient sites 
 in tliis neigliixturliucxl. He was followed hy 
 P.iCiicke af.d Chandler; and more recently hy 
 Richter, Cockerell, Hartley, and Aninih'U. 
 
 The jilacc now bears the name of Pauiliick- 
 kale (Cotton-castle), from tlie white appearance 
 of tlie clilVs of the mountain on the lower sum- 
 mit, or ratlier an extended terrace, on wliicli the 
 mins are situated. It owed its celehrity, and 
 prohaltly (lie sanctify indicated hy its ancient 
 name (Holy City), to its very ieniarkal)le springs 
 of mineral water, the siii;;alar ctlects ol'whicli, in 
 the formation of stalactites and incrustatiojiS hy 
 its deposits, are sliowri in (he accounts of Pocncke 
 (ii. pt. 2, c. I'i) and Cliandler {Asia Minor, c. 
 6S), to have been accurately described by Strabo 
 (xiii. p. 629). A great numl)er and vaiiety of 
 sepulchres are found in the dillerent approaches to 
 the site, wliicli on one side is sufficiently defended 
 l)y th<' precipices overlooking the valleys of the 
 Lycus and iNIajander, while on the other sides the 
 town 'valls are still observable. The magriihcent 
 ruins <learly attest the ancient imjwrtance of the 
 ulace. The maiii street can still lie traced in its 
 whole extent, and is bordered l)y the remains of 
 three Christian churches, one of whicii is up- 
 wards of 300 feet long. About the middle of 
 this street, just above the mineral springs, Po- 
 cocke, in 1741, thouglit that he distinguished 
 eome remains of the Temjile of .Apollo, whicii, 
 according to Dai-iscius, quoted by Photius 
 {Uiblioth. p. lO.ii was in tiiis situation. But 
 file principal ruins are a theatre and gymnasium, 
 both in a state of uncommon preservation; the 
 former 346 (eet in tliaineter, the latter nearly 
 filling a space of 400 feet squaie. Strabo (loc. 
 fit.) and Pliny (Hist. Nat. v. 29) mention a cave 
 called the Plutonium, H'led with pestilential va- 
 pours, similar to the celebrated Grotto del Cane 
 in Italy. High up the mountain-side is a deep 
 recess far into the mountain ; and Mr. Arundel 1 
 says that he should have supposed that tiie 
 mephitic cavern lay in (his recess, if Mr. Cock- 
 erell ha I not found it near the theafie, the position 
 ancieiit! f assigned to it. He adiis that the expe- 
 riments made in this mountain-side recess do 
 not sef *i very conclusive, and conjectures tiiat it 
 may he the same in which Chandler distin- 
 guished the area of a stadium (Arundell, Asia 
 Minor, ii. 210). The same writer gives, from 
 the (Jriens C/iristiamcs, a list of the bishops of 
 Hicra|X)lts down to the lime of the einjieior Isaac 
 Angelus. Fuller accounts o( tlie luins, &c., may 
 be seen in the authors name<l above (comp. also 
 Col. I>iake"s Geogr. of Asia Minor, pp. 253, 
 2i3). 
 
 HIGH PL.\CES AND GROVES. As high 
 places and groves are ahuost constantly associateil 
 in Scripture, it seems undesirable to separate them 
 in our consideration. 
 
 By 'high ]ilac«"s'' (ni03 bamoth) we are con- 
 tent to underst.ind natural or artificial eminences, 
 where worshiji by sacrifice or tillering was made, 
 usually u(«in an altar erected thereon. 
 
 By a 'grove" we understand a jilantatim ol 
 trees around a sp.it in the open air set apart for 
 feurshi]* and otlier sif-rel services, and iherefore 
 
 around or upm the ' hi^h places' which were 
 set apait for the same pui poses. 
 
 In hioking at matters of tl.ii natuix* we are con 
 stantly liable to error, and co(i.-,taiitly do err, froili 
 not taking into account the alteied circumsiiuice* 
 under which the same subject may be brought 
 before us in the comse of a long set ies of age*. 
 Tiius, with rel'eience to the piesent to])ic, it ia 
 manifest that the [latriarchs worshijjied in grovM 
 and upon high places; and iriuch ditliculty liai 
 been felt in reconciling this with the ileep repro- 
 bation with which the piactice is niention»Hi at & 
 later period. It seems to haveoccuned to no on« 
 that the conditions of the question had altered 'n\ 
 the course of ages ; and that what was more an- 
 c ently an indifieiont or laudable custom, had in 
 the lapseof time become, by abuses and coriU|)ting 
 as.sociations, crmiinal and <langerous. , Yet we 
 incline to think that this is tiie real solution of the 
 ditticuliies by which this question has seemed to 
 be siiirounded. 
 
 \^'e h'nd traces of these customs so soon after 
 the deluge, that it is probable they existed ^r/cr 
 to that event. It a]>pears that the fust altar after 
 the ileluge was built by Noah upon the moutitain 
 on whicii the ark rested (Gen. viii. 20). Abiaham, 
 on entering the Promised Land, built an altar 
 upon a mountain l*etween Beth-el and Hai (xii. 
 7, 8). At Beeisheba he planted a grove, and 
 called there upon the tianie of the eveila.-.ting God 
 (Gen. xxi. 3.'>). The same patiiarch was required 
 to 'ravel to the mount Moriah, and tl.eie to oiler 
 iij) his son Isaac (xxii. 2, 4). If was iijxui u 
 mountain in Gilead that JacoLi and Laban olleied 
 saciilices befoie they parted in jieace (xxxi. 51). 
 In fact, such seem to have been the general 
 jilaces of woiship in those times; nor does any 
 notice of a tein|.le, or otlier covered or enclosed 
 building for that purjiose, occiu'. Thus far all 
 seems clear and intelligible. Theie is no reason in 
 the mere natuie of things why a hill or a grov* 
 should be an objectionable, or, indeed, why iw 
 should not be a very suitable, )ilace for wor-hij;. 
 Yet by tlie time the Israelites letiirned fioni 
 Egy|)t, s(inie coirupting cliutige liad taken jluce, 
 which caused them to be ie]ieatedly and stiictly 
 enjoined to oveithrow and destroy tlie high 
 places and groves of the Canaanites wherever 
 they found them (Exod. xxxiv. 13; Deut. vii. 5; 
 xii. 2, 3). That they were not themselves to wor- 
 sliiii the Lord on high places or in groves is ini- 
 jilied in the fact that they were to have liut one 
 altar for regular and constant sacrifice ; and it 
 was expressly enjoined that near this sole altar no 
 trees should be planted (Deut. xvi. 21). 
 
 It is evident fiom tlie prohibition itself that 
 odier nations continued to preserve the pi imeval 
 practice ol' woi»l)ip}iing upon high places and in 
 groves. Among them circumstances had arisen 
 which rendered it inexpediiiit that the piactice 
 should lie continued by the cho.sen people. \\ hat 
 these ciicumst.iiices were we must asceita'n fioni 
 the accounts given by the heathen 1llenl^elves, 
 for the Sciiptiue does not exjilain this matter. 
 And it is impiirtant to observe that the heathe* 
 writeis peifectly agree with Sciipture in de- 
 sciii.iiig hills and gloves as the earliist places o) 
 woiship. 
 
 It is jKissible that the Canaanites had not yet 
 fallen into rank idolatry in the time of Abraham 
 — at least, not into such idolatiies as defiled th» 
 
 3 .
 
 850 HIGH PLACES AND GROVES. 
 
 HIGH I'LACES AND GROVES. 
 
 rery ])'aces in wliich tliey worshipped. We know, 
 at all events, that their iniquity wa^ not lull in 
 those eailiei' times, hut that when the Israelites 
 invaded the land their iniquity was full toovorlli)w- 
 ing. As included in this, we may with toleralde 
 certainty infer that their religion had become so 
 grossly eironeous and im[)ure, that it was nesdi'ul 
 to ))lace under ban even their places of worship, 
 wiiich might otherwise bring the Israelites into 
 danger by the associations which had [lecome con- 
 nected with them. 
 
 The great object of the law was to attach the 
 Israelites to the worship of the One Jehovah, the 
 Creator of heaven and earth, arid to preserve them 
 I'rom the polytheism into which the nations had 
 fallen. Now it is certain that the Canaanites had 
 become jjolyfheistic, and, consequently, that their 
 iiigh places and groves weie dedicated to uiMcrent 
 gods. By continuing or adopting'the use of this 
 custom, tiie Israelites v/ould infallibly liave fallen 
 into the same notions. They would ])vobably have 
 begun by worshipping Jehovah himself under dif- 
 ferent names and attril)utes, which would -even- 
 tually have been erected into distinct gods. Tliere 
 could not be polytheism without idolatry, all but 
 the one Go<l being idols. The one condition, there- 
 fore, involves the other; and injunctions or state- 
 ments beyond this api)ly to the forms which the 
 idolatry iissumed, in the character and attril>utes 
 of the worshi])ped gods. 
 
 The information derivable from heathen wi iters 
 cannot of course ascend beyond the lirsl forms 
 of idolatry ; for, as idolaters, they iiad no notion or 
 tradition of the times when idolatry had no exist- 
 ence. Now, by universal consent, tlie earliest idol- 
 atry was solar and planetary ; the heavenly bodies 
 being worsliipped at first in their natural api)ear- 
 ances, and at length l)y repiesentative lignres and 
 images. It is clear that this was the case among 
 the Canaanites and the other nations with whom 
 the Israelites were brought into contact. And 
 here much might be said of, for miicli is suggssfed 
 by, the sjicrlHce of Balaam, who upon eacli of the 
 nigh places where he sacrificed, built seven altars, 
 and offered seven bullocks and seve7i rams on 
 every altar. Here there was manifestly a poly- 
 theistic it'ference, and the number seven suggests 
 a planetary one ; although Balaam certainly had 
 a historical Unowleilge at least of the true God, and 
 was, after a sort, liis worshiijper. 
 
 As long as the nations continued to worship the 
 heavenly bodies themselves, they worship|jed in 
 the open air, holding that no walls could contain 
 infinitude. Afterwards, when the symbol of Hie 
 or of images brought in the use of teni[)les, they 
 were usually built in groves and upon high places, 
 and sometimes without roofs. Tlie principle on 
 which higli places were preferred is said to have 
 lieen, that they were nearer to the gods, and that on 
 them ])rayer was more accej)table than in the val- 
 leys (Lucian, De Sacrif. i. 4). The ancient writers 
 abound in allusions to this worshi[) of the gods 
 upon the hill-tops; and some of the'r divinities 
 took tlieir distinctive names from the hill on 
 wh'icfi their principal seat of worship stood, sucli 
 as Mercurius Cyllenius, Venus Erycina, Jupiter 
 Capitolinus, &c. To prove facts so well known 
 as tills preference and sj)ec;al appropriation of high 
 places, is scarcely necessary ; but among other 
 authorities the following may be consulted : So- 
 pbociet, Trachin. 1207, 1208} Herod, i. 131; 
 
 Xenopii. Cijrop. viii. 7, p. 500 ; Stral o, xv. i). 732. 
 Ajjpian, Du Bdlo Mithrid § 131. 
 
 Tlie groves which ancient usage had erta- 
 blisiied around fJie places of sacrifice for the sake 
 of shaile and seclusion, idolatry preserved not 
 only for the same reasons, but Ijecause they wer» 
 found convenient for the celebralion of the rite* 
 and mysteries, often obscene and abominable, 
 which were giadually sujjeraddeil. Then the 
 presence of a grove of a particidar species of tree a( 
 the princi|)al seat of the worship of a paiticulai 
 god, wouhl occasion trees of the same k-nd to Ix 
 planteil at other seats of the same worship; whence 
 that kind of tree came to be regartled as sjiecially 
 a])propriate to the particular idol ; and, in prin- 
 cess of time, there was no important tree which 
 had not become the property of some god ot 
 goddess, so that every stranger who ])as8<'d by a 
 sacred grove could determine by the sj)ecies of tre» 
 of which it was composed to what Ciod tli« high 
 place, altar, or temple with which it was connected 
 belonged. To this effect tliere is an interesting 
 passage in the beginning of Pliny's Iwellfh Imok : 
 'Trees were fornrerl y the only temples of the gods j 
 and even now the simple jieasantiy, in imitation 
 of this ancient custom, dedicate to S4>me gml (he 
 linest tree of their district Nor iU> we ourselves 
 adore Vifith move reverence the statues of tiie gods 
 resplendent with ivory and gold, than the siicred 
 giovej and the holy silence which leigns in them. 
 Trees were also anciently, as at jiresent, conse- 
 crated to paiticular ilivinities ; astheesculns to 
 Jove (%tt Jovis esciilns, which seems to have been 
 a kind of oak), the laurel to A]x>lK>, the olive tu 
 Minerva, the niyitle to Venus, the poplar to Her- 
 cules. It is also l)elieved that as the heavens 
 have their projjer and ])eculiar deities, so also 
 the woods have theirs, lieing tlie Fauns, the Syl- 
 vaiis, and certain gotldesses' (doubtless, sncli 
 demi-goddesses as tlie dryades and liauiadry- 
 ades). To this it may be added that groves 
 were enjoined by the Roman law of the twelve 
 tal)h's as pai-t of the public religion. Pliitaich 
 (A'u/Mo, i. (il) calls such groves oActt) Oiciii', 
 'groves of the gods," which lie says Nuiiia fre- 
 quented, an(i thereby gave rise to the story of 
 his intercourse with the goddess Kgeria. In 
 i'acf, a degree of worship was, as Pliny states, 
 transferred to the trees themselve.s. Tbey were 
 sonietimes decked widi ril'bons and rich cloths, 
 lamps were i)laced on theui, the sjioils of eneniifs 
 were hung fiom them, vows were paid to tliem, 
 and their l)ianches were encumlieied with voiive 
 olVerings. Traces of this arborolaliy still exist 
 everywhere, fiutli in Moslem and Christian coun- 
 tries ; and even the Persians, who abhorred 
 images as much as the Hebrews evei' did, ren- 
 dered homage to ceitain trees. The story is well 
 known of the noble plane-tree, near Sardis, liefore 
 which Xerxes halted his army a whole day, while 
 he rendeied homage to it, and hung royal offering* 
 upon its branches (Herod, vii. 31). Tliere is much 
 cur'ous literature connected with tliis subject which 
 we leave untouche<l ; but the reader may consult 
 Sir W. Ouseley's learned dissert.ition or S* red 
 Trees, appendeil to the first volume of his f ravels 
 in the East. 
 
 This statement of the notions connected with re- 
 ligious worship in high places and in gioves seenit 
 amply to support the view we have taken as to tlie 
 nature of the dangers which tlie prohibition of it
 
 HIGH PI ACKS AND GROVKS. 
 
 WU (les;gne<l {o (.ln-iate. Tlic e\|ilarT;ifi(in as to 
 th^ special apjiropiiation of irecs to |).iiii<iilar gods 
 alone snfiices to lliio\i ;i ll()i.<l iiflij^lit upon the 
 injunction to cut dovvn tlio sacn'd gioves of tlie 
 Caiiaaniles; seeing that wiiile these groves re- 
 mained, it u'ouUi l)e iir.po'silile to <liss<iciate the 
 idea of tlie go4 to which the trees had lieen con- 
 gecrated ; and the disgraceful orgies which u ere 
 telehiated und ir their ohseure shaile, woulil alone 
 suffice to exjihiiii the same inJMnction on the 
 fround of tlie holy ahhorrence witli which the 
 icene of such abominations must Ite regarded l)j' 
 One who is of purer eyes than to Ijehold iniquity. 
 The injunctions, however, re?|iecting the iiigh 
 
 E laces and groves were very imiierfectly ohej'ed 
 y tiie Israelites; and their inveterate attaciiment 
 to this mode of vvorsiiip was such that even ])ious 
 kings, who opposed idolatry liy all tlie meaiis in 
 tlieir [lOwer, dared not aliolish tlie high places at 
 which the Lord was worsliipped. And it appears 
 to us likely, that this toleration of an acknow- 
 ledged irregularity arose from the indisposition of 
 the people living at a distance' from the temple to 
 be confined to *he altar which existed there; to 
 their defeiminatljn to have ])laces nearer home for 
 the chief acts of their religion — sacrifice and 
 ofl'.ring ; and to the apjirehension of the kings 
 that if they were prevented from having places 
 for olVerings to the Lord in their own iieighhour- 
 hood, iliey would make the offerings to idols. 
 This view of the case seems to be strongly con- 
 firmed liy tlie fact that we hear no more of this 
 pioiiene<s to worship' in high places and in groves 
 after synagogues and regular relif.'ioMS services 
 had l;een estahlislied in tlie towns and gave suf- 
 ficient o|)i ration to the dis|iosition among men to 
 create a local interest in religious observances. 
 
 It is more ditficult to explain how it ha|)pens 
 (hat, in the face of the jn'ohibition against sacrific- 
 ing at more than one altar, many ])eis<ins of piety, 
 and even jirophet-:, not only did so, Imt, in some in- 
 (tances.tlid so in high places; Gideon. for instance, 
 at OphraJ) (Judg. vi. 25). Manoah in Dan (Judg. 
 xiii. 16-29). Samuel at Mizpeli (1 Sam vii. 10), 
 and at Bethlehem (xvi. 5), Uavid in the threshing- 
 door of Oman (1 Cliron. xxi. 22), and Klij;ili on 
 Mount (3armel (1 Kings xvlii 3o, stj.). It « It, 
 however, lie oliserved that in these cases the jwrties 
 either acted under an immediate command from 
 . God, or were invested witli a general commission 
 of similar force with reference to such transac- 
 tions. As this law more immediately concerned 
 the honour of God, and deiived all its force from 
 his Command, being based on no ol)vious prin- 
 ciple of duty, He und()ul)tedly had a right to 
 suj)ersede it in particular instances, in wliich the- 
 attettdant circumstances and the cimracter of the 
 piirties precluded the |)os>.ihility of the abuses 
 against which it was framed to ^uard. It has 
 also been suggested that greater latitude was al- 
 lowed in this point Ijefove the erect ion of the temple 
 gave to the ritual jjrinciples of the ceremonial 
 law a fixity which they had not j)ie\iously ]i()s- 
 ■essed. This is possible; for it is certain that all 
 the authorized examples occur Itefore it was fjuilt, 
 excepting tliat of Elijali; anil that occurred 
 under circumstances in which the sacrifices could 
 not jxjssibly have taken place at .lerusalem, and 
 in a king tom wheie no authorized altar to Je- 
 brvah then existed. 
 HIGH-PRIEST. [Pkiksts.] 
 
 HINNOM. Ml 
 
 niLKIAH Or\^ji?n; Sept. X*X»fia). Several 
 pei-sons of this name occur in Sciipture, of whom 
 the following are the chief: 1. The father of .Jet^ 
 mlah (.Fer. i. 1). 2. A high-priest in tlw reign of 
 Josias (2 Kings xxii. 4, «, 10). •"!. The fathei 
 of Eliakim (2 Kings xviii. IS, 26; Isa. xxii. 
 20). 
 
 HIN, a Hebrew liquid me;isure [VVisioiits 
 AND Mkasukks.] 
 
 HIND (n^'N ajalah, Gen. xlix. 21; 2 Sam. 
 xxii. 31; Job xxxix. I ; Ps. xviii. U3, &c.). the 
 female of the hart or stag, doe being tlie female o/ 
 the fallow-deer, and roe being sometimes used for 
 that of the roebuck. All the (iemales of tlie 
 
 Cervida; with the exception of the reindeer, are 
 hornless. It may be remarked on Ps. xviii. 33 
 ari<l Hab. iii. 19, where the Lord is said to cause 
 the feet to stand firm like tliose of a hind on high 
 places, that this re])iesentafion is in jieifisct har- 
 mony with the habits of mountain stags: but 
 the version of Prov. v. 19, ' Let the wife of 
 thy bosom be as the beloved hind and favourite 
 roe,' seems to indicate that heie (he w<irds are 
 generalized so as to include under roe mono- 
 gamous species of antelopes, win.se alliL-ctions and 
 consortship are jieimanent and strong; for stags are 
 polygamous. Finally, the emendation of Bochart 
 on the version of Gen. xlix. 21, where for ' Na]ih- 
 tliali is a hind let loose, he giveth goodly words,' 
 he, l)y a small change in the punctuation of the 
 original, ])ro))oses to read ' Naphthali is a spread- 
 ing tree, slio<iting forth beautiful lir.inches,' restore* 
 the text to a consistent meaning, agreeing with the 
 Sept., the Clialdee paraphrase, and the Arabic ver- 
 sion. [Ajai,, Hakt]. — C. H. S. 
 
 HINNOM, or rather Ben-Hinnom (DSH }3 ; 
 Sept. vlov^Evv6ix),M\ unknown person, whose name 
 was given to the valley which bounds Jenrsalem 
 on the north, lielow Muiint Zion, and which in 
 S<-ri()ture is often mentioned in connection wi(o 
 (he horrid rites of Moloch, which under idolatrous 
 kings were there celebrated (Jo.sli. xv. R ; xviiL 
 16; Nell. xi. 30; Jer. vii. 31 ; xix. 2). When 
 Josiah overthrew this idolatr)', he defiled tJ)e 
 valley by casting into it tfie bones of the dead, 
 the greatest of all jKillutions among the Hebrew* : 
 and from that time it l)ecame the common jakea 
 of Jerusalem, into which all refuse of the city wai 
 cast, and where the combustible portions of that
 
 852 
 
 HIRAM. 
 
 refuse were consumed liy fire. Hence it rame to 
 be regarilttil as a sort i)t' type of liell, the (it-lieima 
 of the K ?\v Testament, being no oilier lliaii the 
 name of lliis valley of Hinnom (Ge-Hiiinoni ) ; 
 iee Milt:, v. 22, sq. ; Mark ix. 13 ; Luke vii. 5 ; 
 Jolin iii. 6 [Hades; Jkuusai.em]. 
 
 1. H1R.\M (DTH; Sept. Xeipi^^), king of 
 Tvre at the commencement of Davids reign. 
 He sent an emhassy to lelicitate David on his 
 accession, whicli led to an alliance, or strengthened 
 « previous friendship between them. It seems 
 that the dominion of lliis jjrince extended over 
 the western slopes of LHl)anon; and when David 
 '>uilt himself a palace, Iliram materially assisted 
 the work by sending cedar-wood from Lebanon, 
 and able workmen to Jerusalem (2 Sam. v. ! I ; 
 
 1 Cliron. xiv. !), B.C. 1055. 
 
 2. HIRAM, king of Tyre, son of Abibaal, and 
 grand.ion of the Hiram who was contemporary 
 with David, in the last years of whose reign he 
 asceiiiled the throne of Tyre. Following his 
 grandfather's examjili, he sent to Jerusalem an 
 embassy of condolence and congratulation when 
 David died and Solomon succeeded, and con- 
 tracted with the new king a more intimate 
 alliance than ever before or after existed between 
 a Hebrew king and a foreigri prince. The alliance 
 <eems to have been very substantially beneficial 
 to both ])artie3, and without it Solomon would 
 scarcely have been al)le to realise all tite great 
 designs he had in view. In consideration of 
 large quantities of corn, wii.-e, and oil, fiirnishetl 
 by Solomon, the king of Tyre agreed to supply 
 from Lebanon the timber required for the temple, 
 to lloat it along the coast, and deliver it at Joppa, 
 which was the poit of Jerusalem (1 Kings v. 1, 
 8q. ; ix. 10, sq. ; 1 Chron. ii. 3, sq.). The vast 
 commerce of Tyre made gold very plent^iful there; 
 and Hiram supplied no less than 500 talents to 
 Solomon for the oiTiamental works of the temple, 
 and received in return twenty towns in Galilee; 
 which, when he came to inspec' them, pleased him 
 <H) little, that he applied to them a name of con- 
 tempt, and restoied them to tlie Jewisli king 
 (2 Chron. viii. 2) [Cabui.]. It does not, how- 
 ever, appear that tlie gojd understanding between 
 the two kings was broken by this unple.isant cir- 
 ciunstance ; for it was alter this that Hiram sug- 
 gested, or at least took ))art in, Solomon's traflic 
 to the Eastern seas — which certainly could not 
 have been undertaken by the Hebrew king with- 
 .>ut his assistance in providing ships and expe- 
 riniced mariners (1 Kings ix. 27; x. 11, &c. ; 
 
 2 Chron. viii. ) 8 ; ix. 10, &c.), B.C. 1007 [Opuip. ; 
 Solomon; Phcknicians], 
 
 3. HIRAM, 01 HURAM, son of a widow of 
 the tribe of Dan, and of a Tyrian father. He was 
 Bent by the king of tlie same name to execute 
 the ])rincipal works of the interior of the temple, 
 and the various utensils required for the sacred 
 strvices. We recognise in the enumeration of 
 this man's talents by the king of Tyre a character 
 cimnion in the industrial history of the ancients, 
 namely, a skilful artificer, knowing all the arta, 
 i,r a'- least many of those arts which we practise, 
 Ml their difierent branches [Hanuicuaft]. It is 
 iiiobable that he was selected for this purpose by 
 JiC king from among others equally gifted, in 
 ihe notion that his half Hebrew blood would 
 tender him the more acceptable at Jerusalem 
 
 HISTORY. 
 
 HISTORY. Under this term we Ure intend 
 
 to give, not a narrative of the leading event* 
 det.iiled in the Bihle, but such geiieral remarki 
 oil the Biblical history as may enHblt the reader 
 to estimate the comparative value, and apply 
 for information (o the proper source?, of historical 
 knowledge, as ))iesented in or tleduced from tha 
 .sacred records. Tiie (juestion of insjiiiation we 
 heve leave untouched, because it is one of a 
 dogmatical iiatuie, which vv'ill be fully discussed 
 in a separate article. The hisJorical books 
 that are contained in tlie Bible pass, tlierefore, 
 imder review as other historical documents, and 
 are subjected to the same rules of criticism as 
 those which are applied to the productions of 
 profane v/ritei-s. And if Ihe believer should, in 
 consequence, find himself for a moment dejjrived 
 in imagination of a basis of reliance, he will be 
 repaid by the fact that, while he thus meets the 
 unbeliever on his own ground, he is enabled, by 
 the apjilication of recognised principles of his- 
 torical criticism, to prove beyonil a question that 
 no history in existence can compare with the 
 Biblical history either in age, credibility, value, 
 or interest. 
 
 The sul-ject-matter contained in the Biblical 
 history is of a wide and most extensive nature. 
 In its greatest length and fullest meaning it comes 
 down from the creation of the world till near the 
 close of the first century of the Christian era, thus 
 covering a sjiace of some 4000 years. The liooks 
 presenting this long train of historical details are 
 most diverse in age, in kind, in execution, an<l in 
 wortli ; nor seldom is it the fact tliat the modem 
 historian has to construct his narrative as much 
 out of the implications of a letter, the highly 
 coloured materials of ])oetry, the far reacliiug 
 visions of prophecy, and the indirect and allusive 
 information of didactic and moral precc])ts, as 
 from the immediate and express statements of liis- 
 tory strictly so denominated Tiie history of 
 Herodotus, embracing as it does most of the world 
 known at his time, and passing, under the leading 
 of a certain thread of events, from land to land, — 
 this history, with its n'aive, graphic, gossip, and 
 travelier-like narratives, interweaving in a gu;> 
 cession of fine old taj^estries many of the great 
 events and moving scenes which had, up to his 
 time, taken place ou the theatre of the world, 
 presents to the intelligent reader a continuatiou 
 of varied gi-aiilications. l?ut even the history of 
 Herodotus must yield to that contained or im])lied 
 in the Bible, not merely in extent of compass, 
 but also in variety, in interest, and beyond all 
 comparison, in grandeur, importance, and moral 
 and spiritual significance. The children of the 
 faithful Al)raiiam seem to have had one great 
 work of Providence intrusted to them, namely, 
 the development, transmission, and infusion into 
 Ihe world of the religious element of civiliza- 
 tion. Their history, accordingly, is the history of 
 the rise, progress, and ditl'usion o( true religion, 
 considered in it^ Hiurce and its developments. 
 Such a historv must ])osses8 large and |)eculiar 
 interest for every student of human nature, and 
 jire-eminetitly for those who love to study the un- 
 foldings of Providence, and desire to learn that 
 greatest of all arts — the art of living at once for 
 time and for eternity. 
 
 The Jewisii history contained in the Bible em- 
 braces moie and less than the histury of tit*
 
 HISTORY 
 
 HISTORY. 
 
 SOJ 
 
 laraelites ;— more, since it begins with the l)egin- 
 nirm of the eartli and narrates with extraor(liiiary 
 brevity events wiiicli iiuirkeJ tlie jierinJ t«'rnii- 
 nated by the (lood, jjoing on till it intiodiices us 
 to Abraham, the piitnoj^fnitoroC the Helirew race ; 
 less, since, even with the assistance of tlie poetical 
 books, its nairaiivt's <lo not come down to a later 
 date than some 600 years before the birth of 
 Chiist. The historical materials furnished re- 
 lating to tiie IIel)iew nation may be divided into 
 three great divisions: 1. Tlie books whicii are 
 consecrated to the antiquity of the Helirew nation 
 — the {jeriod that elapsed before the era of the 
 
 C'ges. These works are tlie Hentateucii and the 
 k of Joshua, wliioh, according to Ewald (Ge- 
 schichte des Vvlkes Israel, i. 72), pro])erly con- 
 stitute only one work, and which may be termed 
 the great book of original documents. 2 The 
 books which describe the times of the judges and 
 the kings up to the first destruction of Jerusalem ; 
 tnat is, Judges, Kings, and Samuel, to which 
 belongs the book of Rutii ; ' all these," says Kwald, 
 * constitute also, according to their last formation, 
 but one work, which may be called tlie Great 
 Book of Kings.' 3. The third class comprises 
 the books included under the head of Hagio- 
 grapha, which are of a much later origin. Chro- 
 nicles, with Ezra and Neheiniah, fiiiming the 
 great book of general history re.iching to the 
 Grecian period. After these bo;)ks come those 
 which are classed together under tlie name of 
 A|)Ocrypiia, whose use in this country we think 
 unduly neglected. Then the circle of evangelical 
 records begins, which clused within the century 
 that saw it open. Other books fouml in the Old 
 an.l New Testaments, which are not properly of a 
 hielorical character, connect themselves witli one 
 or other of tliese periods, and give important aid 
 to students of sacred history. 
 
 Bit)licai history has nut iiitherto been satis- 
 factorily treated. Particular ])arts of it may imleed 
 nave received the kind and de^-ree of attention 
 required, liul most writers who have treated that 
 history as a whole have been swayed, some by 
 one, some by anoiher warping influence, so that the 
 Bible has be?n made to sp<-ak the most diverse 
 tongues, now in favour of a naturalism whicli 
 finds an impossibility in every miracle, and now 
 in favour of a mysticism which sees a great s)ii- 
 rllual secret in every fact, if not in every letter. 
 It is useless indeed to expect that men will not be 
 inlluenced by their pre-conceptions ; but they 
 cannot lie justified, when they ])rofess to write 
 history, in ascribing their opinions and forcing 
 their views on writers who lived thousands of 
 years before them, and with whose modes ot think- 
 ing anil manner of wri'ting thev have not much in 
 common. History and the jjhilosophy of history, 
 the history ol' fact and the history of ojiinion, the 
 statement of what men have done, said, and thought, 
 and tlie discujsion of wliat is true and proj)er, are 
 two dltVerent anil very distinct departments of 
 knowledge and art, the confounding of which must 
 kail to ])e'plexity and may involve us in serious 
 "uor. Toe projjer way to treat of biblical his- 
 tory is what we may term the historical (in other 
 words the chronological) deduction of the fiicts 
 pieseiiteil, as tiiese facts were seen, believed, and 
 recorded by th(! several writers. An historian of 
 tiie Hebrews should as far as p<)ssil)le place liim- 
 Mslf and aim to place tlie mind of his readers, in 
 
 the centrc'of the mind of each biblical hiatorian, 
 in order that, by seeing as the Hebrew saw, he 
 may. aided by skill and light whiili the Hebrew 
 did not and could not ]K)ssess, present a vivid 
 picture of the several jieriods that are paiseil in 
 review. These remarks are not intended to be 
 taken so iis to exclude the exercise of criticism on 
 authorities anil alleged facts; but it must be his- 
 torical not philosophical criticism — ciitici-in 
 whose implements, processes, and spiiit, are Imr- 
 rowed from philology, which is the liand-maid of 
 history, not the crucible of modern anti-sujier- 
 naturalisin, which, starting from a preconcei •. ed 
 notion, some persons would say, a huge, dark 
 falseh(K)d, tries to extinguish every ray of hea 
 venly light which may struggle amid the dark- 
 ness of earth, and to make history as ray less 
 and dull as itself. Philosophy has its own 
 sphere, in which we have no desire to give 
 it disturbance, but we do object to its attempt- 
 ing to pass otf its own offsj)ring as pure historical 
 results. 
 
 Biblical history was often treatetl by the older 
 writers as a part of church history in gene- 
 ral, as they considered the history given in the 
 Bible as presenting ditl'eient and succe-ssive 
 phases of the church of God (Bndilei Hist Iicclea. 
 2 vols. 172()-29; Stolberg, Geschichte der Reli- 
 (jioii Jesit, i. 111). Other writers have viewed 
 this subject in a more practical light, presenting 
 the characters found in ihe Bible for imitation or 
 avoidance ; among whom may be enumeiated 
 Hess (^Geschichte der Israelilen vor den Zeiteii 
 Jesii). Hess also wrote a history of Jesus (^Ge- 
 schichte Jesu ; Ziiiich, 1775) ; but the best work 
 is a more recent, and a very valuable one, by 
 Niemeyer (^('haracteristik der Bibel, Halle, 
 ISiJO). Among the moie strictly learned writers 
 sev e;al have had it in view to supply the gaps 
 left in the succession of events by the Bible, out 
 of sources found in profane writers. Heie the 
 chief authors aie of English biith, namely, Pri- 
 deaux, Shuck ford, Russell ; and for the Mew 
 Testament, the learned, cautious, and fair-deal- 
 ing Lardner [Chkonoi.ooy]. There is a valu- 
 able work l)y G. Langen: Versxtcheiner Hariuonie 
 dtr heilii/en uiid profan scrih. in der Geschichte 
 der ]\\-/i. Bayieuth, 1775-80. Jahn. in his Uib. 
 Archiiolof/ie, has, according to Gesenius (art. ' Bib. 
 fJescliichte" in ErschandGruber s.-lZAjr. /;«c.),made 
 free use of Prideaux. Other writers have ])ur8ued 
 a strictly chronological method, such as Usher 
 [ Aiinales Vet. N. T. London, 1650), and D« 
 Vignoles (Chronologie de I' Hist. Sainte, Berlin, 
 1 7-)8). Heeren (^llandh. der Geschichte, p. 50) 
 recommends, as containing many valuable in- 
 quiries on the monarchical period, the following 
 work : J. Hernhardi Cumincntntiu de caiisis qtti- 
 bus effectum sit utregnum Judee diutius persiste- 
 ret quam rcgniim Israel, Lovanni, 1825. Heeren 
 also declares that Bauer's Hundhuch der Ge- 
 schichte des II. Volks, I SOU, is the best intro- 
 duction both to the history and the antiquities of 
 the Hebrew nation ; thou|jrh Gesenius com|)lains 
 that he is tix) much given to the construction of 
 hypotheses. The English reader will lind a use 
 fill but not siilliciently critical compendium in 
 The History of the Hebreio Commomcealtk, trans- 
 lated from the German of John Jahn, D.IX 
 A far more valuable as well as more interesting^ 
 yet by no means faultlesa work, is Milmau'i
 
 854 
 
 HISTORY. 
 
 HISTORY 
 
 Hutory of the Jeics, pnljlislied originally in 
 Miiiiay'g Family Library. A more recent and 
 very valuultle work, Kitto's Pictorial History of 
 Palestine, Is41, combines with the Bihle liistory 
 of the Jews tl)e results of travel and antiquarian 
 researcli, and ia (ireceded hy an elaborate Intro- 
 duction, which forms tlie only Natural History 
 of Palestine in our language. 
 
 German tlieologians are strongly imbued with 
 llie feeling tliat the liistory of the Hel)rew3 lias 
 yet to be written. Niebuhr's manner of treating 
 Roman history has had a great iuHuence on them, 
 and has aroused the theological world to new 
 eflort?, which liave by no means yet come to an 
 end ; nor can we add that they have hitherto led 
 to very delinite and generally aj)]iroved results. 
 The works of Jost (Cesch. d. Israel, s. d. Zeit. 
 der Maccab. 1820-9), and Nork (Das Leben 
 Mosis aus Astron. Stand, betrachiet, 1838), and 
 otliers, must not lie overlooked by the professional 
 student ; nor will he fail to study with care the 
 valual)le introductions to the knowledge of the 
 Old Te3ran-.cnt put forth in Germany, with ■nlii<;h 
 we have nothing compKiable in our language : 
 among these introclucticns we can confidently 
 recommend — Eirdcitinia in d'.is alia Test, von 
 I. G. Kichhorn (a work which form*; an epoch); 
 Lehrbuch der Hist. Krit. Einleit. in die Biicher 
 des A. Test, von W. M. L. de Wette, 5th edit. 
 1840 and llatidb. der Hist. Krit. Einkit. in das 
 alte Testament, von H. A. Ch. Hiiveriiick, 1806; 
 in which last work a more full and thorough 
 treatment of the subject may be foontl. Of the 
 more recent works we may mention Stiihelins 
 Kritischc Untersuvhinigcn uber der Pentateuch, 
 he. 1813; and H. Ewald's Geschichfc des Volkes 
 Israel bis Christus, Eister Band, 1813. Some- 
 thing worth notice may also be found in De Anno 
 llebraorum Jxihilceo, scripsit J. T. K. KranoUl. 
 Ewald intends his present work to be a complete 
 history of the Israelites, and considers it as a con- 
 tinuation of his Die Propheten des Alten Blendes, 
 1840. We have not space to give an account 
 here of the views which tliese writers ])ut forth, and 
 we mean our recommendation of them to extend 
 only to the calm, dignified, an<l ))rofoundly 
 learned manner in which they handle their sub- 
 ject, subjoining that works like these must even- 
 tually produce a great inlluence in the theological 
 world. 
 
 Th'" sources of Biblical history are cliiefly the 
 Biblica books themselves. Any attempt to fix 
 the precise value of these sources in a critical 
 f'Oint of view would require a volume instead of 
 an article. Whatever hypothesis, however, may 
 eventually be hehi touching the exact time when 
 these books, or any of them, were ])ut into tlieir 
 a'.'tual shape, as also toucliing the materials out 
 of which they were formed, one thing apjiears 
 very certain, that (to take an instance) Genesis, 
 the earliest book (jnoliahl y ), contains most indu- 
 Litalile as well as most interesting historical facts; 
 for thouifh the age, tlie mode of life, and the state 
 of f uliufe dilfer so widely fiom our own, we can- 
 not do otherwise than feel that it is among men 
 and women, parents antl children — iielngs of like 
 passions with ourselves, — and not with mere 
 *realio:i3 of f mcy or fraud, that we converse when 
 we peruse the narratives which this composition 
 has so long ))reserved. The conviction is much 
 •trenglliened in die mind.s v( those who, by i^er- 
 
 8ona1 acquaintance wi'h the early profane writp»^, 
 are alje to compare their productions with those 
 of the Hebrews, which were long anterior, and 
 must, had they been of an equally earthly origin, 
 have been at least, tqually <ieformed by fable. 
 The sole comparison of the account given in 
 Genesis of the cieation of the world with the Cos- 
 mogonies of heathen writers, whether Hindoo, 
 Greek, or Latin, is enough to assure the imjiailia) 
 reader that a ])urer, if not a higher inlluence, pre- 
 sided over the composition of Genesis, than that 
 whence proceeded the legends or the jihilosophies (.1 
 heathenism ; nor is the conclusion in the slightest 
 degree weakeneil in the writer's mind by any dis- 
 crf])ancy which modern science may seem to show 
 as between its own discoveries and the statements 
 in Genesis. The Biblical history, as fiund in its 
 Biblical sources, has a decided peculiarity and a 
 great recommendation in the fact that we can 
 trace in the Bible more clearly and fully than in 
 connection with anv other history, the (irst crude 
 elements and the early materials out of which all 
 history must be constructed. How far the litera- 
 ture supplied in the Bible may be only a relic of 
 a literary cyclus called into being hy the felici- 
 tous circumstances and favoural)le constitution of 
 the great Shemitic limily, but which hasjierished 
 in the lapse of ages, it is now ini])ijssihle to deter- 
 mine; but had the other jxirtions of this imagined 
 literature been of equal reliyious- \'ii\ue witli what 
 the Bible oilers, there is little risk in aflirming 
 that mankind would scarcely have allowed it to 
 be lost. The Bible, however, bears traces that 
 its were not the only books current in the time 
 and country to which it rela'es; for writing, 
 wi iters, and books are mentioneil with'.iut the 
 emphasis and distinction which always accom- 
 jiany new discoveries or jieciiliar local cosse.ssions, 
 and as ordinary, well-krmwn, and matter-of-conise 
 things. And it is ceitain that we do not possess 
 all the wdiks which were known in the early 
 periods of Israelite history, since in Numbers 
 xxi. 14 we read of' the book of the wars of the 
 Loril.' and in Joshua x 13, of 'the liook of Jiisher.' 
 Without writing, hi.-'^3ry, projjerly so called, ran 
 have no existence. Under the hrad V\ riting we- 
 shall trace the early rudiments anil ;:;()gress of 
 that imi)ortant art : here we merely rtmaik that 
 an acquaintance with it was ]iossessed by the 
 Hebrews at least as early as their Exoiliis from 
 Egypt — a fact v.hicli sh<iws at least the possibility 
 that liic age of the Biblical records stai;ils some 
 thousivnd years or more [Chuonoi.ooy] prior to 
 the earliest Greek historian, Herodotus. 
 
 There is another fact whicli has an important 
 bearing on the worth and credibility of the Bib- 
 lical narratives, namely, that the people of which 
 iliev sjnak v^ere a comtnemorative race, weie, in 
 other words, given to create and preserve nie- 
 morials of inqiortaiit evenls. Even iii the ])atri 
 archal times we find monuments set up in order 
 to commemorate events. Jacob (Gen. xxviii. 
 18) 'set up a pillar "to ])eriietuate the memory of 
 the divine promise; and that these moniunents 
 ha<l a religious import and sanction a]ipears from 
 the statement that ' he poured oil upon tiie top of 
 the ))illar ■ (see (>en. xxxi. 45; .losh. iv. 9; 1 
 8am. vii. 12; Judg. ix. 6), Long-lived trees, 
 such as oak and terebinth, were made use of ai 
 remembrancers (Gen. xxxv. 4 ; Josh xxiv. 36). 
 Conimemoiative names, also, were given to per-
 
 HISTORY. 
 
 lins, jiUws, ancl things; and frnn '*ie earliest 
 peiioils it was Ubual to substitute a new and de- 
 «cii|)tive for an cild name, wliicli may i" its oiijjin 
 have lieeii desciiptive tuo (Kxod. ii. 10; (jeii. 
 ii. 23; iv. I). Gt"neal(>j;iial tulilts appear, 
 moreover, to have had a very early existence 
 among tlie peoi'le of wjjom tiie Bilile speaks, 
 being carefully preserved first inemorifer, aCter- 
 1 tvards by writins,', among family treasure.*, and 
 thus transmitteil from age to age. These, indeed, 
 OS migiit in: ex()ecttHl, apjjear to liavebeeti tlie (irst 
 beginnings of iiistory — a fact which is illustrated 
 and confirmed by the way in whicli what we 
 sluiuld term a narrative or historical sketch is 
 spoken of iu the Bible, that is, as ' the Ixiok oi' 
 the generation' ('i;f Aiiam,' Gen. v. I) : a mode of 
 speaking wliich is applied even to the account of 
 the creaiio«» (Gen. ii. 4), ' tliese aie the genera- 
 tions of the heavens and the eaitii wiien they wei-e 
 created.' Tiie genealogical tables hi the Bible 
 (speaking generally) are nut otdy of a very early 
 date, but are free from the mixtures of a theo- 
 gonical aiid cosmogouical kiiid which are found 
 ill tiie early literature of otiier primitive nations, 
 wearing the appearance of being, so far at least 
 as they go, true and complete lisls of individual 
 and family descent (Gen. V. I). But, (jeriiaps, 
 the most remarkable fact connected with this sub- 
 ject is the employment of poetry at a veiy e<irly 
 period to peri)etuate a knowledge of histoiical 
 events. Kven in Gen. iv. 23, in I he case of La- 
 mecli, we find [K>etry thus employed, tiiat is, by the 
 great-grandson of the primitive father. Other 
 instances may be Hiund in Exod. xv. ; Judg. v.; 
 Josh X. 13; 2 Sam. i 18. This early use of 
 poetry, wh~ch must be regarded as a consider- 
 able step iu civilization, implies a still earlier 
 pre-existent cullrue; confutes the notion that 
 human society began with a ]ieriod of barbarism ; 
 tooks favourably on the hyjKithesis that language 
 had an immediately divine origin ; exj)lodes the 
 position tiiat the Heluews were at first aii ignorant, 
 untutored, aaid unlettered race ; and creates a 
 |.re8umj)fion on belialf of their historical literature. 
 Poetry is a good veliicle for I lie transmission of 
 great leading facts ; for, though it may throw over 
 fact a colourijig borrowed from the imagination, 
 yet tlie form in which it ap])ears gives warning 
 that sue!) hues aiv upon its details, which hues, 
 besides being themselves a sjiecies of history, are 
 then easily removed, while tlie form shuts up and 
 holds in the facts intrusted to the custody of 
 vei-se, and so transmits them to posterity without 
 additions and without loss. By means of these 
 sev^al forms of commemoration much knowledge 
 would he preserved from generation to generation, 
 and to their existence from the first may we 
 ascribe tlie brief, but still valuable, notices which 
 the Bible presents of the primitive ages and con- 
 dition of the world. 
 
 Other sources for at least the early Biblical 
 tiistory are comjiaratively of small value. Jo- 
 ■ephus has gone over flie same j>eriods as the 
 Bible treats of, but obviously had no sources of 
 consequence relating to primitive times which 
 are not op3u to us. and in regard to those limes 
 does little more than add here and there a patch 
 of a legendary or traditional hue wliich could 
 have been well siawd. His GreeV; and Roman 
 prt'lilections and iiis apologetical aims detract 
 from his value, while iu relation to the early his- 
 
 IlISTORY. 
 
 S&5 
 
 tory of his country he can berecarded in no ottier 
 light than a sort of philosophical interpietei ; nor 
 is it till he roines to his own age that lie huji the 
 value of an indrjK'nKlent (not e\ en then an im- 
 (tartial) eye-witness or well-inftiimed reporter. 
 In historical criticism and linguistic know'edge 
 he was very insulhcieiitly f\nnish<tl. The use of 
 Itotii Jdspplius and Pliilo is far molt; safe for the 
 student of the New Testament than for the «• 
 pounder of the oKl. 
 
 The Talmud an<l the Ridibins afl'old very little 
 assistance for the early |;er o<ls, but might pro- 
 bably be made to render more service in behalf 
 of the times of the Sa\ iour thaJi has been trene- 
 rally allowed. The illustrations w;..;li Ligbtlijot 
 and Wetstein have drawn from these souices are 
 of great value; and Gfioicr, in his Jalivhioidcrl 
 </<?s //t'(7s (Stuttgart, 1838), has made an ample 
 use of the materials they supply in order to draw 
 a picture of the (irst century, a use wliich the 
 learned author is at no small |>ains to justify. 
 The compilations of the Jewish doctors, luiwever, 
 require to be employed vii\\\ the gieatest caution, 
 since the Rabbins were the ilepositaiies, the ex- 
 poundei-s, and the apologists of that coirupt form 
 of the primitive faith and the Mosaic institutions 
 which has been called by the distinctive name of 
 Judaism, which comprisc<l an heterogeneous 
 mass of talse and true things, the coUuvies of the 
 East as well as light from the Bible, and which, 
 to a great extent, lies under the express con- 
 demnation of Christ himself. How easy it is to 
 proiia^Hte fables on their authority, and to do a 
 disservice to the Gosjiel records, may be learnt 
 from the fact that older writers, in their undue 
 trust of Riibbinical authority, went so far as to 
 maintain that no cock was allowed to be kept in 
 Jerusalem because fowls sciatche<l unclean things 
 out of the earth, though the authority of Scripture 
 (which in the case they refused to admit) is most 
 express and decide<l (Matt. xxvi. 34; Mark jfiv. 
 30, fiO, 72). On the credibility of the R;ibbin8 
 see Ravii Diss. Phil. Theol. de co quod Fidei 
 tncrcftd/r, etc. in Oelrich's CoUect. (Jpusr. Hist. 
 Phil. Theol. ; Wolf, Bibl. Hebr. ii. lt)95 ; Fa- 
 bricius, Bibliog. Anliq. i. 3, 4; Bruiismann, Z)tsa. 
 de Jtidaica levitate, Hafniae, 1705. 
 
 The classic authors l>etiay the grossest igno- 
 rance almost in all cases where they treat of the 
 origin and history of the Hebrew jieople ; and 
 e\en the most serious and generally philosophic 
 writers fall into vulgar errors and unaccountable 
 mistakes as soon as they sjieak on the subject. 
 What, for instance, can be worse than the blunder 
 or prejudice of Tacitus,under the influenceof which 
 he declared that the Jews derived their origin froiTi 
 Mount Ida in Crete ; that by the advice of an 
 oracle they had been driven out of Egy])t , and 
 that they set up in their temple at Jerusalem na 
 an object of worship the figure of an ass, since an 
 animal of that sjiecies had directed them in the 
 wiliierness and discovered to them a fountain 
 (Tacit. Ihst. V. 1,2). l)ionCa.ssius(xx.\vii. 17) 
 relates similar fables. Plutarch ( ^<tfs^. Sym- 
 pos. iv. 5) makes the Hebrews jiay divine honoiira 
 to swine, as being flu ir instructors in agriculture, 
 and affirms that they kept the Sabbath and the 
 Feast of Tabernacles in honour c.f Bacchus. A 
 coll«!ctioii of these gross misrepiesentation.s, to- 
 gether with a profound and successful inquiry 
 into tlieir origin, and a full exposure cf theii fal«»-
 
 856 
 
 IIITTITES. 
 
 HOBAB. 
 
 iuio<l, iiiav he found in a pajier by Dr. J. (>. 
 Mikller, rt-cently jjiiblUlied in the Tkeologtsche 
 Studien und Kritiken (1843, Viertes Heft. p. 
 S<)3).— J R. B. 
 
 IIITTITES (D^nn ; Sept. XerToi'oO, or 
 slii'.ilren of Iletli, one of tlie tribes of Cuiiaanlles 
 *hicli occupied Palestine l)efore the Jsraelites 
 ,;Gen. XV. 20; Exod. iii. 8; xxiii. 23). Tliey 
 lived in and about Hebron ; and Abraliain, when 
 lie aliode in tliat neighbom-hood, was treated by 
 them witii ies])ect and consideration (Gei7. xxiii. 
 3-7, 11, I;i). This intimacy led to Esau's mar- 
 riaji;e uito two women of th s nation, to the grief 
 and annoyance of his parents (Gen. xxvi. 31, 35 ; 
 xxxvi. 2). Tiie Hitlifes are described in Num xiii. 
 29. alou;^ with tiie Amorites, as 'iluelling- in fiie 
 mountains,' tliat is in whiit were aftoi wards called 
 * the mountains of Judah,' of whicii Hebron was 
 the chief town. Uriah, who had the high honour 
 of l)eing om of David's tiiirty ' worthies,' and, 
 unba])pily for lii:n, the liusband of Bathslieba, is 
 called a Hiltite (2 Sam. xi. 3, 6; I Kin^;^s ix. 
 20). He was, doubtless, a proselyte, and pro- 
 bably descended from several generatioT!? of jiro- 
 ^elytes ; buttiie fact shows that Canaanitis!) blood 
 was in itself no bar to advancement in the court 
 and army of David. Solomon subjeciad the re- 
 maining Hittites tx) tlie same lrit)ute of bond- 
 service cis the otlier remnants of the Canaanite 
 nations (1 Kings ix. 20). Of all iliese tfie Hit- 
 tites appear to have been (he most important, 
 anil to liave l)een under a ki;ig of their o.vn : 
 for ' tlie kings of the Hittites' are, in 1 Kings 
 X. 29, coupled with the kings of Syria as j)iir- 
 chasers ol" the chariots which Solonuin inipoited 
 from Egypt. VVe miglit have sujiposed tliaf this 
 was some dilTerent division of the Hittite family 
 living far away somewhere in tlie north. But 
 in 2 Kings vii. 6 we find that wiien the Syrians, 
 besieging Samaria, heard the soiuid of advancing 
 chariots, they concluded that tlie king of Israel 
 (Joiam I.) had liired against them ' tlie kings 
 of the Hittites and the kings of the Egyptians.' 
 Now tlie mention of the Egyptians shows that 
 the noise came from the south, from which quarter 
 it seems they and the Egyptians were the only 
 people who could lie expected to make an attack 
 with chariots. Tiiis identifies them with the 
 southern Hivites, who weie subject to the sceptre 
 of Judah, anel it shows also that it was they 
 who purchaseil Egy])tiaii chariots from the factors 
 of Solomon. The Hittites were still jjresent in 
 Palestine a-; a distinct people after the Exile, 
 and are named among the alien tribes with whom 
 the returned Israelites contracted those mar- 
 riages which Eiia 'n'ged. ami Neliemlah com- 
 pelled, them to dissolve (Kzra ix. 1, &c. ; comp. 
 Nell. xiii. 23-28^. After this we hear no more of 
 the Hittites, who jirobably lost their national 
 identity l>y intermixture with the neighbouring 
 tribes or nations. 
 
 HIVITES ("'•"in; Sept. Eia/oi), one of the 
 nations of Canaan which occupied Palestine be- 
 fore the Israelites (Gen. X. 17; Exod. iii. 8, 17; 
 xxiii. 23; .losli iii. 10). They occupied the 
 northern and north-eastern part of the country. 
 In Judg. iii. 3, it is stated that ' the Hivites 
 dwelt in Moimt Hernion, Irom Mount Baal- 
 nennon unto the entering in of Hamath ;' and in 
 Joth, xi. 3, the Hivites are described as lijing 
 
 ' under Hermon in the land of Miz[)en.* Th« 
 ' cities of the Hiviies' are mentioned in 2 Sam. 
 xxiv. 7, and, from being associated with Sidon and 
 Tyie, must have lieen in the north-west. A rem- 
 nant of the nation still existed in (he time of 
 Solomon, who subjected their* to a (ril)ufe o( per- 
 sonal labour, with the remn.mfs of other Cunaaiii- 
 tisli nations wlilch tlie Israelites had be«i unable 
 to expel (1 Kings ix. 20). A colony of this tribe 
 was also found in Northern Palestine, occupying 
 the towns of Gideon, Chepliirah, Beeroth, and 
 Kirjath-jearim : and these obtained froai Joshua 
 a treaty of peace by stratagem (Josh. ix. 3-17; 
 xi. I'J). 
 
 HOBAB, kinsman of Mo.>es and priest of 
 prince (for the word ]n3 caiiies Iwitii significa- 
 tions) of Midian, a tract »)f country in Arabia 
 Petraea, on the eastern bordei' of the Red Sea, at 
 no great distance from Mouit .Sinai. The family 
 of this individual seems to have observed (he 
 worship of the true Goil in common widi the 
 Hebrews (Exod. xviii. 11, 12); and from this 
 circumstance some su)>jx)9e it (o have been a 
 branch of the posterity of Midian, iburth son of 
 Abraliam, by Keturah ; while others, (m the con- 
 trary, maintain that the aspersion cast upon 
 Moses for iiaving married a Cushite is inconsistent 
 with the idea of its genealogical descent from that 
 jiatriarcli (see Calmet). 
 
 Considerable ditliculty has been felt in deter- 
 mining who this {lerson was, as well as his exact 
 relation to Moses ; for the word ^Pn, which, in 
 Exod. iii. 1, Num. x. 2!', Judg iv. 11, is trans- 
 lated father-in-law, and in Gen. xix. 14, son- 
 in-law, is a term of indeterminate signification, 
 denoting simply relationship by marriage; and 
 besides, the transaction which in one place (Exod. 
 xviii. 27) is relateil of Jethro, is in another related 
 of Hobab. The probability is, that as forty years 
 had elapsed since Moses' connection with thki 
 family was formed, his father-in-law (Exod. ii. 18) 
 Reiiel or Raguel (the same word in the original is 
 used in botli places) was. dead, or confined to his 
 tent by the inliimities of age, and that the person 
 who visitetl Mo.ses at the foot of Sinai was his 
 brother-in-law, called Hobab in Num. x. 29, 
 Juilg. iv. 11 ; Jethro in Exod. iii. 1 ; and '•J''p in 
 Judg. i. 16, which, in chap. iv. 11, is rendered 
 improperly 'the Kenite.' 
 
 About a year alter the Exodus he paid a visit 
 to Mo-e.s, while the Hel)rew camp was lying in 
 the environs of Sinai, bringing with liim Zip];orah, 
 Moses' wife, who, together with her two sons, had 
 been left witli her family while her hnshand was 
 absent on his embassy 'o Pharaoh. The inter- 
 view was on both sides atfeclii'iiate, and was cele- 
 brated fir.jt by the solemn riles of religion, and 
 afterward.: by feslivitiei, of wliich .\aroii and the 
 elders of Israel were invited to partake. On thts 
 following day, observing M.ises incessantly occu- 
 pied in deciding causes that u eie submitted to him 
 for judgment, his exjjeiieiiced kinsman remon 
 stratcd with him on the sjieedy exhaustion which 
 a perseverance in such arduous labo'irs would 
 su]ierinduce ; and iii order to reliine hiin.><elf. iA 
 well as .--ecure a due attention to evfrv case. ii« 
 urged Moses to appoint a number of »iiil)oidiiiat* 
 officers to divide with him tJie duty ol' f' e judi- 
 cial tribunals, with power to deciile in all coniinotj 
 affairs, while the weightier and more sei iou< 
 matters were reserved to himself. T.^is wise sujf
 
 HOBNIM. 
 
 gestioi the Ileliiew legislator ado.itjed (Exod. 
 xviii.';, 
 
 Wlien the Ilehrews weie piei)ariiig to decainp 
 from Sinai, the kinsman of Al.ist', :innoiinccd his 
 intention to letiiin to ills invn tenitury ; but if 
 he did cany tiiat purpose into execuli.m, it was 
 13 opjjosition to tlie in-;^ent solicitations of tlie 
 Jew isl I leader, who entreated lilm, for iiis own ad- 
 vantage, to cast in his lot with the jjeo])!'- of (iod ; 
 at all events to continue with tiiem, and afford 
 tliem the henelit of his tiiorongli acipiaiiitance with 
 the wilderness. ' Leave us not, 1 pray thee,' said 
 Muses, ' forasinucii as thou knowest how we are to 
 encamp in the wilderness, and tliou maycst be to 
 iis instead of eyes ;' which the Septuagint has 
 rendereil koX far] iy i;/uii/ Trpetr/SuTT)? — ' and tiiou 
 Boait be an elder amongst us.' But there can be 
 little doubt that the true meaning is tliat Hoiiab 
 might jjerform the otlice of a liyl)eer or guide 
 [Caiiwan] — liis inliueiice as an Arab chief, liis 
 knowledge of the routes, thesitiiatiou of tlie wells, 
 the places for fuel, t!ie prognostics of tlie weather, 
 and the most eligible stations, for encamping, ren- 
 dering him peculiarly qualified to act in that 
 important capacity. It is true that God was iheir 
 leader, by the pillar of cloud by day and of fire 
 by night, the advancement or the halting of which 
 regulated their journeys and fixed their encamp- 
 ments. But beyond these general directions the 
 tokens of their heavenly guide did not extend. 
 And as smaller parties were frequently sallying 
 forth from the main body in quest of forage and 
 other necessaries, which human observation or 
 enterprise were sulHcieut to provide, so Moses dis- 
 covered his wisdom and good sense in enlistir.g 
 the aid of a native sheik, who, from his family 
 cunnection with himself, his powerful influence, 
 and his long experience, promised to render the 
 Israelites most important services. — R. J. 
 
 HOBNIM "(CO^in) occurs only in one pas- 
 sage of Scripture, where the jiroi)het Ezekiel 
 (xxvii. 15), referring to the commerce of Tyre, 
 says, 'The men of Dedan were thy merchants; 
 many isles were tlie merchandise of thine hand : 
 they brought liiee for a present honis of ivory and 
 eboni/ (/wbnhn).' The Hebrev/ word is trans- 
 l.ileil "Eb(]ny' in all the European versions ; but, 
 as Hochart states {Hicrozoicon, i. 2<l, pais ii.), the 
 Chaldee version, followed by R. Selomo and other 
 Jews, as well as tlie Greek and Arabic versions, 
 render hobniin liy pca-fotcl (pavones) : ' Itaque 
 s.ili veterum Symmachus et llieronymus viderunt 
 (,D^33t~) hobniin esse /lebcnum.' Some of the He- 
 brew critics, however, as Klmchiiis, also acknow- 
 ledge this: ■ IJobnim lignum interpretantur, quod 
 .Ai.ibice vocafur abenus.' Of the correctness of 
 tills iipiiiioii there can now be no doubt. In the 
 Kr^t pl.ice, we may allude to Dedan being consi- 
 dered one of the jiorts of Arabia on the Persian 
 (iulf, or at least to the south of the Red Sea; 
 and secondly, as observed by Bocliai t, ' ^o6«i>H et 
 kebenus sunt voces non absimiles," the latter word 
 being variously written by ancient authors, as 
 f.SeVTj, i^iuos, ffiei/of, ebeiius and hebeiius. The 
 last form is used by Jerome in his Latin, and ifievos 
 ■>y Symmachus, in his Greek version. The Arabs 
 
 'jave iM^^\ which they apply to Ebony, and 
 
 by that name it is known in northern India at 
 )2te present day. Forsbil mentions abnoos as one 
 
 UOBNLVL 
 
 891 
 
 of the kinds of wood imported in his time from 
 India info Arabia. \\ hither the /Vrabtc name be 
 a corruption of the Cireek, or the (iieek a miKlifi- 
 cation, as is most likely, of some I'lasti rn name, 
 we require some oilier ev idente, besides the ixciir- 
 reni'.e of the word in .Aiablc woiks on !\lateria 
 Medlca, todefermlne; since in these, (iieek woids 
 are sometimes em])loyed as the princiji.tl terms 
 for substances with which they are not well 
 acqn.iliitei'. liardust is, however. gi\ cii liy some 
 as the .^raliic name; abnoos as the Persian. We 
 found the latter applieil to elxniy in N.irth-west 
 India, as did Forskal in the Red Sea. 
 
 Ebony wood was highly esteemed by the an- 
 cients, and employed by them for a variety of pur- 
 poses. It is very ajiprojirialely placed in jiixta- 
 jiosilion with ivorv, 'qiiamvis unuiii ex animali, 
 alternm ex arbore jietatiir. Quippe, iif not it Ful- 
 lerus (^Misce/l. vi. 11) utrique est extreiniis coloi 
 eodem excellentia; gradu Eliori videlicet pul- 
 clierrimi candoris, hebeno sjieciosissimi nigroris, 
 Utrumqiie jiolitissimum, nitidissimnm, et in- 
 comparabili laevoie consplciinm. Unde est, quod 
 in eosdem usus fere aiihilienlur, et ex utioque 
 arciis tiiint, ])ectines, tabula; lusoiiir, cullrorum 
 nianubria.' &c. (Bochart, /. c). Ivory and Kliony 
 are probably, however, also mentioned together 
 because both were olitaiiied from the same coun- 
 tries — Etliio])ia and India; and, among the conr 
 paratively few articles of ancient commerce, must, 
 from this cause, always have lieeii a.sso(lated to- 
 gether, while their contrast of colour and joint 
 em])loyment in inlaid work, would contrlliute aa 
 additional reasons for their being adduced u 
 articles characteristic of a distinct cummerce. 
 
 S4I. [DmspyTos Ebenuoi.J 
 
 But it is not in Ezekiel only that ebony and 
 ivory are mentioned together. For Diodorus, as 
 quoted by Bochart, t^lls us that an ancient king 
 of Egypt imjiosed on the Ethiopians ihe payment 
 of a tribute of ebony, gold, and ele[)lMnis' teeth. 
 So Herodotus (iii. 97), as translated by Bochart, 
 ■ays, 'y^^fhiopes Persis jto triennali tributo vehunt 
 duos clioenices auri apyri (id est. irjnem nondum 
 experti), et ducentas ebeni phalangas, et ma<{an
 
 858 
 
 HOBNIM. 
 
 elephant! dentes vigiiiti.' Pliny, referring to tliis 
 passage, remaiks. ' But Heroiiotns assigneth it 
 rather 1o Ethiiipia, and saitli, tliat every tiiree 
 years tiie Ktliiiipians were wont to pay, by way 
 or tribute, unto the kings of Persia, 10.1 billets of 
 the tiiiiher of that tree (tiiat is Kbene), together 
 with gold and yvorie;' and, a^^^ain, ' From Syeiie 
 (whicli coiifineth and boundeth the lands of our 
 empire and dominion) as fore as to the iilaiiil 
 Meroe, fc/r the epace of 90t) n}iles, there is little 
 ebene f.inod : and that in all those paits betweene 
 there lie few other trees to lie I'ound, but date 
 trees, wliii:ti peiadveuture may be a cause, that 
 Kt)ene was coinited a rich tiibute ami deserved 
 the thiril place, after gold and ivorie' (Holland's 
 Pliiiy, xii. 4). 
 
 It is sometimes stated that the ancients sup- 
 posed ebony to come only I'rom India. This 
 arose probably from the passage of Virgil (Georg. 
 ii. 117;:— 
 
 ' sola India nigrum 
 
 Tert elienurn .' 
 
 But the tenn 'India' had often a very wide sig- 
 nification, and included even Kthiojiia. Several 
 of the ancients, however, mention both Indian 
 and Kthio[iian ebony, as Dioscorides and Pliny; 
 while some mention the Indian, and others the 
 Etliiopian only, as Lucan {Phars. \. 304). 
 
 'nigris Meroe fecunda colonis, 
 
 Laeta com is ebeni.' 
 The only objection to the al)ove conclusion 
 of any weight is, that hobmm is in the plural 
 form. To this Bocliart and others have replied, 
 that there were two kinds of ebony, as mentioned 
 by Theophrastus, Dioscorides, \c., one Ethiopian, 
 the other Indian. Fidler and others maintain 
 that the plural form is emjdoyed liecause the 
 eljony ^as in pieces : ' referl ad ebeni palangas, 
 quae ex India et y^illliiopia rnagno numero atlere- 
 bantnr. ^a\a.yyas vocant Herodotus et Arrianus 
 in Perlplo. Plinius paliingax, ant jjhalatiijas, 
 variante scii[)iura, id est, fustes tereies, et qui 
 navilius supfLmuntiu-, ant quibus idem onus 
 plures bajulant' (Bochart, I. c). But the names 
 of other valued foreign woods, as Shittim and 
 Ai.MUOGiM, are also used in the plural form. 
 Besides abnoos, Arab authors, as stated by Bocliart 
 (/. c). mention other woods as similar to and 
 substituted fur ebony : one of these is called 
 sheez, sheezcc ; also sasem and se/nsem, in the 
 plural form scinctsim ; described as nigruni tit/- 
 nuni ad patinas conjiciendas. Hence, in the 
 Koran, ' de iis, qui in gehenna torcpientur,' it 
 is said, ' Exibunt ex igiie post aliquam in 
 eo nrioram ; exil)unt, iiupiam, tanquam ligna 
 temasiin ,' that is, black, from being burnt in 
 the tire. That such a wood was known we have 
 flie testimiiny of Dioscoiides — ''^uioi Se to. tr-qaa.- 
 fiiva *] aKo-vQiva ^vXol, ifKpfp'i) uvra, avTi i^ffov 
 iroiAoDcrj : ' NomiuUi sos imina aut acantliina 
 ligna uod consimilia sunt, j)ro ebeno vendunt.' 
 S. ine Clitics, and even Sjiiengel, in his late 
 edilion iif I)ioscovi<les, read cTvKa./j.iva, instead of 
 a-fj(Tauii-a, (or no other reason apparently but be- 
 cause cnKti.fxi.va den;jteo a tree with which Eu- 
 rojiean schulars are acquainted, while sesamiita is 
 only known to those who consult Oriental writers, 
 or will! aie acq ainted witli the products of the 
 East.. Bi-charl rightly observes, ' Cave igitur ne 
 4ui-lqu;>.m mules. Aliuil enim liic susamina 
 
 HOBNIM. 
 
 quam vulgo. Nenipe ligna illius arboris qi* 
 Arabice saaim et semsem api)ellafur, et ita plurali 
 semasim. Itaque Dioscoridis Arabs interprei 
 
 hie recle liabet, &c. ^ -^ - • sesama ; and so 
 
 also ' Airianus in Periplo memim't cpa\(iyyair 
 arjcrafxifuiu Ka\ i^inivwv, palangaruin sesami- 
 narum et ebeninarum, (jua> ex liuhie urbe Ba- 
 rygasis in Persidem aflferuntur ' (Bochart, I. c). 
 The above word is by Dr. Vincent translateii 
 scsamum ; but this is an herbaceous oil piant. . 
 
 If we look to the modern hisfoiy of ebony, we 
 shall find that it is still derived from more than 
 one source. Thus, Mr. HoUza])pfel, in his recent 
 work on Turning, describes three kinds of ebony. 
 1. One from the Mauritius, in roimd sticks like 
 scall'old poles, seldom exceeding fourteen inches in 
 diameter, tlie lilackest and finest in the grain, the 
 harilest and most beautiful. 2. The East Indian, 
 which is grown in Ceylon and the Peninsida of 
 India, and expoiled from Madras and Borrd)ay 
 in logs fiom six to twenty and sometimes even 
 twenty-eiglit inches in diameter, and also in 
 planks. This is less wasteful, but of an iidt-rior 
 grain Siud colour to the above. 3. The Afiicaii, 
 shi])j)ed tiof, the Cape of Good Hojie in liillets, 
 the genera' size of which is from three to six feet 
 long, ihrre to six inches broad, and two 1o four 
 inches faick. This is the least wasteful, as all the 
 refuse is left behind ; but it is tiie inost porous, 
 and die worst in pwint of colour. No Abyssi- 
 niaii eliony is at present imported: this, however, 
 is more likely to be owing to the dillerent routes 
 which commerce has taken, but which is again 
 rctiuiiing to its ancient channels, thcUi to the want 
 of ebony in the ancient Ethiojiia. From the nature 
 of the climate, and the existence of forests in 
 which tiie elephant abounds, there can be no doubt 
 of its being well suited to the group of plants 
 which ha\e been found to yield the ebony of 
 Mauritius, Ceylon, and India, namely, the genus 
 Diospyros of botanists. Of this se\eral sjiecies 
 yield varieties of ebony as their hcart-tcood, 
 as D. Ebenum in the Matnitius, and also in 
 Ceylon, where it is called kaluwara. It is de- 
 scribed by Retz ' folds ovato-lanceolatis, acnmi- 
 natis, gemmis hirtis ;' and he quotes as identical 
 D. glaberriina (Fr. Rottb. Kov. Act. Havn. ii, 
 p. 540, tab. 5). D. Ebcnaster yields the bastard 
 eliony of Ceylon, and D. hirsuta, the Calamander 
 wood of the same island, described by Mr. 
 Holtza]ipfel as of a chocolate brown coloiu', with 
 black stripes and marks, and stated by him to b» 
 consideied a variety of ebony. D. Mehmoxylon 
 of Dr. Ro.xburgh is the ebony-tree of Coromandel, 
 and is figured among Coromandel ])lants (i. 
 No. 40) . it g-ows to be a large tree in the moun- 
 tainous parts- of Ceylon, and in the Peninsula 
 of lndl\ — in Malabar, Coromandel, and Orissa. 
 The black jiait of the wood of this tree alone 
 forms ebony, and is found only in the centre 
 of large trees, and varies in quantity according 
 to the size and age of the tree. The out.side wood 
 is while and soft, and is soon destroyed by timi 
 and insects, leaving the black untouched (Roxt). 
 Fl. bid. ii. p. 530). Besides these, there is in 
 the Peninsula of India a wood called blackwo</ • 
 by the English, and sit-sal by the natives • t 
 grows to an immense size, is heavy, close-grain .., 
 of a greenish black colour, with lighter coloured 
 veins running in various directions. It is yielded
 
 HONEY. 
 
 hr tlie Dalbergia latifolia. To the same genus 
 belongs the .SVssi o, one of the most valueil woods 
 of India, and of wliich the iiee has l)eeii called 
 Dalhergia Sissoo. The wood is remarkably strong, 
 of a lif^ht greyisli line, vitl. darkt-r coloured veins. 
 It is calleil Sissnu an 1 S/iee!>/iuni by the natives 
 of" India. Tiiis is llie naine which we believe is 
 referred to by Aral) authors, and wiiich also appears 
 to have been the original of the Scsamina of Dios- 
 corides and of the Teriplns. The name may be 
 applied to other nearly allied woods, and therefore, 
 perha[)s, to that of the above D. latifolia. It is a 
 curions conHrmati<»ii of this that Forskiil mentions 
 
 that, in his time, j*-.nA shishum, with teak and 
 
 ebony, was among iiie woods im])orleil from India 
 and Arabia. If i.-i satisfactory to have a]>|iareritly 
 Buch satisfactory c.intirmatii)n of ihe general ac- 
 curacy of ancient authors, when we fully under- 
 stand the subjects and tjje imiducts of the coun- 
 tries to which they allude. — J. F. R. 
 HOG. [BoAn; Swine.] 
 
 HONEY. In tlie Scripture tliere are tliree 
 words denoting dill'erent sweet substance.^, all of 
 which are rendeied by ' honey' in the Authorized 
 Version. These it is necessary to distinguish. 
 
 1. "ly^ ynar, which only occm's in 1 Sam. xiv. 
 25, 27, 29 ; Cant. v. 1 ; and denotes the honey 
 of bees and that only. 
 
 2. nSJ nopeth, honey that drops, usually asso- 
 ciated witli the comb, and therefore liee-honey. 
 This occurs in Ps. xix. 10; Prov. v. 3 ; xxiv. 13; 
 xxvii. 7 ; Cant. iv. 1 1. 
 
 3. t^5'^. debesh. Tiiis is the most frequent 
 word. It sometimes denotes bee-honey, as in 
 Judg. xiv. 8, but more commonly a vegetable 
 honey distilled from trees, and called manna by 
 chemists : also the syrup of dateS; and even dates 
 themselves. It ap])ears also sometimes to stand 
 as a general term for all kinds of iioney. 
 
 We shall here confine onr remarks to honey in 
 general, and that of i-ees in ])aiticular, referring 
 for the vegetable lioney to Manna, and for the 
 date-honey to Drink, S'J'UOnq. 
 
 It is very evident that the land of Canaan 
 abounded in iioney. It is indeed described as 
 'a land flowing with milk and honey' (Exod. iii. 
 8, &c.); wliich we appiehenil to refer to rr/^ the 
 sweet substances v.hich the diflerent Hebrew 
 words indicate, as the ]ilnase sterns too large to 
 be confined to the honey of bees .ilone. Yet the 
 great number of bees in Palestine lias l)een noticed 
 by many tiavellers; and they were doubtless still 
 more common in ancie.it times when tiie soil was 
 under more general cultivatiun. A recent tra- 
 veller, in a sketch of the nrtiiral liistory of Pales- 
 tine, n-imes bees, beetles, ami moscpiitoes, as the 
 insects wiiicli are most con)mon in the country 
 (Schuliert, Ueise ins Morgcnlande, ii. 120). 
 
 The natural history of the bee, with iilusfra- 
 lions of the passages of Scripture in which its 
 nan)e occurs, ha; been given under a distinct 
 liead [Hke| ; and tlie use ol Iioney in fiMid, under 
 another [i-oou). The j)rincipal use of the pre- 
 sent notice is theiefbre that of an index to the 
 other articles in which the diflerent jiarts of this 
 'arge sulgect are sejiarately investigated. 
 
 Tiie 'wild hotiey f^eAi 6.y(K v) which, witli 
 V«>c*ut3, formed the ditrt oi John ;lie liajitist, was 
 
 HONEY. 
 
 8ff 
 
 ])roV)ably the vegetable Iioney, which w€ refer to 
 Manna. 
 
 No travellers in the East have given ns much 
 infoiniatioti lesjjecfing the frealnient of l)e«», or 
 any jieculiar modes of piejwring the honey. 
 
 Honey was not permitted to l)e oll'ered on the 
 altar (^Lev. ii. 11). As it is coupled with leaven 
 in this prohibition, it would seem to um>Mint to 
 an interdiction ol' things sour and sweet. Aben 
 Ezra and others allege tliat it was liecause hoi-ey 
 ))artook of the IVunenting natnie of leaven, and 
 when burnt yieldttl aii uii])je<isant smell — qua- 
 lities incompatilde with i.fl'erings made l>y liie of 
 a sweet Kivour unto the Loid. lint Mainionides 
 <ind others think it was tor tlie purpose of making 
 a difference between the religions customs of tliu 
 Jews and the heathen, in who.st- olVerings honey 
 was miicli emj)!oy«'d. The tiist-lVnils oi honey 
 were, however, to lie |ire>eiited, as these weie des- 
 tined for the suppoit of' the priests, and not to l>e 
 oti'ered uj)on the altar. 
 
 Under the diflerent heads to which we have 
 referied, the passages of .Sciipture relating to 
 honey are explained. The lemarkable incident 
 related in 1 Sam. xiv. 21-32, requiies, however, 
 to be here noticed. Jctiatlian and his ))arty 
 coming to the wood, lind honey drop|)!ng froui 
 the trees to the ground, and the prince extends 
 bis rod to the honeycomb to taste the Iioney. Oo 
 this the present writer is unable to add anythinjj 
 to wliat he has stated elsewheie (Pictorial Bibie^ 
 in loc), which is to the following elVect : — First, 
 we are tolil that the honey was on the ground, 
 then that it diO])ped, and lastly, that Jonathan 
 j)ut his rod into the honeycomb. From all thia 
 it is clear that the honey was lieo-honey, and that 
 honey-combs were abo» e in the tiets, from which 
 iioney dropjied uj)on the ground; but it is not 
 clear wiietiier Jonathan put his rod into a honey- 
 comb that was in tlie trees or shrubs, or into on« 
 that liad fallen to the ground, or that had been 
 formed there. 
 
 V\ !:eie wild bees are abimdant they form their 
 combs in any convenient jjlace that otJ'eis, jiar- 
 ticularly in cavities or even on the bianchea 
 of trees ; nor are they so nice as is commonly 
 supposed in the choice of situations. In India 
 jiarticularly, and in the Indian islands, the forests 
 often swarm with bees. • The forests," says Mr. 
 Kobeits, ' literally iiov/ with l.-oney ; large combs 
 may be seen hanging on tlie trees, as you piss 
 along, full of honey' {^Oriental Jihistrntiuns), 
 We have good reason to conclude, from many 
 allusions in Scripture, that this was also, to a 
 consiileiable extent, the case formerly in Pales- 
 tine. Ral)l)i Ben Gershom and otiiers indet;d 
 fancy that tlieie were bee-liives placeil 'all of a 
 row" by llie ways de. If we must nee«ls have 
 bee-hives, why not suj)jK)se that they werejilacetl in 
 the trees, or siispendeit from the boughs t This is 
 a ]iractice in different parts where ijees abound, 
 and the jieople juiy much attention to realise the 
 advantages which their wax and honey ofVer. 
 The woods on the western coast of Africa, l>elwecn 
 Cai)e Blanco and Sierra Leone, and pariic\»larly 
 near the Ganibia, aie full of bees, to wiiich the 
 negroes formerly, if they do not now, paid con- 
 siderable attention for the sake of the wax. They 
 had l)ee-hives, like iMiskets, made of reeds and 
 seilge, and hung on the out-1'onghs of the trees, 
 which tlie bees easily appropriated for the pvuooae
 
 KO 
 
 HOOK. 
 
 offonninj; their comUs in (hem In sotiip n;i ts 
 these li'nes were so tliickly place 1 tluit at a dis- 
 tance tliey looked like tVuit. Tiier.- was aho 
 ttiiicli wild lioiiey in the cavities of flie trees 
 (Jol.5on"s Golden Trad-e, y. 30, in A.stley's Col- 
 lection). Mojiecoiiliims this ucconnt, and adds, 
 that when he was there, the Maiulingoes sns- 
 ](endeil< in this way straw itee-hives not unlike 
 our own, hoarded at the hiittom, and with a hole 
 for the liees to (fo in and out ( Travels into the 
 inhnn' parts of Africa, Drake's Collection). 
 As to the otlier supixisition, that tlie honeycoml) 
 had Ueeu formed on the ground, we think the 
 context rat.lier bears aj^ainst it ; hut tlie circum- 
 •tance is not in itself unlikely, or incoinpatihle 
 with the hahits of wild hees. For want of a 
 better resource tliey sometimes form their honey 
 in any tolerahly convenient spot tliey can find in 
 the ground, such as small liollows, or even holes 
 formed hy animals. Mr. Burcliel, in his Travels 
 in Soidh Africa, mentions an instance in which 
 his party (Hottenti(ts) obtained about three pounds 
 pf good' honey from a hole which had formerly 
 belonged to tlie weazel kind The natives treated 
 this as a usual circumstance, and indeed their 
 experience in such allairs was <lemonstrated by 
 the facility with whicii they managed to obtain 
 the honey without being injured by the bees. 
 
 HOOK, HOOKS. Tlie f.ll.wing Hebrew 
 words are so reii.lered in the English Version : 
 
 nn, nsn, ii, nhm, n-j^jn, n:nr^, n3V,TP. 
 
 The idea of a thorn enters into the etymology of 
 sei-eral of them, prohalily because a thorn, /too^€(;? 
 or straight, was the earliest instrument of this kind. 
 Tacitus thus describt-s the dress of the ancient 
 Germans, Sagum, tibula, ant si desil spina con- 
 Bert um ; a ' loose mantle, fastened with a clasp, 
 or. when that cannot be had, with a thorn" (Germ. 
 17). 
 
 I. nn ; (2 Kings xix. 28). ' I will put my 
 hook in thy nose.' Sent, fl-rjo-a) to ayKiffTpa fiov 
 
 (f Tots IXVKTTjpai ffoti : 
 
 Vnlg. circulwn in na- 
 
 ribus tais. In tlie ]iaral lei passage (Isa. xxxvii. 
 29) t!ie Sept. reads, koX iix$a\co <ptfihv €ts rriv plvi 
 trou, ' I will put my muzzle, halter, or no<ise,' 
 &c. Jehovah here intimates his absolute con- 
 trol over Seuiiacherih. by an allusion to the prac- 
 tice of lea^ling butValoes, camels, dromedaries, 
 &c., by means of a cord, or of a cord attached to 
 a rinq, pa-sed thri)Ui;h the n;isfrils (Sliaw"s Tra- 
 vels, pp. 167. 8, 2i.d edit.); Job xli. I [xl. 25] 
 • Canst iliou draw out Leviathan with a hook ? 
 (HDn occurs Isa. xix. 8, and Hab. i. 15 ; ayKi- 
 erpov, hamuin i or his tongue with a cord wiiich 
 thou lettest do.vn ? Can^t thou place a reed- cord 
 (|D3X. comp. Gr. o-xotyos) in his nose, or bore 
 through Ills cheek with a (liorn ?" (clasp, or possibly 
 bracelet, &c.) Sept. a^eis Se ^piKovra eV ayKia-Tpw, 
 irepiOiicrfis 5f (pop$aiai' xepJ p7va abrov ; ?) 57)<re£s 
 KOiKOV iv Tw iJ.vicTT\pi avTov, <pEWiai 5e TpvTr-r}(r€is 
 rh xfi'^oj aWov. ' Wilt thou draw out a dragon 
 with a hook ? Wilt thou bind a liand about his 
 oose? Wilt (liou fasten a ring in his nose, or bore 
 his lip vvitli a bracelet?' (Vulg. An extrahere 
 poteris Leviathan ha no, et tune ligabis linguam 
 ejus? Nuiupiid pones circubini in naribus ejus, 
 aut armilUi perCorabis maxillam ejus?) * Wilt 
 ttioii put a ring in his nostrils, or Ixire through his 
 cheek with a bracelet." Fiiis passage in Job has 
 mulergone the follow Inj; speculations 'see, for 
 
 HOOK. 
 
 instance, Harris's Xat. Hist, of the Bible, ail 
 
 Leiiathan, Loud. 1 f'2-'>). It has been assumvtl, 
 that Hochart has Ciimphlely jiroved the Leviathan 
 to mean the M-ocrjf/j7<? (Rns. nmiiller on Bochart. 
 vol. iii. 737, Sic, 7()9, &c , Lips. 1796). Hero^ 
 d.itus has then been quoted, where he relate? that 
 the Egyptians near Lake Moeris select a croco- 
 dile, render him tame, and susjiend ornaments to 
 his ears, and soisetimes gems of great value; 
 his fore-Ceet being adorned with bracelets (li, 
 (>S)) ; and the mummies of crocoililes, having 
 their ears thus bored, have been discovered (Ken- 
 rick's Effi/pt of Herodotus, p. 97, Lond. 1841). 
 Hence it is concluded that tliis passage in Job 
 refers to the facts mentioned by Herodo'us; and, 
 doubtless, the terms employed, especially by the 
 Sept. and Vulg., and the third and following 
 verses, favour the supposition ; for there the cap- 
 tive is represented as suppliant and obsequious, in 
 a state of security and servitude, and the objjct of 
 diversion, ' played with' as with a bird, and serv- 
 ing for the sport of maidetis. Herodotus is fur- 
 ther quoted to show that in his time the Kgvjitians 
 captured the crocodile with a hook (ayKicrrpov), 
 with which (f^f\KvcrdT] els ttjv yfif) he was draion 
 ashore; and accounts are ceitainly given by 
 modern travellers of the continuance of this prac- 
 tice (Mail let. Dcscrip. d' Egypt ■, torn. ii. p. 127, 
 ed. Hag., 1740). But does not the e/j^<Ve fZesoi/)- 
 tion go upon the supnositinn of the intpossibdity 
 of so tieating Leviathan? Supposing the allu- 
 sions to be correctly interpreted, is i: not as much 
 as to say, ' Canst thou treat him as thiiu canst 
 treat the crocodile and otJier fierce creatures?' 
 Dr. Lee has, indeed, given reasons which render it 
 doubtful, at least, wiiether the leviathan does 
 mean the crocodile in this passage; or whether it 
 does not mean some species of whale, as was 
 formerly supposed; the Delphirais orca com- 
 munis, or common grampus, found in the Meili- 
 terranean, tlie Red .Sea. and also in the Nile. (See 
 his examination of Bocharfs reasonings, &c. in 
 Translation atid Nofes on Job, ]ip, 197 and 529- 
 539, Lond. 1^37) [Leviathan]. Kzek. xxix. 
 4 (D''"'nn) 'I will put my liooks in thy j iws.' &c. 
 (7ra7i5cs els ras tnayivas ; frwnum in maxillis 
 tt(is) ; ' and I will caitse thee to come up outof ths 
 midst of thy rivers,' wiieretlie ]iro])het foretells the 
 destruction of Piiaraoh king of Egypt, by allusions 
 to the ciestruction, ])i)ssibly, of a crocodile, the 
 symbol of Egypt. Thus Pliny (//is<. Nat. viii. 
 25) states, that the Ten'yritae (^inhabitants o( 
 Egypt) followed the crocodile, swimming after 
 it in the river, spnuig upon its back, thrust a bar 
 into its mouth, which being held by its two extxe- 
 mities, serves — ut frasnis in terram agant — as-a 
 bit, enables them to force it on shore (comp. 
 Ezek. xxix. 3, 4). Stiaho relates that the Ten- 
 tyritae displayed their feats before the Romani 
 (xvii. p. 560, ed. Casaub ). But see Dr. Lee on 
 this passage, xct supra. 
 
 2. nn""!, (Exod. xxvi. 32, 37; xxxviii. 19), 
 ' hooks,' al K€(pa\iSes, capita, capita columnarum; 
 where the Se]it. and Jerome seem to have under- 
 stood the capitals of the pillars ; and it has been 
 urged that this is more likely to be the meaning 
 than hooks, especially as 1775 shekels of silvei 
 weie used in making these Dn^l for t)ie pillars, 
 overlaying the chapiters, and filleting them 
 (cli. xxxviii. 28); and that the hoo/ts aie really 
 the '•Dip, laches (Exod. xxvi. 6, 11, 33, 3ft,
 
 HOPHNI AND PHIXKIIAS. 
 
 iXKix. 33\ Yet tlie Sept. also rendfT^ DH^I, 
 icptKoi. * rUi'^^s.' (ir ' cliisps' (Kx(>il. xxvii. 10, 11, 
 and ajKvXai, Kxod. xxxviii. 17. 19); and r-rni ii 
 Cmiipaiison of these two latter ])assagei it would 
 seem tli.it these hooks, or rather tenters, rose out 
 of the chapiter* oi heads of the pillars. 
 
 3. j'prO (1 Sam. ii. 13, 1 1). ' flesh-hook,' Kpti- 
 ypa, fusc'nnila, and the Dlj/Trj, ' tiie flesli-liooks' 
 (Kxod. xxvii. 3, and eUewiiere). This was evi- 
 dently ill the first passaije, a trident ' of three 
 teetii," a kind of foik, ttc. for tniniiii^ the nacritices 
 On "he fire, and for collectill^' fragments, &c. 
 [3.) nilDTD (Is. ii- 4- and elsewhere) ' beat their 
 jjiears into pruiiin^-hooks" (Sptirava, falces). Tlje 
 Roman jjoets liave tiie sam; nieta})hor (Martial, 
 xiv. 31, • Falx ex ciise"). In Mic. iv. 3. in Itgones, 
 weeding;- hooks, or sliovels, spades. &e. Joel re- 
 verses tl e metaphor ' ])nmiiiL;-liooks' into Sj)eais 
 (iii. 10, liyoncs ; ;ind so Ovid (Fasti, i. G97, in 
 pila hrjones). (4.) D^flDw' (Kzek . xl. 431, ' hooks,' 
 which Geseiiius explains stalls in the courts of 
 the Temple, where tlie sacrificial victims were 
 fastened : oiir translators give in the marj,'iii 
 ' endirons, or the two hearth-stones.' Tlie Sept. 
 leems equally at a hiss, kvX TroAniirT-J/v i^ovai 
 yiiaos ; as also Jerome, who renders it labia. 
 Schleusner pronounces yeiaos to he a barUarons 
 word formeil from VTt, und understands episty- 
 lium, a lilile pillar set on another, and capitallum, 
 
 columned. The Clialdee renders JvpJiy, sliort 
 posts in the house of the olauijhterers on whicii to 
 suspend liie sacrifices. Dr. Lightfoot, in his 
 chapter ' on the altar, the rinj^s, and the laver,' 
 observes, ' On the north side of the altar were six 
 orders of rinirg, each of which rontained six, at 
 wiiich they killeil the saorilices. Near by were loio 
 pillars set up, upon wliich were laid overthwart 
 beams cif cedar; on these were fastened rows of 
 hooks, on which the sacrifices were huno ; and 
 they were flayed on marble tables, which were 
 betv.'een these pillars' (See vers. 41, 42; Works, 
 vol. 11, ch. xxxiv., Lond. 1084-5-0.) HJV 
 (Amos iv. 2), 'take you away witii liooks,' o-KKoii, 
 vontis. • [((lies' or ' sjiears.' In the same verse, 
 run nn*D, * ti.sh-ho;jks,' eU \f0Tjras inroKato- 
 /xevovs ifx^aKovatv, ifiirvpoi \ut/A.oi, et relitjuias 
 vestras I7i ollis fcrventtbus, where both Se[it.and 
 V'ulg. seem lo liave taken T'D in the sense of a 
 pot or caldron instead of a fisii-hook. — J. F. D. 
 
 HOPHNI AND PHINEHAS, the sons of 
 Eli, whose misconduct in the priesthood (as de- 
 scribed in 1 Sam. ii. 12 17) brought down that 
 doom of niiii and tlcgradatioii upon the house of 
 Eli which formed the first divine communication 
 through the young Samuel (1 Sam. iii.). Hophni 
 and Piiinehas were slain in the battle in which 
 tiie ark of God wa^i taken bv the Philistines, b c. 
 lUl (I Sam. iv. 11). [Ei'.i.] 
 
 nOPIIRA (yi?in; Sept. Ova<pp^, or Pha 
 raohhophua), king of Egypt in the time of 
 Zeilekiah kin;; of Juilali, and of Nefiucliadnezzar 
 king of Babylon. He formed alliance with 
 the former again.st the latter, end his advance 
 with an Egyptian army constrained the Chal- 
 da-ans to raise the siege of Jerusalem (Jer. xxxvii. 
 6) ; but they soon returned and took and de- 
 stroyed the city. This momentary aid, and the 
 daiia.er of placln.'i: reliance on tlie irotection of 
 Hoivhra, led Ezekiel to comjiaie the Egypti-iiis to 
 
 HOR. 
 
 Ml 
 
 a broken rrril, which was to pierce the hand of 
 hirrr that leaned upon it (Kzek. xxix 6, 7V This 
 alliance wa>, liowever, tlisa]ipioveil by God ; and 
 Jeremiah was authorized todeli\er the projihecy 
 contained in his 44tli cliapter, which conclude* 
 with a jirediction of Hophra"s tieath anil the sub- 
 jugation of his country by the Chalda>an9 [comp. 
 Euyi't]. 
 
 This Pharaoh-hophra is identified with the 
 Apries or Vajihres of ancient authors, and lie 
 may be the Psamatik 111. of the moniinienfs. 
 Under this identification we may conclude that 
 his wars vyith the Syrians am! Cyrenaeans pre- 
 venleil him from afi'ording any j^reat assistance 
 to Zedekiali. .\pries is de.scribe<l by Herodotus 
 (ii. \G\}) as a monarcli who, in the zenith of his 
 glory, felt jieisuaded that it was not in tlie power 
 even of a deity to disyiossess him of his kingtiom, 
 or to shake the sfaliility of his sway ; and this 
 account of his arrogance fully accords with that 
 contained in the Bilile. Ezekiel (xxix. 3) spaks 
 of this king as 'the great dragon that lieth in the 
 midst of the rivers, which hath saiil, my river is 
 mine own, and 1 have made it for myself." His 
 overthrow and siil)se«jiient captivity and death aie 
 foretold with remarkable )irecision by Jeremiah 
 (xliv. 30): ' I will },Mve Pharaoh-hojihia, king of 
 Egy]it, into the hands of his enemies, and into 
 the hands of them that seek his life.' This was 
 bronght about by a revoll of the ti(>(ij)s. who 
 jilaced Amasis at tlieir head, and after vaiioii.? 
 conflicts took Ajiries prisoner. He was for a time 
 kejit in easy cajitivity by Amasis, who wished to 
 siiare his life; but he was at length constrained to 
 give him uj) to the vengeance of his enemies, by 
 whom he was strangled (Herod ii. I(i9; Wilkin- 
 son, Anc. Effi/ptians, i. 168 IS2). 
 
 HOR (Tl'in, "ih ; Sept. "np), a mountain of 
 Arabia Petr?ea, on the confines of Idumnea, and 
 forming (lart of tlie mountain of Seir or Eilom. 
 It is only mentioned in Sciipture in connection 
 will, tlie circumstances recorded in Num. xx. 
 22 29. Tlie Israelites were encamped before it, 
 when Aaron was summoned to its top to die tlieie, 
 in the ])iesence of iiis b: other and son, who alone 
 witnessed his final de])artuie [.^auonI. 
 
 The m untaiii now identified with Mount Hor 
 is the most con-]>icuous in the whole range ot 
 Mount Seir, and at this day bears the iiaiiie ot 
 Mount Aaron (Jebel Haroiin). It is in N. lat. 
 30° IS' E. long. 35° 33' about miil-way between 
 the Dead Sea and the./5<>lanitic Gulf. It may be 
 open to question if this is really tl e .Mount Hor on 
 which Aaron died, seeing that the whole range ot 
 Seir was anciently called by that name; yet, from 
 its height and the conspicuous manner in whi h it 
 rises among the surroundimg rocks, it seems not 
 unlikely to have been the chosen scene of the 
 high-priest's death (Kinnear, p. 127). To fhij may 
 be aiided that Jo-;ephus aflirnis Mount Hor to have 
 lieen near Petra ; and near that jilace there is cer- 
 tainly lio mountain which can contest the di» 
 tinction with the one now in view. The base of 
 the highest pinnacle of this mountain is in fact 
 but a little removed from the skirts of the rify 
 to the westward. The account oC it given 
 Iweiify years since by (Captains Irby and Man- 
 gles, in their then uiipnbl shed volnme of Traveln, 
 is the best we yet possess, and we therefor* 
 present ihe snljstance of their descrinliot in tlieil 
 own words.
 
 96% 
 
 HOR. 
 
 * We eii;;ai,'e(l an A.rait slie)iliercl as our guide, 
 and lea\ in;,' AIkhi Rascliid witii our servants and 
 Coi-scs wliei* tile sleejiness of the ascent com- 
 mences, we lie„'aii to rnotiiit the tr.ick, wliicli is 
 extremely steep and toilsome, and allords Imt an 
 inilillerfiit toot ng. In some ])arts the pilgrim 
 must pick his way as lie can. and frequently on 
 liis hands and knees. Wln'ie l.>y nature it would 
 have heeii itnpassaliJe theie are (lights of ruue 
 steps or inclined planes, constructed of stones 
 laid toother, and iieie and there are niches to 
 receive the footsfeiis, cut in llie live lock : the 
 impressions of pilgrims' feet are scratclied in the 
 rock in many places, lint without inscriptions. 
 Much juniper grows on the moiuitaiu, almost to 
 the very siimniit, and many (lowering plants 
 which we had not oliserved elsewhere, some of 
 these are very beautiful ; most of them are thorny. 
 
 HOR. 
 
 On the top there is an overhanging shelf in th» 
 rock which forms a sort of cavern : here we 
 found a skin of extremely l)ad water suspended 
 for drinking, and a pallet of straw, with the 
 pitcher and other |)0()r utensils of the sheikh who 
 resides here. He is a decrepit old man, who has 
 liveil here dining liie space of forty years, and 
 occasionally endured tlie fatigue of descending 
 and re-ascending the mountain. The tomb itself 
 is enclosed in a small building, differing not at 
 all in external form arul appearance from those 
 of Mahommedan saints common tiiroughout 
 every province of Turkey. It has jiiobably been 
 rehuilt at no remote period : some small columns 
 are bedded in the walls, and some fragments of 
 granite and slabs of white marble are lying 
 about. The door is near the south-west angle, 
 within which a constructed tomb, with a jxall 
 
 3-42. [Mount Hor.] 
 
 t?/rown over it, presents itself immediately upon 
 eiitering : it is jiatched together out of fiagmenrs 
 of stone and marble that have made part of other 
 fabrics. Upon one of these are sevesal short lines 
 tn tire Hebrew character, cut in a slovenly man- 
 ner : we had them inter(ireted at Aci-e, and they 
 proved to lie merely the names of a Jew and his 
 family wlm had sciatched this record. It is not 
 probable tiiat any professed Jew has visited the 
 spot fur ages past, |irobaldy not since the period 
 of the Mahommedan conquest; it may lay claim, 
 therefore, to some antiquity, and in aijy case is a 
 curimis apfwndage to the testimony of Josephus 
 on the subject. There are rags and shreds of 
 yarn, with glass Ijeads and paras, left as votive 
 offerings liy the Arabs. 
 
 * Not far from tlie nortlr-wes*. angle is a passage, 
 descending by steps to a vault or grutto beneath, 
 for we were unceitain which of the two to call it, 
 being covered with so thick a coat of whitewash 
 titat it is diilicult to distinguish whether it is built 
 
 or hollowed out. It appeared, in great part at 
 least, a grotto; the roof is covered, but the whole 
 is rude, ill-fashioned, and quite dark. The 
 sheikh, who was not iicfoimed that we were 
 Christians, furnished us with a lump of butter. 
 Towards the further end of this dark vault lie 
 the two coiTesponding leaves of an iron grating, 
 which formerly i)re\ented all nearer approach to 
 the tomb; they have, however, been thrown down, 
 and we advanced so as to touch it ; it was covered 
 by a ragged ])all. We were obliged to descend 
 barefoot, and were not without some apprehension 
 of treading oti scorpions or other reptiles in such 
 a place.'' 
 
 It is highly interesting to know what view it 
 was which last greet^'d the ey.es of the dying 
 high-priest from this lofty eminence ; and it is 
 the more so from the fact that the regions over ■ 
 which the view extends is that in which th* 
 Israelites wandered for forty years. Oor trurtUp 
 lers supply this information : —
 
 HOR-HAGIDG.\D. 
 
 ' Tlie view from llie summit of tW edifice is 
 ♦Xtremely extensive in evei» liiectior, ami llie 
 eye rests on fcv olijects wliicii it can clearly dis- 
 tingiii^ii to ;^'i\e a name to, alliioii;jli an excell<«i 
 idea is oiitained of tlie general lace and featiirei 
 of the country. The chain of Iduinicaii inciuii- 
 taiiis, wliicii I'oim tiie western shore of tiie Dead 
 Sea, seem to r.nii on to tlie soniiiwanl, tiioo^'h 
 losing C()nsideral)Iy in tlieir lieight. They a]i()ear 
 in tliis point of view barren and desolate, lielow 
 tliem is s])read out a white sandy plain, seamed 
 with the heds of occ;i.sionil torrents, ami present- 
 ing much the same features as the most desert 
 parts of the Ghor. Where this desert expanse 
 approaches lh(! foot of Mount Ilor, there arise out 
 of It, like islands, several lower j)eaks and ridges, 
 of a purple colour, prohalily composed of the 
 same kind of sandstone as that of Mount Hor 
 itself', which, variegated as it is in its hues, ])ie- 
 «ents in tlie distance one uniform mass of dark 
 purple. Towards the Egyjitian side there is an 
 expanse of country without features or limit, and 
 lost in the distance. The lofty district which we 
 had quilted in our descent, to Wady Mousa 
 shuts up the prosjiect on the south-east side; hut 
 there is no part of the landscajje which the eye 
 wanders over witli more curiosity and delight 
 tlian the ciags of Mount Hor itself, which stand 
 up on every si<le in the most rugged and fantastic 
 forms, sometimes strangely piled one on the other, 
 and sometimes as strangely yawning in clifts of 
 
 a frightful deptli .An arti.^t wh.) would 
 
 study rock-scenery in all its wildest and m. st 
 extravagant fbrnjs would find himself rewarded 
 should he resoit to Mount Hor for that sole 
 purpose.' 
 
 IIOREB. [Sinai.] 
 
 IIOR-HAGIDG.\D, an encampment of the 
 Israelites during their wandering (Num. xxxiii. 
 32, 33) [Wandeiiinq]. 
 
 HORITES, or HORIM, the people who inha- 
 bited Mount Seir hefoie the Edomites [Idum.ea]. 
 
 HORN (p.i? ; Gr. K€pas; Lat. cornu), from its 
 primary use for defence in the case of horned ani- 
 mals (whence Anacreon's Averts Kepara ravpots), 
 came to acquire several derivative meanings, 
 some of which are connected with the illustration 
 and rigtit understanding of holy writ. As horns 
 are hollow and easily jjolished, they have in an- 
 cient and modern times Ijeen used for drinking- 
 vessels and lor military pnrjioses; and as they are 
 the chief source of strength f>r attack and tlefence 
 with the animals to which God has given them, 
 they serve in Scripture as emiilems of ])ower, 
 dominion, glory, and fierceness (Dan. viii. 5, 9 ; 
 I Sam. xvi.' I, "l3 ; 1 King> i. 39 ; Josh. vi. 4, 5 ; 
 1 Sam. ii. I ; Ps. Ixxv. 5, 10; Jer. xlvili. 25; 
 E/,ek. xxix. 21 ; Amos vi. 13). Hence to defile 
 the horn in tlie dust (Job xvi. 2), is to lower and 
 degrade oneself, and, on the contrary, to lift up, 
 to exalt tiie liorn (Ps. Ixxv. 4 ; Ixxix. 17; cxlviii. 
 14), is poetically to rai.se oneself to eminent 
 honour or prosperity, to bear oneself jiroudly. 
 Somethiiig like this is found in classic authors ; 
 ♦•r.us Hiirace (C'arni. iii. 21, 18) says, 
 
 ' Tu spem reducis mentibus anxii« 
 Viiescpie, et addis corr;ua pauperi.' 
 It the East, at present, horns are used as an oma 
 mrat foi the head, and as a tokeu of eminent rank 
 
 HORNET. 
 
 •tu 
 
 Rosenmiiller, Moty. iv. 85). The women among 
 the Druses on .Mount Lebanon wear on llie\r httiilt 
 silver horns of native make, ' which iire the di»- 
 tingui.shing l),ulge of wifehood' (^liow t lutf' i^ Ht(*ort 
 on Si/ria, p. S). 
 
 By an easy transition, horn came to denote an 
 elevation or hill (Isa. v. 1); in Switzerland 
 mountains still bear this name, thus, Schreckhom, 
 Buchhorn. The altar of burnt-olVerings (Ex(m1. 
 xxvij. 2) and the altar of incense (Exod. xxx. 2), 
 had each at the four coiners four horns of shittim- 
 wood, the first being overlaid with brass, th» 
 second with gold (Exod. xxxvii. 2o ; xxxviii. 2; 
 Jer. xvii. 1 ; Amos iii. 14). Upon the liorim of 
 the altar of buint-ofTerings was to be smeared 
 with the tii'ger the blotid of the slain bullock 
 (Exod. xxix. 12; Lev. iv. 7-lS; viii. 15; ix. !) ; 
 xvi. 18; Ezek. xliii. 20). By laying Indd of 
 these horns of the altar of burnt-ollei ing the cri- 
 minal found an asylum and safety (1 Kings i. 
 50 ; ii. 2S). These horns are said to hive 
 served as a means for binding the animal 
 destined for sacrifice (Ps. cxviii. 27) ; l)iit this 
 use Winer {Ha7idici)rterb.) denies, asserting tliat 
 they did not and could not answer for such a 
 purpose. 
 
 Tiie old painters rejiresented the head of Moses 
 as having two horns jiroceeding from liis temples, 
 one on either side. Tiiis practice arose from a 
 mis-translation on the jiart of the Vulgate of the 
 words found in Exod. xxxiv. 29 — cornuta e»set 
 facies sua, where it is said in the Common Ver- 
 sion 'the skill o\' his face shone.' Tlie Septua- 
 gint seems to- have given a good rendering — 
 5e5((^a(rTai 7] ui^ns tov Xfi/UOTOJ, ' the appearance 
 of his face wore a glory, or ' nimbus,' that is, ravt 
 jiarting from his head as from a centre, iw the 
 Saviour, and, in the Roman Catholic Church, (he 
 saints, are often ))ainted — an ajipearance derived 
 from Moses" interview with God. and designed to 
 convince thr Israelites (Rosenmiiller. in loc). In 
 asome'.vhal similar manner the Deity is said 
 (Habak. iii. 4) to have * had horns comin,' o.it of 
 his hands,' that is to say, he was made manifest 
 by lightning and thunder (fiilmina). — J. R. B. 
 
 HORNET, WASP. {'^'p^. Exod. xxiii. 28 , 
 Dent. vii. 20; Sejit. ras crcp-qKias ; Vulg. crabro- 
 ties; Josh. xxiv. 12, ryv ccpr^Kiay, crabi'onetn ; 
 Wisd. Sol. xii. 8, (T<priKai, vcspns, ' wasps'"). The 
 Greek words av6p-l]vri and o'<^'/j| are given in the 
 lexicons as signifying both 'hornet' and ' wa»p,' 
 especially the former of thew (Stepheiu, Scapuu^
 
 M4 
 
 HORNET. 
 
 HORSE. 
 
 ». T.) , and the T.atin vespa ;is denoting the ' wasp,' 
 and crnbro the 'Imrnel " (F'acciolati, Lex. s. v.) 
 But H.inluin ccinteials tliiit tliat which is vespa 
 with the Latins is properly with the Greeks aydp-fiyrj 
 (Gallice, une guepe), and not acp-i]^, as was thonirht 
 by Gaza ami Scalif^er; and urges that on thig 
 point so learned a Latin author as Pliny on;,'ht to 
 be con^ideied siillicient evidence; that he ascribes 
 to the vc'spce those thin^^s whicii Aiistolle (Hist. 
 Anim. v. 19. G17; ix. 6.j. (:(>) iisci'il>es to the 
 ay6p-fivai ; and, IVir'iiei-. that he also ascribes to the 
 crabroiies those things which Aiistotle ascribes to 
 the a-(pT]Kfs (coqip. Aiist. ut .supra; Pliny. Flist. 
 Nat. xi. "24, ed. Harduiri, li p. 17 J 1). The word 
 crabroiies Haiduiii acc<)ldin^'ly explains, ' Gtaecis, 
 a(prJKes : Gallis, rf<s_/i"e/<y)/s, lioiiiets.' If this cri- 
 ticism be jnst, it vindicates boili Jerome's trans- 
 lation of" the thne (irst wonls, and the Kni^l'sh 
 also. Our confideiKC in the ilefiuiteiiess of the 
 Sept. rendering becomes increased when it is re- 
 membered that the Pentateuch, tiie most accurate 
 portion of tlie whole version, was translated pro- 
 bably within (il'ty years alter the cleath of Aris- 
 totle. Certainly the known characteristics (.f the 
 hornet agree with the descriptions given of the 
 vrpv^ by Aiistotle, and of the crabro liy Pliny. 
 ' The kvOp7]va,L do not live by tlie nutriment 
 collected from flowers, a.s the l)ees, but prej; upon 
 many kinds of (lesli ; whence also they frequent 
 manure, for they pursue the great flies, and when 
 tliey have caught them, having removed the liead, 
 they fly aw.iy, carrying the rest of tiie body' 
 (^Hist. Anim. ix.). Again : — al fj.fv avOprivai, fVl 
 (jLsn-Jrpou TLvos' 01 5« (r<^J)/c€s, eV rpiayKri {-Koiovai 
 K-npla), 'The audp^yai build tii^ir nests in some 
 elevated |,'.u.ce. nut the <r<J)7)Key in a hole or cavity* 
 (v. 19). The description of Pliny is neaily a trans- 
 lation of tlie aliove; — ' Vespa; in siiblimi nidos 
 faciniit, crabrones in cavernis, aut sul) terra ;' on 
 which Cuvier remaiks. ' S«>i)esub tectis, aliquando 
 sub terra vesjiae ; in cavis arboribus crabrones, 
 sedlHcant" (Plui. Lihri de Animal, cnrante J. B. 
 Fr. S. Ajasson De Giandsagiie, cum notis a Cu- 
 vier, Paris, 183^, [). 4:24. n 2). 
 
 Still it must lie noticed that, as Harduin re- 
 marks, with wonder, Pliny, wiien speiiking of the 
 ichiieumoncs., a lesser species ui' hornet, calls them 
 vespee, while Aristotle, in the corresponding descrip- 
 tion, calls them G<pr]Kis (N. 10). It wctnld hence 
 eeem probable that the word vespa was sometimes 
 used in iin analogical and moie compreliensive 
 sense by Pliny ; which may account for a similar 
 variation in Jerome's rendering, ' vesyias " (Wisdom 
 xii. S). Even the Greek word had already under- 
 gone great aljuse, ibr Hesychius, 150 years before 
 Jerome, explains arfiprji'T) liy ei'Sor fie\icr<rris, ' a. 
 species of bee'; and Sui<las, in the eleventh cen- 
 tury, expla IIS it as a species of wasp, and observes 
 that the poets misapplietl tiie wokI to tlie bee (see 
 also Horn. IL xiii. 107). It being u|Kin the whole 
 most probable, therefore, that 'the hornet is the 
 true rendering in tlie>e jia-isages of Sciiptuie, the 
 only fiuther qiustion which remains is, whether the 
 word IS to be (aken as literally meaning this well- 
 t^nowii and teiritic insect, or whether it is to be 
 jiidevstood in a meta])liorical and liguiative sense 
 for disejises, supernatural terror. &c. by which 
 Jehovah * drove out the Hivites, Canaanites and 
 Hittites from before Israel.' Atnong the moderns, 
 ^iichaelis has defended tlie figurative sense. In ad- 
 "^iilion to other reasons for it, he doubts whether (lie 
 
 expulsion of the Canaanites cotila t>e efTecled '.j 
 swarms of (T^tjkioj, and proyioses to derive the He- 
 brew fiom a root signifying 'scourges,' 'plagues, 
 scntica, plaga, &c. {i>iippl. ad Lexic. Ilebr. vi. 
 21 ■)4); but his reasons are ably refuted by Ro- 
 seniniiller, apnd Bochart (Hieroz. Li[)S. 1796 
 iii. cli. 13, J). 402, Ike). In favour of the pos* 
 siljility of such an event it is oiiserved, that 
 .(5)lian relates thit the Phaselitae were actually 
 driven from their locality by such means (<!>a(r7j- 
 AiToj 5e npriKes k- t. K. Ha-t. Anim. ix. 28), and 
 Bochart has shown that these Phaselitae weie a 
 Phanieian people (nt supra, p. 412). Even Ro- 
 senmiilhr himself adopts the h'gumtive sense in 
 iiis Scholia on Exod. xxiii. 28 ; but on Jo.sb. 
 xxiv. 12 he retracts that opinion, and anijily re- 
 futes it. His reasonings and refutations have 
 been adopted by numerous writers (among others, 
 see Paxton's lUitstrations of Scripture, i. 303, 
 &c. ; Edin. 1S19). Michaelis's doul't of llie al>- 
 stract jiossibility seems very umeasonable, when the 
 irresistible power of bees and wasps, &c , attested by 
 numerous modern occurrences, and the thin iind 
 partial clothing of the Canaanites, are considered. 
 It is observable that the event is represented by 
 the autlior of the book of Wisdom as a merci- 
 ful dispensation, by wliicli the Almighty, he says, 
 's|iared as men, the ola inhabitants of his holy 
 land,' and ' gave them place for rejientance.' If 
 the hornet, considered as a fy, was in any way 
 connected with their idolatry, the visitation would 
 convey a practical refutation of their error [see 
 Baalzelmb. under Baai.]. It may be remaiked, 
 ttiat the hornet, no less than the v/hole species 
 of wasps, renders an essential service, in check- 
 ing the multiplication of flies and other insects, 
 which would otherwise become intolerable to 
 man; and that in regard to their architecture, 
 and especially their instincts and habits, they <\o 
 not yield to their more popular congener, the bee, 
 iiut even, in several resjjects, greatly excel it 
 ('Kirbv and Sjience, hitroduct. to Entomology, 
 Rvo. Lond. 182S, i. 273, 274; Reaumur, Ue- 
 moire pour servir a I' Histoire dcs insectes, vol. vi. 
 Mem. C, pour des Guespes, 4to. Par. 1734-42). — 
 
 J. V. D. 
 HORSE (D-1D stis; Gr. "ttttos; Turkish sukh ; 
 Gen. xlvii. 17; xlix. 17; Exod. xiv. 9, 23, and 
 in many other places; James iii 3; Rev. vi. 
 2, &c. Other names and epitliets occur in the 
 Hebrew, as t^'"1D parash, a ' saddle and chariot 
 iioise,' Isa. xxi. 7, i) ; D''£^1Q parashim, ' Persians' 
 or ' horsemen ;' ii'D") rechesh, the ' swii't,' Mic. 
 i. 13; 33"! rachab, 'cavalry,' or 'a group of war 
 chariots,' Gen. 1. 9; 2Sam. viii. 4 ; "^OT ram,ach, 
 ' a mare" f) (Esth. viii. 10 ; and D'TUN aibirim, 
 ' mighty or strong ones," Judg. v. '21; Jer. viii. 
 16). In the present writer's remaiks u|X)n the 
 Hebrew names of the horse, contained in Sir \\ . 
 Jar<line's Naturalist's Library (vol. xii.. Intro- 
 duction, ]ip. 78-Slj, several are jiointed out as of 
 foreign oiigiii. By the subsequent observations 
 in the same woik, it appears to be substantiated, 
 that the horse was derived from High Asia, and 
 was not indigenous in Arabia, Syria, or Egypt. 
 They aie not mentioned among the jnesents 
 which Pharaoh bestowed upon Abraham, and oc- 
 cur in Scrijiture for the (irst lime when tiie patri- 
 arch Joseph leceives them from the li^gyntians in 
 exchange for bread (Gen. xlvii. 17) — evidently as 
 valuable animals, disposed of sin„dy, and not ic
 
 HORSE. 
 
 (it)ve« or floPKs, lllcp f.i tie iiml ii«sfs. Tliey nere 
 gtill siillivnei'Mv iiii|i'iil.iiit to be cxpiessiy incn- 
 tioneii in ilii- ("ntiPial piocossiDii wliicli accninpii- 
 nipil tliP ImkIj' of .l.icol) to liis so|inlrlire in Canaan 
 (G*a. 1. 9^ ; and, I'or centuries after, it does not 
 
 HORSE. 
 
 8M 
 
 SH. [Egyptian Horse.] 
 
 appear tliat, luider tlie domestic management of 
 the Eu:yptians, unless tiie niiurain had j^veotly re- 
 duced tijem, liorscs had tnultiplied as they wotihl 
 have done in a land more congenial to their lialiits, 
 Binnc only six liundred chariots appear to have 
 pursued Israel (Exod. xiv. 7); — even admitting 
 that there were odier chariots and horsemen not 
 included in fiiat numher. In the sculptured 
 hattle-scenes, whitli are lielieved to represent 
 ■victories of Se'ostris, or of Thothmes II. and III., 
 over nations of Central Asia, it is evident that the 
 enemy's armies, as \iell as the foreign allies of 
 Kgy])t, are al)unilantly supplied with horses, hotli 
 for cliariots and lor riders; anil in triumpijal pro- 
 cessions fliey are shown as presents or trit)nte — 
 proving tiiat they were ])nrtioris of tiie national 
 wealth of conquered states sufficiently valualde 
 to he prized iu Egy|)t. At a later period, the 
 IxHiks of Deuteronomy (xvii. 16, for the future 
 kings of Jsrael are forbidden to po.isess many) 
 
 345 [Persian Horse.] 
 
 ind loslma (xi. 4) furnish similar evidence of 
 rI.u'i. lance of h rscs in tiie jilains of Syria ; and 
 in J(.t» occurs a <lescripfion of a |)erf'ect war- 
 horse coucheil in tlie l)old ii^'urative 1 an Linage of 
 inspiration, sucii as remains unequal 1('<I Ijy any 
 other poet, ancient or modern. Though the 
 Israelites liad chariots and horsemen opposed to 
 tlieiTi in the plain country from their lirst entrance 
 uito the land of [!r(/Uiise; as in Judges iv. 1 .">, 
 where we (ind Sscra with his chariots of war de- 
 feated al tJie foot of Mount Talwr; yet not bein^ 
 
 nr?uded to make military conqu'**ts hryond the 
 mountain basin and tlie adjacent ter.>'ory as- 
 signed them, they long reniaii.ed "vithouv civalry 
 or chariots themselves (l)eut. xvii. 16; 2 Sam. 
 viii. 4): they obeyed the divine injiniction tii 
 abstain from possessing horses, and, to the time 
 of David, ham-striuig such as ihey captured from 
 their enemies. It ajipeais, how<'xer, that a small 
 cavalry fort-e was ral'-ed by him ; and as, in all 
 tlie military operations of ^Vrsiern Asia, there 
 w£Ls a teiidency to increase the moujiled foice and 
 neglect the infantry, on the full establisliment of 
 royalty, when the Ilelirew government acipiired a 
 more political struclurs, the reign of Solomon dis- 
 ])l.iycd a military system which embraced a re- 
 gular body of horse and of chariots, evidently be- 
 come tlie more necessary, since the limits of his 
 sway were extended to the shores of the Arabian 
 (I'ulf, and far info the Syrian desert (I Kings x 
 26). Solomon likewise acted with commercial 
 views in the monopolizing spirit which Eastern 
 sovereigns have been prone to exercise ju all ages. 
 He bought cliariots and teams of horses in Egypt, 
 and probably in Armenia,' in all lands." and had 
 them brought into his dominions in strings, in the 
 same manner as horses are still conducted tc) and 
 from fairs: for this interpretation, as ofVered ijy 
 I'rulessor Paxlon, apjiears to convey the natural 
 and true meaning of the text ; and not ' stiingsof 
 linen yarn," whicli here seem t(» be out of place 
 (2Chron. i. 16, 17; ix. 25, 28). 
 
 The Tyrians jiurchased these objects from Solo- 
 mon, and, in the time of Ezekiil. impoited horses 
 themselves from Togarmah or Armenia. On r«- 
 tiuning I'rom the Habylonish ca])livity, the com- 
 mon possession of horses in Palestine was no 
 longer opposed ; for Neliemiah numbers seven 
 himdred and thirty-six belonging to the liberated 
 Hebrews (Nell. v'ii. 68). 
 
 All the great origin.al varieties or races of 
 horses were then known in ^^esteln Asia, and the 
 Htlnew [u-opliets themselves have not unfiequently 
 distinguished the nations they had in view, by 
 means of the predominant colours of their horses 
 — and that more correctly than commentators 
 have surmised. Taking Bochart's apjdication 
 of the Ileljrew names, the bay race, DITf^ adorn, 
 em])lialically l)elonged to Egypt anil Arabia 
 Felix ; tlie white, D''i3T' lebmiim, to the regions 
 above the Eiixine Sea, Asia Minor, and northern 
 High Asia ; the dun. or cream-colonietl. Cplf 
 serii/iim, to the Medes; the Sjiottcd pieiiald, or 
 skewliald, D"'Tl3 befudiin, to the Macedonians, 
 the Paithians, and later Tahfars ; and the blaciv, 
 D^TlHt^' sliuchorim, to the Romans ; biit the ches- 
 imts, V'IDN aimttz, do not Ijelong to any known 
 historical race (Zecii. i. 8; vi. 2). 
 
 Bay or red hor.ses occur most freouently on 
 Egyptian painted monuments, this being the pii- 
 mitive colour of tiie Arabian stock; but while 
 horses are also common, aiid, in a few ii.stajices, 
 black — the last probably only to relieve the p. ler 
 colour of the one beside it in the ]iictiire. Theie 
 is .ilso, we unileratand, an instance of a Sjiotted pair, 
 lending to siiow that the valley of the Nile was 
 originally supplied with horses fiom foreign 
 sources, and liistinct regions, as indeeii the tiibn»« 
 pictuies further attest. The spotted, if not real, 
 but painti'ii liurses, indicate the aniiqu'ty ol ti 
 pr;i'tice still iu vogue; for staining the hair of 
 riding animals willi sjiots of variovis colours, atul
 
 086 
 
 IIOSANNA. 
 
 HOSEA. 
 
 dyein;; tlieir linilTs aiul tails crimgon, is a jTac- 
 lice of common oc.c.uiiei.'ce in tiie Kasr, atxi wa» 
 exempli lied in Ldndun when the late Siiali of 
 Persia piLventeil ilie Piitice Rei^ent witli several 
 white anil ^'ley lioises, all ol" wiiich were ridden 
 to Carlton Palace witii their (ails dyed crimson, 
 as we ourselves witnessed [Ass]. 
 
 On the iiaTiiral Instory of the horse there is no 
 occasion to enter in tliis place; l)ut it rtiay lie pro- 
 per to notice that tiie riding hridle was long a 
 mere slip-knot, ])assed round the under jaw into 
 the mouth, liius foinisiiing only one rein; and 
 that a rod was commonly added to gnide the 
 animal with more facility. The bridle, however, 
 and tlie reins of clianot-horses were, at a very 
 earlv age, exceeilinj^ly perfect; as the monuments 
 rif Egypt, Etnnia, and Greece, amply ))rove. 
 Saddles were not used, the rider sitting on the 
 bare back, or using a cloth or mat girded on tlie 
 animal. The Romans, no doubt co])ying the Per- 
 sian Cataphractae, (irst used pad saddles, and from 
 the northern nations adopted stinudi or spurs. 
 Stirru]js were unknown. Avicenna lirst mentions 
 the rikiab, or .\rabian stiirup, peihaps tjje most 
 ancient ; although in the tumnli of Central Asia, 
 Tahtar horse skeletons, bridles, and stirrup sad- 
 dles, have l)een found along with idols; whicli 
 proves the tondjs to bemoie ancient than the intro- 
 duction of Islam. ^Vith regard to iiorse-shoeing, 
 Bishop Lowth and Bracy Clark were mistaken 
 hi believing that the Roman horse or mule shoe 
 was fiistened on witlioiit nails driven through the 
 horny part of the hoof, as at ])resent. A contrary 
 conclusion may be inferred from several passages 
 in the poets; and the figure of a horse in the 
 Pompeii battle mosaic, shod in the same manner 
 as is now the ])ractice, leaves little lUiubt on the 
 question. The (n-eceding cuts represent ancient 
 Persian and Kgyjjtian horse?, both taken from 
 antique Ijas-reliefs. — C. H. S. 
 
 HORSE-LEECH. [Ai.ukah.]' 
 
 HOSANNA(iO \l,V^^\r\; New Test. 'Cicravvd.), 
 a form of acclamatoiy blessing or wishing well, 
 which signifies, Save now I Succour now ! Be 
 now pro))itioiis ! It oocnrs in Matt. xxi. 9 (also 
 Mark xi. 0, 10; Jolm xiL 13) — ' Hosanna to the 
 Son of David; Blessed is he that cometh in (lie 
 i:ame of tlie Lord ; Hosanna in tlie highest.' This 
 was on the occasion of our Saviour's pulilic entry 
 into Jeru-alem, and fairly construed, wouhl mean, 
 ' Lord, preserve this Son of David ; heap favonis 
 and blessings on him !' It is further to be ob- 
 served tiiat Hosanna was a customary form of 
 acclamation at the Feast of Tabernacles. Tliis 
 feast was celebrated in Septeml)er, just befoye the 
 commencement of liie civil year; on whicli oc- 
 casion tiie people canied in tiieir hands bundles 
 of boughs of p.ilms, myrtles, &c. (Josejjli. Antiq. 
 xiii. 13. (J; iii. 10.4). Tiiey then repeated the 
 25iii and 2Gth verses of Ps. cxviii , which com- 
 mence with the word Hosanna; and from this 
 circumstarice tliey gave the boughs, and tiie 
 prayers, and the feast itself, the name of Hosanna. 
 They observed tiie same forms also at the Encaenia 
 y\ Mace. X. (5, 7 ; 2 Alacc. xiii. 51 ; Rev. vii. 9) 
 and the Passover. And as they celebrated the 
 Feast of Tabernacles with great joy and gladness, 
 in like manner, on this oi;casion, did they hail 
 tlie coming of the Mess ah, wiiose advent tliey be- 
 lieved to be reoiesenled in all the feasts. 
 
 HOSEA (VP'in), the first in order of Iht minor 
 [iropiiets in tlie common editions of fi.e Hebrew 
 Scriptures, as well as f!" tlie Alexandrian and 
 Vulgate translations. Tlie arrtxTji^ement of the 
 otiier writers, in the ^'jjoEKairp6<p-rrTov o\' the Greek 
 version, dill'ers consideral)ly from that of the 
 Hebrew copies. Jerome (^I'lvef. in Xll. 7Vo- 
 phetas) says, ' Non idem est onlo dnodecim pro- 
 phetarum apud Hebia-os (jui est ajuid iios,' Both, 
 liowever, place Hosea first in the catalogue; yet 
 the reasons often assigned for the priority of place 
 which this pn)phet enjoys are by no means safis- 
 factory. They are founded on a misinterpretation 
 of the first clause of tlie second verse of his oracles, 
 mn'"in n7nn, ' the beginning of the word of 
 the Lord.' Ilengstenberg {^Cltristology, Keith's 
 translation, vol. ii. )). 23), denying, against Winer 
 and Gesenius, that "IHT is a noun, and ta!<ing it to 
 be the prater ofpi'hel, venders the clause, ' the be- 
 ginning of the Lord hath spoken ;' the status con- 
 
 structus of n^nn, according to him, being ex- 
 plained l)y the fact ' that the whole li>l lowing ]iio- 
 position i3 treated as one substantive idea.' But 
 this ])liraseol()gy has reference not to nriority of time 
 in Hosea "s commission as comjiared with other jiro- 
 jiliets, but to the early period ol'the jiiedictions to 
 whicli it is the inlrtxluctioii. It is merely an 
 intimation that they were the first divine com- 
 munications which the son of Beeri enjoyed. 
 Neitlier did Hosea flourish earlier than all the 
 other minor prophets: the very early era assigned 
 to !iim by the Jewish writers and other exjiositors 
 of former times are alfogetlier extravagant. By 
 the best computation he seems to have Ix'en pie- 
 ceded iiy Joel, Amos, and Jonah. The ])rophet« 
 are thus arranged by De Wette {Einlaituiig, 
 § 225) :- 
 
 1 febrew Text. Greek Text. 
 
 1. Hosea. 1. Hosea. 
 
 2. Joel. 2. Amt>s, 
 
 3. Amos. 3. Micab. 
 
 4. Obadiah. 4 JoeL 
 
 (Jhriinological Order. 
 
 1. Joel, about 810 u.c. 
 
 2. Jonah „ MO u.c. 
 
 3. Amos „ 7yt> B.C. 
 
 4. Hosea ,, 7b5 ii.c. 
 
 The table given liy Rosenmiiller (Scholia m 
 Mill. I'riiph. \i. 7) diU'ers from this only in 
 placing Joiiali before Joel in chronological older. 
 Compare Newcome (Preface to Minor Prophets, 
 p. 45). Tlie jnobable causes of this location of 
 Hosea may be the thoronglily national clwracter 
 Df his oracles, their length, their earnest tone and 
 vivid rejiiesentatioiis : because he dischaigtd the 
 duties of his ofiice for a longer jjeriod tlian any 
 of his prophetic associates, is the less natuial con- 
 jecture which has been hazarded by Rosenmuller. 
 The contour oi' Hosea"s book has a closer resem- 
 blance to the greater pro|)hets than any of tiie 
 eleven productions liy which it is succeedeil. 
 
 The name of this piophet has been \ariously in- 
 terpreted. Jerome eironeously renders it ' Salvator.' 
 It may be either tlie infinitive absolute, 'Salvando,' 
 or the imperative, 'Salva" (O Dens). It is ordi- 
 naril}' written in Greek, 'Clffrje, and once with tl« 
 initial aspirate, 'Clarit (Rom. ix. 25 ). Tlie fig- 
 ments of Jewish writers regarding Ilosea's pa- 
 rentage need scaf-ely be mentioned. His father, 
 ^■TXS, has been confounded with Ttlii;!, a prinM
 
 HOSE A. 
 
 HOSEA. 
 
 8«7 
 
 •f tlie Reiil)eiiites, 1 Climn. v. 6. So, too, Beeri 
 has l)e<'n icckoiied a pinplut liimsell'. iKxoulin,^ to 
 tlie iiil'l)iiiiciil notion that liie iiifnlioii ol" a pio- 
 jiliet's Citlier in the intKuliirtioii to !iis ])n)jilii'cies 
 is a jjroof tliat siie as well as sou was <'ndoweii 
 witii tlie oracular spirit. 
 
 Wlietlicr Ho'ica was a citizen of Israel or Jiidah 
 has been ilis|iutc'il. Tiio ])st'iulo-K])l|ilianius and 
 J^orotlieus of Tyre speak of iiini as liein^ lioin at 
 Ueleinotli, in tlie triiie oC Issacliar (Kpiplian. De 
 Vitis Prophet, cap. xi. ; Dorolli. Do Vroph. 
 cap. i.). Diusius (Critici Sacri, in loc, torn, v.) 
 prefers the reading • Betli-senie.s,' and quotes 
 Jerome, wlio says, ' Osee de Iriliu Issacliar 
 fuit oitus in IJelli-semcs.' But JMauier confenils 
 strenuously that he helonj^ed to the kingdom of 
 Judah {Comtnent. T'lcoL, ed. Roseimiiiller, vol. ii. 
 p. 39 H; wiiile Jaliti supposes tiiat lie exercised 
 his office, not, as Amos tiid, in Israel, hut in the 
 principalily of Ju<iah. Maurcr appeals to the su- 
 perscri[)tion in Amos as a jnoof that prophets of 
 Jewish origin were sometimes ci'mmissioned to 
 labour in the Kingdom of Israel (against the 
 appeal to Amos, vi.le Credner, Joel, p. 6<>, and 
 Hitzig, Ilandb. Kurzge. exeqet zum A. T. p. 72). 
 But with the exceijtioii of the case recorded in 
 I Kings xiii. I (a case altogether too singular 
 and mysterious to serve as an argument), the 
 instance of Amos is a solitary one, and seems 
 to have lieen regarded as anomalous liy his 
 contemporaries (Amos vii. 12) Neither can we 
 assent to tlie other hypothesis of Maurer, that the 
 mention of the Jewish kings Uzziah, Jotham, 
 Alia/, and Hezekiah, liy Hosea in Ins su])erscrip- 
 tion, is a proof that the seer regarded them as his 
 rightful soveieigns, as monarchs of that territory 
 which ga\e him birth. Hengsfenijerg has well 
 re[)lied, that Mauier forgets ' the lelation in which 
 the pious in Israel generally, and the prophets in 
 particular, stood to the kingdom of Judah. They 
 Considered the whole separation, not only the 
 religious, but also the civil, as an apostacy from 
 God. The dominion of the tlieorracy was pro- 
 mised to be the throne of David.' The lofty 
 Elijah, on a memorable o(casi(.ri, when a direct 
 and solemn appeal was made to the head of the 
 theocracy, took ticclve stones, one for each tiibe — 
 a proof that lie regarded tiie nation as one in reli- 
 gious conlederation. It was also necessary, for 
 correct chronology, that the kings of both nations 
 •liould be noted. Jeroboam of I-rael is mentioned 
 Bs a means of ascertaining at what ])eriod in the 
 long reign of Uzziah Hosea liegan to prophesy, 
 and Uzziaii's successors are named in particular, 
 because the confusion and anarchy of the seieral 
 interregna in the kingdom of Israel rendered 
 computation by the names of Jeroboams succeis- 
 sors very awkward, diflicult, and uncertain. 
 The other argurnerit of Maurer for Hosea's lieing 
 a Jew, viz. because his own peojile are so severely 
 threatened in his leprooi's and denunciations, im- 
 plies a predominance of national piepossession or 
 antipathy in the inspire I brea-st wliicli is incon- 
 sistent with our notions of tlie piety and patriotism 
 of the prophetic commission (Knobel, Der Pro- 
 phetisnuis der Hebraer, vol. i. p. 2il3). So that 
 we accede to the opinion of Ue Wette, Rosen- 
 tniiller, Hengstenberg. Kiclihorn, Manger, Uhlund, 
 and Kuinoel, that Hosea was an Israelite, a 
 natne of that kingdom with wlios" sins and fates 
 itis book is S])ecially and primarll occupied. 
 
 There is no reason, with De Wette, Maurer, 
 and Hil/ig. to do(d)t tlie gi luiinencss of the pre- 
 sent su|)erscriplion, or, w ilh liosen in tiller and Jahn, 
 to suppose that it n ay iiave been ad<led by a 
 later hand — though the two last writers uphold id 
 authenticity. The (ir-t and second verses of the 
 prophe<y are so closely connected in the structure 
 of the language and style of the nairation, tiiat 
 th<! second verse Itself woidd lieconi<! suspicious, 
 if the (Irst were reckoned a spurious addition. 
 The superscription determines the length of time 
 during which Hosea prophesied. That |ieii<id 
 was both long and eventful, commencing in the 
 days of Jerobnani, the son ol' Joasli, cKtendiiig 
 through the lives of U/./.iah, Joiharn, .\!ia/., and 
 concluding in the leign of Hezekiah. U/.ziah and 
 Jeroboam were contemporary sover<'igns (or a cer- 
 tain length of time. If we com])ute from the first 
 year of Uzziah to the last of Hezekiah, we (ind a 
 period of 113 years. Such a period appears evi- 
 dently to l)e loo long, and the most jirobalile cal- 
 culation is to reckon lioni the last years uf Jero- 
 boam to the first of Ilezeki^ih. 
 We have then at least of Uzziah's reign 2fi years. 
 „ „ Jotham „ IG „ 
 
 „ „ Ahaz „ 16 „ 
 
 „ „ Hezekiah „ 2 „ 
 
 60* 
 This calculation is as close an approximation 
 as it is now jiossible to obtain. At some point 
 within the last fourteen years of Jeroboam Hosea 
 began to pro|)hesy. From the death of Jeroboam 
 to the beginning of Hezekiah, at an ordinary cal- 
 culation, are fifty-seven or fifty-eight years. 
 Hishop Horsley extends the jieriod considerably 
 longer {Commentary on Hosea , Works, vol. iii. 
 ji. 'I'M), We do not understand tlie jirlnciple of . 
 Rosenmiiller's computation, which reduces the 
 time belwcrn Jeroboam's death and Ilezekiah's 
 accession to a period of almost foity years. We 
 agree with Maurcr's remaik {Comment. Gram,. 
 Hist. Crit. in Prophetas Miiiores, Lipsiie, 1810), 
 'Alii annos ()uadraginta muneiant nescio ipiem 
 comfiutandi motliim Sfcuti." This longduialion 
 of otiice is not im]irobable, and the liook itself 
 fiuTiishes strong presinnptive evidence in su])port 
 of this chronology. The first jiiophecy of Hosea 
 foretells the overthniw of Jehu's liouse ; and the 
 menace was fulfilled on the death of JeroUiam, 
 his great-grandson. ♦ This was the word of the 
 Lord wliicii he spake inilo .lehu, saying. Thy sons 
 shall sit on the throne of Israel unto the fourth 
 generation; and so it came to p;iss ' (2 Kings 
 XV. 12). A prediction of the ruin which was to 
 overthrow Jehu's house at Jeroboam* death, must 
 have bten uttered during .leroboam's life. This 
 fact defines the period of Hosea's commencement 
 of his labours, and vetifies the inscription, ivliich 
 states that the word of the Lord came to him in 
 the reign of Jeroboam, the son of Joash, king of 
 Israel. Again, in ch. x. H, allusion is made to 
 an expedition of Shalmanezeragiiinst Israel; and ' 
 if it was the first inroad against king Iloshea, uho • 
 began to reign in the twellth year of Ahaz, the 
 event releried to by the prophet as pa-t must have 
 hajipened close ujion the beginning of the govern- 
 
 * Mauier. in the Comment. Theol. p. 284, and 
 more lately in his Comment Cram. Wat. Crit. 
 iu Proi>h. Min., Lipsise, 1840.
 
 863 
 
 HOSE A. 
 
 HOSE A. 
 
 Tnptil of Hezekiali (2 Kings xvii. 5). Dafa are 
 thus in like manner allorded to coirononite the 
 ilatemeni that He/ei^iah had asccniled the thniiie 
 ere the lontr-ljved servant ul' ,leho\a'ii wa-; released 
 from iiis toils. The extended duration iiidiealed 
 ,in the snijerscription is thus home out by tije 
 contents oi' ttie jirophecy. 
 
 The years of Hosea's life were melancholy and 
 tragic. The vials of the wrath of lieaven were 
 jioured out on his apostate pe;)])le. The nation 
 eudered uuder the evils of that schism which was 
 etVecfed l>y the craft of him who has heeii l)ranile(l 
 with the indelihle stigma— 'Jerol)oam, who made 
 Israel to sin.' The obligations of law had been 
 relaxed, and the claims of religion disvegariled ; 
 Haal l)ecame the rival of Jehovah, and i;i the dark 
 recesses of tjje groves were jiractised tiie impure 
 and murderous rites of heatlien deities ; pe.iceaml 
 prosperity (led the land, which was iiarassed by 
 foreign invasion and domestic broils; mi, 'lit and 
 murder became the twin sentinels of the throne; 
 alliances were formed with other nations, which 
 brought with them seductioni to pagauisni ; cap- 
 tivity and insult were heaped up.m Israel by 
 the uncircumcised ; the Uiition was thoroughly 
 debased, and but a fraction of its ])opuLition 
 maintained its spiritual allegiance (2 Kings xix. 
 18). Tiie death of Jeroboam H. was followed l)y 
 aii interregiumi often years. At the ex])iry of this 
 [leriod, his sou Zechariah assumed the sovereignty, 
 and was slain by Shall um, after the shoit space of 
 SIX months (2 Kings xv. lOj. In four weeks 
 Shallum was assiv;sinated l)y Meiiahern. The 
 assassin, d':ring a ilisturbed reign of ten years, 
 became tributary to the Assyrian Pul. His suc- 
 cessor, Fekahiah, wore the crown but two years, 
 wiien he v/as m irdered by Pekah. Pekali, after 
 swaying his bloody sce|)tre for twenty years, met 
 asimilar fate in tlie cons])iracy of H.isliea ; Hoshea, 
 the last of the usurpers, after another iuteiregnum 
 of eight years, ascentled the throne, and his admi- 
 nistration of nine years ended in the overthrow ol' 
 bis kingdom and the ex))atriatiou of his people. 
 'The Lord was very angry with Israel, and re- 
 moved rliem out of ids sight. So was Israel 
 carried out of their own land to .\ssyria unto tiiis 
 day' (2 Kmgs xvii. IR, 23). 
 
 The prophecies of Hosea were directeil espe- 
 cially against the country whose sin had brought 
 upon it such disasrers — ])rolonged anarchy and 
 final captivity. Israel, or Kpliraim, is the people 
 especially addressed. Tlieir homicides and foiin- 
 catious, tlieir ])erjury and theft, their idolatry and 
 impiety are censured anil satirised with a faithful 
 severity. Judah is sometimes, indeed, introduced, 
 warned and admonished. Bisliop Horsley ( IVor/cs, 
 iii. 23<>". reckons it a mistake to sup])ose 'that 
 Hoseas prophecies are almost wholly directed 
 against the kingdom of Israel.' The bisho]) de- 
 scribes what he thinks the correct extent of Hosea's 
 commission, but has adiluced no ]M<)of of his 
 assertion. .-Vny one readuig Hosea will at once 
 discover that the oracles having relation to Israel 
 are primary, while the refeiences to Judah are only 
 incidental. In ch. i. 7, Judah is mentioned in 
 contrast with Israel, to whose condition the svni- 
 bolic name of the pro];hefs son is specially a])pli- 
 cable. In ver. 11 the future union of the two 
 nations is predicted. The long oracle in ch. ii. 
 has no relation to Judah, nor the symbolic re- 
 presentation in ch. iii. Ch. iv. is severe u|)()n 
 
 E])hraim, and ends with a very brit f exlior^ation 
 
 to Judah not to folkiw his examjilt-. In the suc- 
 ceeding chapters jilhislons to Judali do indeed 
 occasionally occut, when similar sins can he ])re- 
 dicated of both branches of the nation. The pro- 
 phet's mind was intensely interested in the d."sti- 
 nies of his own jjeople. Ttie nations around him 
 are unheeded ; ids prophetic eye beholds the crisis 
 ap]iroaching his country, and sees its cantons 
 ra\aged, its tribes nuudered or enslaved. No 
 woniier that his reijukes were so ti-riible, his me- 
 naces so alarming, that his soni poured forth ita 
 strength in an ecstasy of grief and all'ection. In 
 vitations, replete wifli tenderness and pathos, arp 
 interspersed with his warnings and expostulations. 
 Now we are startled with a vision of the throne, 
 at first shrouded in darkness, and seudinj; forth 
 lightnings, thunders, and voices; but wiiile we 
 gaze, it becomes encircled with a rainbow, which 
 gradually expands till it is lost in that universal 
 brilliancy whicii itself had originated (ch. xi. 
 and xiv.). 
 
 The ])eculiar mode of instruction which the 
 ])ropliet det uls in the first and third chapters 
 of his oracles his given rise to many disjnifeil 
 theories. We refer fo the command expressed in 
 ch. i. 2 — 'And the Lord said unto Ilosea, Go, 
 take imto thee a wife of whored, ims and children. 
 of whoredoms,' &c. ; ch. iii. 1, 'Then said the 
 Lord unto me, Go yet, love a woman beloved of 
 iier friend, yet an ad.ultcress,' &c. What was the 
 ];rccise nature of the transactions here recorded I 
 Were they real events, tiie result of divine injunc- 
 tions literally understood, and as literally ful.4lled? 
 or were these intimations to the ])rophet only in- 
 tended to be pictorial illustrations of the ajiostacy 
 and spiritual folly and iinfaitlifuhiess of Isiaell 
 The former view, viz. thai the projihet actually 
 and literally entere<l into this impure connubial 
 alliance, was advocated in ancient times by 
 ('yril, Theodoret, B;isil, find Augustine; and 
 more recently has lieen mauitained by Mercer, 
 Grofius, Houl)it>aiit, Manger, Horsley, and Stuck. 
 Fanciful theories are also rife on this subject. 
 Luther supposed the prophet to perform a kind of 
 tlrama in view of the people, giving his lawful 
 wife and children tliese mystical apj)enations. 
 Newcome (Min. Prophets) thinks that a wife ot 
 fornication means merely an Israelite, a woman 
 of apostate and ailulterous Israel. So Jac. Ca- 
 \)e\\\ii [III Iluscam; Opera, \).Ci^^). Hengsten- 
 berg supposes the jn'ophet to relate actions which 
 happened, indeed, actually, but not outwardly. 
 Some, with Maimonides (Moreh Nevochim, pait 
 ii.), imagine it to be a nocturnal vision; while 
 others make it wholly an allegory, as the Chaldee 
 Paraphrasf, Jerome, Drusius, Bauer, Rosen- 
 miiller. Kuinoel, and Lowth. The view ot 
 Hengstenherg, and so.ch as have held his theory 
 (Maikii Diatribe de uxore fi)rnicationu7n acci- 
 pienda, &c. Lugd. Katav. 1696), is nat materially 
 different from the last to which we have refened. 
 Both agree in cididemuiug the first opinion, which 
 the fast and forward mind of Horsley so stre- 
 nuously maintained. Hengstenherg, at great 
 length and with much force, has refuted tins 
 strange hypctheos (C'/^iA-^otof/y. ii. 11-22). Be- 
 sides other arguments resting on the impurity and 
 loathsomeness of the su]i])Ose<l nu])tial contract, it 
 may be argued against the external reality of the 
 event, that it must have re(iuiied several yeacf
 
 HOSEA, 
 
 fot its coinpleticn, and tl'af llic iinpiessiveness of 
 tlie symbol would tlieiet'ore lie wcakcju'd ,iiid ohli- 
 leia^ed. Utlicr [noplielic fransaclionsofa similar 
 natiiie niiLjiit lie icCi'iied to. Jerome {Comment. 
 ir. loc.) lias leCeried to E/.ek. iv. 4. It is not to 
 be sii|)|i()sed, as ha- sometimes lieen ai'^ued, that 
 the urojihet WiLS ivimn andeil to commit lornica- 
 tiun. Tiie divine injunction was to marry — 
 'Scortum aliquis dnceie potest sine jieccato, scor- 
 lari non item." Hrnsiiis (^('omm. in loc. in Criiici 
 Sacri, tom. v.). Whichever way this (jiieslion may 
 be solved ; wliether these occurrences be ret^arded 
 as a real and external transaction, or a.s a piece of 
 spiritual scenery, or only, as is most probable 
 (Witsii Miscell. Sac. p. DO), an allet.'orical de- 
 scription, it is agreed on all hands that the actions 
 are typical ; that tiiey are, as Jerome calls them, 
 tacramenta futuroriim . 
 
 Expositors are not at all agreed as to flie mean- 
 ing of tiie piirase 'wile of whoredoms," Hl^'N 
 D'JIJT ; whether the phrase refeis to harlotry before 
 marriage, or unfuitiifulness after it. It may all'ord 
 an easy solution of the dilliculty, if we look at the 
 antitype in its history and character. Adultery 
 is the ap|)€lIation of idolatrous apostacy. The 
 Jewish uatii;n were espoused to God. The con- 
 tract was formed on Sinai ; but the Jewish people 
 had ))riir to this period gone a-whoring. Josh, 
 xxiv. 2-14, ' Your fathers dwelt on the other side' 
 of tl.'e Hood in old time, and they serveil other 
 gods.' Com]). Lev. xvii. 7, in which it is im- 
 plied lliaf idolatious ])ropcnsities had also deve- 
 loped tliem-;elvei; during the abode in Egypt : so 
 that 0*313? nt^'X may signify one devoted lo 
 lasciviousness ]irior to h'^r marriage. The mar- 
 riage must be suyiposed a real contract, or its 
 significance would be lost. Jer. ii. 2, ' I remem- 
 ber thee, the kindness of thy youth, the love of 
 thine es[)L)usals, when thou wentest after me in (he 
 
 wildernes-;, in a land that was not sown.' '"Jp'' 
 D*313T., children of rchoredoms, refer irost na- 
 turally 'o the two sons and daughter afterwards 
 to lie born. They were not the prophet s own, as 
 is intimated in the allegory, and they followed 
 the pernicious examjile of the mother. Spiritual 
 adultery was the debasing sin of Israel. ' Non 
 dicitnr.' observes Manger, 'cognovit uxorem, sed 
 simpliciter concepit et ]iepent." The chihiien 
 are not his. It is said, indeed, in verse 3, ' She 
 
 bare him a son.' The word y? is wanting in 
 some MSS. and in some copies of the Septuagint. 
 If genuine it only shows the efl'rontery of the 
 adulteress, and the jjatience of the husband in 
 receiving and educating as his own a spiuions 
 brood. The Israelites, who had been taken into 
 covenant very soon fell from their Iir4 love, and 
 were characterized by insatiable spiritual wanton- 
 ness : yet their Maker, their husband, did not at 
 once clivcne them, but exhibited a marvellous 
 long-sufl'ering. 
 
 The names of the children being symbolical, 
 the name of the mother has probably a similar 
 
 signification. DvHTni "lD3 may have the 
 !>vnil>olic sense of 'one thoroughly abandoned to 
 «eii^ual delights:' "lD3 signifies completion 
 J'.Aald, Gram. 22S); D'''pm-n3, 'daughter of 
 gia))e-cakes," the ih.ial form being expressive of 
 the cnode in whi:h these dainties were baked 
 in 'ouble layers. The Greek form, iraAu'0>j, 
 
 HOSEA. 
 
 86S 
 
 is apparently a corruption of the Ilebrew MPn. 
 The names of liie children are 7NV17\ Jezieel, 
 
 non"; Vh, Lo-ruhamah, and >Dy nS, Lo-annni. 
 The prophet ex|.lains the meaning of the ap|iella- 
 tioiis. it is geneially supposed that the name* 
 refer to three successive generations of the Israel 
 itish jxMiple. llengstenberg, on liie other hand 
 argues lijat ' wife and chihiren both are the ])eo- 
 ple of Israel : the thiee names must not be con- 
 sidered separately, but taken logftlicr." Hut as 
 the marriage is first mentioned, and the births of 
 tin: cluldieti aie detailed in order, some time 
 elapsing lietween the events, we rather adhere to 
 the ordinary exposition. Nor is it without reason 
 that the second child is described as a female. 
 
 Tiie first ciiild, Jezreel, may lefer to the first 
 dynasty of Jeioboam I. and Ins siicce-sors, which 
 was terminated in the blood of Ahab"s liouse 
 which Jehu shed at Je/.reel. The name suggests 
 also the cruel and frauduient i.os-ession of tire 
 vineyard of Naboth, ' which was in .lezreel,' where, 
 too, the woman Jezebel was slain so ignominiously 
 (1 Kings xvi 1 ; '2 Kings ix. 21). But as Jehu 
 and iiis fiimily had become as corrupt as their 
 j)redecessors, the scenes of Jezreel were again to 
 be enacted, and Jelufs race must perish. Jez- 
 reel, the s])ot lefieried to by the projihef, is also, 
 according to Jerome, the jilace where the .Assy- 
 rian aimy routtd the Israelites. The name of 
 this child jissociates tie past and future, syniliolizes 
 past sins, intermediate jiunishments, and final 
 overlhrow. The name of the second child, Lo- 
 ruhamah, ' not-pitied,' the ajjpellation of a de- 
 grailed datighter, may refer to the feeble, effenii- 
 nate jerioil which followed the oveillnow of the 
 tiist dynasty, when Israel iiecanre weak and heli>- 
 less as well as sunk and abandoneil. The favour 
 of God was not exinbited to the nation : they were 
 3,s abject as imnious. But the n ign of Jero- 
 boam II. was pro jierous ; new energy was infu.sed 
 into the kingdom : gleams of its former jiros])eiiiy 
 shone u| on it. Tli'S revi\al of strength in that 
 geneialion may be typified l)v the birlh of a third 
 child, a son, Lo-ammi, ' not-my-people ' (2 Kings 
 xiv. 2")). Yet ]irosperity did not firing with it 
 a revival of piety; still, alth.iugh their vigour 
 was reciiiited, they were not Gods ]ie(,ple (iec- 
 tiires on the Jewish Antii,tiities and Scnptitrcs, 
 by J. G. Palfiey, vol. ii. 122, Boston, NA., l^il). 
 The space we have already occupied precludes 
 move minute criticism ; but the geneial juinciples 
 we have inilicaled may be ajiplied to the second 
 and third chapters. 
 
 Recent wtiters, such as Bertholdt, Eichhorn, 
 De Wette, Stuck, Maurer, and Hitzig, have la- 
 lioured much, but in vain, to divide the book of 
 Ilosea into separate ]iortions, assigning to eacL 
 the period at which it was written; but from the 
 want of sufKcient data the attemjit must rest 
 jirincipally on taste and fancy. A sufficient 
 ))roof of the correctness of this ojiinion may be 
 found in the contradictory sections an<l allotments 
 of the various writers who have engaged in the 
 task. Chapters i. ii. and iii. evidently form one 
 division : it is next to im]iossible to separate and 
 distinguish the other chapters. The form and 
 style are very similar throughout all the second 
 portion. 
 
 The ])eculiarities of Hosea's style have been 
 often remarked. Jerome says of hix. ' Com*
 
 no 
 
 HOSE A. 
 
 HOSPITALITY. 
 
 niaticus est, et quasi per seiitentias loqwens ' 
 (Preef. ad XII. Proph.). His style, says De 
 VVette, 'is ibmpt, utinxiiideil, and ebullient; liis 
 r.iytlim lianl, leaping, anil violent. The langnaf^e 
 is jieculiar anil dilliciilf' (^Einleituiig^ ^ 228). 
 Lowtli ( Prcglcct. 21) speaks of liini as the most 
 difficult anil perplexed of tlie ])i(>])hets. Bishop 
 lloisley li.is remarked hi> ]>ecidiiir idioms, — his 
 chanj^e of i)erson, anoniiilies of KB"'lf'' "nd num- 
 ber, and use of llie nominative absolute ( IVorks, 
 vol. iii.). Eicliliorn's description of his style was 
 probably at the same time meant as an irniiati:in 
 of it ( Einleitung^ ^ 555) : — • His discourse is like 
 a garland woven of a multiplicity of flowers : 
 images are woven upon images, conijjarison wound 
 uyon com|)arison, metajihor stiung upon metaphor. 
 He plucks one flower, and throws it down that 
 he may directly l)reak ofi' another Like a bee 
 he flies from one flower-bed to another, that he 
 may suck ins honey from the most varied pieces. 
 It is a natural consequence tliat his li^nres some- 
 times ibrm strings of ])earls. Often is he prone 
 to approach to allegory — often he sinks down in 
 obscurity' (comp. ch. v. 9; vi. 3; vii. 8; xiii. 3, 
 7, 8, 1(5). Unusual words and forms of con- 
 nection sometimes occur (De Wette, § 228). Of 
 the foimer, examjjles are to be found in ch. 
 
 viii. 13, D^anan -, xiii. s, nni^'pn -. x. 2, tiij; ; 
 
 xi. 7, Nl'pn; V. 13; X. 6, 3T Tj'pD; of the 
 
 -alter, in ch. vii. 16, "py vh ; ix. 8, Qy HQ^'; 
 
 xiv. 3. irnsb' anS V,):h€'l. Many examples 
 occur of the comparatio decnrtala, arising from 
 tlie peculiar abruptness of tlie style ; the particles 
 of connection, causal, adversative, transitive, &c. 
 being frequently omitted. 
 
 Hosea, as a ]irophet, is expressly quoted by 
 Matthew (ii. 15). The citation is from the first 
 verse of cii. xi. Hosea vi. 6 is quoted twice by 
 the same evangelist (ix. 13; xii. 7). Quotations 
 from his prophecies are also to be i'onnd in Kom. 
 ix. 25, 26. References to them occur in 1 Cor. 
 XV. 55, and in I Pet. ii. 10. Messianic references 
 are not clearly and jirominently developed (Gram- 
 berg, ReUgionsid. ii. 298). This book, however, 
 is not without them ; but they lie more in the 
 i^irit of its allusions than in the letter. Hosea's 
 Christology aj)pears written not wilh ink, but 
 with the sjjirit of the living God, on the fleshly 
 tables of his heart. The future conversion of 
 his people to the Lord their God, and David 
 their king, their glorious privilege in becoming 
 sous of the living God, the faithfulness of the 
 original promise to .A.l)iaham, that the number of 
 nis spiritual seed should be as the sand of the 
 sea, are among the oracles whose fidlilment will 
 lake place only under the new dis])ensation. 
 
 Hengstenberg (vol. ii. I) gives a long coin- 
 meii'ury on the introductory cliapters. In his 
 Die nuthentie des PenUiteuche^, Ersten Band, s. 
 4. ')-f^:2, occur also many im|M)rtant lemarks on this 
 biiok of |)ropliecy, especially proving liow much 
 its style and form are based on the latiguage and 
 peculiar idioms of the Pentateuch. The argu- 
 ment is tiiiunphant and conclusive. 
 
 Of commentaries on Hosea, distinct froin those 
 on the minor prophets generally, mav be men- 
 tioned Burrough's Exposition of lloxea, Lond. 
 If>t3; Seb. Si-.hmidt, CommcnI. in Hoscini, 
 Fraiicf 16S7; Ed. Pocock, Comment, on Hosra, 
 
 Oxf. 1685 ; Manger, Commentarius in ITosea-^ 
 Campis. 1782; C\n. Fr. Kuinoel, JTosece Ora- 
 cilia, Ilehr. ct hat. perpetua annotalione illut- 
 travit, Lijisia?, 17'j2; L. Jos. Uhlaiid, Aniiofa- 
 Hones 171 Iloseam, Tiib. 1785-1797; Horsley, 
 Hosea, translated from tlie Hebrew, with yotes, 
 explanatory and critical. Lojid. l'01-4; Stuck, 
 Iluscas Propheta, Lipsiae, 1S28; Sciiroder, U-:- 
 sc/iea. Joel, und Amos, vebcrsetzt und crlaidert, 
 Leipz. 1829; De Wette, Ueber die geseh.chllicL 
 Beziehiing dcr prophetischcn Ueden des Iloseas, 
 in Theol. Stnd. tmd Crit. 1831, s. P07 ; Riiekert| 
 Die Hebraischen Prophetcn itebersetzt. Sec, 1831 ; 
 Hitzig, Die 12 kleinen Proph. erkldrt, 183S. — • 
 
 J. E. 
 HOSEA, son of Ekh, and last king of Israel. 
 He conspired against and slew his piedecessor 
 Pekidi, and seized his dominions. ' He did evil 
 in the sight of the Lord,' Init not in the same de- 
 gree as his predecessors : and this, iiy the Jewish 
 commentators, is understood to mean that he tlid 
 not, like Ibnner kings of Isiael ('2 Kings xv. 30), 
 restrain In's sidijects from going up to Jerusa'eTn 
 to worship. The intelligence that Hosea had 
 tnfered into a conl'tdeiacy witli So, kingof Lgvpt, 
 with the view of shaking oil' the Assyiian yoke, 
 caused Siialnianeser, the king of Assyria, to march 
 ^an army into the land of Isiael ; and afier a three 
 year's siege Samaria was t.nken and destroyed, 
 and the ten tribes were sent into the countiies be- 
 yond the Euphrates, bc. 720 (2 Kings xv. 30; 
 xvii. 1-6; xviii. 9-12). The clucmology of rhij 
 reign is much perplexed [see Chkonology, 
 Israel]. 
 
 HOSPITALITY. The practice of receiving 
 strangers into otie's house and giiing them stiit- 
 able enteilainment, may be traced back to the 
 eaily origin of human society. It is not, however, 
 conh'ned to any age or to any country, but has 
 been observed in all jiaits of the globe wheiever 
 circumstances have been such as to render it dt- 
 sirable — thus all'ording one among many instances 
 of the readiness with which human naiu're, in its 
 moral as well as in its physical piopeities, adapts 
 itself to every varying condition. Hospitality 
 is therefore not a jieculiarly Oriental viitue. It 
 was jiractised, as it still is, among the least culti- 
 vated nations (Di id. Sic. v. 2^, 31 ; C»s. Buil. 
 Gall, vi 23; Tac. Germ. 21). It was not less 
 observed, in the early jieriods of their history, 
 among the Greeks and Romans. With me 
 Greeks, hospitality (^fuia) was under the imme- 
 diate piotection of religion. Jupiler bore a name 
 (IfVios) signifying that its rights weie under 
 .liis guardianshi[). In the Odyssey (vi. '206) 
 we are told expressly that all gues's and pixjr 
 )ieople are special objects of care to the gods. 
 There were both in Greeco and Italy two kinds 
 of liospit.ility, the one ])iivate. the other public. 
 The liist existed between individu.ils, the second 
 was cultivated by one stale towaids another. 
 Hence arose a new kind of social lelatii.n : be 
 tween those who had exercised and jiartaken of 
 the rites of hospitality an intimate friendship en- 
 sued, — a species of fieemasonry. wliich was called 
 into l)lay wheiever the individuals might after- 
 wards ch.ince to meet, and the right, duties, and 
 advantages of which passed f om father to son, 
 and weie deservedly held in the highest estimation. 
 But though not jieculiarly Oriental, 1 ospitaiity 
 has nowheie been mure early or more fully prao*
 
 HOSPITALITY. 
 
 ti«^ t! an in the East. It irf still liononralily 
 oljseived amoiijj the Aiiibs, esjiecially at the ])ie- 
 •ent <lay. An Ara<>, on anivinj^ at a village, dis- 
 mounts at tlie house of some one wiio is known 
 to him, saying to the master, ' 1 am your guest.' 
 On tiiis tlie host receives the traveller, and per- 
 forms his duties, that is, he sets Ifelore his guest 
 his supper, consistii.g of bread, milk, ami borgul, 
 and, if he is rich and geiieious, he also takes the 
 
 I necessary care of his liorse or t)east of burden. 
 
 ; Should the traveller he uriacquainle<J with any 
 person, lie alights at any house, as it may hapjien, 
 fastens his liorse to the same, and proceeds to 
 smoke his pijie until the master bids him wel- 
 come, and oilers him his evening meal. In the 
 morninif the traveller pursues his journey, making 
 no other return than 'God l.-e with you" (gootl 
 bye) (Niehuhr, Bets. ii. 431, 4<)2; D'Arvienx, iii. 
 152; Burckhaidt, i. G9 ; Rosenmiiller, Morge?iL 
 vi. 82, i^l\ The eailv existence and huig con- 
 tinuance of this amiable practice in Oriental 
 countries, are owing to the (act of their presenting 
 that condition of things which necessitates and 
 calls fordi hospitality. VVheti jiopulation is thinly 
 scatfeied over a great extent tif country, and tra- 
 velling is com[)aratively infrequent, inns or 
 places of public accoaimodation are not found : 
 yet the traveller needs shelter, ))eihaps succour 
 and supiKUt. Pity prompts the dweller in a 
 house or tent to ojien his tloor to the tired way- 
 farer, the rather because its master has bad, and 
 18 likely again to have, need of similar kiiidness. 
 The duty has its imme;iiate pleasiues and ad- 
 vantages ; for the traveller comes full of news — 
 false, true, wondeiful ; and it is by no means 
 Oiierous, since visits from wayfarers are not very 
 frequent, nor are tlie needful hospitalities costly. 
 In later periods, when population had greatly in- 
 creased, the establishmejit of inns (caravanserais) 
 diminished, but did by no means abolish the 
 practice (Joseph, Antiq. v. I. 2; Luke x. 34). 
 
 Accordingly we lind hospitality practised and 
 held in (iie highest estimation at the eailiest \»- 
 fiods in which the Bilde si)eaks of human society 
 (Gen. xviii. 3; xix. 2; xxiv. 25; Exod. ii. 20 ; 
 Judg. xix. 16). Expiess provision for its exercise 
 is maile iji the Mosaic law (Lev. six. 33 ; Deut, 
 xiv. 29). In the New Testament also its observance 
 is enjoined, tlunigh in tlie jjeriod to which its books 
 refer the nature and extent of hospitality w<iuld he 
 changed with the change that society had under- 
 gone (1 Pet. i v. 9 ; 1 Tim. iii. 2; Tit. i. 8: 1 Tim. 
 V. 10; Horn. xii. 13; Heb. xiii. 2). The reason 
 assigned in this last passage, ' for thereby some 
 have entertained angels unawares,' is not without 
 a parallel in classical literature; for the religious 
 feeling which in Greece was connected with the 
 exercise of hospitality, was strengthened by the 
 belief that the traveller might be some god in 
 disguise (Hom. Odyss. xvii. 48 1). The disposition 
 which generally jiievailed in favour of tlie jjiac- 
 tice was enhanced by the fear lest tiiose who 
 neglected its rites should, after the examjile of 
 impious men, be subjected by the divine wrath to 
 fiightful punishments (^Elian, Anini. xi. 19). 
 Even the Jews, in ' the latter days,' laid very great 
 stress on the obligation ; the rewards of Paradise, 
 their doctors declared, were his who spoiitanei)usly 
 sxerclsed hospitality (.Schcittgen, llor. lleb. i. 
 220; Kypke, Ohserv. Sacr. i. 129). 
 
 .The guest, whoever he might be, was on his 
 
 HOURS. 
 
 S7l 
 
 apjwaring invilc<I into the house or (en* (Gen. 
 xix.2; Exod. ii. 20; Judg. xiii. 15; ^ix. 21). 
 Courtesy dictated that no imjiidix-r que-.tioni 
 should be put to him, and some days <-l>i|)«cd (ie(ul4 
 the name of the stranger wasaskv'il. or wiuit olgect 
 he had in view in his jouinev CGen. xxiv. 3U; 
 Odij^n. i. 123 ; iii. 69; Iliad, vi." 175 ; ix. --'22; 
 Dio.i. Sic. V. '28). As soon as he ainvctl he was 
 furnished with water to wash his feet (Gen. xviii. 
 4 ; xix. 2; 1 Tim. v. 10; Odyss. iv. 49; xvii. 
 &8; vi. 215); received a sujiply of needful food 
 for himself and itcast (Gen. xviii. 5; xix. 3; 
 xxiv. 25; Exod. ii. 20 ; Judg. xix. 20 ; Odyss. 
 iii. lt<l); and enjoye<l courtesy and ])io1ection 
 from his host (Gen. xix, 5; Josh. ii. 2; Judg. 
 xix. 23). The c^ise of Sisera, decoyed atnl slaiu 
 by Jael (Judg, iv. 18, sq.), w;is a gloss infiaction 
 of the rights and duties of hospitality. On his 
 depaitui-e the traveller was n<pt allowed to go 
 alone or em|ity-haiid('d (Judg. xix. .3; W aginseil, 
 ad i>ot. ])p. Itl20, 1030; Zorn, ad Hccat. Abder. 
 22; Jliud, vi. 217). As the fiee )iraclice of hos- 
 pitality was held right and honourable, so lli« 
 neglect of it was conslilered disciedifalile (Job 
 xxxi. 32; Odyss. xiv. 56); and any inteileience 
 wilh the couifuit and ])rotection which the host 
 all'orded, was tioaleil as a wicked <iutrag'0 (Gen. 
 xix, 4, sq,). Though the jiiactir,- ,)f htispilality 
 was general, and its rites rarely yiolated, yet 
 national or local enmities did not fail sotnetimes 
 to interfere; and accordingly travellers avoided 
 those jilaces in which they had reason to exjiect 
 an unfiieridlj' reception. So in Judg. xix. 12, 
 the 'certain Levite' sj oken of said. ' V\'e will not 
 tuin aside hither into the city of a slfangeir, ihat ia 
 not of the children of Israel.' The quarrel which 
 arose Ijetween the Jews and Samaritans after the 
 Babylonish captivity destroyed the relations 
 of hospitality between them. Reganling each 
 other as heretics, they sacrificed eveiy better feel- 
 ing. It was only in the greatest extremity that 
 the Jews woultl jaitake of Samaritan liioil (Light- 
 foot, p. 993), and they were accustomed, in conse- 
 quence of their religious and political hatred, to 
 avoid jiassing through Samaria in journeying from 
 one extremity of the lan<l to the other. 1 he ani- 
 mosity of the Samaritans towards the Jews a]>pears 
 to have been somewhat less bitter ; but they showed 
 an adverse feeling towartls those jirrsons who, in 
 going up to the annual feast at Jerusalem, had to 
 jiass through their coun'ry (Luke ix. 53). At the 
 gieat national festivals hospitality was lilierally 
 practised so long as the state retained its identity. 
 On these festive occasions no inhabitant of Jerusa- 
 lem considered his house his own ; every home 
 swarmed with strangers; yet this unbounded hos- 
 ])itality could not find accommodation in the 
 houses for all who sfood in nee<l of it, and a large 
 proportion of visitors had to be content with such 
 shelter as tents could afl'ord (Helon, Pi/yrim. i. 
 228, sq. On the general subject, see Unger, de 
 ^fvoroKicf. cjiisque litu antiqito ; Stuck, Antiq. 
 Conviv. i. 27 ; De \A'ette, Lehrb. der Archtio- 
 logic; and Scholz, llandb. der Bibl. ArchiiO' 
 logic. — J. R. B. 
 
 HOURS. The ancient Hebrews, like the 
 Greeks (Homer, //. xxi. 3), were unacquainted 
 with any other means of distinguishing the times 
 of day than the natoral divisions of morning, 
 mid-day or noon, twilight, and night (Gen. 
 XV. 12; xviii. 1; xix. 1, 15, 23). The earliett
 
 iiUIjKS. 
 
 HOUSE. 
 
 nrx'tinoii of liniiis occurs in Daniel (iii. 15; iv. 
 19; V. 5); and even in the Septnagint wpa inva- 
 riably sijjiiifies a season of the year, .is in Homer 
 anilHesioil. As the Ciialdueans claimed the honour 
 of inventing this system of notation (Herod, ii, 
 110.), it is most i)rol)able that it was during 
 the r residence in Babylon that tiie Jews hecaine 
 familiar wilh their artilicial distrilmtion of tlie 
 day. At all events no trace of it occurs hefoietiie 
 captivity of that ]ieople; while, suhsecpiently to 
 tlieir return to ttieir own land, we find the prac- 
 tice ado]ited, and, in the time of Ciirist, univer- 
 sally eslalilished, of <lividing the day and night 
 respect! \ely info twelve equal portions (Matt, xx, 
 3-5; Jolin'xi. 9; Actsv. 7; xix.SJ). Tlie.Ievv- 
 5sii iiorology, however, in common willi that of 
 other Ka-iterii nations, liad this inherent defect,, 
 ,hat the hours, though always equal to one another, 
 were miequal in regard to the seasons, and that as 
 iheir day uas reckoned from sunrise to snuset. and 
 not from the fixed period of noon, as with us. tlie 
 'welve houis into which it was divided vaiied, of 
 course, in duration according to the fluctuations 
 of summer and winter. The mid-day, which v;ith 
 «s is the twelfth hour, the Jews counted their 
 sixth, while their twelfth hour d'd not arrive till 
 sunset. At the eijuinoxes, tlieir hours were exactly 
 of the same lengtli with ours, and the time from 
 which they hegJn to reckon their day at tliose 
 seasons corre^jondeil precisely wilh our six o'clock 
 A M. ; their first hour being (air seven o'clock, their 
 third (Acisii. 15). our nine, their ninth (Acts iii. 
 1), our three o clock p.m., and their eleventh 
 (Matt. XX. fi), our five. Tliis equality, however, 
 in (he duration of liieir hours, as well as in their 
 correspondence to ours, was disturlied as the sea- 
 son approached towards the summer or winter 
 solstice In midsummer, wlien sunrise in Judaea 
 takes place at live o'clock a.m., and sunset at seven 
 P.M., tlie Je>vi.><h hours were a little lon^'Cr than 
 ours; and the only one of their iionis wiiich 
 answered exactly to ours was the sixth, or twelve 
 o'clock, wliilc; in all the rest tlieie was a consider- 
 able difference. Their third liour was shortly 
 before our nine, and their ninth a little after our 
 three. In like manner, in winter, when tiie sun 
 rises at seven and sets at five, the Jewish hour was 
 pio])ortionally shoi ter llian ours, their ihiid liour 
 not occurring till a little a/'ferotn- nine, and their 
 ninth a little before our three. Hence it is evi- 
 dent that in order to determine exactly the dura- 
 tion of Daniels .=^ilence, for instance (' he was asto- 
 nied one hour,' Dan. iv. 19), or the exact time 
 ■when the darkness at Christ's crucifixion ended, it 
 is necessary to ascertain the particular seasons 
 when these inciuents occurred. 
 
 In ancient times the only way of reckoning the 
 progress of the day was by (he length of the sha- 
 dow — a mode of reckoning which was l.>oth contin- 
 gent on (he sunshine, and served only for the guid- 
 ance of individuals. By what means the Jews 
 calculated the length of their hours — whether by 
 dialling, by the cle|isydra or water-clock, or by 
 some horological contrivance, like what was used 
 anciently in Persia (Joseph. Antiq. xi. 6). and 
 by tlie Romans (Martial, viii. Epig. 67; Juv. 
 Sat. X. 215), and which is still used in Imlia 
 {Asiat. Ttesear. v. 88), a servant notifying the 
 intervals, it is now impossible to discover. The 
 Lihaldee word nytJ* (Dan. iv. 16), which signifies 
 announcer «eems to countenance the latter (as it 
 
 seems to refer to the mode em]>loyed hy the Per 
 sians, Romans, and Indians) snjiposition. 
 
 Besides these smaller hours, there was ajiotnei 
 division of the day into larger horns, with refer- 
 ence to the stated ])eiiods of prayer, viz. the third, 
 sixth, and ninth houis of the day (Ps. xlv. 17; 
 Joseph, ylntiq. iv. 4. 3). 
 
 The night was divided into twelve equal por- 
 tions or hours, in precisely the same manner as tiie 
 day. The most ancient division, iiowever, was into 
 three watches (Antiq. Ixiii. 6 ; xc. i) ; the first, or 
 be,nnniiig of the watclies, as it is calle.l (Lament. 
 ii. 19) ; tlie middle-watch (Jinlg. vii. 19} ; and the 
 morning-watch (Kxoil. xiv. 21). When Judaea 
 became a ])rovince of Rome, the Roman distiibu- 
 (ion of (he night into four watches was introduced 
 I see CocK-CKOwiNO and Day]; to which divi- 
 sion frequent allusions occur in the New Testa- 
 ment (Luke xii. 38; Matt. xiv. 25 ; xiii. 35), as 
 well as to that of hours (Matt, xxv, 13; xxvi. 
 40; Mark xiv. 37; Luke xvii. 59; Acts xxiii. 
 23; Rev. iii. 3). 
 
 It remains only to notice that the word hour is 
 sometimes used in Scripture to denote some deter- 
 minate season, as ' mine hour is not yet come,' 
 'this is your 'lour, and tlie jiovver of darkness,' 
 ' the hoirr is coming,' &c. — R. J. 
 
 HOUSK. Houses are often mentioned in 
 Scripture, several important ])assages of wliict 
 cannot he well understood witliont a clearer notion 
 of the houses in which the Heliiews dwelt, than 
 can be realized by such comparisons as we natu- 
 lally make with (hose in whii-li we ourselves live. 
 But things so different allbrd no grounds for in- 
 structive comjiarison. We must therefore bring 
 together such facts as can bi^ collected from the 
 Scripture and from ancient writers, with such 
 details from modern travellers and our own ob- 
 servations, as may tend to illustrate these state- 
 ments ; for there is every reason to conclude that 
 little substantial ditference exists between the 
 ancient houses and those which are at this day 
 found in south-western Asia. 
 
 Tlie agricidtural and jjastoral forms of life are 
 described in Scripture as of equally ancient origin. 
 Cain was a husbandman, and .Abel a keeper of 
 slice]). The former is a settled, the latter an 
 unsettled mode of life. Hence we (ind that Cain, 
 when the murder of his brother constrained him 
 to wander abroad, built a town in the land where 
 he settled. At the same time, doubtless, those 
 wiio followed the same mode of life as Abel, 
 dwelt in tents, cajiable of lieing taken from one 
 ])lace to another, when the want of fresh jiastures 
 constrained those removals which are so frequent 
 among people of jiasforal habi(s. We are not 
 recpiired to suppose that Cain's town was more 
 than a collection of huts. 
 
 Our information respecting the abodes of men 
 in the ajes liefore the Deluge is, hov/ever, toe 
 scanty to afi'ord much gioimd ("or notice. The 
 enteijjrise at Babel, to say nothing of Egypt, shows 
 that (he constructive arts had made considerable 
 progress during that obscuie but interesting period; 
 for we are bound in reason to conclude tiiat ttie 
 arts possessed by man in the ages immediat'^iy 
 following the Deluge, existed before liiat greai 
 catasdciphe [Antediluvians]. 
 
 We maj"^, however, leave this eaily jiciioil. and 
 nroceel at once to the later ti-nes in which iht 
 Hebrews flour "shed.
 
 HOUSE. 
 
 The oliseivations )fleied under Auchitec- 
 ruRE will jiircliule .he expfctaiion of fiiuliiiij 
 anioiig tliis Kiistein people tliat accomplisiieil 
 style of biiiUliiij; wiiivli Vitiuvliis ie(jn:ifs, or 
 diat refineil taste liy which tho Greeks ami Ro- 
 mans excited the admiiation of I'oreigti nations. 
 The reason ot"thi.s is |)lain. Tiielr ancestors iiail 
 roved throngh flje country as noniade she|iherds, 
 dwelling in tents; ami il' e\er tliey liiiilt hut;; they 
 were of so light a fabric as easily to be taken 
 down when a chariL'^e of station became necessary. 
 In this mode of life SDlldity in the stmctnre of 
 any dwelliiig was l)y no nioans retjuired ; much 
 le.ss were regular ariangeuietit and tiieotiier reejni- 
 sites of a well ordered dwelling matters of consi- 
 deration. Under such ciicumstances as these, no 
 improvement in the hal)itation takes |)]ace. The 
 tents in which tlie Arabs now dwell are in all 
 probability the same as ti;ose in which the Hebrew 
 patriarchs spent their lives. It is nut likely that 
 what the Htiirews observed in Egy})t, dnriiig their 
 long sojourn in that country, had in this respect 
 any direct iidluence uj)on their own subsequent 
 wactice in Palestine. The reasons for this have 
 been given under Aiichitectuus. 
 
 HOUSE. 
 
 813 
 
 Nevertheless, the information which may bt 
 derivetl from the figures of houses and jiarts of 
 houses in the Egyjitian tombs, is not to be over- 
 looked or slighted. We kave in them the 07ili/ 
 representations of ancient houses in that pait of 
 the world which now exist : and however ditl'erent 
 may have been the state arcliitecture of Egypt 
 and Palesfinf", we iia\e every reason to conclude 
 that tliere was considerable resemblance in the 
 private dwellings of these neighbouring countries. 
 .Such a resendilance now exists, and the causes 
 whicli produce it equally existed in ancient 
 t'mes : and, wliich is more to tiie purpose, the 
 tepresentations to which we refer have almost the 
 ».ine amomit of agreement and of diHiereuce with 
 the preient houses of Syria as with those of modern 
 Egypt. On these and other grounds we shall 
 not decline to avail omselves of this interesting 
 source of ilhistration ; but liefore turning to its 
 details, we shall give a gerieral statement, which 
 may render them more intelligilde. 
 
 On entering Palestine, the Israelites occupied 
 the dwellings of the disiwssessed inhabitants; and 
 fora long time no new buildings would be needed. 
 The generation which began to build new houses 
 must have lieen born and bred in the country, 
 and would naturally erect buildings like those 
 which already existed in tiie land. Their mode of 
 building was therefore that of the Canaanites whom 
 they had dispossessed. Of We/r style of building 
 we are not required to form any exalted notions. 
 In all the history of the conquest of the country 
 by (he Israelites, there is no account of any large 
 
 or cons])icuous building lieing taken )i destroyed 
 by them. It would seem also as if theie h. id been 
 no temples ; for we read not that any »eic de- 
 stroyed i)y the conqueiors; and the cominand 
 that the monuments of idol.itiy slionid be over- 
 thrown, specides only altars, groves, and high 
 ])lace3 — which seems to lead to the sani- conclu- 
 sion; since, if there had been tenqiles exi...iing in 
 the land of Canaan, they would doubtless nave 
 been included. It is also mainfest fioni the liis- 
 tory that the towns which the Hebrews fonnd in 
 Palestine were mostly small, and that ih" l.irgest 
 weie distinguished rathiii- by their number than 
 by the size or magnilicence of their buildings. 
 
 It is impossible to say to what extent Solo- 
 mon's imjiiovements in state arcliitecfurf operated 
 to the adiancement of dcrnestic architecture. He 
 built dillerent ))alaces, and it is reasonable tc 
 Conclude that his nobles and great olliceis fol- 
 lowed more or less the UKjdels which these palaces 
 )iresente<l. ]n the East, however, the domestic ar- 
 chitecture of the bulk of the people is little alVected 
 by the improvements in state buildings. JMen go 
 on building from age to age as their foref.ilhers 
 built; and in all iirobabilily the houses which we 
 now see in Palestine are such as tho.se in which 
 tjie Jews, and the Canaanites before them, dwelt — 
 the mosques, the Chri.stian churches, and the mo- 
 nasteries being the only new features in the scene. 
 
 Theie is no reason to suii])o<e that many houses 
 in Palestine were constructed with wood. A great 
 jiart of that country was always very jxior in lim- 
 ber, and the middle ]iart of it had scarcely any 
 wood at all. iiut of stone theie was no want; 
 and it was consequently much used in ilie building 
 of houses. The law of Moses respecting lejirosy in 
 houses (Lev. xiv. 33-10) seems to jjiove thi.s, as 
 the characteristics there enumerated could only 
 occur in the case of stone walls. Still, when the 
 Hebrews intended to build a house in tiie most 
 s[)iendid style and in accorilance w ith the taste ol 
 the age, as much wood as jiossilde was used. 
 Having premised tRis, the piincipal building 
 materials mentioned in Scripture may be einime- 
 rated with reference to their place in the three 
 kingdoms of nature. 
 
 1. VeGET.^BI.E SUBST.INCES : — 
 
 1. Shittijn, or the tindier of the acacia free, 
 which grows abundantly in the valleys ol' Arabia 
 Petraia, and w as therefore enqdoyed in the construc- 
 tion of the taliemacle. Not being, however, a tree 
 of Palestine, the wood was not subsequently used 
 in building. 
 
 2. Shakemim ; that is, the wood of the syca- 
 more fig-tree, mentioned in Isa. ix. 10, as a build- 
 ing timber in nioie common use than cedar, or 
 perhaps than any other wood known in Palestine. 
 
 3. Eres, or cedar. As this was a wood im- 
 ported from Lel)anon, it would only be used in 
 the higher cla.ss of buildings. Eor its quality as 
 a buiUiing timber, and resjiecting the question of 
 its being really what we call the cedar, see Eues. 
 
 4. Alt/ian-ioood, which, being imported from 
 the Eastern seas, must have been valued at a 
 high price. It was used by Solomon for j.illars 
 for his own palace, and for tlie temjde (1 Kings 
 X. 11, 12). 
 
 5. lierosh, or cyjjress-wood. Boards of this 
 were used for the floor (/f the Temple, which may 
 suggest the use to which it was ordinarily applied 
 (1 Kings vi. 15 ; 2 Cliron. iii. 5).
 
 871 
 
 HOUSE. 
 
 HOUSE. 
 
 Pailiciilar accounts of all these woods, and of 
 the trees wliicli a.lbided tliem, may be seen under 
 the repective wurds. 
 
 H. MlNKltAI, SuUiSTANGES : 
 
 1. Marble. \\"e liml the court of the king of 
 Persia's pal.ice covered with marhle of various 
 colours (K51I1. i 6v ])avid is recorded to liave 
 poisesied ahond.mce of maihle (I Cliron. xxx. 
 [xxix.] 2; ciini|i. Cant. v. 13), and it was used 
 by SjloinuM for his palace, as well as for the 
 Tem[)ie. 
 
 2. Purp'n/nj and Granite are supposed to be 
 ' the jjlistei in^ sloiies, and stones of divers colours' 
 named in I Coron. xxix. 2. If so, the mountains 
 of Arabia Pclibea furnished tiie nearest source of 
 su|)ply, as these stones do not exist iu Palestine or 
 Leiianon. 
 
 3. BricJis. liiicks hardened by (he were em- 
 ployed in liie construction of the lower of Babel 
 (Gen. xi. 3), and the hard bonda^'e of the Israel- 
 ites in E^jvpt c.insisted in the inanufac'ure of 
 gun-diied liricks (Kxod. v. 7, 10-13). This im- 
 portant buildin:i-material has been noticed under 
 another head [Uijicks]; and it only remains to 
 remark that no snl)^e((uent notice of bricks as 
 bein;^ used by tiie Ilemews occurs after tiiey had 
 entered Palestine. Yet, jndgin;^ from existing 
 analogies, it is mure than probable tliat bricks weie 
 to a coosiileralile extent employed in their build- 
 ings. Krom tiieex]iense and lal)our of quarrying 
 and conveying stone, bricks are often extensively 
 used in Eastern ciuuitries even where stone is 
 abundant; and il is not unusual to see the founda- 
 tions anil hr.ver jiarts of the house of stone, while 
 tiie superstructure is of brick. 
 
 3. C'ha/k and Gi/psum, which the Hebrews 
 appear to have comprehended under the general 
 name of TJJ' sid. That the Hebrews were ac- 
 quainted witii these materials apjjears from l^eut. 
 xxvii. 2; and from Dan. v. 5; Acts xxiii. 3, it 
 further appeals that walls were covered with them. 
 A highly instructive and curious account of the 
 plasters used in the K.ist may be seen in tome iv. 
 of Langles's edi'ion of Chardin's Voyages. 
 
 4. Mortar, a cement made of lime, ashes, and 
 cho])ped straw, or of gypsum and chopped straw. 
 This is pr)l)al»ly meant in Jer. xliii. t); Ezek. 
 xiii. 10, II. 20 
 
 5. Aaplialtuia, or Bitumen, wiiicli is mentioned 
 as being u^ed for a cemeut by the builders of 
 Babel, 'liiis must have been in the want of lime- 
 mortar, tiie country being a stoneless plain. But 
 the Israelites, who had no lack of the usual 
 cements, did not employ asphaltum [Bitumen]. 
 
 6. T.ie metals .ilso must be, to a certain extent, 
 regarded as buildiiij; materials : lead, iron, and 
 capper are mentioned ; and eien silver and golil 
 were used in comhinalion with wood, for various 
 kinds of sol ill, plated, and inlaid work (Exod. 
 xxxvi. 31. 38). 
 
 111. Animal Substances : — 
 
 Such substances can be liut in a small degree 
 Ruplicaliie to biulding. Ivory houses are men- 
 tiinicd in 1 Kings xxii. 39; Am.)s iii. 14; most 
 likely iVvim certain parts of the wood- work, pro- 
 Dably aluut the doors and windows, being inlaid 
 with this valuable subitance. Solomon obtained 
 ivory in great quantities from Tyie (1 Kttigs x. 
 22;'2 Clnon. ix. 21). [Ivor-j:.] 
 
 In describing the liouses of ancient Palestine, 
 ttiere is no w^y of arriving at distinct notions but 
 
 by taking the texts of Scripture a:id ihustraLiny 
 them by the existing houses of those parts oi 
 Western Asia which have been the least exposed 
 to the changes of time, and in which the manners 
 of ancient days have been the best preserved. 
 Writers on the subject have seen this, and hav» 
 brought together the descrijitions of travellers 
 bearing on the subject ; but these descMptlons 
 have generally i)een applied wilii very little judg- 
 ment, from the want of that distinct knowledge ol 
 the matter which only actual observation can 
 give. Travellers have seldom been students 0/ 
 Scripture, and students of Scripture have seldom 
 been travellers. The ]iresent writer, having re 
 sided f)r a considerable time in Tmkish Arabia, 
 where the typeof Scrijitmal usages has been better 
 preserved than in Egypt, or even in Palestine 
 itself, is enabled to speak oti this matter with 
 somewhat more precision. Of four houses in 
 which he there icsided, two were lirst-rate, and 
 two were second-rate. One of the latter has 
 always seemed 'o him to suggest a more satisfic- 
 tory idea of a Scriptural house than any cjf the 
 others, or than any that he ever saw in other 
 Eastern coimtries Tliat one has therefore formed 
 the basis of all his ideas on this subject ; and 
 where it seemed to fad, the others have usually 
 su])[)lied the illustration h>f required. Tb"s course 
 he has found so benelicial, that iie will endeaxour 
 to iinpart a clear view of the subject to the reader 
 by giving a general notion of the house referred 
 to, explaining any points in which the others dif- 
 fered irom it, and j)roducing the jiassages of 
 Scripture which seem to be illustrated in the, 
 j)rocess. 
 
 We may premise that the houses present littlo 
 more than a dead wall to the street. Tiie privacy 
 of Oriental domestic habits would render our plan 
 of throwing the front of the houses towards the 
 street most repulsive. (3ii coming to a house, one 
 finds a lofty wall, which woidrl be blank but for 
 tlie low door of entrance [Gate] ; over which if 
 
 us;ially the kiosk, or latticed window (sometimes 
 projecting like the huge bay v/indows of Eliza* 
 bethan houses), or screened balcony of the ' sum- 
 mer jiarloui." Besides this, there may be a smalt 
 latticed window or two high up the wall, giving
 
 HOUSE, 
 
 IIOUSK. 
 
 875 
 
 light arnl a!r to upper cliamhers. Tlii? serins, 
 firom the annexed en^ravinjj 'No. 317), to have 
 been tliecliaracterol't'it' iVuiits of ancient K^'>j)lian 
 bouses. 
 
 The huililinijs which form tlie honse fri>Tit 
 towards an inner square or conrr. S'tnall lionsei 
 have one of tlieso c.mris, hut SMperior houses 
 have two, and tirst-rate houses three, cotnnuini 
 catinj; willi each other; for the Oritnlals dislike 
 ascendinir stairs or sfep^^, and prefer to fijain 
 room ratlier by the extent than heiy;ht of tiieir 
 haliitations. It is only wiien the huildin;^- 
 ground is <-()n(iiied l)y inline or hy foi (rlications, 
 that tliey huild hi^h lionses. None of our four 
 houses hail more tlian one s'ory ; hut, from tlie 
 loftiness of the rooms, they were as l^ii^li as houses 
 of three stories among oinselves. If there are three 
 or more coiuts, all exce])t the outer one are much 
 alike in size and appearance ; hut the outer one, 
 being devoted to tijo more ])ulilic life of tiie 
 OCCU))ant, and to liis intercourse with society, is 
 materially dilVerent fiom all the others. If there 
 are more than two, the second is- devoted cliieHy 
 to the use of the master, who is tliere attended 
 only by his eunuchs, children, and females, and 
 gees oidy such persons as he calls from the third 
 or interior court in which they reside. In the his- 
 tory of Esther, she incurs dan^'er l)y going from 
 her interior court to that of the king, to invite him 
 to visit iier jiart of the palace ; hut she would not 
 on any account have gone to the outermost couit, 
 in which the king lield liis jjuhlic audiences. 
 When tlure are only two courts, the innermost is 
 the harem, in which the women and chihhen 
 live, and wliich is the true domicile of the master, 
 to which he witluhaws when the claims of busi- 
 ness, of society, and of friends have been satisfied, 
 and where no man but himself ever enteis, or 
 couhl he induced to enter, even by strong per- 
 suasions. 
 
 Eniieiing at the street-door, a passage, nsii- 
 ally sloi)ing downward, conducts to the outer 
 court; the opening from the passage to this is not 
 opposite the gate of entrance, hut hy a side tmn, 
 to jireclude any view from the street into the 
 court wlien the gate is opened. On entering the 
 outer court through this passage, we timl op- 
 posite to lis the ])ublic room, in v.liich the 
 master receives anil gives audience to his friends 
 and clients. Tiiis is entirely open in front, and, 
 being richly fitted up, has a splendid a])peaiance 
 when the first view of it is obtained. A refreshing 
 C(>i;!ness is .soiiietiines given to this apartment 
 by a fountain throwing uj) a jet of water in fi-ont 
 of it. Some idea of the aj)artnieut may be formed 
 fiom t'.ie annexed cut (No. o4S). This is the 
 'guest-chamber" of Luke xxii. 11. A large 
 j.ortion of the other side of the court is occupied 
 vvitli a frontage of lattice-work Idled with co- 
 Iviuied glass, hehmging to a room as large as 
 the guest-chamher, and wliicli in winter is used 
 for the same purjxjse, or serves as the apartment of 
 any visitor of distinction, who cannot of course be 
 admiltcil into the iirterior ))aits of the honse. The 
 other apartments in this outer court are compara- 
 tively small, and are used for the accommodation 
 of visitors, retainers, and servants. These various 
 apartmifiits are usually upon what we should call 
 the first door, or at least upon an elevated terrace. 
 Tiie ground tloor is in that case occupied l)y 
 'urious store-rooms and servants' oflices. In all 
 
 cases the up|)er floor, containing the priiiri).«] 
 rooms, is fronted liy a gallery or terrace, protected 
 from the sun hy a sort of )ientho:i*« roof ta))- 
 lK)r<.ed by ))i liars of woi.d. 
 
 In houses having but one court, the rece])tion- 
 room is on the giound lloor, ami the ilomestio 
 establishment in the i:|)per jtart of the house. 
 This arrangement is shown in the annexeil en- 
 graving (No. 319), which is also inteiesting from 
 its showing the use of the ' pillars' so olten men- 
 
 tioned in Scri])ture, particularly ' the pillars OB 
 which the honse sti.o<l, and by wliich iJ was bom*
 
 876 
 
 HOUSE 
 
 ap' (,.Tiul>^. xvi. 29). Some oi'ipr 
 winch we iiifroiliice will exliiliii ii II. 
 
 if f'v 'MlfS 
 
 s <il' siiniiitr 
 im|tort;ince to tlie su]»|)mt oCtJie limise. 
 
 The kiosk. wlii(;li lias hesn inr>rif i.iiie.l altove 
 as fniiitiiiii; the sl/.'et, over liie ^rate.vay is cnu 
 necteJ with iiti« ol' the lar.;er nioms alieady ilc- 
 scril.td. or I'cims a sCiiaiate a|»artmeiit, which is 
 the summer |iar.our ot' Scripture. Here, in the 
 heat of the art«;rti(ioi', the master lounges oi do/.es 
 listless.)-, relreshed liy the air whicii circc.lates 
 between tiie oji!'tiiiii,'s of the luttice-work ; ami 
 here iie can, if iie pleases, notice iitiobservecl what 
 passes ill the street. In this we aie to seek tiie 
 summer parlour in which Khiul smote the king 
 of iMoab (Juilg. iii. "20), an<l tlie ' chauilier on 
 the wall,' which tiie Sliiiiianiite prepared for the 
 prophet (2 Kings iv. 10). Tiie projecting con- 
 struction over llie iece]ition chainher in No. 349 
 is, like tlte kiosk, towards :lie street of a summer 
 jiarlour ; hut there it belongs to tiie women's 
 apartments, and looks into the court, and not the 
 Btreet. 
 
 It is now time to proceed to the inner court, 
 which we enter by a passage and iloor similai 
 to those by wliicli we entered from the street. 
 TJiis ])assage and chxtr are usually at one of the 
 innermost corners of the outer court. Here a 
 much more extended prospect o]iens to us, the 
 inner court being generally much larger than the 
 former. The annexed cut (No. ;5.')0) will convey 
 some notion of it; but l)eing a Persian house, it 
 somewhat ddi'ers from that which we have more 
 particularly in view. It is lower, tlie principal 
 apartments standing upon a terrace or bank of 
 earth, and not u]-ion a basement story of offices ; 
 an<l it also wants the veranda or covered gallery 
 in front, which we (ind in Syro-Araliian houses. 
 The court is fiir the most pari paved, excepting a 
 poi-tion in the mlildle, which is planted with tiees 
 (usually two aiul slu ubs, with a basin of water in 
 the midst. In our Arabian house the two trees 
 were palm-trees, in winch a number of wild doves 
 built their nests. In the second cut (No. 347), 
 showing an ancient Egyptian house, we see the 
 same arrangement: (wo ])ahn-trees growing in 
 the court extend tlieir to|is aliove, and, as it were, 
 out of the house — a curious effect frequetitly no- 
 
 /I h 
 
 S50. 
 
 ticed in the towns of South-western Asia. That 
 the .lews had the iike arrangement of trees in the 
 courts of their houses, an<l tliat the birds nested 
 in them, appears from Psa. Ixxxiv. 2, 3. They 
 had also the basin of water in tlie inner court, or 
 haram ; and among tliem it was used fo:' bathing, 
 as is shown by Davids discoveiiiig Batlisheba 
 bathing as lie walked on the roof of his palace. 
 This use of the reservoir has now been superseded 
 
 lU^L'SE. 
 
 by the est.ddishnu'iit ul pnldic '«:n;r/ 1 l>athp in 
 evi'ry town, and in piivale mansions. Cold 
 batliing has all but ceased in Western Asia. 
 
 Tlie airangenient of the inner court is very 
 similar lo that of the outer ; but the whole il 
 iiu/ie open and airy. The building* usuallj 
 
 occupy two sides of the square, of which the one 
 opposite tlie entrance contains the principal ajiart- 
 ments. They are upon what we should call the 
 first floor, aiul ojieii into a wide gallery or ve- 
 randa, which in good houses is nine or ten feet 
 deep, and covered by a wooden penthouse siip- 
 jwrted by a row of w(K)den columns. This terrace, 
 or gallery, is fnviiislied witli a strong wooden ba- 
 lustrade, and is usually paved with squared stones, 
 or else lloored wiih boards. In the centre of the 
 principal front is the usual open drawing-room, on 
 which the best ait of the Eastern decorator is ex- 
 jiended (No. SriX). Much of one of the sides of 
 the court front is usually occn|)ied by the large 
 sitting-room, with the latticed front covered with 
 coloured glass, similar to that in the outer court. 
 The other rooms, of smaller size, are the more pri- 
 vate apartments of the mansion. The interior of 
 one of these is shown in the annexed cut (No. 
 352). There aie usually no doors to the sitting or 
 drawing-rooms of Eastern Imnses : they are closed 
 by curtains, at least in summer, the opening and 
 shutting of doors being odious to most Oriental*. 
 The same seems to have been the case among 
 the Hebrews, as far as we may judge from tJie 
 curtains which served instead of doors to tb*
 
 HOUSR. 
 
 talwns.iclf, and wliich spparatpil tlie hmer and 
 outer cliamlieis of the ti'rni)ie. Tlie cintiiincd 
 entrances to imr \^'estmin.st(•r conrfs of law stij)- 
 ^•ly a I'iiiniliiir exampie of tlie same practice. 
 
 HOUSE. 
 
 8T7 
 
 Some ideas respecting the arrangements and 
 architecture of" the interior parts of the dwelling 
 may be formed from the annexed cut (No. 353), 
 although the lioiise in this case, l)eing modern 
 Egyptian, dilVers in some points of arrange:iient 
 from those on vvljich our description is chielly 
 based. 
 
 Thp<:p ohsprvations apply to the principal story. 
 The b:>petrie!it is occupied hy various offices, 
 fores of corn anil fuel, places for tije water-jars 
 
 to stand in, place? fir grinding com, hallis. 
 kitdieiis, Sec. The kitchens aie always in ihit 
 inner court, as the cooking is ])cMornied iiy 
 women, and flie ladies of the family snjx'rinteiid 
 or actually assist in liie process. Tlie kiti.hen, 
 open in front, is on the same side as fl r entrance 
 from liie outer court ; and the top of it foiins i% 
 terrace, which alfjrds a communication helwcen 
 the first floor of lioth courts l>y a jirivate door, 
 sekhmi used Imt liy the master of the house and 
 attendant eunuchs. 
 
 The kitclien, of which the annexed cut (No. 
 3.'>1) is flie only existing representation, is sur- 
 rounded by a brick terrace, on the toji of which 
 are liie fireplaces foimed in comparinicnts, and 
 separated liy little walls of lire-lirick or liie. In 
 these dillcrent com])aitnients the various dishes o( 
 an Eastern feasi may be at once prejHued ut 
 charcoal fires. Tliis [ilace lieing wholly o]ien 
 in front, the half-tame doves, wbicli have their 
 nests in the trees of the coiiii, oltcn visit it, in 
 the absence of tiie seivants, in seaicli of crumlxs, 
 &c. As they sometimes Iduckcn themselves, this 
 ]ierhai)s explains the obscure )ia8sage in Ps. Ixviii. 
 13, 'Though ye have lieu among the pots, ye 
 shall be as the wings of a dove coveied with 
 silver,' &c. In Turkish Aiabia most of the 
 houses liave underground cellars or vaults, to 
 which the inhabitants retreat dmiii',' the mid-day 
 heat of summer, and there enjoy a lefieshiiig cool- 
 ness. We do not discover any notice of this 
 usage in Scri)>*>ne. But at Acre tiie snbstiuo 
 tions of very ancient houses weie some years ago 
 discovered, having such cellars, uliicli were very 
 probaldy subservient to this use. In the rest of 
 the year these cellars, or sentaubs, as they aif: 
 called, are abandoneil to the luiis, which swarm in 
 Uiem in scarcely credible minibeis ( Isa. ii. 20). 
 
 From tlie cn>iit a flight of .stone ,ste])8, usually 
 at the corner, conducts to the gallery, from which 
 a plainer stair leails to iho hi.nse-lop. If the 
 house lie large, there are two or thiee sets of steps 
 to the dilVereut sides of the tpikuliangle, but seldom 
 more than one flight from liie teriace to the house- 
 loj) of any one couit. Theie is, however, a .teiia- 
 rate stair from the outer com t to the roof, and it is 
 UKiially near the eutiance. This will liiing to 
 mind ihe cas-e of the paralytic, wliose I'liends, 
 finding they could not get access to Jesus thiongh 
 the people who crov/ded the coiDt of the house in 
 which he was preaching, took him up to the roof, 
 and let him dc«;i ii; his bed thnu-li the tiling, to 
 the place where .(esus stood (Luke v. 17-20). If 
 the house in whicfi our Lord then was hail more 
 than one court, he and the auditors were ceitainly 
 in the outer one; and it is reasonalile to coiuliide 
 that he stood in the veranda addiessing tiie crowd 
 below. The men bearing the paialytic llieiefoie, 
 peihaps went up the steps near the door; and 
 tiiidiiig tiiey could not t ven then get near tlie 
 person of .lesu'^, the gallery lieing also crowiled, 
 continued their course to tlie ri>of of the hiiuse, 
 and remo\ingthe lioards over the covering of the 
 gallen, at the ]ilace where Jesus stood, lowered 
 the sick man to his feet. Jiut if tney could not 
 get access to the steps near the door, as is likely, 
 from thodoor being much cmwtled, their alleii- 
 nutive was to take him to the loof of the next 
 house, and there hoi.-t him ovei 'he ])aia)iet to the 
 roofoftlie bouse which they desiied to enter. 
 
 Tlie r, of of the house is, of coiuse. Hat. It in
 
 878 
 
 HOUSE. 
 
 foimetl l)V layers of blanches, twigs, matiiiiK, and 
 eai-tli, laid over the rafteis and trodden down ; 
 
 HOUSE. 
 
 delivered. T'lese cuts, with (he one liefore givei. 
 (No. 347), are liiglily i'ltcresliii;;, not only will, 
 reference to tiiis particul ir jwint, but as el*T» 
 tioiis of dillerent styles of houses, existing !l. & 
 neighbourinij couniiy in the early ages of the 
 rielirew history. One of them (Nos. 355, 356) 
 exhibits dillerent forms of a jjeculiarity whicli we 
 luive not observed in any modern e.vuniple. Tlie 
 ton of i!ie house is covered with a roof or awning, 
 su|i]iorted i»y columns, whereby the sun w;is ex- 
 cluded, anil a refieshing stream of air passed 
 through. Other Egyi-tian hou.ses iiad merely a 
 ]iara|)et wall, sometimes suiitiounted with a row 
 of battleinents, as in the cut heie given (No. 357) 
 Of the inferior kinds of (3iicntal dwellings, 
 such as are met with in villages and very small 
 towns, the subjoined is not an unfavourable spe- 
 cimen. In these theie is no central court, but 
 there is generally a yard attached, either on one 
 side or at the rear. The shaded platform in front 
 is such as is usually seen attached to collee- 
 houses, which is, in fact, the character of the 
 house represented in No 357. Here the cus- 
 tomers sit and smoke their pipes, anil sip their 
 coffee. The village cabins and abodes of the 
 peasantry are, of course, of a still inferior descrip- 
 tion ; and, being the abodes of people who liv« 
 much in the open air, will not bear comparison 
 widi the houses of the same class in Northern 
 Europe, where the cottage is the home of the owner. 
 
 364. 
 
 after which it is covered with a compost whicli 
 acquires considerable hardness when dry. Such 
 roofs would not, however, endure the heavy and 
 contini'..ius rains of our climate; and in those 
 yarts of Asia where the climate is more than 
 usaallv moist, a stone roller is usually kept on 
 every roof, and after a shower a great ])art of the 
 jwpiilatidu is engaged in drawing these rollers 
 over the roofs. It "is now very cotnmon, in coun- 
 tries where timber is scarce, to have domed roofs; • 
 but in that case, the flat roof, whicli is indis- 
 pensal)le to Eastern luU»its, is ol)tained by filling 
 up the hollow intervals between the several 
 domes, so as to !brm a flat surface at the top. 
 These flat nxifs are often alluded to in Scrijiture; 
 and the allasi<ins shaw that they were made to 
 serve the same uses as at present. In fine weather 
 the inhabitants resorte<l much to them to breathe 
 the fresh air, to enjoy a line prospect, or to witness 
 any event that occurred in the neighbourhood 
 f2'Sam. xi. 2; Isa. xxii. I; Matt. xxiv. 17; 
 M.irk xiii. 15). Tlie dryness of the summer 
 atmosphere enabled them, without injury to 
 heiilth, to enj>)y the bracing coolness of the night- 
 air by sleeping on tlie house-tops; and in order 
 to havt the benefit of the air and ^irospect in the 
 daytime, without inconvenience from the sun, 
 sheds, booths, and tents, were sometimes erected 
 on the house tops ('2 Sam. xvi. 22). 
 
 The roofs of the houses are well protected by 
 walls ar^d parajiets. Towards the street and 
 neigUbuuring liouses is a high wall, and towards 
 the interi ir cimrt-yard usually a para)iet or 
 wooden rail. ' Battlements ' of this kind, for the 
 prevention of accidents, are strictly enjoined m 
 the Law (Dent. xxii. S) ; and the form of the 
 battlements of the Egyjitian houses, as shown in 
 die anrii'xed engravings, suggest some interesting 
 analogies, when we consider how recently the 
 l»r:*eiites had quitted Egypt when that law was 
 
 No ancient houses had chimneys. The woid 
 so translated in IIos. xiii. 3, means a hole thiouth 
 which tJie smoke escaped ; aud thia exi«ted ooly
 
 HOUSE. 
 
 «H the Imrer cla«8 of (Uvellings, where raw wood 
 «ii8 emjiloyeJ I'or fuel or ((inkiii,', ami wliere tliere 
 waa an npeniii:^ iiiiineiluitely over tlie lieaitli to 
 let out tlie smoke. In tlie l)etler sort of lioiises 
 the rooms were warmed in winter l>y charcoal in 
 braziers, as is still the practice (Jer. xxxvi. 22 ; 
 Mark xiv. 51; John xviii. 18). 
 
 HUNTING 
 
 879 
 
 m 
 
 The windows Ivid no glass. They were only 
 latticed, aird tans ^ave free passage to the air anil 
 admitted light, wiiile l)irds and bats were ex- 
 cluded. In winter llie cold air was kept out hy 
 veils over the winilows (see cut 352), or hy shut- 
 ters with lio'es in them sufficient to admit liy;ht 
 (1 Kings vii. 17 ; Cant. ii. 9). 
 
 In the East, wliere die climate allows tlie jj^'ople 
 to «]ieiid so much of their lime out of door-i, the 
 articles of furniture and the domestic utensils 
 
 iiave always been fe.w and simple. They are in 
 this work noticed under separate heads [Bkd; 
 Lamps; Pottery; Seats; Taulks]. The 
 rooms, however, althougii comparatively vacant 
 of movealjles, are far from having a naked or 
 unfurnished a[)pearance. This is owing to the 
 high ornament giien to the walls and ceilings. 
 The walls are broken up into ^ arious recesses, 
 and the ceiling into compartments. The ceiling, 
 !f of wi>od and Hat, is of curious and complicated 
 joinery, or, if vaulted, is wrought into nunieroug 
 <x"es, and enriched with fiet-work in stucco; 
 iml the walls are adorned with arabesques, mo- 
 ■ai ;», m irrors, ]iainting, and goM ; wiiicli, as set 
 oflT by the marl)le-like whiteness of the stucco, has 
 K tiuly lirilliant and rich etlecl. Tlieie is much 
 in this to remind one of such descriptions of 
 ^letidid inferiors as that in Isa. liv. 11. 12. 
 
 HULDAH or rather CiiLinui I'JTn^^n; fVpt 
 "OXSa), wile of Shalliim, a ])roplii't«N-. whi>, in lli« 
 leign of Josiah, aliode in that part of .Jerusalem 
 called the .Mi«bneh, where the book t.f the Law 
 was (iisco\ eied by llie high-prie,-,! H'Mah. This 
 l)ro))hetess was consulted n'S] erttii^ llie deiii.lv- 
 ciations which it contained. She ijieii deliveie.i 
 an oracular lesponse of mingled judgment an. I 
 inercy ; declaring the not remote de^trucion ot 
 Jerusalem, but ])nimi>ing Josiah that he should 
 be taken fiom the uoild before these evil davs 
 came; h c. 623 (2 Kings xxii. l4-'0; 2 C'lnoii. 
 xxxiv. 22-2*^). Huldah is oidy known for this 
 circumstani-e. She was jirobalily at this time the 
 widow of Siiallnm, a n.ime too ci.nimni" to sug- 
 gest any iiifoimation ; but he is said to haveleen 
 grandson of one Haihas, ' keejier of the wanliiibe,' 
 but whether the priestly or tiie loyal wardrobe is 
 uncertain. If the fiiinier, he niu>l h.ive been a 
 L"vite, if not a priest. As to her residence 
 nJC'!D3, in the Mishneh, which the Autli. V. rs. 
 renders ' in the college,' iheie is no ■;roiiiid to 
 conclude that any school or college of the pio- 
 phets is to be undnstood. The iiiime means 
 'second' or ' dviuble; and many of the Jews them- 
 selves (as Jaichi states) understood it as the name 
 of the suburb lying between the inner ami outer 
 wall of Jerusalem. It is safest to regard it as a 
 proper name denoting some (juarte. of Jerusalem 
 about which we aie not ceilain, and, accoiilingly, 
 to translate ' in the IMishneh ;" for uhich ue have 
 the preceilent of the Sejituagint whii h has eV Tjf 
 MaarffS. The place of her lesiilmce i." ".neptioned 
 probably to show why she, beitig at hand, was re- 
 sorted to on tliis urgent occasion, and not Jere- 
 miah, wtio was then probably away at his native 
 town Anathoth, or at some moie distant place. 
 Tliere were gates of the tem|)le called ' the gates 
 of Huldah ■ (Mishu. lit. Michloth, i. 3) ; but" this 
 name had probably no connection witii tt/e pro- 
 phetess. 
 
 HUNTING. The pursuit and captuieof l)easts 
 of the field, was the first means of sustenance 
 which the human race had recourse to, this mode 
 of gaining a livelihood having naturally jiieceded 
 the engagements of agriculture, as it jiiesented 
 food already ])ro\ ided, requiring only to be taken 
 and slaughtered: whereas tillage must lia\e been 
 an ai"tert bought, and a later lesonrce, since it 
 implies accumulated knowleiige, skill, and such 
 jjrovision aforehand \>i subsistence as would enable 
 a clan or a family to wait till tlie fiuits of the 
 earth were maturetl. Hunting was. therefore, a 
 business long ere it was a sporl. And originally, 
 before man had established his empiie on the 
 earth, it must have been not only a seiioiis but a 
 dangerous pursuit. In process of time, however, 
 wdien civilization had made some jirogress, when 
 cities were built and lands cultivated, hunting 
 was carried on not so much for the food which ;t 
 brought as fur the recreation it gave and its con- 
 duciveness to health. 
 
 The Kast— the cradle of civilization — ]>resenfj 
 us with hunting in both tlu; characters now s)X)keii 
 of, originally as a means of sujiport, then as a 
 manly amusement. In the early records of his- 
 tory we find hunting held in high rejiiite, ])artly, 
 no doubt, from its costliness, its dangeis, its simi- 
 litude to war, its cajiability of coinl/u-.ing the 
 energies of many, and also from the relief wiiich
 
 HUNTING. 
 
 HY^>NA. 
 
 h afforded fo tlie stas^imnt mnnniony of a cniirt, 
 in the \i'vj;\\ iitul liiiun(liri;r spirits lluit it called 
 forth. Hmitin^\iiis always liomc soincvvliat of a 
 regal ciiiiac-ter, anil down to t!ic ])it'seiit lumr hm 
 worn an aristocratic air. In Baliylon and Persia 
 tliis attrilmte is |.re.-iented in bold relief. Im- 
 mense jiaiks ! irapi^etani) were enclosed for nnr- 
 Virini,' and preserx iii^ heasts of the cliace. Ti)e 
 monarch liiniself led the way to toe s})ort, lot 
 only ill these preserves. Imt also over the wide 
 g)irfi<;e of the conufry, lieins; attended by his 
 nobles, especially by tlie yoiini^er aspirants to 
 fame anil warlike lerjown (Xen. C'y/". viii. 1. 38). 
 
 In the Bilile — our ciiief storelionse of primitive 
 history and customs — we find hnntinij eo!i- 
 nected with royalty so early as in Gen. x. The 
 great (iiuiider of li.iliel was in general lepnte as 
 • a inij,diiy hunter liefoie the Lord.' The patri- 
 archs, iiowever, aie to be regarded rather as herds- 
 men tiian hunters, if lespect is hail to their 
 habitual fiiule of life. The condition of the 
 herdsma.li ensues next to tltat of the linnter in the 
 early stages of civilization ; and so we lind that 
 even Cain was a keeper i;f sheep. This and the 
 fact that Abel is ilesignated ' a tiller of the 
 ground,' would seem to indicate a very rapiii 
 progress in the arts and pursuits of social life. 
 The same contrast and similar hors'ility we find 
 somewhat la-ter. in the case of Jacob and Ksau ; 
 (lie (irsf. 'a plain man dwelling in tents;' the 
 Becnnd, ' a cunning hutiter, a man of the field " 
 (Gen. XXV. sc} ). Tiie account given of Esau in 
 connection with his fatlier seems to siiow that 
 hunting was, conjointly with tillage, pursued at 
 that time as a means of subsistence, and that 
 hunting had not tlien ]iassed info its secondary 
 stiite, and tjecome an amusement. 
 
 In Kgjpi the cliildien of Israel would be spec- 
 tators of hunting carried on extensively and pur- 
 sued in diflsrent manners, but chiefly, a,s apjjears 
 probalile. with a viev; rather to recieation than 
 subsistence (\V ilkins-m's Anc. Egypt- vol. iii ). 
 Tliaf tlie land i.f pr(»>ijije into which the Hebrews 
 were coinlucled on leaving Kgypt was plentifully 
 gu])plieil with lieasfs of the chace, a])pears clear 
 from Kxoil. xxiii. 23, ' 1 will not drive them out 
 in one year, lest the land become desolate and the 
 beast of the field multiply against thee' (comp. 
 Deuf. iii. 22). And fr.im the regulatinn given 
 in Lev. xvii. \ft. it is manifest that hunting was 
 practised after the settlement in Canaan, and was 
 pursued with the view of obtaining food. Prov. 
 xii. 27 jjroves that hunting animals for their 
 flesh was an established custom among the 
 Hebrews, though the turn of the jjassage may 
 SCTie to show that at the time it was penned sport 
 was the chief aim. If hunting was nut forbidden 
 in the*' year of rest,' special provision was made 
 that iKit (i:dy the cattle, but ' the beast of the field ' 
 sliouUl lie allowed to enjoy and (iourisl. on the 
 nncropjied sjiontaneous p.oduce of the l;uid 
 (Exod. xxiii. 11; Lev. xxv. 7). Ilartner (iv. 
 y57) savs ' there are various sorts of cieatures in 
 the Holy Laud pn)per for hunting; wiKl boars, 
 antelopes, I. ares. &c. are in considerai>le num- 
 iiers iheie, and one of tlie Christian kings of 
 Jerus,il«'m li)>t his life (Gesfa Dei, ]>. S87)in pur- 
 •uiag a liaie. Tiiat the lion and otJier ra- 
 venous iieasls of prey were not wanting in Pales- 
 tine, many ])assages of the Bible make obvious 
 (1 Sani xvii. 34; 2 Sam. xxiii. 20; 1 Kings 
 
 xiii. 21; Ilariis, Xatmal Ilisfory of the Bible, 
 Kitto's Pictorial Palestine). The lion was even 
 made use of to catcli other animals (Ezek, 
 xix. 3), and Harmer long ago reinaiUed that ag 
 in the vicinity of Gaza, so also in Juda'a, leopards 
 were trained and used for the same ]iuipose 
 (Harmer, iv. 35S ; Hab. i. 8). That lions were 
 taken by pitfalls as well as liy nets a^ipears fioin 
 Ezek. xix. 4, 8 (Shaw, p. 172). In the latter 
 verse the words of the prophet, ' and spread theit 
 net over him,' allude to the custom ol enclosing 
 a wide extent of country with nets, int.o whicfi 
 the animals were driven by hunters (Wilkinson, 
 Aiic. Kgijpt. iii. 4). The spots thus enclosed were 
 usually in a hilly country and in the vicinity of 
 water brooks : whence the propriety and force of 
 the language of Ps. xlii. 1, 'As the (hunted) 
 hart panteth after the water brooks.' These places 
 were selected because they were those to which 
 the animals were in the habit of repairing in the 
 morning and evening. Scenes like the one now 
 supjiosed are found portrayed in the Egyptiiin 
 paintings (Wilkinson). Hounds were used for 
 (uniting in Egy])t, and, if the passage in Josepnus 
 {Antiq. iv. 8. 9) may l>e considered decisive, in 
 Palestine as well. From Gen. xxvii. 3, ' Now 
 lake tliy weapons, thy quiver and thy bow,' we 
 learn what arms were employed at least in cap- 
 turing game. Bulls, after being taken, were kept 
 at least for a time in a net (Is. li. 20). Various 
 missiles, jiilfalls, snares, and gins were made use of 
 in hunting (Ps. xvi. 3 ; Amos iii. 5 ; 2 Sam. xxiii. 
 ■»). That hunting continued to be followed till 
 towards the end of the Jewish state appears from 
 Josephus (De Bell. Jud. i. 20. 13), where the his- 
 torian speaks of Herod as ' ever a most excellent 
 hunter, for iti one day he caught forty wild 
 beasts.' The same passage makes it clear that 
 horses were employed in the pursuits of the chace 
 (comp. Joseph. ^?j?i'(^. xv. 7. 7; xvi. 10. 3). — 
 
 J. R. B. 
 
 HUSKS. [Cf.kath.] 
 
 HYACINTH. [Lkshem.] 
 
 HYyI':NA (yu:^, Tzeboa ; in Syro-Hexapl. 
 of Ai[uila, Tzaba ; in Arabic, Tzvba (RusBell'g 
 Aleppo); Dubba (Shaw's Travels); Tzabiton 
 (Bochait); "Tai;'o. Ecclus. xiii. 18). Exce])ling 
 in Ecclesiasticus just noted, the word does not 
 occur in the English Bible, although there ar« 
 several passages in the Hebrew canonical books, 
 where Tseboa, ' streaked ' or ' variegate!,' is a»- 
 
 sumctl to designate the hyaena. In a woik on tht 
 CanidfC, the present writer formerly questioned the 
 presence of this animal in Egypt and Western 
 Asia before the Macedonian conquest, and moitih
 
 UY^ENA. 
 
 HYMENALS. 
 
 6»1 
 
 tained that it was scarcely known by name even 
 in the time of I'liny. Tliis opinion was {^roiindid 
 on the total silence of some of the writei-ii of anti- 
 quity, and tlK'.a'osurd tail's of otiiors; all hoiif^li there 
 were anioiii? tluMii natives of Asia Minor; altliout;h 
 others had resided in Kicypt or in Palestine ; and 
 although the whole region in question had been 
 under the succ:-ssivc swa\' of tlie Greeks and 
 Romans for above throe centuries and a half — the 
 former spreading their language, and the latter 
 maintaining garrisons, in every quarter. Indeed 
 the ancient notices respecting thj hyiena are ei.hcr 
 totally fabulous, or so confused that th-i moderns, 
 up to a very late period, failed to d 'tect the real 
 animal in the classic authors, and both B.'lon and 
 Gesner, with others, referred the name to a l)aboon ; 
 while tholast-mcnlioucdtigured the striped spxies 
 under thj app -Uation of IttjiUi m irinus. "Yatva, 
 therefore, in Ecclesiasticus xiii. 78, did not 
 bring connnentators to a riglit understanding of 
 the word ; although it is there placed in opjiositioa 
 to the dog, and is much more appropriate when 
 taken for the true hyuena than when applied to 
 a baboon. In the Romaic or modern Greek, 
 hrokalos and (jliuos are substituted for the an- 
 cient denomination hyuena; and henc3, when tho 
 Sept. rendered V']^^ ^^1? ''^ Jer. xii. 9, b}' o-Tr/y- 
 \aiov vaipijt;, ' the cave of the hvicna,' modern 
 commentators, up to a rec.mt piriod, were at a 
 loss for the moaning, and preferred to translate 
 the Hebrew nil/i Iztbo t 'a speckLd bird,' as it 
 stands in our version. Bat Bociiart and the con- 
 tinuator of Calmet vindicate what wo take to be 
 the true reading, oi'h tzibia, ' the strip?d rusher,' 
 t". e. tiie hyiena, turning round upon his lair — in- 
 troduced after an allusion in the previous vei-sa 
 to the lion calling to the beasts of tlie field (o.iier 
 hyienas and jackals) to come and devour. This 
 allusion, followed up, as it is, by a natural asso- 
 ciation of id 'as, with a description of the pastor, 
 feeder or rather consumer or d^^'ourer of tho 
 vineyard, treading down and destroying the vines, 
 renders the natural and poetical picture com- 
 plete . for the hyaena seeks burrows and caverns 
 for a lair; like the dog it turns round to Ha 
 down; howls, and occasionally acts in concert; 
 is loa'.hsome, savage, insatiable in app^.tite, offen- 
 sive in smell ; and will, in the season, like canines, 
 devour grapes, as the writer has himself ascer- 
 tained by ac.ual experiment. 
 
 Tzeb la, therefore, we consider proved to be, 
 generically, the hytena ; more spccilically, the 
 cunis hijrena of Linn., the hyaemi vulgaris of 
 more recent naturalists, th'-fuoilh of Barbary, tho 
 diih, dubb'/i, d'l'i i/i, Z'lba'i, and kij'taar of modern 
 Semitic nations: and, if the ancients understood 
 anything by the word, it was also their Ir ichus. 
 The strip^'d sp cies is one of three or four — all, it 
 seems, originally African, and, by following ar- 
 mies and caravans, gi-adually spread over Southern 
 Asia to beyond tliu Ganges, though not as yet to 
 the east of tlie Bramupootra. It is now not un- 
 common in Asia Minor, and has extend<'d into 
 Soutliern Tali ary ; Imt this progress is compara- 
 tively so recent that no other than Semi.ic names 
 are well known to b-long to it. The he^d and 
 jaws of all (he sp-cies are broad and strong; the 
 muzzle trunca'ed; the tongue like a rasp; tlie 
 teeth 84 instead of 42, as in the c mi lie, but ro- 
 bust, large, and eminently formed for biting, lace- 
 rati.ig, and reducing the very bo;ie ; the ucck stiff; 
 
 the body fihort and compact ; the limbs tall, with 
 only four toes on each foot ; the fur coar.sp, furmiiif^ 
 a kind of somi-crectile inane along the liaek ; tho 
 tail rather short, with an imperfect bru>li, and 
 with a fetid pouch beneath it. In stature the 
 .species varies from that of a large wolf to much 
 less, llyienas are not bold in compariMin willi 
 wolves, or in proi>or(ion to their powers. They do 
 not, in general, act collectiv'cly ; ihey prow 1 chiilly 
 in the night ; attack assfs, dogs, and weaker ani- 
 mals; feed most willingly on corrupt animal 
 offal, dead cam:ls, &e. ; and dig into human 
 graves that are i.ot wt 11 prot; cted with sUikes and 
 bramblcA. Th -^ s.riptd sp cies is of a diity ashy 
 buff' with some, oldique bli;ck streaks iicross the 
 .shouldei-s and l:ody, and iiumeious cioss-bars on 
 the legs; tlie nnizzle and throat are black; and 
 the tip of the tail white. 
 
 There is reason to believe that the dteh, or Scrip- 
 tural wolf, when represent d as carrying off a 
 lamb, is no other than tliehy;ena — unless the reai 
 wolf has been cxtirpattd; for zoologists have not 
 found the wolf in Syria, and the vague reports^ 
 of travellers nsp cting it may apply to wild 
 dogs, whoso manners are diflerent, or to canis 
 (inthiis or thnes unfhus, whose powers are totally 
 inadequate to ins])ire fear [Wfn.K. ]— C. II. S. 
 
 II YiMEN/El'S('\7if lAiio..), a protissor of Christi- 
 anity at Epliesus, who, V itli .\leNai;der(l Tim. i. 20) 
 and Philetus ("2 Tim. ii. lf<), had dejiarted from tho 
 truth both in priiici[ile aid praciice, and led others 
 into apostacv. The c! i f doctrinal error of these 
 persons caiisistcd in maintaining that ' the resur- 
 rection was past already.' The precise meaning 
 of this expression is by no means clearly ascer- 
 tained : the most general and pel haps best founded 
 opinion is, that they ui.dersKmd tlie resm-recion Srt 
 a tigurativc sense of the great change pioduc. d l>y 
 the Gosp^'l dispensation. Some have suggested, 
 that they attempt! d to supjiort their views by the 
 Apostl-'s language in his Epistle to the Ephesians 
 ()'t;c,)oi)f — Tirj/fcciiTroiTjrrti' — rvvliynpn', &c. ii. 1- 
 6): but this is very improbable; for if such mis- 
 conception of his language had arisen, it might 
 easily have I)een corn ctcd ; not to say that one of 
 them appears to have been personally inimical to 
 St. Paul (2 Tim. iv. 14\ and would scarcely have 
 appealed to him as an authority. Most critics 
 suppose that the same person is referred to in both 
 the ( pistles to Timothy l)y the name of Ilyinenani*. 
 Dr. Moslicim, however, contends that there were 
 two. He seems to lay great stress on the Apostle^ 
 d:claration in 1 Tim. i. 20, 'whom / hare di-lirn-ed 
 vii'o^ i/a/i that they may learn not to blasi)heinc.' 
 But whatever in.ay be the meaning of this expns- 
 sion, the intticrion was evid-nily designed for tho 
 benefit and restoration of the parlies (con p. 1 Cor. 
 V. 5), and was therefore far from ii.dicaling their 
 hopeless and abandontd wickedness. Nor do thp 
 terms employed in the second Epistle inqiort a 
 less flagrant violation of the Chiisiian profession 
 than those in tho first. If in tl.e one the indivi- 
 duals albid d to are charged with having 'dis- 
 card d a good conscience' and 'made shipwreck 
 of faith,' in the other they are described a-^ indiilf;- 
 ing 'in vain and profane iKibbling.s, \\hieh would 
 increase to more ungodliness,' as 'having errc<l 
 concerning the truth,' and 'overthrowing tlu? faith' 
 of oJiers. These can hardly be .-^aid to be 'two 
 distinct characters having nothing in common but 
 the name' (Mosheim's Commentaries, i. 304-306). 
 
 3l
 
 892 
 
 HYMN. 
 
 IITPERBOLE. 
 
 For Dther )ii1er,)retatioii3 of 2 Tim. ii. IS, see 
 Gill's Comm-eiitayy, in loc, and Walcliii Miscel- 
 lanea Sacra, i. 4; de Hyin&iueo I'hUeto, Amstel. 
 1711.— .1. K. R. 
 
 HYMN {vfjLvos). In the only places of the 
 Now Testiiment where this word occurs, it is con- 
 nected with tu. others of very similar import. 
 ' S])eakiiii; to yotuselves in psalms {}\ia\fjio'ls\ and 
 hymns (vixvois), and spiritnal songs (o53orj), sing- 
 ing and making mel<«ly in your heart to the 
 Lord" (Ejih. V. 19; Col. iii. 16). It has been 
 conjectured, that l>y ' psalms and hymns' the 
 [loefical compositions of tlie Old Testament are 
 chieUy to be umhrstood, and tliat the epithet 'spi- 
 ritual,' here ajipl ied lu ' songs, is intended to mark 
 those devout ell'usions which resulted from tiie spi- 
 ritual gifts granteil to tiie primitive church; yet 
 in 1 Cor. xiv. '2(i a ])ioduc.tion of the latter class 
 is called ' a psalm.' Josephus, it may lie remarked, 
 ifses the terms vixvoi and oJSai in rel'erence to 
 the Psalms of David (Antiq. vii. 12. 3). Our 
 information resi)ecfing the hymnology of the first 
 Christians is extremely scanty : the most distinct 
 .notice we possess of it is (hat contained in Pliny's 
 celebrated Epi-tle(£/;. x 97): ^Carmen Christo 
 quasi den, di-cero serum invicem ' (Augusti, 
 Handbuch d^r Christliclicn Archdnlagie. B. V. 
 Gebet und Gesang, ii. l-UiO ; Walchii Mis- 
 cellanea Sacra, i. 2;v De hymnis ecclesice AjJOS- 
 toliccB, Amstel. 1744). 
 
 The hymn vvhicli our Lord sung with his dis- 
 ciples iit i! e L:ist Supper is generally sup]>osed to 
 iiave been the latter ])art of tiie Hallel, or series of 
 psalms which were sung by the Jews on tlie night 
 of the Passover, comprehending Ps. cxiii.-cxviii. ; 
 Ps. cxiii. and cxiv being sung l)efore, and the rest 
 after the Passover ("Buxtortii Lejt. Talm. s. v. 
 y?T\, quoted by Kuinoel, on Matt. xxvi. 30 ; 
 Lightfoot's Heb. and Talm. Exercitatiniis. on 
 Mark xiv. 26 ; Works, xi. 435).— J. E. R. ' 
 
 HYPERBOLE. Any one who carefully exa- 
 mines tiie Bible must be surprised at the very few 
 hyjjerbolic expressions which it contains, consi- 
 dering that it is an oriental boolv. Some of these 
 lew liave occiisioned so much difficulty to sincere 
 men, tliat we have reason to bless God that the 
 scene of those great events which comprise tiie 
 history rf man's salvation, was laid in Western, 
 and not in Eiisteiri Asia, wi.ere the genius of 
 hyjierliole reigns without limit or control. In 
 Eastern Asia liie tone of composition is pitched 
 .so liigri as to be scarcely inteiligil)le to the sober 
 intellect of Enroj)e ; while in Western Asia a 
 medium seems to have been struck lietween the 
 ultra-extravagance of the far east, and the frigid 
 exactness of the far west. 
 
 But even regarded as a book of Western Asia, 
 the Biide is, as comiiared with almost any other 
 Western Asiatic iiook, so singularly free from 
 Hyperbolic exjiressions as might well excite our 
 surprise, tlid not our knowledge of its divine 
 origin permit us to suppose that even the style 
 a;id mode of exjnession of liie vvriteis were so far 
 controlled, as to exclude from their writings 
 wtiat, in other ages and coimtries, might excite 
 pain and otl'ence, aid proie an obstacle to the 
 ieceptK)H (if tlivine truth. Nor is it to be said 
 *liat the usage of hv])erbole is of mor'.ern growth. 
 'Ve lind it in the oldest eastern writings whicii 
 •iow exist; and the earlier rabbinical writings 
 
 attest that, in times apj)roaching near to tJioM 
 in which the writers of (lie New Tfsiamen: fiou- 
 fished, the .lewisli imagitiation l.ail riui riot iu 
 this direction, and has lelt hyperboles as frequetvi 
 and outrageous .is any whicii Peisia or India oat 
 produce. 
 
 These things being considered, we shall cer 
 tainly have more cause to admire the rarity oi 
 hyperbolic ex|iressions in the Bible than to marv*;! 
 at those whicii do occiir. 
 
 The strongest hyperbole in all Scripture is that 
 with which the Gosjiel of St. John conclii les ; — 
 'There are al.so many other things which Jesui 
 did, the which, if they shciuld be writ'en fverj 
 one, I su)ipoSc! that the world itself could not coa 
 tain all the ijooks that should be writle'i.' Thii 
 has so much pained m£iny comnr)=;- ^lors, tb.al 
 they have been disposed to regard it aa an un 
 authorized adilition to the sacred text, and tt 
 reject it accordingly. Now this is always a dan- 
 gerous jtrocess, iind not to be adopted biit on siicl 
 overwhelming autlioiity of collated mannscrijit* 
 as floes not exist in the present case. How much 
 more natural and becoming is it to regard the 
 verse simjily as a hyjjerbole, so perfectly confoiin- 
 able to Oiiental modes of expression, and to .smie 
 other hyperboles which may be found interspersed 
 in the sacred books, that the sole wonder really 
 is that this one should be rare enough to afford 
 ground for objection and remark. 
 
 This view of the matter might be illustrated 
 by many examples, in which we find sacred 
 and profane authors using hyperboles j)f the like 
 kind and signification. In Num. xiii. 33, the 
 spies who had retmneil from searcliing the land 
 of Canaan, say, that they saw ' giants thece, ol 
 such a prodigious size, that they were in their 
 own sight as grasslioppers.' In l)eut. i. 28, cities 
 with high walls abdiit them are said to be ' walleil 
 up to lieaven.' In Dan. iv. 7, mention is made 
 of a tree whereof ' the height reached unto heaven, 
 and tiie sight tiieieof unto the end of all the 
 eaitli ;'and the autlior of Ecclesiasticus (xlvii. 15), 
 speaking of Solomon's wisdom, says, ' 1 by soul 
 covered the whole eaifli, and thou filledst it with 
 paraliles." As the xvorld is here said to be tilled 
 with Solomon's paraliles; so in Jolin xxi. 2.'), by 
 one degree more of hyi)erbole, it is said that the 
 world could not contain all the tiooks that should 
 be written concerning Jesns's tniiacles. >f a par- 
 ticular account of every one of them were given. 
 In Josej/nus {Antiq. xiv. 22) Gi d is mentioned 
 as promising to Jacob tliat he would give tiie land 
 of Canaan to him and his seed; and then it ia 
 added ' they shall fill the whole sea and land which 
 the sun shines upon.' Wetslein,in his note on the 
 text in John, and Basnage, in his Ilistoire desJuifi 
 (iii. 1-9; V. 7), have cited from ti.e ancient rab- 
 binical writers such passages as the following: — 
 ' If all the seas were ink, and every reed was i 
 pen, and the whole heaven and earth nere parch- 
 ment, and all the sons of men were writers, they 
 would not lie sufficient to write all the lessonj 
 which Jochanan composed ,' and conceining one 
 Eliezer it is said, that ' if the heavens were parch- 
 ment, and all tbcsvins of men writers, and all th« 
 trees of the forest pen.s, they would not be sufiti 
 cient for willing all the wisdom whicix lie wai 
 possessed of.' 
 
 Hy}>erboles not less strong than th&C unda 
 review find tlieir way into our own poetry, with*
 
 HYSSOP. 
 
 9iit shocking our jud<jnicnt or offending om 
 taste, thus : — 
 
 'And I as rich in haviii<?8uch a jewel 
 As fifty seas, if all tlieir sands were pearl, 
 Their rivers nectar, and their rocks ]iure gold.' 
 
 Hemer, wlio if not horn in Asia Minor, had 
 sindouhfedly lived there, has iometinies followed 
 the hyperbolic manner of speakinj; which pre- 
 vailed so much in the H'ast : t'.ns, in Iliad xx. 
 246, 217, he makes ^.neas say to Achilleg, 
 ' Let us have done with reproaching one another; 
 for we may throw out so many reproachful words 
 on one another, that a ship of a hundred oars would 
 not b« able to carry the load.* Few instances 
 of this are to be found in Occidental writers ; 
 yet it is observed that Cicero (Phil. ii. 41) lias 
 'praeserfim quum illi earn gloriain consecuti sint, 
 quae vix ccelo capi posse videatur,' and that 
 Livy (vii. 25) says, ' iiae vires populi Romani, 
 quas vix terrarum capit orbis.' See Bishop 
 Pearce"s Commentary on the Four Evangelists, 
 1777, &c 
 
 HYSSOP (3iTN esobh; Gr, i(r<T'j>iros). A great 
 variety of opinions have been entertained respect- 
 ing the plant called esobh, translated ' hyssop' in 
 the Authorized Version i)oth of the Olil and tlie 
 New Testament ; but as yet no satisfactory inves- 
 tigation has been made, so as to enalileus tofix with 
 certainty on the jilant inteniled. ThedilKculty ap- 
 pears to have arisen from tliesimilarity of I'lieCireek 
 name virtr&jTos to the Hebrew esobh, whence the 
 former seems, from an early period, to have been 
 considered synonymous with tlie latter, and used 
 foi it in referring to the passages of the Old Tes- 
 tament where it is mentioned. As the ucrcr&iTros 
 of Greek authors is generally acknowledged to be 
 the common hyssop (Iltjssopiis officinalis of bota- 
 nists), it has been inferred that it must also be the 
 plant of the Old Testament, as well as that re- 
 ferred to in the New Testament. This inference 
 has not, however, been universally acquiesced in; 
 for Celsius enumerates, under no less than eighteen 
 neads, the different plants which have been ad- 
 duced by various authors as the hyssop of Scrip- 
 ture. Before mentioning these, it is desirable to 
 !cfer to the passages of the Old and New Testament 
 wliere the jilant is mentioned. Tlie first notice of it 
 occurs in Exod. xii. 22, where a bunch of hyssop 
 ia directed to be dipped in blood and struck on 
 the lintels and the two side-posts of the doors of 
 the houses iu which the Israelites resided. It is 
 next mentioned in Lev. xiv. 1, 6, 52, in the 
 ceremony for declaring lepers to be cleansed ; 
 and again, in Num. xix. 6, 18, in preparing 
 the water of se|)aration. To these passages the 
 aiwstle alludes in Heb. ix. 19: — 'For when 
 Moses had sjx)ken every jirecept to all the 
 people, according to the law, he took the blood of 
 calves, and of goats, with water, and scarh^t wool, 
 ami hyssop, ^nd sprinkled both the book and all 
 tlte people.' From this text we find that the 
 Greek name vffrrooTros was considered synonymous 
 with the Hebrew esobh; andfroiu the precedini^that 
 the plant must have been leafy, and large enou^di 
 to serve for the )iurposes of sprinkling, and that it 
 riiust liave \iecn found in Lower Kgyjit, as well as 
 in the country towards Mount Sinai, and onwards 
 to Palestine. From the following passages we get 
 some information respecting the lial<its and the 
 supposed properties of the plant. Thus, in 1 Kings 
 
 HYSSOP. 
 
 1)1 
 
 IV. 33, it is said, 'Solomon sjxike of tiws, frow lh» 
 cedar-tree that is in Lclianon, even n:('> t'l-; hynwj 
 that sjirl^i gel h ou of the wall;' and in tlie pen\ 
 tential ])8alm of David (li. 7), 'Far^e mc witt 
 hys30]i, anil 1 shall be clean : wa»h me, and I shall 
 be wliiter th:;n snow.' In this passage it in, 
 no dpubt, considered by some commentatcTS thai 
 hyssop is used in a figurative sense; but still it ii 
 possilde that the plant may have possessed som« 
 general cleansing jiroperfies, and thus come to b« 
 employed in preference to other ]ilaMts in the ccr»- 
 monies of purification. It ought, at all events, to 
 be found growing upon walls, and in Palestint, 
 In the account of the crucifixion of our Saviour, 
 the Apostle John says (John xix. 29), ' Now ther« 
 was set a vessel full of vinegar, and they filled • 
 sponge with vinegar, anrl jiut it upon hyssop, and 
 put it to his mouth.' In the parallel jiassages o* 
 Matthew (xxvii. 4S) and Mark (xv. 36), it ii 
 stated that the sponge filled with vinegar waa put 
 upon a reed or stick. To reconcile these state* 
 ments, some commentators have supposed that botk 
 the sponge and the hyssop were tied to a stick, and 
 that one apostle mentions only the hyssop, because 
 he considered it as the most important; while, for 
 the same reason, the other two mention only the 
 stick ; but the simplest mode of explaining the 
 apparent discrepancy is to consider the hyssoj) and 
 the stick to be the same thing — in other wordi^ 
 that the sponge was alKxed to a stick of hyssop. 
 
 A great variety of plants have been adduced by 
 different authors as that alluiled to in the above 
 passages, though some do not seem to think it ne- 
 cessary to reconcile the plant which they prefei 
 to more than one or two of the passages, and 
 seldom take the trouble of proving tliat it is found 
 in the localities where the hyssop is stated to have 
 been employed. 
 
 Celsius enumerates the several plants which 
 have been adduced, under eighteen diiTercnt heads. 
 Of these some belong to the class of ferns, ai 
 Capillus Veneris, maiden-hair, and tiuta 3/m- 
 raria, or wall-rue, because they will grow u]>on 
 walls ; so also do the Polyti-ichum, or hair-moss, 
 the Kloster hyssops, or pearl wort, and Sagina pro» 
 ciimbens are suggested by others, because from their 
 growing on rocks or walls, they will answer to the 
 passage in 1 Kings iv. 33, and from their small- 
 ness contrast well with the cedar of Lebanon, 
 and are a proof of the minute knowledge of Solo* 
 mon. Some again contend for species of worm- 
 wood, as being, from their bitterness, most likely 
 to have been added to the vinegar in the sponge^ 
 that it might be more distasteful to our Saviour, 
 The majority, however, have selected different 
 kinds of fragrant plants belonging to the natural 
 family of Laiiatie, several of which are found 
 in dry and barren situations in Palestine, and 
 also in some parts of the Desert. Of thesi 
 may l>e mentioned the rosemary, species of la- 
 vender, of mint, of marjoram, of thyme, of ga» 
 vory, of thymbra, and others of the same tribe, 
 resembling each other much in characters as well 
 as in projierries : but it does not apj)ear tliat anj 
 of them grow on walls, or are possessed of cleansing 
 pro]ierties; and. with the exception of the rosemary, 
 they are not caj.able of yielding a slick, nor ar» 
 they found in all the required situations. If >t» 
 look to the most recent authors, we find some otlj«» 
 plants adducd, though the gen^' Mty adhere U. 
 the common hyssop. Sprengel {BisU liei IItri>
 
 hri 
 
 liVSSOP. 
 
 IIVSSOP. 
 
 I. I4j)»fc^ms U> t't.tertaiii no <lii<.ii' lliiil tl:c' Thvm- 
 bta ijjt^^ta fomia l)y Hasjel'jnis!, (lu tlie ruins 
 alxnit Jer.isalfin, ii thu liyssojt ol' Salomon tlu>i)w!i 
 Haswiijnist liiinst'if tlioiijjlit that tliu moss calltid 
 Oyrnnjstomum truncatuin was the p'aiit. Lady 
 Calcolt asks, ' Whether the hyssop ujion which 
 St. John 3;iys the sjioii^e .stee|ie(l in vinegar was 
 put, to he held to the lipsof Clnist upon the bross, 
 Hiiglit not be the hyssoj) altaclied to its stalV of 
 cedar-wood, for the purposes of S[)rinkling the 
 jwople, lest they should conliact <lt'tileinent on 
 llie eve of the Salihath, which was a high-day. by 
 being in the field of execution ' (^Scripture Her- 
 bal, p. 20S). Roseniniiller, again, thini^s that the 
 Hebrew word Eiubh does not denote cur hyssop, 
 but an aromatic plant resembling it, the wild 
 marjora-n, which the Germans culi Dasten. or 
 Wu/ilae/HUlk, the Arabs Zatar, and the Greeks 
 Origanum. In the rictoriai Bible (i. 161), Mr. 
 Kitfo observes ' that the hyssop of the sacred 
 ficriptiires has opened a wide field for conjectiue, 
 but ID i.>'} in8tiuice has any plant been suggested 
 tilCit, a' Uw taoMi tim«. has a si'JKcient leu^th of 
 
 ttern ti. annwer the purpose iif a wand or ]X»1» 
 and sn( i detergent or cleansing profx'r'ie* as ta 
 rei (I-!i it a lit oiril)leni for j)i!.':t;ca.tit:u;' and h« 
 «uj;ge«ls it as probable, that ' the hyssoj) was s 
 8]«cie3 of Phytolacca, as combinini; length of 
 Klein with cleansing properties, from the quantify 
 of potash which is yielded by the aslies of the 
 American miecies, 7'. devandra, of this genus.' 
 /'. Abyssiiiica grows to the si/.e of a shrtdi 
 in Aljyssiiiia. Winer (Bibl. Iiealici'i7-tcrbiicJ>, 
 ii. 811), ,v. V. Ysoh) gives a ilescripfion of iht 
 common hyssop, but says (hat it must not i>e 
 concealed that the Talnuidists distinguish the 
 hyssop of the Greeks and Romans from lliat 
 nientitfiied in the law. lie then adiluces the 
 Oriyanum, mentioned in the quotation f'lom 
 Roscnmiiller, as i":;e ii'«o6A of the Hebrews; but 
 concludes by observing that a more accurate exa- 
 mination is required of tlie hyssops and Oriyana 
 of tJiat part of Asia, before t!ie meaniDo- /.*' tli« 
 Hebrew Esobh can be considered as 8atisi'actcrl;y 
 determined. For any new iuformatior we Sba} 
 be able to communicate, »ee Ysoi*. — J. F. R. 
 
 W ost 'iovews 1.
 
 mkiss^m 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY 
 
 Los Angeles 
 
 This book is DUE on the last date stamped below. 
 
 I'HTERLIBRAEY LOAJJS 
 
 
 or96 
 
 Form L9-32m-8,'58(5876s4)444
 
 UniversMy Ot Calitornia Los Anqeles 
 
 ''|||||||f<||||||i||ii||i|||!i|T|n:T||i'i'r': 
 
 L 007 361 016 4 
 
 UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY^ 
 
 AA 000 904 536